Oh, I call to order, thank you. I thought me saying we were starting was good enough. I call to order
tonight's Jack Hopkins committee meeting. Okay, so we don't have a lot on the agenda tonight, but it
is gonna be a fairly longer process. So the three things that I wanted to cover tonight was number one,
I have a date adjustment for one of our meetings.
And then before we jump into the apps, I'd like us to review the rubric. I know we had at the end of
last committee last year for 2025, we had a bit of a debate about some of the rubric issues. I thought,
if nothing else, let's talk about how we're proceeding to the categories. So you're all on the same
page and then introduce Catherine to the rubric as well. And we'll all just talk through it so that
we are grading
equally. And then finally, we'll begin the app review. Now I know we didn't have access to the actual
applications, but Aria put a ton of work into that lovely spreadsheet for us. And just to give us a
head start, and we can just start going through one by one and having those conversations and figuring
out what questions do we have about their proposals and also are there any that we know right off the
bat that we want to eliminate and
Who do we ultimately want to invite for a presentation for our next time? All sound good? Awesome.
Thank you. Should we wait on ESOC for the date adjustment, though? Because I want to make sure everybody
can chime in for that. It's just our allocation meeting is two nights before my son's graduation. And
I won't be able to do that long meeting
to next before the graduation. What's that? Oh, sorry. It's May 28. This is the date of the allocation
meeting. So we can talk about, hopefully, finding a date that works for everybody. But I'll wait until
Isak gets here so we don't schedule something he can't do. So let's take a look at the rubric. I'm going
to pull up the rubric from last year on my computer. Aria, do you have access to the rubrics? Awesome.
Okay, thank you. There we go. It's this one, right? Yeah, that's it. Perfect. All right. So there we go. So
I'm assuming we all want to stick with a rubric again. I know last year was the first year we did the
rubric. Nobody seemed to have any objections overall to using rubric last year. Has anybody's mind changed
drastically? No, I just think we needed to tweak some bits. I think the rubric was helpful. It made
things a little bit less unfair. Yes, I think so too.
What I liked about it was that even though we noticed by the end of the allocation meeting last year
that several of us were interpreting some of the categories differently, and yet we all still were kind
of coming to the same, more or less, the same outcomes. So I think in that way, yes, it was really helpful.
OK, here's my rubric. So organization amount requested.
What we filled in starts over with partial funding, right? Did we fill in, before that, the grant type,
priority population? I don't remember. I don't think we filled that in. I think that was filled out
for us. I think so, yeah. Okay. So with the partial funding, project location,
emergency services, residents served lasting contribution, number of full-time staff, community partnerships.
And then we had that bonus category, which some of us struggled with, I think. Were any of these categories
completely unhelpful to anybody? Or did you have strong feelings against any of these categories?
The lasting contribution, I remember, was kind of giving me some issues because I think I was making
some judgment calls on what is a lasting contribution, a direct one indirectly. So I don't necessarily
have a problem with this category, but we can define what each of these in the meaning, so that way
we're consistent. Because if I was having trouble, I can imagine maybe someone had a different idea of what
each of those things, then the rubric's not as helpful as a good read. Right. I agree. I struggled with
that one, too, because I felt like, well, in a way, you could argue they were all last e-computers.
So it was very subjective. In fact, all of them, but a few I have marked as yes, directly.
Yeah, I agree. I mean, I started with, is the funding going to go to some kind of capital improvement
for building? That would be obviously tangible and lasting, but is it going to go to something that
is going to basically possibly affect people in a way that may be novel or isn't being addressed? Well,
that's lasting too, because it's likely to.
So it really does need to be impacted a little bit. I mean, what I found helpful was when we had all
of these filled out and we all just basically discussed amongst ourselves, like how we interpreted this.
It was very helpful to me to find out where people were landing. And I actually adjusted my scores a
bit on that basis, I think. So anyway, this is really a good place, I think, for a first take, is to
have that word worked.
But that is fuzzy. That topic is fuzzy. Yeah. I agree. Actually, I have a question about the number
of full-time staff as an indicator of fundraising capacity. I remember in our first conversation, there
was a young girl who had submitted a project. But of course, she didn't have any staff. So I don't know
if I necessarily agree with that indicator. The rest of them make sense to me.
Okay, I said that I The full-time staff I don't agree with because I just don't think that that every
single organization will have full-time staff. Yeah What heading a heading home plan is for example, I'm
Definition would be helpful for for someone who's new like me So the definition for What would be helpful
for someone like you? I'm sorry, um the the under the community partnerships tab or Section it says
I really struggled with as well. Okay Yeah, I just don't know what that is No
Okay, so Any Home is an organization in town that is working towards eliminating homelessness. And I
think it was used as an example of what a community partnership like teaming up with someone rather
than trying to tackle a problem alone. I think part of the issue was there are some organizations who
don't work collaboratively,
with the rest of us and it makes it difficult for us to fund them. They may be duplicating services
and or they are not doing it efficiently for someone else to do it better. So I think that was part
of the community partnerships. Does that sound correct? Okay. And heading home was just an example because
they're doing a lot in this community right now
they are very good at bringing in organizations to work with them. So I think that was just an example,
not a prerequisite of being a community learner. So, because I haven't seen the applications yet,
do you know, Aria or Sophia, if you've seen the applications, is there a question on there that would
somewhat help us determine community partnerships?
I mean, first thing I can spend just the collaborative ones, but that's like a separate thing,
I feel like, like an indicator, but there's no question that was really, like, do you work all the groups?
Yeah. I feel like that might just be like a dead end. Yeah. Cause I felt like that was, that was one
that I had a hard time finding the information for. I mean, did, did anybody have tips? Cause I just
approach it wrong. I mean, you know, something in the work.
So I am familiar with the partners. I'm familiar with the one, I'm not going to put anyone out, but
familiar with the ones that are harder to enter the table. So I have those like internal bias, right?
That internal bias. So that's just me, but I'm not sure some folks here know other organizations better
than others. They know, yeah, they're out there on the farm. So. Yeah. But you've got an institutional
knowledge that the rest of us
don't necessarily. A lot of it was like main rock and boom is that I was looking for this like, like
the leveraging resources so I don't have any money left on me. Yeah. Outside of like things I was already
learning. Yeah. Okay, so the lasting contribution, number of full-time staff and community partnerships
are the three that are in question right now. I think, yes. I'll just jump in real quick if I can and
just say, I think last time around I used the lasting contribution
of category rating as a way to help me with the trouble I had with the fact that you could have, or
at least I, could have a series of scores that added up for two different agencies to a similar total,
but for any of various reasons, I felt
Much stronger that one just did something that was more urgent or more important overall Even though
this might have had the similar number of people impacted Same number they could have been the same
in a lot of ways but I was looking for ways to like somehow give those projects that I just felt were
just more We're just just contributed more were just more important and I think I last seen contribution
was one of the places where I
I kind of gave use that to be able to give more weight to projects that scored similar similarly, but
I thought were actually not that comparable in terms of their overall potential, uh, beneficial impact.
See what I'm saying? Yeah. So almost like you saved it till later. And then if there were one score
similarly, you used it almost like a tiebreaker. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Great. I like that. That, that makes
some sense. I mean,
I think, again, with these rubrics, we're all going to have our slightly own approach,
you know, interpretations of things. I like that. I could see using that as a helpful way to score that
category. Yeah. And really what I think we're talking about, too,
With that particular category, which I feel like I see differently now when I saw it last year is really
the level of measure ability of impact at the end of the day. And so we're looking at direct versus
indirect. It's like, okay, the direct impact of fixing the floors that and this house like for a long
term long term impact of that is very tangible.
versus like paying for six months of a caseworker at the Beginner Recovery Alliance, how do we like
understand what the spillover effects are of that? And so that is like where to interact these phones
in. So it's like, I think that a lot of it's looking at how they talk about the measurability of, and
what the evidence they present of research based on like the impact of like, okay, this caseworker will
increase in fact being with six months because,
Yes, you know? Yeah. That does. But I feel like that's also kind of hard to... I mean, I think that
helps with us, or it helps me with defining what the category means, you know, kind of putting that
definition, like Eddie said, you should start out with figuring out, defining that. Does anybody else
disagree with kind of taking that approach to lasting contribution or defining it
a bit in that way and then figuring out how to move forward with that category. All right, I hope that's
clearer. It feels clearer for me. Okay. And then, yeah, number of full-time staff as an indicator of
fundraising capacity. You're right, that's kind of arbitrary. But we're getting more points
who have less staff and have less bandwidth. We are giving an extra point to people who are doing, I
won't say doing more with less, but kind of that reason, right? I mean, we're knocking an organization
my size that have a lot of employees versus some other folks. So maybe we need to dial in on that a
little bit better because
10 to 25 and 25 plus have the same amount of points. So it, yeah. Well, do we want to turn the 25 plus
more to a red where it's like medium low to 2.5? I don't know if that would totally mess up the math
on the charts.
Honestly, I feel like this, I heard this is a really good conversation that I think you could regard
good insight on in the sense that like it goes back to what our mission is ultimately like if we're
trying to disseminate more funding to other resource organizations, then that change is like how we
look at it. This is like, I don't know what you think being part of like a larger organization that
also works with a lot of other resource organizations.
Just to make it easier, maybe you've seen it staff didn't apply for a grant this year. So I feel more
comfortable kind of weighing in on this. So I definitely think larger organizations should be penalized.
But I think zero to 10 should be its own category. And then 10 to 50 is yellow and then
15 and above is, I mean, these are arbitrary, but I think that definitely we should reward organizations
that are trying to do, because if they have less staff, it's probably because they're trying to do something
newer, right? They're a new organization. They don't have the history some of the other organizations
do. Yeah. I think, actually,
I realized it was not like an algorithm, it doesn't do the math for you. If we just market red, we're
the ones who are adding it up in our head. So if we add a 50 plus box that then chooses red, that's
easy enough to. Yeah, we can edit it.
I don't know if that has to happen during this meeting, but I'm thinking that's not what we're talking
about. So I can make edits and mark where you distribute if that would be helpful. Oh, cool. Thank you.
Yeah, I was just looking to edit on the Google Sheets so that's easy to edit and change those numbers
too. So does that sound, Catherine, does that sound like that makes sense and like might be a fair approach
for the full-time staff? Yeah, I think it's a fair approach and it also helps with context. Yes. Yeah.
Yeah. Thank you, Eddie, for giving your insights. That is helpful. And then I think, yeah, maybe we
add 50 plus gets a red box. Yeah. They have less points because they could spare staff. Not necessarily,
but we may have more staff that can do more fundraising for that particular organization. So for scoring,
are you thinking the same, like, green is one, yellow is half a point, and red is mirror points?
Yeah, but last year I had this issue where a lot of my scores were very similar to each other. So it
was very hard for me to, so I was going through everything, I was allocating money. Then I got to this
category where everyone had the same score and I couldn't, and I admittedly couldn't find anyone else
because I couldn't make a big decision. So maybe we need to add another color in there.
