News


Palo Alto looks to shield two nonprofits from grant competition

Council committee votes to remove Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care from competitive process

As senior and youth populations continue to grow in Palo Alto, the city is looking to change the long-standing relationship between City Hall and the two nonprofits that are most involved in serving these two demographics.

The change is meant to shield the organizations -- Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care -- from the year-to-year fluctuations in funding that local nonprofits receive from the city as part of the Human Services Resource Allocation Process, a city-funded grant program. The organizations are by far the biggest nonprofit recipients of city dollars. In the current fiscal year, they received $868,014 in grant funding ($431,185 for Avenidas and $436,830 for Palo Alto Community Child Care), which comprised 76 percent of the total program budget.

Under a proposal that the City Council's Policy and Services Committee backed by a 2-1 vote March 25, with Greg Schmid dissenting and Greg Scharff absent, the nonprofits would be funded separately rather than vying with dozens of other organizations for city dollars.

The grant program has been in place since 1984. In addition to consistently awarding Avenidas and PACCC more than $400,000 each in annual grants, the program provides much smaller contributions to more than a dozen other nonprofits, including Adolescent Counseling Services, InnVision and the Downtown Streets Team.

The change, which still has to get the approval of the full City Council, was made at the request of Avenidas and PACCC and with full support of Councilman Larry Klein, who noted that the two agencies have long had a special relationship with the city because they offer critical services that would otherwise have to be provided directly by the city. Both nonprofits were launched by the city in the 1970s to address a pressing community need before splintering off and becoming its own agency.

Avenidas, formerly known as Senior Services Center, provides an array of services for seniors, including case management, exercise and enrichment classes, day-care programs and services for home-bound seniors. The agency has been receiving city grants every year since 1978.

Palo Alto Community Child Care has received city funds since its inception in 1974. It is under contract to provide after-school services at 11 of the 12 elementary school sites, which serve about 600 children, according to the city. The agency's existing HSRAP contract helps it administer the city's child-care subsidy program for low-income families.

Given the two nonprofits' long-standing "special relationship" with the city, their continued inclusion in the broader grant program makes little sense, Klein said.

"I think it's misleading to include programs that really are city functions with ones where we're making relatively small contributions to -- organizations that are very useful but really not taking over, in a sense, a city function in the same way that PACCC and Avenidas do," Klein said.

Executive directors from the two agencies have supported the move. In a joint letter, Janice Shaul of PACCC and Lisa Hendrickson of Avenidas noted that because they make up the lion's share of the budget, they are often seen as attractive targets for funding reductions when other agencies look to join the allocation process.

The city's Human Relations Commission, which makes recommendations about which agencies to fund, has recommended on several occasions increasing the Avenidas and PACCC contracts by a lesser amount (or decreasing them by a great amount)than other grant recipients, the letter stated.

"When this happens, PACCC and Avenidas are forced to lobby the City Council directly to take action in opposition to the HRC recommendation," Shaul and Hendrickson wrote in December 2013. "This dynamic is uncomfortable for the City Council which relies on its commissions to deliver recommendations that it can support. And it is uncomfortable for the sole-source agencies because it puts them in competition with other human service providers with which they often collaborate."

The Human Relations Commission has been against the change in the process, arguing that removing the two largest grant recipients from the program would lessen the funding program's visibility and influence. In January, the commission voted to keep Avenidas and PACCC in the process but to include a provision that guarantees that these agencies will not lose money because of reallocation to other grantees. The provision also guarantees that the two agencies will receive the same cost-of-living increases that all other agencies in the program get and that in the case of budget reductions, the two agencies will bear their share, but no more than that.

Jill O'Nan, who chairs the Human Relations Commission, said she and her colleagues were primarily concerned about the generally low level of funding that the city has been granting to nonprofits, which has yet to be restored to its pre-2008 levels. She said the commission wanted to keep the two groups in the allocation process to make it more "visible."

"This community is unusual in our nation in that we have such a huge disparity between the wealthy and the non-wealthy," O'Nan said. "The people who are not wealthy really get marginalized to the point of being invisible. They are told by counties, states and private foundations, 'You don't need money. You're in Palo Alto.' It's really important that our city recognizes how isolated some of our agencies are."

Councilman Greg Schmid agreed that it's best to keep all the human-services agencies in the same funding mechanism, which allows the council to have a more comprehensive view of community needs.

"I think there is an advantage to having a human-services budget, rather than breaking it up into little pieces," Schmid said. "It's the one time of the year where the attention of the council turns to range of services."

But Councilwoman Gail Price agreed with Klein that Avenidas and PACCC have a special relationship with the city and should not be required to compete with other agencies in the grantee pool. Removing them from the broader grant process would make the budgets for these recipients more predictable.

