File #: 19-371    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Action Item Status: Approved
File created: 11/15/2019 In control: City Council
On agenda: 12/10/2019 Final action: 12/10/2019
Title: Communication from the City Manager and Director of Community Development with a Request to APPROVE the Funding Recommendations from the Advisory Commission on Human Resources for the 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PUBLIC SERVICE FUNDING, in the Amount of $260,000.00
Indexes: Goal 1 - Financially Sound City , Have an efficient government., Reinvest in neighborhoods, Support sustainability
Attachments: 1. Attachment A - Funding Recomendations, 2. Attachment B - Minutes from November 15 Meeting, 3. Attachment C - Public Service Funding by Organization 2014-2018, 4. 19-371 AGREEMENTS, 5. 19-371 FamilyCore Agreement.pdf, 6. 19-371 Dream Center Agreement.pdf, 7. 19-371 Community Workshop & Training Center (2) Agreement.pdf, 8. 19-371 Community Workshop & Training Center Agreement.pdf, 9. 19-371 Heartland Health Services Agreement.pdf, 10. 19-371 Hult Center Agreement.pdf
Related files: 18-202
ACTION REQUESTED:
Title
Communication from the City Manager and Director of Community Development with a Request to APPROVE the Funding Recommendations from the Advisory Commission on Human Resources for the 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PUBLIC SERVICE FUNDING, in the Amount of $260,000.00

Body
BACKGROUND: As approved by City Council on June 26th (Item # 18-202), the Advisory Commission on Human Resources (HRC) reviewed the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) public service applications. For the 2019 funding year, twenty-one eligible applications were received, requesting over $550,000. Applications were received in all priority funding areas adopted by Council:

? Child Care Services (under 13)
? Youth Services (ages 13 -19)
? Services for Victims of Domestic Violence
? Employment Training
? Substance Abuse Services
? Mental Health Services
? Health Services
? Services for Abused and Neglected Children

Each Commissioner reviewed all eligible applications received. Applicants presented a short overview for the Commission, and the Commission had the opportunity to ask the applicants questions at a special meeting on November 1. Following the meeting, Commissioners independently submitted evaluation forms for each application. City staff compiled these scores and dropped the highest and lowest score for each application. Then, an average score was created from the remaining scores, taking into account any Commissioners who did not score an applicant due to a declared conflict of interest.

At the November 15th Commission meeting, the average scores were presented to the Commission along with some funding options as a starting point for discussion. After a detailed discussion, the Commission decided to fund 19 of the 21 applications. There was a large gap in scoring from the last program funded to the next application. To comply with HUD underwriting standards, grant amounts were awarded based on an average score tied to a percentage of grant fu...

Click here for full text