HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSD-18-088 - Community Grants Appeal Process UpdateREPORT TO:Finance and CorporateServices Committee
DATE OF MEETING:November 5,2018
SUBMITTED BY:Michael May,Deputy Chief Administrative Officer,519-741-2200,ext.
7079
PREPAREDBY:Carrie Kozlowski, Executive Assistant to the Deputy Chief
Administrative Officer, Community Services, 519-741-2200 ext. 7395
Kathleen Woodcock, Manager, Service Coordination and Improvement,
519-741-2200 ext. 7597
WARD (S) INVOLVED:All
DATE OF REPORT:October 16, 2018
REPORT NO.:CSD-18-088
SUBJECT:COMMUNITY GRANTSAPPEAL PROCESSUPDATE
___________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:That the community grant(Tier 1and Tier 2) appeals process be
delegated to apanel of staffon a permanent basis, as outlined in report CSD-18-088.
BACKGROUND:
On August 28, 2017, City Council resolved that for 2018, it would not consider appeals arising
from the community grant(Tier 1 and Tier 2) program. Instead, Council delegated the
consideration of appeals to a panel of staff made up of the CAO, the Deputy CAO Community
Services, and the Executive Director, Office of the CAO.
Council passed the following resolution:
Community Grantspolicy, review process and
assessment framework that is used to evaluate grant applications received by the City;
and,
WHEREAS the City's standard process of allowing grant applications to appeal decisions
made on their submissions to City Council has the potential (real or perceived) to politicize
grant applications;
THEREFOREBE IT RESOLVED that no Community Grant (Tier 1 and Tier 2) appeals
will be heard by City Council in 2018 and that for 2018, any appeals be delegated for
consideration by the CAO, Deputy CAO -Community Services, and the Executive
Director, Office of the CAO, as an appeals mechanism;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back in late 2018 on the effectiveness of this delegation
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
2 - 1
This report satisfies the second component of thedirection from Councilto report backinlate
2018on the effectiveness of the delegation of appeal consideration to staff for possible
permanent consideration.
REPORT:
As directed by Council,a panel of staff considered all community grantappeals arising in both
Tier 1and 2 of the programfor the 2018 grants cycle.The following measures were implemented
to ensure a fair decisionmaking processand to limit the amount of work appellants are required
to complete the submission of an appeal:
Very clear criteria were communicated to appellants to reduce the amount of time
required to prepare concise appeal submissions.
Maximum submission length wasspecified to limit the amount of work required by
appellants.
Groups had approximatelytwo weeks to prepare their appeal submissions, which is
similar to the previous appeal process.
Process:
Appellants submittedwritten appeals by the deadline.
The staff appeal panel undertook a detailed review of the written appeal submissions
independently, evaluatingthem against the appeal criteria.
Input from subject matter staff (e.g.special events, arts and culture, community
development) was collected and considered during the decision making process.
The appeal panel met twice for a total of four hours to discuss the appeals received for
both Tier 1and Tier 2andto make decisions as a group.
Results of the appeals process werecommunicated to the appellants.
No concerns were expressed to staff by groups participating in the community grant program
regarding the new appeal process.
Tier 1 Grant Appeals
Appeal
Additional
Appeals Appeals
amount
Yearaward Appeal method
recgranted
requested
amount
Written, criteria-based appeal
201841 (partial)$26,204$1,000
reviewed by staff panel
201732 (partial)$124,969$16,000*
201632(partial)$105,679$22,306*
201542 (full)$43,027$21,913*
20140000*
* Oral presentation to Council; not confined to specific grant criteria; new information allowed
2 - 2
For 2018, the Tier 1 grant budget increased by approximately 1.7% across the board (although
appealing their grant allocations were allseeking additional grant funds, over-and-above the
grant awards they had been allocated for 2018.
Fourof the 59 groups in the Tier 1program appealed their 2018grant allocations.Three of the
four Tier 1groups had previously experienced successful outcomes when appealing to Council,
which may have been a motivating factor in their decision to appealagain.
Rather than appealing the initial grant allocation award, two of the four appellants submitted
entirely different requests than outlined in the original grant submissions.This practice provides
those appellantswith an unfair advantage over other Tier 1 groups: an opportunity to submit a
revised request for considerationand additional time to prepare it.