Um, like maybe green gets two points now, and then yellow gets a point when there's a half point when
there's no points. And that might need, that might have a wider range of sports that we can choose perfectly
from. Yeah. But then it doesn't match a traffic one. And that's not as easy to. Yeah. I, I can see doing two, one.
half and zero points. So like thinking about this one as an example, so zero to 10 would be two, 11
to 15 would be one, and then 15 and above would be half? 15 and 99, half. Okay. Okay, thank you. Okay,
and then the
The really tough one in my brain was the community partnerships. But the question isn't asked on the
application. Maybe you should just start this one from our rubric. I would be fine with that. Yeah,
it's not specific for you. Is anybody attached to the community partnerships question? I understand
the intent of it.
But it's something that is, I found so tricky last year. It's not directly on gender assets. Yeah,
I mean, 100%. Yeah. Does anybody feel differently about striking it? So we're not going to use it to
evaluate at all? Is it? Or? I just want to. So the groups applying had that likely intention that we
were going to use that as a, right?
I don't think so because it's not a question in the application. If they were paying attention to the
rubric last year, maybe? Because I think I know some groups that might have been looking for community
partners but couldn't find them and then were dissuaded from applying for that reason. Well,
one of the... I'm so sorry. Well, just to say that I'm not opposed to that because I think it's problematic
too and obviously they found it to be problematic.
Um, but, um, don't feel unfair. Well, I'm just kind of changing, changing things up. So maybe, maybe
we don't use it as part of the rubric, but we, but we keep it in mind as we go ahead and discuss these
things. I don't know about the bonus. Category that we can award bonus books, which I hated. Well, but
maybe you hate the bonus.
I did because I was like, that just feels like it's us putting our thumb on the scale. I like this.
Or I felt something, you know, just a personal bias we could put in. Like we didn't have, um, I felt
like we didn't have really good guidance on what, I know it says right there, like, yeah, we can, we
have flexibility, but maybe we can come up with certain categories. Like, did they specify community
partnership? They can give us, you know, did they have X, Y, or Z?
that can get, you can consider giving them a bonus for that. Would that make you feel better about striking
the community partnerships as a forced gradient? Yeah, that's sort of a good compromise, I think. Do
you guys agree? You're finding it difficult with, you know, sort of changing things sort of midstream
or, but then again, it doesn't appear
Yeah, because I mean we hadn't approved a rubric before the applications went out so
I get both sides, I do. All right, I think I vote to strike community partnerships. And I think my logic
last year during that was just like the required piece about the heavy metal plan. But like, I don't
think I had a full understanding of what that meant. And so I tried to overgeneralize it. So that's
what required me.
I don't want to take up too much more time because I know we have a lot of applications to go through,
but do we want to quickly maybe come up with a list of what we would consider in the bonus category,
such as community partnerships? I think they're explicitly apparent. Any other ideas for what we might
give a bonus point for? Maybe give it to one of the applications
which I know we're going to go through this in a little bit, but if, can we determine if they've ever,
for some of these organizations, I think every organization that applies at some point has received
the Jack Hopkins grant, a successful one. Can we give a point to organizations that have never received
the Jack Hopkins grant, if it's a ready application and then they get a point for being made and eventually made a,
to help with their work. We've got something on fire. To try to help get some new blood into the...
I think that the problem isn't... At least last few years, we've funded new stuff, so that way we have
a rubric and we can differentiate between organizations, maybe giving points to
the organization that never received a grant from us, so. Yeah. Well, Courtney, do you have problems
with one of the groups who also is a first-time applicant? I feel like you recuse yourself. I was going
to bring it up after this, so thank you for reminding me.
Any other feelings on like considering first timers for a bonus? You know, there's just like half a
point. Yeah, I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure I agree with that idea. Or just because you're
a new. I mean, are arguably you could just do the opposite. You could say established, well-connected,
proven agencies
actually are more likely to do more bang for the buck with their grant because of their experience and
their connection and their history. So I'm not suggesting we do more for that, but one could make that
argument, I think. That's a valid argument, but at the same time, organizations that are successful
at fundraising who can't give more bang for the buck, this is a
a finite, and at the end of the day, you know, a lot of these organizations are getting a ton of money
to do things that I think a newer organization or a small organization can benefit from what they would
consider a substantial grant as opposed to a bigger organization where it's just, you know, they're
going to do good work with it, but it just feels strongly about trying to help out organizations
or potentially doing something new that no one else is. So just to be clear, are you suggesting, I'm
a little confused, maybe I'm not keeping you up, but are you suggesting adding an entirely new column
for that purpose or just using a bonus that it would be part of the- It could be part of the bonus.
Because I could see that being very helpful because I was doing that anyway last year and I was thinking,
wow, this is something completely
I mean, this fills a niche that nobody else is doing. Maybe we're just sort of refining innovation.
I was just going to say it does say innovation. So maybe this is how we're defining, partly defining
innovation, you know, an older organization. Oh, go ahead, Catherine. It could also be, I mean, a large
organization that's innovative and has never applied for a grant before. That's very good. Yeah.
or even an organization that has applied and won before, but they're doing something totally out of
box that we've not seen before. I see what Eddie's saying though, because it tends to be the same groups
are pulling in, they kind of parking and request a certain amount and pretty soon, it becomes kind of
fossilized and
I mean, if anything, if the rubric helps bring some people off to the top, because if everyone has the
same scores, we're going to hit all these folks, give money to a lot of the same people, which that's
not necessarily a problem. I'm not saying all these organizations are doing a lot of stuff for our community.
But if we can give points to folks so that way they kind of rise to the top because they are new, they
are trying to do something different,
I think that's something that we can talk about and it wouldn't be a ton of points. I mean, we're talking
about like a half a point, but that might make a difference where we recognize someone. Eddie, can I
ask you then, do you have a feeling that any new program or agency is going to be
Automatically disadvantaged in the other rubric categories because they don't have some of these things.
There's going to be hard to score them high in some areas, maybe. So this helps. This would help offset
some of that. I mean, you know, maybe. Yeah. Okay. I get it. Yeah. I do feel like the bonus column is
also very subjective. So.
I think, again, it kind of comes down to, we're all gonna have our own rules for how we're interpreting
certain things. And so, you know, I may be giving a bonus point for community partnerships where somebody
else doesn't think it's important and they're not gonna give a bonus point for partnerships. So I think
that's then how it all comes out in the wash at the end of the day when we do our allocation meeting
and we talk through everything. That's where the negotiation part comes in. I feel better having a little more
just having had the conversation about some of these categories to see, to take everybody's temperature,
how are they thinking about each of these and helping give me ideas for how to think about them and
make sure we're not, you know, like marbles running off in completely separate directions. Are there
any other ideas for the bonus category that anybody thinks are worth keeping in mind about awarding
a bonus point or half a point for?
Well, I feel like that covers the rubric. Wait, I have one more thing that I remember. I just remember
came up. What was that? For residents served, we started talking about looking at that as a ratio versus
a number, a ratio of number of residents served to ASC. I think we brought that up. Oh, yes. Okay. You
mean like, so it's important. Yeah, serving a lot of,
Residents with a small ass versus a few residents with a large ass. Yeah. And maybe that's not even
something that's like, I don't know how important we want to classify that, but like, you know, like
if they're asking for a certain amount, but our own serving or 10 people versus like that kind of thing,
just because that fits under specifically what we're talking about in the guidelines, which is like
maximizing. Yeah. Yeah.
Can I say something specifically? One of the recommendations that I did think of when I was looking
at applications was doing like a amount requested for like resident serve, like just simple division.
And that way you can consider like per person how much is like being allocated. If that would be a full
bank, that would just be me. I think that would be super helpful. Yeah. Yeah. Like I think that was
a more powerful number than just that number. Or it tells a different story. Yeah. I mean, I think that's, I think,
Yes, I think that completes the picture of we have the category of residents served that we plug that
in. Oh, yeah. It helps it on both sides, potentially. We can keep that one and then add the ratio. Yeah.
So if we could do that, that would be amazing. Cool. OK. All right. Are we good on the rubric then for
now? Is that feeling pretty set?
Awesome, thank you. So we will get that updated. And then I know you're putting it in the chat.
I can have it. Yeah, yeah, I can make that and send it back to you. That's nice. Awesome, thank you.
Okay, cool. So we are set with that. Isak is still not here. I think he texted. Okay, he's on his way.
All right, he's on his way. So let's quickly do Cameron's
Um conflict of interest. Does she need to like she's going to need to sign something or you don't know
council stuff. Yeah, it is. Isn't it? Yeah. Okay. Well, I guess you can like officially declare it in
the meeting now and then um I declare I have a uh conflict of interest with silver lining rescue because
of my longer board. Thank you. So we will just have you
It does recuse me as soon as I step out. And I appreciate you bringing it up when we were discussing
an issue that would actually specifically affect your innovation. So that was great. And now I lost
my cheat sheet for tonight. So bear with me.
So we'll move on to, we'll get started with, actually, let's talk about the allocation meeting date.
Right now we have it on Thursday, the 28th of May. I would like to propose moving it to Tuesday, the
26th of May for the same time. I know we had, I believe we had some conflicts with Tuesdays because
there was teaching, maybe there were classes at the time,
It's the end of May, so I'm hoping all those classes would be over. Would anybody have a conflict with
moving into that Tuesday, the 26th of May? I may be traveling. OK. But I could potentially be Zooming
as I'm traveling. Mm-hmm. So I could set up a hotspot. I know it's right after Memorial Day weekend.
But I could make it work, I think. Or I might be already at my destination soon. OK. Oh, you mean like
actively in transit? I have a long drive that day. I see. But I might have arrived. Where are you driving
to? I've got a nine hour drive. What about Monday? It's Memorial Day. Yeah, Monday's Memorial Day.
Yeah. So anyway, so it works from anywhere. Yeah. Okay. I just want to tell you, I'm very busy. Okay.
Very much busy. Does anybody else have a potential conflict with that? Tuesday, May 26, if we did from
six to nine for that one. Okay. Okay. Well, about, yes.
The only other thing not related to, well, because you have the notion for that one or that one.
I think so. Let me, you know what? I'm going to quickly test Esau before we set it. Sure. I'll see if
I can get him. Yes. I think he's sad, too. I looked at last year's conflict of interest form. You might
want to maybe run this by the council attorney then. It looks like it's only if there's a financial
gain. It's a financial conflict of interest.
I'm not going to turn in, so please double check that. But at the same time, I don't think it's harmful.
There's nothing from last year. And I'm not in the folder, so I don't think that's helpful. I was just
a little too involved in helping them build that together, but I didn't feel comfortable. If you're
not paid, that should be fine. OK. But if you'd like to have a checklist chair, I would recommend double
checking. I will. Thank you.
Okay. Sorry, this is obnoxious, I know. Our allocation meeting on May 28th to that Tuesday,
May 26th instead, question mark. My husband gets so mad when I do my talk to text when I'm messaging
people, but it's so much faster.
and so much fewer typos. Oh, okay. And also while we're waiting, I looked at the last meeting memo and
I don't believe you all voted on the agenda. So I don't think you would need to make another motion
today. We change it. Okay, great.
E Sox says he can move it. So let's go ahead and officially move. We'll cancel May 28th and schedule
for May 26th. Thank you, everybody. I really appreciate it. There was no vote. Okay, motion.
