|
|
CITY OF VANCOUVER ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT |
Report Date: |
March 11, 2005 | |
Author: |
Rick Gates | |
Phone No.: |
604.871.6036 | |
RTS No.: |
4839 | |
CC File No.: |
2151 | |
Meeting Date: |
March 31, 2005 |
TO: |
Standing Committee on City Services and Budgets |
FROM: |
Director of Social Planning |
SUBJECT: |
2005 Community Services Grants Allocation |
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT Council approve 8 Neighbourhood Organization Grants totalling $484,268 as listed in Appendix A-1. Source of funding is the 2005 Community Services Grants budget;
B. THAT Council approve a one-year terminating Neighbourhood Organization Grant of $52,324 to Kitsilano Neighbourhood House. Source of funding is the 2005 Community Services Grants budget;
C. THAT Council approve 7 Organizational Capacity Building Grants totalling $169,424, as listed in Appendix A-2. Source of funding is the 2005 Community Services Grants budget;
D. THAT Council approve 75 Direct Social Service Grants, including any recommended CONDITIONS on the grants, as listed in Appendix A-3, totalling $2,427,100. Source of funding is the 2005 Community Services Grants budget;
E. THAT Council approve a six-month terminating Direct Social Services Grant of $14,400 to the Mt. Pleasant Community Centre Association for the Cambodian Family Support Services program. Source of funding is the 2005 Community Services Grants budget;
F. THAT Council approve the establishment of a $20,000 reserve for the Partners in Organizational Development program. Specific allocation recommendations will be made at a later date this year;
G. THAT Council approve a Rent Subsidy grant of $39,073 to the B.C. Coalition of People with Disabilities, source of funding is the 2005 Other Grants budget;
H. THAT Council approve a Rent Subsidy grant of $8,880 to Central City Mission for the Dugout, source of funding is the 2005 Other Grants budget;
I. THAT Council approve a Rent Subsidy grant of $15,500 to Family Services - Street Youth Program, source of funding is the 2005 Other Grants budget.
CONSIDERATION
J.1 THAT, in order to remain within the limits of the 2005 Community Services Grants budget, Council approve the following 6-month terminating grants:
ORGANIZATION |
GRANT |
La Boussole, Centre Communautaire Societe |
$7,000 |
Pacific Post Partum Support Society |
$8,500 |
Vancouver Recovery Club |
$13,000 |
AND that NO GRANTS be approved for
North Shore Counselling Society |
|
Western Institute for the Deaf & Hard of Hearing |
OR
J.2 THAT Council approve the following Community Services Grants, and add $47,100 to the 2005 Community Services Grants budget to fully fund these grants:
ORGANIZATION |
GRANT |
La Boussole, Centre Communautaire Societe |
$14,280 |
North Shore Counselling Society |
$10,000 |
Pacific Post Partum Support Society |
$17,000 |
Vancouver Recovery Club |
$26,780 |
Western Institute for the Deaf & Hard of Hearing |
$10,000 |
Source of additional funding is Contingency Reserve.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of A to I, and submits J1 and J2 for Council's CONSIDERATION.
COUNCIL POLICY
On October 9, 2003, City Council approved, as policy, a number of revisions to the Community Services Grants program, including:
_ the creation of three categories of Community Services Grants;
_ three sets of eligibility criteria which apply to the new categories of Community Services Grants;
_ priorities for the Direct Social Services category of Community Services Grants.
On that day, Council also reconfirmed, as policy, other aspects of the Community Services Grants program, including: Basic Eligibility Criteria, Ineligible Services, Core Funding Guidelines, Rent Subsidy Grants, and the Reconsideration Process.
On July 20, 2004, City Council approved some revisions to the criteria, priorities and the reconsideration process.
In June, 1993, City Council decided that rent subsidies to social service or cultural organizations, occupying City-owned property, held in the Property Endowment Fund, will be provided as grants. Rent Subsidy grants must meet the same eligibility criteria as regular Community Services Grants.
Approval of grant recommendations requires eight affirmative votes.
PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
This report recommends the 2005 Community Services Grants allocations (in all three categories and Rent Subsidy grants) for all applications that have not been referred to the reconsideration process.
Staff are recommending approval of 8 Neighbourhood Organization Grants, 7 Organizational Capacity Building Grants and 75 Direct Social Services Grants. One organization applied for a Neighbourhood Organization Grant but was found to be ineligible. However, staff wanted to ensure that services would continue to be provided by this organization, so a one-year terminating grant is recommended, with the expectation that the group will apply for a Direct Social Services Grant (for which it is eligible) next year.
