R2001-17 AUTHORIZING SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENTS

Home Browse Search

. , Neighborhood Services Department Memorandum 01-06 DATE: January 31, 2001 TO: Honorable Mayor Howley and City Council FROM: Steve Garman, City Manager ' 1 Reginald Fluker, Director—Neighborhood Services Dept. � Valencia Thompson, Renewal Section Administrator '�� Patricia Tyus, Program Specialist/Evaluation Committee Chair,� SUBJECT: CDBG Public Services/Facilities Allocations—FY01/02 SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests approval of its FY 2001-02 recommendations for allocating to community organizations, the related year's U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD) Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) funding for public services and public facilities. BACKGROUND: Each year the City requests applications from not-for-profit organizations that need additional funding in support of community programs that meet Federal, State, and Local regulations and guidelines. Each application must include specific information, documentation, and a funding request that enables Staff to evaluate the proposal for regulatory compliance, capacity, service level, adequacy, and capability. A public hearing is conducted to explain and clarify information contained in the request for applications (RFA). After receipt of applications by the published cut-off date, an application evaluation committee is established. Additionally, Staff conducts site visits with each of the applicants. Each application is thoroughly reviewed, evaluated, and scored based on pre- determined and published criteria. A recommended funding amount is then calculated for each application based on its Consolidated Plan priority level, its score, and the requested amount. Each applicant is then notified of the proposed CDBG funding recommendation in an effort to determine if the recommendation, along with other non-CDBG funding, is sufficient to operate the program. This year, Staff inet with all of the applicants to explain, discuss, and receive comments on the evaluation and funding determination process. For those applicants that could not be recommended for funding, Staff conducted individual and private meetings to explain why, and to provide helpful information on how the respective program could be potentially positioned to receive funding in a later fiscal year. Although not required, all applicants were invited to attend the Council meeting on February 5.