Vancouver City Council |
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: March 12, 2003
Author/Local: Rick Gates/6036
RTS No.3186
CC File No.2151
Meeting Date: March 25, 2003
TO:
Vancouver City Council
FROM:
Director of Social Planning
SUBJECT:
2003 Community Services Grants Allocations
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT Council approve 89 Community Services Grants totalling $2,926,312 as listed in Appendix A, including conditions on the grants, where noted in Appendix C; source of funding is the 2003 Community Services Grants budget;
B. THAT Council approve the following CONDITION to apply to all Community Services Grants recipients in 2003:
The organization must report to the Social Planning Department any significant changes in its financial situation as soon as possible after the change becomes known.
C. THAT Council approve the establishment of a $20,000 reserve within the Community Services Grants budget for the Partners in Organizational Development program. Specific allocation recommendations will be made at a later date this year;
D. THAT Council approve a rent subsidy grant of $34,755 to the B.C. Coalition of People with Disabilities, and that the Community Services Grants budget be increased accordingly;
E. THAT Council approve a rent subsidy grant of $8,880 to Central City Mission for the Dugout, and that the Community Services Grants budget be increased accordingly;
F. THAT Council approve a rent subsidy grant of $15,500 to Family Services -Street Youth Program and that the Community Services Grants budget be increased accordingly.
Note: Source of funding for the rent subsidy grants referenced in Recommendations D - F is the Other Grants/Annual Recurring budget.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of A, B, C, D, E and F.
COUNCIL POLICY
On September 30, 1993, Council adopted, as policy, the criteria and priorities which are used in assessing Community Services Grants applications. These were amended by Council on October 24, 1995.
On June 8, 1993, City Council decided that rent subsidies to social service organizations occupying City-owned property, held in the PEF, will be funded from the Community Services budget, and that this budget will be adjusted to accommodate the subsidies approved by Council. Applications for rent subsidy grants are to be assessed for eligibility on the same basis as applications for Community Services Grants.
On February 27, 2003, City Council approved a Community Services Grants budget of
$3,029,700.
Approval of grant recommendations requires eight affirmative votes.
SUMMARY
With this report, Social Planning staff are recommending approval of 89 Community Services Grants, at a total cost of $2,926,312. Because the current and upcoming changes to Provincial funding of non-profit agencies, including many that are City-funded, could have significant effects on services and the organizations themselves, staff are recommending that all grant recipients be required to report any significant changes in their financial situationand that they be advised that their grants may be subject to review, and possible revision, at various times throughout the year.
Nine applicants have advised us that they disagree with our recommendations, and have requested reconsideration. Consequently, these applications have been removed from the list of recommendations contained in this report; they will be reconsidered over the next few weeks, and recommendations arising from this process will be presented for Council consideration at the end of April, 2003.
PURPOSE
This report recommends the 2003 Community Services Grants (CSG) allocations for all applications which have not been referred to the reconsideration process. It also provides an overview of this year's grants program.
BACKGROUND
On February 27, 2003, Council established a budget ceiling of $3,029,700 for the Community Services Grants program. Not included in this budget are any rent subsidy grants, as Council has previously directed that the budget be adjusted by an amount equal to any rent subsidy grants which get approved.
Social Planning received 105 regular grant applications and 4 rent subsidy grant applications. Staff have reviewed and assessed these applications on the basis of the criteria and priorities which have been established by Council. We are recommending grants that total $392 less than the approved budget
All applicants were informed, in writing, of Social Planning's recommendations shortly after the budget was approved.
Reconsideration
The Reconsideration process was approved by Council in 1994 to ensure that there would be a consistent process for reviewing grant recommendations and to allow adequate time for organizations to make a case and staff to provide Council with a response. At the time of notification, all grant applicants were given the opportunity to request reconsideration if they disagreed with the recommendations. Nine organizations, listed in Appendix B, have requested further review of their applications and the proposed recommendations. These 9 applications have been referred to the reconsideration process, and are therefore not included on the list of grant recommendations, Appendix A. (Note, however, that staff recommended a grant to only 3 of those requesting reconsideration, so the list ofrecommended grants is reduced by 3, not 9). One organization, End Legislated Poverty, also requested reconsideration of the recommended rent subsidy grant.
Council may also refer grant recommendations to the reconsideration process. Under current policy, all referrals to the process, from Council as well as applicants, are assessed on the basis of the two approved grounds for reconsideration: that eligibility criteria and priorities have not been properly applied and/or the financial situation of the applicant was not properly assessed at the time of the review. Any grant recommendation referred to the reconsideration process will be addressed in a separate report that will be before Council in about a month's time.
RECOMMENDATIONS SUMMARY
Following is a summary of the recommendations, with comparative figures from previous years:
2003
2002
2001
Recommended at the same level
80
77
24
Recommended increase: - inflation adjustment
0
0
49
- other increase
8
9
15
Recommended new grants
3
3
1
Recommended decrease
2
2
0
Recommended terminating grant
0
0
0
No grant recommended
12
14
4
Total
105
105
93
Appendix A lists the grants which are being recommended at this time. Applications which are in dispute (i.e. requests for reconsideration have been received) are not included in this list.
Appendix B lists the applications for which requests for reconsideration have been received -these are currently scheduled to be considered by Council on April 24, 2003.
Appendix C lists all applications for 2003 grants, and provides information on last year's grants (if any), the initial staff recommendations for this year's grants, and any conditions and/or comments related to each application.
Appendix D lists all applications, sorted by the target group which they primarily serve. Most organizations serve more than one group, so a completely accurate picture of the allocation of City funds to each target group cannot be given when organizations are shownonly within a single category. However, this table does give an indication of funding changes within sectors.
