The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1990-02-05-HSC-rpt.pdf gebruary 5, 1990 (Th HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE FISCAL YEAR 1991 BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN The Human Services Crimmittee i charged with advi ing the Selectmen on human tervice policies and their implementation and on matters pertaining to the structure funding and coordination of human services in Le-ington. The Committee is pleased to submit this report onntaining its budget -ecommencia- ions 101 FY 1990 The C3rnrnittee reqularlu, undertakes tn assess the changing human services needs -I the rnmmunity and hi promote cnordination in the ay the services are planned and delivered. In its eff Drt to ensure the most appropriate and cost-effective ex- cenditure of to'vn funds on human services programs the Committee has sought to support first,programs that engage in primary prevention activities and, second C ) those that through timely interentions prevent more serious long-lasting, and generally more costly, consequences. Early in the past year the Committee reviewed its charge from the Selectmen in ight of the passage of time and circumstances ince it 'as formulated 111 year 3go roncluded that 'he charge itself a! sufficiently broad to meet ,,`-anglno -ircumstances and that no significant revisions 'ere necessary. However the Committee also feels that it can serve the Selectmen and the Town more effec- tively by placing increased emphasis on ( 1) examining whether the Town resources expended on human services are allocated to meet the evolving needs of the com- munity in a changing social and economic climate iLkonsidering the priorities that should be recommended fur Town consideration as circumstances change and 17) er aluating existing programs vi thin that context and acting as a catalyst 5nfilur -.uordinator for level iprnetit and implementation of ney initiatives among the relevant groups affected. ‘le hope the Selectmen endorse this approach and we believe it will prove to be of increasino value over time ( .) For the operational administration and oversight of programs funded by the Town 'e have placed reliance on the Town Ilanager and his staff in this past year y'ith 1 V ;pod results and we 84.20 1155 LJOJL-etam le •;url'inq relationship to e':pand a: 'e (Th ontlnue in His new direction Thi shift in emphasis ha: air eady begun •with the ransfer r•f t n.3 line item° r the budget from Human SRr''res t ths? C unr it nn .Agin°, ..a the Senior Health Monitor prngram and the Adult Day Health program. ESI) 'e plan to cuntinue program bu program r evie' of human services programs funded by the town from the perspeLti 'es outlined abu"e relying on nwn :staff for contrart billinig and gag to day management e loot: fur-ward. to a nntinued cooperate Tp •orkl 7 7 it, ..hip 1 h Tin i i tration help g resat .~r..,�,�, r' t„ the •r. adm•n� � :� ian " .:, ucceed in this approach. REVIEW PROCESS The pacific r.riteria employed big the Committe to evaluate thi year funding re- ales i.nntinue to be those establi .tied by the Cummittee in 1 argil A :n014 III .nese riteria 1 attached for your informati-+n. The program re"iaw proce°s i as fill- lo' is Nhen proposals are recei ed, teams of two or three Committee members are asssigned Lc re"iew each proposal in deptn. Teams may conduct a bite iisit lien they consider it necessary. After reviewing the response to the proposal includ- C) ing the budget and material from prior years each team reports to thy' full :ommittee 'hen the Committee agrees that sufficient nfnrrnation is available for a decision the team submits a r•ritten report lith recommendatiuns the full Committee discusses the merits and then votes on each proposal :r 'me time the C :mmittee has d' ,;sed the naed fir the Tc •tn t be more ;pecifl abuut the ser•,'iues it fishes to purchase to be w le t estimate a reanon- able rost for the service to specify what is being purchased in its r.ontracts w'e belie"e this approach will increase the ability of the Town to monitor purchased ;errices effectively. This year the Committee has made 5 - ignificant change in its approach to evaluating request for funding from service providers. We have developed a program budget format which contracted providers were asked to in- Ride in their responses to our Requests for Proposal The format requires alto- nation of both expenditures and revenues among the provider programs and the irrtormation presented in this •ray has gi 'en us a sounder analytic framework for decision-making. it has enabled us to attach a dollar cost to individual services in R.ume programs and to base our recommendations to you an-our assessment of the U most effective and appropriate use of Town funds. While both the format and pro- ;ess need further refinement we are pleased with the initial results and expect to continue to improve on them in the next budget cycle RECOMMENDATIONS ter r e' ierving pro-ides material._ ,ubmitted to us this near •e cunciudea that additinnai information id needed, in order to enhance the abiiitu of Town ^teff to ionitor programs and ei:penditure• ^ enable our Committee t._ develop a data base for planning purposes and to alIc •1 us to evaluate -het her a program i' meeting Town needs effect 'eiy. e therefore propose the following and offer the assistance of the Committee in this effort tbnPs ,fl.lt8 I Budgets- All agencies seeking Town funding that operate rnultifaiieted program services, Jaye multiple income sources and recei Pe substan- tial amounts of funding from the Town should be encouraged to delelop budgets that ;:how the allocation of both$ costs and revenues. Both •ePlace and the Cuunc 1 on Agi .g have made ignifii ant ad"ance• 'n his direction h ch e think deserves recognition. We 'ouid 11 e lee them cont ince is reline their methodology fur tie net budget Lytle 2. Reports: All Town-funded agencies .should be required to submit ;uarterly reports and clear-end summand reports of client utilization and cc. t data for both TO itiring 2nd planning purposes 3 Claims_ The Town should develop new billing ferns to be used isg all endor agencies ;at pro"ide more detailed .nformatior• on entc or riom 19ims are oeiriq .iibrnitted and the Kind and amount -Ii .er 11:8 deliaered to each client Some more specific recommendations follow in the reports on individual aaericies. CONCLUSION In the course of discussing our recommendations to you eve have been eery mindful of the serious financial constraints facing the Tuwn as it prepares to wrestle kith the budget for the coming fiscal year We are also acutely aware of the con- traction during the past 11, years of federal support for human services and the dramatis decline that is now taking place at the state level all of p•hich threatens the Towns most vulnerable residents In our deliberations we have tried to bal- ance the need for fiscal restraint against the social and financial costs of not maintain-if-1c :,et ,"r.et. i times of 'imi ed resources 'e tillrl> a Lurrrpe 1 iriG ar_qu- n rnerlt uon be made fur their L sntinuatt -in in that they are more cost-effect) ie In rie i 'rig run non the aiternat 'e f aban'nnment ''ve present J reuonlm_nda- tl'inn tii 'jut; after Larefu1 •.un9iderat ^ i all the tartars believing that at nirrlurn maintenance of T Yvn support of hump; .ervices programs c :rrently in place -e;ieris tree alues of Le"ington and continues to make an important contri- outin.n t'i the welfare of it•= residents R;espectiullu submitted HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Renee C.. hi Co-C, air Rnbert Cu:•ilman C -Chair Pi -herd C urghert:l Leonora Feeney Ann Irving Seymour Mandel C ) Sheila Martin Cenr'ic Murakami U 4