Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Human Services Senior topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senior services advisory group recommends $625,000 levy distribution; commissioners discuss funding allocations and new centers
Summary
The Senior Services Advisory Council recommended distribution of $625,000 in senior levy funds for a two-year term beginning Nov. 1. Commissioners discussed awards, one center—s larger request and the creation of three small pilot centers funded at $15,000 each.
The Trumbull County Senior Services Advisory Council recommended that the Board of Commissioners distribute $625,000 in senior services levy funds for the contract term effective Nov. 1 through Oct. 31, 2027. Commissioners reviewed the advisory council—s spending plan and asked questions about several allocations and program mechanics during the meeting.
Diane Jurcovic, senior services administrator, said the council recommended full funding across the list submitted with the request-for-proposal results and that the recommendations reflected the council—s review of bids and unit prices. Commissioners asked whether any current centers would be cut; Jurcovic responded that no center had been eliminated and most awards matched last year—s contracts. One provider, identified in the meeting as Gerard Multigenerational (referred to in materials as "Gerard"), had requested $90,000 but the council recommended awarding $61,015, noting Gerard also receives revenue from a local levy.
The council recommended opening three new small "scope" centers and funding each with $15,000 as a start-up allocation to allow them to demonstrate operational viability. The council characterized the $15,000 awards as pilot funding subject to re-evaluation at the end of the two-year term.
Commissioners and the council discussed procurement processes for sealed proposals after a county prosecutor advised that communication with bidders prior to award is limited under Ohio law and that sealed proposals may permit some negotiation but should be handled carefully. Commissioners asked for clarifications on how awards were calculated and whether any of the centers had previously failed to use awarded funds.
On balance, commissioners indicated support for the council—s recommendations but asked for the council to be prepared to answer follow-up questions before final contracts are issued. The board did not adopt a final contract in the meeting record; staff said contracts would begin Nov. 1 and that the advisory council would provide supporting documentation on the awards.
