File #: 20-200    Version: 1 Name: COVID-19 CDBG Public Services Funding
Type: Action Item Status: Approved
File created: 7/15/2020 In control: City Council
On agenda: 7/28/2020 Final action: 7/28/2020
Title: Communication from the City Manager and the Director of Community Development with a Request to APPROVE the Funding Recommendations from the CDBG Public Services Advisory Commission for the COVID-19 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PUBLIC SERVICES FUNDING, in the Amount of $200,000.00.
Indexes: Goal 1 - Financially Sound City , Goal 2 - Safe Peoria, Reinvest in neighborhoods, Support sustainability
Attachments: 1. Proposed COVID CDBG Public Services Funding, 2. CDBG-CV Public Services Evaluation, 3. July 17 2020 Minutes DRAFT, 4. 20-200 Agreement 1.pdf, 5. 20-200 AGREEMENT 2.pdf, 6. 20-200 AGREEMENT 3.pdf, 7. 20-200 AGREEMENT 4.pdf, 8. 20-200 Agreement - HULT Center Revision.pdf, 9. 20-200 FamilyCore, 10. 20-200 Prairie State, 11. 20-200 Hult
ACTION REQUESTED:
Title
Communication from the City Manager and the Director of Community Development with a Request to APPROVE the Funding Recommendations from the CDBG Public Services Advisory Commission for the COVID-19 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PUBLIC SERVICES FUNDING, in the Amount of $200,000.00.
Body
BACKGROUND: City Council approved a COVID-19 CDBG outline on April 28th, which included up to $300,000 dedicated to public services intended to prevent, prepare for, or respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. On May 26th, City Council approved the public services priorities and application recommended by the CDBG Public Services Advisory Commission. Nine eligible applications were received, requesting over $365,000. Applications were received in the following priority funding areas:

* Employment Training
* Food Banks
* Health Services
* Legal Services
* Services for Abused and Neglected Children
* Services for Victims of Domestic Violence
* Youth Services

Members of the CDBG Public Services Advisory Commission reviewed and evaluated all eligible applications received. They had the opportunity to ask follow-up questions via email, and all commissioners received these questions as well as the agencies' responses.

City staff compiled the scores from each evaluation and dropped the highest and lowest scores for each application. An average score was then 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 July 17th 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 all nine applications. To comply with HUD underwriting standards, grant amounts were awarded based on an average score tied to a percentage of grant funds requested. This amount was then multiplied by 73.258393% in order to achieve a...

Click here for full text