I think he sucks trying to get out of coming. He keeps asking me, are you almost done? Do I still need
to come? I'm like, we haven't even started yet. Okay. Thank you. So now we can move on to the,
uh, applications. Very fun. I'm going to pull up my sheet. Was everybody able to access their sheet?
So the ones that I sent, you guys won't be able to edit, but you can save your own copy and download
it and then open it up on your own with edit abilities so that you can make notes on it. You can click
invite to interview. I have my copy here somewhere. Sorry, I thought I had it all pulled up.
mine in alphabetical order, so I'm out of order of probably how everybody else is looking at it. Yes.
Andy likes that one. I wouldn't even have known how to have done that. I live in Google Sheets. I organize
my whole life around them. Okay. Which one is first on the sheet? Can I just ask something real quick?
Yes. If I'm looking at everything and it's complete,
The sheet, the total request is only $520,000 or there about. I thought it was almost $700,000.
Is it $700,000? Maybe I added it wrong because I was going through and adding it. Did anyone add it
up? I did not. The request? I summed it and it was $696,300. Oh, wow. What's the total you got? $696,304.25.
Okay. All right. I probably don't see a lot of things. Okay. Okay. So that's, oh, you're, yeah, 696
through the phone. Okay. I guess I have to refuse myself. We need a normal corporation. Ask those board
directors. Okay. So I am not receiving any financial compensation for it, but
Okay, great. Thank you for letting us know. Does that make sense? For me, I just like didn't help them
with the brand. So that's fine. It doesn't affect my salary, but still.
Okay, better safe than sorry. Yeah, I mean, we still have more than enough people here to make that
decision. I'm not in there for one. Okay. All right. So the first application was Monroe County Court
appointed special advocates seeking support to improve our technology infrastructure for our training
and ongoing office needs.
Are we able to pull the application? That would be super helpful. Thank you. Are we able to access those
through our portal? So I had sent an email, I think it was about a month ago, sharing the instruction
on how to get the access because they'll have to go through and once you get through admin login, they
set up the account to give you access. I believe maybe two or three people had done that.
So, yeah, that's kind of the process, but if there's any questions regarding getting access, it would
be Jeremy, for ITS, and I can share that, you know, if necessary, but otherwise, I can project it out.
That's awesome. Thank you.
Let the record show that Council Member Asaru. Was egregiously late then. We're just happy to see you.
So can I just get clarification like for today, we're just saying we want to review their application.
If we know we want to refuse right off the bat for whatever reason, or if we want them to present. Some
of them we know we want to review them, but we don't necessarily think they need to present.
What was I gonna say? I had a thought and it went away. I hate when that happens. I felt like it was
something important. Yeah, three o'clock in the morning. Love to call each other and be like, I know
what it was. Something about doing the application. Okay, nevermind. I'm gonna let it go. All right,
so Isak, we just started.
Um, so we are on Monroe County court pointed special advocates. I had a question. One of the things
that I thought was one of our rules is that you can move hard once as a single entity.
Looks like New Leaf New Life had two applications. One was collaborative. One was collaborative? I don't
know if I can double check that. Okay, so that, okay. Never mind that. That's great. All right. So Menorah
County Court Appointed Special Advocates. Where are they? I've seen them. What the applications look
like, yeah?
Technology infrastructure for our training and on-going office needs youth support. This is CASA, correct?
Mm-hmm. I don't believe that we need to present. And I don't see why we would ask why we would refuse
their application. All right. Agreed. All right. So we can just
them along without we'll just invite no we're not inviting them but we're not refused okay super so
the next one is pantry 279 ink we did we weren't on that email
No, I know that to all of you guys, the one that I said, they asked me to get, but yeah. Got it. Yeah.
Thank you. Yeah. Cause I think we all missed it somehow. Um, he's like, do you want me to forward it
to you? So pantry 279, food delivery and children's food for their summer program, food, children's
summer food program, um, and delivering, covering delivery costs.
So they're asking $12,000. They serve a total of $43,000, but for Bloomington, almost $9,000. Does anybody
have any questions? Do we think we want them to present? We've not, during our tenure, we've not had
an application from Pantry 279 to here.
I don't think we have. I mean, I feel like they're probably pretty straightforward. We probably don't
have any questions. Now, we also do have the opportunity, the option to do some email questions if we
don't feel we need people to come in. Yeah, what did we land on last time? What did we land on? Like,
weren't we between, you know, last week just emailing people? And no presentations? If I remember correctly,
we felt like most
questions to be answered with an email. But some organizations... The only question I would have for
this organization is that when I pull it up in Google, it says that it's based in Ellitsville. Well,
that was my... Yeah. I don't think it warrants a whole discussion in person, but it'd be a nice email.
So the director just won, I think, Woman of the Year at the City of Wilmington's
Um, or one of the awards at the city of Linton's, uh, women's history luncheon. And I know that they
provide a lot of, um, for Monroe County as a whole. I don't think this one's saying we have a problem,
but if I could see us interviewing them and asking them direct words and questions, but I, they're,
they're not into being in town. So.
Yeah, I mean, that had been my initial thought on them, too. I was like, wait, I thought they were based
out of Alexville. Can anybody remember better than I can what? What was we took a boat our very first
time with that thing was to set a threshold for interviews for applicants, including first time applicants.
So I think the goal was to decide today what that threshold would be.
Okay, at the time you didn't set a threshold, but I think that was what the goal was once you had an
idea of what the Africans learned. I see. And it was, I think first timers is what we wanted to, yeah,
include. So in other words, set like a clear,
And if people fall within it, they automatically get invited. And if they don't, they automatically
just get email questions. And you all can determine that as a community today. OK. Actually, what I
was trying to, my question is, we also had taken a vote on, or no, there was change in the Jack Hoppins
groups about community they serve, where they're based, whether in Monroe County or specifically in
Bloomington. That's what I wanted to pull up to try to find
what that change was. Does anybody on board are talking about? Like if they are, if they don't, because
it had always been, they had to serve loomies and residents, but then there's a slight change to, they
have to be based in. It had something to do with that whole, the discussion was around that Hendricks
County thing, remember? And they've applied again, right?
They have, but they also have like a branch here in Bloomington. I think the question I think had actually
revolved around was that the Ellitsville Boys and Girls Club. Yeah. I'm on my own.
a change. Okay. So we should, okay. So do we need to set that threshold right now as a community and
then before moving on? That would be a good idea. Yeah. Okay. So I think first timers should automatically
be asked to give us a presentation or be invited to interview. Does anybody have any other specific
parameters that think we have to include or we have to exclude. Because anybody we don't include in
this parameters right now, we can't invite them to. They'll just get email questions. Unless we want
to reject them, I would say that anybody with a no on within city limits on the spreadsheet should be
invited to an interview.
I mean, I suppose that could just be an email where you say, are you, are you in city limits? Like when
you explain how you're, but also they kind of have to. Yeah. I think that's fair to have them on the
invite list. Yeah. Okay.
those the only categories we want to come? The committee shall prioritize funding for programs and projects
that serve city Bloomington residents and are delivered within the city limits, which I have been
the rule of the law. That's when we voted for January 7th. Yeah. So they don't need to be in the city.
They're projects that get the city. Right. It doesn't matter if they're a person. They can be out of
the city. Yeah. A person from California could apply and say, I'm doing a project in Bloomington and
I want money to do it and we could grab that. But I'm serving it for, it is serving Bloomington residents.
Okay. So our parameters are first timers,
or people who have marked no to being within city limits? So we can ask them more deeply about how they're
serving women to the city limits. Is there any other category that we feel needs to be included? So
not be included in part, but like Hendricks County, we know why they're not within city limits.
at least the Hennepin County folks, Masusi's place did come and talk to us last year. We don't need
them to get from that, even though they mark them as the words. Can we make an exception that if we've
interviewed them before, if they qualify for one of these categories, but we've interviewed them within
the past two years, we can exclude them, or is that too late? No, yeah, I can't really. Okay. That's fine.
We're kind of blinded in the blind here. Yes, exactly. So we can do that. Yes. All right. Well, then
does anybody want to make a motion? Are we ready to make a motion? I can't think of any other categories.
I'm going to be clear. You only want to do this categorically, not like
That was what we had decided at our last meeting we were going to do. In which case we should also do.
Okay. And the organizations that said no on candy or fund with partial funding. I don't think anybody
did say no. One did. I was scrolling through the sheet. No, one did. Oh, one did? Okay. Yeah, one did. Okay.
All right. I don't feel strongly about this is whether.
whether all of the collaborations should be interviews, because I think our collaborative application,
we only have two, I feel like our collaborative application, well, they're also kind of small, nevermind,
I take it back. We just have those two, now we have, oh no, I was looking at pressure funding. How many
do we have that are outside of, how many do we know that we can talk to at the top of our head,
I think we interviewed them last year. We interviewed them either last year or the year. Okay, I'm sorry.
They don't fall in any of these categories. I think I think the collaborative. Projects should be invited
to interview as well. To talk about.
I'd like to see that too. So that was my original thought. But my counterpoint to that is that the two
collaborative projects at the same time, there's one that's $30,000 and another is $5,000. I would always
say that collaborative with a threshold of $10,000. But then that's nobody. If you're feeling like the
app is too small,
I think it's pretty straightforward versus a big ass thing. I mean, that's the direction we would want
to go. Did we ask collaborative projects to present Wall Street? Yeah, because the example would be
to understand the relationship between entities. That's what I thought. We wanted to ask if they liked
the relationship between the thing they were doing and the collaborative ones.
I know it's small, but I'd like to hear about the collaboration between New Leaf New Life and Courage
to Change, just as they both have individual applications in. I don't think we're gonna ask somebody
to make a comment, so I'm fine with it. Yeah, I agree. Yeah, I just want to understand what we're doing.
Yeah, yeah, okay, so yeah, we'll leave the collaborative in. So, I'd be ready for a motion at any point.
So this is a motion to interview
social service agencies that are first timers that answered no on partial funding, that answered no
on whether they were within Bloomington and those that have collaborative projects. Is that everything?
Yes. Thank you.
Jason. Do I do that? You're the chair. I'm supposed to be the chair. Don't get me. I thought you would
just type in the motion. All right. I will call the roll. I will start on Zoom. Catherine. Yes. Andy.
Yes. Dave. Yes. Isaac. Yes. Cameron. Yes. Eddie. Yes. Me. Yes. Okay, that passes unanimously.
Thank you, everybody. Well, now that we've done that, that was really what I thought we were going to
be doing the bulk of the meeting tonight was going through one by one and determining who we were going
to invite. Do we want to go through and talk about if there's anybody we want to refuse right after
that, or do we want to still? We also need to determine what questions we have, right? Yes.
Did you have a question? Even for the people who are asking, we should probably still send them questions
that we haven't. OK. And this time, I'm just throwing it out as a suggestion. No, that's good. I'm having
a crazy time trying to get into this. Go down to the bottom of the sheet and clip lock and not the top
of the sheet. And locked in.
I don't have it either. Do I download CSV? Is that going to get me to all the applications? No, not.
All right. Well, we'll rely on this. I think that's what he has to do from the back end.
