# Community Development & Social Services Committee - August 14, 2012 > Auto-transcribed civic record · August 14, 2012 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/2654 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/2654?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2012-08-14 - **Last revised**: July 17, 2026 - **Length**: 16,770 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Social Services & Community Development Committee met on August 14, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers, with Myers presiding. The committee addressed four agenda items during the session, including approval of Partner Agency Process Amendments, two informational presentations on the UK Student Social Services Needs Assessment Project and a Summer Youth Employment Update, and consideration of Committee Referral Items which were deferred. The committee took two motions to a vote and heard four public comments during the meeting. ## Attendance The following individuals were present at the meeting on August 14, 2012: * Myers * Henson * Ellinger * Kay * Ford * Lawless * Stinnett * McChord * Lane No absences or late arrivals were recorded. ## Votes and Decisions **Approval of Proposed Schedule and Fiscal Year 14 Application and Scoring Instrument for Partner Agency Funding** Motion by Ford, seconded by Henson. This motion passed unanimously [timestamp: 0:44:08]. All nine members voted in favor: Myers, Henson, Ellinger, Kay, Ford, Lawless, Stinnett, McChord, and Lane. No votes were cast against the motion. **Motion to Remove the Funding Cap for Any One Agency in the Next Round of Funding** Motion by Myers, seconded by Henson. This motion passed unanimously [timestamp: 0:45:44]. All nine members voted in favor: Myers, Henson, Ellinger, Kay, Ford, Lawless, Stinnett, McChord, and Lane. No votes were cast against the motion. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting included approval of the following financial action: **UK Student Social Services Needs Assessment Project Grant** A grant of $35,000 was awarded to the University of Kentucky College of Social Work and Martin School to fund the UK Student Social Services Needs Assessment Project. ## Public Comment Council members addressed several aspects of the Summer Youth Employment Program during the meeting. Council Member Kay spoke first [timestamp: 1:01:13] regarding stipends for student researchers. Kay emphasized the value of the students' work and suggested the council consider allocating stipends, noting that unpaid practicums are a burden on students. Council Member Ford [timestamp: 1:22:04] praised the Summer Youth Employment Program and emphasized the need to fully fund it to meet growing demand. Ford noted that increased funding would allow 225 youth to participate in the program next year. Council Member Henson [timestamp: 1:29:08] expressed concern about the lack of diversity in the youth employment program. Henson offered to help with outreach efforts in underrepresented communities to address this gap. Council Member Stinnett [timestamp: 1:36:16] requested specific data to support program expansion. Stinnett asked for a list of the 80 work sites currently participating in the program and a breakdown of applicants by school, indicating these materials would help expand outreach and recruitment efforts. ## Contested Items **Funding Cap for Partner Agencies** The committee debated whether to impose a funding cap on individual agencies. Council Members Kay and McCord argued against implementing caps, instead advocating for funding decisions to be based on program merit rather than predetermined limits. Following discussion, the committee voted to remove the proposed cap. ## Partner Agency Process Amendments The committee discussed proposed amendments to the partner agency funding application and scoring process. [timestamp: 00:08:16] **Key Speakers** Mills, Henson, Kay, Lawless, and Ford participated in this discussion. **Proposed Changes** The committee considered several modifications to the existing partner agency process: - Transition to a paperless application system - Implementation of a revised scoring rubric with weighted categories - Removal of the requirement that agencies must have been in operation for a specified minimum time period - Elimination of the funding cap previously applied to individual agencies **Outcome** The committee approved the new partner agency process amendments. The approval included acceptance of the paperless application format, the revised weighted scoring rubric, the removal of the operational tenure requirement for agencies, and the removal of the individual agency funding cap. ## UK Student Social Services Needs Assessment Project The committee received a presentation on a four-semester needs assessment project led by University of Kentucky students under faculty oversight. [timestamp: 0:47:19] **Project Overview** The project will analyze existing needs assessments, conduct site visits to partner agencies, and produce findings intended to inform future funding decisions by partner organizations. The work represents a collaborative effort combining student research with faculty guidance to evaluate social services needs in the community. **Committee Discussion** The committee engaged with the presenters to clarify expectations and project scope. Key speakers in the discussion included Mills, Weeks, Lukefeld, Henson, Kay, and Ford. The committee requested specific input regarding the parameters of the assessment and what outcomes stakeholders could expect from the student-led research initiative. **Outcome** The agenda item was informational in nature, with no formal action taken. The presentation served to brief the committee on the project's structure, timeline, and intended impact on partner agency planning and resource allocation decisions. ## Summer Youth Employment Update The Division of Youth Services presented an update on the Summer Youth Employment Program during this agenda item. [timestamp: 1:07:46] **Program Results** The program successfully hired 153 youth across 80 work sites. Due to increased funding, the program expanded to accommodate 75 additional youth beyond the original cohort. **Key Speakers** The presentation and discussion involved Morton, Ford, Stinnett, and Henson. **Presentation Highlights** The Division reported strong feedback from employers participating in the program. The update addressed program expansion, outreach efforts, and workforce development outcomes. **Committee Discussion** The committee engaged in discussion regarding outreach strategies and diversity within the program. Members also emphasized the need for continued investment in the Summer Youth Employment Program to sustain and potentially expand these efforts in future years. **Outcome** This agenda item was informational in nature, providing the committee with an update on program performance and current operations. ## Committee Referral Items [timestamp: 1:40:04] The committee reviewed the status of several items that had been referred for further consideration and action. **Section 108 Loan Program** The Section 108 Loan Program was noted as having received endorsement from the full council. However, the program remains in a pending status as implementation details have not yet been finalized. **Partner Agency Funding Policy** The partner agency funding policy was removed from the agenda following progress made on this item. **Senior Citizen Center Site Selection** The Senior Citizen Center site selection was deferred pending receipt of further updates on this matter. **Speakers and Outcome** Ford, Henson, and Mills participated in the discussion of these referral items. The overall outcome of this agenda item was deferred, with the committee choosing to postpone final action pending additional information and progress on the outstanding matters. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of the proposed schedule and fiscal year 14 application and scoring instrument for partner agency funding - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to remove the funding cap for any one agency in the next round of funding --- ## Full transcript Hey golfers, this is it. Lexington Parks and Recreation Golf Courses now have new affordable golf rates. Check them out now. Lake Kearney Hill Golf Links, Lakeside, Tate's Creek, and the Gay Brewer Junior Course at Picadome. And we haven't forgotten about the students. Check out the new golf rates and discounts for UK and Transy students. And don't forget about our fully stocked and awesome gift shops too. From tees to drivers and shoes to hats, we have it all. For more information, please visit LexingtonKY.gov or like us on Facebook today. Play Golf Lexington. All right, so after the pasta has been cut, right now we have linguine spinach. We get it and we measure the pasta into ounces. Every portion is about four ounces per serving. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. environmental quality and public works. Welcome to another edition of A Greener Blue Grass. Thank you. Thank you. Welcome. If we can call the meeting to order. Welcome back to today's August 14, 2012 Social Services and Community Development Committee meeting. I want to welcome my colleagues back from break. and welcome all of our participants in the meeting today, Commissioner, the folks you brought with you. If we could go ahead and get started with a motion to approve the summary. Council Member Henson? Do you have a motion to approve? You want to make that motion? Yes, and then I have a correction if we can get a second. Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? We have a motion and a second. I just wanted to note that I was absent for that meeting in the vote-taking where the motion was made regarding the HUD to implement the 108 loan program. There was a motion made, and it should reflect that I was absent. Okay, so you're talking about number two? I'm sorry, number one? Yes, the motion made on item one. For those looking at the packet, it's the motion that's right above number two on page two of the packet. So we want to change that to reflect that Councilman Henson was absent during the vote. Is there a second on that? I have to say it. Any discussion? Okay, those in favor of that amendment say aye. Those opposed? Okay, that passes. Are there any other amendments to the minutes? Everything else is okay? Okay, so then we have a motion on the floor to approve the minutes as amended. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed? That passes unanimously. Thank you. Okay, second on the agenda, we have partner agency process and amendments. Starting at page four, if we could have Commissioner Mills come up. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner, for coming today. Sure. Good morning. Welcome back. This presentation was prepared by Craig Bents, and he did most of the work on the partner agencies. He called this morning. He's really sick, and he didn't want to bring his germs here. So I'm going to do my best to present on Craig's behalf. Yes, I certainly will, Commit Council Member Lawless. So you have this in your packet, and I've got his talking points. A couple of the council members worked with Craig on this review process, so I think we'll be okay. