planning retreat - thurston county | home · planning retreat . table of contents ... agenda for...
TRANSCRIPT
February 13, 2017
9:00-4:00
Tilley Road Emergency Management Office
9521 Tilley Rd SW, Olympia, WA 98512
Planning Retreat
Table of Contents
ITEM PAGE
Action Items for Today! 2
Agenda for Retreat 3
2017 HHSC and CIP Members 4
2017 Revenue Projections 5
HAT Recommendations 6
Housing Pipeline 7
Notes from Housing and Non Housing Sessions 8
2016 Funding Process 13
2016 Review Committee Members 14
Non Housing Priority Work Tables 15
Housing Work Tables 17
Multi-Year Funding Questions 19
2017 RFP Schedule 20
Review Panel Members Recruitment 21
HHSC Interlocal Agreement 23
CIP Memorandum of Understanding 30
Page 1 of 35
Tasks that must be completed today
ACTION ITEMS: Elect HHSC Chair
Elect CIP Co Chairs
Sign CIP MOU (CIP Co-Chairs)
Select priority areas of focus
Choose housing priorities/outcomes
Choose non housing priorities/outcomes
Decide on one year or multi-year funding for housing programs
Determine whether review teams will use a scoring method or forced
pairs to rank projects.
Should review teams recommend to CIP on funding amounts?
Should review teams recommend to CIP on multi-year funding?
Should review teams Conduct Interviews of all or targeted interviews?
If no Interviews, should review team Co-Chair email applicant questions
through ZoomGrants? Applicant provides email response within X days
and response is shared with review panel members before final scoring.
Assign CIP members to serve as co-chairs on review teams.
Should CIP members participate in scoring applications?
Approve staff to recruit for panel(s).
What guidance, if any, should be inserted into the RFP regarding
outputs, outcomes and data reporting?
Page 2 of 35
Community Investment Partnership Retreat Agenda Monday, February 13, 2017 - 9:00 – 4:00 p.m.
Tilley Road Emergency Management
Time Agenda Item Facilitator 9:00-9:05am Welcome and Introductions Barb Burgener 9:05-9:15am Review of the Agenda/Meeting Purpose Barb Burgener 9:15-9:30m Elect HHSC Chair and Vice Chair and
CIP Co-Chair Positions (1 from HHSC/1 from United Way) Barb Burgener - All Members
9:30am-12:00pm
CIP – RFP - Areas of Focus and Priorities • What are areas of focus for 2017? (2016: Financial and
Residential Stability/Promoting Healthier Choices/Child and Youth Resilience)
• Affordable & homeless housing priorities • Non-housing priorities • Multi-year funding strategy?
Barb Burgener
12:00 – 1:00pm Lunch and Overview of RFP Process and ZOOM Grants Application (Includes 2- 15 minute breaks)
Gary Aden and Tom Webster
1:00 – 3:15pm Cross Cutting RFP Policies • Decision making process in 2016 (Attachment) • What is the decision making process for 2017 • Scoring method (Forced Pairs) • Allow an amount per review team? • Interviews of applicants Yes or No? • CIP members on review teams? Assign to teams if yes. • Review team members? (2016 Review Team members) • Outputs, Outcomes and Data
Barb Burgener
3:15 – 3:30pm 2017 Funding Projections All Sources • Current Estimated Funding amounts from all sources
will be reviewed.
Gary Aden
3:30 – 4:00 Wrap Up - Our Decisions Barb Burgener and CIP
4:00 Adjourn Barb Burgener
Next CIP Meeting Date and Topics MARCH 13, 2017 1:00 TO 3:00 PM Olympia, WA 98512 Conference Room 280
Page 3 of 35
2017 HHSC/CIP Members
NAME Representing Role Virgil Clarkson Lacey HHSC/CIP Jeannine Roe Olympia HHSC/CIP Joan Cathey Tumwater HHSC/CIP
John Hutchings Thurston County HHSC/CIP Paul Knox UW CIP
Lee Wojnar UW CIP Faith Trimble UW CIP Ron Bruchet UW CIP
Wayne Fournier Tenino HHSC/CIP Molly Carmody/
JW Foster Yelm HHSC/CIP
Randy Schleis Rainier HHSC/CIP Alan Carr Bucoda HHSC/CIP
HHSC Officer Election. HHSC Interlocal Section III. D.:
D. Chairing The Council shall annually elect a Chair and Vice Chair. The duties of the Chair shall be to preside over Council meetings and provide the direct link of the Council with the administrative staff providing administrative activities as set forth in subsection E hereof. The Vice Chair shall serve in the absence or inability of the Chair.
CIP Officer Election. CIP MOU- Section III. B.
B. Leadership. The CIP s h a l l a n n u a l l y e l e c t C o - Chairs (one each from the HHSC and the UWTC) to manage the administrative tasks necessary to the CI P's functions. The Co-Chairs shall preside over the CIP meetings.
