HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11051991 - 1.77 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 5E c /S III
Contra
FROM: JOAN V. SPARKS-, DIRECTOR
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Costa
OCTOBER 22 1991 = County
DATE: / ?sr�-cbu ` -�r
SUBJECT: ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSILS FOR 1992
COMMUNITY SERVICES BLOCK GRANT (CSBG) SUBCONTRACT ALLOCATION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
I. RECOMIUMDED ACTION
REVIEW Economic Opportunity Council (EOC) recommendations for
proposals for 1992 Community Services Block Grant funds to be
obtained from the State of California Department of Economic
Opportunity and awarded to the following agencies and FIX December
1.0 to consider approval:
Amount Discount
Agency Requested Factor Allocation
United Council of $ 73,155 10% $ 65,839 .
Spanish Speaking Orgs.
Cambridge Community 18,,000 10% 16,700
Center - "B"
Pittsburg Preschool 40,000 20% 32,000
Coordinating Council
Cambridge Community 7,000 20% 5,600 '
Center - "A"
Neighborhood House of 25,985 30% 18,189
North Richmond
Family Stress Center 23,000 30% 16-,100
$ 187,140 $ 154,428
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: RYES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF B A D COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: County Administrator ATTESTED NOV 5 1991
County Auditor-Controller PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
County Counsel SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Community Services
M382 (10/88) BY I DEPUTY
II. FINANCIAL IMPACT
None. If approved by the- Board of Supervisors,- the Contract Year
will be January 1, 1992, through December 31, 1992. The period
January 1, 1992, through June 30, 1992,= is already refected in the
department's budget. Funding from July 1, 1992, through December
31, 1992, will be reflected in the department's FY 1992-93 budget.
III. CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION
A decision not to approve the Economic Opportunity Council
recommendations would result in the loss of needed CSBG services to
the poor of the county._ It will also result in the layoff of
approximately two County employees and approximately twenty-four
delegate agent staff who will be employed via this Contract. This
report is for the review of the Board of Supervisors. A Board
Order will be submitted in December to include changes recommended
by the Board as a result of this review.
IV. REASONS FOR RECOMMMDED ACTION
A., EOC Proposal Review and Allocation Process
The Request for Proposal (RFP) for Community Services Block
Grant. funds was distributed to interested organizations,
beginning August 18, 1991. On September 10, 1991, a bidders'
conference was held where questions from submitting agencies
were answered. The deadline for RFP's was set as October 1,
1991. Eight proposals were received from seven organizations
in the county. Cambridge Community Center sent two proposals,
each with a different objective; both were considered.
The Program Development Committee (PDC) had developed a new
rating sheet to determine a point total for each proposal.
The greatest possible point total was 105 and the least
possible point total was 18. In an effort to determine which
proposals to consider for funding, a cutoff total of 70 points
was established. Using this cutoff point, two proposals were
eliminated from consideration.
The total requested dollars of the six remaining proposals was
$187,140. It has been estimated by the Community Services
Department that there would be approximately $150,000 avail-
able to award. After examining many methods to bring these
two amounts in line, the PDC decided to discount the requested
amounts. The PDC also decided that the amount of the discount
should vary depending on the strength of the proposal.
This resulted in a 10% discount for the top two proposals, a
20% discount for the middle two proposals, and a 30% discount
for the last two proposals. The application of these dis-
countsdoes not appear to adversely affect the agencies'
abilities to provide their proposed services. This formula
brought the requested dollars to $154,428. The difference
between the amount of dollars requested and the recommended
allocation is $32,712. The EOC recommends, should additional
funds become available, that they be applied in such a way as
to eliminate this difference.
The Economic Opportunity Council agreed with the process and
the recommended. funding levels at their meeting on October 16,
1991.
B. Agency Scoring: in Rank Order
1. United Council of Spanish Speaking Organizations. . .96.6
2. Cambridge Community Center "B" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90.75
3. Pittsburg Preschool Coordinating Council. . . . . . . . . . .87.3
4. Cambridge Community Center "A" . . . . . . . 11 . . . . . . .87.25
5. Neighborhood House of North Richmond. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76. 3
6. Family Stress Center. . . . . . . . . . . . . .70.
------------------------------------------------- ------------
7. Battered Women's Alternatives,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . .67.6
8. Prevention/C. C. Co. Health. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61.
The- Federal mandate for the CSBG program is to help the
poorest in our society toward self-sufficiency.
All the agencies selected have played a historic role as human
service providers in Contra Costa County.
C. 1992 Economic Opportunity Council priorities for CSBG funds
are for programs in the following areas:
Employment
Education
Prevention of Starvation and Malnutrition
D. Proposals Eliminated Rationale
1. Battered Women's Alternatives
This is an extremely strong organization, well financed.
Its good works are well known and promoted both locally
and nationally. It was felt that this organization has
sufficient resources itself. Their request was for
$55,898.
2. Nutrition/Prevention Program/Contra Costa County Health
Department
This organization is interested in a media campaign to
educate the county to end childhood hunger by increased
participation in three Federal food programs. While we
believe this would be a good program, we feel our
resources should be reserved for direct service programs
as much as possible. Their request was for $56,611.
E. Description of Agencies Recommended for Funding by EOC
1. United Council of Spanish Speaking Organizations
UCSSO offers a wide spectrum of human services county-
wide. Services include information and referral,
translation and interpretation, employment and training,
nutritional support, transportation, interagencylinkage,
weatherization referrals and a Head Start program.
2. Cambridge Community Center
This agency provides essential emergency services to low-
income people in the Central County area. Services
include food and nutrition, senior citizen activities,
child care, clothing, employment counseling information
and referral. This agency provided two proposals: (A) to
help fund a job developer/counselor, and (B) to maintain
and augment their dynamic food distribution program,
which is serving 500 families per week.
3. Pittsburg Preschool Coordina�,.ing Council
This agency provides child care and other community
services to low/no income families in Pittsburg and East
County. This agencyo provides services to other
organizations, e.g. , F ` tptress, works closely with
the public school sys the school-age bridging
l + r
project, provides day care for drug-addicted babies,,
grandparent support group, provides food, substance abuse
prevention, etc. , etc.
4. Neighborhood House of North Richmond
This agency has historically provided much needed human
services to the most impoverished community in West
County. Some of the services provided are an education/
employment outreach program, alcohol/drug abuse counsel-
ing and inpatient halfway house, senior program-, AIDS
counseling and testing, youth program. With an increase
of 20% Asian population, this agency is developing a
Human Relations Skills project to help the larger Black
community resolve its feelings in re: the Asian influx
and help both groups resolve conflicts and tensions.
5. Family Stress Center
This agency is a Contractor, providing Head Start
services in the Central County area, i.e. , Martinez,
Concord, West Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill.. However, their
proposal is to continue, in East County, their Latino
Family Program. This project uses the case management
model in working with low-income Spanish speaking
families who are at risk for abuse and neglect. The
service provides in-home visits, counseling, resource
linkage, advocacy, job referral, transportation, transla-
tion, school presentations to children and youth on
health education and acculturation. It is important to
note that these families are first generation. The
agency provides intensive care and works well with other
community-based organizations.
V. 1992 CSBG Estimate of Budget Allocation
The State Department of Economic Opportunity's first estimate of
Contra Costa County Community Services Department allocation was
$419,066 in CSBG funds. At present we are waitingl for a final
contract amount. The estimated sum would be $5,000 less than CSD
received in 1991. The CSD Director feels we may maintain approxi-
mately $150,000 to let to community based organizations.