HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 4803
City of Palo Alto (ID # 4803)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 5/19/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Consideration of Finance Committee Referral to the HRC
Title: Consideration of Finance Committee Referral to the Human Relations
Commission Regarding Additional Funding for Human Resource Allocation
Process Agencies (This item was continued from May 12, 2014)
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Community Services
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council consider the recommendation by the Finance Committee at
their meeting on April 15, 2014 that the Human Relations Commission (HRC) re -visit
potential funding for underfunded, new, and emerging needs for agencies within the
Human Services Resource Allocation Process for FY15 in an amount up to $200,000.
Background
At the April 15, 2014 Finance Committee Meeting, staff presented the Hum an Services
Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) FY 2015 budget request (see Attachment A). HSRAP
contracts run on either a two- year (14 agencies) or six-year (2 agencies) funding cycle;
FY2015 is mid-contract cycle for all agencies. For the 14 agencies on a two-year cycle, this
recommendation would impact the second year of their two-year cycle.
Staff recommends that Council review the issue and make a policy recommendation prior
to staff and the HRC reviewing a potential additional funding plan. If Cou ncil support is
unclear, staff and the HRC could dedicate considerable time exploring potential funding
plans, unintentionally raising funding expectations on the part of the agencies that could be
unwarranted if Council would not consider expanding funding.
The following is the Finance Committee recommendation:
“The Finance Committee recommends that the Human Relations Commission
review the funded agencies in Human Services Resource Allocation Process
to identify the most critical needs that were requested and unable to be
allocated for Fiscal Year 2015, not to exceed the amount initially requested
City of Palo Alto Page 2
by those agencies with the following guidelines: 1) include any critical and
new and emerging needs that the Human Relations Commission has
identified, as well as critical needs that were identified previously but unable
to be allocated in the previous budget cycle; and 2) not to exceed the
additional $200,000 that was requested in aggregate that was not funded at
the beginning of the prior two-year cycle. “
The amount included in the motion ($200,000) was selected as it was the difference
between the amount requested in FY2014 by the fourteen agencies with two-year
contracts and the amount received, which was based on the amount of funding available.
Staff asked the Finance Committee for clarification on the effect of the motion on Avenidas
and Palo Alto Community Child Care, the two agencies on a six-year cycle, as those agencies
have requested to be removed from the HSRAP process and the item is up for Council
review on May 12, 2014. Chair Berman noted the Committee would have clarification on
PACCC and Avenidas prior to discussing the Community Services Department budget,
which at the time of the Finance Committee meeting was scheduled for May 20, 2014. At
the Council meeting on May 20, 2014, a recommendation was passed to remove PACCC and
Avenidas from the HSRAP process.
Resource Impact
If Council decides to provide one-time funding for the HSRAP program, staff recommends
using the City Council contingency ($250,000) in FY15. If Council approves ongoing
funding, then staff recommends using the Budget Stabilization Reserve as a one -time
source of funding; staff will incorporate the ongoing increase into future budgets. The
process timing may not allow for discussion during the proposed budget meetings, but this
transaction can be approved after budget adoption as well. In addition, the Council has the
option of recommending a specific amount and asking staff and the HRC to return with
detailed recommendations.
Attachments:
ATTACHMENT A - STAFF REPORT # 4617NEW (PDF)
ATTACHMENT B - Excerpt - 04-15-2014 FC transcript (DOCX)
CITY OF
ALO
LT
City of Palo Alto (ID # 4617)
Finance Committee Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/15/2014
Summary Title: HSRAP FY15 Contract Renewal
Title: Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) Contract
Renewal for FY 2015
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Community Services
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Finance Committee Recommend to the Council that:
1. The funding allocation as recommended by the Council for the 2013-2015
Human Services Resource Allocation funding period (Attachment A) be included
in the Fiscal Year 2015 Human Services contract budget.
2. The City Manager or his designee be authorized to execute year two of separate
two-year contracts with fourteen agencies as was approved in June 2013.
3. The City Manager or his designee be authorized to execute year five of separate
six -year contracts with Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care.
Executive Summary
This report transmits the Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) Fiscal
Year 2015 budget request (Attachment. A), 2013-15 Priority of Needs (Attachment B),
and the Fiscal Year 2014 mid -year HSRAP Program Description and. Performance
Measures (Attachment C.)
During the FY 2014 budget hearing in June 2013, the Council approved the funding of
the HSRAP program for FY 2014 and approved in concept the funding of the same
agencies for the same dollar amounts for FY 2015. The FY 2015 funding
recommendations will provide $1,216,177, the same level of funding as in FY 2014„to
sixteen programs.
Background
City of Palo Alto Page 1
HSRAP is a program intended to deliver direct economic and/or social services to
individuals or groups largely for the community's well-being and to ensure that Palo Alto
residents have a safety net of services. The HSRAP allocation process is needs -driven
and provides funding opportunities for services that address emerging needs in the
community. Priority areas of funding are determined on a bi-annual basis by the
Human Relations•Commission (HRC) and Staff and the recommendations are forwarded
to the Finance Committee and approved by Council. (Attachment B.)
