Laserfiche WebLink
Page 3 of 7 <br />Attachment 4: Human Services Commission Statement of Priorities – This is reviewed <br />and approved annually by the commission, with the purpose of keeping the commission <br />focused on Pleasanton-specific priority needs and service delivery. <br /> <br />Summary of HHSG Applications <br />Applications received are of high quality, target a wide range of needs, and demonstrate <br />the broad scope of services provided to the community. Summary observations: <br /> <br />• 27 applications received <br />• $1,261,561 total funding requested <br />• Three (3) new human services programs/projects, highlighted in red on Attachment <br />1, were submitted this year: <br />o Assistance League of Amador Valley / Operation School Bell <br />o Axis Community Health / Enrollment Specialist <br />o One National Dream Makers / Last Mile Delivery and Food Recovery Program <br /> <br />A few agencies submitted multiple applications. Agencies submitting multiple <br />applications were asked to rank requests in order of agency priority for funding, and <br />when appropriate, staff considered the preferred prioritization in developing its <br />recommendations. <br /> <br />Staff funding recommendations are provided in Attachment 1. As in prior years, staff will <br />adjust the recommendations at the meeting to assist the commission in developing its <br />funding recommendation. The commission recommendation is scaled to the funds <br />available in each of the funding source categories: CDBG and City General Funds. <br /> <br />Projects are separated into those that are identified for review and recommended by <br />each commission (Human Services and Housing). Attachment 1 includes columns of <br />information for comparative purposes: funding requested; funding allocated last year; <br />estimated Pleasanton residents to be served; and estimated cost per resident. <br />Regarding the “cost per resident” column, this statistic is not meant to provide a direct <br />comparison across projects as data across projects may not be comparable. <br />Nevertheless, it does serve as an indicator of the cost of providing services. <br /> <br />The following general comments apply to the staff’s funding recommendations: <br /> <br />• Eight applications are for housing services and programs that are eligible to be <br />funded through a combination of federal HOME and City LIHF funds (shown at the <br />bottom of Attachment 1). These applications will be reviewed by the Housing <br />Commission. <br />• The remaining 19 applications are non-housing, public services projects and <br />approximately $332,000 in CDBG funds and $222,800 in City General are available <br />to fund these applications: <br />o Most of the public services projects have applied for and received HHSG funding <br />in the past and provide useful, important ongoing services in the community