Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Wellbeing Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors open hearing on $3.2M growth to Children's Fund; residents urge preserving CSAP process
Summary
The committee held a charter-required hearing on amendments to the Children's Services Allocation Plan proposing $3.2'$3.4 million in new spending; the Citizens Advisory Committee and numerous providers recommended RFPs or reserves for new initiatives and stressed preserving the CSAP public process.
The Government Audit and Oversight Committee convened an extended hearing on Item 4, a proposed amendment to the Children's Services Allocation Plan (CSAP) to allocate approximately $3.2'$3.4 million in unanticipated growth. Department staff presented a package of direct-service expansions (including intergenerational tutoring, capital support for Ella Hill Hutch, youth workforce funding, a pilot for therapeutic foster homes and operating support for Huckleberry House) and system investments (financial literacy pilot, SF Promise expansion, Mandarin/dual-language support and place-based school-community initiatives).
September Jared (department planner) outlined the direct-service proposals, noting allocations such as $160,000 for intergenerational tutoring to add eight sites (about 200 youth), $490,000 for capital work at Ella Hill Hutch, and a proposed $1M therapeutic foster-home pilot to serve foster youth with severe mental-health needs. Broader system investments included $250,000 for SF Promise implementation and smaller amounts for dual-language expansion and high-school community-service infrastructure.
Members of the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) and scores of community groups urged adherence to the CSAP's bottom-up process. Lorne Needle (CAC vice chair) said the committee recommended proceeding with some direct-service items, RFPing the youth workforce allocation, and placing the foster-care pilot funding on reserve until a detailed plan is developed with community partners. Many public speakers (Coleman Advocates, Family Budget Coalition, Child Care Planning Advisory Council, Mission Neighborhood Centers, and others) urged that the growth be allocated by DCYF through its established public process, and several highlighted an absence of proposals for early childhood (0—5) care in the proposed list.
Supervisor Peskin acknowledged procedural shortcomings that led to late notice of the fund growth and proposed referring any allocation-plan amendment consistent with the CAC recommendations to the Budget Committee for additional public deliberation; the Board will consider the item at a future meeting. Department staff said they could return with more detailed plans or RFP proposals. The committee did not adopt an amendment on the spot; the next procedural step is referral and further public input per charter requirements.
Key outstanding issues recorded in the hearing: the therapeutic foster-home pilot lacks a detailed implementation plan and provider safeguards (cultural competency, placement location); advocates requested a clearer childcare (0—5) allocation plan; CAC recommended reserving or RFPing several items to protect the integrity of the original CSAP priorities.
