SR-012886-11A (2)C/ED:CD:MK:wp
Council Meeting January 28, 198b
T0: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
r~- ~
,ypK 2 g 986
~r~ ~~
~~ ~ ~~
~ ~~
Santa Monica, C<~lifornia
SUBJECT: Recommendation to Consider Expanded Programs to the
Homeless and to the Frail Elderly in the Context of the
1986--87 Community Development Program Budget
INTRODUCTION
This report transrr~its information regarding the status of funds
set aside in the 1986--87 Community Development Program for
expanded programs for the horr~eless and for the frail elderly.
The report summarizes proposals submitted by local organizations
in response to "Requests for Proposals" (RFP's) issued in
Noverr~ber of 1985 and recommends that two of these programs be
considered for funding in the next fiscal year.
BACKGROUND
On May 29, 1985, the City Council adopted the 1985--86 Community
Development Plan which included the award of funds to a range of
community service agencies. In addition, the Council set aside
$1PJ4,395 in General Funds to be used for expanded services to
homeless individuals and to frail elderly residents and directed
staff to issue Request for Proposals (RFPs) in these two program
areas.
~/ r /y
JR& 2 g 1 `966
-- 1 --
Due to the uncertainty regarding the level of Federal funding the
City would receive in the current fiscal year, these funds were
set aside until the status of this funding became clearer and
there were strong indications that current funding would not be
cut. In November 1985, with Federal funding seemingly secure
through FY 1985--85, staff followed Council direction and issued
two RFPs to currently---funded agencies: one for expanded services
to frail elderly residents and one for expanded services to
homeless persons. The deadline for proposal submission was
December 16, 1985.
By the Decerr~ber 16th deadline, a total of six proposals was
received: four horr~eless proposals and two frail elderly proposals
{see Attachment I for proposal summaries). Complete copies of
all proposals are available for Council review in the Council
office.
DISCUSSION
On Decerr~ber 11, 1985, the Gramm-Rudman--Hollings Deficit Reduction
Plan, H.J. Res. 372 (P.L.99--177), was passed, and signed the
following morning on December 12. While it is uncertain what
specific cuts will be faced by the City as a result of this law,
the impact on Community Development Block Grant and General
Revenue Sharing Programs, which are authorized only through
Septerr~ber 1986, is expected to be significant. Additional
inforrr~ation on projected cuts and their impact on the Community
Development Program was included in the recent staff report on
the coming year's funding rationale.
-- 2 --
This uncertainty about Federal funding has not only made it
difficult to plan for the 1986--87 fiscal year, but it has also
necessitated a change in the approach for reviewing the six
proposals which were going to be considered for funding in the
current year. Staff first identified the most meritorious
programs in terms of their ability to address identified service
needs, their program design and cost effectiveness. Selection
criteria used in this evaluation are included as Attachment II.
After identifying the most competitive proposals, staff then
considered the availability of funding and the timing for
possible implementation of the selected programs. The results of
these two steps are detailed in the following sections.
(1) Review of Proposals
Attachment III provides a description and brief analysis of all
proposals submitted. After careful review, staff has identified
two prograrr~s that are especially meritorious and successfully met
the selection criteria:
Westside Independent Services to the Elderly (WISE) -- In--Home
Assistance Program: Consistent with the recon~n~endation by the
Commission on Older Americans to allocate City funds for a "home
chore" or "homemaker aide" program for frail elderly residents,
this program would provide homemaker/personal care training for
individuals desiring to provide these in--home services; a
"matching" service for trained aides and homebound seniors
needing assistance; and the hiring of three home/health aides to
provide assistance to those individuals identified by WISE as
3 --
rr~ost in need. This program addresses a glaring deficiency in the
current network of services to the homebound senior and will
enhance elderly residents' ability to continue living
independently.
Ocean Park Community Center (OPCC) --- Daybreak: Consistent with
recomrr~endations rr~ade by the City's Working Group on the Homeless
for such services, this two--corr~ponent prograrr~ provides for an
outreach tearr~ of two social service advocates and a half--time
counselor and for a day center for horr~eless women and children.
The outreach tearr~ would work closely with homeless individuals in
the City's public parks and other public areas, providing crisis
intervention and social service information and referral to these
individuals. Close ties will be established with the Santa Monica
Police Departrr~ent, other social service and rr~ental health
agencies, and the business community.
