Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Funding Cycle topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Scottsdale outlines human services funding calendar, scoring changes and Neighborly review process
Summary
Staff told commissioners there are 37 proposals for review, a condensed scoring rubric (35 staff points + 70 commissioner points), and new rules including mandatory IRS 990s, client surveys and five bonus points for proven collaboration; key deadlines: Jan. 30 (questions), Feb. 19 (scoring) and Feb. 26 (work study).
Chad, a community grants staffer, and Melissa McNeil, community grant specialist, briefed the Human Services Advisory Commission on Jan. 8 about the city’s annual grant and scoring process for human services funding.
Chad said 37 proposals were assigned to commissioners for review and explained logistics: proposal packets are being delivered via secure mail, and commissioners will use the Neighborly platform for full application review and to enter scores. Key dates presented were questions due Jan. 30, Neighborly scoring due Feb. 19, a work‑study session on Feb. 26 to view aggregated scores and a March 12 formal funding recommendation that will go to City Council (March 28 for CDBG/HOME items and May 12 for local funds).
Melissa outlined funding buckets and approximate availability while noting HUD had not yet allocated CDBG and HOME funds. She said staff anticipates about $148,000 for CDBG public services (six proposals requested roughly $343,000), $60,000 available for housing activities, Scottsdale Cares funding around $180,000 (18 applications totaling $306,000) and $34,500 for general funds (10 applications totaling $195,000); SRPMIC funds of $130,000 were committed to home‑delivered and congregate meals.
Staff described scoring changes this year: commissioner scoring is condensed into seven 10‑point sections for 70 commissioner points; staff scoring totals 35 points, for a 105‑point maximum. The application now requires IRS Form 990s and a client survey; staff added a new shortfalls/needs form to capture program gaps. One notable procedural change is awarding five bonus points for proven collaboration with city human services, which staff cautioned will be applied sparingly. Chad warned that “any proposal that scores 70 or below will not make it into the review process.”
Staff also discussed technical issues experienced with Neighborly during submission and emphasized that some agencies needed to update their submissions; commissioners were shown how to find human services evaluations, historical data and uploaded documents inside Neighborly. Commissioners asked how to treat agencies that underspent prior awards; staff said expenditures and served counts are available in the historical data and that awards are reimbursed on an expense basis rather than paid up front.
Next steps: commissioners to send agency questions by Jan. 30 and complete Neighborly scoring by Feb. 19 so staff can prepare the Feb. 26 work‑study session.