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner. Okay. Ready to go? Yes. Okay. The first thing I want to talk about is the objectives for today's presentation. Okay. Have I got a clicker? Do I have one? Oh, okay, great. Just click the big button. Oh, this one. There we go. Nope. Okay. The first thing we're going to talk about, the progress to date on the partner agencies. We had a committee to meet about the improvements. This one. Forward and back. Thank you. Back and forth. Thank you. The summary of improvements to the application and scoring that were recommended through surveys and a committee. And then we have some items that we would like you all to consider today. And I would like for you all to know that we have two guests from the U.K. College of Social Work here. Pam Weeks, who's a professor and director of field education, and Sarah Beth Lukefeld, who is a doctoral candidate. And they want to take notes of today's process and working with the students as we move forward. Okay. Progress update. Craig did a survey monkey to review with people, all the people that applied for partner agency funding, as well as all the reviewers, to find out how things worked with the process, what worked well, what needed to be changed. In March, we told you that we were going to look at this survey and talk with the committee about how they could improve the process and get back to you. So we did the survey, and I'm going to give you some of those results in detail in just a minute. And then there was a discretion group. We had four people that volunteered to get together and talk about changes in the process. We're meeting today to see if you want to adopt these amendments to the process. And then starting in this fall, we're going to put the word out that the applications are due, and we will start the process in October to apply for these. And we're also going to talk a little bit about the needs assessment after this. Okay. Of the agencies that applied, we had 21 agencies that we funded, and 17 of those replied to our survey, which is a pretty good response rate. And we asked them how they learned about the funding, because until date we hadn't had public advertisement. The vast majority learned about them either through social service list serves or other e-mails that we put out. Other ways they learned about it, we put an ad in the local newspaper or just word of mouth from one agency to another. We also ask about the limits of putting a limit on the dollar amount of partner agency funding. 71% of the agencies felt that there should be an upper limit of funding since there are limited funds. And that's something that you all can consider whether you all want to do that or not. Of the agencies that were in favor of the funding cap, about a third felt that $100,000 should be the maximum. and more than half, 54.5%, were in favor of a cap of $250,000 for any one agency. None of the agencies who wanted a cap felt that any one should have over $500,000. One of the items that received 100% consensus was the paper application form, paperless application form. We talked about that, how they put things on the Good Giving website and then sent their application to us via email. Every agency liked that. They didn't want to send paper. It was less burdensome for them. We also talked about whether to have one application meeting or two for them to come, and consensus was it was fine to have one. It's less expense for our department, so we're going to do that. And 80% of the applicants said that the profile on goodgiving.net helped them in ways other than our application. They were very favorable to that. So those processes went very well. The folks that reviewed our surveys, and there are some of those among you here in the group, some of you all in your aides were reviewers, we found out that 77% of the folks who had reviewed had reviewed grants in the past, so they were people with grants knowledge, which was very good. 69% said that the process was effective, and the interesting thing is they wanted paper copies. So the applicants liked paperless, but the reviewers wanted paper to review. So I guess the onus is going to be on us to produce those copies for the reviewers, and we will do that because they're volunteer reviewers. So that was the response from the reviewers, and we had a pretty good response rate from them as well. So after the reviewers met, Craig sent an email out to everyone who was in the reviewing work group and said, would some of you all like to get together and talk to me about the process? And fortunately, two of our council members agreed, Council Member Kay and Council Member Henson, thank you so much, Phyllis McAdam and Elizabeth Combs. And all four of these folks have had grant experience, and they sit on the review committee with Craig. So the focus of this group was to see how could we improve the application and the scoring, and they also used these surveys that I just gave to you all to this process as well as their own experience in reviewing the partner agency applications this year. So these are the application changes that they came up with, and these are things that we would like this committee to consider, that if you all want to make this a part of the application next year. To date, we had asked that if an agency only had 20% of their total budget being coming from us, that they got five additional points. This group felt like that that ought to be a requirement, that if an agency asks for 20% or more of their total budget from urban county government, that they should be disallowed so that we have a cap, and that's something for you all to consider. The group took some redundant questions out of the application to make it a little more user-friendly, and I think maybe Council Member Kay and Henson can speak to those if you all have questions because I'm not familiar with what those were. And we have a logic model for how the agencies put in, what their programs are going to be, and how they're going to be funded. That's on page 34 of your packet in detail if you want to look at it. And the inputs column was taken out. And that's basically things like what do you do to reach the service. We put in staff, paper, transportation. Everything else is left in there. And the applicants will get an example of one of those logic models when we meet with them in October for their application. And finally, the financials were very extensive for volunteer reviewers. Each one of the reviewers had six or seven applications, and they were big, thick financials. So what the group suggested was that there be a summary of the financials that be given to the folks that are reviewing the grants. It's not that they won't have the backup information, but that a summary be involved. And there's also some discussion in here about the Division of Budgeting being involved with this, which we'll get to in just a minute. We did not actually give the scoring instruments to the agencies last year. We told them what kind of things they were going to be scored on in very broad categories, but they did not have the instrument. So this group also looked at the scoring instrument because they had the score agency, so they knew firsthand what worked and what seemed a little cumbersome or just didn't make sense. So they simplified the questions and clarified some of the wording in the criteria, which I'm sure the two council members can speak to. They added a weighting for certain categories in the application, so it went from 100 points to 140 possible points. And Craig has suggested another item in here which could make it more than 140 if this committee wants to go that way. There were points related to how long the agency had been in operation, and those were removed. I think there was some discussion in this committee that maybe agencies who were new didn't have the same opportunity for an agency who had been around for five or ten years. So that question was removed so that how long an agency has been in existence won't be counted. And the other thing that was decided is that the Division of Budgeting is being contacted to assist with scoring the financial performance trends. The reviewers felt that the time and expertise necessary to review this item needed assistance from budgeting staff. So we know that they've got a lot of work up there. We don't know how that's going to move forward, but we'll be in discussions with Mr. Bear about if we can get some help from budgeting. So these are the differences in the scoring rubric from this past year to the year coming forward. If you'll see, we had, these were the categories that we used, and we got a total of 100 points. The committee that met recommended that we change to the one on the bottom down here. The quality of the application along with the agency's mission statement is a small part. The part that seems to have the most weight that the group felt like should be most looked at is the program approach. And that's about 43% of the total score. That measures how innovative and creative the programs are, how accessible it is, does it reduce poverty, Does it improve the quality of life in Fayette County? And how do they partner with other agencies? So all those things are going to be weighted really heavily. Program measures, did the agency set achievable goals and can they actually measure what they're doing was another high one. You see the budget and the diversity of funding. One thing that Council Member Lawless brought up in the community meeting that we forgot to put in here was leveraging dollars with the money that we give folks. So that's another thing that this committee could consider. You could add points for using matching funds. Are they using our funds to draw down state and federal dollars or foundation dollars? So if you wanted to add that in to the 140 points, that's another thing that this committee might consider. The funding priorities for FY13, as you all recall, we came into six areas, and then anything that was funded or required by statute or LFUCG ordinance. Since we haven't been through the needs assessment, we would recommend that we use these same priorities for FY14. We'll be advertising in September. We'll be having the community meeting in October. In just a little bit, I'll talk about how the needs assessment will go forward, and we should be able to use the information from the needs assessment for FY15. But we'll probably just use this next year unless the committee has another idea, another way for us to go. So this is the schedule moving forward and some decisions that we need from this committee. Today we would like for you all to approve the amendments or change the amendments as we propose for this year's process. In September, we're going to advertise the funding. We already have a date set for the mandatory pre-application meeting. We had several agencies that did not come to the meeting last year and still wanted to submit applications, and that was a no deal. If they don't come to the pre-application meeting, they don't get to apply. That's one of the few standards that we set. The applications will be due in January of this year. The review committees will meet in February and March. The partner agency work group, we had that last year. After we came forward with you all with the rankings, the work group was formed with council members, people from the mayor's office, and people from my advisory board, and they made a recommendation to the mayor. So they will come forward again in March, make their recommendation of how to fund the ranked agencies, and they'll be sent forward to the mayor for his decision. But they will come to you before we send those, or I guess we'll send them to the mayor first, and then they'll come to you all. Isn't that the way the budget process works? Is that right? Does he get them before you all get them? I don't know. You all get them before he gets them. Anyway, in March, both parties will get the budget recommendations. Okay. So these are the actions we need from you all today before we move into the needs assessments. The schedule of how we want to move forward and the scoring instrument with its changes. The idea, if you want to set a cap. This year we had a funding cap of $666,000. and the surveys recommended a lesser cap. You all can make a policy recommendation regarding funding caps today or you can leave it to the work group to decide a cap. But I will guarantee you when the decision for funding is made, there's going to have to be a cap of some sort because we always have more requests than we do funds available, even if we increase the funds because it was like two to one. We had $3 million requested for $1.75 million worth of money. So I think some decision does need to be made about caps. I will let you know that some agencies submitted one or two programs. One agency submitted ten. And we asked the partner agencies, did they want a cap on the number of programs that people could apply for? And they said no, they didn't want a cap, that each program should be evaluated on its face. so this is what we have and then i'll have if you have any questions or want to move forward with this we'd appreciate it and then we'll talk a little bit about the needs assessment thank you commissioner are there any questions or the two council members that sat on the committee would you like to add any input you don't have to but it's just the two council members that sat on the on the committee that reviewed these changes do you have any input you'd like to put in You don't have to, but I just wanted to give you the opportunity. Okay. Council Member Henson? Thank you. Remind me again when we should expect that needs assessment to be completed. Okay. I'm going to do a detail on the needs assessment as soon as we finish this, Council Member Henson. Okay. It's going to be a four-semester process. Okay. Because I think that would have a big impact on this. Now, also, the 38% cap, did you arrive, did we arrive at that number based upon past history? Or, for instance, I guess I'm thinking about the larger agencies that it would be 38% of the funding we have available. Correct? Yes, we did do that, but the 20% cap has to do with their overall funding. Correct. The 38% cap this year was decided on by the work group. Yes. Because it was based on the funding amount from last year. Okay. That's what I wanted to be clear about because it's obvious that there are some agencies that provide an enormous amount of services, But yet, like you said, we don't want to keep new agencies from getting a start. And the needs assessment, that's where I think that's critical. Those are difficult decisions. Where do you cap it at? Because we never have enough money to fund everyone. Thank you. And thank you and your staff for all the work. I appreciate this, and I think it's something that really needed to be done. It's a good start. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Councilman Henson. Councilmember McCord. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for all the hard work. It's been a long time coming, and I appreciate Chairman Myers pushing for this for all these years. The one, I guess the Balancing Act, out of everything that you had said, I think the thing that we need to spend a little bit more time trying to figure out where we stand as a committee is the capping the needs. I mean, obviously there's never enough money to meet all the needs. But, Council Member Myers, it goes to the question that you and I had seven years ago about when Katrina came and kind of looking at what our needs were, you know, what are the needs of this community and shouldn't we put our resources towards that instead of trying to spread it so thinly. So I think out of everything that I saw today, the one question I would like us to drill down further and really come to a policy decision, it doesn't really matter to me one way or the other because I'll be gone before we get into this, but I think the council needs just to say this is how we feel about that capping the needs piece. If we identify that seniors are our number one priority for the next three years, then capping that might be tying our hands. So I just would encourage us to have a further, deeper discussion about that. But otherwise, thank you very much for all that because I know it's a very laborious task. Craig gets credit. Okay. Well, thanks to him. Thank you, Council Member Myers. Thank you, Council Member McCord, and I agree with your comments there, and we'll follow up on that. Council Member Lane? Yes, I'd like to also say thanks. This was a very good study, and I found it very informative to be able to look at all that. The only area that I had a concern about was on the capping, and there were a couple of reasons. One is that things do change, and some new organization may start up one year, and then they might want to expand and the capping would limit that. It might be fulfilling a really important need for the community. The other point is that really technically only the council can vote on a case-by-case basis on the grants because we really are not able to bind any future council on how much the grants can be. So if we tried to really set a real hard cap, I think that would be hard to make it enforceable. But I think the idea of a cap or letting people think about not over-asking so that we can be more reasonable when we grant the awards, I think it's a good idea. Thank you. Council Member Lane, Council Member Lawless? On the cap issue, I had the same concern. As Council Member Lane, did I see in here that you're recommending a cap of no more than 20% funding from the previous year? That's not a cap of what we give them. We're saying that when they apply for funds, if the amount they apply for from the urban county government exceeds 20% of their total budget, their application would not be accepted. because we don't want to be the major funder of any one agency. This year, there were no agencies that asked for more than 20% of their total budget from us. But we just wanted to make that a hard and fast rule, because if we're the single funder and something changes the next year, that agency or that program could go away if they're dependent only on us. But it's not about the previous year's funding. The budget we would look at is the, no, it has nothing to do with the funding that we give them. I think I'm understanding what you're saying. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Lawless. Council Member Kaye. Thank you, Chair. On the question of CAP, I'm not a kind of, I don't have a strong opinion on this, but I think there's a way to think about it that's important for Council, and that is that my understanding in the work we've been doing is the shift from funding agencies to funding innovative programs. Correct. And if we are, I think, to be totally consistent with that, that a cap on any one agency is inappropriate, that is we ought to be looking at programs. We ought to be seeing whether they do what they're supposed to do, whether they improve the services and so on, and that ought to be the bottom line. Now, the other side of that is that there's no question that larger agencies have more resources to put grants together. They're more sophisticated. I think we have to weigh that. But, you know, kind of on balance, I kind of lean toward no cap, let the process, set up the process appropriately, make the judgments, and then fund appropriately. So thank you, Chair. Thank you, Council Member Kaye. Are there any other Council members that have any comments? Okay, if I could make a couple. On the cap, I think I agree with what Council Member Kaye said as well as Council Member McCord. And the needs assessment, I think, will help us get to that. If we want to have a cap until then, that might be somewhat appropriate. But once we get the needs assessment, then we look at the programs that are being applied for and what they're going to do to impact the needs that we have out there. Getting to that point on the proposed FY14 scoring rubric, a couple things. program approach, and this might be in greater detail someplace else, but we're weighting 60% of the application on that. How do we know how... 42%, actually. It's 60 points, but it's 40 points. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. Okay. So 42%. Right. How do we know that that program approach is one that produces results? we have outcome measures program measures which is the next category and the way we know that is the approach this is when we're looking at the application council member myers and that logic model is going to show us how they're going to get there and that's the program measures which is the second measure okay quarterly we will be looking at those outcome measures and getting numbers from them so on the award we won't really know it's just they're saying what they're going to do, and then as the year goes long, we're doing that this year. Every quarter we're looking at their outcomes to see if they're meeting the things that we funded them through. Okay. Councilmember Kay? Yeah, if I can, add a comment. I don't know if you have this with you, but I think it would be useful for the council to see the specific elements of both of those two big things, program approach and outcome measurement, because within each of those categories, there's four or five elements, and they themselves are weighted differentially. So we can see a little better what the committee would really be looking at, what they would be weighing as most important. Excellent. Do you have that? You have the scoring in your backup, and I'm thinking if you want to look at pages 55 through 58, that kind of shows you where they're showing us how they measure what they're doing. Is that correct? That's the example? That's what I was looking for. Right. Yeah. So that shows us in detail what we're asking of them to show them what they're spending their money on. Okay. Councilor McKay, are you finished? Or do you want to add something else? Just to kind of point out that if you look within the description, The weighting basically says that there's five possible points, like the program is innovative and creative, five possible points. But that's weighted by three, and you can get 15 possible points as a part of the application. So innovative is most important. Reducing poverty, et cetera, is most important. Demonstrated need is most important. And then other things slightly less important. Okay. Okay. So when we look at page 56, program approach number five, it says the program will reduce poverty and or improve the quality of life in Fayette County. How do you measure that? That's what the program is supposed to do. Right. How is that going to be measured? We're asking them to bring us the metrics. How do you measure that? Can you show that, for example, if it was an employment program, How many people moved off a public assistance grant or their families got a job such that it rose them above the poverty level? That would be a measure that a program would use. Improving the quality of life, suppose you have a substance abuse recovery program and you can show a success rate that you have X number of people that have been clean and sober for X number of days. That would improve the quality of life for that individual in Fayette County. It's my assumption that those are the kinds of things. They are hard to measure, but it's going to be kind of program-specific, I think. Okay, so if I'm filling out an application, when I get to this point, I'm going to provide to you the metrics for how that particular thing will be measured. Absolutely. And when you go back in the scoring, the application, which is on pages 30 to C, I think it starts on 25 through 34 of your packet, that's where they have an opportunity to write the narrative. And the folks who review them, they get the narrative where they will say, this is what our program is going to do and this is how we're going to achieve it. So then the scoring rubric is only filled out by the reviewers, the part we just looked at. They'll read the narrative and they'll produce the score based on what the agency said they were going to do with our funds. So if I were running a GED program, and I might say to measure that, we're going to have 25 people successfully enter in and complete our program and end up with a GED at the end of the year. And so to do that, I'm going to have 100 people come through because we're going to have some fallout. And so each quarter we're going to show how many people we expect to enter into the program. How many graduated, how many are this far along in the program, and those are the things we're going to look for. Okay, so that's what you're going to look for. will the person who reviews the application, will they have that level of detail as they're making their – Yes. Okay, excellent. And then program measures, we're giving them 30 points for program measures. Can you go into a little more detail on that? Program measures are the things we have just spoken of. Have you made it something clear and definable that we can measure that this person – You can't measure how a person feels better about themselves. But if a person reduces the number of days in mental health counseling, you could measure that. So that's what we're giving them credit for. Did their measures look specific and measurable, or is it just some we're going to do a good job here? Okay. And then is there a place in here where you're going to – and you're doing the site visits, right? You're still going to do those? Yes, and we're