Fort Lauderdale officials debate role of Budget Advisory Board in vetting nonprofit funding

Fort Lauderdale city commissioners and members of the Budget Advisory Board (BAB) met April 15 to discuss whether the BAB should continue its role in scoring and recommending nonprofit grant recipients and to request direction on how the city should organize nonprofit funding going forward.

The issue matters because city staff said the general fund operating budget is about $450,000,000 and current annual allocations to nonprofits total roughly $2,600,000, shrinking the pool of discretionary support as personnel and other costs rise. The BAB said past public scoring drew dozens of applications and significant staff time; some commissioners said the process lacked clarity for applicants and sometimes produced recommendations that did not align with commission priorities.

Bill Brown, chair of the Budget Advisory Board, told the commission that in a prior cycle the BAB received about 72 applications, used a scoring matrix to narrow the list and spent multiple nights reviewing proposals. Brown said some board members now question the value of repeating that labor-intensive process if the commission does not adopt the board’s recommendations. "They came up with the final ranking," Brown said of the earlier process, but "some of the board members...felt that it was kind of a waste of their time doing that type of process if it didn't have a lot of buy in from the commission."

Commissioners raised several options. Commissioner Glassman said the BAB "did a great job" but that the scoring was "too time consuming" and suggested the commission or an external group could manage vetting. Glassman mentioned a county-level group, Funding Arts Proward, volunteering to assist. Vice Mayor Herbst urged a predictable, public process with deadlines and criteria so applicants know how to apply. "There's really no process that people can rely on," she said.

City staff described how nonprofit contracts are monitored. Laura Reese, speaking for staff, said contracts are written to align city funds with the commission's policy goals and include reporting and audits. "We do, in each of our grant agreements, have outcomes and accountability and reports that come back to staff and audits," Reese said. But commissioners and some BAB members pressed for greater emphasis on outcome measurement rather than activity reporting. One BAB member and former performance manager said the city typically measures inputs (for example, matched dollars or contact hours) and not longer-term outcomes such as graduation rates or other life-course indicators.

Staff proposed two practical options for the current budget cycle: (1) set a placeholder amount for nonprofit allocations in the coming budget and develop a competitive application and vetting process now for use if funds are approved; or (2) defer starting a new competitive process until the next fiscal year. Raquel (staff member) said staff could implement a competitive process in coordination with the BAB or manage it internally, and recommended negotiating any contract for external vetting as a percentage of the total nonprofit allocation.

Commissioners acknowledged the city's fiscal constraints and suggested that, regardless of the vetting approach, the commission should identify priorities against which proposals are judged. The commission also asked staff and the BAB to return in the next joint workshop with more specifics and, if appropriate, a placeholder allocation to allow planning.

The commission did not adopt a formal motion or vote during the workshop. Members agreed to continue the conversation in June and to consider a placeholder amount or a competitive application process during the budget development cycle.

Looking ahead, staff said outcomes and accountability language exist in current contracts, but most monitoring is single-year performance tied to the specific services purchased (for example, number of children receiving matched childcare or number of senior meals delivered). Reese said longitudinal outcome tracking would be ideal but is difficult within single-year contract frameworks. The BAB urged that, at a minimum, future processes include clearer performance measures and that the commission consider whether external vendors should help both vet applications and measure outcomes going forward.

The commission asked the BAB to return with recommendations and said the city manager and budget staff will incorporate commission priorities into the budget development process. The discussion closed with the commission asking staff and the BAB to bring back a more detailed plan and timeline at the next joint workshop in June.