Oh, so none of us can get into it right now. Well, if you just saw him, you'd know because he needs
to go in and assign you guys like access to it. That's why I got it. Okay. I thought it was a me problem
because it usually is. Okay. Great. Thank you. I feel better now. So looking at Monroe County court
appointed special service at special advocates. So pasta.
training, technology, infrastructure, and office project. They're seeking to support to improve their
technology infrastructure for their training and ongoing office needs. They are seeking just a little
over $9,000. They can partially fund. The majority of their services are for Bloomington residents.
They're within city limits. It's not collaborative. It's youth services.
Does anybody have any questions about this one off the top of their heads? And they don't qualify for
any of our invites. So we're not inviting them to interview. So then we did already move on to pantry
279 and they are being invited to interview because they are out of city limits.
Does anybody have any questions off the top of their head that they know they want to ask pantry 279
specific, but on this application, on the spreadsheet, you see there were density limits. That's what's
confusing to me. But then all of their public facing information says that it's based in Alexville.
Yeah, everything I always hear about them. That's the question. Can you just say, where are you located
and how do you say it? If it's helpful for me to address something at this point. Yes, please.
In years past, I believe they have been interviewed and it is based on the data that they collect from
individuals. You have to read your name and then advertise and there's a certain
amount of time that you are, I think, I don't know if you can go on your day, but they collect that
data, so that's how they're able to say they served blue business. I see, okay. Even though they're
not based in Bloomington. That makes sense. So do we also have a mechanism for, and I'm sure this has
come up in years past, and we've probably discussed it then too, how to make sure the money we're granting
only goes toward the
services are provided to the Bloomington residents. Yes, because it's a refund model. So they say what
they're going to spend and then they make an agreement with the city that they will spend on those things
and then they get refunded after spending on those things. So that's the that's the that's the mechanism
right there. So this is just to clarify their street address is actually in Bloomington.
47404. And I think when they applied previously, they were in Alexville, but now they look at the city
limits. So that changes at the end of the Illinois audit. It's up to you. But yeah, just look at their
address, and it is located 3609 West Cedar Road 46, Luton, and Manor 47404 behind the Arby's.
That is, okay. That is a right. I see, I see the confusion because that is that lot, like right at the,
that's where like urban areas. So that is confusing because it is considered Alexville, but it's not
technically Alexville. I used to live right up behind there. That's why I know. Like, did you say 3609?
36 or what? 36, oh, 3609, I'm sorry. West State Road, 46. Oh, yeah, yeah. 4744.
It is outside city limits because it is technically when I lived back there, we didn't get city services.
I just checked my building time. Oh, that's easy. Okay, so we definitely will invite them to not to
make more work. That area does get confusing. Okay. So we know we want to ask them,
How do you serve Bloomington residents and what was the other one? I think that's the greater one here.
Is that something though, if I may encounter that we have to bring the, if it's only one question, is
that warrant a whole like coming in and taking time off or in the evening to do that? Could that just
be an email?
Like if it's just, maybe there's a threshold, like it's like one question or is it four questions? That
pantry 279 was a newer, this was the first application, but we were just told that it's very cheap.
So yeah, I mean, I don't, I don't see why that name.
But if they're a new organization, is there something we want to ask them? Or are we just asking them
to re-litigate, or to re-explain why they're applying? Is there something specific about them being?
I agree with that. I agree from the application. Anyone want to ask? I totally agree with Catherine's
point. And maybe once we go over the questions, we can make a motion to exclude folks from the criteria
if we found that we had no questions.
and move that upon evaluating questions that we exclude people for whom we don't have more than three
questions. Well, I mean, they could zoom. It's also one question could be a big question, like how do
these organizations relate to each other? Yeah, good point. It's just that one question may lead to
more impact.
Um, I mean, I'm not, um, Katherine makes a really good point. We don't need to drag somebody into,
you know, just a simple. We could, we could say that if we have less than three questions, we can vote
to exclude them, excuse them, not exclude. We'll say excuse them from the criteria, but we could still
choose to invite them in if we just have one big question.
I'm going to take an alert to excuse. Does that sound appropriate? Mm-hmm. OK. I'm going to get a motion.
Oh, the sun moves. OK. Yeah. You can also, at the very end, go back through your list of people that
you've selected to interview and decide those you choose to excuse. Oh.
I like it. Okay. I would draw the motion and I, and I moved exactly what the honorable chief said. Okay.
Well, thank you. Okay. Courage to change sober living. So we'll allow residents.
to actively engage in monthly or twice monthly recreational and educational pro-social activities in
and around Bloomington. They're requesting 4.5 thousand. Yes to partial funding. They serve 37 Bloomington
residents, 37 total residents. So they are within Bloomington city limits. They are not a collaborative
application.
questions off the cuff for them. I don't see any. Maybe we hear from them every year and I don't think
we need to invite them in. Okay. Pathways Inc. holding the line for families support to bridge a sudden
$750,000 federal funding gap in 2026 to assist
to sustain proven high impact programs that support families facing housing instability, economic strain,
and childcare barriers while advancing the city's consolidated plan priorities and long-term financial
sustainability. They're asking for 50,000. They served 480 Bloomington residents, although their total
served is 405. I think that question was confusing for a lot of applicants because there's
quite a bit of people who have that. Yeah. Like discrepancy within the answers. Yeah. They serve more
Bloomington residents than they serve total people. Yeah, I'm not completely sure what they're... I
think that happened a couple times last year, too. Yeah. Did we hear from them in the past? Have we?
They're a family, right? They change their name. That's right. Thank you for the reminder. I don't feel
like they need to have any of them. Also, no studies. They don't fit our criteria.
Yeah, they don't they're just under a different name, which is what confused us We're going to be how
many questions we want to ask them in writing Well, i'd like i'd like to know about that that loss was
that seven hundred fifty thousand dollars to Just what they did in this community Annually the the money
they would receive from the federal government. I That just seems like a huge number
I think that's for the child care vouchers. But I don't know their financials off the top of my head,
but they may be taking that because of child care voucher, they have to exclude families and or reduce
services. OK, so maybe that's one for an email for them. Sure. Asking where where did that
$750,000 number come out of that. Yeah, what does it represent or whatever child care? Yeah, does it
represent is it from child care vouchers? Is it a national? Yeah federal funding loss Just some details
on that, okay Anybody else have any other questions that they would like included in the email? I
email them. Thank you, Andy. Developmental Services Inc. Independence Kitchen Project. This program
delivers hands-on culinary training to individuals with disabilities and their support staff to promote
food independence, improve nutritional consistency, and strengthen daily living skills. They are new
to us, correct? I believe that they are, but at the same time, I think DSI used to be
options for better learning. And I don't, but I don't think options is required for a few years.
But I, yeah, I'm not, I don't know how we knew the output process. Does that ring a bell to anybody?
Developmental services, I think?
Yeah. I mean, they, they have all over Indiana. Yeah. But I don't see anything about a name change on
there. They, they bought a device to OBL. Formerly known as Life Design. Life Design. Yeah.
They've had, they've gone through a couple.
Have we interviewed them or have they applied before? I don't recall. I don't think they applied before
ever, but I remember them through the last few years. Yeah. So I think we need to invite them to interview.
And then what questions do we have for them?
I'm sorry, I was typing in the comments, like the questions and notes. No, you're on this page. I thought
it was my copy. No, you're really funny. But that's good, because we need... It's not my personal notes,
anyway. Okay. I mean, I guess it can just be a very... You're new. Introduce yourselves, please. Tell
us a bit about yourself. Yeah.
how you work. Yeah, and I think this is one of being able to go over and understanding more about their
community partnerships. It's been around since 1981 and no one in this room is familiar with their work.
I think DSI, the company has been in the country
as, as, but they, they used to, so they bought out light designs or they merged for black designs and
line designs. You know, they work with, with, uh, disabilities and in reverse though. So I, I don't
think they.
I don't think ESI definitely hasn't applied in the last three years. Yeah, I don't think it's about
not being familiar with them at all. It's just more like we haven't talked to them, but we've talked
to most other people who have applied in the past three years. Tell us more about ESI. No, but don't
you think we should only ask, like, we have the strategy we have.
Yes, but I do not think that there's anything unclear about what they're asking for. They're asking
for $2,800 by cookware and they've explained their cookware project. Like knowing who they are to justify
giving them money for a cookware project, I feel like is not a good enough reason to bring them here.
And so I'm thinking our question should be focused on understanding
And also our questions should be focused on our evaluative criteria and who they are has nothing to
do with how we're choosing to evaluate them. That's fair. Do we have a more concrete record that we
can do like people who have applied before? Because I feel like that's like, I don't know, I agree with
you, but it's like if we're talking about who has and hasn't applied, but how do we know? And I know
a record doesn't exist because we've been given that information, we're given that information like
first year. Right. So, well, I don't know.
that it necessarily matters as if they five years ago, none of us were on the committee five years ago.
So they're new. But like, do we need, I guess my position would be at the end of the day, we have a
rubric that we've worked on for two years. Yes. We should be asking people to come and talk to us if
the data that they've given us is not easy to put into our rubric.
I mean, we're giving them the best chance possible to get sport in it, right? And so- You just motion,
that's all you're supposed to do. You just motion. Yeah. You know what I'm saying? I'm just thinking,
as we're thinking through this, if we say, okay, because we decided that we have some criteria, we can
also change our rules. But it's like, if our criteria is, okay, we're greatly blundered for the first
time, I guess my question to us is like, how does that bear on our rubric?
And, and, and so then if we're defaulting back to, well, it's just good for them to have an opportunity
to talk. Well, then we should default to interview everybody, right? Like, so, so just, um, yeah, I
don't know. With that in mind, we should tell you what we talked about the rubric. Yeah. So we just
had three areas that we wanted to kind of tweak, or at least to get on the same page about, um,
So the lasting contribution, well, you don't have it in front of you, but one of them was lasting
contribution, where we could rate them, yes, directly, yes, indirectly, minimal, or none. And so we
all had a bit of difficulty with defining what that meant in terms of lasting contribution, because
we're all going to process that and interpret it differently. So we just kind of talked through what
that means for us, so we're all kind of
closer to being on the same page and how to think about it. So we talk about it in terms of measurability.
And also, Andy had a good approach to it, too, that he kind of, you know, thinks about saving that for
last to compare it with other ones that are similarly graded. If they both have, they both grade exactly
the same, you can kind of use that as a tiebreaker, which one has longer
impact or lasting contribution of those two that will get the higher points there. So that's how we
were approaching lasting contribution. Number of full-time staff, right now it's zero through 10 is
green and 10 through 25 plus is yellow. We're adding a red category there for, it's gonna go 10 through
50 is yellow and then 50 plus is red.
Oh, no, actually, we're adding another partner. Yeah, we're going to do two points to people who have
less than 10 employees, and then one point to the next category, half a point. To the 50 to 99. And
then if there's over 100, it gets zero points. We're striking the community partnership question, but
we're moving that into consideration under focus.
So if we can determine that there's a community partnership, they can get a bonus point for it. Innovation,
you know, how brand new or innovative we feel something is, however we want to interpret that. So those
are kind of the guidelines for bonuses rather than just kind of vibing. Like, I really like them. I'm
going to throw off vibes here. So that's it. Those were the only notes that I had that I wanted to make
sure you could also build in on.
for helping us as we're evaluating based on the rubric for these applications. Sorry. Okay, so back
to Developmental Services Inc. This has not been charging the whole time. Are you kidding me? How silly.
I'm okay for now. The real question that I have for them is they report 120
Residents served and a hundred clients. I'm looking at this. This is a, and must be difficult, especially
to look at here, but. Aria had brought up earlier that people had had issues with that. There are lots
of posts made for the state there. What's the possible mistake here? It's pathways service.
480 residents, but a total service of 405. So what's the interpretation issue? What's the possible
explanation? I don't know. Do you have a question phrased? It's literally, thank you. In the human past,
it's also been what the entity serves, but then what the project has served.
Right. So that's one example. And then another one here would be, uh, children. Right. Right. So,
I mean, this could just be, if we want to invite them in, we could ask them to come in and clarify that,
or we can take care of it a little bit now. Like, can you please clarify because this doesn't add up?
It could also be like, if it, since it says number of Bloomington residents,
outside of them. That's what I was wondering. Oh, oh, but this like, I'm not sure. Also, is someone
taking notes on the questions? Yeah, I am. As we're going to move on to this, the habitat humanity process
that they serve matter to residents that their total service on will convert
Yeah, I mean, there's a lot of discrepancy here. I think this is a good email question. Yeah. What I'm
learning about is that first things across the board, this question, this number we're specifically
using to assess the ratio that we're scoring or weighting very heavily in our scoring. So it's interactually.
Exactly. Exactly.
So I don't know, I mean, that could really be easy. It's like as easy as an email off at all.
I was gonna say, we're gonna have to just email there. We still need to be clear about these numbers.
But I think we need. Okay, I think that's fair. We'll just have to figure out how to phrase it so that
they understand exactly what we're asking to. There was also the e-verify issue. Oh yeah. That would
probably be to everybody as well, so.
But that happens by way of giving them the money anyways, right? Yeah, that's why I wanted to ask all
of you guys today. Just the platform for the website that we confirm it has been not the best. Yeah,
so we don't have a way to confirm if they are or they aren't. So just a simple notification that they
would have to be by the time they receive the grant might be helpful. I mean, I think for the email,
about the numbers, we can just please clarify the total number of Bloomington residents served and the
total number of people served by this project. And then in parentheses, please note your total number
of people served should be higher than, higher or equal to. That's it. Yeah. No, we were confused when
we were going through some of those ones. Yeah. I do remember seeing that on a couple of applications
previously in other years.
I'm going, how did I do that? So yeah. So then, do we think we don't need to invite developmental services
to come in? That feels completely something. I think that it's not necessarily going to work. OK. If
we want to ask them a question, I had also had a question about this.
Well, I mean, like if we're so when we're clarifying the numbers, then it becomes really important.
Like are we saying year long cooking and nutrition program for a hundred unique participants or are
they're going to be repeated attendees across 24 sessions? I think that's a fair question to bring them
in. Right. Cause you could have, you could have five, you could have,
five people doing 24 sessions and then they record it as 100 people or something like, right? So like-
100 lessons. Exactly. So is it 24? Is it, you know, like, the math is weird for me. They have 24 sessions,
100 people serve, 120 residents affected. So all of their numbers. So I think that would be, that would
be a very good question to ask them. How many unique individuals will be participating
and benefiting as opposed to what? So I think very specifically, the question I would ask is one of
the year long cooking and nutrition program is meant for a hundred unique participants or repeated attendees
across 24 sessions. Okay, great. That's in the notes. Thank you. So we will invite them to interview
them. Does anybody have other questions that we should
But down now for developmental services. Okay. All right. Okay. Goodyear Hills food bank. Supplemental
healthy food purchasing the purchase.
food for distribution to city residents through partner agencies that serve them, and through our Bloomington
neighborhood mobile pantoos. For $40,000, they will accept partial funding. Bloomington residents serve
$15,000, total served $15,000 within Bloomington city limits. This is not a collaborative application.
which they don't qualify to be invited in. Yeah. I mean, the only thing is that in that, and this isn't
anything other than an observation, but they basically need this thing asked every year and it's just
like straight food, which I support, but it's also just like something worth it. It falls into like
our concern area because we specifically say we don't want reliance on this funding. Like in terms of
like different projects here, there's the only thing I would point out, but it is not because they do
not support.
That's important. Have you all ever fully funded them? Uh, I don't remember. We got close,
whatever we got, we got close last year. Yeah, I don't, we've never denied them. But I don't know that
we fully, fully funded. It's like $36,000. No.
And as we were trying to allocate for some other organizations. Right. Yeah. Trying to spread it around.
So the number here matters again, quite a bit. It's a ginormous number. And that's going to, I mean,
just based off of our rubric, we'll just, just by virtue of that number, that would be very high on
our list. And so,
I mean, 43,000 people? That's a lot, right? 43,000? 15,000. Isn't there 43 on there? They're requesting
40,000 and they're serving 150,000. That's a lot. A lot of people. There's a lot of people.
know that the insecurity is a big issue. And they're like the main player. Yeah, they do have
the partnerships. They do play well with others. Is there a reason that you're asking? Oh, I'm sorry,
Catherine, you cut out. Can you say that again? I said I wonder why they're, are they asking the other
thing? And that's interesting. No, but Isak was looking at contagious in mind, so.
Oh, okay. Forgive me. I'm going to throw them on the table and get you guys charging. Now it is. Okay.
That's just a dead outlet, I guess. So for Hooters Hills, what I wrote down was, um, um,
and they define what share of the 15,000 Bloomington residents are reached directly through this branch,
rather than through their larger annual food distribution baseline. Okay. And then like, and I mean,
they're more pressing question to me, and sorry, I was confused before looking at pantridges like that,
but the more pressing question to me, and it's similar, they're asking for quite a bit of money, is like,
like the marginal, I had to say this correctly. So they're just going to do this regardless, right?
And so the question is like, marginally speaking, are we buying something, like what's the marginal
benefit of 40,000 so that we're comparing, like are we, so we're comparing the effectiveness of the
money that we're spending
Instead of comparing the effectiveness of an organization, if that makes sense, because because here,
if you know it's sort of like if we don't fund you, are you saying that.
15,000 people will go hungry, is that what you're saying? That's a different claim than we feed 15,000
people and we'd like an additional $40,000 to continue to feed, that would be both very important claims,
right? But they're substantially different claims, right? And so, which then gets at this question of
like, is the 40,000 that Jack Hopkins is spending and that we have spent over the last X amount of years,
is it being leveraged to the full extent
that it can be because this fund exists to sort of help people do something they couldn't do otherwise,
right? So, I mean, if we want it to be particularly difficult, I don't know, that's the wrong way of
saying it. Like if we're being, you know, strict about what we do, that's the question I would really
ask. Well, do you want to put that in writing and send it to me and I will put it in the comment box.
If you want to make like a shared, I can just type in like, where are you keeping it? Yeah, I'm just
writing you access to this.
and you can type in. I just feel like we already, like I do agree with you, but I think that both can
be true because based on the conversation about food security that you all posted as well, we know that
there's a shortfall in resources. So no matter what, it's like not having 40,000 dollars does mean food
won't be distributed. And then they also reference in their application
that this could be considered a bridge to cover the loss of federal food support. And since that support
is going to continue to diminish. So I feel clear about. Yeah, that's true. All right. You can put it
right in the comment box. Well, I mean, I think that your point, though, is that it may not be necessary
to ask. What are other things? I'm just trying to navigate a lot of information.
I think we serve definite numbers here. But out of this 15,000, maybe they're not getting a better food
allocation about that $40,000 funding. There's a difference between hungry and insecure. And if the
money could be keeping people from actually being able
I don't feel the need to bring one in. I think it's pretty straightforward. If we choose not to fund
the full amount, that's up to us. I was just saying, I was just going to bring that up. I was just asking
that for you. Well, an email question. I mean, my curiosity is, so they're purchasing food for partner
agencies. And then they're also, some seems to be
through Bloomington neighborhood and mobile pantries. I'm curious about that. I mean, is this funding
going to be particularly supporting those mobile pantries today? I don't know anything about it. But
I'm just curious, is that what it's allocating for? I'm just curious. I don't have any too need
bring them in or even form a question. But if I had a question, they would be in. Do we need to take
a vote if we want to email them? I mean, there's been a number of questions. If there's people on this
committee who wants to ask their questions, that's fine.
I'd rather err on the side of information. So go ahead and put in that question that you had, please,
because you phrased it better than I can in the notes. Did you share it with me? Yes, we should have
it. Do you need me to send you the link? Just tell me where you should be. Well, I gave you editing.
I had shared it with you in the email yesterday, and then I gave you editing capabilities just now.
Here, here. Do you want me to resend you the link? No, I am ready. That's fine. OK. OK. Thank you. You're
welcome. All right. An application summary on that one, please. Under comments. Got it. All the way
on it. Yeah. I don't know the appropriate time to say this, or to break this up, because we've already
talked about river, but I've just calculated all the ratios. They range around 4 to 4.10 cents.
for residents served up to $400, $500 for residents served. So at some point we just need to come up
with a threshold of like what the color categories for storing them. Yeah. So just wait a little bit.
That's super. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. All right. Should we move on to Bloomington Cooperative
Living? So they have been before us before. Yeah. I remember.
Infrastructure starts with a thousand. Fossil, yes. They start with a thousand. Okay, yeah.
So they serve, they're only in Bloomington as their name implies. So they serve 64 residents. They're
looking for $8,500 for digital outreach package. Excuse me, I said that weird. Consisting of website
design services, social media, advertisements, and social media advertisement management services.
This project is intended to bolster outreach and community awareness of BCL programs. It's
not a collaborative project, it is human development. I have reservations about this one. Thank you.
I don't think this is the right thing to do. A good way to spend
these funds, unless someone feels very strongly about it. This is the only one I marked in red as one
I didn't feel like fit. That's what I'm feeling. Right here, yeah. It doesn't fit the immediate needs
for the communities. I would agree with funding this. If they had a plan to demonstrate that
after these services are completed, that somebody will be able to manage it on their team. If people
can't get the services through an online portal or digital advertisement, then their organization may
cease to exist or not getting the services that they need. If they can explain that this is going to
transform the way that people are able to access their services and they can manage
these platforms after the package runs out, then I'd be okay with funding it. Can they demonstrate that
they need these services in order to continue to provide services?
If they can demonstrate that they will improve outreach to their intended audience or their intended,
I don't know, target audience, then by having improved digital advertisement and social media platforms,
then I'm okay with it. And if they have a plan for transferring the skill set from the person who will
or the organization that will provide the package to a member of their team being able to take this
on, then I'd be okay with it.
like having adequate communications is extremely difficult for these types of organizations from what
I've seen from my vantage point. So I think it's a good use of their funds, but that's my opinion. Yeah,
I guess that's fair. And then, yeah, asking them to clarify, is this just a one-time spend on this?
Is that not going to have a lasting impact if they're doing a one-time spend
And there's always this first series that would last them throughout the year. So you advocate for us
sending them an email question to explain this a little more deeply. I think they need to come in and
explain it. I don't know if they can, I don't, because they weren't able to adequately explain it in
the project information, I don't think they'll, an email necessarily do it. I feel like they, this,
this, this warrants to me at least. Yeah. Hearing from somebody.
They might be able to explain it better verbally. Um, does anybody else have any thoughts on this one?
Yeah. I mean, I would, I would, you know, only hear them out and then we could really decide if we want
them. Yeah. That's fine with that. Yeah, I'm fine with inviting them and we'll have to make a separate
motion to invite them in because they don't. I mean, if you wanted to, right.
If you want to give them the best chance also to make their case, then I think in addition to what Captain
just said, I don't get the theory of change. How does a website translate into housing, or for that
matter, any stabilized outcomes?
understand Katherine's point is that how are people going to know about their services being an option
for them? That's fair. So, but like, I think beyond the question of like, are they going to be able
to sustain this? Like, do you feel like they've made a strong net theory change argument? That it's
like, are we breathing into that theory or like, you feel like they know that? Well, I guess that's
what we're asking them to
But I don't know what Katherine suggested. It's so funny. I know. The door lock is very funny at this
moment. You can't hear it, but there's a very loud vacuum. They came in. I thought that your question
was about sustainability, like that being the key. Sustainability. But it's also, I think it's also
your question, your point also is a good one, because if they can't articulate,
For example, maybe their platforms, they've done a survey. Exactly. Website is really hard to navigate,
and I really want to utilize your services, but I have no idea how to use them. And so maybe they have
all this information of like, if we better advertise, if we better present our information, actually
access it, and then we can actually serve the people that we're looking to serve. Yes.
I move that we add to our criteria of invitation people for whom we have substantive questions that
hinder our ability to properly rubric and assess them fairly. Second. All right, I have a motion and
a second. Dave? Yes. Esau? Yes. Cameron? Yes. Eddie?
Me, yes. Catherine? Sorry, can you say that again? Yes. Yes, thank you. And Andy? Yes. All right,
that passes. So I believe that qualifies Bloomington Cooperative Living for an invite to interview.
So I'd like to ask a question on why are there
vacancies, if they're having problems housing the appropriate people. And this is why they need to reach
out to, cast a wide net to get more residents. Or, you know, that's my primary question is this, are
you guys leading tenants? Do you have vacancies? Oh, yeah.
billing spots. These notes that I'm putting in the comments are just really just that notes. They're
not eloquent, but they get me going across, at least in my brain. Okay. Awesome. Thank you. All right.
So we will invite them in and hear more from them firsthand. Stone Belt Arc Inc. They're Java Palooza.
They bring this to us every year.
Java Palooza allows individuals with disabilities to connect with local employers and try new job tasks
to determine areas of interest and competency. This project also allows local employers to connect with
new possible employees with disabilities in our community, which fosters greater diversity in the workforce.
They're only asking for $5,000. They don't qualify at least off the surface right now for an invite
to interview.
see us having any questions other than, of course, the numbers, but that's going to go out to everybody.
I mean, like I said, they come before us every year. Anybody have any questions that they want us to
ask? No. They're pretty straightforward. Habitat for Humanity of Monroe County. They are looking for
a tool investment.
They are seeking $14,137 in funding to replace their Makita tools, purchase a trailer, and two ladder
racks. Regular replacement and the purchase of a trailer and ladder racks will keep their volunteers
and staff safe while building and supplying quality, affordable homes. So they enroll 910 Bloomington
residents, but they must serve a total of 100. I think that 100 is probably houses.
Again, so I think we should probably have the question as broad of a way possible. You know, we messed
up, our farm is wrong. So will you just clarify because it will affect our root grant, right? Yeah,
yeah. And then we should proliferate through what it is that we want them to tell us, you know, number
of residents served, number of clients overall, something like that. Yeah, people. We're happy people,
not units, okay?
I'm just tall, sorry. I don't understand. Um, do we have any questions then? I mean, they don't qualify
unless we have substantial questions. They don't qualify for an invitation to interview. No questions.
All right.
Girls Inc. of Monroe County. They also apply every year. Their project title is Inspiring Strong, Smart,
and Bold Leaders. Girls Inc. of Monroe County delivers intentional, evidence-based programs that build
confidence, strengthen—this doesn't really tell us about the project, but they're looking for the
money—build confidence, strengthen social, emotional, and
physical well-being, and provide academic enrichment for school-aged girls in the Bloomington community.
Our programs equip girls with the skills, knowledge, and support to grow into confident leaders and
engage community members. They're asking for $34,870. That's a very specific number, but they're not
telling us what specifically that is for. I know typically it's for like, sometimes it's for... Oh,
thank you.
Also, when it'd be helpful for us, I'll share the spreadsheets. You don't have to read each description.
Oh, it's, you guys don't like that. Yeah. Yeah. No, that's why you could do a split screen. Yeah. Okay.
It just, if, as long as we can all read it, is that something that we can jump back and look at?
If not, I can, I can toggle it. Yes. Okay. So, uh,
Yes, so this project description is where they put it up here, so that forms a brief overview, but I've
been putting these up here. Oh, thank you. Not that I didn't enjoy your reading. No, I appreciate it.
Do they? They break it down in their budget. 26,870 staff and personnel and 8,000 in summertime scholarships.
Staff and personnel is the majority of this funding? That's correct. What we could ask them, you know,
getting at the point that you're getting at is like, what is the impact of funding staff on the cost
of the event, right?
So like in many ways, like a staff fund is defraying costs for the camp. So it's somewhat equal to a
scholarship. And so it would be useful for, as they clarify a follow-on question for them specifically
about numbers is, you know, how many, like for them to explain how many people they think are being
affected by this when they actually don't have a discrepancy in their numbers, I guess, but,
you know, like the numbers affected by scholarships versus the number affected by staff and in what
ways, could be a question to ask, but I think they're fairly, you know, I think it's fairly clear. So
are you saying, you think we should just email those questions, we want them invited in, how are you?
I would notice, ask the question about what portion of, that we know what portion of scholarships and
what portion is program content,
The question is like, what is the distinct outcome tied to each of those portions? Okay. Do you want
to put that in the questions in the comment box there? Do you know that to them? Unless you think we
should invite them in to have a deeper conversation. Okay. But I actually don't think that, now that
I said that out loud, I don't think that really affects our rubric per se. So whatever it's worth. So
maybe I would, I would draw that question. Okay.
Anybody else have any questions? Well, I think you should put your question back. And I also, I do want
to hear more about the long-term impact of the programs. Because if they keep asking for money and you
all don't know or not sure what the impact of where the programs are, I mean, I've been to their programs.
They're fantastic. I just don't know. Yeah, OK. Yeah, I think it'd be OK to ask them to share the impact.
Yeah. Because I'm seeing a lot of- Yeah, I think that does affect the rubric.
But not a lot of impact that is is listed here. Yeah, thank you. Alright, so you're doing that. Move
on to community kitchen of Monroe County for equipment purchase.
SAS seems pretty straightforward. I personally would not have any questions for them. I don't have any
questions either. And they don't fit any of the other criteria for an interview. All right. We're good
with just moving on with community kitchens. Tandem is next.
I do have a question for community kitchen. Sorry. I'm so sorry. It's my fault. They selected capital,
but also said the project is not involved with capital improvement. So just a minor inconsistency that
could be clarified in an email, but like, so like,
I assume that we're thinking of capital improvement means like change of the building rather than buy
a thing. But in this case, it's a wheelchair. Yeah, it's first aid. Yeah, it's first aid equipment.
Yeah. I think in the application there's capital and capital as like a separate set of answers. So capital
would be different. Okay. Okay. Okay. Thank you for the presentation. All right. So I feel clear. Does
anybody have other clarifications? And are we? I don't know.
It's a minor, but I'll ask you when we're about to do it. Okay. Are you sure? Yes. Yes. Yes. All right. Tandem.
I mean, as a former diaper buyer, I think those $50,000 is probably going to be spent on diapers alone.
Uh-huh. But I think we can start with this, and I don't think this is something to worry about now,
but more when we're doing the evaluations later, is that we're not supposed to be spending money on
recurring for paying staff. They're not supposed to rely on us for it. They're paying for staff.
creating positions or getting position on the ground with the understanding that the agency who was
requesting that would be able to continue paying them once they get that person in place. So I only
just worry about the, you know, paying staff or any utilities since they do our business, are they relying
on this? I mean, so the insider information here, which, you know, decide whether it biases me or not, but yeah.
They're under like so much financial pressure. I think that the question that we might want to ask them
is about sustainability. And then the broader question of really, and back to I think a question that
I've tried in multiple cases where it's like, what are we actually buying? And so like, is it that we're
giving them a longer runway?
Is it that we're allowing them to divert other things and other grants that they have directly into
customer services like and what is it that that
that pay for staff bias. So I think to go beyond the question that you said, I don't think we need to
just have a black and white gate, but it's like either you're establishing a position or we don't fund
it. It's really saying like, what happens when this position gets funded? And what's the antithesis
to us not funding this is maybe the easier way for us to understand it, but it's like, well, we close,
right? And so I think in this case that elevates it in a different way, it makes it an emergency, it
makes it a whatever.
I'm arguing all those things because I have some insight into it. So I think that it's important for
us to ask them to see if that's the way they perceive it. Do you think that merits an invitation to
come before us? It could. It's on the largest ask. I do think it will be hard for us to properly, based
on the answers to the question that I just raised, it would flip where they are on my regret.
You know, so I would say something like we need a clear explanation or like sustainability and what
this grant concretely buys, something like that. And I would argue that we cannot, that I don't have
enough information based on what they said to fully evaluate them on the rubric. I think I would end
up minimizing some other points for lack of clarity, just me.
So we should invite them to interview because this is substantial questions that we have. Any other
thoughts? Agreement, disagreement, motions? What have you? No, I don't think that's valid. I think that
we say we want to be able to provide our personal support. I think it's very valid for us to have a
conversation with them about what this looks like past six months.
Okay. We gave them very modest support last year. Oh, yeah. Six thousand. Wow. Wow. That was a big deal.
They were established in a postpartum center. I mean, how much do you know? I don't remember. I thought
the request was quite substantial, too. No, no, no. Last year, last year, they because there was,
you know, there's a handful of groups that in the last several years have been like, why is this all
you're asking for?
And they were one last year, it was like, they asked for like, you know, some diapers. Right. You know,
and I, and I said, I remember very specifically in the meeting being like, I know that you have financial
issues. Like, why are you asking for five, $5,000? And they were like, I don't know. Like it
was a substantial aspect of the form. I can't remember what we decided, but it was for South Bay or
cheaper than us about it. Probably. I think it's seriously, they were establishing.
Yeah, I thought the year before the question was the one about the burden center. That's what they wanted
us to fund the year before. Yeah. Then last year it was some, you know, just a silly, like I say,
I mean, just like, like, you know, just like, I'll give us some money if you can. And here's the thing
we can use it for type of application. And so I feel like this year they balanced those two things.
Right. So. Well, we're going to need motion if we want them to come in. I think we don't need the motion.
That's right.
Sorry, it's not as specific. Okay, so we are inviting them to. It's a big ask. It is. Yeah, we should,
it would be good to explore them. We have a lot of questions. Okay. Super, thank you. So Bramessa Foundation,
Inc. They're getting moving. When are we going to be going to the house?
I'm really interested with them about how they're counting their beneficiaries. There's a possibility
that what they're counting here is the amount of people that their partners reach.
So I did a project with Eddie, and then I was asked how many people did the project reach? We just trained
two people in his office, but I reported 14,000. Because that's how many people he serves, right? So
that was a little unclear to me about what their numbers mean. Yeah.
You know, we should invite them, I think. Outreach. That to me is a substantial question, because if
they themselves are reaching that many people, wonderful. If they're reaching them through their partners,
great. But then we have a lot of questions about, OK, explain to us how what you're asking us to accomplish
that end. Right. OK, so we need to invite them to a group because A, there's substantial questions and B,
I don't think they've come before us before. Yeah, so two reasons to bring them. Yes. Okay, great. Courage
to change sober living. I think this is a revender. I think it might be either a tech issue or they,
I'm sure, because it's the exact same application. Okay, so we can skip this one. I was like,
wait a minute, I heard that before. Oh, here we go, Susie's place.
Hendricks County. Is Catherine saying something? Catherine, are you saying something? You're muted.
All right, that's not me. That's my children. Well, okay. Got it. Looks like they're looking to fund,
do I understand, their play place, basically? It's operational expenses.
for a salary match. This is what you guys think. The question I have here is, this looks way different
from the ask last year. And then last year when we were talking about fundraising, she was like, oh,
we've got, because they had a relatively small ask last year.
and and she was like we've got most of our fundraising covered and so because it's operational because
they're not mentioning some of the things that other places mentioned in terms of word bridge funding
or reduction and explorers need which could very well exist i think it would be worth asking about that
um or why do you need this operational funding now um yeah because last year we funded like office furniture
for that but yeah and she was so
confident about it better than last year. That stuck out to me when we were talking. Is this an email
or an invite? It's a big ask. This is another one of our very large ones. It's 48, NASA. I think this
is so big. I wouldn't mind inviting. Yeah. It seems like a similar kind of apps.
Yeah, that's a lot of... Is it because the amount is high or is it because of what they're asking to
spend it on? I think it's similar to what Ysak was talking about. Are we providing a longer runway for
them or are they going to close their doors because they don't get this funding? To me, it seems a little
similar to what Ysak was asking about Pandam. Okay, that makes sense to me.
Thank you. All right. So we will invite them as well. Okay. Planned. Whoa. My sheet just scrolled all
the way down. Planned. Parenthood. Great Northwest. Hawaii. Alaska. Indiana. Kentucky. That cracks me
up every time. They also have the same mask every year. Yeah.
I don't have any questions for them. I don't see need to invite them in. Does anybody have any questions
for them or want to hear from them? Okay. All right. So cancer support community, South Central Indiana.
I believe this is the same as last year more or less in terms of
description, I don't remember, amount, but. That can help against them? No, I'm just saying I. That's
something that's considered a root root root root root root root root root root root root root root
root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root
root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root
root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root
root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root
root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root
root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root
root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root
root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root root
root root root root root root root root root root
I mean it's not, it's such a minor, I think it would skew my thing better. This is an example of where,
I don't know what the service region of something like this is, but I imagine that people come in from
Bedford and people come in from, right, which I don't have this, you guys don't know, I don't have the
strong of a view of
It must be governed by the resident who lives in the place and appearing with the taxes. I think it's
generally good to do good things. But this one, it raises this question of how we capture that when
it's talking about a fluid transient service area.
which are very different than the like you're in Ellensville or people for non-groupings that come to
you. It's like one question, but like, this is like, you know, what is your service area anyways? Especially,
you know, they, other communities don't have the medical facilities. I mean, I mean, you know, the number
served and total service, once again, we can't actually do that, but they say they only serve 20 Booms
residents to nine and seven.
Yeah, but I don't. Yeah, I mean, it says right away in the description, we'll provide 24 cancer patients
who are city residents with immediate short-term financial resources. I mean, that sounds like a very
clear plan. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But I mean, cancer is expensive, man. Yeah, totally. Yeah. Let's move
on. All right. People and animal learning services.
say like, you know, this, this really relies on you already believing that, um, or already knowing that
you didn't, you decide what your biases, um, that, um, that equite therapy is a great idea. You know,
if we're really going to scrutinize it,
I would say that I don't think that they make a strong argument for the theory of change. I
don't necessarily, I personally don't think they need to, because I think that there's a lot of research
on the topic, but just looking at what's in front of us, like, you know, however, we also have talked
about the last two years and asked them such questions. So, right, you know, whether we should view
ourselves as episodic or as a continuous thing is another interesting theoretical question to ask at
8.30 at night.
I mean, it's a pretty low amount of money. I don't know. I'm not asking for any infrastructure. I mean,
I'm asking for a specific program. So I personally do not have any questions. The validity of acquiring
therapy, that's really not something I'm going to try to comment on. I mean, it's a guess.
Interesting question. And I'm curious now, but I don't, I wouldn't bring. So we'll leave them no email,
no invite. Yeah. Okay. Um, he said, can you take over? Um, okay. Um, uh, people and what's the next
one? People and horses began, began, began.
Thank you. So it seems pretty straightforward. Yeah. 22. Oh, sorry. I'm looking at the wrong spreadsheet.
Any questions? Okay, moving on. Wonder Lab Museum. Any questions?
Moving on, new leaf, new life? This is not the collaborative one. Sorry, I think I had a question.
They get coming. What questions would you like to ask them? Number discrepancy.
I'm a little bit familiar with this and I don't think there maybe this doesn't matter but
I don't think there's any connection necessarily to low-income or marginalized groups or low-income
people for this program, for this camp. I think it's for absolutely anybody who's got a parent or any
family that's been impacted in the immediate family by cancer of a parent. So, I mean, maybe that doesn't
matter, but maybe it- No, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. Sorry. Sorry. No, I'm just saying it
doesn't matter because that's in our requirements.
that needs to be low income. So maybe we need to ask a clarifying question about this. I could be wrong,
but I know someone very well who's been a counselor there a few times. And that's not my understanding
that it's income related. Right. But I could be mistaken. But OK.
So what if we ask the question, oh, you're back in charge again. In my handover, I will say, what if
we ask the question, would they be willing to limit these funds to low income Bloomington residents?
Scholarships, basically, to low income folks. But I think that then we're asking for an adjustment in
their rate, what they wrote.
We can write friendly amendments, right? Where we can go, yeah, we like that you want this board, but
we want you to do your window. We'll do that. It says 98% of parents. Kids have cancer. I mean, we just
said the cancer is an expensive treatment, so I guess I'm inferring. Yeah, that's also right.
And I would say that when I was going through chemo, if I had kids, I would have loved for them to go
to account. It would have been very difficult to have them at home. So let alone the being poor part.
Well, maybe our question is just what their application process looks like for their participants, so
we can understand that better. Or the question could be,
Is there an assumption that everyone who participates in Kesem is financially stressed, seriously stressed
just due to the fact that they're suffering from a cancer impact? Yeah. Okay. I've added it. Boom.
Thank you. So are we inviting them in then because they're new too? They're new. They get invited. Yeah.
Super. Thank you. You're in charge again. Okay. Silver linings rescue. So we will...
Pause so Cameron can step out. Is this where she's conflicted? Yes. Hey, bring in conflicts. Come on.
I thought we dealt with those. So they are a new organization, new application for us. Yeah. If we have
questions for them.
Why didn't they do a collaborative one with MCHA? What else? Did MCHA apply for anything this year?
They did. Yeah. I think that's a good question to ask for any organization. Yeah, I mean, that's more
of that. They get to tell us because, you know, it's more us giving them some information than maybe
they don't realize it, for example. Yeah.
So what would we ask them if we invite them in. I mean, more so they have to come their first year,
their first time. No, we decided that if we can get them okay we can we can. Oh yeah.
I think similar to some of the things that Catherine and I brought up, I think this is like the sort
of outcome measures aren't super, super clear in terms of specifically to the Emergency Medical Fund.
So if they could elaborate on the outcomes associated with the Emergency Medical Fund, that would be
cool. I think they talk generally about their organization as a whole, but it would be nice to know
about the Emergency Medical Fund specifically. Okay. And then invite them to
Thank you. You want to let Cameron know she's welcome to return. Please. So now we have a collaborative
application with New Leap New Light. It hurts to change.
So people want to, I forget why people are coming where it's collaborative. This seems very straightforward.
Yeah. Don't worry, see a need to ask them any questions. I don't either. I mean, they're both organizations
we've dealt with before. They seem pretty straightforward. Yeah. Their collaboration makes sense.
Sometimes the collaborations don't quite make sense. It's a small movement. Yeah. All right. Yes. Yeah,
the collaborative. All right. So I don't think we need to invite them to participate. C-Jam. It's been
before us before. Eviction, prevention, mediation. Isn't this similar to what they can
with last year requesting. I think it was, yeah, eviction mediation. Yeah. Yeah, I think you're right.
I'm okay not asking them anything. I thought this was one of the clearest applications. Yeah, we don't
have any questions. Does anybody have any questions they want emailed or clarifications?
You can ask them if they're abiding by the Heading Home Plan and if they're collaborating with other
agencies associated with the Heading Home Plan. Not that we as a city are necessarily following the
Heading Home Plan.
Is this a new organization? They were not last year, I don't think, but two years ago. We did fund them
two years ago because they were not abiding by the Heading Plan. Very famous moment in my mind anyways,
where I said, are you abiding by the Heading Plan? We told them ahead of time that we would ask them
this question. And they said, what's that? And I thought, well, that's interesting. We've also sat here.
for five hours and heard other organizations then suddenly. I would like to ask them, who are
they cooperating with now? It's the question. There's been organizations that have invited you on to
staff, and they never come, and they never commute to the general class. So I would like to know,
What are you doing to moderate the area for either? I also, I mean, I'll probably ask when they're here
about the theory of change, why in the world do they, I mean, based on the theory of change, why are
they not asking us to fund the programs and asking us to fund the person? I think they did ask for the
other results.
Yes, but we didn't fund them. But we didn't fund them because we said that we will only fund, we said
at the beginning, we asked them to question and email, then ask them in person. It was a very clear
lesson. We'll try to do that. Okay, so we will invite Patel Shroud, Menorah County Humane Association.
I personally didn't have any questions for them. No, me neither. And they were just really hit by the
tornadoes. And they're not asking for treatment or stuff. Never accused myself for Summit Hill. And
all these conflicts out here. Only two of these are. Yeah, I was like, oh my goodness. All right, Summit
Hill Community Development Partnership.
grad housing food access. Have they come before us before? I don't. I don't. I'm not saying they haven't.
I just don't know. Okay. You didn't want that when you community garden project last year, but I don't
remember. I mean, we could ask them whether
their vehicle buyout is like a contractually locked agreement. Stated price. Do people, so once they
do that, what happens with title insurance? All the associated costs that come with owning a car, it's
not just like purchasing the car. They should have asked for more, like to take into account maintenance and
Licenses and... Exactly. So yeah, that'd be a good question. It's like, what's the plan for maintenance?
What's the plan for all of these other things that come along with owning a car? All right. So does
this warrant us inviting them in or is this an email?