going to change those. I'll get to that when we get to the needs assessment. So where at, if I'm a reviewer, do I get to try to analyze whether or not they can actually be successful in what they put in the approach and the measures? Well, it's going to be subjective. I think once you see the application, the reviewers individually review them and score them, and then they meet as a group because each one of the agencies gets to come in and do an oral presentation. And so if they had questions, that's why we do the oral presentation. You know, I'm not real sure they can do this. And then the group has a chance to talk about it. I think that happened a lot in the reviews. People may have come in from reading an application and had one idea about the agency, but then after the oral presentation, they might have felt a little differently. I don't know if that was the experience of you all, but that often happens. And then moving forward, so next year, or FY15, and the same agency applies for funding for the same program, will part of this process be to go back and look at what they said they were going to do the year before and see how well they accomplished those outcomes? If it is the same program, I think that could certainly be built in there. We haven't, but if they're applying for the same program, it makes sense that we would look at their performance to date on the same kind of program. Sure, because the first year we're looking at the program approach and measures and we're trying to analyze whether or not we think they can get there and how we help them along the way. Because one thing I think is great about this process is when you get to the second quarter, if you haven't met your first quarter and your second quarter is a little bit behind, it's not that it's punitive when we go after you and we say we don't get your funding. We come alongside you and try to help you figure out what you can do different so that by the third quarter you are where you need to be so you can continue to get your funding. Because what we want is everybody to be successful so that our people going to the programs are successful. So I think if we can include that in there so that the next year's look, if they're applying for the same year. Preview the previous year. Because that's really going to tell us whether or not they can do what they're going to do this year, what they did last year. I think that's all I have right now. Thank you for this work. You guys put a lot of hard work into it, a lot of thoughtfulness in the process, and it's going to be a good thing for not only our residents that go through these programs, but everybody else in our community as well. So other than the funding cap, are you all okay with the changes to the? I've got three more people that have questions. I'm sorry, I thought it was good. Can I let Council Member Ford go first since he hasn't asked any questions yet? Sure. Is that okay? Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank Commissioner for her work and those who have helped her. I don't have any questions. I was going to just refer to the committee actions that were prepared on page 15, and I was prepared to bring forth a motion for the approval of the proposed schedule and the fiscal year 14 application and scoring instrument. Could I ask before you make a motion, can we let the other two speak? Yes, Mr. Chair, that's fine. Okay, thank you, sir. Council Member Henson? Thank you, Chair. Commissioner, when we look at the funding priorities list, that's based upon a previous assessment or just... That came from my staff this year, frankly. We just talked about the areas where we saw service needs. Right. That's why we need this needs assessment process to refine that. But for next year, this needs assessment will not be ready until FY15, so we just thought we would go with the same things. Right. And I agree that all of these are very much a need. And they're very broad. They're not very program-specific. Right. I guess I was thinking when we're looking at the caps put on the funding, and we might consider this once the assessment's complete and we find that the majority of the needs in the community are for seniors, just as an example. So should they, an agency that is providing services to that population that is listed as the top priority receive additional points? I think after the needs assessment comes out, we're going to be changing the scoring rubric because if indeed we want to fund on the basis of needs and programming, then in 15 we probably are going to have to change it all again to meet that. And we still have to meet all the needs even though it says maybe seniors is ranked one and homelessness or basic human needs is two, but all of our funding can't go to both of those, but maybe percentage-wise we could rate it. Those decisions will have to be made going forward. None of them are pleasant because we wish we had enough money for everybody to do everything. Me too. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Henson. Councilman Lawless. Thank you. There's no place that I can see on the application that asks about in-kind support or, for instance, when I used to fill these out, There was a place for how many FTEs were trained volunteers doing hands-on work. For instance, some agencies like the Bluegrass Rink Crisis Center had eight or nine full-time employee equivalents who went through extensive training, were highly supervised, answering the crisis line, going to the hospital. And that is an asset. I mean, that's a measurable. That could certainly be included in the financials as part of their package of what they bring. I mean, I think that's significant. And it also shows how any agency is reaching out for innovative and other sources of providing the services, which I think is very important. That's a good point. Thank you, Council Member Lawless. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I bring forward that motion to approve the proposed schedule in the fiscal year 14 application and scoring instrument as prepared by the Commissioner and her department. So moved. We have a motion. Second. We have a second. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? That passes unanimously. Thank you, Commissioner. Aye. I'm sorry, Chair. Do you also want to discuss and reach conclusion on the cap? It seems to me that's important guidance for the next phase. Okay, sure. You want to start that discussion? Yeah. Well, I'll make the motion that we not have a cap for any one agency in the next round of funding. So move. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Now, just for clarity, is this a 38% cap that you're talking about, or is this a 20% cap on there? This is a 38% cap, right? The cap for any individual? Yes. Okay. Percentage of the total funding. For award? This out for award. Not with application, but for award. Am I correct? We're going to keep the 20% on application, but not a cap for the award. My understanding of the 20% cap is that no agency can receive more than 20% of its total funding from LFUCG. Right. I would leave that. The question now is, should any one agency be able to receive more than X amount total funding out of the pool of funds available? And my motion is to have no cap on that amount. Okay. Thank you. Okay, so we have a motion in a second to remove the funding cap for FY13, or is it going to be 14, actually? 14. 14. 38% of the total funding that LFCCG has for partner agencies going to one specific agency. Does everybody understand what we're doing here? Okay, any discussion? All those in favor say aye. All those opposed? Aye. Okay, that passes. Oh, I guess we can vote electronically. Can we vote electronically? Okay, that passes. Okay. Is there anything else that we need to take care of regarding to the application and the application process? Thank you, and I hope some more of you all will be able to participate in the review process again next year. It worked very well. A couple of your aides came, and several of the council members came. We appreciate y'all's assistance. It's a big chore putting together enough people to review 40-some applications. You did a fantastic job. If you want to move along now to number three on the agenda, UK Student Social Services Needs Assessment Project. And I'm going to go through this real quickly. I don't have a PowerPoint on this. This is a one-pager on page 62 in your packet. and the folks from the College of Social Work here are to take notes on your input because they're going to be driving the bus on this one and they need to know what you all want to do. So we're going to need some input from you. Basically, I'm just going to tell you how the needs assessment moves forward. We have an MOA with UK and the Martin School right now. We're going to start this August and it's going to be led by Dr. Diane Leffler. She is a faculty mentor from the College of Social Work and Sarah Beth Lukefeld, who's a Ph.D. candidate, is with us today. Sarah, I want to stand up, and this is Pam Weeks. She's the Director of Field Instruction. Pam's placing the students with us, Professor Weeks, and Professor Lukefeld is going to be meeting with us and the students on a regular basis and directing them in this. So, so far we will have four or five MSW students. The college has one senior undergraduate who is supposedly a real star, and they would like for her to help us out as well as an independent study, even though we agreed on MSW students. They would like to send an undergraduate. The students are going to provide, and this kind of goes to what Council Member Lawless said, 1,080 hours of work over this first semester, which is the equivalent of one 20-hour employee. So it's a pretty good deal of work we're going to get from these students. The way we want to work with the students, the 21 agencies that are funded, we're going to divide up the agencies and give them to the students. We have been partner liaisons. Craig will be making regular visits to the agencies, but rather than our staff doing it in the coming year, we're going to have the students make the visits to the partner agencies. So each student will have a number of partner agencies to visit. Since we're doing needs assessments, we're going to ask them to go to the agencies and say, do you have existing needs assessments? And if they do not, we would like for the faculty to develop an evidence-based tool for us that says, what are your assets, what are your deficits, and the students will talk with them a little bit about their needs if they don't have a needs assessment. We will give them protocols in talking with the agencies. There's always trepidation among agencies that when you do needs assessments, you're trying to cut our funds, not help us. And I think that's natural. So we're going to meet with the students beforehand with protocols about how all this came to be, how the council's been involved, and how we want an open and fair process. And frankly, it would be my desire to prove that the need is such that we could grow the pot of money that we give to partner agencies, not shrink it, because there hasn't been a raise in those funds for a long time. So we don't want the agencies to feel like this is something that's taken away from them, and I think that's going to be real important how the students communicate. So we'll do the protocol part out of my office, but then we're going to have the College of Social Work actually do the instruments and the analysis and needs assessments. That's what we're paying them for. So some of the existing needs assessment, there was a needs assessment done in government in 2008. That sat there, and I don't think a lot of things were done with that. We had the 10-year plan to end homelessness. I think some of those major needs assessments that we have, we're going to give those to the students, plus the ones that they find in the agencies. That's going to be semester one, because I think we all talked in this committee how there's a lot of needs assessments out there. Why go reinvent the wheel? So what they're going to do between August and December is, with the help of their professor and the faculty, they're going to go through these needs assessments and look at common deficits or common trends or what are some areas that