Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03241987 - 2.5 Jr— OL. T� BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Finance Committee, FRC9M= Contra Internal Operations Committee Costa DATE: March 12, 1987 County SUBJECT: ` GAIN PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUESTS) OR RECOMMENDATION(_S) CATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Support the concept that an RFP process for GAIN contractors is necessary to protect the County from liability exposure. 2. Support the concept that use of a "master contract" whereby one agency provides all the employment and training programs by contract with the County, is not feasible, due to the liability issue. 3 . Direct the County Administrator to work with the Social Services Department to develop changes in the current plan which show increased in-house emphasis in Assessment of clients and decreased in-house involvement with the Job Club/Job Search component of the program. 4. Direct staff to review the change outlined in #3 with the existing coordinating committee. 5. Endorse the concept of a Coordinating Committee to continue to advise the Social Services Department on the GAIN plan. 6. Approve the remainder of the GAIN plan as it was originally submitted. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The GAIN program is supposed to be 100% State funded. The changes outlined in our report should have no substantial effect on the budget that has been developed. BACKGROUND: On March 3, the Board held a workshop on the County' s proposed GAIN plan. Several individuals and groups expressed support for, and opposition to, certain components of the program. Rather than try to work the issues out during the Board meeting, further review of the program was referred to both the Finance Committee and Internal Operations Committee. The committees met in joint session on March 9. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: .X_ YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR R ON OF ARD COMMITTEE Y APPROVE OT ��. Supero' s r Tom Powers, Chair rA( mance) SIGNATURE 5 : Su ery T r NancyFanden Chair (IOC) Su ervisor Torlakson M ACTION OF BOARD ON arch 2/1 , 1927 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 SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: County Administrator ATTESTED _ Marche, 19871987 Social Service PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY ,DEPUTY M382/7-83 J .At that meeting, it was established that the issue of contracting was the major point of dispute. The alternatives discussed were: 1. Contract out all possible employment and training and education programs to the private sector or other public agencies. 2. Keep all possible program components in-house. 3 . Use a mixture of public, private and in-house efforts to provide the various components. The Social Services Department has recommended that alternative #3 be used, using an RFP process for 970 of the potentially contracted costs and keeping the Job Club/Job Search component in-house. After hearing testimony from staff and eleven speakers, the Finance and Internal Operations Committee concluded that for liability reasons, an RFP process was essential and a master contract concept was not feasible. However, the Committees concluded that some refinement in the assessment process and Job Club/Job Search plan could be made to bring more of the assessment function in-house, and to contract out more of the Job Club/Job Search program. The two committees directed the Administrator' s Office to work with the Social Services Department to develop a recommendation which would meet those ends. A separate report on this issue is on the Board' s agenda for March 24. TO- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Phil Batchelor, County Administrator + FROM: Robert Jornlin, Social Services Director Contra March 18, 1987 Costa @ .DATE' County SUBJECT: CHANGES TO PROPOSED GAIN PROGRAM ll� ���/ SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: Pursuant to the Finance and Internal Operations Committees' direction, approve changes in the proposed GAIN Program which would: bring the entire client Assessment function in-house, and contract out the entire Job Search portion of the Job Club/Job Search component. IMPACT• The impact of bringing the entire Assessment function in-house would be the addition of eight vocational counselors and two supervisors and revenues of $330,032 to the Social Services budget. The impact of contracting out the Job Search portion of the Job Club/Job Search component of the program would be a reduction of $62, 568 from the Social Service and two vocational counselors proposed for this component. Overall, the requested GAIN budget would increase by $132,293 . BACKGROUND: When the Finance and Internal Operations Committees met on March 9 , the primary point of discussion was how much of the GAIN Program could potentially be contracted out and how much should remain in-house. County employee groups encouraged the committees to make greater use of in-house staff because of the belief that in-house efforts would result in less fragmented service delivery. Outside agencies encouraged the committees to recommend even more contracting in order to avoid duplication of services they already provide in the community. The Social Services Department had recommended that approximately 970 of the total dollars eligible should be contracted and that 30 of the amount eligible should remain in-house to provide a Job Club/Job Search Program. After hearing extensive testimony on this issue, the two committees directed the County Administrator to work with the Social Services Department to develop a recommendation which would show increased in-house CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMEN TION OF BOAITTEE 0 APPROVE OTHER � a SIGNATURE(S)' ACTION OF BOARD ON March 24 , 1987 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 SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. cc: County Administrator ATTESTED March 24,. 1987 Social Services Department PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR M382/7-83 BY ,DEPUTY emphasis on the assessment of clients and decreased involvement with the Job Club/Job Search component of the program. Staff was also directed to meet with the Coordinating Committee to review the changes that were agreed to by the CAO and the department. Based upon Finance and Internal Operations Committees' direction, the County Administrator and Social Services Director concur that the entire program for Assessment of clients be brought in-house and that the Job Search component of the Job Club/Job Search program be contracted out. This recommendation would result in several improvements to the program as originally proposed. 1. It would result in less fragmentation of program components. 2. The Social Services Department is the only agency without a potential conflict of interest since they would not be in a position to refer clients to their own programs This may result in more potential for a successful program to be developed for each client. 3 . Doing the assessment in-house may allow the Social Services Department to more effectively do long-term planning regarding the direction of the program, since their knowledge of the applicant pool would be more direct than if assessment is contracted. The disadvantages of proceeding with this recommendation are that the concept of more in-house efforts runs contrary to the desires of the majority of the Coordinating Committee. Secondly, the assessment function was seen by some agencies as one of the most desirable components to bid on because the results would be more tangible than some other aspects of the program. On March 19, the Coordinating Committee met to discuss the changes in the proposed GAIN plan that are discussed above. The Committee continues to express concern about the possible duplication of services already provided by existing agencies. In addition, concern was expressed about separating the Job Club and Job Search components of the plan. The Social Services Department staff related to the Committee that an interagency concept, whereby contracted and in-house services would be coordinated to the maximum benefit of the client, was the goal sought by the department. This could take the form of meetings between staff of the various programs, and at the Coordinating Committee level.