Agenda Index City of Vancouver

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

TO: Standing Committee on City Services and Budgets
FROM: Director of Community Services, Social Planning
SUBJECT: Reconsideration of Community Services Grants Applications
 

RECOMMENDATION

GENERAL MANAGER’S COMMENTS

COUNCIL POLICY

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.

PURPOSE

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.

BACKGROUND

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 that there is considerable community support for it, or any of a number of other reasons.

All applicants for 2000 Community Service Grants were advised in late February 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. Six applicants, out of 97, requested reconsideration. Upon closer review of these requests, staff discovered that one of them, the Avalon Recovery Society, was in fact not requesting reconsideration. They wanted further explanation for the recommendation of no grant, and this explanation has been provided.

Requests for reconsideration were submitted by the following organizations:

City Council subsequently, on March 28, 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 $11,140 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 $61,300 originally recommended for ALDA, DERA and the Vancouver Recovery Club was unallocated, and so remains available in the budget for these or other grants.

RECONSIDERATION PROCESS

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

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 I.

The original recommendations for all but one are being reconfirmed. Staff are changing their recommendation for ALDA to provide funding at last year’s level ($15,000). The original recommendation of $7,500 remains in the unallocated portion of the budgets and is available for this grant. Funding for the recommended additional amount, if approved, will come from the Emergencies and Unforeseen Circumstances Reserve, leaving a balance of $3,640 in the Reserve.

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 wish to appear as delegations when this report is dealt with by Council.

CONCLUSION

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

* * * * *

cs000504.htm

ALDA - Adult Learning Development Association (#1)

Request: $30,000
1999 Grant: $15,000
Social Planning Initial Recommendation: $7,500 (Terminating Grant)

Program Description (summarized from the grant application)

ALDA help adults with learning disabilities/difficulties develop their abilities and gain social, personal and economical independence. ALDA provides services which include advocacy, regular support groups, counselling, information and referral, career exploration/vocational planning and employment assistance services for adults who have learning disabilities and general learning difficulties.

Social Planning’s Initial Response

Staff recommended a six months terminating grant. It was viewed that the agency’s core services have changed to focus mostly on pre-employment and employment training programs which fall under the mandate of other levels of government.

Basis for Reconsideration

The applicant requested reconsideration and provided a letter (attached) indicating that in their view, the rationale for the grant termination has been applied using incorrect information. The applicant indicated that the core services of the organization (information, referrals, counselling, advocacy, and support services) have not changed over previous years. The applicant also argues that they do not provide employment training programs per se, but rather provide support services for adults with learning disabilities, on an independent basis, who wish to achieve a measure of economic independence through work. This type of service is provided through special contract arrangements with other agencies.

Social Planning Comments

Social Planning staff reviewed the ALDA submission for reconsideration and met with their Senior Administrator. A discussion on the issues raised by ALDA was conducted, and additional information was given by the organization on the different service activities provided by them, particularly in the area of public education, advocacy and information dissemination. It was also indicated, that even though ALDA has increased its revenue almost three-fold in the last four years, with a heavy focus on employment assistance and vocational planning activities, this does not take away from their commitment to the other ongoing services and program activities.

New written information was subsequently provided indicating that the Senior Administrator spends 70% of her time engaged in advocacy and access type of activities on behalf of ALDA. A listing of organizations where referrals and educational presentations are being made by ALDA’s staff and volunteers was presented (it includes 60 agencies). It became clear that these activities do form a significant part of ALDA’s work.

More information on the nature of the support groups sponsored by the organization was also submitted. Groups such as the Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), Pre-employment Support Group, and a General Support Group, meet regularly and incorporate both self-help and instructional approaches to their functioning. More than 45 people participated in these support groups during 1999.

Given this additional information on the different type of activities and services provided by the organization, staff is recommending reinstating the organization to its 1999 funding level.

Recommendation

Grant of $15,000

Letter from ALDA re Request for Reconsideration not electronically available.

Common Concerns Association (#18)

Request $120,000
1999 Grant $0 (new application for 2000)
Social Planning Initial Recommendation $0

Program Description (summarized from the grant application)

Common Concerns Association was formed in the summer of 1998 as a mutual aid, self-help organization to bring together and develop the assets, skills, and talents of Strathcona/Downtown Eastside residents for the purpose of developing local economically-sustainable small businesses.

Social Planning’s Initial Response

Staff recommended NO GRANT, with the explanation that community economic development activities are not eligible for Community Services Grants.

Basis for Reconsideration

The organization claims that the eligibility criteria and priorities have not been properly applied and that the financial situation of Common Concerns has not been properly assessed or understood. In their request for reconsideration (see the attached letter) the organization points out that “Alleviation of Poverty” is listed as a priority for funding from Community Services Grants (CSG), and that they view their service as being very much directed towards this objective. The group states that the CSG was intended to support their planned educational, training and mutual support programs, not the business plan activities that they also hope to undertake.