seem to be a great need. They want to come back and present to you all on December 4th at this committee meeting. We're going to have the students come and present their findings to you then. And they're also going to tell you what they're going to do the second semester. We know for sure that two of the students will be continuing with us in the spring semester. We hope maybe three or four of them will because that way we'll have continuity from one semester to the next. They will give you their action plan on December 4th, too, for semester two, where we think it will probably be focus groups. After we've honed down what seemed to be the interest, you're going to go have focus groups and try to find out more about those needs, and they will present to you again in the spring. In the summer, it's going to be passed off to the Martin School. who's going to do data analysis. They won't have students in practicum. They're just going to do data analysis, come up with some end product so that we'll have it by the end of next summer. This time next year, we should have something that we can use for partner agency applications in FY15. And then the social work students are going to come back a final semester to do a report out and dissemination to the community. So we're actually going to have students from August of this year until December of 2013. The social work students will also be doing other duties with me, with the multicultural affairs coordinator, and with the aging and disability services coordinator. They'll be having some other service things besides the needs assessment. So we're planning on them to come back to you all on December the 4th. We have a project budget. It's pretty basic. This council awarded $35,000. $12,000 will go to the Martin School for faculty compensation for the summer. $21,000 to the College of Social Work for faculty and Ph.D. stipend. And $2,000 for operational expenses, printing, travel, those kind of things. The things we would like to ask you all today so that the faculty and the students know how to move forward, they will be starting this month, into this month. we would like for some of you all probably to meet with the faculty and students to talk about your expectations, what you all would expect on December 4th so that when we don't have apples and oranges. So if some of you or a group of you would like to meet with the faculty and the students, we would appreciate that so that they have your input. And today, if there's any particular, I know I'm just right here on the spot, but if there's any particular data or questions or suggestions that you would like to give Professor Weeks or Sarah Beth Lukefeld, we'd like for you all to do that so they know. As a matter of fact, if you want to get those to me, if you think about them when you leave, I can forward it to them by e-mail as they work with students. So we need some input from you all on what you would like to see in the needs assessment and hopefully in meeting with the students. Any questions about the needs assessment for the coming semester? Have you covered the second page already? The second page is the first page. It's a one-pager. Oh, okay. Okay. I'm not as detailed as Mr. Benz. Okay. Are there any questions from council members? Council Member Henson? Thank you, Chair. And you may have said this and I missed it. I apologize. But I guess, will we be receiving, like, the questions of, you know, it's like when the assessment takes place and there will be certain criteria for the assessment, how you determine what the needs are, questions that you want answers for. Would we receive that? Like, say, a survey? I could provide that to the committee. We could let you all know what need assessments the students have found as they move forward during the semester. We could provide you all with a list of those as well as the instrument that they come up with for determining needs. We'd be glad to get that to you. Yeah, I would be curious to see if, you know, to make sure I guess there are certain concerns I have in my district to make sure it fits what I... And I would encourage you to get those concerns to me so I can get it to the faculty. Any of you all, if there's a certain service area that you have a concern about, be sure and e-mail those to either me or Craig, and we'll see that it moves into the needs assessment. I'll send you a long list. Okay. Okay. Thank you. We'll put them to work. Thank you, Council Member Henson. Any other questions? Okay. I have a few questions. Okay. Following up with Council Member Henson's question, how will you determine how comprehensive the needs assessment is going to be? I know that you're going to assign the students to the 21 agencies that are currently funded, but how broad is your scope going to be on the needs assessment? We will be asking, well, we have these major community needs assessments, the things that come from grants and the 10-year plan, and the community needs assessment. they also may want to look at the continuum of care, which is produced every year. But I would hope that when the students go out, it's going to be kind of like a chain. What assessments do you have? Do you know of an assessment out there in the community that you've used? They may want to go to more global agencies like the United Way or the Fayette County Public Schools to get data. And I think that's where we need a faculty mentor because they will have the time to devote to how to funnel all that information because it's going to be a whole lot. And that's why this semester it will only focus on finding what's out there and analyzing what we have because we really can't move forward until we do that. Okay, so when you said finding what's out there, are you going to look at all the social service agencies or supportive service agencies out there? I think that would be a good start. That's excellent. Yeah. Something I've always wanted to do is a project where we would gather all that data and then put it into a computer system where you have touch screen, and we can have those at different locations, community centers around the city, where if I was looking for daycare, I could hit the daycare button, and it would pull up the daycare and the zip code that I'm looking for so I can find it close to work or close to home. And so as they're out gathering that data, that would be some excellent data to gather. That might be a sidebar from this study. I think once we get all this data together, there may be all kinds of interesting uses for it beyond the needs assessment. Yes. They're just charged with doing the needs assessment. Right. But once we have that data bank, there might be some interesting things we can do with it. Will technology innovations that have happened, if you look at the homeless study that was done, it was done, what, probably 10, 12 years ago? Yeah. Will we also be looking at technology and how it can impact whatever these needs are as part of the needs assessment? We'll have them consider that. I mean, everything's on the table, and they will sit down. That's why we would like to meet with you all with all these ideas to say, what is it that you all want them to bring to the committee on December the 4th? Because we want to make sure they bring you a product that you all want so that we can move forward into the next semester. When we went to San Antonio this year, they have an SA 2020 plan, and it's sort of an umbrella plan for their entire city. and it encompassed everything from parks and rec to they even looked at the number of students that are reading on grade level by the third grade. And after that conversation, after Daryl gave us his presentation, three or four of us talked to him afterwards and said, once you determine what you're going to put in that plan, how do you actually attack those issues and get the outcomes that you're looking for? Another one they had was Councilman McCoy liked this one that they wanted to have the healthiest population, I believe they said, in the world on that particular one, because they were seventh on that list that we were number one on with Sedentary Cities. So one of the things that I took from that conversation was Darrell, and I can't remember the last name of the director, he said that an example of how they address the issues is this. If you come to me and I'm your financial advisor, you say, I want to retire at age 59, and I want to have this type of lifestyle when I retire and I have this much money in my retirement account, I can contribute this much per month between now and then. How do I get there? And then he or she takes all that data, they go back, they do their research, they come back and they said, here's ten funds that we believe if you invest in, however you choose to do so, you'll get where you want to be by age 59. And he said, going back to all the kids reading on grade level at third grade, we did the same thing. We looked at that and we looked across the country and we looked at who's impacting student outcomes with reading levels now, not 10, 15 years down the road, but who has a program that's innovative and that's working now and getting results fast. And so then they would come back to that organization and say, here are the agencies or here are the programs around the country that are working now. If you engage any number of these organizations or programs, we think you'll get to where you want to be. So can that be a part of this needs assessment? And I don't say that to suggest that the people that are providing programs and services here aren't doing the state-of-the-art, doing the best practices and the best things out there. But if there is something out there that is innovative that we're not doing here locally, that is a program that can just be brought in? I think that may be considered for the last semester. I think once we get through the needs assessment, identify where they are. If there's time in the last semester as the students disseminate, they could do research on some benchmark programs maybe and give us something on creative ideas. I don't see that happening, though, until the whole needs process is done. Sure, sure. Well, this is going to be an ongoing process, I think and I hope. The last thing I'll say is on the last bullet point, the $35,000 budget, how much of that in there is for student stipends? There's none for student stipends. That's kind of what I thought I heard. The money is for the Ph.D. stipend and for faculty. These students will get course credit for doing these, but there's not money for student stipends. Okay. Well, I don't want to beat this dead horse, but the council knows my opinion on that, my opinions on that. I went through social work and did a lot of free practicums. I can't. My name here. What's your name? Jack Burks. I couldn't think of your name. He's shaking his head, and we don't always agree, but he's shaking his head in agreement with me right now. So often we have students that do free practice, and I think it's a travesty in social work, and I think it's not anything that you've created, so I'm not beating you up for that. What I'm saying to the committee is I would hope that we could, and I may just make a motion, but first I'd like to get with you guys from the university and the commissioner on the side and talk about what a reasonable stipend might be for the students that are involved. and then come back to this committee and ask that we take a vote to go to the full council and suggest that we come back with some money for stipends for the students that are doing this work. Obviously, the work they do is going to have a tremendous impact on this community and a tremendous benefit to this community. And we all understand that without that information, without the work that they're doing, we can't do and we can't accomplish what it is we're trying to accomplish here today. I think we all understand that. Without the need assessment, we're just paddling in the water. So there's real value in what they do. They're good at what they do. They're working hard. They're paying for their education. And although they get course credit, you know, when I did practicums, I had like a six-hour practicum. I had to pay for that six-hour practicum. Okay, so I got course credit, but I had to pay for