 So this is a case study in logic models and she used Bertie, her dog, as the case model. So basically you saw the dog is unhealthy and she needs to lose some weight to be healthier. And her goal, the large goal is for her to get to a healthy weight and she needs a plan or program to get there and she needs a way to measure progress toward that goal of getting to a healthy weight and a way to determine what is working and what isn't. And so this is a program design evaluation and use of a logic model in everyday life. So basically the logic model works like this. It documents what our activities are, what the agency's programs, whatever projects do, and she lists some there. And then it says what we did. So this person read a couple of books, she walked the dog. So the outputs are about what actions we took and how output measurements is how we measure the actions that we took. In this case, you know, on the education piece, yet the output was the reading of the books and the measurement was that they wrote something about what they read, whether it be a report or whatever. They kept daily logs of what they fed the dog and exercise the pride dog. So these are all output measurements and the activities that we do. But outcomes is what changes because of the activity that we have done. So in this case, since they read a book, the outcome is somehow I have learned more about how to keep my pet healthy and keep them at a healthy weight. And because my activity was to feed them right and to exercise them, then the outcome should be that my pet will be at an ideal weight. Then they talk about time. We don't usually do timelines in our because we do one year contracts. So the idea is what happens in a year. But, you know, they can talk about how long it'll take for it to happen. Some programs are longer than others. And then how do we measure the outcome? So for example, the first one is hard to measure how much you've learned unless the program you were doing did pre and post exams to see how much you learned about pet health and weight. But the second one is pretty easy to measure because you can weigh the dog. You can see the dog. So I'm not going to spend a whole lot of time on the activities piece. But here are some measurements of so if you have an activity, how many people, the old saying butts in seats, right? That that's an output. How many people attend a session? How many people take the walk? How many people do the actual activity? That's the output. A lot of our agencies, this is where they struggle. For them, butts in seats is an outcome. Right. And that's not that that's just getting people to your program. The outcome is what happens because of the program. Are they more self-sufficient? Are they healthier? Are they, you know, did they resolve their legal issue, et cetera? Do they feel safer? And that's that's really what we want to get to. And that's the outcome. So these are these are good outcomes. 75% of those who attend the session will ensure increased knowledge, right? And you and or will have attained 75% will attain their ideal weight. Those are the outcome. We're seeing what has changed because of the activities. Outputs measure what the activities are. They measure how they work. But outcomes measure what happened, what changed happened. And again, the timeline, it just depends on the program. Some take longer than others. But we contract for a year. So we want to try and find out what their outcomes are within that year. And we measure them so they hear they're using. I love my pet assessment tool. And hopefully most agencies will have created or use. I mean, this is where the best practices piece comes in. The lies best practices should have some type of assessment tool or agency should be able to create some. And of course, in the dogs case is you weigh the dog. And there's a dog in a much healthier state and their ideal weight. So any questions about I hope this makes sense, but any questions about outcomes or I'm going to stop sharing. But how we use outcomes or what we're looking for in outcomes. Yeah, Brian. I really like that presentation. The logical way it just kind of goes through it. I think it really helps differentiate the outputs and outcomes. So I don't have any questions. I do have a protest that they're two different dogs. Birdie has a black nose, the dog at the end as a pink nose. But we will have accurate outcomes on ours. Your attention to detail, Brian, is one of the reasons why you're a great board member. Are there other questions for Ellie Berto? I have a question. Ellie Berto is, I think this presentation is actually really well done, like Brian said. And it's easy to follow regardless of how much knowledge you have about this type of thing. Is this something that can or could be made available to our agency partners, like or something along these lines? So it is on, so for those agencies when they apply, it is on the resource page. It's been on the resource page since we did it. Yeah, it is made available to them. Great. All right. Thank you very much. Seeing no other questions or comments, we will move on to the next item. Reviewing and commenting on the Human Service Agency Funding application to provide input to the funder's collaborative. So Ellie Berto, I had a question and Caitlin. So did we want to discuss anything about the outcomes? I thought we were going to talk about the outcomes, Karen. Okay. We were or were not? I thought we were. Because this is a different. Yeah, so did you want to pull up that? Because we did include that in their. In the packet. In their packet. So continue on, Ellie Berto. Yeah, tonight's the Ellie Berto Show. Sorry. It is the Ellie Berto Show. I'm the backup band. So that's right. Sorry. Yeah. So I'm going to, and you've all seen this before. This is not nothing new, but I'm going to pull up the outcomes that came out of the work that Brian and I did. What I added to it this time was the actual outcomes that are currently, and they're called goal areas that are in the application for our agencies to select. It's a drop down list for them. They see it in the instructions, but then when they get to the application, it's a drop down. I can show you all when you go through the application where it is. But right now, the background or the context for this is the city of Boulder is also doing this work too. I think their committee is meeting tomorrow to talk about, because the city of Boulder is kind of doing their new human services master plan. And so they're kind of doing the same thing. So Karen and I thought this is the perfect time for this board to provide input. And so they're going to provide input. And then the collaborative, we will decide what are the goals that we want to move forward in our collaborative application. So I thought this was the perfect time to just get input. They may, you might be fine with them, and that's okay. Or you might have other ideas. And this is the time that we want to capture those ideas and then share it with our partners. And so I'm going to start backwards. I'm going to have it up, but I'm going to start. I'm going to, there's going to be a lot of scrolling really quickly here, so I apologize for that. But I'm going to start with what is on the application right now. So I apologize for the screening for the, okay. So can everybody see these? All right. So these are the current goals on the right that, and they didn't copy over really great. Sorry, I can see at the top one is in a different blue, but those right ones are the actual goals. And you've seen them in our goals, because when Brian and I did this, I shared these with Brian, and we just copied some of them, or we have some other goals too. And there may be some new goals that we want to add. And on the left is how they fit with our priority areas, right? You'll see all our priority areas there, and you see some have more than others. But those are the goals, and these are our priority areas. Okay. So I'm going to start scrolling up, and then we're going to see. So I think the first one. And Elisabetta, real quick. These are the goals that are in the current funding that the collaborative as a whole allows folks to choose. So this is essentially the goals that are agreed upon by everybody in the funding collaborative. Correct. Which is us, the city of Boulder, and Boulder County. Okay, thank you. Boulder County Community Services. So just to, again, just to set context, our collaborative right now is made up of Longmont Community Services, City of Boulder Housing and Human Services, and Boulder Community Services, Boulder County Community Services. Boulder County Housing and Human Services has a separate funding process outside the collaborative. They do it differently because they have different pots of money. They have federal dollars they got to deal with. So they have, they do it differently than we do. But these are the 16 goals, there should be 16 of them, that an agency can select from when they're selecting their programs or when they're, when they're in the program section of the application. So I think the first one is safety and our safety net. No, self-sufficiency came up first for me. Okay. So the, some of these, of course, are in, but for example, we have now bridge the, and we could rewrite this Brian, bridge a digital divide, or we could say increase access to increase digital access or increase access to devices or internet or something. But just want to get folks' input. So don't worry about the blue or the green. It's really about the orange right now. And to see if these are, these are the outcomes that we want to propose to the collaborative. So Eliberto is the outcome synonymous with the goal? Yeah. Okay, thank you. So Graham in the application is called goal area. But basically, yeah. Yeah, I don't know why they called it that, but that's what they called the goal area. Kimberly. Okay. How much in the weeds is, are we allowed to go into with the orange? I had a clarifying question up, but I don't know if it's over analyzing. Well, you can ask it. Okay. The question is, it's under program outcomes at the bottom of that first box that says increase ability to earn livable wage. I guess my question would be, do we want to increase access to positions that offer livable wages, or do we want to increase educational opportunities so people