January 25, 1999

To:Budget Committee

From:City Clerk

Subject:Grants Priorities

Recommendation:

The Municipal Grants Review Committee on January 25, 1999, recommended to the Budget Committee the adoption of the attached report (January 14, 1999) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services recommending that for the 1999 fiscal year, because key Council policy directions through the Strategic Plan, Social Development Strategy and Official Plan are not yet available, any funds available for reallocation within the consolidated grants budget be allocated to grants service areas on an equal priority basis.

The Municipal Grants Review Committee reports for the information of the Budget Committee, having:

(1)received the joint report dated January 22, 1999, from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services; and

(2)referred the recommendations from Community Voices of Support to the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services for consideration during the overall budget process.

Background:

The Municipal Grants Review Committee had before it the following reports:

-(January 14, 1999) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services respecting Grants priorities; and

-(January 22, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services respecting 1999 funding levels for Municipal Grants Programs.

The following persons appeared before the Municipal Grants Review Committee in connection with the foregoing matter, and submitted recommendations on behalf of Community Voices of Support:

-Mr. Peter Clutterbuck, Co-Director, Community Social Planning Council of Toronto;

-Mr. Lee Zaslofsky, Citizens for Public Health; and

-Mr. Barry Rieder, Jane/Finch Community Ministry.

City Clerk

R. Dyers/tl

Item No. 3

(Report dated January 14, 1999, addressed to the

Municipal Grants Review Committee from the

Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services)

Purpose:

This report provides a discussion of the challenges to establishing priorities between grants service areas and a proposed approach for 1999.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not Applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)for the 1999 fiscal year, because key Council policy directions through the Strategic Plan, Social Development Strategy and Official Plan are not yet available, any funds available for reallocation within the consolidated grants budget be allocated to grants service areas on an equal priority basis; and

(2)the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting on November 20, 1998, the Municipal Grants Review Committee received a report titled "1999 Funding Levels for Municipal Grant Programs". The report recommended that the Committee provide direction with respect to establishing priority service areas/functions or considering all grants service areas equally. The Committee then requested the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services to provide a detailed report on all aspects of the grants programs with a view to establishing priority service areas for 1999...."

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The Council policy that staff would normally use to create a framework to determine priorities between grants service areas is not yet in place. Typically Council policy direction is articulated in a range of key documents including the Official Plan, Strategic Plan, Social Development Strategy, Environmental Plan, etc. In the absence of these key planning documents, there is little basis from which to build a discussion with respect to the relative importance of one grants service area over another.

As well, Council has established a number of task forces to address specific issue areas or target populations such as seniors, access and equity, community safety, children and youth, and homelessness. It is anticipated that the work of the task forces will result in a range of recommendations related to municipal grants programs and may impact on any discussion of the relative priorities between the various grants service areas.

Levelling Up:

Levelling up applies to those programs which were not provided in all of the former local municipalities. Service levelling can result in program deletion, dilution and needs based levelling up. Each service area review report provided the Municipal Grants Review Committee with an overview of how the needs based levelling up requirements were established and a number of budget scenarios including an incremental approach. Service area review reports also identified the impacts of providing programs on a City-wide basis with no increase in funding levels. Requiring programs with a limited geographic mandate to provide services on a City-wide basis will result in a smaller proportion of eligible communities receiving service, and communities in the former City of Toronto may have a reduced level of service.

Priorities:

Priorities between service areas contained within the consolidated grants budget have not been set. In the absence of priorities the approach to the budget options has been to accommodate the proposed increases to all grants service areas on an equal priority basis. Each of the service area review reports, submitted to the Municipal Grants Review Committee in September and October, 1998, provided a review of priorities to be used within in each grants service area.

Proposed Approach for 1999:

In light of the difficulties in establishing priorities between service areas, it is recommended that any funds within the consolidated grants budget made available for redistribution to the nine grants service areas be allocated on a equal priority basis. Finance staff are reviewing the 1998 consolidated grants budget to determine the precise amount of funding that may be available for redistribution within the consolidated grants budget.

Once this information is available, each grants service area will be informed of the amount of additional funding which may become available (assuming Budget Committee and Council approve a flatline consolidated grants budget). Each service area will then be required to report back to the Municipal Grants Review Committee on a program plan based on the available funding levels. The program plan will need to identify how the grants program will achieve City-wide service with the funding available and what efforts will be made to minimize the impact on communities which will receive less service as a result of service levelling.

Conclusion:

This report summarizes the issues associated with attempts to establish priorities between grants service areas. In the absence of the key Council policy documents referred to above, it is recommended that grants programs be treated on an equal priority basis with respect to the 1999 consolidated grants budget.

Contact Name:

Chris Brillinger

Tel: 392-8608

(Joint Report dated January 22, 1999, addressed to the

Municipal Grants Review Committee from the

Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and

Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services)

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Background:

During December, the Budget Committee advised the Municipal Grants Review Committee that the 1999 grants budget envelope will be maintained at the 1998 level and that the Budget Committee is interested in seeing equity as a priority over new programs, while maintaining the service level for existing programs.

The Municipal Grants Review Committee has recommended that:

(1)available, unexpended grants funds in the 1998 consolidated budget initially be used to address one-time financial adjustments required in the AIDS Prevention grants program up to $526.4 thousand, one-time financial adjustments required in the Arts and Culture grants program up to $350.0 thousand and to cover off the unsourced $75.0 thousand Caribana grant; and thereafter

(2)any funds available on an ongoing basis be reallocated within the consolidated grants budget to grants service areas.

Comments:

Staff from Budget, Accounting and the Municipal Grants Working Group have reviewed the 1998 consolidated grants budget against all grants funding releases to date. In the upcoming week, meetings have been scheduled with each grant service area, to determine where liabilities need to be established for 1998 and assign administration responsibility for outstanding line item/miscellaneous grants. Once this review is completed, an amount for reallocation will be determined. Preliminary estimates at this point in time indicate a minimum of $800.0 thousand should be available for reallocation. Should the Municipal Grants Review Committee approve the report titled "Grants Priorities" at its January 25, 1999, meeting, the funding available for reallocation will be allocated on an equal priority basis.

Conclusions:

A complete financial review is underway to determine the appropriate grants funding available for reallocation amongst the grant service areas for the 1999 requested budget. To date, preliminary estimates are that a minimum of $800.0 thousand will be available for reallocation.

Contact Names:

Susan Bury,

Budget Division, Finance

Tel: 392-8351/Fax: 392-3649

Chris Brillinger,

Community Resources, Social Development and Administration

Tel: 392-8608/Fax 392-8492