Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Innovation Fund Allocations topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Nevada County CCP executive committee splits $40,000 innovation fund, awards $20,000 each to PAWS and CVV

3550574 · 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

Nevada County’s Community Corrections Partnership executive committee voted to award two $20,000 innovation grants — one to PAWS (animal fostering for people in recovery) and one to CVV — and declined Connecting Point’s request. The committee limited PAWS outreach spending to $1,000 and prohibited use of funds for legal services.

Nevada County’s Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) executive committee voted to split $40,000 in innovation funding into two $20,000 awards, approving a $20,000 grant to PAWS (a program that fosters animals while people are in recovery) and a $20,000 grant to CVV (a restorative-justice–oriented program). The committee also voted not to fund the Connecting Point request during this cycle.

The award to PAWS included two specific conditions: committee members prohibited use of the $20,000 for legal assistance and capped outreach and marketing spending at $1,000. Committee members said the innovation fund’s intent is seed funding for pilot projects and emphasized that applicants should demonstrate sustainability beyond the one-year award.

Committee members described the $40,000 figure as the budgeted total for innovation grants this cycle. Several members said most applicants requested the full $40,000; the committee instead chose to pilot two smaller awards to test program models. One member noted the committee could increase the innovation pool only by a formal budget amendment.

Members debated which requests were properly “innovative.” PAWS was discussed as a program that provides animal care during treatment and recovery; concern arose because PAWS budgeted some funds for outreach, printed materials, travel and legal assistance. Several members argued grant funds should prioritize direct services (veterinary and animal care) rather than marketing or attorneys. The committee amended the PAWS award to restrict legal assistance and to limit outreach/marketing to $1,000.

CVV drew extended discussion because it proposes a restorative-justice model focused on domestic-violence and sexual-assault survivors who choose to engage. Several committee members said restorative justice can be appropriate in some cases but flagged the risks when victims and offenders have ongoing criminal cases or power imbalances. Members asked that CVV coordinate with the district attorney and probation when cases are active; speakers also noted CVV staff are certified in crisis intervention and meet state requirements for domestic violence and sexual-assault counseling.

Members discussed Women of Worth, a program the committee funded in the prior cycle and which proposed an expansion. Committee members said Women of Worth was previously funded as an innovation project and could be considered for longer-term funding through other county or state funding streams (including JJCPA or other CCP allocations) if it submits outcome data demonstrating success. The Connecting Point request for job services was not funded this cycle; members suggested staff follow up with that applicant about alternative funding opportunities.

The committee also discussed governance and process issues: members said the innovation program should be clarified in future application materials (explicitly noting one-year seed funding and requiring sustainability plans), and staff said a toolkit on funding intent and process is under consideration for future CCP meetings.

Next steps noted by the committee included notifying applicants of the decisions, directing PAWS to the amended spending limits, and asking CVV to coordinate with DA/probation on any restorative-justice work tied to active criminal cases. Members said successful pilots could be considered for funding in future CCP or JJCPA cycles if they provide outcome data.