can be applying to positions that offer higher wages? So I don't know if that's too detailed, but there's a real difference there in my mind. There is. Well, I don't think we can increase access to positions. That's not out of our control, right? That's, we don't have the kind of control to say you need, we want you to create positions and we don't give that amount of funding. We don't have that level of funding to do that. So the educational opportunities that increase your ability to earn a livable wage. Yeah, I think we could change it to that. I know Karen's taking notes, it's great. So yeah, that we can change. I think that, I like that question, Kimberly, because the other thing I'm thinking though is that some of our agencies, in addition to providing education to employees, also actually provide information to employers to help them. Because we had one applicant, or we had one, yeah, one applicant last year that was talking about ways that they worked with like smuggers, I think it was they told us, where they were basically helping identify specific skills that like smuggers was looking for to then help match people. They were helping them with language and having people that could do interviews in Spanish or provide information to the Latinx community in Longmont about those jobs. So that seems to me like we're not funding them providing those positions, but things that help employers do that better. I would say would be fair game for this and I think would be helpful. It seems to me that those are exactly the right questions only because the semantics matter. These outcomes should be a really effective filter for us to say, for instance, does this program, does Spanish translation increase the ability of a Longmont resident to earn greater income? Or whatever the language is. And my recollection is that these boxes are filled in from the needs assessments. And so it was kind of parsing the language primarily in those needs assessments. And then part of the idea was understanding is this really what does this actually mean to the community on the ground? How do they translate something like this? How do they think about something like this? But I think probably some of these can be simplified, but in terms of representing what was found in the needs assessment, they seem to me to be accurate. I guess the question is are there changes where the needs assessment maybe some things need to be modified a little bit? Or is there just so much language that it's confusing because we're parsing different ideas and regrouping? Maybe on this one, I think it is like kind of parsing that, but I think looking at the beginning part of that first outcome, one thing I'm seeing is increased earnings, employment or eligible benefit, like increasing the number of livable wage jobs in the community fits within that. But maybe that outcome is really improving overall number of community members that have access to livable wage jobs or benefits and steady employment. Any one of those things kind of fit in there because that addresses both the supply of those jobs as well as the employee side. So in that context, Caitlin, oh, I'm sorry, Karen, go ahead. No, go ahead, Brian. I'll be quick. In that context, it's almost like there's a header and then there's the tagline or the subtext. And because I look like when I look at the one below, there's a general idea and then a lot of the text really kind of paints a picture of what that idea looks like in practice or in more detail. So, yeah. Karen. So I just wanted to clarify, Caitlin, what you were saying, because I think in terms of having access to jobs that pay livable wage, I think Ellie better to address that. So our focus isn't necessarily on making sure that on the supply end of things, that there are livable wage jobs for people to be able to access. That is in the whole economic development arena. That's really not our role. So I just need to clarify because it sounds like that you were suggesting that that would be part of this outcome. And I really don't think that it is. I think that's actually really useful to recognize, to say that that, even if we have an applicant that comes in and that's what they're doing, that that's not the role of this funding, that this funding is really about that self-sufficiency and resilience and sort of helping the employees. It's really helping people to prepare and to be successful and have the training and education kind of what Kimberly talked about. Yeah. I think that's a really good question, Kimberly. And I think obviously it creates a lot of discussion here, but understanding that that's not what this funding is for. Like we talked about last time, there's a whole lot of other funding areas that contribute to some of our overall goals. So Karen, I can update with the outcome based on what we just had discussion, but I want to make sure that we continue moving on to the next pillar. Arrows don't work. I hate when my arrows don't work. All right. Here's health and well-being. Kimberly. Sorry to be the one to speak again. It's just, I guess, wording here, prevent, maintain, and improve. They don't seem to be the same kind of direction towards physical health and behavioral health. So I would love to see prevent poor health outcomes and then maintain and improve physical health and or behavioral health. Just because I think it's confusing that the word prevent doesn't really state what it's preventing and it works against the other two verbs. Okay. So to prevent poor health outcomes and maintain and improve physical and or behavioral health. That sounds great. Okay. Does it, does it make sense on this one to actually split it into two different ones because there's physical and or behavioral health, but then there's increased mental, increased crisis mental, like there's mental and physical health here? I wonder if we should just like have those be two separate things in this? Like all the things that go under mental and behavioral health and all the things that go under physical health? And I think maybe access deserves its own too. So one thing is so and I see your hand Brian, but so let me just finish this thought and then so one thing is to maintain and improve physical health. So these are folks that are engaged in with a program already, but then there's also the increased access piece which would be a separate a different outcome and because that's more around how do we increase engagement and that's how you would measure that is increased services or increased engagement in those services. So those could potentially be be separated as well. Brian. Thank you. I agree with that and I think you know one of the challenges here is it gets very loopy and I mean that like in a looping sense right because improving access is a means of improving physical and or behavioral health. So is it you know some of it's just semantics. I mean I think at some point there's probably some of these where we just say well pick that one because it's six to one and a half a dozen the other, but you have a good point. Yeah. To me access almost reads like an output and it's not an outcome and so we maybe want to focus in on what are the why do we care about access because it improves you know physical and mental health prevents you know we've got increased crisis mental health services therefore we see a reduction in XYZ you know we have suicide prevention or we have you know reduction in HIV transmissions in in the county or those types of things. So phrasing our outcome as an outcome and not an output might also help our our agencies. Graham. Yes thanks I have I guess two concerns about separating it off into two if we do separate it then I think we have to assign different weights and different programs might fall into different categories and thereby you know achieve a potential funding cap or percentage based on those weights right or am I misunderstanding that I guess that's one issue and then the second one. Go ahead. So let me answer that so I think so the weights and we and this is part of the work that we continue and we need to do we have you know that but the weights in my mind grant really come at the activities not necessarily outcomes or at least that's the way that we did it last year is it was around the waiting piece came around activities the outcomes are more of the filter right in other words if they if their outcomes fit the programs have to fit the outcomes or have to be aligned with the outcomes to get scored but the weighted piece was in the activity level. Does that make sense? It does yeah thank you and then I guess my other concern is it's all it's not always clear to me where the line is between the physical and the mental and thinking of like substance abuse or or mental health problems it's I don't know and this is not just like an anti-dual list you know Boulder County sentiment it's like I don't know it's all so intertwined it's hard to to separate. Kimberly I think I saw your hand it's a shy hand tonight um I think identifying the fact that there are providers specific to mental health and providers specific to physical health is important so I definitely agree Graham that there is that you can't have you know behavioral health without some level of physical health but the the providers giving those services are often very separate so I think that's important to note depending on who's applying for the funds. Okay Karen do you think we got what we need to? You're on mute Karen okay um Ellie Berto I had one quick question for the outcomes when they fill out the application I'm just mystery I just am not remembering when I was looking over the applications do they pick one outcome or can they pick multiple outcomes? Well they can pick one outcome for programs so if they're applying for multiple programs they can pick multiple outcomes but yeah but it's one outcome for program and and that's hard sometimes for some agencies because some agencies do multiple things. Yeah um yeah my thought there was just like whether the the separation because providers do tend to do tend to do one or the other but keeping them together allows a little more flexibility for the for areas where maybe it fits under mental health maybe if it's under physical health so no I don't have any strong opinions about that but just was wondering if that was that filter is basically you pick one of those and then you've got a okay yep great thanks. All right moving on to the next one I'm moving on if we don't hear anything. Anyone have comments? You can wait forever Ellie Berto but I move it. Thank you Brian. Thank you this one's fortunately compared to the others relatively straightforward I think the you know there's some question about the details underneath again those are more kind of like descriptive adding a little more color to it so it seems somewhat straightforward. Okay so some of these outcomes read to me like outputs again and I wonder if the outcomes would be more like you know because I think we've had folks say we have fewer people you know fewer kids coming to school hungry fewer families reporting you know not having sufficient nutrition we have an increase in families saying that they are not having you know food or nutrition related health issues so I wonder if we could pull out some of the specific in outcomes because providing a larger volume of health food higher quality food high quality prepared food those are like that's what we're giving but what why do we care about that we don't want kids we don't want families to go hungry we don't want anyone to sort of be in you know have food insufficiency because we know that that has impacts on mental and physical health as well as you know overall you know ability to work and educational outcomes. Caitlin thank you for that I think that makes a lot of sense I'm wondering if it's something like increase percentage of total days family has adequate access to healthy and nutritious food or something like that no not I'm trying to get away from the access but basically they have enough food healthy food on the table to meet their needs yeah you know whatever that looks like. So I think that's that's good and here's here's the challenge with that because this this area so for example you're saying you know how many kids came to school hungry first that's a great outcome reducing number of kids but unless the school district supplying who would measure that who's going to so the challenge with that who's going to measure that outcome. Well we had several we had several applicants last year indicate that they did before and after surveys and one of the questions we saw was you know you know how how many days this month did you go did you have insufficient amounts of food for your family I think was like one of the questions and they did like pre and post so but I don't know if all the programs can or could do that right and maybe from the output is okay because we know that this output is like in and of itself we know it has effects that sometimes we just can't even measure because we know that it impacts so many things when when people go hungry. Kimberly I wonder if any of our county partners like WIC or SNAP would have information around food insecurity of the clients that they're serving which would definitely be a more measurable outcome. I also think rates of obesity among the population would be another measurable that would directly you know address some of the outcomes listed here in terms of healthy food. I don't know if that would be appropriate for this. I think the challenge is that you you can provide all the healthy food but you can't control how people eat and so those larger community ones are great and they're hard to measure. That's been my experience is that you know they're probably the best outcomes that we could have but they're hard to measure when they're that when they they're so all-encompassing of the whole community. Karen. So I think just uh so Elliberto I just wanted to clarify so we are gathering this input which is great from our advisory board members and then and then you're going to have a you're going to discuss this even further with the city of Boulder and Boulder County representatives. So just a reminder so this is great input and we're not then talking about this so we so you know we don't have to come to resolution but it's really about these are great ideas we're capturing those and then there'll be further discussion which we will come back. Right and negotiation ultimately we we can we're this is really wonderful stuff yeah and there has to be agreement from the other partners because I don't know what Boulder's going to bring to the table come Friday right come Monday once they because they're meeting tomorrow night to talk about this so but this is wonderful and and to keep it funny I think those large ones are great and maybe to Kate this point maybe we add them as potential outcomes but we keep this one we keep this one available but we think about adding those those outcomes that you mentioned too Caitlin. Yeah I mean I'd be interested in what the others have here like to think about like what are the outcomes that we're hope that we're wanting folks to measure other than just like oh we gave a bunch of food away um like cool if you gave it to a bunch of people that already have access to healthy food is that helping the community um what do you measure how are you measuring that this is going where where it needs to be and creating the outcomes from it so um but that's yeah okay okay that's great that's great oh this is huge this is the biggie this is it's always has been always has been the biggie yeah and this came out of a lot of the the needs assessment any feedback oh go ahead Graham the second one relevant still we think since I think schools are reopened or are reopening that's a great question I don't know I mean I think that we're gonna can in less or until you know I think we've still from what I'm here and what I'm seeing is we've got two to three years before COVID is like completely and you know I think we're still going to run the risk of kids being you know having to quarantine for two weeks um the impact on them as well as their classrooms and their families um I also think employers um you know many employers closed offices um may have to move because of you know economic impacts and so forth so I think we're going to continue to see some level of impact from these um for a while yet and going into the next school year we may see uh impacts on educational outcomes for kids who are out of school for a year um or not doing very much so Brian I think the last one maybe could is more of a tier three okay box than a tier two and and it's it's really broad any it's basically the reiteration of the safety net pillar tier one in some way I don't know doesn't seem to be at the same level okay a bunch of these focus on kids and like you know we've got like school achievement um schools being closed um readiness for kids um that last one is really decreasing unhealthy and risky behaviors and educating and training the workforce are the only two that like address adults in some way um and I'm kind of curious if there's some broad thing that we can bring in that would address some of the like that education and skill building or if like that ends up falling I think that the very first one we had things around like how do you prepare for jobs and so forth so maybe most of them fall in there rather than this education and skill building section that makes hate when when you look at the activity that's linked to decrease unhealthy and risky behaviors I'm I'm guessing that's also oriented at children yeah I mean the the interesting thing there is I feel like some of the stuff around health also falls into that decreasing unhealthy and risky behaviors so I think about like we had the organization last year that wanted to provide um that was basically providing um like resources and education around like sexual activity and teen pregnancy that would be that's an activity but that's also like that's health but it's also decreasing unhealthy and risky behaviors so um I think that falls into the Ellie Berto's comment that some of like this can be really hard on some of our um some of our applicants because it's both life is never neat but I do agree that that the bottom one for sure should either probably be a tier three or should be somewhere else I would suggest otherwise I think they are pretty straightforward the having gone through this you know once before it it just like there's always an output that leads to an out that one person's outcome is another person's output you know and it just keeps going down the the line until we're all dead and that's the final outcome and you know it's so at some point it's like it's just going to be imperfect right but they seem logical other comments or questions on the outcomes for this safety this education and skill building okay I think we're ready to go to the next one Ellie Berto safety and justice um one outcome I don't see here that I think we talked about that I would propose adding um is services or programs that are designed to reduce recidivism and provide support to folks coming out of the criminal system in some way um because we there's really clear indications that recidivism is reduced when there are sufficient supports and reduction in recidivism has you know basically helps provide more safety to a community as a whole so I would propose some an outcome that is geared in that direction that would account for things like you know while courts are not meeting in person making sure that people have access to phones so they can show up to their hearings you know because if folks are not dangerous but our can't attend their hearing like that just does not that ultimately doesn't make our community safer so Brian Kimberly I'm trying to make you feel better about the three times you spoke up you don't feel bad um so I wonder if the top one again thinking about outcomes in this term access if access actually is more of an output than an outcome if it's more like increased utilization of advocacy and legal representation resources or something you know where like just opening the door may not be enough you may have to actually pull people through the door or make sure they know it's open because what we really want them to do is be able to use these resources so I like that yeah I like that right because I mean so I'm going to tell you the ones I've had the hardest time with this one and and the health one because a lot of times it's about it's about getting people to the service more than about what the service does for the people um you know for example when I talked to several legal of the our legal providers like you know we don't we don't know it takes a long time to do a case so it's hard to measure you know where was my was my situation resolved I think that's the best outcome for legal representation right is resolution of the legal situation but you know maybe it's yeah maybe it is utilization and saying increased utilization of legal representation and it is a sort of a butt and seat type of thing but it focuses on the the resident side of the equation right so it's not just that they're open more hours it's that more people are using them I don't know that's that's always a tricky one yeah I mean that this one does feel like in many ways access is the barrier for things because you know non-criminal things people don't aren't entitled to a lawyer but we know like for immigration I think there's something like if you have a lawyer you're 10 times more likely to be successful in like appealing an immigration decision if not more than if you don't have a lawyer so like like literally just accessing it is enough to make a difference um in the outcomes so do you want to leave it as access or do you want utilization or do you want to add utilization to it like they have some choice I think adding utilization would work here Kimberly I think that's great and I think by extension um the second box increase participation in programs that provide protection and support um so I think that's a big barrier survivors of child abuse and domestic violence may not actually utilize those services or participate so that would be the true measure I think of success um by the same extension of access versus utilization Brian Shakita raised her finger uh not her digital hand but her okay Shakita um what I found a lot of times is I know you're talking about utilizing legal rep legal services but a lot of times people can't afford legal services right I think that is for me that would be the key thing like I know there are attorneys out there but can I afford those attorneys you know and then the eternal the attorneys that are providing pro bono services are always booked up so you're talking years down the line before you can get a pro bono attorney so what happens then you know yeah I know everyone knows there's legal references representation but can you afford and that's what that that's what increasing access is about so but maybe it's less about like maybe access isn't the right word there maybe it's um improved affordability um increase in number of cost in clients served uh increase in number of cases that they're able to take um or something like that like so that is like access but it's like access is not maybe not the right word because everyone technically has access it's just whether can they afford it does the person have time and so maybe we just tweak that slightly to be increase affordability um number of people served number of cases able to be serviced or something like that and that may be in the program activity if it's said provide affordable legal support that would presumably then support the outcome of increased utilization so maybe it falls more on that side okay anything else on the safety and justice pillar okay on to the next one I think it was the last one questions or comments on these outcomes yes brian I think you're going for the prize oh my god I'm I don't hate to hear myself talk I'm going to give you the zoom crown I'm going to try to make this the last comment but we know that's not going to happen so the I think this is an excellent example of how interpreting the needs assessments can be really challenging because in the top box we have a specific target audience which is at-risk families individuals and youth we know what we're looking for housing stability like that that statement to me is a really good outcome the bottom one is kind of vague it doesn't you know it's just generalized and the yet I know they were both expressed in the needs assessment in some way so I wonder if are are they actually different do we have a different audience or different customer base for the top than the bottom we do we do so typically the ones on the bottom are not housed the ones on the top are housed and we're trying to stabilize them got it thank you and for the bottom one I again I wonder if this is just instead of increased access it's maybe increased capacity for transitional housing or shelter and increased utilization because we I mean more transitional housing and shelter like some of our partners provide transitional housing and if they're able to provide more beds or more locations for that that's better and you know folks you being able to utilize that I like to utilize for this funding I don't like we don't this funding doesn't fund building of more beds or I think this is more on the program side than the than the construction or the capacity side unless the capacity is that we're going to increase case management in transitional housing right but I don't think we with this money we fund well but like I think of like hope one of the things they funded was employees to be able to keep their shelter open additional days which increased the capacity that they could do right like because they couldn't do it unless they had someone who was employed who could work the desk and and so it wasn't necessary and it was very specifically shelter for them right right yeah I just don't want I just don't want to be confusing so that I mean that's that's kind of Kathy's yeah the realm this one might be interesting to see what the other collaborators collaborators say as well of like how you know what the outcome is there you know yeah because because I think the LA version does point you know this particular pot of money is more for operational support and we use our CBG our home our affordable housing funds to really work on the rehab acquisition and construction of of units so what if for this one we're actually not even looking at increasing access to it so much as increasing support like operational because you mentioned like we talked about like caseworkers and folks that provide those and so it's like maybe providing operational support to reduce transitional homelessness or you know or something like that like reduction in number of people on the street or something like that um well well some outcome right there that like supports is doing I'm thinking that that that that clicks something in my brain so maybe the outcome is increased housing exits for clients in transitional housing and shelter or increased successful like I mean a house just successful exits because that's really when I think about the agencies we fund that's what they use this money for is to help people move out of the transition situations right right that's what they use the money for typically yeah I think I think alberto you're you're on it we can figure out the language but yeah it's really about it's it's a different level of stabilization it's moving from either unhoused or temporarily housed into more permanent stable housing so I think we probably if I'm understanding that which I think makes makes sense and and I think we have samples of language from that with our homeless solutions and so I think those are good distinctions so I've noted it okay awesome great anything else on this pillar uh Karen Phillips you know I feel like I'm a little bit of a simpleton here but the reason that we are doing this the purpose of this is for organizations to pick uh outcome to get their money is that the purpose of all this that's exactly right it's really about so I think so I think it's it's twofold Karen I think it's one we want to share our values or our what we feel are the goals or outcomes that we think are important for our community with our agencies and then two it's it's them sharing with us how their work aligns with what we feel with the board and where the collaborative feels is important for our community that's the way I look at it okay okay thank you and it's not just what we feel it's it's also linked to the assessment right right what what we what we learn from the community is yeah experiencing so they pick one of these and then go for it okay got it yep yeah and I can show you where they pick it in the next the next part there you go it's coming up okay moving along then Eliberto it is still your show so take us away I'm gonna stop sharing here um and I'm gonna go to the next one um bring it up okay and I'm going to share it so the next piece again because we're in the midst of getting ready is looking at the actual application so this is the 2021 application the first piece is about the agency so we asked for a description about the agency their purpose function of the organization unique services um and their strategic goals um we asked them to upload a board director's table uh we asked them to we talk about inclusive board and staff practices we asked them to describe what their plan to create increase and maintain diversity and inclusive practices are and then we give them a table to fill out to to demonstrate that diversity um Eliberto just a quick question I know we're going through this is um would you like folks to give feedback or suggestions as we go through this or ask questions what's how what's the best way to proceed here and what's the goal that we're with looking at this so I think if there are if there are suggestions I think those are fine so we are going to be you know to Karen's point there's further conversations but I don't know how this application is going to end up I did have a meeting last week about it and Boulder had some things they wanted to to change already so for me this is just giving me um helpful input that I can bring back to the next meeting yeah I think it I think it's really about if there is and I you know Eliberto I think we probably wanted to review a section and then stop and get feedback so if there are if there are tweaks in the language or if there is you know some question that you think we should add or something we should take away if you can just provide that input to Eliberto and then when and then he will take it again to the to the funders and and they'll they'll really kind of um review that and negotiate what what what changes are made and what needs to say the same so any any any thoughts on the agency narrative piece um one thing I was gonna suggest is this inclusive board and staff practices it asks for your organization's plan it does not ask you to report on how your organization has already implemented anything um and what has been like whether you've tried something because I think we probably have seen many organizations that come in and are like oh yeah we've been talking about this but you literally see no results um like I'd love to understand what their history is of like trying to do this um and have they've been successful at it okay we can do that other feedback or thoughts on this section the the narrative and other information here for the agency seeing none I think you can move along Eliberto so they're just tables um are they gonna more tables um around projected clients um we do ask them about uh to and we don't really get tons of stuff here about any type of narrative so but we typically don't get a lot of data here to be honest then it's the budget these are the things these are the the first start with revenue where the revenue comes like there's a lot of things you can drop down you can add you know you can add things under these um so for example under other foundations you can add as many foundations as you have or you want um and just to clarify this is the agency budget the overall agency and then the program for which you're applying that budget comes later right that comes in the program piece Eliberto sorry could could you go back up age with that demographics right now it's just a narrative would it be possible to provide sort of like a blank table where they could provide like what demographics they track um so that we can see it more easily I know some of them don't but like if someone does um we could definitely ask that we could definitely ask the group if we could because it was hard to compare that um just and to see that when they give a narrative of it and they don't actually like put in you know hi we serve you know only women or we serve the lgbtq population and here's the breakdown by race or things like that like it would help us at least see like what you know what demographics are you tracking and why is that important and like what's the breakdown of the the clients you serve based on the demographics you track I yeah we can ask for sure uh brian thank you on the budget one thing that I've I've kind of always been confused by is the amount of degree that agency should add like some agencies under salaries for instance will list individual positions for their agency budget and then the salary and others will just say salaries and have one number is there an intention of what the the collaborative is looking for there so I would say right and Karen can may have other thoughts for me at the agency level I don't see why an agency would break it down by individual salaries I think for me at this level it's all it's just the overall um personnel cost okay there is a reason to do it at the program level if you're asking for funding for a specific position within the project so I think you will do it by do it by habit but I'm not necessarily interested in at the agency level the breakdown I don't care if you have thoughts on that so I what I don't remember Eliberto is is what is in the instructions is so it we've gone this particular advisory board not not you all here but in the in history historically we have asked for and the agency budget we've asked for salary breakdowns of their of very specific positions and and and then sometimes we haven't so I I I think the Eliberto's point I think the value when really understanding the the salary breakdown is at the program level you know rather than the the agency level agencies pretty much push back about um putting that um that information in the in the application and I and I would say in in in the past some of our advisory board members have um have um made judgments about positions that either are making their price too high or they're maybe not making enough money and you know and I don't know whether I don't think that's really the purview of this advisory board so um so I mean that's that that's really what I know historically so I wonder if it could say like cumulative or something like that where we're really kind of giving some direction on you know what level of detail I can look at the instructions and I can bolder sometimes ask for more than we do so I can also I can bring that up with with the collaborative too Brian great hi Deanna welcome we're currently going through the application and giving feedback we're asking questions about sort of a section at a time um to so that Eliberto can take feedback back to the um funding collaborative since this is a shared application between um well city of Boulder county of Boulder and Longmont okay thank you sorry I'm late everyone hope practice was good okay go ahead Eliberto so then the next piece also within the budget there's always an accent you know um um you know if you have a negative you need to explain it um or if you have an access you should explain it as well uh most agencies try to have an access there's very few that try to zero out there's something to zero out but most try to have at least a little bit so they can add to their operating reserves um but that's what that that piece is and it's a narrative question um and there's also an important piece here and that's the agency's reserve the agency reserves because that's part of what me and Karen are at evaluation we do evaluate reserves um and typically a best practice is between three and six months of reserves uh of the operating reserves um so I know I've I've deducted points if an agency you know just doesn't have reserves for you know to something were to happen that they couldn't continue so that is an important one to us it seems like that policy may bear some reconsideration for a couple of years following COVID imagine that's a good point that's a good point during their reserves yeah I'm pretty sure many agencies did so may have to be a little more lenient on reserves because it may take a while to come back well and I think it also is it provides the opportunity because they usually explain it so it could be that what we learn is that agencies that have that have utilized a reserve you know we're we're able maybe to come through and um the the pandemic in a in a better place than if they would not have had any reserve so there's there's a story to tell for sure right so then we now we come to we come to where you all do most of your work and that's that's the program section um so let me show you the first thing that we need to see is the goal area of focus so the work that we just did this is where it's reflected and it's it's a drop down once the goal area the outcomes are decided upon they will be they will be a drop down right here um that agencies choose um and then we come into I mean this is really the bulk of the application um which we'd ask about so to to some of the the conversation we were having earlier this is where we ask that community change right question knowing that it's hard to knowing that it's hard to track and measure community change but we want to know what community change are they interested in addressing knowing for whether they may not be able to track right all all how their program impacts for example obesity rates right there's multiple variables to that and their program may not be the only thing that changes that but we want to know what that that's what they're trying to address does that make sense yep anyone have questions about that it says we go down here go ahead Karen so actually I had um at at the beginning when we're talking about the goal area of a focus I'm I'm thinking we we need to rewrite that intro just a little bit because it says um what what goal area fits the proposed program so it almost like the program is I think it should be flipped I think we really want to talk about um you know the goal area what goal area are you um you know accomplishing because it almost sounds like the tail is wagging dog this is the program that I want to offer and then here's where it fits I know it's a detail but I think it's really about this is the outcome we're trying to accomplish and you know and and and how you are proposing to um address it so I just think it's it's tweaking that intro just a little bit okay that makes a lot of sense Kimberly go ahead um I had a question on that same area it says that the program spans more than one goal applicants will need to complete another program application and logic model so I know that was referenced earlier I'm just thinking back to the risky behaviors of youth and how that can be under education but it might be more appropriate under health so would an applicant have to do two applications for both of those areas yeah you only get one one area per for application and they they could apply for the exact same program and the same amount in two different goal areas and we could choose to fund it under one and not the other correct you know that's a great question I don't know if we've seen people do that but that would be like maybe it's possible they can apply for more than one program but I think what we're trying to indicate is that they have to even though there might be multiple um areas that they try to address or outcomes it's it's still it's still really one one program and one outcome they can apply for more than one program but they have to make a choice about what's the primary outcome they're trying to accomplish right but this sentence doesn't say that so we need to have it more clear right because I read this and say the program spends more than one goal applicantly to complete another program application and logic model for that goal I don't think that's what we are so that's a great question that we need to do some clarification but I because that's not how we're doing that in practice right great question also strikes me as like we're asking applicants to determine which of the outcome like which of our outcomes it is um and trying to like pigeonhole it like you know they might apply under health and education because that's where they think it falls but like when you look at it it really does fall under housing stability or something like that um and so if they pick wrong they might not get funded because they picked