To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body

Meeting Information


2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 

San Francisco Local Homeless Coordinating Board
Funding Committee
Meeting Minutes
February 20, 2009

I. Introductions: Committee Co-Chair Lara Guzman welcomed everyone in attendance.

II. Meeting minutes:
No changes were made to the minutes.

III. FY 2008-2009 Budget: Follow Up and Updates:
There were no new budget updates to announce since the last Local Homeless Coordinating Board meeting. Human Services Agency has gotten their proposed budget cuts approved by the Commission. Cuts include 3.3 million for homeless programs. DPH is still making decisions on cuts. One  particular cut mentioned at this meeting was the $114,000 cut to the SHEC, a McKinney collaborative. This is a 77% cut to their general fund amount. CHP will work with the Board of Supervisors to fight this cut.

During this budget update the Committee also recognized and celebrated the announcement of the 2008 McKinney Awards. San Francisco received all of its renewal amounts, plus the bonus funding, and was one of the recipients of the rapid re-housing grant. The City will get over $19.8 million. Congratulations to all!

IV. Preliminary Analysis of Funding Changes for Homeless Programs

Bridget from Hombease started preparing a document, per the request of the LHCB, that documents all the cuts from DPH, DHS, DOSW, and DCYF that would affect homeless programs. The Committee asked that the cut list be detailed out more, separate out employments, and list from which departments the cut amounts are coming from.

The committee also discussed how potential stimulus funds that are coming from the Federal Government might impact local cuts. The committee would like to learn more about this and include revenue sources into the list of cuts. Also the committee chair briefly mentioned additional Medicaid money that might be coming from the Federal Gov. More details are needed to know how this might impact the cuts that DPH and DHS have to make.

Finally, new news about one other funding source coming from the Federal Stimulus package. There will be funding coming down via the ESG grant. The money will be used for homeless prevention and rapid re-housing, details were not know at the time of when the money would come, how much, and who it could serve. The LHCB and the Funding Committee would like to be a part of the local decision making process about this funding, how it will be used, who will get priority, etc. The recommendation of being involved in the process will be brought up at the Full Board meeting.

V. 2009 McKinney Priorities
A) Priorities for use of Bonus Funds and/ or Reallocated Funds that become available.

The committee continued its decision on reallocation of funds. The committee determined that the need for all currently funded McKinney programs still exists. They also determined that there are currently no other alternative and sustainable funding sources that could replace McKinney dollars. They also stated that the current budget situation creates a climate where cutting McKinney dollars from a program would not be a good idea. In conclusion it was the recommendation of the Funding Committee to apply in 2009 for all the renewal projects at their current amount and not reallocate funds.

The committee then discussed how to prioritize the use of the bonus funding. In particular the committee was discussing how to use the money  (construction and rehab vs. leasing) and if there are any projects in the pipeline that should be prioritized, etc. The committee would like Mayors Office on Housing to come to the next meeting to advise on this.

B) Current Program Stability:
The committee started the discussion on a possible scoring cut off for programs to determine if they should be funded or not for the next round of applications. In the past there has not been a policy during the applications that a program would not be allowed to apply for funding if they scored below a certain level.

The committee members did not feel comfortable giving than much power to the priority panelist, who score the applications, to determine if a program should be allowed to apply for funding or not. However the committee also stated that the programs should be accountable for their performance and a standard way should be created to deal with those programs that are not. No solution was determined on what that policy and practice should be. It will be discussed more at the next meeting.

Next meeting the Committee will discuss scoring tools for the 2009 Application and MOH will present.

VI. Adjourned