Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02111986 - 2.4 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on February 11, 1986 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson and Powers NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Contract Process for Allocation of AB 1733 Funds (Child Abuse Prevention and Intervention Programs) The Board on February 4 , 1986 , deferred decision to this day on the recommendation of the Family and Children' s Trust (FACT) Committee and requested the Director of the Social Service Department to provide information on the AB 1733 contract funding process for Child Abuse Prevention and Intervention Programs . In a report dated February 10 , 1986 , R. E . Jornlin, Director, Social Service Department, explained the options available to the Board relative to the allocation of AB 1733 funds . He noted that the law allows counties to determine local funding priorities and to select service providers as well as allows a county to terminate and/or rebid some or all of the existing contracts for the current fiscal year. Board members considered the options presented to them. On motion of Supervisor Fanden, seconded by Supervisor Schroder. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the Director- of the Social Service Department, (or his designee) , is ;AUTHO_RIZED t_o\ negotiate contracts with the current providers for AB 1733 funds as noted below: We Care Society, Inc . Child care for at-risk infants ; located in Concord Child and Family Therapy Center Treatment of sexually abused children; based in Martinez . Early Childhood Mental Health Program Diagnosis and treatment ; based in Richmond. Family Stress Center Respite care ; based in Pleasant Hill . hereby certify that th?s Is a trate and correct corm•of an action taken and entered on q e minutes ci ;e Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: .,�_ /// / FF�g PHIL BATCHELOR, C 1 rk of the Scant of(Supervisors and County Adir!n!stra4( r B -�,�—U' Or.g. De;j' : Clerk of the Board CC' Welfare Director County Administrator County Counsel Contractors via Contracts & Grants Unit L/ SOCIAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TO Members of the DATE February 10, 1986 Board of Supervisors FROM r�33COUNTnY n, Director cc SUBJ CONTRACTS Following is information on the AB1733 contract funding process as requested by the Board of Supervisors February 4, 1986. Early in January I submitted to the CAO a draft board order relative to AB1733 contract funding for FY 1986-87. The Family and Children's Trust Committee, which reviewed the options open to the County, recommended that the four current contracts not be automatically reviewed but that a Request for Proposal (RFP) process be used for allocating contract funds for next fiscal year. The FACT Committee was presented information on the current contracts, and options on the contract process before making their decision. The following data is from a written report presented to the Committee along with an oral presentation made by the Department Contract Administrator. The State Department of Social Services has sent the counties information for planning purposes relative to AB1733 contracting in FY 1986-87. They intend to notify the counties about their specific allocations after the Governor's proposed budget has been released. The law allows the counties to determine local funding priorities and to select service providers. Therefore, unless restricted by subsequent statutory change or budget control language, the County may decide to terminate and rebid some or all of the existing contracts for the current fiscal year. The second alternative is to renegotiate the existing contracts and extend the same contractors. A third alternative is to continue contracts in the same manner as for 1985-86 without renegotiation. The final alternative is to initiate these actions in combination. Whatever the County decides, the decision must comply with program intent of applicable sections of the W&I Code. Also, the Department must notify the Office of Child Abuse Prevention in writing of its intentions by January 15, 1986. This notification must specify the planned actions and rationale for that action for every currently funded project. Should the County continue currently funded contracts into FY 86-87, these contracts may be let without a competitive selection process (RFP). Should the County decide to terminate 1 or more of the contracts and rebid that particular service or a new service, a competitive process would be required. The current contractors and services areas follows: We Care Society, Inc. $25,974 Child care for at risk infants. Located in Concord. Serves Central and East counties. GEN 9 (Rev. 1/79) -2- Child and Family Therapy Center $81,878 Treatment of sexually abused children. Based in Martinez. Provides countywide service. Early Childhood Mental Health Program $66,032 Diagnosis and treatment. Based in Richmond. Serves West County. Family Stress Center $27,732 Respite care. Based in Pleasant Hill. Service is open to all but serves Central County mainly. I want to point out to you some of the ramifications of any of the alterna- tives that the County selects for allocation of AB1733 funds for FY 86-87. The simplist process would be to reallocate without significant renegotiation to the 4 existing contractors. Each of these contractors continues to provide service which fall within the program intent of the applicable sections of the W&I Code, and these services continue to be needed and are well utilized in the County. We have not closely monitored the quality of the service because the State provides extensive monitoring. However, all reports indicate that the services provided are of above-average quality and fill program voids. It becomes a difficult matter to discontinue contract service funding when the contractors have become dependent upon a particular source of funding in order to maintain their service. If the County were to discontinue funding for current contractors, it does not appear that they would have adequate funds to continue their service at the rate that they are now providing it. Indeed some of the services might very well be discontinued and not available to the County. The problem with continuing services without a competitive process is that the County is unable to incorporate a different range of priorities. When the current 1733 contract services were selected, they were not selected based on a priority system, but the selection process was open to any contractor who could fill RFP requirements with a child abuse prevention and intervention service. A second reason why it is a problem to continue the current con- tracts for a fourth year is that the contractors become dependent on this particular source of funding; and we no longer have an open competitive process. In addition the FACT Committee, as it is now constituted, has not been involved in this selection process or addressing different service needs related to child abuse prevention and intervention. The FACT Committee considered all of the above information and then voted to recommend an RFP selection process for FY 1986-87. This was not intended as a negative comment on the services provided by current contractors. FACT wished to have the opportunity to consider other service needs and service providers before making a recommendation to the Board for a fourth funding year under AB1733. Some or all of the current contractors could be extended under the RFP process. Members of the Board of Supervisors have raised questions about the use of committees to make contract recommendations. Indeed the AB1733 process and -3- TAP II-A (Riefugee service) process became somewhat confused at the 2/4/86 Board meeting. They are entirely different processes. The FACT Committee has been appointed by the Board and delegated authority to recommend programs to be funded from AB1733, birth certificate fees and Family and Chldren s Trust monies. TAP II-A is a Federal program which operates on a FY Plan that is recommended by the Advisory Council for Refugee Services and Targeted Assistance. Based on the Plan which the Board approves, an RFP is issued which must conform to State and Federal guidelines. Current contractors can not be automatically extended. Although the Social Service Department uses community resource people in evaluating proposals, the department makes the actual recommendations on contracts to be funded based on the scores of the evaluations. I understand that the current AB1733 contractors are submitting data to you on their programs and have not detailed that information for you in this memo. EH/dc AB1733.1