Page 4 of 35
2017 Revenue Projections all Sources
HHSC & United Way Revenue
Amount Jurisdiction/Agency 47,852 Lacey 25,000 Tumwater 85,677 Olympia
$67,000 Thurston County $225,530 Subtotal
<$22,553> <Less 10% from HHSC portion for County Admin. $202,977 Available for Program $430,000 United Way Contribution $632,977 Total Available for Program Funding
Homeless and Affordable Housing Revenues
1 year amount
2 year amount
2017 Projected Revenues for Federal State and Local HOME/Homeless and Affordable Housing Funding
417,600 835,200 HOME Investment Partnership Act 188,600 272,100 HOME CHDO Set-aside 750,800 1,501,600 2163 Homeless Housing Fund (Local Document Recording
Fee Estimate) 100,000 200,000 2163- Set aside through RFP for Coordinated Entry 277,200 554,400 2163- Set aside for Cold Weather Shelter (87,200),
Homeless-Affordable Housing Coordinator (90,000), Emergency Fund (100,000) - not in February 2017 - RFP
212,900 425,800 2060 Affordable Housing Fund (Local Document Recording Fee Estimate)
372,700 745,400 Consolidated Homeless Grant (CHG) (1 year Estimate) 1,478,800 2,957,600 Housing and Essential Needs (HEN) (1 year Estimate) 128,000 256,000 Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) (1 year Estimate)
3,926,600 7,748,100 HOME and Homeless and Affordable Housing RFP Total for Programs
Total for 2017 RFP= $4,559,577 (1 Year)
Page 5 of 35
HAT Recommendations
HAT Activity 2017 Available Amounts (1 Year) Homeless and Affordable Housing SERVICES (including Agency and Program Operating Costs)
600,000
Coordinated Entry 100,000 Rapid Rehousing 651,500 Capital Construction (Includes CHDO $188,600)
769,100
Green and Healthy Housing 50,000 SUB Total 1,967,800 HEN Program 1,478,800 SUB- TOTAL 2,967,800 Additional Set Asides 277,200 TOTAL 3,926,600
NOTES: - Approximate Blue and Green (Capital) total in above chart= $819,100 (HOME/2060) -Approximate Red/Orange (Homeless) Total in above chart= $1,628,700 (2163/CHG/ESG) -2 year funding cycle would double the amounts indicated on this page. -State CHG contracts are 24 months. State HEN contract is 12 months. All other homeless contracts are 12 months. -Affordable Housing/Capital contract awards are until completed.
Page 6 of 35
$6
30
,50
0 $
83
,50
0
12
Total
Target Po
pA
nn
ual A
vg2
9U
nits P
rojecte
d:
17
21
66
42
Pro
ject Nam
eA
gency
Pip
eline
Placem
ent
City
Prim
ary Type o
f
pro
ject
Total #
of
New
Un
its
# New
Un
its
for Target
Po
p
Avg C
ost
Per N
ew
Un
it
Total P
roject
Bu
dget
Target Dem
ograp
hics
Inte
nt o
f Fun
din
gP
roFo
rma
Go
lf Clu
bTC
HA
20
17
LaceyM
ulti-fam
ily6
41
95
,00
0$
1
,50
0,0
00
$
WFH
Co
nstru
ction
Yes
FFC H
om
es XI
FFC2
01
7O
ly / Lacey
Single Fam
ily
Ren
tal / PSH
33
15
0,0
00
$
45
0,0
00
$
Men
tally Disab
ledA
cqu
isition
Yes
Olym
pia M
ixed U
seLIH
I2
01
8O
lymp
ia
Mu
lti-family
(app
roxim
ately 20
PSH
un
its)6
06
03
00
,63
8$
1
8,5
90
,60
0$
Ho
meless Fam
ilies with
Ch
ildren
, Ho
meless A
du
lts,
Ho
meless V
ets, Disab
led,
WFH
Families, W
FH Sin
gles
PreD
evelop
/
Acq
uisitio
n /
Co
nstru
ction
Yes
Deyo
e Vista P
hase
VSP
S Hab
itat2
01
8Lacey
Single Fam
ily Ow
n8
81
42
,50
0$
1
,14
0,0
00
$
Disab
led, M
entally Ill, W
FH
Families, W
FH Sin
gles,
Disab
led V
etsC
on
structio
nn
/a
Safe, Health
y,
Affo
rdab
le
Ho
mes
First**
20
19
Co
un
ty wid
e
SRO
/ Oxfo
rd /
Mu
lti & Sin
gle
Ren
tal/ PSH
10
10
variesvaries
All b
ut W
et ho
usin
g
Acq
uisitio
n /
Reh
abYe
s
Pear B
losso
m 2
FSC2
02
0O
lymp
ia
Mu
lti-family
(app
roxim
ately 22
PSH
un
its)4
44
42
53
,78
8$
1
7,0
00
,00
0$
Ho
meless Fam
ilies with
Ch
ildren
, Men
tally Ill, WFH
Families, D
V Su
rvivors
Co
nstru
ction
No
La Man
cha
Pan
za2
02
0Th
ursto
n C
ou
nty
SRO
/ PSH
30
30
11
6,6
67
$
3,5
00
,00
0$
H
om
eless Ad
ults
PreD
evelp /
Co
nstru
ction
No
FFC H
om
es XII
FFC2
02
1O
ly / Lacey
Single Fam
ily
Ren
tal / PSH
33
15
6,0
00
$
46
8,0
00
$
Men
tally Disab
ledA
cqu
isition
Yes
Sequ
oia Lan
din
gTC
HA
20
21
Tum
water
Mu
lti-family
84
15
5,0
00
$
1,5
00
,00
0$
W
FHC
on
structio
nYe
s
88
OP
EN P
OSIT
ION
20
20
total an
ticipate
d P
erman
ent Su
pp
ortive H
ou
sing u
nits
** Den
otes C
HD
O Eligib
le Organ
ization
Estimate
d A
dd
ition
al HO
ME C
HD
O fu
nd
s:
Total C
HD
O e
ligible agen
cies:
Estimate
d T
otal A
nn
ual Fu
nd
ing A
mo
un
t:
Total P
rop
osals Su
bm
itted
:
Total A
gen
cies R
esp
on
din
g:
( exp
ecte
d 2
01
7 fu
nd
ing fro
m H
OM
E of $
41
7,6
00
and
20
60
of $
21
2,9
00
)
Thu
rston
Co
un
ty Ho
usin
g Pip
elin
e P
rop
osal O
vervie
w
Page 7 of 35
2017 Community Investment Partnership (CIP) Learning Session: Housing
November 14, 2016
Report-Out Summary
Following presentations and table discussions by participants, a report-out of key messages and discussion points was conducted. The report-out and following summary is organized by three themes:
• Current conditions • Desired state • Opportunities for Improvement
In addition, feedback was gathered from participants on what worked well during the meeting and what changes/improvements are suggested. Checkmarks at the end of an item indicate that multiple groups raised the same comment.
1. CURRENT CONDITION
Resources − Need year round resources − Need more seed money − Not enough supportive services − Need for more section 8 vouchers/subsidies and rapid re-housing − Not moving enough people out of shelters − Rapid Rehousing – great idea but not enough inventory. No place to take vouchers − Not enough focus on low income home owners − Need an understanding of interrelationship between subsidized and market rate housing − Build economy, education far upstream/preventive/effective but not what CIP funds are for
Planning
− Not meeting requirements expected by Fed/State − Continue improvement in coordination across government units and institutions to better map out
efforts and to maximize leverage of funds − Role of Housing Authority – better integration − Homeless numbers are under represented − Good understanding of gaps specifically supportive housing − Seeking to build community among residents like Habitat for Humanity, Quixote Village; Oxford Houses − Have dedicated coordinated entry but needs work − Too many restrictions for builders − Not enough focus on those who are not struggling but are vulnerable − Focus on prevention of homelessness – some of these activities might affect priorities and decisions − Better understanding of different level of needs
Politics
− Political Will – Community Will- Do we really have it? − What other counties are doing impacts Thurston County. Specifically Pierce County shutting down
shelters. Also King.
Page 8 of 35
2. DESIRED CONDITION
Pursue zoning, fees changes − Develop and implement land use policies to allow for higher density with proximity to
transportations √√√√√√ − Use the Housing Action Team pipeline process for capital projects − Bankers & developers want to invest in our community and raise incomes to afford
market rate housing (Policy not CIP) − Mix of services/capital development
Improve Communications between CIP and HAT
− Honest and respectful discourse; courage to talk about structural impediments/constraints
− Continued review of the CIP funding process − Improve communication and coordinate better − Have someone be a liaison between CIP and HAT − No one size fits all approach − Resolve difference between CIP and HAT especially pipeline funding − CIP needs to coordinate with HAT when making priorities for funding − Improve accountability and reporting for $$$ spent
Improve landlord tenet relations − Need for housing specialist to build landlord relations and work with builders √√√√ − Marketing that destigmatizes homeless folks (example: DV flee and get eviction on
record) − Explain to landlords why some people have poor rental history − Build incentives for landlords
Better Long and Short Term Planning
− Collect the right data √√√√√√ − Showcase Lacey Con Plan – how to address homelessness − Design innovative housing model that allow for more self help − Increase capacity for rentals − Rapid rehousing needs more second level inventory – There is nowhere for people to
move up to. − Inventory of how many units are needed − Look at BEST PRACTICES − Look at Housing First 10 year plan − Look at most cost effective way to house people beyond shelters − Look at more supportive housing − More units for most vulnerable − Ensure alignment with state and federal priorities to leverage inter-jurisdictional local
plans Priority Populations
− Fund long tern multi-generational housing for families with children − Improve safety net – protect essential services (housing, shelter, etc.) − Housing needs of mentally ill − Use new Medicaid resources for supportive housing − Deal with most expensive to house – prioritize − Prioritize children and families
Page 9 of 35
− Funds for low-income homeowners not just renters − Unsheltered population − Upstream populations √√√√√√
3. OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT
Data Collection − Need for comprehensive data collection. Look at effectiveness of current efforts
− Thurston Thrives – where are the stats? − Look at Economic Development Council (EDC) demographics −
Resources − Increase resources − Increase housing units − Substandard housing often the most affordable − Not enough subsidies/incentives for private developers to get involved − Not enough supported housing − Think about using trade schools/education/job and build your own − Look at best practices in Pierce -Salishan
Relationships − CIP can benefit from analysis coming from HAT − HAT can’t tell CIP what to do − Improve communication and relationship between CIP and HAT − Improve communication especially with school districts − Support relationship between land lord and tenants (Navigators) − Need tenant rights organization to help those in need and to ensure protection and
advocacy for tenants − Coordinated entry system needs work − Increase public education and support − Improve inter-jurisdictional housing planning and coordination
Policies and Education − Felony restrictions and other Section 8 limitations − Expiring subsidy restrictions take away from affordable housing − Overcome NIMBY issues − Need developers at the table and look at how to waive all the fees − Barriers to entry –Mental Health, Criminal History- Substance Abuse − Need better understanding of Rapid Re-Housing needs. One size does not fit all. − Improve coordination with other counties. − Recruit private developers who’s niche market is low income development − Align with and utilize best practices to inform decision making − Use Thurston County bonding authority to do something like Tacoma − Increase tax incentives for developers to increase affordable housing
4. Plus/Delta
Plus/Positives
− Whistle − Storytime
Delta/Changes
− Parking − Spread out CIP members more
Page 10 of 35
− Stayed at one table − Visual elements − Different views from each table − Table discussion − Good markers − Good starting point for
communication/conversations among HAT and CIP
− Not moving − What is the mission – unclear − Missing data – need to go down levels to
get specific data
CIP Minutes
January 9, 2016 4:15 PM - 5:15 PM Olympia, WA 98502
Committee Members in Attendance:
Virgil Clarkson City of Lacey X Molly Carmody City of Yelm
Jeannine Roe City of Olympia Paul Knox United Way X
Joan Cathey City of Tumwater X Faith Trimble United Way X
John Hutchings Thurston County X Ron Bruchet United Way X
Randy Schleiss City of Rainer X Lee Wojnar United Way X
Sirena Painter City of Tenino X
Alan Carr City of Bucoda
• Gary Aden, Tom Webster, Chanita Jackson Thurston County PHSS • Jessica Bateman, United Way
Welcome
The meeting began at approximately 4:15pm.
Review and Approval of Minutes from July CIP meeting:
A motion was made and seconded to accept the December 2016 minutes, Virgil asked that the grammar error in the first sentence be corrected. The minutes are approved with the correction of the first sentence under the subsection “Housing Needs and Gap Learning Session Debrief”.
Discussion of Non-Housing Learning Session:
Immediately following the meeting with “non-housing” service providers and interested parties, the group debriefed on their initial thoughts and reactions to the discussion.
• Organizations are struggling with limited capacity and resources. This limits their ability to provide services in an efficient manner.
Page 11 of 35
• There is interest in exploring ways to integrate services as well as “back room” operations for many service providers in a way to improve service delivery, increase operational efficiencies, and build organizational capacity. o CIP Members briefly discussed how the CIP would make integrated services a reality through
the RFP process, but determined it was a discussion topic for the February retreat. • While many organizations are operating on the edge, there has also been a lot of successes and the
CIP should look to see what approaches and organizations have been successful and to look to build on this success or support the models/approaches that led to these successes.
• Sirena noted that the Public Library offers may of the services as well as organizational supports that several of the “non-housing” non-profit service providers in the meeting today were discussing, particularly around early childhood education. She suggested that the Public Library should have a place at the CIP table. Faith stated that the topic of inviting other organizations to participate in the CIP was most appropriate for discussion after the February retreat.
• Virgil expressed a desire to have the CIP agree on a clear conclusion on an objective to achieve and to follow through on that goal through completion.
• CIP members discussed the desire to identify a set of statistics or data to collect to be better informed about the results funded organizations achieve. Other points made regarding data/statistics include: o The CIP does not have the capacity or mandate to collect and analyze statistics. o The CIP should identify both short and long-term outcomes it wants to track during the
February retreat. o Capturing baseline data will also be necessary to measure progress, with more discussion
needed at the February retreat.
February Retreat Agenda
Faith reviewed the draft agenda for the February retreat. The group agreed on changes to the agenda, including moving the discussion of priorities to the beginning of the day.
The CIP agreed that one area of focus for the CIP is on affordable and homeless housing programs. The group stated that staff could begin recruiting review panel members on this topic prior to the February retreat. Recruitment of panelists for other topic areas will need to wait until after the February retreat.
Staff asked members what additional information is needed to prepare members for the February retreat. Staff will obtain data from the ERAT and Food Action teams regarding available data that ties to performance measures identified in each team’s strategy map.
Next CIP Meeting
February 13, 2017 9:00am to 4:00pm Tilly Road Emergency Management
Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 5:15pm.
Page 12 of 35
2016 Funding Process for HOME
• Release RFP
• Receive responses
• Review teams read and rate proposals
• Final recommendations back to the HHSC members
• Final recommendation to the BoCC for contract authority
• Contracts begin in July or September depending on funding source
2016 Funding Process for CIP
• Release RFP
• Receive responses
• Review teams read, rate, Interview and complete forced pair exercise
• Final responses back to the CIP in top 1/3 fund fully, middle 1/3 partially fund/bottom 1/3 do not fund
• CIP group met and reviewed proposals and achieved a final set of recommendations with
changes
• Final recommendations to the BoCC and United Way for contract authority
• Contracts begin in July
Page 13 of 35
2016 Review Committee Members
Panels (5-7) Applicants Organization/Affiliation Previous Panelist Health Jan Sharkey Evergreen State College N Dave Kapun Intercity Transit Y Douglas DeForest Retired N Housing Katrina Van Every TRPC Y Marco Rosaire Rossi Planned Parenthood N Thomasina Cooper Thurston County N Ben Kniola Auditor’s Office N Kris Retlin Retired Y Jeff Spring Housing Services Y Daniel Hildreth O Bee Credit Union N
Education & Resilience
Kris Tucker Former TRPC Y
Lars Andreassen Dept. of Ecology Y Heather Hahn Edward Jones N Leatta Dahlhoff WLC & YMCA Y Evan Olsen Dept. of Transportation N Natasha Hays Pediatrician N Michelle Harvey Ass. Of WA Cities Y
Megan Fiess Pacific Mountian Workforce Dev. N
Mary Henley Tumwater ED Foundation N
Page 14 of 35
CIP RFP CIP Focus Areas, Priorities, and Desired Outcomes
Shaded cells indicate which cells CIP members must complete during the February 13, 2017 retreat.
Strategic Focus Areas North Star CIP Priorities Desired Outcomes
.
Page 15 of 35
CIP RFP CIP Focus Areas, Priorities, and Desired Outcomes
(Example)
Shaded cells indicate which cells CIP members must complete during the February 13, 2017 retreat.
Strategic Focus Area North Star CIP Priorities Desired Outcomes
Youth and Education • Children 3-6
years of age
• Young adults entering work force
• County with highest % of children determined “ready for kindergarten” in WA state.
• 50% increase in 18-24 year olds completing trade schools or apprenticeships
Food Security
• Low-income seniors
• Low-income families
• 25% reduction in seniors reporting eating less than 2 meals per day
• 25% increase in number of low-income households with regular access to healthy food
Page 16 of 35
Homeless and Affordable Housing RFP
CIP Focus Areas, Priorities, and Desired Outcomes
• These strategic focus areas for housing are primarily dictated by the types of eligible activities allowed by funding sources.
Strategic Focus Areas* North Star CIP Priorities Desired Outcomes
Affordable Housing-Capital
Low-income households in Thurston County pay
no more than 30% of their income for housing.
.
Rental Assistance (Rapid Rehousing/Diversion)
Housing and Homeless Services (Operations and
Maintenance)
Page 17 of 35
Homeless and Affordable Housing RFP CIP Focus Areas, Priorities, and Desired Outcomes
(Example)
• These strategic focus areas for housing are primarily dictated by the types of eligible activities allowed by funding sourc
Strategic Focus Areas* North Star CIP Priorities Desired Outcomes
Affordable Housing-Capital
Low-income households in Thurston County pay no more than 30% of
their income for housing.
• Rental Housing
• Households below 50% AMI
• Increase the supply of affordable rental housing available to persons below 50% AMI by 20 units
Rental Assistance (Rapid Rehousing/Diversion)
• Homeless families
• Single Adults with mental health or developmental disabilities
• DV victims
• Reduce % of persons returning to homeless to 5%
• Reduce # of nights in an emergency shelter to under 20 days
Housing and Homeless Services (Operations and Maintenance)
• Homeless families
• Single Adults with mental health or developmental disabilities
• DV victims
• Achieve functional zero homeless for veterans and families
Page 18 of 35
Multi-Year Funding
CIP RFP
Previous CIP Decision
• 60% for multi-year awards o 60% of this amount for “collective impact” o 40% of this amount for single-agency projects
• 40% for single-year awards
Outstanding Questions:
1. For multi-year awards, how many years? 2. What is the definition of “collective impact” and what must be included in a proposal to be considered as
“collective impact” 3. For single-year awards, determine if any additional guidance or eligibility requirements are needed (such
as, only for basic/emergency/emergent needs)
Category Allocation Sub-Allocation Length Eligibility Single Year Funding
40% of CIP Funds 100% Single Agency
1 Year • CIP Desired Outcome • ??
Multi-Year Funding
60% of CIP Funds 60% - Collective Impact
X Years • CIP Desired Outcome • ??
40% - Single Agency
X Years • CIP Desired Outcome • ??
Homeless and Affordable Housing RFP
No previous decision has been made on multi-year funding. The Housing Action Team recommends multi-year funding, except for capital projects. The HAT has recommended a 5-year pipeline of capital projects.
Outstanding Questions
1. Should the CIP make multi-year awards for non-capital housing? If yes: a. For how many years? b. What percent should be for multi-year vs single year
2. How does the CIP want to address the proposed 5-year capital pipeline?
Category Allocation Sub-Allocation Length Eligibility Capital $769,000 100% Single
Agency 1 Year • CIP Desired Outcome
• ?? Non-Capital Housing
$2.78 million XX X Years • CIP Desired Outcome • ??
Page 19 of 35
Community Investment Partnership (CIP)
2017 Grant Cycle Timeline
Month Date Task Responsible Party February
2/20/17 2/24/17
• RFP Released
• Bidders Conference with CIP Steering Committee members present and Review Panel Chairs
Staff organize, Staff puts out on Website Staff contacts all known agencies in the county Staff places advertisement in paper of record
2/29/17 • Orient and Train Panels (by first week of March)
Steering Committee identify and participate/do the orientation
March
3/14/17 • 2015 Six Month funded agency progress report reviews
CIP Steering Committee
3/24/17 • Applications Due
3/27/17 1-4pm
• Staff Review Staff completes a threshold review
3/29/17 4-5pm
• Review Panel Chairs Orientation
3/29/17 5-7pm
• Orient and Train Panels Steering Committee identify and participate/do the orientation Staff provide overview of the application
April No regular CIP Meeting in APRIL
All month • Panels Review RFP
• Reading/Meeting/interview/site visit with applicants
• Prepare write up for Steering Committee
Review panels working
May
5/8/17 • Review Panels presentation to CIP / HHSC Steering Committee
• CIP / HHSC Deliberation
Panels and Panel Chairs HHSC / CIP Steering Committee
5/29/17 • Awards announcement by CIP Steering Committee
June No regular CIP Meeting in MAY
All month • Contracting County Staff prepares contracts, obtains Board of County Commissioners Approval
July
7/1/17 7/10/17
• CIP, CHG.HEN.ESG Contract Start Dates
• Begin Planning process for 2017
CIP Steering Committee
Page 20 of 35
The Community Investment Partnership
Seeks Skilled Volunteers for Community Investment Grant-Making Panels CONSIDER THIS UNIQUE VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITY. SHARE YOUR EXPERTISE, BE PART OF A SHORT TERM, HIGH LEVEL TEAM AND HELP IMPACT CHANGE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
Overview United Way of Thurston County and the Thurston County Health and Human Services Council (HHSC) have created the Community Investment Partnership (CIP). The partnership was formed to increase impact around targeted community social and health priorities by combining financial resources.
By coordinating public and private resources the CIP will:
• Amplify our impact and focus our results around common goals • Create incentives for service coordination • Increase efficiencies for both non-profit service providers and funding organizations • Support common performance reporting and continuous improvement
The Community Investment Partnership will release an RFP in February 2016 requesting grant proposals from interested and eligible nonprofit organizations. Non-profits applying for Community Investment Partnership grants provide programs that advance the common good for Thurston County residents in the following goal areas:
• Promote financial and residential stability • Prepare children and youth to be resilient, to learn and to succeed • Improve people’s health and healthy behaviors
Volunteers are needed to serve on Citizen Review Panels
Responsibilities We are seeking dedicated volunteers to join one of three rating, ranking and performance review panels that focus on the priority goal areas for the entire grant process. Each panel will be co-chaired by two members of the CIP Steering Committee.
To fully engage in the process, each panelist must:
a. Attend an orientation meeting b. Attend four to six meetings for debriefing, collaboration and funding recommendations c. Conduct interviews with grant applicants d. Access grant applications from a website e. Read, evaluate and rate each application f. Collaborate with other panel members f. Comply with the CIP ethics code which includes conflict of interest, confidentiality and non-discrimination policies
Page 21 of 35
Time Commitment Panel members will be required to attend an orientation and commit to approximately 20 hours in April and May 2016. Each panel will meet four to six times in the late afternoon – early evening period in the Olympia area. Grants are read outside of meeting times. Panels will convene once after six months to track grantee’s success and ensure grant guidelines are being met.
Desired Qualifications
• An interest in the welfare of our community and a desire to create change through strategic investments in local programs.
• Some knowledge and interest in the goal areas above. • An ability to be open minded and unbiased, considering each program application equally and
fairly. • The ability to articulate questions and opinions in an engaging and non-confrontational manner.
An orientation will be provided to help volunteers understand the priority goal areas and how to use the tools to effectively and fairly evaluate grants.
To Apply To apply as a Community Investment Partnership volunteer, please send your contact information and a short cover letter responding to the three questions below. Send both to Jessica Bateman at mail to: [email protected] by February 19th, 2016.
Please tell us:
1. What interests you about serving as a Community Investment Partnership volunteer?
2. What skills or expertise do you bring to a funding panel?
3. Which of the three priority goal areas below interest you the most and why?
Promoting financial and residential stability Preparing children and youth to be resilient, to learn and to succeed Promoting health and healthy behaviors
Thank you for considering joining us in this exciting community endeavor! Please contact Jessica Bateman above if you have any questions or comments.
Page 22 of 35
Page 23 of 35
Page 24 of 35
Page 25 of 35
Page 26 of 35
Page 27 of 35
Page 28 of 35
Page 29 of 35
AMENDED
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING for the Governance and Administration of
the Community Investment Partnership
This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is entered into by and between the Thurston County Regional Health and Human Services Council (hereinafter the “COUNCIL”), and The United Way of Thurston County (hereinafter “UWTC”), a non- profit corporation, for purposes of defining a structure to manage the COUNCIL and UWTC’s combined funding initiative which shall be referred to as the Community Investment Partnership (hereinafter called the “CIP”). The COUNCIL is referenced in the Regional Health and Human Services Interlocal Cooperation Amended Agreement (hereinafter the "Amended HHSC Agreement," attached by reference as Attachment A) between the County and the Cities to facilitate services necessary to address unmet essential basic health and human services needs within the Thurston County region. The UWTC is a fundraising organization working on finding solutions for our most critical issues that provides funding for identified human needs in the Thurston County community.
WHEREAS, the COUNCIL and the UW T C agree to work together and join
resources necessary to address common needs in meeting basic health and human services needs within this region; and
WHEREAS, pooling and coordinating health and human services resources can
be more effective in meeting these needs; and
WHEREAS, there is a benefit to the participating parties to develop common approaches, common strategies and common performance measures; and
WHEREAS, effectiveness increases with use of Research Based and Promising
Practices; and
WHEREAS, the COUNCIL and UWTC recognize the need to create a structure for the CIP to manage the functions and processes identified herein and hereafter.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises made and the mutual benefits received, the Parties agree as follows:
I. Formation of the CIP, its Administrative Purpose and Capacity.
The COUNCIL and UWTC approve and accept this MOU for the purposes of detailing the CIP structure and function. The purpose of the CIP is to help allocate a pool of funding contributed by each party to address critical areas of need in health and human services as well as look at avenues toward consolidation and collaboration of
Page 30 of 35
other health and human services funding. The general function of the CIP is to identify priorities, for Requests for Proposals (RFPs), identify appropriate projects for funding, and review funded program outcomes.
II. Membership.
A. The membership of the CIP shall include all members of the
COUNCIL and four representatives of United Way of Thurston County.
III. Roles:
A. 1. The CIP Steering Committee shall include up to eight
members of the COUNCIL and four representatives of the UWTC to be selected by the UWTC Board. The CIP agrees to these Guiding Principles:
a. Honor the principles of collective impact (common
agenda, shared measures, aligned activities, communication and backbone organizations).
b. Honor the community work of Thurston Thrives Action Teams when possible.
c. Honor the process created by the CIP. d. Fund results, not programs: no proposal/idea is too small or
too big e. Apply fairness, thoughtful progress and transparency
2. Processes. The CIP Steering Committee shall develop a set of process protocols based on best practices. These protocols are intended to be used in letting RFPs and Contracts.
3. The CIP Steering Committee shall make recommendations on all funded projects through this initiative provided that UWTC will have only one vote for projects being funded with HOME and other state and federal housing funds.
4. Conflicts of interest. A conflict of interest exists if a person or a member of their immediate family receives in any way a direct financial benefit from an applicant for CIP funding. Examples of a conflict of interest include, but are not necessarily limited to, working for the applicant as an employee or engaging with the applicant for a fee as an independent contractor. If a person has a conflict of interest, he or she may not serve on the CIP Steering Committee. If a conflict of interest arises with regard to a person who has already been made a member of the CIP Steering Committee, he or she must immediately disclose the conflict and resign
Page 31 of 35
from the CIP Steering Committee. A potential conflict of interests exists if a person or a member of their immediate family has a connection with an applicant for CIP funding, but that connection does not involve the person or a member of their immediate family receiving a direct financial benefit from the applicant. Examples of a potential conflict of interest include, but are not necessarily limited to, serving on the applicant’s board of directors, formerly having worked for the applicant or engaged with them as an independent contractor, or making donations to the applicant. If a member of the CIP Steering Committee has a potential conflict of interest, he or she must disclose the conflict to the CIP Steering Committee as soon as possible after the applicant has applied for CIP funding, and thereafter, the member with the potential conflict must recuse him or herself from all committee discussions, deliberations and voting on the subject applicant’s application. This provision is in addition to state and local laws concerning conflicts of interest.
5. None of the participating jurisdictions in the CIP or the United Way may apply for funding from this program. 6. Voting. Each member of the CIP Steering Committee shall have one vote in making recommendations to the Board of Thurston County Commissioners to allocate available funding and recommendations to select proposals. PROVIDED that UWTC members shall have only 1 vote for all county federal, state and local homeless and affordable housing funding (HOME, 2060, 2163, CHG, ESG). 7. The CIP Steering Committee shall appoint technical groups as needed including RFP Review Committees who will submit ratings based on criteria published in the RFP. The CIP shall create an administrative work group comprised of County and UWTC staffs to develop RFPs, advertise and solicit responses, provide outcome reports and any other administrative functions relevant to the accomplishment of the CIP objectives. The administrative work group will provide regular progress reports and performance reviews of funded agency programs to the CIP Steering Committee.
B. Leadership. The CIP s h a l l a n n u a l l y e l e c t C o - Chairs
(one each from the HHSC and the UWTC) to manage the administrative tasks necessary to the CI P's functions. The Co-Chairs shall preside over the CIP meetings.
