Memorandum

City of Lawrence

City Manager’s Office

DATE:
TO:	David L. Corliss, City Manager
FROM:	Casey Toomay, Budget Manager
CC:	Cynthia Wagner, Assistant City Manager Diane Stoddard, Assistant City Manager Jonathan Douglass, Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk
RE:	Social Service Funding Advisory Board Recommendations

Pursuant to Ordinance 8501, the recommendations of the social service funding advisory board for agency funding for the 2012 budget year are below. 

General Operating Fund

The advisory board reviewed applications from seventeen agencies for funding from the general operating fund. The table below shows the recommendations for 2012.

	Recommended
GENERAL OPERATING FUND	2012
Ballard Community Center	$7,500
Big Brothers/Big Sisters (Bigs in Schools)	0
Boys & Girls Club of Lawrence	143,722
Douglas County CASA, Inc.	20,000
Douglas County Special Olympics	250
TFI Family Services	6,750
Ecumenical Minister's Fellowship	2,000
Health Care Access-Pharmacy	23,000
Homeless Services
Bert Nash City Homeless Outreach Team	164,000
Lawrence Community Shelter	8,000
Lawrence Community Shelter	49,000
Salvation Army	0
Salvation Army	15,000
homeless services subtotal	236,000
Housing & Credit Counseling	17,100
Jayhawk Area Agency on Aging	7,400
The Shelter, Inc.	32,000
Van Go Mobile Arts	35,000
Warm Hearts	6,000
Willow Domestic Violence Center	6,000
Total	$542,722

The Board felt that resources were not available to begin funding new programs in 2012, however, because the request was so small, the Board recommends funding the Douglas County Special Olympics. 

Because all the program currently receiving City funds are doing good work, the Board recommends holding agencies to the same amount of funding they received in 2011 with three exceptions.

• Ecumenical Fellowship.  The Board recommends funding the scholarship program for youth in the amount of $2,000 but did not recommend funding the entire request for 2012. 
• Healthcare Access.  The board recommends that Health Care Access receive the amount of their request for 2012, which was $3,000 less than what they received in 2011. 
• Salvation Army.  The Salvation Army submitted requests for both a transitional housing program and heating and cooling centers.  The Board considered the fact that because the Salvation Army only actually requested half of their budgeted allocation for 2010.  They felt that was an indication that the Salvation Army didn’t need the other half of their funds.  In addition, the board felt there was some level of duplication of services because the Lawrence Community Shelter is also providing heating and cooling centers.  Therefore, the board recommends funding to the Salvation Army be reduced by $9,000. 

Special Alcohol Fund

The Board reviewed nine applications for special alcohol funding.  The table below shows the Board’s recommendations for 2012. 

SPECIAL ALCOHOL FUND	2012 Recommended
Big Brothers/Big Sisters CORE	$27,000
Boys & Girls Club of Lawrence	100,000
DCCCA	41,000
DCCCA  d/b/a First Step House	27,661
Headquarters, Inc.	22,500
Lawrence Alcoholic Recovery House (Hearthstone)	0
Lawrence Community Shelter	36,000
Lawrence Police Department	250,000
Van Go Mobile Arts, Inc.	44,000
Willow Domestic Violence Center	17,000
Total	$565,161

The Board felt resources were insufficient to begin funding new programs.  Instead, they recommend maintaining 2011 funding levels for agencies with one exception. 

• Lawrence Community Shelter.  The board is recommending an increase in funding to the Lawrence Community Shelter for heating and cooling centers.  As mentioned above, the board felt that the Lawrence Community Shelter and Salvation Army were duplicating services.  In addition, the Salvation Army did not request all of their allotted funds in 2010.  Therefore, the board recommends increasing funding to the Lawrence Community Shelter for heating and cooling centers in the same amount that was reduced from the Salvation Army.

Conclusion

The Board respectfully submits their recommendations for social service funding for 2012 as outlined above.  The Board also seeks additional direction from the City Commission regarding desired outcomes for social service agency funding.  This will help the Board as they consider future applications and recommend how to spend limited City resources most effectively and most efficiently.