P1
POLICY REPORT
FINANCE
Date: October 6, 1995
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: Director of Social Planning
SUBJECT: Update on the Annual Review and Adjustment of the
Community Services Grants Process
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT Council adopt, as City policy, the revised criteria and
priorities for Community Services Grants, as described in
Appendix A of this report.
B. THAT the Core Short-form process, described in Appendix B,
not be implemented.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of
A and B.
COUNCIL POLICY
On September 30, 1993, Council adopted, as policy, the criteria and
priorities which are used in assessing Community Services Grants.
Council also adopted, as policy, the criteria and procedures for the
Core Short-form (CSF) process, described in Appendix B. This process
was to be implemented in 1995, but on November 22, 1994, Council
deferred implementation until 1996.
SUMMARY
Social Planning staff conduct an annual review of the Community
Services Grants priorities and criteria to ensure that they are
relevant and useful. The conclusion reached as a result of this
year's review is that few changes are needed.
Staff are proposing some changes in wording to the Guiding Principles
and statements of priority to make them clearer and easier to
understand. We are proposing that our practice of requiring Board
members at grants interviews be made into policy. Similarly, we are
proposing that the guidelines we have used for determining whether or
not a grant should be used for core staff costs be put into policy.
Finally, we are recommending that the Core Short-form process,
approved in 1993 but not yet implemented, be abandoned. This process
would have provided multi-year funding to some eligible organizations,
but we feel that the economic climate is too uncertain at this time to
make such commitments.
PURPOSE
This report provides an update of the on-going review of Community
Services Grants and seeks Council approval of some amendments to the
grants' policies.
BACKGROUND
In September 1993, City Council approved changes to priorities and
criteria for the Community Services Grants (CSG) program. At that
time, Social Planning committed to review these changes as they were
being implemented and to make any adjustments, as required, to improve
the program.
Also in 1993 Council agreed to a process for providing assured, multi-
year funding to organizations which met specified criteria (described
in Appendix B). For a number of reasons, this new process has not
been implemented.
Each year, after completion of the grants review process, staff have
held de-briefing sessions to identify areas that worked particularly
well and those that could be improved. Grant applicants have been
surveyed to ensure that grant priorities remain relevant, and many of
the groups we maintain close working relationship with provide ongoing
feedback on the grants process.
After two years of operation under the new criteria and priorities,
staff have concluded that the general approach has worked very well,
but some (relatively minor) changes are now needed. These are
discussed in the next sections of this report.
DISCUSSION
The CSG review process has two components - applications are first
checked to ensure that they meet the basic eligibility criteria, and
then they are assessed to determine if they fit within the City's
priorities for funding, both for the organization itself and for the
service(s) provided.
1. Service Priorities
Last year's statements of service priorities each began with the
phrase "priority is given to organizations which .....". This
caused confusion as some applicants felt that we would only
consider the merits of the organization, paying little attention
to the services offered, whereas others placed more emphasis on
the services. In either case, it was not clear what criteria
staff were using to determine priority. We are proposing that
the statements of priority be re-worded (see part 6, Appendix A)
to make it clear that priority is given to services and programs,
as described.
Previously, the priority statements took several different
formats - some listed preferred services, some described
objectives, and others described the conditions or environment
under which the service should be provided. The proposed re-
wording puts all the statements in the form of objectives or
goals. This allows the applicants to determine which services
will best meet those goals, and gives staff a more precise
evaluation tool.
Even with this proposed re-wording, the intent of the service
priorities remains unchanged. Organizations responding to the
"Feedback on Priorities" survey were almost unanimous in their
support for the priorities as they are.
2. Guiding Principles
One of the most significant changes adopted in 1993 was the
introduction of principles which are intended to guide the
operation of organizations in receipt of City grants. Applicants
are required to do a self-assessment of how well they are working
within these principles when they first apply for grants. In
subsequent years, they are asked about organizational changes and
improvements over the previous year.
When the Guiding Principles were first introduced, they were not
used to assess eligibility for funding. However, as
organizations develop a better understanding of what is expected,
failure to put considerable effort into working within these
guidelines is becoming a more predominant factor in grant
evaluations.
The wording of the Guiding Principles (see part 5, Appendix A)
has been changed a little to be clearer statements of principle.
However, the intent remains the same. The most significant
change in wording is with the principle of inclusion. There is
now specific recognition of the fact that not all organizations
are set up to deliver services to all residents; however, they
are still expected to be inclusive within their own mandated
community.