Proposals are accepted for the funding of one year. Provided all terms and conditions
are met through the service agreement, contracts may be renewed for an additional 12
month terms. Funds allocated through the HSRAP process are made available on a bi-
annual basis through the City's General Fund. Two funding recipients, Avenidas and
Palo Alto Community Child Care, are currently on six year contract (see explanation
under "multi -year contracts" below.) Their current contract term is from 2010-2016.
In June 2013, the Council approved fourteen Human Services Contracts as part of the
HSRAP process for the contract year July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014, renewable for
one more year at the same level of funding for the budget period July 1, 2014 through
June 30, 2015, subject to the availability of General Fund resources to pay for this
obligation.
HSRAP contracts are awarded either for a multi -year or for a two-year term.
Multi -year contracts:
The services receive funding through multi -year, ongoing contracts upon meeting one
of the following criteria:
• Services having a historical relationship with the City of Palo Alto by either having
been created through City efforts or having traditionally received Council's high
priority for funding over the years;
• Services addressing emerging socioeconomic indicators such as needs of special
populations;
• When the service meets the City of Palo Alto target population needs as
described in the City's Comprehensive Plan or Consolidation Plan.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Please note: As noted above, Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care are
currently the only multi -year funding recipients. Their current contract term is from
2010-2016. The Council has requested that staff bring to the Policy and Services
Committee the question as to whether these two agencies should remain or be
removed from the HSRAP process. This matter was discussed by the HRC and they
forwarded a recommendation to keep the two agencies in the HSRAP process to the
Policy & Services Committee for consideration at their March 25, 2014 meeting. The
Policy and Services Committee voted 2-1 to forward a recommendation to the full
Council to remove Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care from the HSRAP
process. This issue is scheduled for City Council consideration on May 12, 2014.
Two -Year contracts:
Funds made available on a bi-annual basis for services that meet a second set of
criteria:
• Meeting a critical service need in the community, based on the HRC's bi-annual
priority of community needs, as originally intended by Council (Attachment B);
• Agencies requesting a limited funding would compete for bi -annual
appropriation through the HSRAP Request for Proposal Process;
• The bi-annual funding cycle will encourage new and existing nonprofits to apply
for funding that address the community's priority of needs and emerging issues.
Deliverables:
Agencies provide semiannual reports relating to the Scope of Program Services covering
the preceding six months. The final report focuses on the preceding six months, but
agencies also provide information on contract services for the entire year.
The report includes information such as:
• Quantitative performance measures (Provide a description of how the Program
objective is met, activities conducted and measuring tools utilized, if any);
• Unmet performance measures (Explanation of why the objective is not being met
and the corrective action taken to address the problem);
• Unmet client needs (Discussion of any unmet clients' needs the agency has
identified during the period);
• And other information as the program manager may request.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Refer to Attachment C for the 2014 mid -year Program Descriptions and the
Performance Measures.
Resource Impact
The FY 2015 budget request for HSRAP is $1,216,177, which will be included in the FY
2015 Proposed Budget scheduled for issuance early May 2014.
Policy Implications
These recommendations are consistent with the existing City policies.
Attachments:
• Attachment A - FY2015 HSRAP Funding Recommendations -FINAL (XLS)
• Attachment B - HSRAP Priority of Needs 2013-2015 (PDF)
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Fiscal Year 2015 Hu man Services Reso urce Allo cation Pro cess (HSRAP)