There is insufficient funding available in the Community Services Grants budget to be able to adequately fund all eligible Direct Social Services applications. Consequently, for the lower priority, but eligible, applications, staff are presenting two sets of recommendations (J1 and J2) for Council's consideration: either J1 terminating or no grants for 5 groups, or J2 continued or new funding for a full year for these same 5 groups, which will require the addition of $47,100 to the grants budget.
As has been past practise, we are recommending that $20,000 be set aside for the Partners in Organizational Development program. Details on funding allocations for this program will be reported to Council later in the year.
Twelve requests for reconsideration have been received (listed in Appendix B). These applications will not be dealt with at this time; rather, City Council will consider the results of the reconsideration process, and any subsequent staff recommendations at the end of April, 2005. Grant funding originally recommended for the groups that have requested reconsideration (totalling $246,224) remains unallocated, and will be carried forward to the meeting when reconsiderations are addressed.
Finally, staff are recommending 3 Rent Subsidy Grants. The funding for these grants does not come out of the Community Services Grants budget, but rather from the Other Grants budget category.
The total amount recommended for Community Services Grants (including the funding set aside for reconsiderations and the amounts in recommendation J1), plus the funding set aside for Partners in Organizational Development, is $2,460 less than the 2005 Community Services Grants budget. If Council selects recommendation J2, then the required funding ($49,560) will come from this balance plus $47,100 from Contingency Reserve.
BACKGROUND
City Council formally established the Community Services (CS) Grants program in 1978 (along with the Cultural and Other Grants programs). Since then, on several occasions, various aspects of the program have been reviewed and changes have been made.
A major review took place in 2003 to determine what revisions were needed for this grants program to ensure that it continued to be relevant and responsive to the changing social environment. Coming out of this review were the following changes to the grants program, approved by City Council on October 9, 2003:
_ the grants program structure - from one type of grant to three, called Direct Social Services, Neighbourhood Organization and Organizational Capacity Building Grants;
_ new criteria for each of the three types of grants; and
_ newly defined priorities, which apply solely to the Direct Social Services category of grants, and a rating process using these priorities, to help determine recommendations for funding.
These changes were incorporated into the processing of 2004 grant applications. Upon completion of the 2004 process, Social Planning staff conducted a review of the revised program. We concluded that, for the most part, the goals and objectives of the program had been met. However, we also identified a few areas for improvement, particularly with regards to clarifying eligibility criteria, priorities and the reconsideration process. The resultant recommendations for further revisions were adopted by Council on July 20, 2004.
One significant change approved in July, 2004, was the process for dealing with applications which are eligible for funding but are lower priority and there is insufficient funding available in the grants budget to provide grants to them. Previously, such situations were dealt with as part of the reconsideration process, even though they didn't technically meet the criteria for a reconsideration review. Now, such applications will be submitted with two recommendations for Council's consideration, as part of the allocations report (see J1 and J2, above). The first recommendation will be the one that is necessary for all the grant allocations to come within the current budget; the second one reflects the amount that staff would recommend if sufficient funding is added to the budget. Low priority applications which are dealt with by this "consideration" process cannot apply for reconsideration on the basis of their priority rating. They can, and two have, requested reconsideration of the amount of the recommended grant.
For the 2005 CS Grants program, Social Planning received 118 regular grant applications and 3 rent subsidy grant applications. This compares with previous years, as follows:
Table 1 - Application Summary
|
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 | |
|
Total applications: |
105 |
105 |
113 |
118 |
|
Total organizations: |
89 |
88 |
91 |
97 |
|
Types of applications: |
||||
|
Previously funded |
90 |
90 |
93 |
100 |
|
Applied the previous year, but not funded |
1 |
6 |
5 |
0 |
|
New applications |
14 |
9 |
15 |
18 |
|
Total amount requested |
$3,805,064 |
$4,107,222 |
$4,435,125 |
$4,892,370 |
Note: for comparison purposes, the totals above include the 12 groups that have applied for reconsideration. These groups are not included in the recommended grant totals included elsewhere in this report.
COMMUNITY SERVICES GRANTS BUDGET
The 2005 Community Services Grants budget is $3,444,700. Not included in this budget are any rent subsidy grants, as Council has previously directed that these grants not be funded from the Community Services Grants budget.
