Pierce County has approved more than $17.6 million in funding for homelessness programs across the region, but the process has left service providers and county council members frustrated by what they call a lack of transparency, community cooperation and expediency.
Pierce County Council Member Ryan Mello (District 4, Democrat) called the funding-procurement process “highly flawed” during the July 2 council meeting where the council approved the funding recommendations made by the Human Services department .
During that meeting, Pierce County policy analyst LeighBeth Merrick said 56 homeless service applications were filed for funding through the Homeless Housing Program and more than $32 million was requested.
The investment is known as the Homeless Housing Program (HHP) and is the county’s largest regular funding opportunity for homeless services. The resolution passed on July 2 included a list of nearly 50 projects that included outreach programs, emergency shelters and various types of housing support for those experiencing homelessness over the next two years.
Applications for funding were submitted to Human Services and graded on a rubric and given a score. The rubric, created by the Human Services department, evaluates proposals based on factors that include budget management, staffing, organizational experience and connections to supports and services, among others.
In council and committee meetings leading up to the approval of the resolution, Mello pointed out that several projects received high scores but were not recommended for funding by the department, while other lower-rated projects did receive recommendations for funding.
He pointed out that St. Vincent de Paul’s proposed outreach program, which received the second-highest rubric score of any outreach project, was not recommended for any funding. The City of Fife’s jobs program was ranked third in rubric score among outreach projects and was not recommended for funding.
In an interview with The News Tribune, Mello said the funding recommendation process was “not a transparent one,” happening in “closed backrooms” between a small amount of advisors.
According to county staff, Implementation Advisory Board members who “did not have a conflict of interest” were invited to evaluate applications. The Implementation Advisory Board is comprised of people who help advise the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan to End Homelessness .
The scores from the application evaluation committees were submitted to the Homeless Document Recording Fee Advisory Group to determine the funding recommendations using priorities established by the Human Services Department. The Homeless Document Recording Fee Advisory Group consists of two Pierce County Human Services Department representatives, one representative from the City of Lakewood and one representative from the City of Tacoma.
Mello said the funding recommendations came before the council in such a way that did not allow input or effective amendments from the council, calling it “bonkers” that the legislators would not be able influence the policy and funding decisions outside of a “yes” or “no” vote.
“I wish we had the authority to amend something out of this,” Mello said in response to a concern Council Member Dave Morell (District 1, Republican) raised with a particular funding item during the July 2 meeting. “That is the reason why through proper public deliberation the legislative branch should have the authority to amend the list. Because I think you know your district better than anybody, and I think you should be able to make those recommendations to your colleagues.”
When asked by The News Tribune why the funding process works the way it does, a spokesperson from the office of Pierce County Executive Bruce Dammeier (Republican) provided a memo the executive sent to the council on Nov. 9, 2023. The memo was in regards to an ordinance the executive vetoed which would have created a special fund for the council to administer funding to community organizations for services .
“Our county code requires competitive contracting. This promotes fairness, fiscal responsibility, and public trust by ensuring taxpayer dollars are awarded based on professional merit rather than political influence,” the memo read. “This is important because the best vendors are often not the best-connected vendors. Competitive, professionally administered processes give everyone a fair shake.”
According to the memo, the executive believes the approach respects the council’s policy making and budgeting roles, while allowing professional staff to vet suppliers and identify who can provide the desired goods or services most cost-effectively.
“This is just the latest example that has highlighted frustrations,” Mello told The News Tribune.
Council Member Jani Hitchen (District 6, Democrat) told The News Tribune she also shared frustrations with the process. She said “couldn’t really get good answers” as to why highly ranked projects were not recommended for funding.
“There should be a transparent process,” she told The News Tribune.
Hitchen said the council could either approve the recommendations or send it back to Human Services. With the fiscal deadline on July 1, she said sending it back would have caused funding delays that would have harmed service organizations that needed the funding to operate.
Council members were not the only ones frustrated, as representatives from service providers also publicly commented on the process.
Director of Social Service for The Salvation Army in Tacoma, Douglas Jarvie, testified on July 2 about his concern with the “slowness” of the procurement process. He said the delays in the process were making organizations such as his “nervous.”
“If there was a way to make it happen faster, or more transparent, or more supportive of agencies, I just would really appreciate that,” Jarvie told the council.
Leading up to the July 2 vote on the resolution, several representative from St. Vincent de Paul’s Community Resource Center in Tacoma provided public comment expressing concern over the funding process and how they believe their organization was snubbed.
Jake Nau is homeless outreach case worker for St. Vincent de Paul’s Community Resource Center in Tacoma — an organization that requested more than $188,000 for an outreach program that would support unhoused immigrants that was not recommended for funding despite having the second-highest rubric score of any outreach program that applied.
During the July 2 council meeting, Nau said it was “hard to make sense of” why the St. Vincent de Paul’s outreach program did not receive a recommendation for funding.
“The explanations and justifications offered for our zero dollar recommendation are pure nonsense,” Nau told the council. “I asked for transparency, I asked for explanations and I hope for an eventual system correction.”
Human Services spokesperson Jordan Chames said some projects with higher application ratings did not receive funding once all applicants were collectively reviewed by the Homeless Document Recording Fee Advisory Group. According to Chames, the advisory group prioritized permanent housing.
Nau said funding would help the organization hire more staff, acquire an outreach vehicle and would “double or triple” its impact.
Duke Paulson is the director of Tacoma Rescue Mission, which was recommended to receive more than 88 percent of the more than $1.6 million the organization requested across two proposals.
Paulson told The News Tribune he felt the process was fair, as Human Services did a “thorough job of vetting through a multilayered process”. He did say he was concerned over the delay the process had caused in getting funding to the organizations.
He said the reimbursement contracts can take 6-8 months before they get money to the organizations, and while they wait, they are paying out of pocket to continue providing services and paying employees.
“It puts providers in a really tough spot,” Paulson told The News Tribune. “Any delay is painful to us.”
Nau of St. Vincent de Paul testified on July 2 in support of passing the resolution to distribute homelessness funding into the community even though he was critical of the process’s lack of transparency.
“Please vote ‘yes,’ because if your only choice is ‘yes’ or ‘no’ and you have no power to amend or change the funding recommendations, ‘yes’ is the right choice,” Nau told the council.
On July 2, the council unanimously approved the resolution.
“We really want to get the dollars out the door, so we can be ready when winter comes, so we can be ready to get outreach going right now, so that we can services funding that are already happening,” Hitchen said before voting for the resolution on July 2. “ Instead of paying for things after the fact in month-long delays.”
Most Popular
Comments / 0