Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Nonprofit Partnerships topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Policy & Services reviews nonprofit partnership applications; schedules June 4 deliberation

3585942 · May 27, 2025
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

Staff presented Phase I nonprofit partnership applications and an evaluation rubric; more than a dozen nonprofits gave brief presentations. Committee asked staff for a condensed evaluation (high/medium/low bands) and scheduled a follow-up committee meeting for June 4 at 8 p.m. to prepare a recommendation to council.

The Policy & Services Committee on May 28 received the Phase 1 applications for the city's nonprofit partnership work plan, heard short presentations from a dozen applicants and directed staff to provide a condensed evaluation ahead of a June 4 committee deliberation.

Staff member Lupita Alamos summarized the application review rubric staff would use to evaluate requests under four criterion: community reach, equity impact, alignment with council priorities, and program sustainability. Alamos said staff avoided ranking organizations solely by the number of Palo Alto residents served because service types and scales vary widely; instead staff proposed assessing whether Palo Alto residents are served, reviewing program description, goals and outcomes, and assessing funding request relative to program budget.

Alamos told the committee staff also planned to include applicants' prior city funding in the summary and a short classification of service categories to aid side-by-side comparison. She said staff would aim to provide the evaluation variables committee members requested and to be transparent about missing information.

The meeting included brief pitches from organizations that had applied for Phase 1 funding. Examples of applicants and remarks during public presentations:

- Third Thursday / Palo Alto Chamber Foundation (Charlie Weidans): described monthly Third Thursday events on California Avenue that attract an estimated 400 to 900 visitors and said data show a 40% increase in visitors on event nights; the Foundation said Third Thursday supports local businesses and civic life.

- Musical Memories Foundation (Cheryl Merrymount): a new nonprofit proposing music programs for seniors including interactive performances, workshops and movement sessions focused on memory-care and underserved seniors; the speaker said the group launched in January 2025 and would dedicate any city funds to Palo Alto programs.

- UNAF / Palo Alto International Film Festival (Misha Milojkovic): provided comparative figures showing many small-city film festivals run on budgets larger than UNAF's request and emphasized festival community programming and year-round free offerings.

- DreamCatchers (Nicole Chu Wong): described nearly two decades of free after-school academic and social-emotional programming for low-income middle-school students and families; the presenter said DreamCatchers is the only free after-school program of its kind serving socioeconomically disadvantaged Palo Alto middle-school students and families and partners with PAUSD for site space.

- JobTrain (JobTrain staff): said the workforce-training nonprofit served more than 400 Palo Alto residents over the past three years and offers medical assistant, CNA and hospitality workforce pipelines.

- Youth Community Service (Maura Uhman): described Youth Connect, a youth mental-health and connectedness program started as a city contract in 2017; staff noted the county provides match funding and that the program serves more than 2,300 individuals annually.

- LifeMoves / Opportunity Services Center (Sophie Pigman): requested funds for meals after the program lost complimentary meal providers; staff said food costs rose from approximately $18,000 in FY25 to an estimated $66,000 in FY26 and emphasized meals' role in case management and engagement.

- Peninsula Healthcare Connection (Christina Barajas): described trauma-informed mobile and clinic-based care for unhoused and medically vulnerable people and said funding would support outreach and case management.

- Avenidas / ADAS Cafe (Kathleen Foley Hughes): requested support to expand community events and programming at Mitchell Park, including dance and social opportunities for mission-based employees with disabilities.

- Museum of American Heritage (Michelle Fabian): asked support to expand garden hours from the current Friday-Sunday 11 a.m.-4 p.m. to six days a week (8 a.m.-4 p.m.) and requested funding for maintenance and visitor amenities.

- Palo Alto Special Education PTA (Brian Baker): a newly chartered PTA requested $5,000 to pilot social-skills programming for students with disabilities across school sites.

Committee members debated evaluation approach and timeline. Chair Bienker emphasized the program is a pilot to introduce transparency and a predictable cadence for requests and suggested committee members test partial funding scenarios. Council member Stone asked staff to include an overview showing which organizations already receive city funding (for example CDBG, HSRAP or other line items) and which do not; Stone said that context would help avoid double-counting and understand "who is relying on which pots of money." Council member Liu suggested categorizing applicants by service type so the committee can compare similar proposals and said she favored including vacancy and sustainability indicators.

After extended discussion the committee agreed staff should produce a condensed evaluation for committee review. Members asked staff to use high/medium/low bands across the key evaluation areas (rather than a strict numeric rank) and to include prior city funding amounts and funding sources where available. The committee scheduled a follow-up Policy & Services meeting for June 4 at 8:00 p.m. to discuss the evaluations and prepare a recommendation to the full City Council; staff said the packet for that meeting will be provided as a late packet if needed.

The committee did not make award decisions at the May 28 meeting. Staff and committee members reiterated that applicants will have additional opportunities to address the committee and council during the June review and that staff will update materials to reflect committee feedback.