The proposed outreach tearr~ differs frorr~ the new "outreach
services" provided through St. John's Hospital and funded
entirely from private donations. This part--time program provides
consultation to agencies serving the homeless with staff coming
to these agencies to evaluate clients. They do not do outreach
to parks and public areas. The proposed OPCC team would work in
these public areas, establishing bonds of trust with very
isolated individuals. As these individuals are eventually
referred to services at agencies, St. John's staff would be
available to consult with the agency and provide psychiatric
services at these sites. Project contingencies, included in
Attachrr~ent III, address the need for the two agencies to
-- 4 --
coordinate these related efforts and to assess the feasibility of
coordinating requests for County funding.
The request for a day center for women and children did not
propose a specific site but did document a high level of private
sector support through the recent award of a grant from the
Weingart Foundation. This program would provide day shelter,
showers and counseling support for homeless worr~en, many of whom
would be identified by the outreach team and referred to the
center. While this component of the prograrr~ successfully net
selection criteria, the inability of the applicant to identify a
site at the time of application resulted in a lower staff
assessment than the outreach team. However, if a site is
identified it should be considered as a logical and important
"next step" for those women receiving assistance from the
outreach team. The ultimate success of the team will depend on
the availability of other supportive services, including the
proposed day center.
The need for both programs has been clearly documented. The
recent public hearing on homeless issues conducted by the City
Council indicated a high level of support for an outreach tean~
and day center. In addition, while the needs of homebound
seniors are not as apparent to the public, the absence of
homechore services has diminished the ability of many Santa
Monica residents to remain in their homes. Additional
infor~r~ation on these proposed programs and any suggested funding
contingencies are included in Attachment III.
-- 5 --
(2~ Availability of Funding and Timing of Prograrr~ Implerr~entation
A careful review of the two successful proposals indicates that
the prioritized services could be supported by the current year's
allocation of $1414,395 for a five--month period. If funded as
proposed, the annualized cost of these services would be
approximately $2441,04141 with the following breakdown by component:
Outreach Team $72,000
Day Center 72,000
Horr~echore Services 96,000
While $104,395 has been set aside for these programs in the
current year and is a part of the "on--going base" of support for
community service grants, a number of factors has resulted in a
staff recommendation that these new services not be irr~plemented
in the current year but be given rr~aximum consideration for the
1986--87 fiscal year, beginning July lst. Service levels and
specific funding levels would be determined within the context of
the 1986-87 grant review process. Factors considered in reaching
this recomrr~endation include:
o the uncertainty of Federal funding available to support
1986--87 community service grants and the possibility of a
40o decrease in funds available for these grants;
o The possibility of having to make substantial cuts to
ongoing prograrr~s in 1986--87;
o the need to provide a certain degree of stability to newly
funded programs at the onset. Starting new programs for
-- 6 --
five months, in light of pending funding cuts, does not
ensure this stability;
o the need to coordinate the City's funding efforts for
expanded homeless services with other governmental
entities. The Los Angeles County Department of Mental
Health is currently in the process of allocating $2(~0, Pl(~a
in State funds to the Santa Monica area for services to
homeless chronically mentally ill individuals, City staff
have recently initiated discussions with county and state
officials to emphasize the need to coordinate funding
efforts.
While deferral of a specific funding decision on these two
programs is proposed at this time, the staff recommendation also
recognizes the critical need for these services and the track
record and experience of applicants in implementing quality
programs. Staff's review indicates that these proposals will be
highly competitive with currently--funded programs during the
1986--87 grant funding process.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
This recommendation will result in a savings to the General Fund
of $114, 395 in account number 0~1~20P1--262--af~~1--651.
RECOMMENDATIONS
City staff recommends that City Council approve the inclusion of
the proposals submitted by OPCC for services to the homeless and
by WISE for homemaker services to the frail elderly in the
1986--87 Community Development Progran~ review. It is further
-- 7 --
recommended that these proposals compete equally with
currently--funded programs.
Prepared by: Barbara Stinchfield, Community Development Manager
Maggie Kennedy, Grants Adrr~inistrator
Departrr~ent of Com~r~unity and Economic Development
g
Reference Contract
Nos. 4644 (CCS)
and 4645 (CCS).