that class just like every other class. Except my other classes in psychology and things like that, I didn't have to go out and work also as a part of that class. So, again, not to be a dead horse, but I would like to get with you guys and see what a reasonable stipend might be and then come back before this committee and see if we'll make that recommendation to the full council. Thank you very much for your work on this, and I'll turn it over to Councilmember Steve Kay. Thank you, Chair. A couple things. I agree on the issue of stipends, and I think it would be useful to have that conversation. And I want to, I guess, add a word of caution about the scope of the work. It seems to me the focus on needs assessment is where it needs to be. And while there may be information about best practices that's useful, I would not want that to be an expectation of this work. That's just my take. I think there's enough to be done just to get a really good needs assessment put together. That may be the basis for further work. We may want to talk about that at a later time. But I think I'm fearful if you open it up to the question of best practices. It becomes a much larger study, and I would not want to put that expectation on people. And finally, as you move forward, I'd be happy to meet with people to see what you're doing, see if I have any ideas about how it might be made as effective as possible. We appreciate that. We expect to have all the students on board by the last week of August, first week of September. and once we have all the student group, I would send an email to everyone on the committee inviting you all to meet with faculty, students, and myself so that we have some direction from you all and then we hope that everyone will be in attendance on December 4th to see what the students have to present. Okay, and just finally, I think this is going in the right direction. I appreciate all the good work. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Kay. Council Member Henson? Thank you. Sorry. the mention of stipends, we already have an agreement in place with Call It Right. So if we offered stipends to the students, then we would have to come up with additional funds from somewhere. I think that's a correct assumption. Okay. I just wanted to thank you. Thank you, Council Member Henson. And, yes, that's clear. That's why I said that we would look at a number and come back and make a motion to suggest to the full council that we come up. some additional money. I'm not suggesting that we would alter the contract that we already have with the university. Okay. Are there any other questions for Commissioner? Any other input? Does anybody from the UK want to add anything to the discussion? We'd love to hear from you. We're excited to have you on board. Thank you for your time. Good morning, or I guess we're getting ready to be good afternoon. We just want to thank you for this wonderful opportunity for our students. I think that there's been a lot of talk over the last several years about town and gown, and I think that this is a perfect example of that. Hopefully we will be able to offer something to you with the expertise that is just a few blocks away. And I know that this will be a wonderful experience for our students. They'll have an opportunity to really get to know their community, to get a better understanding of how these agencies work together or maybe don't work together so well. and hopefully in their learning process they'll bring something to everybody here in council, obviously, and also to urban county government and the community at large. So thank you very much for the opportunity, and we look forward to working with you. And like Commissioner Mills said, we really would like your input early in the process so that if there are certain things that you think your particular district needs, certain concerns that relate to the people in your district that you want us to know about, that you want the students to know about. We would love to hear that up front, so we go into this process knowing as much as we can possibly know. And for those of you who have special expertise in these areas, then absolutely any help you can offer the students is greatly appreciated. So thank you again. Thank you very much. As the commissioner comes up and we transition into the summary of the youth employment update, I just want to take a second to thank Mr. Chris Edwards over here for the new projectors we have. You notice this is the first meeting we've had, in fact, from recess. And normally when we have a slide presentation, we've got a little lights in the room so that you can see the presentation. But he brought some advancements in technology into the room, and we're able to be able to read and do the things we're doing up here and still look at the projectors. So I appreciate all that you do to continue to keep us on the cutting edge. Commissioner? Did you bring me an electronic presentation for summer youth? I want to get the one. Do you have it on a phone drive now? I want to introduce to you all Maddie Morton. She's one of our program administrators in the Department of Youth Services. Maddie, how many summers have you run the youth employment? Four or five? Six. Six. This is her sixth year for summer youth employment. It was a great year this year, and thanks to this council, it's going to be a bigger year next year. So Maddie's brought a presentation for you all, and this will be the fun part of today's committee, I think. Thank you, Commissioner. I think it's all been fun, very informative. You guys have done a fantastic job, and we're making great, great progress. It's one of my favorite people in social services, Ms. Maddie Morton. Thank you. Could you tell us what the most exciting thing for you was in the program this year? Probably the fact that we didn't get rid of many kids this year. This year we only got rid of four out of 153, so that's real good. So it gets to last and last every year. But actually the program was actually exciting. I think a lot of kids had a lot of fun doing this. The employers were really engaged this year more than ever. and I think it just gets more and more, gets better every year. Okay. Thank you. Take it away. Okay, and as the Commissioner was saying, this is the sixth year that Division of Youth Services has been doing the Summer Youth Employment Program. We got this program after the closing of the Mayor's Training Center. And this year I had volunteers that helped, but I also had a part-time program I made, which is Stephanie Love. And Stephanie entered all of the summer youth employers' time, or assists me in entering all of that time every week. And also she kept up with all the data and a lot of the administrative work. I also had a lot of help from the DYS social workers, e-social workers. not only did they keep up their own duties, and they also set aside one day a week to work in Gainesway until 9 o'clock at night, and then they committed every Friday to conducting three workshops apiece for the Summer Youth Employment Program, so I have to credit them as well. And this is pretty much the focus points that we had for the Summer Youth Employment Program. We focus on work readiness. We focus on financial literacy, mentorship, and career building, and how we've done that with the work readiness. We had weekly workshops with the youth, and we talked about employability skills, job skills. We also focus on substance abuse in the workplace or the use of substance abuse in any setting. and we used the Junior Achievements Program, which was real jobs, real world. We also used the Health Rocks Program, which is from Kentucky State University, which focused on tobacco use, alcohol use, and drug use. We focused on financial literacy. We had guest speakers that came in, like we had Metro Employee Credit Union. We had the Kia. We had the social workers. We all did portions on talking about credit cards versus debit cards and ATM cards versus debit cards, wants versus needs, budgeting. We did a lot on financial literacy. We did mentorship, which is where our site supervisors came into place because the kids got to shadow them. They got to work with the people on the different work sites. We had 80 work sites this year. But not only did the work site supervisor take interest in the youth that were on their site, but also other employers on site. So we got very good feedback from employers on the different work sites on our youth placed at these sites. And then we focused on career building. We had a job fair in which we had the youth to actually go to a job fair and interview for their positions. We also had a college and career fair at the end where we had 15 different colleges to come, and the youth got to visit the different colleges, and they had selected questions they had to ask to find out how they get into the college, what are the financial obligations, and different things about the colleges. This is pretty much like a timeline of how we start planning the summer youth employment program, even though the program is for six weeks, as you can see, we start planning in January. So that's when we start the application process. We start doing the monthly meetings. We start working on the budgets and getting a lot of things approved. We start putting the applications online in March, and we start doing the youth orientations and employer orientations. and in June we conduct our first two workshops and the youth will start two weeks of work. From July to August we focus on work and we're doing workshops. We have at least four workshops during that time. We have a college and career fair during that time. We have a reception for the youth, a reception for the work sites, and we do program wrap-ups. and then in September we're pretty much closing out all of our data and putting little reports together and then we're ready to start over again in January. We'll take a few months break and then we're ready to start again in January. The application process went online for three weeks. It went online from March 12th through the 31st. we had 369 youth that applied under the Summer Youth Employment name, but we had several youth that just went in and applied for the job by just clicking any job, and then they applied. So it's hard to have a count of how many did that, but under the Summer Youth Employment Code, it was 369. And then the required documents were birth certificate, social security card, picture ID, and it is income-based. And this is a breakdown of the race and the age of the youth that attended the program. Our large race was the African American population, and then our largest age group was the 14 and 15-year-olds with 15 being the largest. And we had a couple of youth that turned 18 while they were in the program, but that is our pie right there. 