The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/18/2014 - Minutes _ � --� � �'� � , i 1 ' ', ::' ;, ° C��O�. '� - � Humdn Services Advisory Committee , Meeting Minutes _ _ . _ ; � , Renton City Hall _ th ,. ' Council Conference Room, 7 Floor � ' ` . February 18; 2014, 3:00 p.m. _ . . .. _ _ CALL-TO ORDER: Chair Shannon Matson cal.led the meeting to order at 3:07.p.m. A quorum was present. • AITENDANCE: : ,. � In Attendance: 5hannon.Matson,Chair; Linda 5mith;Vice-Chair;.Leslie Anderson; Elyn Blandon;.Len Aron; Ryan Mclrv.in; Brook:Lindquist;:Chad Beuchler;Amy:Koehl. Excused:.Dorothy Capers. City of Renton Staff; Karen Bergsvik;Dianne Utecht; Katie McClincy;Jennifer Jorgenson._ , Shannon welcomed two new members: C had Beuchler and Amy Koehl. Introductio.ns were made. 1: APPROVAL OF PREVIO.US IVIINUTES ' ' Shannon asked for a motion to approve the January 21, 2014, minutes. Elyn moved.for approval of the . ' .. _ minutes as presented; Linda seconded. Motion carried, 2. RESIGNATION OF ZENOVIA HARRIS Karen explained Zenovia had recently married, and was now living oufside the Renton city limits and she had _ ' subse uentl resi ned her position.. . ' ' . ' ' ' ' , q Y. g _ 3. YEAR-END PERFORMANCE REPORT bianne went over the purpose of the Agency Report and the.agencies'2013 year end performance requirements. Hero House did not meet the.performance:measure of unduplicated residents served, but they were paid because of their marketing and outreach efforts. .Therapeutic Health Ser.vices failed to submit an invoice for the fourth quarter,and did.not get paid for that.quarter. . � 4. 2014 FUNDING PROCESS ` - - Dianne reviewed the funding process of other suburban cities. Shannon described the use of rating tools - and scoring.:It was noted thaf Renton has the most extensive and objecfive rating process. . . . . . . . . - � F .' .. _ .: . �. . . : . .; . . .: .� . . . ,. . . . .. . . . . . The.r.e_verse time line`wa.s,discussed,.so that .members understood the strategic dates,a.nd what event(s) triggered the date(s). . _. Shannon went ov:er the objective:s in determining the best:way to serve the-needs of Renton residents. She ; - noted that in some circumsfances it might be better to fund two separate agencies with similar goals at a y lesser arriount,'as opposed to funding just one agency at a larger dollar amount. _ . . . The.City has identified seven of the nine Renton Results areas for funding. It is not knowri how many applications:there will be,or what Result area they will be in. � ` ` ' � . Shannon clarified that several decisions had fo be made at:this meefing. The'first decision is whefher the.- . _. membe.rs want to read the applications electronically:or have hard copies.printed.The gro.up decided tha# thiey wanted hard c,opies printed. City of Renton Human Services Advi. :ommittee Minutes ' February 18, 2014 � Page 2 Karen clarified the Community Needs Assessment and Strdtegic Plan would not be used during this funding cycle. . We are waiting f.or the Executive Summary of the Needs A.ssessment, before M.ayor Law and the Cit.y Council are briefed. The Strategic Plan will be completed in 2014/15: There was discussion about the pre-screening of applications. It was asl<ed if staff would do.any pre-screening of the applications: Karen responded it:'is up to the Commitfee members whether they would like them to be pre- screened.Shannon would like to.have a guideline for screening out applications. Karen clarified that the Committee has the ability to set the parameters for what must be included to be considered a complete application and/or the absence of items that might make.an application incomplete, and:therefore:not be reviewed and considered for funding. Any items that we want agencies to taKe notice of that are specific to Renton, is done in the CitySupplemental Notice. There:was much discussion as to what is considered a complete or incomplete application. Examples weregiven of: If an attacfiment is required, but no information is available,a page must be submitted stating that no information is available. Late submittals will not be accepted. Brook made a motion that Renton will: A. Not accept late applications—based on Pacific Northwest Daylight Savings Time of 4:30 p.m. (KB's note:this.was 4 p.m. originally and was changed to 4:30 p.m.:after the HSAC meeting was.held.) B. Not