Their letter also states that they are enclosing year-end Financial Statements and Balance Sheets; however, these were not included with the letter. The Executive Director advised City staff that she intended on presenting them directly to City Council. In the letter, they do state that they are running an annual deficit of $10,000.

Social Planning Comments

The organization is correct in noting that alleviation of poverty is one of the priority areas for CSG funding, and that community economic development can be one method of addressing poverty issues. However, the decision to fund, or not fund, any particular organization is made on the basis of a range of considerations, starting with basic Council policies.

One of the first things that staff look at when considering grant applications, particularly new applications, is the list of services and programs that are NOT eligible, by policy, for CSG funding. Included in that list is “duplication of services which are clearly within the legislated mandate of other governments or departments”. Economic development falls clearly within the mandates of both levels of senior government and within the purview of the City’s own Economic Development Commission. The Provincial Government also has a department that provides support and funding for the “community development” component of community economic development. The senior levels of government and the City’s Economic Development Commission are currently engaged in various activities that will probably result in support for community economic development in the Downtown Eastside.

Because the organization did not supply updated Financial Statements with their request for reconsideration, staff have no way of knowing if the financial picture presented in the grant application has changed significantly. However, even a major change in the finances of the organization does not get around the basic problem that they’re not eligible for CSG funding.

Recommendation

NO GRANT

Letter from Common Concerns re Request for Formal Reconsideration not electronically available.

Downtown Eastside Residents Association - Organizer (#20)

Request $46,797
1999 Grant $27,540
Social Planning Initial Recommendation $27,540 TERMINATING GRANT

Program Description (summarized from the grant application)

The programs and services of DERA are directed at:
… providing information, tools and skills necessary to deal effectively with governments, landlords, Revenue Canada, etc. that have an impact on the neighbourhood residents;
… organizing residents to identify gaps in government programs and services, and
… educating residents about local issues and processes so that they can provide meaningful input to decisions about the neighbourhood and city.

The stated focus of the position that has been funded by the City is community organizing in order to end homelessness.

Social Planning’s Initial Response

Social Planning recommended a grant at the same level as the previous year’s ($27,540), but also recommended that it be a terminating grant - that is, this would be the final year of funding for this program. Staff noted that DERA has been re-examining its roles in the community and has shifted toward economic development strategies and activities, functions which are not eligible for CSG funding. The one-year terminating grant was recommended to allow the organization time to find other sources of funding for this work.

Basis for Reconsideration

DERA is requesting that the recommended grant not be terminating. In their letter outlining the reasons for the request for reconsideration (see attached), DERA states that they feel that Social Planning’s definition of community organizing is too narrow, and that a broader definition would result in a conclusion that their work is indeed eligible for CSG funding.
They also claim that the financial situation was not fully understood by Social Planning. They say that it will not be possible to continue with this work if City funding is discontinued after a year - more time is needed to develop other funding sources.

Social Planning Comments

Over the past 2 years, staff have requested clearer reports from DERA regarding the nature, purpose and effectiveness of activities funded under this program. Staff noticed from these reports that increasing amounts of time were being spent on community economicdevelopment activities, to the point where it appeared to constitute the primary role of the DERA staff person that the City was funding.

One of the primary considerations of staff when considering grant applications is the list of services and programs that are NOT eligible, by policy, for CSG funding. Included in that list is “duplication of services which are clearly within the legislated mandate of other governments or departments”. Economic development falls clearly within the mandates of both levels of senior government and within the purview of the City’s own Economic Development Commission.

As DERA was evidently moving into an area of work that is not eligible for CSG funding, they were advised of this by Social Planning staff in December 1999 and asked to make a decision whether to continue in this direction (and find other funding sources for it) and/or engage in other social services and programs that could be eligible for City funding. At the grant interview meeting, the DERA representatives provided a detailed description of the work they are doing; it included the establishment of a real estate company, a property management company and a janitorial firm, providing bookkeeping services for these enterprises, setting up a street market, and doing the preliminary planning work on setting up a bakery. They confirmed that they felt economic development was a good vehicle for involving residents in the improvement of their community, and that they intend on carrying on with this work. Social Planning staff reiterated, at the meeting, that these activities come within the mandates of other funders, and are therefore ineligible for CSG funding.

The City is committing considerable resources to working with the residents and businesses of the Downtown Eastside to develop plans for solving the many problems in this neighbourhood. Community economic development may very well emerge as an important component of these plans, and funding for this activity will have to be an integral part of the plan. City Council has already provided funding support to the Economic Development Commission to begin work on this aspect of the community development project. So while DERA’s economic development work may ultimately become eligible for funding as part of the larger community plan, this won’t happen for some time yet. Consequently, staff recommended a further year’s funding to DERA to ensure that there can be a more orderly transition in community development activities.

While staff are prepared to recommend transition funding for a further 1 year period, we are still of the opinion that the economic development activities being undertaken by DERA are not eligible for CSG funding.