the wrong category that it went in because we put all of you know 50 you know 35 percent of our funds toward housing stability um so that's one thing we're like we're asking them to do it but then we we've moved them I guess I was gonna say we've moved them for that very reason it says like well you know so it's it's it has been a conversation um sometimes among the legal providers so like legal aid um or boulder county legal services and said you know I shouldn't be pigeon pigeonholed in legal services what I'm really doing is I'm helping you know we're helping with housing stability or blah blah blah so um so we've moved um entities okay got it um for that phrasing one thing we might consider is like which of the following um program outcomes best fits what you're trying to accomplish or something like that um with this program um or which of the following like community needs does your program address okay yeah we'll definitely look at that okay uh I don't necessarily want to go through each of these questions if you get a chance to look at them I think just if people have if if members have any suggestions that would be great any questions or suggestions around these these questions okay I think you're good to move on elli bairto okay so we go back to demographics here's where we ask them how many unduplicated clients they're serving in longmont their age race ethnicity I guess this is more that part's more important really than what the agency the overall agency serves since we're funding the program and not the agency right right that one is both on the board demographics and here that one's weird to me because male female transgender like there are duplex there's duplication in there because someone may be male or female and transgender um and so like the totals that one just is weird to me and I think that it should probably be like I don't know if the funding collaborative like anyone else has brought that up but um do we take this from census Karen I forgive you I don't know but I'm imagining I think it's a good question to bring up with the the partners um certainly there's been a lot of um a lot of different you know language and how people want to be referred to so I think that is that's one that we'll have to be we'll have to look at and see what and what do we ask there right honestly if it comes from like uh federal guidelines federal census or how there's you know one of those yeah yeah we can definitely look into that one and then again to your point earlier Karen if you want we could try and add a table here to see if they if there's yeah demographics that they you know blank table I don't know if that's possible in the system the system is limited to some to an extent but we could definitely ask yeah or is I don't know if that's something they could like attach something if they have other demographics and encourage that that is like you know if there are other demographics you you track for your you know who's being served you know please attach that so that we can see it um okay that might be easier I'll I'll bring that up okay so then the next piece is really the funding request budget and this is where we're asking them to provide program revenue uh and this is always I always always have issues with a few agencies here and I'll show you where the where the issues are um so it doesn't that's weird it didn't copy it right so you're you're seeing it so this this basically looks like this basically looks looks like the agency one you're not seeing it but it just it has all these different it for some reason it didn't copy it right I just noticed it right now uh but um it it has it's a table and they can put all different sources of how that agency is funding um and then this table is where it gets tricky the the expense one because we're what we're asking them to do is a you know up here we ask them what their request is on that first column right so we want 15 000 from Longmont right what let's say this is 15 000 and here's all the revenue this one has all the revenue from the program in you know everything for foundations donors etc and then we we what we want them to do is say okay so we we want to list all your expenses we know that we can't cover all of your expenses so we want to know how you're going to use our money and then we want to know how you cover the rest of the money rest of the expenses that's what the other funding sources are uh column is for and there's always confusion there um so that usually affects the access or shortfall um but that's basically how that works is we want to know where all the revenues come from for that program and we want to know how you're going to what your what your expenses are but in particular if this is this is only for those that apply to Longmont if you would apply to Boulder you would have columns for city of Boulder and um Boulder County right this is only for us at this point but that's how that works and then they have an access or a shortfall for the program any questions uh brian baritone i'm i'm looking at the language i'm going to pull out my copy here so under funding award expenditure the the first paragraph makes sense and then it says second paragraph says please demonstrate how requested funds from each funder from each funder will be expended for the program during the grant year your program budget for each funder should total the amount you requested in the funding request section of this application uh and i'm wondering if that's a little confusing because the funding request in my eyes is just what i'm requesting from city of Longmont so brian this this application is not typical because they're worthy only ones that did an application in 2021 so typically you would have up here you would have city of Longmont request city of Boulder request Boulder County request in that bottom column that bottom row okay and then other i assume there's another like if you're getting not no there no it's only because you're only applying to us but you're asking for expenditures for the entire program right and that's where the other funding sources come that far right column right and then typically you would have two more columns one for Boulder County and one for city of Boulder for my if i understand what you're asking brian if you go back a page where it has like it has 2021 program revenue so it'd be like the line item on the left so it'd be like united way $15,000 would go in that 2021 program revenue column right there's going to be no funding request from anybody for that but then you may have like city of Longmont and it will show up in the city of Longmont funding request there right so generally any line item would only appear in you know you'd have the you know city of Longmont you might have $15,000 as your total program revenue and that's what you're requesting from Longmont to me exactly exactly right it's just that this this application doesn't have the others because we're the only ones who had an application so we removed the other two columns does that make sense brian yeah i i think so yep and i think and then of course there's a budget narrative um and that's it any other feedback or questions from folks on that application ellie barato and karen do you have what you need for for that all right um that i think we're moving on to the next item on our agenda which is city investment in human services and other approaches for determining an amount the amount of the investment so this may or this you karen you're just continuing on i'll open it up so um and and i don't know whether i don't know whether you we need to pull this up as a as a um something to look at but i believe um at the last uh advisory board meeting we talked about staff talked about that we would be requesting in the 2022 budget a um the to increase the set aside of funding for human service agencies to 3% that the current what was um what was allocated in the budget for 2021 was 2.52% we have been you know we've been on a path um to to basically increase the set aside amount to 3% over a three-year period we we didn't get as much as we had hoped for in the 2021 budget because of the state of of revenues if you will so um we did go ahead and we we've made a request the our budget process hasn't closed yet it closes the end of may but we did put in a request for for taking that all the way up to 3% at this point in time i can't tell you what that means in terms of an increased amount of revenue because we have not our budget office has not yet projected what that amount of revenue will be for for the city of longmont in 2022 um our our revenues for the first three months i haven't looked at march march just came in but our revenues for the general fund revenues for the city of longmont have been pretty darn strong the first three months of this year so for what's that that's worth that that's a better that's better than um oh my gosh we're we're looking at a reduction so so i think the question that came up from the advisory board is so what does 3% mean you know is 3% um what other entities use i mean how what do we compare it to in terms of other um other entities that fund human services you know is there is there a benchmark and i think the other thing that and so that in the question was well should we be instead of saying 3% of the general fund budget general fund revenues for the city should we be looking at some other metric to decide what what should be what we should be setting aside for human service agency grants so i think it was like should it be a per capita what what what else should we be looking at as a metric for an appropriate amount of money to be requesting from the city council to support human service agencies through this grant program and so um elli burto took a a stab at at that um and also reached out to city of boulder and in boulder county really to find out about you know what what do they use in terms of determining the amount that they put in their human service agency grants every year there also was a um just a question about an acknowledgement that the city of uh longmont also funds a variety of programs directly and a variety of services directly so there is a broader base of support that our city council funds beyond the human service agency grants and so so that is what elli burto put in your packet just and that really would just be