My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
22
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2011
>
041911
>
22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2011 9:58:16 AM
Creation date
4/13/2011 12:17:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
4/19/2011
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
22
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
55
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
[Continued] <br /> FY2010 FY2011 <br /> Source Fundin Funding Notes <br /> 9 (Est d.) <br /> LIHF $86,500 $93,000 Based on the current year requests for projects that have been funded <br /> from the LIHF in recent years. The allocation of funds from the LIHF is <br /> subject to recommendation by the City's Housing Commission. <br /> Subtotal: $326,500 $263,000 [Funding reviewed by the Housing Commission] <br /> Total $795,422 $673,000 Total estimated fundin • available for FY2011 HHSG Pro* ram <br /> A summary of the applications received by the January 24 deadline is included in <br /> Attachment 1, Table A. As noted in that attachment, the total amount requested was <br /> $773,457 and the total amount recommended is $673,000 <br /> HHSG Applications Reviewed by the Human Services Commission <br /> The process followed by the Human Services Commission (HSC) varied from last year <br /> in that it 1) utilized a computer software program that enabled the Commission to rate <br /> and evaluate grants, and 2) the Commission evaluated projects against the priorities it <br /> developed in November 2010: <br /> • Projects that address basic life needs (food, shelter, medical care) <br /> • Innovative programs and services that meet emerging needs /trends <br /> • Projects that demonstrate service coordination and collaboration <br /> • Agencies that are based in the Tri- Valley or provide unique services in the Tri - Valley <br /> Accordingly, to incorporate and address these priorities, staff developed three funding <br /> alternatives for the HSC's discussion and consideration as follows: <br /> • Alternative A: Focus on Basic Life Needs including food, shelter, and medical care <br /> • Alternative B: Focus on Basic Life Needs and Other HSC Priorities including: <br /> • Innovative programs and services that meet emerging needs /trends <br /> • Projects that demonstrate service coordination and collaboration <br /> • Agencies that are based in the Tri - Valley or provide unique services in the <br /> Tri - Valley <br /> • Alternative C: Balanced Distribution of Funding including a traditional funding <br /> strategy implemented last year (and in prior years) based on an attempt to provide <br /> some meaningful level of funding to all eligible projects given the fact that generally <br /> all of the agencies are providing useful and necessary services to the community. <br /> For each alternative, staff provided a potential funding scenario that the Commission <br /> evaluated as part of its deliberations and review. As an outcome to this process, the <br /> Commission was able to see various funding options that enabled it to make its <br /> recommendations. <br /> Listed below are the Human Services Commission HHSG program recommendations: <br /> Page 3 of 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.