Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Social Services Programs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners press for more transparency on DayMark partner program and housing referrals
Summary
Board members sought clearer reporting on DayMark’s partner-funded case‑management program serving schools, DSS and the jail, including how partner dollars are spent, caseloads and outcomes for clients referred to housing programs.
Davidson County commissioners pressed DayMark representatives and county staff on Jan. 2 for clearer financial and performance reporting for a partner-funded program that places DayMark case managers in the county’s schools, Department of Social Services and jail.
Sheryl Sawpaw, Center Director of Outpatient Services for DayMark, and Rebecca True, regional program director, updated the board that the program entered year three on Oct. 1 and that, for the most recent quarter, DayMark served 21 client cases (plus family members) and said the program has served 210 clients over two full years. Sawpaw described the program’s caseload mix and said staff routinely attend court and school meetings and make referrals to community partners.
Commissioners asked for more financial transparency on how partner funds are used. One commissioner noted the county’s contract or minimum funding threshold for the program was recorded as $385,654 in the county contract documents; another commissioner said the partnership had been described previously in the county as a roughly $500,000 annual program. County staff said partner organizations now direct the funding to DayMark and that the county does not hold those dollars on its own books; commissioners asked partners to supply breakdowns showing local spending and staffing-line costs.
Commissioners also pressed DayMark on operational details: how many active clients each case manager carries (presenters estimated 10–20 active clients per case manager depending on assignment), turnover in DayMark staff since the program began and how local housing referrals are handled. DayMark staff said the program recently began referring clients to a “Back at Home” housing assistance program run by a regional housing entity (named in the meeting as BrickStreet/Bridal CDC and a state‑funded shelter pathway), but presenters said they lacked complete vendor contact details at the time of the presentation and agreed to provide contacts and a list of community partners to county staff.
Commissioners requested these follow-ups in writing and asked that DayMark or the partners provide a quarterly, in‑person briefing on program metrics: caseloads, referrals by source, CCAs completed, clients placed and a line‑item budget that shows personnel, program services and administrative costs. Commissioners said quarterly in‑person updates should be required while the program is new.
Ending: County staff and DayMark agreed to supply the requested contract line items, partner spending breakdowns and a caseload report; commissioners said they would review the materials and consider whether to redirect partner funding priorities if program results do not match county expectations.