17 schools were represented in the summer youth employment program as pretty much all middle school and all high schools. And where you see other is because somebody forgot to write their school down and we did not get that. So there was about a few kids that had others or they may have moved here from somewhere else. So all schools in Fayette County, middle and high school were represented in this program. And here are some pictures. This is the job fair. At the job fair, the youth, all the, not everybody shows up because we have 80, but a majority of the job sites come to the job fair and they select their own youth. So what we do is we have youth to go and they interview at the different job sites with employers. And then the youth, as they interview, they select who they'd like to work for. the employers select who they would like to have, and we go back and do a match. And that's how we place youth on job sites. Those youth who did not get selected, then we match them with other job sites that may or may not have been at the job fair. So that's a lot of work, putting that match together, because sometimes we go by first, second, and third choices, and sometimes a job site and a youth may not be a match because the youth may not have picked that job site. The job site may have picked them or vice versa. So we do a whole lot of work by sitting around and trying to match them, but we at least try to get them into a job site of their choice. If they pick child care, we still continue to try to put them in a child care facility, even if it was not the particular job they had selected. And all the youth come during that day, and we have two sessions where we have so many youth come for the first hour and then so many come for the second hour. And the employers really like that because they get to see all the youth instead of seeing just the selective ones. And this is just one of our work sites. Sometimes we have classroom-style workshops and sometimes we have physical activity workshops. And these are some of our workshops. And these are some of the youth-owned work sites. As you can see, we have a variety of work sites. We had the Bluegrass Area Development. We had the Legends Boxing. We had the Chrysalis House, Kids Unlimited. So there you have your office assistant. You have the boxing, which is like training, but he helped with a lot of maintenance work. maintenance work. We had your Christmas house, the male done maintenance and the female done clerical work. And then Kids Unlimited is a child care facility. And this is Clark Equipment. They were very impressed with their youth. And that is just a quote from what the staff said about the youth on her site. She said she'd never seen another young man that worked with such pride. So they had very good things to say about him. We did do evaluations at the end of the program, and we really didn't have many negative evaluations. Anything that might needed a little bit more work would be a little bit more initiative on some of the youth's part. But for the most part, all the evaluations were great. This is our college and career fair in which we had various colleges to come. We had 15, as a matter of fact, that came in. We had colleges. We had the KIA. We had universities. We had some programs like Job Corps and Bluegrass Area Development. So anything that we could think of that we didn't have any military, even though we had invited them. But anything that we thought youth might be interested in once they graduate from high school or if they didn't graduate from high school, what would be available for them. So we invited them. For the most part, we anticipated everybody graduating from high school, so we pretty much put everybody up there that would be for high school graduates. Here are some more of our work sites. One worked in probation with a probation officer. We have one at Goodwill. There's Imani, which is a summer camp program. Still more workshops and youth registering for different programs. And here is the complete data. We had 153 youth that we hired in. We had four that we dismissed. Of the four we dismissed, three were attendants, and one was just pretty much attitude. We had 80 work sites. They worked for six weeks. We had 17 middle and high schools represented, which 87% of our youth successfully completed the program. We had 82 females and 71 males, and that's a breakdown of race, 130 African Americans, five biracial, five Hispanic, eight white, two Asians, and the others were refugees, and we didn't exactly know the exact race, so they went under the categories of others because they usually sometimes don't put a race there. And that's all I have. Thank you for your presentation. Are there any questions from Councilmembers? Councilmember Ford? Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Ms. Morton, for the work that you do at IU. I want to make some acknowledgments. This past spring, the Commission on Youth Development and Public Safety, this was one of the areas that we brought forward a recommendation, which was to increase the funding for participation in the program. As Maddie mentioned, we have traditionally about 350 or so youth apply annually. But for the past few years, we've been able to fund about 150. And so with this council's leadership in this prior budget deliberation, we've increased that by 75. And I hope that will have an impact next summer to be able to have 225 youth to be able to participate. And we definitely want to continue to kind of close that gap between demand and interest in the program and what we're able to provide. provide. So again, I wish that you guys continue to put up the good work. What's also important that I did not realize until this presentation, and Commissioner Mills, this is why this information is so important, the partners that we have that are supporting our youth, which will soon be young folks that hopefully will be in our educational systems and also in our workforce, 80 different work sites and then also 15 different colleges. I mean, it's a But some major kudos to those folks because what they are basically providing and absorbing are training costs. Is it correct that the funds that we provide is about $1,000 per youth per job, please see, and we basically pay their wage? And so some people would think that these work sites are getting free labor. But what they're basically doing is taking the time to invest and provide the training and guidance that our young folks need. Could you speak just briefly to the sacrifices and investment that our work sites place in our youth? Yes, I can, because some of them, I mean, we actually have supervisors that wait and take their vacation after some of these employment programs are over. And what they do, they provide them with a lot of information. They teach them about if they go in the work site and they're not dressed appropriately, they do sit and talk to them about appropriate dress skills. And we tell them to treat them as if they were your employees. What would you do with your own employees? So anything that we get on the job site that needs to be taught, they teach it while they're there. So they take time out of their busy schedule, actually, and spend some one-on-one with each of the youth on their job site. They take time to show them how to do what it is they want them to do. They take time to, we have one job site that taught about conflict resolution, and they had ten kids on that site, and she would teach them how to handle conflict. So they would have staff meetings or whatever with the kids, and she would take time out to teach those different skills. So each site done something different, but they all invested a lot of time on just whatever youth were on their site. Well, again, Mr. Chair, thank you for your time. And Ms. Morrner, we appreciate your work. I'm very excited and appreciative of your program, and we look forward to continuing to make it better. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Ford. Council Member Stent. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for coming and giving us this update. This is one of the most important programs we've ever started since I've been on council the last eight years and getting this summer workforce development. As Council Member Ford said, the training is invaluable for the future for our youth and getting them introduced into the workplace and a place where they can learn a skill or trade will just provide big benefits for all of us down the road. Looking at your numbers and your data there on the screen, you had over 300 or 300 applicants? Over 300, yes. And so we were only able to hire about half of those. Is that based on the number of sites we had or based on our funding last year? Funding. So this year we added the additional 75,000? Yes. And so what number will we get to this year? Do we know yet? That would be 225. So it's about $1,000 a student or a young person. All right, and then do we set goals in terms of the racial breakdown, in terms of the types of jobs we want, in terms of the number of kids from each school? Do we have goals, or do we just kind of take it as it comes and make the best decision we can? We take it as it comes, and because all schools are represented, we just take them as they come. We don't say we have to have at least one from this school? No. And then who actually chooses the students out of the application? We do. Actually, we invite all the kids to turn it. They wean themselves out, really, when you start lowering your numbers because there's certain documentation they have to turn in to us, and some never bring it. And then when we start doing our interviews and orientations, a lot of them wean themselves out. Okay, so your staff basically sits down and goes through the application. And go over the criteria again in terms of is there certain, I assume, income levels? Yes, there is an income. We use the federal income guidelines that they use in the school system. And then there are a few kids, I think, that we let in that are not income-based because if they turned in the application, even though we have that income base on there, If they turn in an application and their income is not extremely high, a family income is not extremely high, and they've done everything we let them in. So we probably more or less at least have at least 10 each year that probably get in that's not in that income guideline. But they've done their part and didn't actually recognize the fact that it was income-based, so we don't turn them away. Yeah, I was just trying to think. Out of 300 applicants, how many do you automatically disqualify because of income? I actually put them in there. Yeah. Well, I mean, I'm just trying to see, do we really need to, you know, given youth or youth in our community, given everyone an opportunity to learn a skill or trade, I'm just trying to figure out is it best to focus on lower income or is it best to focus on all kids and give kids a chance to learn a skill or trade? I think it's best to focus on all kids. Yeah, and that's what I'm getting to in the future because, you know, it just takes one kid to learn something and, you know, be the next entrepreneur in our city. So I would hate to discourage kids from applying. And 300 is a hefty number for our youth employment, for our operation. That's a good number. Thank you for all your information. I appreciate all you do. You're welcome. Thank you, Council Member Henson. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Maddie, for the presentation. And I agree completely. This is one of our very serious issues in Lexington. You and I have worked on youth in the past, making them to be what they need to be. And I think the program benefits Lexington because they're getting out in the community, getting out of the neighborhoods possibly that they live in where there's not good role models, and getting into a business where they do have good role models. So I applaud you for that. I wish that we could, you know, there's never enough money, but at least we'll be able to hopefully close to double what we've got so far. And I am, you know, I have to question the diversity of it. But, you know, it's like, and I would be willing to help in my district do some outreach or whatever because I know there's a need. So I don't know if that's something you all have looked at and that you would, you know, possibly, you know, is the world not getting out in certain areas or whatever, but. I don't know. Okay. A lot of times with the Hispanic kids, it's about the Social Security files. Right. They have to have them. And as far as, I don't know, I mean, we get the information out, so I don't know about the diversity, why it's always like it, but it's usually heavily populated with African Americans. Yeah, I just, you know, I'd be willing to help any way I can to reach out to some more communities, more neighborhoods, I guess. You're very familiar with our neighborhood, so. And I think a lot of it, too, is with being a lot of African-American kids being in the program in the past, they're sharing the information. Right. The word of mouth in that area. So if we could promote it in some other areas, too. I know I was at the back-to-school rally with Cardinal Valley recently, and I told the kids there that the supplies they were receiving, the gifts they were receiving, was an investment. I consider it an investment in their future because we're going to be counting on them to be there for us. and I think this program is the same thing. But thank you for your work and let me know if I can help in my areas. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you, Council Member Henson. Anybody else have any questions? I have a few questions. This is a great program and I, like everybody else, hope that we can continue to grow the program over time. So I had a couple questions. How many of the work sites are multi-year work sites? You say multi-year? Year-round? Well, not year-round, but like how many of these have been back? Back year at the year. Two, three, four, five. Majority of them. So they continue to come back. We have a few. The ones, when they bail out, it's usually something going on within the agency that they may have to sit out a year because of either downsizing or under new management, but then they come back on the following year. So the majority of our work sites come back, but we add lots of new ones every year. So this year we had a few that, because of some changes within their own organizations, didn't do the program, but said they'll be back next year. How do we target the work sites? We send out letters with people that we know. The mayor does a letter for us. The Commerce Lexington sends something out and just word of mouth. Okay. And how many of the students are multi-year students that come back each year? It changes. So because they have to apply every year, they don't get favoritism because they were in the year before that. So it varies. And I can look at that and send you something to tell you, but I did not write that down. Okay. Do you know what kind of jobs the students are being given in the different work sites? Yes. They're giving clerical work. They're giving child care assistance. They're doing maintenance. They're doing landscaping. They're doing, we even have an automotive site where some of the guys learn how to put in transmissions. Oh, yeah. and change oil, and we have such a variety. Dentist's office, doctor's office, hospitals, they're everywhere. Lawyers, we have several in every kind of government department, so they're everywhere. That's awesome. If you've got students that learn how to work on cars and things, and all these other fields as well, Do you know if there are any of these relationships, like mentor-mentee relationships, that continue on throughout the year after the program's over in the summer? Yes. We've had some youth that were hired on after the program has ended. So several have. And then some have been hired on, like, to do certain duties to help out their job sites, you know, even though they may not be old enough, but the job sites may hire them in or give them a stipend or something to come back and help them do something. So we've had several sites to do that. Okay. And then do you know if there's any, you had, was it 15 colleges and universities that were involved? Yes. Are any of those institutions continuing their relationship with any of these students throughout the year within Fayette County Public Schools so that they can keep those kids on a track that keeps them interested and engaged in continuing education past high school? I know this past year we had some that did because we had students that expressed an interest when they went to the job fair that this is where they wanted to go. And I know like we had one kid, Georgetown College pretty much was with him the entire year. And so as he graduated this year, then he turned around and changed his mind with the EKU. but some of them, they select their colleges based on the people that they meet at the college and career fair and they get the information, the colleges take their information down and they have contact with them. And I've only known some that have, I haven't kept up with a lot of them, but there are several who decided on their colleges from the college and career fair. Okay. This is excellent because this is the information that we really need, and getting this information to the council will help encourage us to vote more money into this program next year and the following years. Could you do me a favor and put together a presentation that includes some of the work sites and some of the kids and come back at a later date and let them talk about, for example, the testimony that you had up there from the one company that talked about the character and the integrity and everything of the student that they had. Can you put something together and bring that back to us? I can. And include all those things, including some of these colleges and universities and other programs that are engaging these students on throughout and some of the mentor-mentee relationships that are continuing, and we can see if we can't get some more money in this program. I can. Okay. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Is there anything else? Council Member Stinnett? I just want to ask, can we get a list of the 80 work sites and what companies participated, the council, to see who they are? Because we may be able to help. If you need some more, we'll help you recruit some new ones. We'll need more. Yeah, you need more? We'll need more, yeah. Well, definitely we can. If you put these 15 people to work to and let us help nominate some people and have them contact, I guess you, and we have criteria and all that kind of stuff we can share with them. If you could forward it to the council, and we'll do our part to help you get more sites as well as more schools. There's two big schools in Lexington that aren't on that list that I'd like to see at that fair, too. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you, Council Member Stennett. Also, could you get us a breakdown of your 300 applicants? Could you get us a breakdown of how many of the 300, what schools they came from, middle and high school? It's not on, because they have to sign up on the Lexington Fair Every County Government website, and it does not ask that. Okay. Okay. And the only reason I get it is because I create another contact sheet and ask for it. So once they come to orientation, we do our own sheet with those who come. So I can give you what I have. On the 153 participants? I can give you of everybody that turned in their applications and done the extra paperwork that I needed. Can you add that to the application process? Is that a difficult? I don't know if they can add that because it's done online. It's the standard application. It's the standard LFUCG. Gotcha. Okay. They're standard on our payroll. They're in the LFUCG payroll and our standard application. Okay. Oh, so they're filling out basically an employment application for LFUCG. We may have to hire some help from Maddie next year, though, too. So that may be something we're coming to you all with. I do have some temporary and seasonal employment money in my budget, though, but when I'm sitting here thinking about all that she's doing with the extra 75 kids, we're going to have to get you some clerical help next year. Okay. Well, that would be fantastic. I look forward to that. I'm very forward to it. Is there anything else from the Council? Councilman Ford? Thanks, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to speak twice. I'd be remiss if I didn't say this at this time. I gave the defining of the commission report, but some way between knowing of the work sites, knowing those colleges, we need to fully fund this program. If we have 370 kids that want to participate, and I agree with Council Member Henson, get the word out. So if we identify 400, 500, we need to not turn those young folks away. So hopefully, and I know Maddie and Social Services, they're going to eagerly get the information we've requested. But maybe we can continue to monitor this when they come back and we think about what policy and what teamwork we can put in place to get these young folks to work. So thanks, Mr. Chair. Appreciate it. Thank you. And certainly when she comes back and tells a story, that's going to give us a reason to put some analytics behind it to say, yes, this is successful. This is what we need to do. Any further comments? Okay, thank you. Do you have anything else you want to add? No. Okay. Next on the agenda is committee referral items on page 79. Before we move to that, though, could the committee members send maybe an e-mail to, let's send it to Paul. If you have any suggestions, recommendations in terms of soliciting companies to be involved in it or any of the things that were brought up, If you want to send those to Paul, we'll compile all that, send it back out to the committee and send that to the commissioner and to Ms. Morton. Okay. And page 79. It's like we can probably maybe take a couple of these things out of committee. Let me start at the bottom here. Council Member Ford, have we done anything we need to do with Section 108? I believe so, Mr. Chair. I was reading a summary, and I believe that the leadership of our committee here has taken this on to the full council, which has endorsed the implementation of it. So we hope, hopefully, the administration can bring us back something here soon about where they are in helping us, hopefully, come close to implementing and getting this tool online. I think the committee has done its work. I think so, Mr. Chair. Okay. Let me ask you one follow-up on that. Because you kind of initiated this. Did you have a program that you were looking for that would fit this, that you want to get in the mix or anything, or you just want to let the administration come back with something? Well, no. I think, as I mentioned earlier, is that I don't think we have to get it implemented first. I didn't want to put the cart before the horse. And I think we're still waiting on whether or not we can practically implement this program. For example, just for comparison, Social Services did a great job today in explaining it to our partner agencies who are already beginning to prepare for fiscal year 14 funding and how they apply. So there's no guesswork there. It's clear as mud. There's a process. We don't have that just yet for Section 108. I'm hoping we're on our way because the council has embraced this. The administration is working towards it. I would imagine it would be similar to our block grant process, but because it's geared towards economic development, it's surely going to be some slight variations. So I think we really need to get our hands around that first from a policy standpoint and then allow all 15 of us in conjunction with the administration to pursue some viable projects. So to that end, I guess my question is, it sounds like we've got more work to do then, because something's got to come back to the council so that we can make a policy based on. I think that's right. I think you're right. The committee may still need to monitor this and work with the administration. Okay, so you want to leave this in? Yes, sir. Okay. Yes, sir, that would be great. Okay. Okay, and then discussion of creating a policy recommendation to the full council around how we fund partner agencies. I think we've made great strides towards that. And do we want to take this out? I mean, they're working on it. They're doing it, and it's a work in progress. Do we need to leave this in on this list or go ahead and pull it? Pull it off at a moment. Okay. You want to make a motion to do that? Yeah, I move to remove this item from the agenda. Any further information? Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed? Okay, that passes. And then Vice Mayor appointed a task force to look at the need for Senior Citizen Center. Appears to be complete until the site's chosen. Would you guys like an update on that? on site selection or Mr. Maloney are you back there? Yeah. Could you I know I'm catching you off guard here I don't want to put you too much on the spot but are you guys still working on a site for this? Or maybe I should ask the commissioner. Yes we are still working with the site visit. Okay. Do you guys can you come back with an update maybe in a couple of months? Hopefully we have some for you next month. Okay. Okay. Okay thank you. And then the community development block grant and its consolidated plan, I'd like to leave that in and do some work on that for the next meeting. Is there anything else that we want to add? I know we can't add in this meeting, but is there anything else that we want to take to the vice mayor, to the full council, to put into committee? Okay. Any further comment? You have a motion? You have a motion to adjourn? A second. A second? In discussion, all those in favor say aye. We're adjourned. Thank you very much.