review incomplete applications. :There must be an upload for every required document. If the document requested does not exist or is not applicable, upload:a page with#he name of the required attachment with a brief explanation why it is not included: C. Not review applicetions that are less than the minimum level of requested funding,which is set at ' $5,000. `� � Elyn seconded the motion. Motion carried: Tlie second decision that needs to 6e.made is if the members read all the applications,or some of them: In the last funding process,the different Result areas were assigned to teams.composed of 2 or 3 members. The teams read and:rated them. The.teams then got together, negotiated,and approved the level of recommended funding,which.was subsequently forwarded to the City Council. There.:was much:discussion a6out different scenarios.in reading and rating the:applicatiorrs. El.yn thought that th'ere were four options to rating the applications: 1. Eacli member reads and rates all of the applications; 2. Each member reads and rates one Renton Result area; 3. Each member reads and rates two Result areas, and,4. -Each member reads.and rates on.e result area—but reads the applications:in the other result areas that are not assigned`to that member. A fifth option of splitting the group and applications in half=and each group would read.and rate half the applications-was added as a possibility. _ It was asKed if there were key parts of an application that could be read—to get tfie essence of the application, _ without reading the entire application. It was.clarified that pages.l-3 contain the key.information: It was suggested that if people are.assigned a subset ofapplications to read,that everyone read.these pages of all the epplications,to be familiar with them for discussion purposes. A member felt that all applications should,,be read and most of,:the time should be spent on the rating process. Other members felt that reading fewer applications was better—for it would take a lot of"time and concentration.to read them all at a quality levef of review:: Members discussed the concept of reading and rating half the applications,and generally the group favored this option. E.lyn reminded mem6ers that reading and rating are two entirely different fhings. � H:\HumanServices\Mainfolder\AdvisoryCommittee\Agenda-Haridouts-Minutes\Minutes\2014Minutes\February2014 1Vllnut�.'S,d�CiX � � � � - � � , � . . . . . . . . " {_� . . . " City of Renton H'uman Services Ad�i� �?Committee Minutes ', ,%. February 18,2014 . . L y � Page 3. ` . , • It was.noted that certain sections of the application should be read by everyone—the Needs Statement,the Ask;- and/or the Justification. � - Ryan moved, and Brook seconded, a motion that the Advisory Committee be split in two,with each group reading and rating half the applications—and for all applications—those parts'that are deemed crifical, as � . decided by the Chair,Vice-chair, and staff. Motion carried. " The third decision that needs fo be made is if the funding:for new programs should remain or$5,000 or not. .: There was clarification as to if this was for new agencies or new programs. It.was clarified,that it is for.new programs, meaning ones that had not been previously funded by the City of Renton'during the last funding cycle. . � Brook made a motion,to`raise the limit for,funding-a New Program to$10.,000 for this funding,eycle. After � - discussion, Brookamend"ed her motion to raise the funding limit to$7,500. Elyn seconded the motion. Motion , ' , . `carried. . ; . Karen gave'a brief summary about the Severe Cold Weather Shelter. It.had been activated from February 4 ,through February 10th. Catholic Community Services was v.ery involved as the site supervisor; and they managed to place three people into temporary housing situations. Brook moved and Lincla seconded to close the meeting. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 5:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, : S. nnon Mafson, Chair ` � ;< NEXT REGULAR MEETING `"' ; f �� , y � � � : ; . � ' MARCH 18, 2014� 3,00 p m Council Conference Room' 7th Flo�or R�`enton City Hall � - >. �:� � n�. r� ,. � + �� H:\Human�Servkes\Main�folder�AdvisoryCommittee\Agenda-Handouts-Minutes\Minutes\2014Minutes�February20141V11IZUteS,�OCiX ' � � � �� - � � ' � . . . . . � � . . ' ., ..� . . . . . . � - ' .�. .; ' �