3. Disadvantaged Residents
In reviewing the Guiding Principles, we noted that one (titled
"serving and working with disadvantaged residents") is more
appropriately a statement of priority. Consequently, we are
proposing that this no longer be a Guiding Principle. Rather, it
should be included as a statement which applies to all the
priority service statements (see the preamble to part 6, Appendix
A). Thus, within each target group, priority is given to
services which are provided to disadvantaged residents and which
meet the goals in the priority statement.
4. Core Short-Form
In 1993, City Council approved, in principle, the concept of a
shortened application and review process and assurances of
continued core funding to organizations which met certain
criteria - this process was called Core Short-form (CSF) and is
described in detail in Appendix B. Implementation of this
process was deferred until 1996 to give time to assess the impact
of the 1993 changes to the CSG program. Although the CSG program
has stabilized, significant changes in the external environment
in which the grants programs operate are looming.
The downloading of Federal programs to the Provincial
jurisdiction is causing the Province to re-assess its priorities
and funding programs. Also, severe cut-backs in some types of
programs have been implemented, and more are planned. These two
factors particularly affect programs the City jointly supports or
provides ancillary support to.
Consequently, staff are recommending that no grants programs
which involve longer-term assured funding be implemented now or
in the foreseeable future. Although there is a need for funding
stability within community organizations, we feel that the
potential costs of losing funding flexibility outweigh potential
benefits to the community.
5. Policy Amendments
a) Representation at grant interviews - as part of the grant
review process, Social Planning staff conduct face-to-face
interviews with applicants. All applicants are requested to
send at least one Board member to these interviews. We have
found that it is useful and productive for the Board to hear
first hand what the City's priorities and approaches are,
and it provides us with an opportunity to see if there is
any difference between the goals and objectives of the
organization's Board and staff.
This year, one organization refused to send a Board member,
claiming they had decided not to get involved in such
things, and two others held meetings where the scheduled
Board members did not appear. Staff feel strongly that the
benefits of having some Board representation at the
interview far outweigh the small measure of inconvenience
they may experience. Therefore we are recommending that
attendance by at least one Board member at the grants review
interview become, by policy, a basic eligibility requirement
(see part 2, Appendix A).
All grant applicants have volunteer Boards, and in a few
instances, no one is available from these Boards during
regular working hours. Consequently, there may have to be a
few more evening or weekend meetings scheduled (with
resultant staff overtime), but experience has shown this
would not be more than a few each year.
b) Core funding - there was a great deal of confusion in the
past year over the provision of "core" funding. The Core
Short-form program, described above, contained a definition
of core funding, but this only applied to certain
organizations which met other CSF criteria. Although the
CSF program was not implemented, many groups were aware of
its provisions.
Several organizations had been receiving core funding for
many years, but with the changes to the CSG program in 1993,
we have been slowly moving away from this form of general
purpose funding towards funding for the specific priority
services identified two years ago. This has caused some
organizations to conclude that the City is devaluing their
work or is "punishing" them for some unknown misdeeds.
Consequently staff are recommending a policy (see part 8,
Appendix A) which describes the circumstances under which
the City will or will not fund core staff. In summary, we
are proposing that organizations whose primary purpose and
activities are eligible for City funding and are City
priorities (this includes those in the Neighbourhood-based
General Services category), will be considered for core
funding. In all other situations, City grants will only be
available for eligible, priority services offered by the
organization.
c) The priority for funding to immigrants and refugees has been
for services and programs which encourage integration into a
multi-cultural society. We have funded programs for
specific cultural groups, but only where the situation makes
this approach the most effective way to address individual
needs, and only where the program is structurally tied to
larger service networks and will support integration.
Programs intended mainly to preserve the cultural heritage
of any specific ethno-cultural group have never been funded
by the City. Funding for these activities has been
available through the federal government.
In order to make this approach clearer for applicants, we
are recommending adding a statement to the "don't fund" list
which makes it clear that support will not be given for
preservation of any particular ethno-cultural heritage (see
part 4, Appendix A).
6. Response to Federal/Provincial Cut-backs
By policy, the City does not fund services that are within the
legislated mandates of other level of government. However, the
City does fund programs that are provided by organizations that
receive much of their revenue from the other levels of government
(City grants account for less than 10% of the total operating
budgets of City-funded agencies).
The anticipated cutbacks in federal and provincial funding to
programs which we are financially involved in will undoubtedly
affect both the programs and the ways in which we support them.
However, we do not yet know the extent of these cutbacks and any
resultant re-allocations of funding, so we are not in a position
to develop a coherent response vis-a-vis City grants. Some
significant changes in the grant program will, in all likelihood,
be needed within the next year or two.
