pages: SocialServiceHumanRelationsBoard/2014-04-01.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
SocialServiceHumanRelationsBoard | 2014-04-01 | 3 | Ms. Brown shared that if its program were to be recommended for funding, the main part of the grant would go to provide a part-time case manager for housing stability issues that would be different than that provided by ECHO and Legal Aid for Seniors. One of the challenges working with seniors is that they often require that more time be spent with them during the case management process. Their experience to date has been an average of 90 minutes per meeting, with two meetings per client, but in some cases as many as nine meetings. Their services would also include home visits, which is required for some seniors with mobility issues and added that these type of services also help with seniors with a sense of independence Liz Varela, Executive Director - Building Futures with Women and Children Ms. Varela thanked the Board and staff for their continued high level of funding and support of Midway Shelter and the Homeless Prevention Services provided by Building Futures. The support from the community through donations to the Alameda Homeless Network, and local support in general, also make a big difference. She added that, with the possibility of additional loss of state funding, Building Futures is anticipating that it may need to close one of its shelters San Leandro. She suggested that, if Alameda Family Services were to provide Homelessness Prevention case management and qualify their clients for rental assistance, Building Futures might be able to provide direct services. In response to questions about the $5,000 in their grant to staff the Domestic Violence Task Force, she stated that they have been very fortunate to be able to leverage funds from congregations and foundations, and have had active and positive participation from all of the Task Force partners. Discussion President Biggs shared with Members Watkinson and Blake, who were not present at the February 19 meeting, that he and Member Radding had the opportunity to review and evaluate all of the grant applications. Primary elements of the Board's discussion are summarized in the three underlined paragraphs below excerpted from Social Service Human Relations Board recommendations to the Mayor and City Council regarding the proposed FY14-15 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) public service funding levels and programs. Following the RFP process, City staff ranked and selected proposals for funding. Deviating from the practice of previous years, members of SSHRB were not included in an objective ranking of the proposals. Eight agencies applied for funding, and staff selected seven of the agencies for funding. All eight agencies proposed services are important to the community, but not all proposals addressed the safety need priority as identified by SSHRB. Two of the proposals - for 211 and Echo Housing - were submitted for services that historically have been funded by the City out of non-public service funds; (one of them, the 211 program was originally funded out of General Fund) however at staff's discretion, they were included in the public service pool this year. This was done to fulfill a HUD mandate and/or expectation that the City must fund these programs. However that mandate does not, and historically has not, meant that they must be funded out of public service funds that should be used to serve community needs. While both of the selected programs provide a useful service, neither program addresses the limited safety net priority identified by the SSHRB. Despite this and other weaknesses in the proposals, both of these programs were recommended for funding by staff. BIPACKETS\2014April 1, 2014\MINUTES April 1, 2014.doc | SocialServiceHumanRelationsBoard/2014-04-01.pdf |