Working within the established overall budget, staff took the following steps to determine how much would be allocated to each of the three grant streams, and ultimately to each application:
· since the grant budget included a 2% inflation adjustment, we decided to maintain the real value of grants by passing the inflation adjustment on to all applicants that had been funded last year, provided that they had requested such an adjustment.
· staff place a very high priority on the community building work being done by some of the neighbourhood houses, and are therefore recommending grant increases to enable the maintenance and enhancement of this work. This resulted in an increase of $49,000 in the Neighbourhood Organizations category.
· Staff determined that one of the previously funded applicants for an Organizational Capacity Building (OCB) Grant was no longer eligible. With the inflation adjustments added to the other grants in this category, the total budgeted amount for the OCB grants was subsequently reduced by $28,192.
· Increases in Direct Social Services (DSS) Grants are recommended to support a marked improvement or increase in high priority services.
· Finally, grants are recommended for 6 new DSS applications which rated highly in meeting City priorities.
After the adjustments and recommendations, noted above, had been made, it was determined that in order to remain within the budget limits funding would have to be cut from 7 lower priority organizations that had been funded last year. Staff are recommending that four are for 6-month terminating grants where the programs are on-going, and three are for immediate cessation of funding. Two of the seven (Theatre for Living - Headlines and The Vancouver Women's Health Collective) have requested reconsideration of the amount of grant recommended, so only 5 of the 7 are referenced in J1 and J2 above.
GRANT REVIEW PROCESS
The grant review and adjudication process, using the three grant categories, eligibility criteria for each category, and newly articulated City priorities for funding, was implemented again for the 2005 grants.
By policy, all eligibility criteria for the respective grant category had to be met for the application to be eligible for funding. A total of 10 applications were found to be ineligible for funding - 1 was for a Neighbourhood Organization Grant, 2 were applicants for Organizational Capacity Building Grants and the remainder were for Direct Social Services Grants.
Once the eligibility of the applications had been established, each of the requests for a Direct Social Services Grant was rated for how well it met each of the stated City priorities. The list of applications was then sorted by priority rating, and those at the top and middle of the list are being recommended for funding. There is insufficient funding available in the CS Grants budget to fund all applications; therefore, those at the bottom of the priority list are the ones being submitted for Council's consideration, as described above.
All applicants have been informed, in writing, of Social Planning's recommendations.
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 for 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. This year, 12 applicants have formally requested reconsideration (listed in Appendix B).
Under current policy, applicants' requests are assessed only on the basis of the two approved grounds for reconsideration: that eligibility criteria 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 late April, 2005, and are not included in the recommendations contained in this report.
RECOMMENDATIONS SUMMARY
Following is a summary of the recommendations, with comparative figures from last year:
Table 2 - Recommendations Summary, by Grant Category:
Neighbourhood Organization |
Organizational Capacity Building |
Direct Social Services | ||||
2004 |
2005 |
2004 |
2005 |
2004 |
2005 | |
Recommended at the same level |
3 |
0 |
7 |
0 |
60 |
8 |
Recommended Increase: |
|
4 |
0 |
6 |
|
58 |
Other increase |
1 |
5 |
0 |
1 |
5 |
8 |
Recommended new grants |
7 |
6 | ||||
Recommended decrease |
1 |
6 | ||||
No grant recommended |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
13 |
13 |
TOTAL |
11 |
10 |
7 |
9 |
95 |
99 |
Appendices A1 to A4 list the grants which are being recommended at this time. Applications which are in dispute (i.e. requests for reconsideration have been received) have been removed from these lists.
Appendix B lists the applicants that have applied for reconsideration.
Appendix C lists all applications, where staff are recommending no grants, along with the reasons for this recommendation.
Appendix D lists all Direct Social Services Grant applications, sorted by the target group which they primarily serve. Most organizations serve more than one group; therefore, a completely accurate picture of the allocation of City funds to each target group cannot be given when organizations are shown only within a single category. However, this table does give an indication of funding changes within sectors.
A copy of the front pages of all applications, along with information sheets that contain the approved criteria and priorities 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
Although the changes to the CS Grants program that were adopted by Council in 2003 were not drastic, they did result in significant changes in the way in which staff assessed grant applications and in the resulting recommendations. Also, the continuing roll-out of Provincial funding and policy changes is having an effect on our recommendations and the organizations that the City funds. These points are explained in more detail in the following sections.
Continuing changes in the social environment
Just over 80% of last year's CS Grant recipients also received Provincial funding, sometimes for programs that are jointly funded by the City, but more often for other programs and services which are not eligible for City funding. In 2002, the Province announced significant budget reductions in most ministries (including reductions in funding available for non-profit organizations) that were to take place over the subsequent three-year period. These cuts have continued to have a significant impact on community groups that apply for and receive the CS Grants.