CONCLUSION
Social Planning has completed its annual review of the Community
Services Grants program. We have concluded that the criteria and
priorities, with some relatively minor changes, are still relevant and
useful.
Given the uncertainties in continued funding from other levels of
government for programs and services that we are involved in, staff
are recommending that the concept of longer-term assured funding for
some organizations be abandoned at this time.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX A
COMMUNITY SERVICES GRANTS - 1996
1. PURPOSE
The City of Vancouver's mission is "to create a great city of
communities which cares about its people, its environment, and
opportunities to live, work and prosper."
The Social Planning Department contributes to the fulfilment of this
vision by:
a) Working with colleagues, other civic departments and levels
of government, and community organizations to ensure that
accessible, equitable and appropriate social services are
available to all residents.
b) Building on the visions of inclusiveness and partnership and
equity of opportunity, access and outcome which are so
essential to the development of a fair and just society.
The Community Services Grants represent an important and necessary
tool which is available to us to help in achieving these goals.
Specifically, these Grants provide financial support to non-profit
organizations which are working with each other, the various levels of
government (including the City) and residents to address social
problems and bring about positive social change.
2. BASIC ELIGIBILITY
- The organization must be a registered non-profit society in good
standing with the Registrar of Companies.
- The organization must have an independent active governing body
composed of volunteers. Its main responsibility must be program
and policy development, and acquisition of other funds. The
Board is held responsible for the effectiveness of services
provided and financial accountability for funds received from all
sources. At least one Board member must be present at meetings
with City staff to review the organization's grant application.
- All organizations receiving funds from the City of Vancouver are
required to have the following or similar clauses in their
constitution and by-laws:
a) Staff members cannot be voting members of either the Board
of Directors or Executive of the Association;
b) No director shall be remunerated for being or acting as a
director, but a director may be reimbursed for all expenses
necessary and reasonably incurred by him/her while engaged
in the affairs of the society.
- The organization should not act in the capacity of a funding body
for, or make grants to any other group or organization.
- The organizational will be able to show that it has fully
explored other sources of financial support.
- The organization must extend its services to the general public
in the City of Vancouver, and shall not exclude anyone by reason
of religion, ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation,
language, disability or income; except in instances where it can
be proven that exclusion of some group is required for effective
targeting of another group to occur.
- Community Services grants are only for services delivered to
Vancouver residents. An organization may serve a broader
geographical area or client group, but City funds will apply only
to services provided to Vancouver residents.
3. GRANT REVIEW CONSIDERATIONS
In reviewing grant applications and preparing recommendations for
grant allocations, Social Planning staff will give primary
consideration to the following factors:
a) Basic eligibility and organizational efficiency,
effectiveness and stability.
b) How the organization is working within the Guiding
Principles.
c) The priority of the proposal as determined by its match with
the City's stated Service Priorities.
In addition, the following factors will be taken into account:
- numbers of residents served
- effectiveness and quality of service
- financial need of the organization
- cost of the service(s)
- community support
- role and number of volunteers
- use of existing community services and facilities
Not all organizations meeting the above criteria will automatically
receive a grant or grant increase. Grant allocations are dependent on
the Community Services Grants budget, as established by City Council.
4. COMMUNITY SERVICES GRANTS ARE NOT FOR:
- services which are primarily recreational or educational (in
particular academic or technical training)
- medical treatment, maintenance or rehabilitation programs
- research
- transportation
- residential programs or housing
- duplication of services which are clearly within the
legislated mandates of other governments or departments;
e.g., Continuing Care Programs, settlement programs,
employment and job training, Alcohol and Drug treatment
programs, licensed Childcare programs, etc. (Note: this
does not preclude cost sharing on programs which are within
the mandates of several jurisdictions.)
- payment of City property taxes
- capital expenses
- operating or capital deficits
- direct welfare supports, including food banks
- agencies which are primarily funding bodies to other
organizations
- processing legal or human rights cases
- services or programs directed to the preservation of any
ethno-cultural heritage
Organizations receiving Community Services Grants may provide one or
more of the services noted above, but the City's grant cannot be used
for these purposes.
5. GUIDING PRINCIPLES
We have an expectation that organizations applying for and receiving
Community Services Grants share certain fundamental values and
objectives in common with the community at large and the City.