Fun din g Rec ommen dation s to Fin anc e Committee
No
Agency
Pro gram Desc ription
2013 15
agencys
Reqiestfor
Fundt'rig ,
r
2014 Allocation'.
Fiscal Year 2015
Recommend ation
(same as FY 14)
Avenidas
Senior Services
$ 431,184
$ 431,184
PACCC
Child Care Subsidy Program
$ 436,830
„
$ 436,830
SixYe arO on Ka00,1i 6 r
$ 868,014
Two -Yea r Contracts
1
Abilities United
Disability Services
$ 53,111
$ 40,352
$ 40,352
2
Adolescent Counseling Sv
On Campus Counseling /Outlet Program
$ 110,000
$ 103,434
;,;
$ 103,434
3
Community Technology Allia nce
,Share d Technical Infrastructure
$ 8,000
$ 5,823
Y
$ 5,823
4
Do wntown Streets Te am
Do wntown Streets Team
$ 75,000
$ 36,090
$ 36,090
5
Dre amCatchers
Tutoring & Mentoring low-income PA
Youth
$ 55,000
$ 8,000
$ 8,000
6
InnVisio n She lter Network
Opportunity Service Center
$ 25,000
$ 12,340
$ 12,340
7
La Comida de California
Hot Me als for the Elderly
$ 33,300
$ 32,548
$ 32,548
8
MayView Community Health Center
Health Care for Low Income & Homeless
PA Residents
$ 25,000
$ 17,231
$ 17,231
9
M omentum for Mental He alth
Homele ss Outreach Program
$ 30,000
$ 25,847
$ 25,847
10
Palo Alto Housing Corporation
Stepping Stone to Success -Academic
support: 1st -12th grade
$ 47,730
$ 10,000
$ 10,000
11
Peninsula HealthCare Connection Inc
Project Downtown Connect
$ 41,200
$ 26,800
$ 26,800
12
Senio r Adults Legal Assista nce
Le ga l Assistance to Eld ers
$ 9,000
$ 8,616
$ 8,616
13
Vista Center for the Blind & Visually
Impaired
Vision Rehab . Svs f or Seniors
$ 20,650
$ 5,000
':
$ 5,000
14
Youth Community Service
Service and leadership
$ 16,000
$ 16,082
;';?;
$ 16,082
Two -Year Total
$ 548,991
$ 348,163
$ 348,163
$ 1,216,177
2013-15 HSRAP Funding Alloc ations
Age ncy
Name of Program
(Services that address
emerging nee ds prov ided by
agencies)
13-15 Agency's
Proposed Bu dge t
City's 13-15
Funding
Amo unt
Percentage of City's
Funding in
Co mparison to
Agency's Propo psed
Program Bu dget
City's Funding is use d
for:
Mid Year Quantative Performance Measure
Performance Measure
Act ual to Date
6 -Year Con tracts
Avenidas
Senio r Services:
Se rvice s to the elderly and
their families and caregivers10%
g
thro ugh enrichment and
individual and family se rvices.
$4,441,623. 00
$ 431,184.00
Salaries, bene fits,
insurance, capital
expensese, utilities,
office supplies, and
program operating
expe nse s
Provide case management to 40
frail homebound seniors,
prov ide brief s essions of
resource, housing and practical
support, group support f or 600
attendees, 2,600 one-way trips,
12,000 h ours of adult day
health services
Provided case management to
28 hom eb ound seniors; 708
sessions of res ourc es, h ousing,
pro vided 4,491 days of adult
health services
Palo Alto
Community Child
Care Center
(PACCC)
Child Care Subsidy program
for low income families
$1,572,072
$436,830.00
o
28%
Salaries, benefits,
insurance, direct
subsidies, pr ogram
operating expenses
incl . utilities, sta ff
d ev't/training
Appro x. 50 children of low
i nc ome families
To date 54 children hav e been
served .
HSRAP/2-Year Contracts
Abilities United
Disability Services:
Community based services to
physically and/or
developmentally disabled
p y
individuals thro ugh
rehabilitatio n, wellness and
prevention
$3,593,797. 00
$ 40,352.00
1%
Staff salaries
300 hrs Early Interventi on:
13,050 hrs Adult S vs
372 Early Intervention; 7,836
hrs Adult Svs.
2013-15 HSRA P Funding Allocations
Ado lescent
Co unseling
Services/Commun
ity Health
Aware ness
Co uncil
On -Campus Co unse ling (OCC)
Program pro vides free mental
health services to students and
parents/Crisis Counseling:
Outlet pro gram services for
p g
le sbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender and questioning
youth (LGBTQ)
$1,009,943. 00
$ 103,434. 00
10%
Salaries and operating
expenses (incl.
insuran ce , printing &
publishing expenses)
Pro vide counseling sys to 731
unduplicated PA residents;
3,000 indivudals & family
co unseling sessions/Direct
suppo rt (group, co unselig, GSA
suppo rt) to 140 Palo AItoLGBTQ
teens with ACS/Provide
sensitivity trainigs and
consultantions for 603 PAUSD
staff as well as 3 agencies in
Palo Alto who se rv e LGBTQ.
647 unduplicated PA resid ents;
2,496 individual and family
couns eling s er vic es
Community
Technology
Alliance
Community Voicemail
pro gram that creates access to
basic teleco mmunications
assistance toperso ns who are
very low inco me, homeless, or
at -risk of homelessness
$1,719,000. 00
'$5,823.00
o
3%
Salaries, benefits and
Coimmunity Voice Mail
phone lines, supplies &
training supplies
Connect 15 hom eless and at-
risk residents to opportunties
for job, income, housing and
J
healthcare thr ough voice mail,
enter residents into a case
management system, sucessful
housing, healthcare and mental
health searches for residents
To date 8 residents have been
given opportuniti es f or jobs,
income , housing and
healthcare, 353 residents have
been enter ed into a case
manag ement system and 589
successful searches have been
made for residents
DreamCatchers
O ne-o n-one, lo ng-term
tutoring and mentoring
-
services fo r low-income Palo
Alto youth
$155,000.005%
$8,000.00
Salaries, program
operating expenses,
space rentals
90 low-income students and
their families
Measurement will be made
after surveys are completed
Do wntown
Streets Team
Food & shelte r v ou che rs to
local home less in exchange for
g
keeping the City's streets clean
and v ibrant
$265,00014%
$36,090
Salaries, benefits, and
program operating
expenses: vouchers f or
p
participants
Provide weekly Success Team
Meetings, evaluate w eekly, job
search skills, ment or program
and j ob leads . T otal population
p p
to serve is 75.
