Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Human Services Grants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lacey staff recommend funding formula to prioritize top-scoring human services applicants
Summary
Michelle Chavez, the city's Human Services Coordinator, told the Lacey City Council on July 22 that the Human Services Commission recommends concentrating the city's $300,000 human services grant fund on applicants scoring 90 and above, while capping awards at requested amounts.
Michelle Chavez, the City of Lacey's Human Services Coordinator, presented the Human Services Commission's review of 21 submitted applications for the 2025 Human Services Grant Program and recommended a funding approach that concentrates more of the $300,000 available on applicants who scored 90 and above on the commission's rubric.
The commission received 21 applications (one withdrew), heard 20 five-minute applicant presentations on June 5, and used a scoring rubric to consider awards. Chavez told council the total requested from applicants was $841,761 and the maximum allowable request per agency was $50,000. The commission evaluated 11 allocation scenarios and coalesced around a formula similar to 2024 that gives larger percentage awards to the top-scoring applicants and smaller percentages to applicants with slightly lower top scores.
The recommended distribution would fund applicants scoring 95 and above at a higher percentage of their request (60 percent of the $50,000 maximum as presented to council) and applicants scoring 90 to 95 at a lower percentage (46 percent of the $50,000 maximum), while capping awards at the lesser of the percentage or the amount requested. Chavez said this approach is intended to balance measurable outcomes and administrative capacity against inclusivity for smaller organizations.
Councilmembers asked about reporting and monitoring. Chavez said awardees must submit quarterly and annual reports and agree to site visits; she indicated the city requires cost-reimbursement reporting with receipts. One councilmember suggested asking awardees to provide short videos for the city's media; Chavez said the city could request videos as part of annual reporting but would not require them beyond existing written and site-visit reporting obligations.
Several councilmembers praised the commission's work and said they broadly supported the recommendation while urging continued community outreach and a future needs assessment to better target limited funds. They debated whether concentrating funding on fewer, higher-scoring organizations would yield greater impact versus spreading smaller amounts across more groups to promote inclusivity. One councilmember specifically urged staff to weigh patient outcomes and measurable impact when refining future allocations.
Next steps: the commission's recommendation will come to a regular council meeting for formal action; staff and the commission will continue community engagement and consider policy adjustments such as administrative cost caps and a needs assessment to refine priorities.
Ending: Chavez closed by noting the commission's difficult decisions given requests that exceed available funding by roughly threefold and by reiterating that award administration requires quarterly/annual reports and site monitoring.