C. Administrative Staff. Staff functions may include: 1)
support for the CIP activities in support of their member(s) including staffing the meetings; 2 ) preparing and releasing R F P s 3 ) contract management, and; 4) resources for special projects, (e.g. data collection, quality improvement and reports).
Page 32 of 35
a. Administrative staff functions for County staff shall be funded
entirely by the administrative allocation of the COUNCIL, and shall not exceed the funding allocated and available for these activities as identified in the Agreement.
b. Administrative functions for UWTC shall be funded by UWTC
and shall not exceed the funding allocated and available for these activities. If there are additional requested activities, the CIP will identify and approve strategies to address the need for additional administrative funding and how these services will be provided.
D. Public. All meetings will be noticed public meetings as per
RCW 42.30. The CIP will make all materials related to the RFP process, applications, reports and other related materials available for public review. The COUNCIL’S staffing agency, as set forth in the Agreement, will ensure notice requirements are met, minutes of meetings are kept and all necessary documents are retained.
IV. Funding Principles:
A. For the COUNCIL, as set forth in the Amended HHSC
Agreement, the annual amount allocated by each participating jurisdiction to the COUNCIL shall be an amount not less than one half of one percent of that member’s prior year general sales and use taxes (excluding criminal justice and treatment sales tax collection). Unspent COUNCIL funds will be administered consistent with the terms of the Agreement.
B. A single RFP will be available on or about February 15th of each year for proposals to be submitted on or about April 15th and to be awarded by June 15th of each year.
C. Funds will be awarded to service providers in a timely manner based on identified priorities established by the CIP Steering Committee.
E. The CIP Steering Committee will appoint RFP Committee(s) who will submit their ratings based on criteria published in the RFP to the CIP.
F. The intent of this MOU is to provide clear guidance to the parties that for the allocation of and approval of HOME and other state and federal housing funds, the Thurston County Board of County Commissioners has final approval of the award selection and authorization of funding the grants. With respect to United Way and HHSC funds, the Thurston County Board of County Commissioners will authorize funding these grants, but will not have authority to change the award selection.
Page 33 of 35
G. The CIP desires and will seek to include other funding sources in the pool of money. Funding will include federal, state and local homeless and affordable housing revenues as made available by member jurisdictions, private foundations and others.
V. Regional Projects with Collective Impact:
In service of the purpose of this MOU, the CIP may recommend implementing fewer awards, focusing on regional projects, or providing larger awards to encourage broader cross-agency collaboration and greater collective impact. Proposals will be judged for their potential to coordinate community assets (agency and community volunteer time, staff and other resources) to implement research-based or promising strategies.
VI. Legal Scope. This MOU creates no separate legal entity.
VII. Public Record. Prior to its entry into force, this MOU shall be filed with
the Thurston County Auditor's Office or posted upon the websites of the County and Cities as provided by RCW 39.34.040.
VIII. Effective Date. This MOU shall be effective upon the signature of the
last of the Parties hereto.
IX. Waiver. No waiver by any party of any term or condition of this MOU incorporated in this MOU shall be deemed or construed to constitute a waiver of any term or condition or of any subsequent breach, whether or the same or different provision.
X. Amendment/Renewal. The provisions of this MOU may be
amended or renewed with the mutual consent of the Parties. No additions to, or alterations of, the terms of this MOU shall be valid unless made in writing and formally approved and executed by the duly authorized agents of all Parties.
The voting structure shall be reviewed and amended if new members are added to the CIP Steering Committee (new Community funders for example) or new funding sources are added to the available fund. (TST for example).
XI. Dissolution. Should the CIP cease to function and the membership
vote to disband, any assets of the CIP shall be transferred to the COUNCIL and UWTC, proportional to the amount contributed by each. Such transfer will be made in full compliance with the Agreement and whatever laws are applicable.
XII. Applicability of Law. This MOU is and shall be construed as
being executed and delivered within the State of Washington and it is mutually understood and agreed by each party hereto that all agreements and statements of work shall be governed by laws of
Page 34 of 35
the State of Washington, both as to interpretation and performance. The Parties agree that the venue for enforcement of any provisions shall be the Superior Court of Thurston County.
XIII. Severability. If any section or part of this Agreement is held by a
court to be invalid, such action shall not affect the validity of any other part of this Agreement.
XIV. Entire MOU. The Parties agree that this MOU is the complete
expression of the terms hereto, and any oral representations or understandings not incorporated herein are excluded. Further, any modifications of this MOU shall be in writing and signed by all Parties.
XV. Termination Clause. It is the intent of the Parties that this MOU
shall continue in force until amended or terminated. This MOU will terminate upon: 1) withdrawal of a party; or 2) the mutually agreed upon decision of all parties to terminate the MOU
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this MOU to be executed by the date and signature herein under affixed. The persons signing this MOU on behalf of the Parties represent that each has authority to execute this MOU on behalf of the Party entering into this MOU.
Thurston County Regional Health and Human Services Council
By: Date
United Way of Thurston County By: Date
Page 35 of 35