136 und uplicat ed indi viduals
ha ve been served.
InnVision Shelter
Network
Three pro grams o perated at
the Opportunity Center.
Prov ide meals, groceries, and
assistance in food stamp appl. ,
$968,246
$12,340
1%
Salaries and operating
p g
expens es
Population ser ved by proposed
program/Unduplicated Palo
Alto residents served: 305
Total population served by this
pr ogram: 305
La Comida de
Califo rnia
Senio r Nutritio n Program
$340,288
$ 32,300 .00
9%
Salaries, Program
operatingexpens es
p
(food), and suppli es
43,850 meals at 3 sites; 135
indi viduals daily/ 74% are Palo
y
Alto residents
36,334 meals served/71% of
goal
2013-15 HSRA P Funding A llocatio ns
MayView Health
Center
Health care fo r low income &
uninsured Palo Alto residents
$4,348,740
$ 17,231.00
4%
Salaries, insurance,
printing/publishsing &
lab service
He alth care to 100 lo w in co me
or ho me less Palo Alto re siden ts;
200 direct clinic services
Provided health care to 77;167
dire ct clinic servic es
Momentum for
Mental Health .
Homeless Outreach to v ery
low or no income Palo Alto
homelessperso ns.
$28,000,000. 00
$ 25,847. 00
9%
Salaries and program
operating expenses
500 contacts with 50
unduplicated individuals; refe r
minimum 40 indiv iduals to
mental health services
209 contacts with 57
unduplicated individuals/ 54
p
with mental illness/ referred
28 individuals to mental health
services
Palo Alto Ho using
Corporation
Ste pping Stone s to Succe ss
offers low-income Palo Alto
students academic support
$117,613. 00
$10,000
9%
Salaries, equipmemt &
materials, pro gram
activities,
transportation and
professio nal fees
1,000 hours of homework clubs,
70 hours of experiential skill
building , 80 hours of
entrepreneurial and leadership
exercis es, 150 hours of
leadership and techn ology skill-
building
To date the Homew ork Club
have s erved 761 h ours, skill
building 105 ho urs, l eadership
and techn ology 229 hours and
entrepreneurial have served
105 hours with a total of 74
y outh s er ved
Peninsula
HealthCare
Co nne ctio n
Provide services to improve
me ntal and physical health of
ho meless members of the
community or risk of
homelessness
$1,131,509. 00
$26,800
2%
Salaries and expe nses
650 unduplicated primary care
patients and over 200
psychiatric patients will be
ser ved
A t otal of 680 patients have
been served
Senior Adults
Legal Assistance
Legal assistance to elde rs32%
g
$27,200. 00
$8,616. 00
Salaries
Direct legal sys to 60
unduplicated s eniors,
community ed ucati on
Provided free legal s ervic es to
35 Palo Alto s eniors .
Vista Ce nter fo r
the Blind and
Visually Impaired
Outre ach to edu cate senio rs
on the av ailability of services
that will enable seniors to
"embrace life to the fullest"
despite vision loss or blindne ss
$2,455,350.00
$5,000.00
2%
Salaries
Vision rehab w orkshop reaching
15 seniors, social work to
pro vide assessment and
ind vidual r ehab for 10, daily
li ving skills training for 4 seniors,
and orientation and mobility
training to travel safely for 4
seniors
To date 21 seniors participated
in vision r ehab workshops, 14
seniors have worked with
social workers, 11 seniors have
recei ved daily livings skills, and
11 ha ve recei ved orientation
and mobility trainings .
Yo uth5
Co mmunity
Svs-YCS
Yo uth Services and Leadership
$740,000
$16,082
2%
Salaries and expenses
Recruit and train 5 teach er-
sponsors, 5 weekly YCS Clubs
with a t otal of 400 students,
quarterly service days
teacher -spons ors are in
place, 5 sch ools have clubs
with 400 students and services
e vents with over 50 students
have taken place
FINANCE COMMITTEE
EXCERPT - FINAL MINUTES
Page 1 of 13
Special Meeting
Tuesday, April 15, 2014
3. Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) Contract Renewal
for FY 2015.
Minka Van Der Zwaag, Community Services Manager reported the Council
approved Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) funding for
Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 and approved funding in concept for FY 2015 in the
same amount. The FY 2014 HSRAP allocation included a 7.1 percent
increase which was distributed in equal proportions to all HSRAP grantees.
HSRAP executed six-year contracts with Palo Alto Community Child Care
(PACCC) and Avenidas and two-year contracts with other agencies.
Agencies under six-year contracts had a historical relationship with the City
and provided services identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Agencies under
two-year contracts traditionally provided critical services identified in the
Human Relations Commission's (HRC) annual priority setting process. A
biannual funding program allowed the HRC, Finance Committee
(Committee), and the Council to incorporate new agencies to meet emerging
needs. The HRC recommended to the Policy and Services Committee that
Avenidas and PACCC remain a part of HSRAP. The Policy and Services
Committee recommended PACCC and Avenidas become direct services
contractors. The Council was going to consider this issue on May 12, 2014.
