Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Innovation Fund topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nevada County CCP approves $40,000 innovation fund allocation, removes three-year operating-history requirement
Summary
The CCP approved up to $40,000 for the innovation fund, removed a three-year operating-history requirement for applicants and directed staff to modify application materials. Members discussed adopting a rubric and giving preference to established nonprofits but no binding scoring matrix was adopted.
The Nevada County Community Corrections Partnership approved an allocation of up to $40,000 for its innovation fund, voted to remove the prior requirement that applicants have a three-year operating history, and directed staff to revise and circulate the updated application materials.
Why it matters: The innovation fund is intended to support pilot projects or new approaches to reduce recidivism and improve community supervision. Lowering barriers to apply could allow start-ups and newer organizations to request CCP funding, altering who may compete for limited local funds.
What the CCP decided: Members approved an innovation fund overview that includes up to $40,000 in expenses related to applicants. The partnership also voted to remove the stated three-year operating-history requirement from the innovation fund application, enabling newer organizations to apply. The updated documents will be modified and distributed to applicants.
Discussion and constraints: Members debated whether to cap individual awards, how to set a program cap, and whether the county’s risk-assessment guidelines for nonprofit contracting should apply. Staff noted a trade-off: committing a fixed amount in the CCP budget may require a future budget amendment if the partnership later decides to increase the total.
The board discussed creating a scoring rubric to guide decisions and increase transparency; several members favored a rubric that would examine organizational capacity, sustainability and fit with the fund’s purpose rather than making operating history an absolute gate. A motion that "preference be given to established nonprofits" was proposed and seconded and generated discussion, but there is no record in the transcript of a final, separate vote adopting a quantified preference or scoring matrix. Members agreed staff will send revised application materials and that the partnership will decide on final procedural language for awarding innovation funds.
Outcome and next steps: Motion to allocate up to $40,000 to the innovation fund — carried. Motion to remove the three-year operating-history requirement — carried (moved by Jesse). Staff will update application forms, remove the three-year mandate from the posted solicitation, and circulate the revised documents to CCP members and potential applicants.