Organizations must be able to demonstrate that they are actively
engaged in working towards ensuring that the following principles
provide the primary direction for the work and functioning of the
whole organization:
a) Working together, not alone - organizations which work well
with other organizations in their communities are more
effective, efficient and responsive than those which operate
in isolation, or with minimal contact. There is a wide
range of ways in which organizations can work together,
including co-operation, collaboration, co-ordination and
integration.
b) Using an inclusive approach - one of the primary
characteristics of Vancouver communities and neighbourhoods
is the broad diversity of its residents. Integration of the
many components of this diverse population into a multi-
faceted whole is preferred over the creation of isolated
solitudes. Community organizations have mandates (often
self-defined) to serve many different communities - those
seeking City support must ensure that the goal of their
mandates is integrative and that their policies, services,
and programs are appropriate and relevant to the communities
they are mandated to serve. The organization needs to
acknowledge, accept and respect the legitimacy of individual
differences, including gender, age, disability, sexual
orientation, ethnicity, language, income, or religion.
Ultimately, the measure of inclusion is found in the
history, policies, and service delivery practices of the
organization and in the degree to which each person is
treated as an individual, rather than as a stereotypical
member of a group.
c) Ensuring opportunities for participation by all - active
participation by all stakeholders in the planning and
implementation of services, programs or organizational
changes which will affect them will produce results which
are longer lasting and more appropriate. While it may seem
quicker and easier to have the organization run by a small
number of people, one of the strongest catalysts for social
change is the involvement and empowerment of all the people
affected by the change.
All organizations applying for Community Services Grants are asked to
describe what they were and are doing to operate within these
principles, and to assess how effective they have been in
incorporating these values in the organization's work and structure.
In the self-assessment of each organization, we will be looking for
references to staff, volunteer and Board development plans, policy
development and descriptions of organizational change.
6. PRIORITY SERVICES
Priority services are those which are specifically directed to serving
and working with residents who are experiencing social, physical
and/or economic disadvantages and/or who face discrimination. The
focus of the service(s) should be on providing additional supports and
removing barriers so that disadvantages are removed or compensated
for, and discrimination is identified and eliminated. All services
funded by Community Services Grants should be community-based, relate
directly to need, help to empower, and be respectful of those served.
Within the context of this overall priority, further priority is given
to services which respond best to the specific needs and goals
identified for one or more of the groups of people listed below or to
the support needs of organizations providing these types of services.
No preference is given for any one method for meeting these
objectives; our emphasis is on using whatever method works best in any
particular situation.
- Children and Youth
Priority is given to services or programs which provide children and
youth who are at risk or at a disadvantage with the resources, skills,
and opportunities to allow them to participate fully with their peers.
- Families
Priority is given to services which are designed to prevent family
breakdown, support family relationships, structures, and the
development of healthy parenting skills.
- Gays and lesbians
Priority is given to the development of individual and group support
systems and to programs which are intended to end discrimination
against gays, lesbians and trans-gendered people.
- Immigrants and Refugees
Priority is given for services aimed at removing the barriers to
access to service which exist for many members of ethnic communities
and/or facilitating the integration of new-comers into community life.
Community development and organizing within any single ethnic group or
among groups is also a priority, especially for newly arrived groups
with unique and serious problems and inadequate resources to deal with
them.
- Native Services
Priority is given to community development and Native organizational
development which will improve coordination of existing services and
assist in the development of new services.
- Support to other non-profit organizations
Priority is given to commonly needed services and programs which are
intended to support and assist other non-profit organizations in the
delivery of their services in a more effective and efficient manner.
This includes program development and support for volunteers, the
promotion of volunteer participation and training and organizational
development programs.
- People With Disabilities
Priority is given to the provision of additional or specific types of
assistance that people with disabilities need in order to have equal
access to services and opportunities and to help lessen isolation and
discrimination; this includes advocacy aimed at securing these types
of services or protecting the rights of people with disabilities.
- Prevention and alleviation of poverty
Priority is given to community development programs which are intended
to empower people with low incomes, with the goal of reducing the
affects of poverty, and ultimately to eliminate poverty.
- Residents in poor or service deficient neighbourhoods
Priority is given to organizing and working with local residents to
develop and implement strategies to deal with local issues and
concerns.
- Seniors
Priority is given to services which are intended to reduce isolation,
help seniors to retain their independence and develop support networks
across and within cultural communities.
- Women
Priority is given to services which address the issues of poverty,
violence, discrimination, and equality, particularly as they relate to
women.
7. NEIGHBOURHOOD-BASED GENERAL SERVICES
Organizations applying for this type of Community Services Grant must
be providing neighbourhood-based social services and community
development programs. Such organizations must be multicultural,
multi-purpose and must support linkages to and from the community.