"I feel by separating it out there may be an opportunity here to reduce a certain amount of angst that goes through this process," Price said.

Comments

Posted by JO, a resident of College Terrace
on Mar 31, 2014 at 3:37 pm

I don't understand the concern about reducing the angst for particular nonprofits. Nonprofits with cozy relationsips with the City deserve as much scrutiny as other nonprofits, Perhaps even more.Have we forgotten pAHC and Maybell already?


Posted by Sally, a resident of Crescent Park
on Mar 31, 2014 at 4:56 pm

It's a sweet heart deal for Larry Klein's cronies. They help him dominate the Council and he funds their beloved causes. Just look at the board members and staff of both Avenidas and PACCC and compare that with Klein's and Price's donor lists... Shame on them both!

Avenidas and PACCC both do fine work but they should not be allowed to operate beyond the scope of Council review.


Posted by Anonymous, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 31, 2014 at 7:16 pm

This doesn't pass the smell test. If these are such great non-profits, they will win funds through normal competition. If the City really wants more stable funding for non-profits just issue an RFP for a multi-year grant. Something fishy is up.


Posted by anonymous 2, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 31, 2014 at 10:31 pm

I agree. After recent experience with a venerable non-profit that may possibly be in the process of being looted, and witnessing just how poor the oversight of non-profits is, it just seems like removing an important competitive process is asking for trouble. Oversight may be work, but it's ultimately what keeps non-profits healthy.

I support PACCC and Avenidas, but I don't see a compelling reason for this change.


Posted by palo alto resident, a resident of Palo Alto High School
on Apr 1, 2014 at 9:00 am

While I don't dispute that both these organizations provide extremely valuable services, I don't quite understand why they would get special treatment because "they offer critical services that would otherwise have to be provided directly by the city". Is the City required to provide child care and elder care? I also believe that school district was required to open the PACCC on site school child care as part of the agreement not to sell some school sites and the Cubberly deal.

Can anyone clarify this for me?


Posted by Crescent Park Dad, a resident of Crescent Park
on Apr 1, 2014 at 11:10 am

Wonderful organizations. Very bad idea.


Posted by source of funds, a resident of Midtown
on Apr 1, 2014 at 12:08 pm

re:" they offer critical services that would otherwise have to be provided directly by the city" I second the question above; "required" by whom or what law?
RE: source of these funds, I believe the City receives "Community Development Block Grant Program - CDBG" funds from State and/or Feds that must be spent. Are those funds used here, or these General Fund $?


Posted by Jean, a resident of Community Center
on Apr 1, 2014 at 12:16 pm

My husband and I will 'probably' continue membership in Avenidas but will no longer give extra financial support since it chose to get involved in politics - that is, support of Measure D - the Maybell issue. It publicly endorsed the Maybell issue in the Pro-D advertising. I am sure that not everyone who belongs to Avenidas endorsed the measure, and Avenidas has no business getting involved pro or con in any political, i.e. ballot issue or even endorsing a candidate. We are NOT alone in this opinion. It makes no difference about how we personally felt about the ballot issue. It is a 'matter of principle'.


Posted by T, a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Apr 1, 2014 at 12:24 pm

Is the youth population in Palo Alto growing? How does one research that? I feel like there are less kids around...not more.


Posted by Joe, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 1, 2014 at 12:26 pm

This is absurd! With the $1.5M a year that the City is giving the Palo Alto Housing Corporation for twiddling their fingers, this ear-marked $600K brings the total for these three NGOs to over $2M a year--GUARANTEED!

Anyone have any idea what this money is going for?

Any chance the City Auditor will ever audit these operations? Probably not! The Auditor audited Comcast once, but it's not likely these NGOs will ever come under the same kind of scrutiny!

Another example of just how broken PA City Government is!!!!!


Posted by anonymous 2, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 1, 2014 at 4:10 pm

There is very little oversight over nonprofits, which makes me worry about why Larry Klein is being so chummy with the better-funded ones in the waning days of his term.

The best place I know to get information on what a given nonprofit is really doing is

Web Link

You can pull up nonprofits' tax forms here, and this website has the most complete assembly of them that I have seen.

If you want to know what the money is going for, what assets they have, etc., look at their 990s.

Tell us what you find!

PACC by the way, is different than PAHC.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Scottís Seafood Mountain View to close, reopen as new concept
By Elena Kadvany | 12 comments | 3,704 views

Who Says Kids Donít Eat Vegetables?
By Laura Stec | 9 comments | 1,889 views

Breastfeeding Tips
By Jessica T | 11 comments | 1,699 views

How Bad Policy Happens
By Douglas Moran | 20 comments | 1,197 views

The life of Zarf
By Sally Torbey | 8 comments | 821 views