Recommendation

Terminating grant of $27,540

Letter from Downtown Eastside Residents Association re Request for Reconsideration not electronically available.

La Boussole (#46)

Request: $33,000
1999 Grant: $0
Social Planning Initial Recommendation: $0

Program Description (summarized from the grant application)

La Boussole has operated in the Downtown Eastside for seven years providing advocacy, information referral, workshops, and assistance with resume writing to Francophones who are new to Vancouver. The clients they serve come from Quebec, Europe, Africa and Asia. They also provide a drop-in and services to French speaking residents of the Downtown Eastside. The organization was seeking a grant for a bilingual Volunteer Program Coordinator.

Social Planning’s Initial Response

Staff recommended NO GRANT. The service was not seen as a high priority at this time.

Basis for Reconsideration

The applicant requested reconsideration and in their letter questioned the staff recommendation for no grant based on the service not being a priority at this time.

Social Planning Comments

Social Planning staff reviewed La Boussole’s reconsideration submission and met with the Executive Director of the Society, Ms. Christine Sotteau, to get more detailed information on the organization and the services they provide.

Currently, the Society serves 60 clients per month out of which about 35 are Downtown Eastside residents. The French speaking newcomers to the City are from Quebec, Europe, Africa and Asia. It was suggested by Social Planning staff that the Society could seek funding for the services they provide to newcomers from funders such as the Provincial Ministry for Multiculturalism and Immigration or Canadian Heritage.

Ms. Sotteau explained that the bilingual volunteer coordinator, for which they sought City funding, was intended to work with the French-speaking Downtown Eastside clients to provide them with activities and volunteer opportunities at La Boussole. These residents tend to be older and usually have some facility in English, however, they prefer to use the services at La Boussole. They find the French atmosphere welcoming and enjoy the ability to drop-in and read French papers. Ms. Sotteau commented that the activities and individual assistance provided in a Francophone setting are not duplicated by any other Downtown Eastside agency.

Social Planning staff explained that City funding for language-specific services to assist Vancouver resident, non-English speaking populations was usually provided to help break down access barriers to mainstream services. Ms. Sotteau confirmed that the Downtown Eastside French-speaking residents had generally lived in the area for at least 5 years and had enough language proficiency to access various government and non-profit services without assistance. It was acknowledged that there are existing City services in the Downtown Eastside with French speaking staff and a guide published by the Carnegie Centre lists these staff contacts.

Given the low number of residents served by this group, the general availability of services in the area that are provided by Francophone staff (including direct services provided by the City), and the acknowledged lack of problems with access to services, Social Planning staff confirmed their assessment that this program is not a high priority for City funding.

Recommendation

NO GRANT

Letter from La Boussole re Request for Reconsideration not electronically available.

Vancouver Recovery Club ( #89 )

Request $50,502
1999 Grant $26,000
Social Planning Initial Recommendation $26,260

Program Description (summarized from the grant application)

The Recovery Club operates a 24-hour a day, 7 day a week drop-in and referral centre for alcoholics and drug addicts, and runs a community outreach program and the Saferide program. As the only drop-in open on a 24-hour basis, it is also open to anyone who needs support and referral during evening/early morning hours. City funding assists with the salary/benefits of the manager. The request for additional funding was to help support both a day and night manager who are needed to respond to increased usage of the facility.

Social Planning’s Initial Response

Staff recommended a 1% COLA increase over last year’s grant.

Basis for Reconsideration

The applicant requested reconsideration on the basis that their financial situation had not been properly assessed or understood. The applicant believed that their rental costs had not been understood, and stated that it was becoming difficult to sustain the 24-hour operation without additional paid staff hours. The applicant also noted their need for additional tables and chairs.

Social Planning Comments

Social Planning staff met with representatives of the Recovery Club to review their financial situation. The organization needs a large space to accommodate its many groups/activities but it has difficulty paying the yearly rent of $67,000 to $85,000 (depending on the amount of space used). This is not a new situation: it has been a problem since the Club moved to its present location.

It does appear that use of the Club is increasing and that the organization would be helped by an additional staff person to manage evening activities and volunteers. However, whether this increase is within the City’s funding mandate is another question. City funding relates only to the drop-in/support offered to people other than those involved in AA or other addiction support activities, because the funding of alcohol/drug recovery/support is outside the Community Services Grants mandate.

Staff have recognized the benefits of having the Recovery Club’s 24-hour drop-in, and have recommended increases over the last three years ($17,500 in 1997; $21,000 in 1998; and $26,000 in 1999). We cannot recommend another increase at this time based on the financial and program information that has been provided.

Recommendation

Grant of $26,260

Letter from Vancouver Recovery Club re Request for Reconsideration not electronically available.

 

cs000504.htm

Comments or questions? You can send us email.

[City Homepage] [Get In Touch]

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver