from human services agency that the human services service agency commission actually disapproved. this lays chu: it shows me that we are pretty far away. you have to hear what the $109 contingency means we will be talking about what those cuts are. when the mayor's office be able to share a tentative budget about decisions that will be made around what continuance the cuts will be taken? >> we are in the process right now getting into the details and

going to the decision making process. we are in the process of taking a significant amount of input from the public before we finalize decisions. we have town halls across the city, we have a series of meetings going on right now where we are meeting with cbo's to discuss the department's proposals. our expectation, we will be starting to form a picture of which of these reductions will be able to take to get to balance and starting to share that with members of the committee. and to get a sense of what will be required and get input on

those decisions and have some conversations about what alternatives might be preferable to that proposal. supervisor chu: does that conclude your presentation? i know is a joint effort between the budget office and the analyst. with the budget analyst like to add anything to this presentation? >> we don't have anything specific to add. we will be looking in detail at these issues as we review the mayor's budget in may and june. supervisor chu: if we don't have any other questions, i would like to open this item out for

public comment. are there members of the public that would like to speak? >> that sounds like your lucky to end up with one penny. ♪ have you seen the budget coming have you seen the budget i have seen the budget when the cold wind blows and the sweet music on the radio have you seen the budget have you seen it? why did the budget have to leave and go away i have been used to having a budget to lean on. i see your budget hands reaching out to me i wish you good luck on these years ♪

♪ have you seen it why did the budget ever have to leave and go away and i hope it comes back soon ♪ supervisor chu: and many other members of the public that would wish to speak on item number one? public comment is closed. and we have a motion to file this item to the extent that you have the comments that are made from the rating agency, can you share that with the committee? i think it can be informative. >> hearing for an update on the

budget submission from the department of youth and families. supervisor chu: does the mayor's office when to kick it off for the apartment? >> just a question about if you have extra power point presentation for the committee.

i also have extra power point presentation is for the members of the public if they want to. good afternoon, supervisors and the members of the board. it is my pleasure to be here. i am the director for the department of children, youth, and their families. i will provide you with a very brief overview. and walk you through some of our planning processes and conclude with our proposal for

fiscal year 20112012 budget. -- 2011-2012 budget. it was created in 1991 through really wonderful efforts from children advocates throughout the city. the ballot measure that was put in front of the voters has become known as the children's amendment. it set aside property tax revenue. that revenue source has been called the children's fund. the children's fund is used to fund services from ages 0 to 17. it is a wide range of services from child care to after-school,

violence prevention, as well as employment and teams services. the children's amendment also created the children's baseline. it mandates the services before the amendment is passed. it mandates that it goes through very rigorous and inclusive planning processes. it is a three-year planning cycle. we go through a community needs assessment. all 20 neighborhoods throughout the city, we have community meetings as well as intensive focus groups with certain populations. we gather that information, and with what we gather through the

mayor's budget office, we do the allocation plan. this is how much money we have. how do we prioritized and early impact and have better outcomes on those needs? after we do that process, we go through the implementation of that. which essentially is called the request for proposal processes which is the competitive solicitation process. both the community needs assessment and the application plan mandates within the target, but within our own philosophy, it mandates that we work very closely with community members. both of these processes take up to a year to complete. it makes us go back to the community's many times do that

some of these ideas. and within the children's amendment, it requires us to do an assessment of the services. we continue to have high-quality programs that will improve the outcomes of our children. it is mandated to meet four goals. these are in the charter and are called the quality of life benchmarks. they are ready to learn, they live in state-supported families and viable communities. and contributing to the development and vitality of san francisco. i have highlighted the second bullet. as well as the allocation process, we found that the resonating comments and requests for the communities of from parents and educators was that

we needed to make sure that we focus our energies on helping young people get ready to go to school. even beyond that, going into secondary. we made the decision to prioritize this particular goal in our request for proposal. this is just a graphical representation of all the things i just described. your community needs assessment, the allocation plan, and the implementation of the allocation plan to request for proposal. what is the 2010-2013 allocation plan that we are using right now to guide all of the work that we are doing? many voices and many meetings, everyone said the same thing. this is during a time when the

city was going through the really tough economic downfalls that we experienced a couple years ago. the community-based partners were being hit left and right on the state, federal, and other departments. the public partners like the human services agency, also, the private partners. trying to be as targeted and purposeful as possible. and improving our systems. of the things that guided our thinking and our planning, i apologize for that little thing. it says to serve all families city-wide. it is mandated that we serve all children in the city of san francisco.

we made the policy decision to prioritize children that are living in hardship. we prioritize children and families that are involved. they're either in the system, the juvenile justice system, where they are under house. it includes homeless and families that are living in situations where there are living with other families or other single-room occupancies. and of course, children and families that are experiencing challenges have put them at risk for negative outcome. the statement was to highlight the fact that children and families are extremely resilience. we need to make sure our services are there. we need to be able to react and to support them. and to make sure that these

services are there to support families on a daily basis. and to prioritize neighborhoods with the greatest needs. we use lots of different data and indicators that have the highest need. some of the data that we use are the police data and the school district provides free and reduced lunch data. so once again, from the allocation plan, we created several service areas. at this point, a lot of people are familiar with them. it really focuses on services from birth to five years old. and the focus on services from kindergarten for eighth graders. and a large bucket.

, it focuses on young people 14- 24. within the service area, it includes permit funds, they are used lead. , health and wellness, it refers to the wellness center is that are in the public high-school. these are more focused or specialized team programs that we provide. the area is balanced prevention. it serves 14-24 years old. once again, in implementing the plan, we develop a request or we

do in partnership. in the service area, we partnered with the human services agency to put together this particular request for proposal. funding for this proposal and it got to be $2.11 million. we were going through a very uncertain economic situations. we put a range inside there. the worst-case scenario, we would allocate $9.6 million towards the service area. if it was the best case scenario, we did not have to do the general fund cuts. we would find this particular service area at $12 million.

we were able to really partner and leverage the dollars available within the city. going down to the next one. supervisor chu: i want to make sure i understand how they choose to allocate funding. there is a community process to identify needs across the city, it sounds like. that is done through community meetings and other formats. reorganization determine the allocation based on the service areas. how does that tie in with a guiding principle, the service areas. >> the allocation plan which is the step that happens after the needs assessment, we take what we project to be the available money, the amount of money that we would have. we create priorities based on needs.

we make loud and clear that childhood is a need throughout the city. and balancing the amount of money that we have available. we would allocate that way. >> informs you on these service areas how much to allocate? and it just on the estimates that you base that on, what was the impetus for the low and the high? what was it based on? in >> it was a 40% reduction budget. it was a projection around 40% as well as general fund reduction.

what we don't see here is the base. i apologize for not putting the base here. it is similar to what we ended up funding. from the base, there was a low. it sounds like it is where you expect revenues to come in. and from my understanding, you guys provide- -- you might see reductions or not. the year after, thinking about the joint report of there is a modest amount of revenue growth. there is a modest amount of revenue growth. how does your contract work? the u.s. anticipates providing for those that are funded over time?

>> we work very closely with the mayor's office to get that number. the projection numbers for the three years. for us, what we tell -- supervisor chu: and do you fund for what you expect for the first year? >> and continuing to years 2 and 3. supervisor wiener: thank you for the presentation so far. the low and the high are sort of the worst case scenario? and that is the actual budgets? >> within the final budget, if

we took it out, it would fall. we will fall close to the high, but not over the high. supervisor wiener: is that because of the set aside? you and the been closer? >> we experienced eight children's fund cut. last year, the city -- supervisor wiener: and there would be years away and it would increase more or increase despite cuts elsewhere.

>> especially the years before i became director. >> thank you for your presentation. a couple quick questions. there are folks that returned -- referred to the proposed cuts that are being considered that are catastrophic. potentially, san francisco can lose $20 million of funding programs. how does that affect your department and other departments. >> it is a very important question. i think it is a given that the early care and education service area will take a significant hit. we know that the governor signs the budget for his first budget

proposing a $1 billion reduction for california. the impact is really down to approximately $11 million. that is one budget impact. the $11 million, instead of more, it would mean significant reductions to our mental health services and mental-health consultation to child-care providers. it would be a subsidy to child- care providers. it would be a production to some of our early literacy programs. it would be a reduction to some of our augmentation programs to keep our teachers in place.

that would have a catastrophic impact. the other impact that the state budget would have on the city, but not directly with the department would be that the state has contracts with certain providers on their own. they are proposing a reduction to those contracts. what is the actual grant amount itself, but they're also proposing a reduction to the reimbursement rate. the providers are going to be hit twice. they will not be able to even drawdown of money. it is not enough to cover the actual cost to provide services. >> once we finally understand what the state and federal budget looks like, it is imperative that the founders of for the service area had get together. and yesterday, we started

talking about that. they need to sit down and really think about bottom line, what are the priorities for this particular service area? and how we move forward to ensure that there are slots. that is what our families need. the need to be able to go to work and make sure that the children can trust. supervisor chhiu: the challenge we have is that we have to make budget decisions over the next few months that they are not coincide with the state budget cuts that will have to adapt. any contingency planning to participate with whatever degree of certainty we have, it would be something i would certainly support. the priority area at this

something that we care about deeply. one thing i would like to request a view, it would be great to get a break down of what the proposed fiscal year 10-11 numbers were compared to these major categories the last few years to get a sense of a trend. and how funding levels have changed in violence prevention versus family support and the care center. i would love to get that just as a sense of scale. >> i will bring that next time or send it straight to your office. really quickly, to continue, at this time, we are the primary if not the sole funder for all of these services here. we work very closely with the

school district, so this is the first year that we partner with the school district to leverage the after school funding. because we have so little dollars a as a city on the table, we wanted to make sure that we have the quality of programs and the quantity. we partnered with the school district to enhance their after- school programs a week and have one large after-school program in each of the schools. and the service area. we jointly fund the service area with the office of work force and economic development. >> i know that you started to talk about it, but specifically, for each one of those, if this money is the only city that is being invested or if other entities are doing it, this is

not the only budget that has been there. >> for the out of school time, this is all of the city's funding going into it. for early care and education, both the human services agency are expected to take a budget cut from the states. it would put this particular service area. it is hard to rank this, but in grave jeopardy. for a larger impact. we leverage, we don't land the dollars, but we leverage them with the after-school dollars. the youth leadership empowerment and development services area,

they are in use employment, use empowerment funds. we're also the primary funder for everything except for the u.s. work force that would partner with. as you are aware, they have received reductions on the dollars as well as others. we work very closely with the department of public health to make sure that we continue to have the health and wellness opportunities for other children. >> this service area we partner with the department of public health. we augment the service area to state grants.