The same issues that arose last year as a result of provincial funding cuts and changes in the availability of social services continued, and in some areas became more acute. Many of the community groups reported an increase in the number of clients in need of services and that the needs of their clients have continued to become more complex and difficult.
The emerging issues and trends that arose over the last year, as described by the community groups, included serving a greater number of clients who were unable to access welfare, an increased number of clients with mental health issues coming through their doors and increased violence. The community groups were also seeing an increased need for food amongst clients and food provision has become an essential service area for most organizations. Refugee-serving groups report that there has been a growing number of French-speaking African refugees arriving with high needs who require additional services.
One specific area that has been significantly affected by Provincial changes is services to youth. All the provincial contracts for youth services in Vancouver have been consolidated into four - this is intended to result in a full range of services being delivered from four youth service hubs. Approximately half of the seventeen organizations that we fund for youth programs have been affected by these MCFD changes - three were awarded one of the four consolidated contracts, the others lost their contract funding as it got folded into the consolidated contracts. The most profound change is the major reduction in the street youth outreach workers that are provincially funded. Consequently, we are recommending that conditions be placed on the two City funded street youth programs that will result in a review of their funding and activities, once the outcomes of the Provincial changes are fully understood.
Community groups have been creative in making adjustments to the way that they provide services and programs to their clients to address the changing demands. This has included altering services and programs to address these needs, increasing volunteer capacity and training to increase the capacity of clients to help themselves. Community groups have also had to find new sources of funding or face reductions in service provision. In addition, many groups have recognized the need to work more closely together, to provide support to each other and ensure that resources for services are put to their best uses.
New Themes for Grants Requests
This year, Social Planning received several new Community Services grants applications that provide programs and services which are significantly different from requests that we have previously funded. These new applications are related to the provision and/or distribution of food as a community development exercise and attracting youth involvement through the arts as a mechanism for addressing social issues. Although both of these types of activities may be the harbingers of creative, new solutions to social issues, Social Planning staff are reluctant, at this point, to recommend funding for these approaches, with little proven track record, at the expense of organizations with proven effective services that have been funded through grants program. Therefore, grants are not recommended for these proposals at this time.
Over the next year, staff will initiate discussions with the City's food policy team and the Office of Cultural Affairs to try to develop a more positive response to the development of these types of programs.
Grant program changes
Significant changes in the grants program, adopted in 2003, were incorporated into the processing of 2004 grant applications. Upon completion of the 2004 process, Social Planning staff identified a few areas for improvement, particularly with regards to clarifying eligibility criteria, priorities and the reconsideration process. The resultant recommendations for further revisions were adopted by Council on July 20, 2004.
With these minor revisions, the processing of the 2005 applications went a little smoother, with a clearer understanding of the program by everyone involved.
Also, this year we introduced the beginning of a process to identify and assess the outcomes achieved by City-funded programs. In the 2005 grant application, organizations were asked to describe the activities they planned to undertake, the outputs that result from these activities and the short-term outcomes anticipated from these activities. Those that get a 2005 CS grant will then be asked to identify intermediate and long-term outcomes, some indicators of the short-term outcomes and the ways in which they plan to measure the progress made. That information will be used in the evaluation of 2006 and subsequent grant applications.
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 also agreed to 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.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The total amount recommended for CS Grants (including the funding set aside for reconsiderations and the amounts in recommendation J1), plus the funding set aside for POD, is $2,460 less than the 2005 CS Grants budget. If Council selects recommendation J2, then the required additional funding ($47,100) will come from this balance plus Contingency Reserve.
Twelve requests for reconsideration have been received. These applications have subsequently been removed from the list of recommended grants. A total of $246,224 had been recommended for these 12, and this amount has been set aside until they are addressed in a separate report that will be before Council in late April 2005.
The recommended Rent Subsidy Grants do not come from the CS Grants budget. Rather, they are funded out of the Other Grants category, and there is sufficient funding in that budget for the recommended level of Rent Subsidy Grants.
CONCLUSION
The revised CS Grants program has enabled us to direct some City funding to organizations that are providing services and programs that help to further the City's social planning and services priorities while, at the same time, continue to provide funding stability in an environment of drastic social change. The end result is the ability to continue to build strong communities and to ensure the delivery of quality services to Vancouver residents.
* * * * *