The Outlet Program, an outreach program to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and
transgender (LGBT) youth, was now a part of Adolescent Counseling
Services. All grantees met performance indicators and were good stewards
of funds. The HRC visited HSRAP agencies to understand the services b eing
provided. Stepping Stones and Dream Catchers, tutoring programs for low -
income youth, and Vista Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired were new
agencies that received HSRAP funding in FY 2014. The HRC conducted a
detailed Human Services Needs Assessment in 2011 and was currently
working on a supplement. The HSRAP Budget for FY 2015 was the same as
the FY 2014 Budget. If the Council acted to remove PACCC and Avenidas
from HSRAP, then Staff needed to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to seek
providers for senior services and child care.
Jo Jaros, Vista Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired served more than
50 senior citizens in Palo Alto in FY 2014. Vista Center utilized HSRAP
funding to provide daily living skill services, orientation and mobility
services, counseling, and support groups.
FINAL MINUTES
Dawn Wilcox, Vista Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired was able to
maintain her nursing license because of services she obtained at Vista
Center. She now volunteered as Coordinator of the Health Library at Vista
Center. More and more residents needed the services provided by Vista
Center.
Georgia Bacil, Senior Adults Legal Assistance (SALA) Directing Attorney
provided free civil legal services to senior citizens throughout Santa Clara
County (County). HSRAP funding allowed SALA to double the number of
appointments scheduled in Palo Alto.
Karen Anselmo, Community Technology Alliance (CTA) Director of
Operations indicated CTA provided technology solutions to issues of
homelessness and poverty. HSRAP funding supported three programs, one
of which was community voice mail. CTA was exploring a pilot program to
design a mobile service specifically for homeless and low-income
populations.
Council Member Burt asked if the new program was intended to be cellular,
wireless, or both.
Ms. Anselmo indicated it was mobile phone technology.
Council Member Burt clarified that use of a wireless network did not incur
fees for the user.
Ms. Anselmo said she would provide information at a later time.
Eileen Richardson, Downtown Streets Team and Peninsula Healthcare
Connection advised that the Downtown Streets Team won an award from
MetLife for its partnership with the Palo Alto Police Department and the Palo
Alto Business Improvement District. Peninsula Healthcare Connection
merged with New Directions in 2013.
Council Member Holman requested Staff provide reasons for the HRC
recommending PACCC and Avenidas to remain a part of HSRAP and the
reasons the Policy and Services Committee voted against that.
Chair Berman indicated the issue was not a part of the Agenda Item under
discussion.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag clarified that the Council would consider the issue in May
2014. Proposed allocations included funding for Avenidas and PACCC.
Chair Berman did not believe it was appropriate for the Committee to
discuss policy issues.
FINAL MINUTES
Council Member Holman inquired about the anticipated Budget for FY 2015.
Lalo Perez, Director of Administrative Services and Chief Financial Officer
reported Staff was still preparing the Proposed Budget.
Council Member Holman requested a rough estimate.
Mr. Perez believed the Budget would be in the range of $170 million.
Council Member Holman noted the City did not commit one percent of its
Budget to HSRAP funding and wanted HSRAP funding to reach that level.
She inquired about the process to introduce a new nonprofit agency.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag reported new agencies could submit applications at the
beginning of the next cycle. In the fall of 2014, Staff was going to release
an RFP for FY 2016. In her experience, agencies were not added in the
second year of the funding cycle.
Council Member Holman seemed to recall from her service as liaison to the
HRC that some organizations were removed from HSRAP.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag advised that more agencies applied for funding than
HSRAP could fund. To add new agencies, funding for existing agencies had
to be reduced. In her experience with HSRAP, agencies continued to receive
funding in new cycles unless they missed a deadline in the application
process.
Council Member Holman wished to provide the name of an agency for
consideration for HSRAP funding.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag indicated Staff provided names of agencies to the
Purchasing Department when the RFP was issued.
Council Member Holman suggested Staff include Fresh Lifetimes for Youth
(FLY).
Vice Mayor Kniss asked if the suggestion of agencies was appropriate under
the Agenda Item.
Mr. Perez suggested the Committee only provide the names of agencies for
inclusion in the RFP process.
Council Member Holman reported FLY was a new nonprofit agency that
worked to break the crime/violence/incarceration cycle for teens.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag was familiar with FLY.
FINAL MINUTES
Council Member Holman reiterated that HSRAP funding should total one
percent of the City's Budget.
Council Member Burt recalled that HSRAP funding had not contained
inflationary increases and had actually decreased since 2003.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag reported the Council policy to include a Consumer Price
Index (CPI) increase for HSRAP grantees was temporarily suspended in
2003. In 2007 and again in 2009, HSRAP funding was reduced.
Council Member Burt was not able to recall a reason for suspension of the
CPI increase, and inquired about the reason for the suspension becoming
permanent.
