Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Family Resource Center Funding topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Family Resource Center describes services, contracts and funding at Bear Valley Unified meeting

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A program representative described the Family Resource Center's services, staffing partnerships with the hospital and Department of Behavioral Health contracts, saying the center exceeded its service target and is pursuing further multi‑year contracts while warning about unstable grant funding.

At the Bear Valley Unified School District board meeting, a program representative for the Family Resource Center outlined the nonprofit’s services, its relationship with the local hospital foundation and current grant funding that supports staff and programming.

The representative said the Family Resource Center operates under a fiscal structure that includes a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and an MOU with the district, and that the center uses staff-sharing agreements with the hospital to cover clinical roles.

Why it matters: the center is a local provider of behavioral‑health and family support services that contracts with the county Department of Behavioral Health (DBH) and other funders; its funding choices and contract renewals affect service continuity for residents in Big Bear and surrounding communities.

The representative told the board that the center’s DBH contract was scheduled to serve 1,900 unique individuals this year and that the program reached that number in the first quarter, saying, “We were scheduled to serve 1,900 unique individuals this year. We got that in the first quarter.” The speaker said service counts include a mix of tabling events, assemblies and more‑structured class series.

The program described staff‑sharing arrangements with the hospital: “LaRon, who’s our ACSW, 50% is under our program, and then 50% is under the clinic,” the representative said, and named substance‑use navigators Brian Sharp and Chastity Burke as jointly funded positions. The representative added that the center has used hospital foundation fiscal sponsorship in the past and then moved to a separate 501(c)(3) while entering an MOU with the district so Family Resource Center employees are district covered for benefits and payroll administration.

Board members asked about capacity and funding stability. In response to a question about contract length, the representative said the DBH grant is a two‑year award and that the Family Resource Center was pursuing another five‑year contract: “This grant under DBH is only for 2 years,” the representative said.

The representative also discussed state funding changes affecting future revenue, referencing the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) transition and a redirection of some funds to homeless services. She said the Family Resource Center is the only family resource center contracted in Big Bear and that other regional partners include Ring Family Services and LSS. The representative described reserve funds and prior grant investments: she said roughly $500,000 from San Manuel had been invested and that the hospital had provided about $250,000 in a reserve fund the nonprofit had not needed to use.

The representative asked the board for support and noted the nonprofit had recently asked the district for a letter of support for another contract opportunity.

The board heard the program’s explanation of services, funding sources, staff sharing with the hospital and contingency planning; no formal board vote on the program was recorded during the meeting.

Details: the representative described a range of programming from short tabling events to multi‑session classes and said service counts reflect the mix. She cautioned that grant funding is “unstable” and that the organization monitors opportunities and reserves.

Next steps: staff requested and confirmed a previously sent request for a district letter of support for a forthcoming multi‑year contract application; the transcript shows the request had already been delivered to the superintendent’s office a few days earlier.