They must also provide coordination and support collaboration and
integration with other service providers and community organizations
in the neighbourhoods in which they operate. Grants are provided
primarily for core staff costs to enable the organization to secure
other program and project money and to carry out its outreach,
linkage, diversity and inclusion work.
8. CORE FUNDING
The stated priority for City funding is for specific types of programs
or services, delivered to specific target groups. In organizations
where the primary goal and activity of the organization is to provide
these types of services, consideration will be given to providing
grants to support core staff, as these are the staff positions which
enable the effective and efficient delivery of these services.
As noted above (in section 7), funding for organizations in the
Neighbourhood-based General Services category will be directed to core
staff as this is usually the best way of supporting the coordination
and delivery of a wide range of neighbourhood services, as well as
supporting the community development/ linkage function.
In organizations where a substantial proportion of the service
provided is ineligible for City funding or where the primary purpose
of the organization is to meet needs not included in the City's list
of priorities, core funding will not be provided; grants will only be
for the specific services eligible for City funding.
9. RENT SUBSIDY GRANTS
Organizations which are renting their premises from the City, and the
property is held in the City's Property Endowment Fund, may apply for
a Community Services Grant to provide a rent subsidy. The
organization must be eligible for a Community Services Grant. Social
Planning's recommendation for or against such a grant will be based on
the grant review considerations noted above.
10. TERMS OF COMMUNITY SERVICES GRANTS
The term of a Community Services Grant is one year, from January 1 to
December 31.
* * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------
CORE - SHORT FORM (CSF) GRANT
(BAS Replacement)
PURPOSE
- to provide a shortened application and review process and
assurances of continued core funding to organizations which
meet the criteria. Such organizations apply using the 'short'
form, and would normally be subject to full review only once
every 4 years. Social Planning commits to recommend for
Council approval, early in each year, continued funding (at the
previous year's level, as a minimum) for organizations eligible
for the CSF Grant.
The Grants program is losing some flexibility through the provision of
CSF Grants; it is expected that the organizations receiving the
funding will compensate for this by providing flexibility in their
programming and resource allocation. Therefore, eligible
organizations will be required to demonstrate, annually, how they are
meeting the changing needs of the community they serve. In addition,
a description of the organization's efforts to bring about the changes
contemplated in the Guiding Principles will be required annually.
CRITERIA
- the City CSF grant is only for core staff funding (see
definition of CORE below)
- the organization must be eligible for a regular CS Grant in
either the Priority Target Group or Neighbourhood-based General
Services Stream
- the grant must cover at least 20% of core staff costs
- the minimum grant amount is $5,000
- the grant must represent less than 33% of the organization's
total operating budget
- at least 3 continuous years of City CS Grant funding,
immediately prior to applying for CSF funding
- no conditions on the City Grant in the previous year
OPTING OUT OF CSF
- any significant changes in staff, client numbers or
composition, funding from other sources, or in the organization
itself, or any major concerns or complaints from Social
Planning or the community could result in the regular review
process being applied
- the organization may opt out at any time for any reason
FULL REVIEW TIMING
- all organizations will receive full review in 1994
- beginning in 1995, 1/4 of all eligible organizations will be
subject to a full review, with another 1/4 receiving a full
review in each of the next 3 years
- after 4 years, a regular review every 4 years will be
instituted on a rotating basis, as determined from the last
date of a full review
ONGOING SOCIAL PLANNING CONTACT
- each organization receiving a CSF Grant and which does not have
regular contact with Social Planning will be asked to meet with
SP staff at least once annually (not during Grant review time)
to discuss: community issues, trends, and concerns; the actions
that the organization is taking to address City and local
community priorities; and any significant changes in the
organization's programs, services or funding
- all organizations will be assigned an SP staff contact person
(most already have one)
DEFINITION
For the purposes of CSF Grants, "Core staff" is defined as:
- the person (or persons) who is responsible for the on-going
administration, management, and supervision of the entire
organization, not just a part or one aspect of it; AND
- the person (or persons) who is responsible for the initiation,
coordination and implementation of all the programs and
services offered by the organization; AND
- the administrative or clerical support staff assigned to work
for and with the positions noted above on the overall
administration and programming for the organization
For example, typical job titles for "core staff" include:
Executive Director, Manager, Director, Coordinator, Program
Coordinator, Office Manager, Executive Assistant, Programmer,
Secretary to .., Assistant to..
Note, however, that "core" is defined by function, not title.
In instances where a large organization is sponsoring a program or
service which functions primarily as a stand-alone service, with staff
having considerable budgetary and personnel control and independence,
then some or all of the staff working in this program who meet the
terms of the definition above may be designated as being "core staff".
* * * * *