Mr. Perez did not have the complete history; however, he believed the
impact of pensions not being fully funded resulted in an overall decrease in
the City's Budget.
Council Member Burt noted the Budget for FY 2015 would be approximately
$170 million, and inquired about the total Budget amount in FY 2003.
Mr. Perez said he could provide that information shortly.
Council Member Burt referenced Ms. Van Der Zwaag's comments regarding
the HRC's process to identify needs. Staff anticipated Budget surpluses for
the next several years. He was concerned that input from the HRC would
lag behind the Committee's consideration of additional HSRAP funding in FY
2015. The Committee was able to use a placeholder amount without
identifying the allocation of HSRAP funding. He asked if Staff had additional
ideas.
Mr. Perez suggested the Committee place HSRAP funding in the parking lot
during the Budget process. The Committee was able to discuss HSRAP
funding during the Community Services Department Budget review or at
wrap-up night.
Council Member Burt inquired whether the HRC would be able to provide
information to the Committee within that timeframe.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag felt the HRC could complete its supplemental report if
they knew there was an opportunity for increased funding.
Mr. Perez recalled that in 2013 the HRC was tasked with determining HSRAP
allocations prior to the final adoption of the Budget.
FINAL MINUTES
Council Member Burt advised that the Committee could not provide an
explicit allocation under the current Agenda Item, but could request the HRC
provide recommendations early in the Budget process.
Mr. Perez added that the Committee could utilize funds from the Council
Contingency Fund for HSRAP funding when discussing the Proposed Budget.
Past Committees provided one-time funding from the Council Contingency
Fund.
Council Member Burt believed the Committee was ready to institutionalize
funding for HSRAP because of anticipated surpluses and prior discussions.
Mr. Perez indicated the FY 2003 Budget totaled $114,950,000.
Council Member Burt stated at that time HSRAP funding was greater than
one percent of the total Budget. It was a possibility for the Committee to
consider creating some type of reserve fund to assure level HSRAP funding
in times of economic downturns. He also understood the Food Closet could
be in jeopardy with its funding.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag requested Mr. Dah of InnVision Shelter Network to
respond to Council Member Burt's comment.
Philip Dah reported the Food Closet served two bags of groceries twice a
week to homeless and low-income people in Palo Alto. The budget for the
Food Closet was $41,300 and HSRAP provided only $12,000.
Council Member Burt suggested the HRC review funding for and needs of the
Food Closet.
Mr. Perez noted the Adopted Budget in FY 2004 included HSRAP funding of
$1,318,853. Proposed funding for HSRAP in FY 2015 was almost the same
as in the Adopted Budget for FY 2005.
Council Member Burt remarked that it was important for the Committee to
consider how HSRAP services integrated with other elements of City
programs and the ability of the recipients to access services. He inquired
whether proposed shuttle routes would meet the needs of clients served by
HSRAP funding.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag indicated neither HSRAP Staff nor the HRC was involved
in the creation of new routes.
FINAL MINUTES
Jaime Rodriguez, Chief Transportation Official indicated routes were created
in conjunction with public input at community meetings. In preparing the
first Needs Assessment, the HRC talked with the Planning and Transportation
Commission regarding concerns that transportation was a baseline need with
key gaps. The new routes encompassed many senior centers.
Council Member Burt recalled Staff stating to the Council that the routes
were conceptual. Earlier in the day Council Members received information
which indicated proposed routes. He was not sure those routes would meet
a variety of needs.
Vice Mayor Kniss remarked that Staff did not mention the interaction of
HSRAP funding with other funding sources or the agencies' rationales for
their requests.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag reported that agencies provided specific scopes of
service and specific information about the percentage of agency funding
requested from the City. Agencies also indicated the percentage of funding
received from government agencies, in-kind services, donations, etc.
Review of that type of information was part of the HRC's recommendation
process. The HRC did not want City funding to be a major source for
agencies.
Vice Mayor Kniss was curious as to how the one percent of total Budget
amount was determined.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag indicated it was a conceptual amount.
Vice Mayor Kniss asked if the one percent amount was subjective rather
than objective.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag answered yes. Some cities provided a percentage of
their overall budgets to agencies. The HRC viewed that as a model for its
requests for funding.
Vice Mayor Kniss noted many HSRAP agencies received funding from the
County as well as the City. There needed to be an objective means to
determine the appropriate amount of funding for HSRAP.
Mr. Perez commented that the Committee should note the difference in
budget sizes between Palo Alto and other cities. Palo Alto provided non-
typical business activities, such as utilities. Staff discussed whether one
percent was the correct amount to consider, given the Budget differences.
FINAL MINUTES
Vice Mayor Kniss hoped the reports clearly demonstrated why the HRC
selected certain amounts.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag offered to include the information in the Staff Report to
the Council.
Vice Mayor Kniss wanted background information for the current funding
cycle.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag explained that in the past, the mid-cycle Item was
informational.
