CSAC Grant Subcommittee Only Requires the Equivalent of a ‘D Minus’ to Receive Full Funding

Liberal grading system, conflicts of Interest, and only applying rules some of the time in an effort to allocate $3.2 million.

CSAC’s Grant Subcommittee meeting on 5/29. In attendance, NEAR TABLE: Subcommittee member, Susan Aguirre, Community Services Director, Cindy Emerson, Human Services Director, Megan Kendrick, RIGHT TABLE: Michael Kint, Susan Curtis, Brooke Sauserman, Caryn Toole, Kyleigh Motiwala. BACK TABLE (R-L) Tracey Zudans, Dr. Deborah Long, LEFT TABLE (from back): Michael C. Marsh, Sherri Kolodziejczak, Chairman, Bob Schlitt, Wendy McDaniel & NAACP President - Tony Brown.

On May 29th, the Grant Subcommittee for the Children’s Services Advisory Committee met for over 5 hours to recommend funding for over 50 programs. Grant Subcommittee Chairman, Bob Schlitt, opened the meeting with an overview of what members would be doing for the day. He noted that the County approved $3.479 million. Administrative costs were 8% and subcommittee members would be recommending allocation of $3.2 million. Employees of some non-profits asking for funding are members on the subcommittee.

Chairman Schlitt confirmed that non-profit agencies had requested, through the CSAC application process, nearly $3.8 million. Being $600,000 over the budget most likely stems from all the programs receiving a passing grade. Out of 130 possible points, an agency’s program only needs 60%, or 78 points, to qualify. Schlitt commented, “If an agency fell below 60% of the maximum points available, then they would not qualify for funding… so none of the programs got kicked out.”

The grading scale is the same in the School District. It was implemented when Community Services Director, Cindy Emerson, took over in 2023. A former elementary school principal, Emerson left the School District to revamp CSAC oversight. Later in the meeting, a grading curve wrinkle was revealed. The average score was produced after the lowest member assessment and highest member assessment for each program were removed from their analysis.

Parlay?

The bending of the rules continued. Matter of fact, they seemed to be “guidelines” as the legendary Hollywood character from Pirates of the Caribbean, Jack Sparrow, would say. For example, when the non-governmental organization (NGO), Early Learning Coalition of Indian River, Martin and Okeechobee Counties, asked for $110,000 for a new program for Kindergarten Readiness, the subcommittee consensus was “No” because the funding was “an all or nothing situation,” according to members. The NGO was not using their own resources, demanding CSAC fund 100% of it. Normally, CSAC funds a percentage of a program capped at 25% of its cost. Subcommittee member, Michael Kint, called their approach “lousy” in asking for a grant in such a manner. NGO’s must explain program sustainability through alternative funding sources. More significant, how did the NGO’s unsustainable program score a 75% ?

Yet, later on in the meeting, when discussing The Learning Alliance and their request for $370,000 to fund their Moonshot Academy, it was pointed out by the organization that if they did not receive the grant, they would scale back their program which, according to the non-profit, would affect up to 600 families in the county. The $370,000 pays for 40% of the programming and the veiled threat of scaling back the program didn’t sit well with subcommittee members, Kyleigh Motiwala and Susan Aguirre. Aguirre said, “When you scale back a program without looking at different funding, then that puts us in the same conversation that we had with one of the previous non-profits that said, ‘well if they don’t have alternative sources and CSAC is the only fund, then we can’t give our dollars to that because it is not sustainable.’”

Aguirre mentioned that The Learning Alliance receives millions of dollars in philanthropy, referring in her comments to their income statement in 2023. The Learning Alliance had $19.8 million income on just over $23 million in gross revenues according to their 2022 IRS-990 filing. Subcommittee member and NAACP President, Tony Brown, called the scaling back comment a “bully move” because he believed that such a statement “plays on the psyche of grant subcommittee members.”

In 2023, Indian River County Commission Approved an Additional $425,000 to a Non-Profit Showing Income of $19.849 Million.

The question of sustainability for non-profits and their programs is one of the core questions of CSAC analysis. The Moonshot Academy received one of the highest grading scores, 117 out of 130 points for a 90%. How did it receive such a score when The Learning Alliance admits it is unsustainable on their application?

CSAC’s incorrect public statement: ‘We fund programs not agencies.’

