Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Opioid Abatement Grants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sumner County opioid abatement committee recommends most grant applications for FY25–26 budget, earmarks $359,261.40
Summary
At a special-called meeting, the Sumner County Opioid Abatement Committee recommended that most grant applications proceed to final scoring for the FY25–26 budget, rejected several for noncompliance or missing documentation, and reported $32,264.12 remaining of the $391,525.50 allocation.
The Sumner County Opioid Abatement Committee at a special-called meeting voted to recommend most grant applications for final scoring and to forward those recommendations into the county’s FY25–26 budget process while rejecting or acknowledging withdrawals for several applications.
Dr. Dustin Owens, the committee’s grant manager, told members they would review each application under the same pattern used in the first grant cycle and asked the committee to either accept applications for final scoring or deny them from further consideration. "We're following the same pattern as we did with the first grant cycle," Owens said as he opened the item and summarized staff recommendations.
The committee voted to move multiple applications to final scoring, reject some for noncompliance or missing documentation, and accept one withdrawal. Finance recommendations were the basis for most motions. The committee reported an allocated total of $391,525.50 for this cycle and said it is earmarking $359,261.40; $32,264.12 remained and will be discussed at the committee’s April meeting.
Votes at a glance
- Risk management (AED and naloxone for Sumner County buildings): recommended for final scoring (finance recommended; motion passed).
- Sumner County Health Department (purchase of fentanyl test strips): recommended for final scoring (finance recommended; motion passed).
- CASA (Court Appointed Special Advocates) application: rejected from consideration for final scoring. Finance cited multiple deficiencies in the application, including insufficient linkage to opioids in required narrative responses and outstanding requested revisions that were not returned within the two-week window.
- Cumberland Heights Foundation (expanding access to substance use navigators and opioid use disorder treatment): recommended for final scoring (finance recommended; motion passed).
- Mid Cumberland Community Action Agency: applicant withdrew its application; committee acknowledged the withdrawal and allowed the agency to apply in a future cycle.
- Mid‑Cumberland Human Resource Agency (capital purchase/property work in Burns, Tenn.): rejected from consideration because the proposal did not meet the committee’s application requirements for capital purchases located outside Sumner County.
- Sumner Prevention Coalition (opioid misuse prevention initiative): recommended for final scoring (finance recommended; motion passed).
- Recovery Refuge (not-for-profit): rejected from consideration due to missing nonprofit documentation (missing IRS nonprofit verification, annual audit or Comptroller-prescribed annual report).
- Safe Baby Courts (housing assistance for Safe Baby Court participants): recommended for final scoring (finance recommended; motion passed).
- Recovery Courts Inc. (building renovation to expand service delivery): recommended for final scoring (finance recommended; motion passed).
- United Neighborhood "Salvatore map" program: denied from consideration under the committee’s performance-metrics policy because required performance metrics or corrective action plan were not submitted within the first two weeks of the following quarter; finance recommended not to move it forward.
Committee discussion and clarifications
Finance staff summarized rationale for rejections and withdrawals, citing program guidelines, state funding criteria, missing or inconsistent application responses, and required documentation that had not been returned after requests for revision. For example, the finance reviewer noted CASA’s application did not clearly describe how opioids affected its services, included contradictory statements about partnerships, and had outstanding requested corrections.
For an item the committee recommended to the FY25–26 budget, the committee chair (name not specified in the record) moved to accept the final scores and forward them to the budget committee; the motion passed. The committee said the remaining $32,264.12 of the cycle allocation will be considered at the April meeting.
Why it matters
The committee’s recommendations determine which local programs move forward to compete for opioid abatement funding and which projects will be evaluated in greater detail through final scoring. The decisions affect local services that provide naloxone and fentanyl-testing supplies, prevention initiatives, housing assistance tied to child welfare (Safe Baby Courts), and expanded treatment or service-delivery capacity.
What’s next
The committee forwarded recommended final scores for the FY25–26 budget and will revisit remaining funds in April; final budget adoption and any required implementation steps will depend on subsequent budget processes and agreements with grantees.
