REP HSSPSC 011 09/05/2012 2010-2012

Home

HSSPSC-11 Page 2 September 5, 2012 report be due on January 31 ", and if that is not received they would then be ineligible for the following year; and if they fail to provide a year-end report in August, then they would be ineligible for the following year. Ms. Ford asked Mr. Hoffmann if the non profit doesn't submit the interim report in January and does not submit a year end report, should there be a penalty? Mr. Hoffmann agreed and said it is up to the Committee to deny them future funding. Ms. Smart stated that she would agree to a lower number as long as a strong message is sent to the nonprofits that the year end final report is important as it is taxpayer money that is being spent. At the August 14, 2012 meeting, Chair Pilago asked that the meeting be postponed due to technical difficulties. Mr. Yagong moved to postpone Communication 801/Bill 287 to the September 5, 2012 Governmental Relations Committee meeting. At the September 5, 2012 meeting, Ms. Smart withdrew Communication 801.1 and moved to amend Bill 287 with the contents of Communication 801.2. The amendment would prohibit an organization from being funded for a period of one year and require them to return the grant money to the County if they fail to turn in a final report. Mr. Ikeda disagreed with the measure requiring returning the grant money, but agrees to not allowing future funding for a period of one year. Mr. Hoffmann stated that the amendment captures the intent of his concern, that one year is adequate, and asks for Council to approve the amendment transmitted via Communication 801.2. The motion to amend Bill 287 was approved. Ms. Smart explained that Bill 287 removes all references to "purchase of service" as it is unnecessary with regards to the nonprofit grants. It also expands some of the requirements with regards to auditing, conflict of interest, increases the minimum budget allowance from $900,000 to $1,000,000, requests specific benchmarks, measurable outcomes and accomplishments be stated, changes the date for notifying grantees of their awards and adds a contract clause for contingency relief funds. New sections are added to make sure county funds are being spent appropriately. Ms. Nancy Crawford, Finance Director, came forward and explained that the final reports go straight to Council, and stated further that the department does not review them. Ms. Crawford stated that there is already a provision regarding not funding an organization if they fail to turn in a final report. Her concern is that if "shall" is included in the requirement, there would be no room for discretion or flexibility. Ms. Colleen Schrandt, Legislative Auditor, came forward to explain that there is a difference between the financials required to be submitted with the application and the comparative or performance audit that is being asked of the legislative auditor. Operational or performance auditing is a different type of audit that looks at the outcomes, rather than the financials. Mr. Hoffmann stated that it would be better to say that the County may or shall require the organization to repay all unexpended funds, rather than the entire grant.