Grant Selection and Performance Task Force

April 13, 2016

 

Present: Ed Barrett, Rob Liscord, Nicole Pellenz, David Wihry, Joe Young

Absent: Kevin Bois, Laura Hudson

Staff: Michael Ashmore

Guests: Joely Ross, Steve Niles

Minutes:

  1. Confidentiality Policy

MA shared background and context for minor change in language of the Confidentiality Policy recommended by the Attorney General’s office.  EB proposed a draft change to address that the policy needs to require confidentiality to be kept after individuals complete their work or service with the Commission.  The group approved the proposed change and asked that it be moved for consideration by the whole Commission at their next meeting

  1. Performance Measures for Commission Support Grants

DW provided background information on a request from ASC to gather feedback from Commissions on a process and resulting set of Performance Measures that are intended to be more appropriate to Commission Support Grants than the set currently used by CNCS.  DW reviewed the goals of the working group and the process they are using as well as their initial results.  He noted that he group began by looking at areas of effort common across Commissions.  Six areas were identified (see attached ASC Discussion) and then a subset was selected for initial development of Performance measures.

Members of the group offered a variety of thoughts regarding the initial performance measures related to AmeriCorps Outreach and Selection including tying the number of applications to the size of the granted funds, and engaged in a thoughtful discussion of how a PM related to increased match share might help expand program options or cause unintended consequences like adding additional burdens to staff.

Also noted were the difernet incentives for PM’s related to formula grants (desire for high quality submissions) as opposed to competitive grants (increased resources for state). JY noted that different PM’s would be appropriate for rural states as opposed to urban states.  He also asked if it would be feasible to measure whether programs progress from formula to competitive and whether eith move out of using AmeriCorps resources all together. NP asked about the purpose of the ASC request. MA noted that it is an attempt to better match PM’s to Commission activities while also creating an acceptable list for CNCS, who have moved towards a set of discreet PM’s for most of its funding.. DW noted that initial discussion was valuable and that it should be expanded to include all Commissioners.

  1. Additional formula funds – $60,000 plus unexpended

MA informed the group that CNCS had expanded the minimum amount available to states for formula funding this year by $60,000.  Because the Commission is in the initial year of a three year cycle already, there are limited options for how to utilize the additional funding.  MA described three options:

  1. Distribution to current formula grantees (if fully enrolled)
  2. Planning grants ($15,000 to 20,000?)
  3. Rural pilot grants (timing and year)

The group heard how each of these options would play out and elected to bring options one and two, in combination, to the larger Commission.

  1. National Directs operating in Maine

MA informed the group that CNCS released the list of National Directs operating in Maine and that the recommendations approved by the Commission at the February meeting included all of the programs on the list.  There were no programs that failed to consult prior to the deadline.