MAY 8, 1997

                             ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

                                           Date: April 22, 1997
                                           Dept. File No. 
                                           C.C. File No. 2152-2

   TO:       Standing Committee on City Services and Budgets

   FROM:     Director of Community Services, Social Planning

   SUBJECT:  Reconsideration of Community Services Grants Applications


        A.   THAT Council not approve a grant to High Risk Project Society,
             in accordance with Social Planning s original recommendation.

        B.   THAT Council not approve a grant to the Neil Squire
             Foundation, in accordance with Social Planning s original

        C.   THAT Council approve Social Planning s original recommendation
             for a Community Services Grant of $27,540 to the South
             Granville Seniors Friendship Centre.

        D.   THAT Council not approve a grant to the Stroke Recovery
             Association of B.C., in accordance with Social Planning s
             original recommendation.

        E.   THAT Council not approve a grant to the Westcoast Youth Net
             Society, in accordance with Social Planning s original


        The General Manager of Community Services submits A to E for


   On November 22, 1994, City Council established that reconsideration of
   grant recommendations can only occur if they are based on one or both of
   the following premises:


     1) that eligibility criteria and priorities have not been properly
        applied; or

     2) the financial situation of the applicant has not been properly
        assessed or understood.

   Approval of grant recommendations requires eight affirmative votes.


   This report contains the results of the reconsideration process which
   was initiated by five Community Services Grants applicants, and makes
   recommendations based on the outcome of this process.


   In November 1994, City Council approved a grants "reconsideration"
   process for those grant applicants who disagreed with the Social
   Planning Department's recommendation with regards to their applications. 
   A key feature of the process is that there are only two grounds for
   requesting reconsideration (referred to in Council Policy, above).  This
   has all but eliminated requests based solely on the fact that the group
   does good work (most do), or there is considerable community support for
   it, or any of a number of other reasons.

   All applicants for 1997 Community Service Grants were advised in
   mid-March of Social Planning's recommendations, along with our rationale
   for recommendations for reduced or no grants.  They were also told of
   the reconsideration process which could be used if they disagreed with
   the recommendations.  Five applicants, out of 113, requested

   Requests for reconsideration were submitted by the following

            Organization             Original Recommendation
    High Risk Project Society     No grant (new application).

    Neil Squire Foundation        No grant, reduced from
                                  $10,000 last year.

    South Granville Senior        $27,540, but they requested
    Friendship Centre             $35,000.
    Stroke Recovery Assoc. of     No grant (funding cut by the
    B.C.                          City in 1996).

    Westcoast Youth Net Society   No grant (new application).


   City Council subsequently, on April 8, approved Social Planning's
   recommendations for all Community Services Grant applications, except
   for the five which were referred to the reconsideration process.  At
   that time, Council also established a reserve of $24,538 for emergencies
   or unforeseen circumstances.  It was understood that any new or
   increased grants coming from the reconsideration process would be funded
   from this reserve.  The $27,540 originally recommended for South
   Granville Seniors was unallocated, and so remains available in the
   budget for this or another grant.


   The applicants for reconsideration have all submitted written material
   supporting their requests for changes to our recommendations.  This
   material is included in Appendix A.

   Social Planning staff reviewed the original applications, supporting
   materials, interview notes, and the new information that was submitted
   with the reconsideration requests.  If there was still some confusion or
   lack of clarity, applicants were personally contacted to ensure that
   staff had a clear and complete understanding of the situation.

   Staff then developed recommendations based on this review of all the
   pertinent information, and prepared written explanations for their
   decisions.  These comments and the recommendations, along with the
   applicants' submission, are attached as Appendix A.

   All applicants were advised that they could make presentations to
   Council if they were still in disagreement with the staff
   recommendations.  Some of them may appear as delegations when this
   report is dealt with by Council.


   After a careful and thorough review of the five applications that were
   referred, by the applicants, to the reconsideration process, Social
   Planning staff have concluded that their original recommendations should
   remain unchanged.

                             *   *   *   *   *