for some you know uh discussion it's our it's the it's the beginning of that conversation about a week ago we said okay it's time to look at the agenda and put that together and we're reviewing the the notes from the meeting in april and we're like oh we said we are bring this back so um so bad on us we've made it a point now to uh the week after we have the meeting we're going to look at what we made a commitment to so that we weren't that we aren't surprised by something we said we were doing we didn't allow enough time to do that so so we can continue to you know flesh this out what um what we have in your packet when it talks about other human services provided by the city what we can do is we can put some dollars to that we did not put dollars to that we have a priority based budgeting program in the city and each one of these particular programs um we can pull out um the amount of money that goes toward that and we just um we we didn't do that so we we will put the dollar amount to um to that uh for four pages of programs that the the city funds directly so that you can have a better picture of of that investment so i apologize that that we um we gave you a partial presentation so so anyhow what would be great is um any conversation that you have about you know is is this helpful are we on the right track is there some other information that you would like to see um so i'll just i'll just kind of you know leave it at that and invite your your your comments about what else would be helpful thanks so much Karen um Graham so are these programs funded by the city because they're staffed by the city or commissioned by the city or there's city oversight in more detail than like the grant process what like why do they get money without this process and other nonprofits it's a direct it's it it would be it's a it's a direct um service that the city is providing so it just would be like the police department budget or the parks budget or the firefighters budget so those are services directly provided by the city and they are um and they are directly funded by the city and in their their funding whether they get funded how much they get fun is that is that all filtered through the same sort of community feedback loop and loop and prioritization that that we do here when we take we figure out what matters to the community and then fun fun things yes i mean that process looks different you know then we um then we do that in the um then how we do that for our grant funding so i mentioned and what we can and what we'll do um Graham is send you a link so we and and actually many municipalities throughout Colorado and I think out the the country are using what we call priority based budgeting so um so that is how we come up with um the prioritization you know if if you will of of the services and how much you know different services do receive so there is there is uh we have a a a waiting system um for for the service that helps put that puts the service and either um a priority one two three or four tier we um we do every so often and I don't it probably I'm just gonna spit ball it here it's about maybe every five years um that we go out and we do get input from the community about about the community's priorities um so that is all written up in and you can find that on the city's website so I we will send you a link there's a lot of and you can just at your leisure go through that um and and see all the the processes that go that goes into that so so like in in theory if you um if you are um you know a level one program which usually means it means a lot of things means like you you have no choice but to provide that service it's a mandate to provide that service um there's there's various criteria um that then these each of these programs gets scored based on that criteria and your overall score um helps to determine in what tier that you um that you've you've you fall so to speak and then what that should mean is that a city government should be investing investing a um a higher proportion of its funds in those services that are say level one that are that meet that higher criteria or priority and and they and the city should be investing fewer dollars in those programs that are at level four for example not that you would never ever fund a ever not fund level four services but but it should if we say these are the highest priorities then those are the things that probably should get most of of of the money so you know example public safety right maybe not the good example but you know it is that is the that is the role of of city government and um and so that gets a higher rating than say many of the programs that we provide in community services where um you know so it it might be great that we have um you know a Lamont youth center that provides a lot of services that help um youth development services but um but it probably doesn't that really is kind of more of a a a a choice that the city makes versus it's a mandate that we provide for the safety of our community through fire and police services not that the other isn't you know so so so clearly children youth and families isn't you know they're they don't have a special tax two special taxes well actually they do have part of a special tax actually but they're they're not going to be they're not going to have a $50 million budget as compared to say um you know fire and police albert you're smiling how am i i think you don't protest too much kimberley did you have a question or comment that helped graham that's a long answer to your question but there is a whole big process that we will send to you and it will make more sense thank you sorry i just wanted to thank you for putting this together i really appreciated seeing the trends over time and it was especially interesting to see the numbers broken down based off of the poverty level too which was really helpful to see how that changes the numbers so thank you for all the time you put into it yes agreed um one thing i thought was interesting was i just did like a quick search for what city of boulders 2020 general fund budget was to see how that like 2.7 million dollars that they set aside compared to their overall funding and they were at like 1.6 percent of the general fund assuming that like my numbers matched up um for the right years um so the fact that like yes they put more into it and but they also apparently had significantly higher like total general fund revenue um what i found interesting is when i reached out to my colleagues um none of them knew how that number was put in place uh they just know it's a number that they've been working with for years but nobody knew how that number came about i thought that was interesting um so yeah i they said this is a number and on occasion we'll ask for an increase uh boulder county in particular asked for cost of living increase um but yeah nobody knew exactly how it originated it's just the number that they've been working with interesting uh brian i really appreciate you putting this together and i i love data i i think there's always something to learn in it so seeing the trend year over year and kind of you know some of the aberrations that happen uh and being able to compare it to other municipalities i think is really valuable because it's good to know like when we're being perhaps a little unreasonable in what we're asking or you know taking for granted what we have or knowing that perhaps we really do need more um so i find it very helpful thank you i want to echo that like comparing it to the poverty rate and then seeing sort of like the trailing because obviously what set aside for a year is like decided the year before and then you don't necessarily know the poverty rate until you know a year or two later because of like data collection and so forth so it's interesting to see that like 2017 the per capita based on the poverty rate was really low but then the following year looks like you know there was more put aside and there was there was some effective work there like it's almost like you see that the the poverty rate dropped significantly between 2017 and 2018 so even though that was a low per capita number in 2017 there was a lot that you know whether that's because it wasn't all coming from the human services funding um or something else like you just at the very least you can kind of see that there's there's an impact there so so it's it's it's data i don't know if it um compels any of you or the group to think about our our metric or our set aside for human service agency grants any any differently so so absent that we'll ask for three percent and then we'll continue to you know you know to to massage this i mean i think it was a great question i mean it was like so what's what's so magical about three percent so it was it was a great question and i think something that is um worthy of our considering to to look at that and karen i i would add that you know it's great to be able to compare to communities and also recognize that i like palm beach i don't know what their per per capita number is because there's probably not as much need i'm i'm and you know i have no clue i mean people say the same thing about boulders so um but i think it can be helpful to have this kind of year over year because we largely know that it's not enough i mean there's still not enough affordable housing there's still too many people who don't eat regularly all of that but we can see there's progress being made and you know then it becomes something that we can actually work with rather than just hyperbole or an emotional reaction to a situation okay great so i i think kaitlyn that's it for this one unless um we hear anything else and then i think ellie berger has one more show for today okay i don't see i don't see any other comments again thank you for for helping put that together and give us a context of what you know the funding that we're doing what context that operates in um i don't think it doesn't sound like anyone has a like you know burning need to change that funding request but just being able to see that and understand the context we're in i think is really really helpful um so ellie bear toe back to you you got new all right so last thing um just because the board asked for an update on the american rescue plan uh we karen and i presented this to the same ring community