Tier 2Grant Appeals
Appeal Additional
Appeals Appeals
Yearamount award Appeal method
recgranted
requestedamount
Written, criteria-based appeal
201830$15,9200
reviewed by staff panel
4 (3
20177partial;$54,000$6,500*
1 full)
201674(partial) $49,400$8,427*
201511 (partial)$12,000$1,400*
2014106 (partial)$44,600$8,200*
* Oral presentation to Council; not confined to specific grant criteria; new information allowed
The following chart summarizes the 2018 Tier 2 grant allocations:
Submissions received54
Full awards20
Partial awards26
Denials7
Disqualifications1
Tier 2 grants are allocated through a rigorous volunteer peer and staff review process based on
alignment with Council strategic priorities. The 10 members of the Peer and Staff Review
Committee spent a total of 220 hours of independent and group time reviewing grant allocations
and making grant allocations. Note that the Peer and Staff Review Committee and the appeal
panel are made up of different members.
2 - 3
In 2018, three of the 54 groups that applied for a Tier 2grantappealed their allocations. One of
the appellant groups appealeddisqualification from the process, the second appealeddenialof
its request, and the third appealedfor a grant award greater than allocated.
Following a careful review of the appeals, the appeal panel upheldthe Peer and StaffReview
Cto deny all three appeals.
However, the staff appeal panel had something to offer all three of the appellant groups:
In the case of the disqualification, the group was encouraged to meet with staff for
assistance in improvingfuture complete applications.
In the case of the denial, the appeal panel suggested a possible partnership with Special
Events staff to provide in kind support for eventsthat align with City activities.
In the case of the partial allocation, the appeal panel supported the Peer and StaffReview
Ca$2,000increase over the
2017grant award.As the amount of funding the City has available for grants is
limited, decisions must be made within the available funding limits, and not all grant
groups can receive the full amount of their grant request.Further, if Tier 2appeal requests
are granted, funding sources must be identified.
CONCLUSION:
Based onthe2018 experience, Tier 1and
2 grant appeals to a panel of staff accomplished the following:
Ensured an easier process for community groups by providing explicit criteria and limiting
submission length, thus making expectations clear and the appeals process
straightforward for appellants to navigate.
Provided a fairer process between community groups seeking limited grant funding.
Eliminated the need for an oral presentation to Council which can be very intimidating.
Mitigated the risk of appeals based on previously successful appeal outcomes rather than
grant award criteria.
Ensured a fair and responsible decision making processfor the appeals panel(given
budget limitations) by:
o accepting written appeals,
o providingappellants with very clear guidelinesregarding what an appeal
submission requiresincluding appealcriteria and submission length, and
o consultingwith sector staff with subject matter expertise.
Removed the perception of the possible politicization of the appeals process.
Ensuredthat appeal decisions are strongly aligned to the Council approved objectives of
the grant programand policy.
It is important to note that groups participating in the community grant program expressed no
reservations or concerns to staff before, during or after the appeals process.
2 - 4
to delegate the appeals process,a change in
the composition of the appeals panel is recommended as a further enhancement.The following
staff have an intimate knowledge of the sectors served by the community grantsprogram, yet
are distanced from day to day contact with potential appellant groups:
Director, Neighbourhood Programs and Services (with expertise on organizations/groups
providing municipal services in the area of community support and development).
Director, Sport(with expertise on organizations/groups providing municipal services in
the area of sports and recreation).
Executive Director, Economic Development (with expertise on organizations/groups
providing municipal services in the area of arts and culture/special events).
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
the delivery of core service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
None
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM Thi
council / committee meeting.
CONSULTThe Peer and Staffreview committee provided invaluable expertisethroughout the
initial assessment process. In addition, the staff appeal panel consulted with sector staff subject
matter experts to inform their appeal decisions.
ENTRUST Council entrusted the staff appeal panel to consider community grantappeals for
2018.
PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER:
On August 28, 2017, City Council resolved that no Community Grant(Tier 1and Tier 2) appeals
would be heard by Council in 2018, and for 2018, appeals were delegated for consideration by
the CAO, Deputy CAOCommunity Services, and the Executive Director, Office of the CAO.
This resolution was passed in response to
applicants to appeal decisions made on their applications to City Council, which has the potential
(real or perceived) to politicize the Community Grantprocess. Council directed that staff report
in late 2018 on the effectiveness of this delegation for possible permanent consideration.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY:Michael May, Deputy CAO
2 - 5