Finally, Appendix E lists all grant applications in separate tables that show how the 2003 recommendations compare to last year's.
A copy of the front pages of all applications has already been distributed to Council. These contain more detailed information on the applicants and the programs or services for which they are seeking City funding.
DISCUSSION
Effects of Provincial funding and organizational changes on the CS Grants program:
Just over 80% of last year's CSG recipients also received Provincial funding, sometimes for programs that the City jointly funds with the Province, but more often for other programs and services provided by the same organizations that the City funds. Last year, the Province announced budget reductions to take place over the subsequent three-year period. There are also significant reorganizations and redefinition of priorities and mandates taking place in all Ministries and the regional health authority. Some programs will be cut completely; while others will get the same, or in some cases, more funding. These changes will not only affect the organizations themselves but also their program participants and the types of issues that they need to have addressed.
Note, however, that many of the announced Provincial changes have not yet been implemented. Those that have been, are sometimes different from what was announced, so we can't accurately predict what may happen in the next year or two. In light of this uncertainty, staff are recommending that a CONDITION be placed on all grants that the organizations must report any significant changes in their funding as soon as possible.
There are a number of provincial changes which are starting to and will continue to affect groups which receive or are applying for City funding:
1. Contract restructuring. Most Ministries are restructuring their contracts with community groups, often via contract consolidation and competitive tendering. The Ministry of Human Resources has already done this with some of their employment programs. While we don't fund employment programs, several groups that we do fund, lost employment contracts and have had to adjust their budgets accordingly. Although it hasn't happened yet to any City-funded groups, the continued effective functioning of some organizations could be jeopardized by the contract restructuring process.
2. Development of new service models. There are concerns that in its contract re-structuring, the Province won't provide enough funding for organizational infrastructure and administration costs. We received 2 grant applications for front office support for primarily Provincially funded programs. We cannot recommend grants in these areas until the new models are fully developed and we can confirm that the Province is adequately funding its own programs. Also, it may emerge that there is an appropriate role for the City in these new services models; we don't want to prejudice the situation by funding some aspect of the model that may not represent the best use of City grants.
3. Regional funding authorities. MCFD is developing a new regional governance model. In the future, funding decisions for a number of organizations that the City also funds, will be made by these new authorities. Even though we have some understanding of Provincial directions, we have no idea what may emerge as the priorities for these new social service authorities.
In the past, Council has approved grants on an annual basis. However, these grants are paid out on a quarterly basis, and if problems have arisen with the organization and/or the delivery of the services which are supported by the grant, staff have sometimes withheld one or more of the quarterly payments. Even less often, we have reported back to Council and have recommended that the grant be reallocated to another group or for another program. Because some of the Provincial changes that will significantly affect some of the groups that the City funds will take place this year, we are recommending that all grant recipients be advised that we will be monitoring the situation and, if necessary, may review some grants and, from time to time, make recommendations, during the year, to Council for reallocation of the funding.
Also, staff will be initiating a complete review of the CSG program this year, particularly with regards to the criteria, priorities and processes. The last major review and changes took place eight years ago. Social service needs are constantly changing; therefore, it is important that the CSG program be reviewed periodically to ensure that the program is relevant and responsive to the needs of Vancouver residents. The Provincial changes have made it a necessity to begin such a review as early as possible. Depending on the nature and effects of the Provincial changes, it may be necessary to make some changes to the CSG program prior to next year's application and review process taking place.
As with previous grant program reviews, we intend on making this a very inclusive process, involving the community groups we fund (and some we do not); other funders; City, Provincial, and Federal staff; and City Council.
Recommendations
In the midst of all the uncertainty about Provincial funding, staff felt that it is now especially important to maintain our priority to provide some stability and certainty. This has resulted in recommendations for 80 grants that are exactly the same as last year's. For 8 others, we have recommended small increases for increased levels of service or to help pay for increased program costs.
Guiding Principles
One of the non-monetary aspects of the CSG program that is showing positive results is the application of our "Guiding Principles". All grant applicants are required to demonstrate how they are working within the principles of inclusion, working together and participation. There are numerous examples of significant improvements in these areas over the past few years. Many of the applicants have commented to City staff that operating within these principles has enabled them to become more effective and responsive to the community. A few applicants are still having trouble meeting these objectives, but staff are able to use the leverage afforded by the grants to continue to push for the changes that are needed.
Partners in Organizational Development (POD)
The Partners in Organizational Development program was initiated in 1989 as a jointly funded partnership of the Vancouver Foundation, United Way, Secretary of State and the City, to help non-profit organizations deal with common organizational problems. In 1994, additional Federal and Provincial partners agreed to also provide funding to this program.
POD aims to strengthen community organizations' capacity to work more effectively and efficiently. Small grants, averaging $4,000 per group, are given to assist in the development of strategic plans or to bring about organizational change. This is a very successful program, with increasing demand every year. Staff are recommending that $20,000 be reserved for POD. If this reserve is established, a report seeking Council's approval of specific POD grants will be submitted later in the year.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The total of the staff recommendations for CS Grants equals the total approved budget. Consequently, if Council wishes to add to existing grants or approve additional new ones, the funding will have to come from Contingency Reserve. Similarly, staff are not recommending a reserve for emergencies and unforeseen circumstances as has occurred in the past. If some situation arises that Council feels warrants some funding, the grant will have to come from Contingency Reserve.
CONCLUSION
Continuing with City funding to non-profit social service agencies in Vancouver provides some much needed stability in an otherwise constantly shifting environment. The end result will be assured continuity of services to Vancouver residents.
* * * * *