Richmond human services presents FY24 non‑departmental grants impact report; council calls for more time to review

Tracy DeShazer, deputy chief administrative officer for Human Services, and Dominic Beard, strategic projects and grants advisor, presented the City of Richmond’s FY24 non‑departmental grants annual impact report and described changes to the department’s grantmaking process.

DeShazer said the report covers only “human services administered grants” and that the presentation would focus on eligibility criteria, application review and scoring, monitoring and reporting, and the program timeline. Beard described the grants as “competitive 1 year grants” focused on “critical unmet needs,” and said the program is intended to fund services the city “can't provide or can't provide at scale or in the way that these nonprofit partners can.”

The presenters told the committee that for fiscal year 2024 the program received 96 applications and funded 54 organizations; the median grant award was described as about $96,000. Staff said applications typically open October 1 and close around December 1 (the 2024 deadline fell on Sunday, so it closed December 2), and that each eligible application is scored by two reviewers and reconciled by a subject‑matter review team before administrative leadership reviews scores and recommendations for incorporation into the mayor’s proposed budget.

Beard said monitoring begins after budget adoption and execution of grant contracts. He said staff pull the scope of services and performance measures from the application into contract language, perform site visits and compliance monitoring, and reserve the right to request additional reporting and to audit grantees. Staff described a recent change to include members of the review and scoring committees on site visits beginning in FY25 and said the department has moved to lump‑sum payments for many small‑to‑medium grants to reduce invoicing burdens.

DeShazer and Beard also described a new annual grantee celebration and a number of program enhancements the department has implemented, including lengthening the application period, increasing technical assistance sessions, streamlining application questions, expanding subject‑matter experts on review committees, reworking performance measures and increasing cross‑portfolio staff support. DeShazer noted that the human services non‑departmental grants team comprises three staff members who work closely with the Department of Budget and other subject‑matter experts.

Council members welcomed the additional detail but raised concerns about timing and clarity. Councilwoman Gibson said she opened the packet expecting the impact report but found a placeholder and said she could not provide informed feedback without time to review the larger document. Gibson asked for a follow‑up conversation after council members have had time to review.

Other council members made practical requests: Vice President Jurden asked for a single consolidated table listing each organization, the dollar investment, the target and actual outputs, and the population served. Councilwoman Alba Barker and Councilmember Robertson asked staff to clarify how outputs reported by individual grantees map to measurable outcomes for city priorities and to explain how the city is ensuring equity in annual repeat awards. Several members recommended a fuller breakdown of other related funds (Health Equity Trust Fund, Positive Youth Development Fund, Eviction Diversion Program, Family Crisis Fund, Heart of Richmond program) and how those funds intersect with the human services non‑departmental portfolio.

DeShazer and Beard acknowledged the timing issue and said staff will provide the full impact report and are available to meet individually with council members. They agreed to produce a consolidated, comparable spreadsheet of organizations, award amounts and key performance measures and to provide additional breakdowns on pass‑through funding and allowable overhead. Beard and DeShazer also said they will continue presenting other related fund reporting to the council’s Education and Human Services Committee and provide more timely delivery of materials in future cycles.

The presentation generated a number of requests for additional follow up rather than immediate formal actions. Council members asked staff to supply the full FY24 impact report in electronic form, provide a consolidation of award amounts and performance targets vs. actuals, clarify which funds fall outside the human services non‑departmental report and provide detail on pass‑through overhead limits in grantee contracts. DeShazer and Beard said they will provide those materials and follow up with council members individually.

The committee proceeded to the next agenda item after the discussion.