HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11291988 - IO.7 To BOARD OF SUPERVISORS I. 0. 7
FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEES Itra
November 14, 1988 (JxJJIU
DATE; C
V 1.i1 It
CRITERIA FOR AWARD OF ^
SUBJECT; CHALLENGE GRANT FUNDS
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECONIlUKNDATIONS
1 . Direct the Human Services Advisory Commission to utilize the
following criteria in evaluating applications for Challenge
Grant funds for the 1988-89 fiscal year:
A. The primary emphasis should be on encouraging proposals
which will generate new, non-governmental sources of
ongoing matching funds in as innovative a manner as
possible.
B. Where ongoing funds are not available, one-time funds
can be used as a match, but these proposals should not
be ranked as highly as ones which can achieve a
permanent source of new funds.
C. In-kind sources of matching funds should be allowed, .
but only up to 500 of the matching funds and only on
the condition that the in-kind funds are clearly new,
additional funds, not funds or personnel that are
already available or committed.
D. Preference should be given to proposals which provide
new or additional services in the following areas:
Substance Abuse Programs
Teen Pregnancy Programs
Intergenerational Programs
These program areas should be given preference where
all other criteria are otherwise of equal value, but
are not to be considered exclusive. The intent is that
proposals which show the promise of new, ongoing,
innovative sources of non-governmental matching funds
should be given preference, providing that Ithe program
area they propose to address is felt by the Commission
to be one of importance in this County.
E. Geographical distribution of awards should be given
little or no importance in the decision-making process.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMEND TION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
X APPROVE OTHER
!'1 ons►.-
SIGNATURE s : Sunne W. McPeak Tom Torlakson
ACTION OF BOARD ON November 29, 1988 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES; NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORRSJ ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: County Admi ni strator ATTESTED
Joe Goglio, Chairman, HSAC
George Johnson, Staff, HSAC PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
M382/7-83 BY_ ,DEPUTY
I
Page 2
F. A three-tier grant program should be indicated to those
who wish to apply for funds, as follows:
TIER MAXIMUM AWARD AMOUNT OF MATCH
1 $ 9, 999 1: 1
II $20,000 2: 1
III $200, 000 3 : 1 or more
Here again, the emphasis should be on innovative
programs which can make a firm commitment to a
substantial ongoing match of non-governmental funds.
We would prefer to see a single grant for an
outstanding proposal with substantial match or leverage
of private funds on a permanent basis than an effort to
satisfy a wide variety of agencies each of whom want a
few thousand dollars for a worthy project.
G. Grant awards should be made based on the promise of
matching funds. However, actual release of funds
should be contingent upon actual receipt of matching
funds.
2 . The Human Services Advisory Commission should be authorized
to proceed with the public meeting outlined in their
recommended process, although the actual meeting may be held
on December 6 rather than November 30 .
3 . In addition, the Human Services Advisory Commission is
authorized to proceed to implement the process they have
outlined in the attached memo, except as modified above, and
to return their recommendations to the Board of Supervisors.
4 . Remove this item as a referral to our Committee.
BACKGROUND-
On August 16, 1988, the Board of Supervisors requested that the
Human Services Advisory Commission recommend a process by which
the Challenge Grant funds should be awarded this fiscal year. on
November 14, 1988, our Committee met with the Chairman of the
Human Services Advisory Commission and staff to the Commission to
review the attached proposal.
Our Committee feels strongly that the purpose of the Challenge
Grant funds is to generate matching funds of an innovative nature
on an ongoing basis more than they are intended to meet immediate
service needs in the community. As a result, we have modified
the proposal submitted by HSAC as noted above in order to clarify
the emphasis which we believe the Board had in mind in creating
the Challenge Grant Program.
Contra
Costa
County
S�.
HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY COMMISSION
November 10, 1988
Supervisor Sunne McPeak and
Supervisor Tom Torlakson
Internal Operations Committee
651 Pine Street, 11th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553
Dear Supervisors McPeak & Torlakson:
The members of the Human Services Advisory Commission voted at
their meeting of October 12, 1988 to adopt and refer to your
Committee the attached recommended process for implementation of
the 1988-89 Challenge Grant program. This action is taken in
response to actions taken by the Board at its August 16, 1988
meeting " . . . to request HSAC to propose a process for awards of
Challenge Grant funds and to recommend the appropriate role of HSAC
in this process. "
The recommended process is a modification of the process adopted.
last year. The modifications include ( 1) reducing the size of
grants to be awarded so that the number of grants awarded can be
increased; ( 2) requiring that no more than 50% of matching funds
can be "in-kind" ; and ( 3 ) convening a public meeting to receive
comments from agencies, advisory groups and community represent-
atives to help HSAC determine areas of needs and kinds of programs
to be addressed by the 1988-89 Challenge Grant.