The problem stems from instructions to the grant subcommittee. At the top of the meeting, chairman Schlitt informed members, “We fund programs not agencies. We only look at the program as it relates to children,” adding, “We don’t have any say in whether we think that what a program is designed to do is good or bad as long as it meets the Needs Assessment.”

Agencies looking for program funding have to show they are serving children’s needs in at least one of three areas: Success in School and Life; Health and Well-being, or Nurturing Families and Communities. Director Emerson, shared that the County’s position is to fund children’s care through programs that follow the Needs Assessment. She stated, “What we are working on [as staff] is talking to the community about a reframing of what people think CSAC is because it’s not charity. The county government is not charity. These are services we put out in an RFP (Request for Proposal) to meet the needs that were addressed in the Needs Assessment.”

Normally, when an outside organization engages an RFP, it submits a bid in direct competition with others to provide very specific things. Should they win, they enter contract negotiations for the scope of work based on the RFP and their winning proposal. A construction company hired to build a facility and completing it under budget is a good example. Recently decided, the Three Corners project was an RFP created by the City of Vero Beach. The City discounted the lease of the lagoon property to the winning developer in exchange for building and operating the proposed retail and mix-use project. The goal of entering that contract for the City is to increase tax revenue through tourism and shopping at a world-class location.

In the case of CSAC, the RFP can take as many programs as the money approved by the County Commission can allocate. There are multiple RFP winners of various awards. The outcomes of the programs is how you measure return on invested tax dollars. Referring to the Needs Assessment areas, Emerson addressed the subcommittee members. She explained, “The return on investment should be clear in your mind as to what research-based strategies were used — You did the hard work already. You have the rubric, and you scored them based on measurable outcomes. These are like vendors providing a program to meet the needs, a service to meet the needs of our children. Try to think of it as sterile as possible.”

To put it another way, CSAC is taking welfare dollars and distributing them to NGOs. CSAC can fund salaries in programs as long as that non-profit employee is engaged with helping children as defined in the Needs Assessment. Yet, there is not an RFP for every need within the Needs Assessment categories. There is one RFP worth nearly $3.2 million recommended by some employees of the non-profits seeking CSAC dollars.

Conflicts of interest.

During the debate concerning The Learning Alliance, which lasted a good 10–15 minutes, grant subcommittee member, Susan Curtis, recused herself. However, she did not leave the room. Mentioned by another committee member was that $226,300 is 25% program cost. As Aguirre and subcommittee member, Caryn Toole, noted, the workers funded in the Moonshot Academy are teachers hired by the school district. Not all teachers want the extra pay to do an after school program. The money from CSAC pays salaries of teachers in the School District, which already receive 51% of property taxes and has an annual budget over $400 million.

After the lengthy discussion, the grant subcommittee voted to allocate $350,000 to The Learning Alliance.

There were other conflicts. Chairman Schlitt recused himself from conversation about Feed the Lambs. Dr. Deborah Long stepped back from discussing GYAC. Kyleigh Motiwala cited her conflict as an associate of 2 agencies, Thrive IRC and Helping Hands. Nobody left the room as part of their recusal while their own organization’s funding was being debated.

Team Success Enterprises, Executive Director, Michael Marsh, looked on intently as the subcommittee discussed his organization’s application to receive $14,000 for their Prevention Before Intervention program. Last year, the program was not funded after an ask of $60,000. The first year subcommittee member sat with his arms crossed after members discussed the “vague purpose” and description of the submitted program. The program received a score of 90 points - 69%. Still, it isn’t a matter of whether “the program is good or bad, as long as it meets the Needs Assessment.”

Non-Profit Files Faulty Affidavit Invoking Sheriff’s Department and School District to Secure Indian River Tax Dollars.

While the program lacked definition and scored below average, the subcommittee approved $6285 in funding for Team Success Enterprises. In grading other non-profit programs, Marsh gave out the highest average score of 123.4 (94%) over 51 programs. He gave 6 perfect scores of 130 and no organization scored below 104 points, which is 80%. Every program at 80% or above was guaranteed funding.

In the last hour of the meeting, after going through each program, the subcommittee found they were over budget $163,000. At the center of the argument was Childcare Resources, who increased a program funding ask from $350,000 to $610,000. It was noted that the non-profit lost a major trust funding source and are making an appeal to the County through CSAC. Children’s welfare is not the only CSAC concern. Sometimes, the non-profit’s welfare is depending on the government too.