Chair Berman suggested HSRAP information presented at the beginning of
each cycle be included in the mid-cycle report. He concurred with Council
Member Burt's suggestion of a reserve fund for HSRAP. He inquired whether
the HRC lacked sufficient resources to complete the supplemental Needs
Assessment.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag reported that in 2010 the HRC had the services of an
intern who prepared demographic information and researched data.
Chair Berman asked if a small amount of funding would assist with
completion of the supplemental Needs Assessment.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag indicated the HRC conducted one-on-one contact with
agencies, with the possibility of a full Needs Assessment in the next few
years. At the current time, the HRC felt they could perform the smaller
review.
Chair Berman recommended Commissions approach the Council if they
needed a few thousand dollars for professional assistance. With respect to
shuttle routes, the Transportation Department needed a comprehensive
discussion with other departments to receive input.
Council Member Burt inquired whether the Committee could request that the
Transportation Department engage fully with the Community Services
Department regarding needs.
Mr. Perez suggested the Committee provide direction to Staff in the Budget
hearing for the Planning Department.
Council Member Burt expressed concern that plans would be set by the time
Budget hearings were held.
Mr. Perez reported Staff could hold internal discussions without specific
direction.
FINAL MINUTES
Council Member Burt wanted Staff to reconsider routes before the process
had advanced.
MOTION: Chair Berman moved, seconded by Council Member Burt to
recommend to the City Council that:
1. The funding allocation as recommended by the Council for the
2013-2015 Human Services Resource Allocation funding period be
included in the Fiscal Year 2015 Human Services contract budget;
2. The City Manager or his designee be authorized to execute year two
of separate two-year contracts with fourteen agencies as was
approved in June 2013; and
3. The City Manager or his designee be authorized to execute year five
of separate six-year contracts with Avenidas and Palo Alto
Community Child Care.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to request that Human Relations Commission
evaluate supplemental or increases for funding for Fiscal Year 2015 and
bring to the Finance Committee as soon as possible.
Council Member Holman asked if the Committee should utilize the parking
lot approach to consider additional funding.
Chair Berman explained that HRC information would be presented to the
Committee which determined whether to move HSRAP funding to the
parking lot in order to understand the overall Budget.
Council Member Burt clarified that if the HRC did not have ample opportunity
to complete the process at the commencement of the Budget process, then
the parking lot would give the HRC three to four weeks to complete it. The
HRC needed to begin work now so that they could provide a
recommendation by the end of the Budget process.
Vice Mayor Kniss asked if the intent of the Motion was to provide additional
funds for HSRAP.
Chair Berman stated the intent was to approve amounts contained in the
original contracts and to inquire whether the HRC would propose increased
funding and provide a report on possibly increasing funding. The Committee
was not advocating a funding increase, but it was open to the concept if the
HRC had a logical recommendation.
FINAL MINUTES
Vice Mayor Kniss remarked that the Committee was indicating there might
be additional funds available for HSRAP. She inquired whether additional
funding could be $200,000-$300,000.
Chair Berman was not setting any amount.
Vice Mayor Kniss wanted to understand the process being discussed.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag did not believe the intent of the Motion was to invite
other nonprofit agencies to apply for additional funding. Through the
supplemental Needs Assessment, the HRC held specific conversations with
current grantees regarding new and emerging needs or urgent budget
shortfalls. The HRC presented those needs to the Committee, and the
Committee determined whether to allocate additional funding on a one-time
basis or an ongoing basis to address those needs.
Council Member Burt referenced the difference between an agency's request
at the beginning of the two-year cycle and the amount allocated.
Vice Mayor Kniss felt allocations were made based on specific reasons. She
asked if the Motion was indicating that the Committee could reassess the
situation now that there could be additional funds available.
Council Member Burt responded yes.
Vice Mayor Kniss asked how the Committee would assess that.
Council Member Burt inquired whether Vice Mayor Kniss meant assess the
amount of funds to allocate or how funds would be spent.
Vice Mayor Kniss answered either way. For example, Abilities United
requested $53,000 and received $40,000.
Council Member Burt clarified that the Committee would utilize the usual
process. The HRC provided funding recommendations and the Committee
deviated from HRC recommendations only if they found an unusual reason to
do so. The Committee did not normally review each agency's funding.
Vice Mayor Kniss inquired about the criteria utilized to make a decision.
Council Member Burt stated the criteria was the HRC's recommendations.
Vice Mayor Kniss indicated the Committee had the HRC's recommendations.
Council Member Burt clarified that the City could not fully fund those
recommendations. The HRC had to review specific programs.
FINAL MINUTES
Vice Mayor Kniss asked if the HRC already did that.
Council Member Burt responded yes, but the HRC would update their
recommendations. He suspected the HRC would update information and
make specific recommendations.
Vice Mayor Kniss needed to know the amount of money and whether the
Committee was telling the HRC additional funds were available.
Chair Berman asked if Vice Mayor Kniss was suggesting some sort of cap.