Upon Board of Supervisors ' approval, HSAC will convene the public
meeting; determine criteria for use and award of funds; request,
evaluate, and select proposals for recommendation to the Board of
Supervisors for funding by mid-Spring 1989.
It is our hope that the 1988-89 Challenge Grant process will build
upon and enhance the benefits resulting from the 1987-88 program.
incerel ,
Joe Goglio, Chair
Human Services Advisory Commission
JG:GWJ:cvd
Attachments ( 2)
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR • 2425 BISSO LANE,SUITE 103 • CONCORD,CA 94520 • (415)646-5661
HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY COMMISSION
1988-89 Human Services Challenge Grant Program
RECOMMENDED PROCESS
1. ROLE OF HSAC
HSAC is to be responsible for both the planning and
selection process (that is, the design, development and
implementation) of the 1988-89 program as well as the
recommendation the Board of Supervisors for funding of the
selected proposals.
2. ROLE OF COMMUNITY BASED_ ORGANIZATIONS (CBO' s) , CONSORTIUM OF
HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY BODIES TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS,
COMMUNITY GROUPS, COUNTY EMPLOYEES, AND INDIVIDUALS
Representatives of the above groups will be invited to
participate in the planning process by asking for their oral
and written presentations at a public meeting tentatively
scheduled for Wednesday, November 30, 1988 in Board of
Supervisors Chambers, Martinez (4:00-6:00 p.m. , and
7: 00-9:00 p.m. ) .
3. PROGRAM CRITERIA
The initial listing of program areas to be funded by the
1988-89 Challenge Grant Funds include:
Crime and Violence
Drug and Alcohol Abuse
Teen Pregnancy
Child and Elder Abuse
Chronic Welfare Dependence
Failure of Children to Learn to Their Potential
HSAC may make additions or deletions to the above list as a
result of the November 30 Public Meeting.
4. GEOGRAPHIC CRITERIA, CLIENT GROUP CRITERIA
AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
At the November 30 Public Meeting, HSAC will encourage
representatives from County Departments, Advisory Bodies,
the Consortium, CBO' s and the community, to give information
and recommendations regarding: (1) Human services needs
within the County; ( 2) extent of services being provided by
the agencies; ( 3 ) gaps in service delivery; and ( 4) possible
role of Challenge Grant in helping to meet those needs.
, r
2
This data will be used by HSAC in developing the final
criteria for use of the funds.
I
5. SIZE OF INDIVIDUAL CHALLENGE GRANTS j
There will be two tiers of grants:
Tier I : Up to $9,999 &
Tier II: $10,000 to $20,000
NOTE: In 1987-88, Tier I: $2-$14,999; Tier II: $15,000-$30,000
6. SIZE OF MATCH
Tier I : $1 Match to $1 Grant
Tier II: $2 Match to $1 Grant
7. KIND OF MATCH
Match can be either monetary or in-kind but in-kind not to
be more than 500 of total match.
8. RATING CRITERIA
Follow procedures established for 1987-88 process and
include additional questions regarding appropriateness of
mix of funds being requested for administration and
services.
9. CBO' s AND HOW TO DETERMINE ACCURACY OF THEIR PRESENTATIONS
CBO' s shall be requested to make oral presentations. HSAC
members can ask questions regarding these items.
10 . STATUS OF PROGRAMS RECEIVING 1987-88 CHALLENGE GRANT FUNDS
IN THE 1988-89 PROCESS
Agencies receiving Challenge Grant funds in 1987-88 must
participate fully in the 1988-89 process if they wish to be
considered for continuation refunding during 1988-89.
11. CALENDAR OF EVENTS
Upon review of data from the Public Meeting, HSAC will
develop the detailed calendar for: ( 1 ) Announcement of Grant
Application; ( 2) time period for preparation deadline for
receipt of Letters of Intent; ( 3 )review and invitation of
selected applicants to submit Final Proposals; and ( 4) the
selection of final applications to the Board of Supervisors
• for funding. HSAC will schedule adequate time in the
1988-89 process to allow applicants to develop reliable
sources of required matching funds.
12 . DESIGN OF NOTICE OF CHALLENGE GRANT PROGRAM
THE LETTER OF INTENT AND THE FINAL APPLICATION
HSAC will use the design of these documents as developed by
the Consortium for the 1987-1988 program.