It's an existential question though, isn't it? Yeah, I think so. I'm just making sure we're inviting
them in. Okay. I'll go get them. Thank you. I don't think we did, we definitely didn't talk to them
last year and I don't remember them. Okay, thank you. Exodus Refugee Immigration. We'll maintain emergency
assistance programs.
Well, and they've come before us before. Any questions or requests? I'm just nosy. Because the number
of refugees in the United States are going down, who's their target audience now? Like, are these refugees
that are currently in? And this is an interesting question, but like, who are they aiming to? Because
we're not really letting you know.
Yeah, it would be nice to know that. But does it change our? No, it does. Just being nosy, I guess.
Oh, yeah. Awesome. Avalon Community Land Trust. They're new. Yeah. They're new cooperatives, so they
would be invited in. Yeah.
If we felt like you wanted them to come to the question, I would ask that this is maybe is the question
about cooperatives is about ownership structure of public facing infrastructure or something like that.
So, they're not new. They came in last year with a collaborative project with the universe. This is
between our project from last year. Yeah. And this is the one where I felt.
This is the one that made me feel like we shouldn't do summaries in the North, but this was like, well,
if you reviewed our budget, we would have seen, and I was like, you're right. Sorry. All right. So do
we have questions for them then, or are we any concerned? It's more of an interesting conversation to
be had than a question. I see. All right. And so we have no reason to invite them in? Correct. All right.
Boys and Girls Club of Bloomington. Is this in Bloomington? Jokes, jokes, jokes. It is not. It's in
Bloomington. So they asked for money for doors and security at this facility. Yes. Didn't we fund that
last year? We did. We did. We're just doing the ones we did. There's still a piece in security. There's
an outlet.
No, this is the one in Bloomington. Last year, though. But I think the Lincoln site had the new words.
It was the... Oh, no. Was it the Lincoln site? It was a couple years ago. Yeah. Yeah. Well, should we
have our chair find this out and hand in the answer that you have? No, she denied. So, in other words,
this is still security all around for $20,000.
But this was what they asked last year. Did we just partially undercover? A couple of years ago. It
sounds like they had an incident in November of 2025 that showed that there was disparities with the
black community. I would like to have them, I would like to ask a question, maybe not have them come
in. And I don't know if they'll elaborate on
what's going on with the security. The elevator is pretty straightforward. That's the issue. All right.
So you're saying this can be an email? Yeah, I think so. What additional security measures will
$20,000 to help prevent criminal activities on the grounds. Sorry, Seth. To prevent future criminal
activities. Should we ask about did they get the doors?
or does that really afford me to ask? I don't think so. I just, I want to know what they need to spend
to for them to feel safe. And maybe it was wasn't it two years ago, right? So I want to know what, what
underlying issues would be helpful. What measures spend will make you feel safe?
Okay, so we will invite. No, we're not invited in the bill. Yes. Understood. Thank you. All right, Amethyst
House. Oh, question that just occurred to me. How are we going to deal with discrepancy? So you're going
to say, hey, we were wrong. Correct your numbers. And then what if their numbers are still lying on?
What do we do?
Well, the biggest thing is we're giving them the hint that one number needs to be bigger than the other
number. So that correction alone, well, and we can say, well, we're trying to just clarify it. We're
trying to give them that. But what we're trying to find, I guess, is the question. What is it that we're
asking them? We're asking them that we're going to resident search versus just number of people served
by these projects. Both of these are by this project.
is how the question is phrased, right? We might want to add a direct and indirect number to say like,
direct people served by this project, and be clear, unique individuals. Yeah. Number of people served
by this project, whether directly or indirectly, unique individuals. Yeah, and then I love that number.
How many are moving tonight? Yes. It's probably the better way to phrase it. So what do we do if they
come with funky numbers? Then we go, you don't know numbers and you can't manage money. You don't get
money. But I'm saying, like, do they get, is there a follow-up email? Is there a, right? Or do we just,
that's how we read them? From a project management perspective, I think what's happening before is emails
get responses and then the committee can decide
Or you could give the chair the authority to then invite them in order to interview very patiently.
Yes. And motion that the chair be authorized with the great chief authority to invite people who, upon
receiving the emails back, still finds a discrepancy. OK. Well, well.
Nobody seconded it, so that dies on the vine. That's fine. I tried. I tried. Just wait so we all see.
This is the problem. All right. We've got 20 minutes left. 22 minutes left. Eight more things.
We can do this. Amethyst has come to us before. No questions. No questions.
Any questions? None. Okay. Ivy Tech Community College, Wilmington. Tide and Harvest Food Pantry. So
technically, they're new to the fabrication process, correct? They are. I think you should hear from
them from that point.
assuming that a, I want to understand their relationship with, like, Ivy Tech is a higher ed institution
that does have a long research base. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, that's, that had been my, I saw Ivy Tech on
there. I was like, I can't believe that they say something like that. I mean, they are a nonprofit.
Yeah. But. Why didn't they list Tujer here, so they're not here? They did list them.
Why did they apply as a collaborative? Well, and why? I think they're just trying to demonstrate that
they have, like, they built some infrastructure that legitimizes them, where Hooger Hills has their
own priority for funding. Yeah, I would jump in and say, I mean, I like this idea, but in a way, it's
kind of weird. It's kind of like the city of Bloomington applying to Ivy Tech for a grant for some sort
of service.
It just feels, it's just kind of different. Also, why didn't they use their foundation? I see that Ivy
Tech has a foundation. Yeah. Why they didn't go to the parent company. I'm just... Yeah. Agreed. Okay.
So we'll invite them in and we'll ask them, please explain this setup better to us, this relationship,
and why didn't you use the foundation? And also is...
It seems like it's a non-profit, but I mean, it's a for-profit. Am I correct? No. Ivy Tech is, yeah,
Ivy Tech is non-profit. Interesting. Okay. Yeah, it feels unusual. I mean, I think we're just not there
for standards. Yeah. All right. Wheeler Mission Laundering Services.
They don't have any questions. Any questions? I mean, do they follow? We can email them. Do they follow
the Heading Home Plan? No, they're co-authors of it. Yeah, they're collaborators. Oh, they are. OK.
I know that they don't take part, I think, in the pit. They do now. They do now? They part in pit?
Carry on. All right.
Big brothers, big sisters of South Central Indiana. Would you say it, Siri? So it's like the same ask
we tend to get each year from them, am I correct? Or similar? It's a really big ask. Yeah. But we were
asking for a fine position.
I think these support mentors are volunteers. They're big, right? Well, do we have, I'm assuming we
don't need to invite them in because they've come before us before.
We don't seem to have a ton of overwhelming questions for them. Do we have any email questions that
we want clarifying? All right. Pretty much speaks for itself. Okay. All right. Mother Hubbard's cupboard.
Any outstanding questions from other Hubbard's covered? No? All right. New Hope Family Shelter. New
Hope for Families. This is similar to Pathways, I feel. Are we having Pathways for Men? I think so.
So are we having Pathways for Men?
I mean, they've kind of spelled it out in the project information. I think we have an app named Book
of Millions at Fort Lewis. I'm trying to. I don't know that we are here in Paris. If they're not coming
here, then you can listen. I didn't know. It's been a big ass. Yeah. I think we're e-mailing pathways.
questions you're going to vote, because they kind of spelled it out. Yeah. Is this maybe funded in the
past? They actually were rejected last year. But we have funded them in the past. And their organization
was very collaborative. Yeah. Last year, they were looking for a canopy over there. Oh, yeah. Yeah.
It hit a lot.
priority. Can I ask a question about Mother Humbertson? You'll have to make a motion to go back now.
Just as we're thinking more about the numbers of people served, when they clarify this, this is my example
where I don't know,
That's more people than live in this city, mate. On both occasions. That's more people than the hills.
That's like almost as many, that's like all the people in in Monroe County. Yeah. So, so I, so I did,
I don't know, all I'm saying is it illustrates that we're going to ask for clarifying and they're going
to send us back these numbers. And that number gives them some,
positioning difference to me, but I don't know what that number means. What does that number mean? Yeah,
so let's just ask him to explain. Can you explain where you got your numbers? Yeah, so like, yeah, so
when we send it to everybody, can we also be like... We need to be like, you said this. No, I'm just
saying like the broad question is like, tell us these four things that we said earlier. And he's like,
and can you please provide a little explanation to like how you came to these numbers?
Sorry, that is just, sorry. No, I, yeah, that, I mean, you're right. We want to be as clear as we can
and get as much info as we can. Exactly. So we don't, so we're not, we end up misjudging people based
on, you know, based on, based on faulty data. Absolutely. Incomplete data or whatever. Yep. Yep.
All right. No, you're good. Indiana Recovery Alliance, they've been before us before. So this is a new
position that they have funded.
They've done a good job about asking very specific and incoming jobs that they fund afterwards. Yeah,
because I believe the past two years was each to get new positions off the ground. Yeah. I don't necessarily
have any questions that I thought was asked. Anybody have any questions for IRA? All right.
The last one, My Sister's Closet. They're very large. Yes, they also are moving. Paper HVAC consists
of electrical costs. Report me if there's something I haven't tried to read over there. We actually
had a better workbook on there too.
That's not part of our rubric. So you should ask questions to clarify what's not clear in there,
in the graph. Plus, we made the move, so. Is this an invite or is this a no? If you feel like it's totally
unclear and it would,
like it would stop you from being able to evaluate them, then we have to invite them or you have to
ask all of your questions so you can evaluate them. I don't know. I like what they're saying they're
going to do, but I'd love to hear like, because if they expand, will they reach more people? Will they
be able to do more client outreach? Like what will these renovations, what does it mean to be critical
maintaining uninterrupted access? What is that?
What do they mean? What are the renovations? What's that? Okay. So the question, so are you, are we
saying we want to invite them in or send an email? I thought you were all saying it was unclear. No,
I was, I was saying historically they've not sold themselves well in their grant writing. That's why
I said, I wish they had help with their grant writing. That's all.
I just don't think they're good salespeople for themselves. I say they should bring them in. I'd love
to hear more about what this $50,000 will do for their long-term success and goals. I don't think it's
clear here. All right, so we will invite them in. OK, anybody else? All right.
It looks like, I didn't mark at the beginning. I have at least one, two, three, four, five, six, seven,
eight, nine, 10, according by my count. 10 organizations were requesting to come in.
So by my record keeping, we're inviting in Bloomington Cooperative Living, Tandem, Sober Mesa,
Suzy's Place, Hendricks County, Casam at IU, Silver Linings Rescue, Hotels for Help,
Summit Hill, Ivy Tech, and my sister's closet. I have spoken. This is the way. This is the way.
I go home. The Star Wars comes out today, guys. Woo-hoo! Whoa! Very exciting. Thanks for opening the binder.
My pleasure. I've been waiting for years for this one. All right. So am I good? Yes. Yeah, just for
the record, the set, I think it's pronounced Kessam. Kessam, thank you. Kessam. Kessam with like the
small e or short e, Kessam. Not like Casey, remember Casey Kasem? Not Casey Kasem? No, not Casey Kasem.
Not Shaggy from Scooby Doo. All right. If nobody else
Has anything important to say?