Vice Mayor Kniss needed to know the amount of funds. The Motion
appeared to be requesting the HRC review allocations to agencies and
determine whether some agencies should receive additional funding. She
expressed concern that all agencies would compete for the additional funds.
Mr. Perez reported that prior Committees provided parameters either as a
percentage or a specific amount.
Chair Berman inquired whether Vice Mayor Kniss wished to offer parameters.
Vice Mayor Kniss did not wish to do so as any additional funding was not
known.
Chair Berman did not want to spend the entire Budget surplus, as funds
were needed for infrastructure projects.
Vice Mayor Kniss asked if Chair Berman would increase allocations to the
amounts requested if each agency could justify additional funding.
Chair Berman replied no.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER that the Human Relations Commission review the
funded agencies in Human Services Resource Allocation Process to identify
most critical needs that were requested and unable to be allocated for Fiscal
Year 2015, not to exceed the amount initially requested by those agencies.
Council Member Burt explained that the difference between amounts
allocated and amounts requested was the high-end parameter. The Motion
asked the HRC to review each program to determine the most critical unmet
needs.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag believed the original request and the original scope of
service could be different from new and emerging needs. As the Motion
stated, it seemed to include only the former.
FINAL MINUTES
Council Member Burt felt the HRC should review new and emerging needs as
well as previously identified needs without funding.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to: 1) include any critical and new and emerging
needs that the Human Relations Commission has identified, as well as critical
needs that were identified previously but unable to be allocated in the
previous budget cycle; and 2) not to exceed the additional $200,000 that
was requested in aggregate that was not funded at the beginning of the
prior two-year cycle.
Vice Mayor Kniss inquired whether the Committee was willing to allocate a
maximum of $200,000.
Council Member Burt was willing to consider allocating a maximum of
$200,000.
Vice Mayor Kniss said she could support that but was very uncomfortable
with an open-ended direction.
Mr. Perez advised "consider" was an important word that needed to be part
of the Motion as the Committee had not seen the Proposed Budget.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag suggested the effect of the Motion on PACCC and
Avenidas if they were removed from HSRAP could be discussed at a future
meeting.
Chair Berman inquired whether the Council's consideration of removing
PACCC and Avenidas from HSRAP would occur prior to the Committee's
review of the Item in the Budget process.
Mr. Perez indicated Committee review of the Community Services
Department Budget was scheduled for May 20, 2014 and wrap-up was
scheduled for May 29, 2014.
Chair Berman noted the Committee would have clarification on PACCC and
Avenidas prior to discussing the Budget.
Council Member Burt suggested the Committee request HRC place additional
funding in two categories, highest and second highest priorities.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag commented that the HRC often provided multiple options
for Committee and Council consideration.
Council Member Holman understood the Motion requested the HRC identify
emerging needs not funded in the prior cycle up to requested amounts. She
FINAL MINUTES
inquired whether funding not allocated to one agency could be transferred to
another agency. For example, Dream Catchers requested $55,000 and
received $8,000. She asked if the Committee could shift some of the
difference, $47,000, to InnVision for example.
Council Member Burt stated the additional amount was aggregate. The
Motion allowed the HRC to use its discretion in the recommendations
regarding application of total dollars.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to allow the Human Relations Commission to use
their discretion in the recommendation on how the total dollars will be
applied.
Chair Berman supported increasing HSRAP funding, but was unsure whether
to support the full amount of $200,000. He requested Staff ensure the HRC
of the understanding that $200,000 was the high end.
Vice Mayor Kniss requested a restatement of the Motion.
Kimberly Lunt, Administrative Associate III, reviewed the Motion and
incorporated language.
Vice Mayor Kniss wanted the record to reflect that the Committee was not
guaranteeing additional HSRAP funding.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag clarified that the HRC would review current agencies
and/or new needs identified in the supplemental Needs Assessment. The
total dollar amount was not to exceed $200,000. If additional funds were
less than $200,000, then the Committee was able to reduce HRC
recommendations by a percentage. The HRC had discretion to bring to the
Committee's attention either additional distribution among current grantees
or new Items.
Council Member Burt indicated the HRC was free to make recommendations
for new needs that they felt were more important than other previously
requested needs.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag reiterated that the HRC would have flexibility to reduce a
current allocation so the total amount did not exceed $200,000.
Council Member Burt did not believe HRC recommendations would exceed
$200,000.
FINAL MINUTES
Chair Berman clarified that the Motion allowed the HRC to allocate the
$47,000 difference between amount requested and amount allocated for
Dream Catchers to Dream Catchers or to other agencies.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER that in looking at the revised allocation provided
by the Human Relations Commission, that it [the report] be provided in a
two-tier recommendation.
Chair Berman asked if the HRC usually provided a prioritization of
recommendations.
Ms. Van Der Zwaag reported the HRC usually provided multiple
recommendations when Commissioners did not agree. If Commissioners
were in complete agreement, the HRC provided only one funding
recommendation.
Council Member Burt advised that the Committee preferred HRC
recommendations be provided in two tiers of priorities.
MOTION PASSED: 4-0