uh council um a few weeks ago and the truth is we're still working on i mean the caveat is there's a lot of conversations going on about how this fund is utilized i will say i did learn this week um there's quite a bit of money coming in for rental assistance to the county i think i heard uh around 17 million dollars um so there that that's good to know there's quite a bit of funding for rental assistance um but i'm going to go through this quickly this is this is based off on something that was done for city council previously um and i just i we just took the highlights of it and there's more more to come uh we are still working on on figuring all of this out so um this is this this 15.3 million is the current the this what we call the cv ref or the corona virus relief fund um wait i'm sorry this is this is the estimate that we're going to get 15.3 million actually that has come down oh see uh good didn't know that it's it's probably about two million dollars less than that is the new revised estimate so things are changing as we speak um and i think having worked on the cv ref fund i'm so happy it's more flexible uh it was very difficult to work with that funding it was very complicated and um we did help a lot of people with it uh but it was it was challenging um and so we're going to get 50 right away and then we're going to get more later um so that's good what can it be used for well it can be used to respond to the public health emergency and that means a lot of different things uh but here's something it can it can it can help households and we're looking at that in particularly around utility we we've we've learned that there's a lot of utility assistance needs and i am really advocating to see how we we did have a program with the cv ref fund to help with utility needs so we want to bring that up that's been an issue uh we can help small businesses we did that with the with the first round as well with the cv ref fund and we did help uh npo's uh nonprofits uh we did help we didn't we had a lot of childcare providers too when it comes to specific industries i'm not sure we did much for tourism travel and hospitality we'll see if we do it with this with this round of funding um and so we can provide grants to employers we can make investments in water sewer or broadband speaking of the digital divide and in fact i think i saw something in the paper um about new funding that allows for more help uh for next with next light it was it was in the paper this this week um and we can also fund our own services as well so in particular i'm sure there's conversations around recreation and the fact that they lost a lot of revenue due due to the lockdown and people couldn't access those services what's different is that we're last time it went through the county and then to us this time we're getting it directly um and this time instead of doing reimbursement the issue with reimbursement is you got to get ready for audits and that has been i've been working on childcare stuff since since we got done with done giving out the cvrf fund because we want to be ready for an audit and that's been a lot of work uh getting ready for those audits and it's not over just yet um and that we we're still trying to figure out whatever revenue replacement is um so we're still going to be dealing with audits but it's going to be different it's going to be more real time than what we the way that we did it this time with the cvrf funds oh sorry um and then there is a project fund that we can work on capital projects so we're still figuring out what this means at this point for capital projects i'm not sure it's going to go to each state and of course the state will have a lot to do with it um but i'm not sure if you know anything more about this Karen but idea yeah um so that's basically all um here's some just broad categories housing retention efforts like i said 17 million in in the pipeline for that uh providers family children so we we may be helping childcare providers some more uh business assistance um so like our boost grant that we we gave 1.2 million dollars to local uh businesses including some nonprofits um expanding of health care in particularly around around um um vaccine uh work and some infrastructure and then here's some specific examples um so we can do direct funding for local governments grants for child care providers grants for nonprofits uh funding for mental health um so there's a lot of money coming and we're still trying to figure out exactly how we're going to use it um Karen are going to be in a meeting on Wednesday morning to get some some more information about this and i've invited our our recovery manager to that meeting as well so that's it that's what we know at this point thanks elliaberto seems like i appreciate all that staff is doing to wade through the you know the eligibility the amounts what we're allowed to use it for where it's going to go um it seems like you know that's a full-time job in and of itself just to figure that out um not to mention actually like administering the funds so really appreciate you being able to pull that together and and sharing it with us um does anyone have any questions or comments about that it's pretty exciting this is a uh a very unusual opportunity it seems to give this level of federal funding with that kind of flexibility i was thinking that rent stabilization or like the rental assistance and so forth that that amount um has the potential to be you know to really stabilize things for many people in our community um at a time when things have been very expensive and there's a lot of instability both for tenants as well as like landlords um like just hearing that amount i'm like oh that's that actually might make a huge difference when you know eviction moratoriums are are not there um that we may not see the like the rush to foreclosures and evictions and so forth that they could really destabilize the community for for years really you know and i think the other thing that um that i will you know quickly mention is is is that because we have done a lot of work collectively and um collaboratively within the county there are continued conversations about how we can leverage these dollars that each community is getting to really make a big difference in specific areas because these are obviously these are one-time funds and um and and we we talk about it in in terms of the the last disaster that we had which was the the flood and um and what we were able to do with all of that investment to help us in recovery was the the the millions of dollars that went into housing acquisition and building more affordable housing units so out of that disaster we were able to add over a thousand affordable housing units throughout boulder county so so we're kind of looking at those big investments too so certainly helping people recover but if we are also looking at by 2035 boulder county will have 12 percent of its housing stock be permanently affordable think about what this what these dollars that are coming to all of the communities can do to help us really move forward in a huge way uh you know some of those um significant goals as it relates to housing so we're trying to look at all of those kinds of things and determining how to you know really how to use use these dollars we don't want another pandemic for a while we don't want to we it's good to have all of this investments um but we certainly don't want to have um we don't want to have that level of investment if you know what I mean for for more disasters um so I think Karen had her hand up yep Karen I was just wondering how are people going to know about these things how are people going to know that we're going to be able to get money for rent and things like that so I think so there I know the so a lot of the funding for rentals going to the housing helpline and I know they've been doing and and are planning more right social media type of stuff that um so that that'll be happening throughout um getting stuff out there of course word of mouth is huge um but yeah there is definitely something to get the word out there yeah I think it's a great it's a great point so um so there's has to be lots of different ways of communicating that and you know it's it's not unlike what we're seeing with uh you know with the vaccines and really looking at um equitable access so there isn't one size fits all that will um help make sure that we're connecting with all members of our community that could benefit from the resources that are available so that is um absolutely something that right now we're trying to figure out what the heck we can do with it and um but also you know we need to have our mind on how to make sure um folks really know about this incredible resource great point I really uh I I really want to thank you for also like highlighting the that housing helpline um I've seen I've seen questions um multiple times on like social media over the last month um where I've shared the link to you know where people can call for that and a number of people have been like I had no idea this existed um so um and it sounds like from what I've heard it has been really useful for folks to get connected to the right place um so hopefully hopefully some more awareness of that will you know continued increasing awareness for that all right any other comments or questions on this and do we have any other business seeing none I will entertain a motion oh yes Karen I don't really have any other well I kind of do it's really the question that we talked about initially um and maybe we'll we'll put that on our June meeting is when we see what level clear is all about um we might want to have a discussion in June if we want to um if we want to continue to meet virtually if we want to start meeting in person or what the heck we want to start doing so um so anyhow that will be on our radar and you know we'll we'll bring back that conversation in in June if that's okay if you want to do another virtual meeting in in June and we'll we'll we'll talk about do we ever want to get together again so so that's all great all right if there is no other business I will entertain a motion to adjourn the meeting motion to adjourn seconded by anyone Shakita seconds we are adjourned see you all in about a month thank you everyone have a great month talk to you soon bye