Uploaded byEvan Jones
HOPE Community Services June 15 Meeting
The document summarizes a meeting of the HOPE Community Services Governing Board. It discusses HOPE's mission to promote programs aimed at alleviating poverty conditions. It then reviews HOPE's performance in serving member counties and achieving goals. Many of HOPE's programs have been eliminated, including Head Start, energy assistance programs, homeless prevention programs, and others. The document identifies issues like lack of transparency, staffing problems, and lack of program approval and funding that contributed to the losses. It outlines recommendations for the board like a vote of no confidence in leadership, expanding board membership, and implementing stricter oversight and new leadership to potentially save the Community Action designation.
More Related Content
Similar to HOPE Community Services June 15 Meeting
![Apporach to lung biopsy [Auto-saved].pptx latest](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/apporachtolungbiopsyauto-saved-251211225655-93258539-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
HOPE Community Services June 15 Meeting
- 1. HOPE Community Services GoverningBoard Call Meeting
- 2. HOPE Community Services Effortto Save Community Action (CAA) Designation
- 3. • Goal: Topromote Community Action Programs (CAPs) and other activities aimed at the causes and conditions of poverty. These include: • job placement/work experience, • health and nutrition, • outreach and motivation, • and day care to better the general welfare of the people of the member counties. Performance Against Mission
- 4. • Member CountyArea: To promote CAPs and other activities aimed at the causes and conditions of poverty. These include: Member County Area • Amelia • Buckingham • Cumberland • Lunenburg • Nottoway • Prince Edward
- 5. Member County Area,Contd. …such other contiguous counties, which wish to become associated with the program, the inclusion of which will promote the objectives of the Agency, subject to the approval of the Board of Directors.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8. Governing Board Executive Director Energy Share HumanResources Director Custodial Services Performance Against Goals
- 9. Review by Grantor Funding Area
- 10. Community Services BlockGrant (CSBG) • Funds central management and core activities (creation, coordination and delivery of programs and services) of the CAA • CSBG recipient is able to mobilize additional grants and resources because of its CAA designation (public trust)
- 11. Virginia Community ActionRe-entry System (VA Cares) Ex-offenders transition and support •GONE
- 12.
- 13. Head Start • 21Locations • $Millions brought in through Head Start • Citizens reached through Head Start • Program Removal − Non-compliance − http://www.hhs.gov/dab/decisions/dabdecisions/da b2487.pdf GONE
- 14. • Department ofEnergy • American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009 • Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program Weatherization/Weatherization Assistance Program (DHCD) Willie Fobbs, III
- 15. • Program tohelp keep children in school • Resources for high school students interested in attending college • Vouchers for SATs • Facilitates college campus visits for high school students Project Discovery
- 16. • Safe waterand waste water treatment facility Water Project GONE
- 17. Homeless Prevention Programs (DHCD)Kathy Robertson • Emergency Solutions Grant − Rent and utilities • Homeless Intervention Programs • Rental Mortgage Assistance • Emergency Home Repairs • Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-housing Program GONE
- 18. Resource Mother • Assistanceto mothers under the age of 19 GONE
- 19. Emergency Funds forNeedy Families GONE
- 20.
- 21. What Went Wrong •Income • Amelia Thrift Store • Southside Electric • Amelia County Medication Program • Energy Share
- 22. What Went Wrong •Lack of transparency from Executive Director to Board • Staffing • Program Approval • Funding • IRS • Board Insurance not paid
- 23. Recommendations Vote of NoConfidence Not Renewing/Extending ED contract Expanding Governing Board Membership New Leadership Stricter Oversight and Governance
- 24.
- 25. Can the designationbe saved? • Possibly. Section 678C(a)(4) of the CSBG Act allows for State discretion in the implementation of a quality improvement plan by an eligible entity to correct an identified deficiency or deficiencies.
Editor's Notes
- #14 http://www.hhs.gov/dab/decisions/dabdecisions/dab2487.pdfMr.Fobbs provided us with this link to the DHS response to H.O.P.E. Community Services, Inc. HHS Report 2012.11.30; DAB2487 regarding the issues of non compliance with DHS regulations.
- #26 The Act specifies that States must consider the seriousness of the deficiency and the time reasonably required to correct the deficiency.Examples of instances in which a State may exercise discretion on whether a quality improvement plan is appropriate or necessary may include, but are not limited to the following:A deficiency for which an eligible entity has previously instituted a corrective action plan and has repeated findings;A deficiency that involves evidence of fraudulent reporting or use of funds, or other evidence of criminal wrongdoing and therefore presents a risk requiring immediate action.If a State determines that an eligible entity should be allowed to develop and implement a quality improvement plan, the CSBG Act requires the State to allow the eligible entity to develop and implement their plan within 60 days after being informed of a deficiency. States are encouraged to review quality improvement plans and issue decisions on whether the plans are approved as quickly as possible within the 30-day time frame. The quality improvement plan should identify actions that will be taken to correct the deficiency within a reasonable period of time as determined by the State. States may exercise discretion based on the specific circumstances.