force, supporting the office of professional service providers. we asked about four rate we were addressing professional service needs. part of that is addressing the cbo as well, where they learn about the latest interventions. i wanted to see if there were any questions in that service area, too. if none, wrapping up, systems development. the four main categories in our systems development include our annual -- actual funds to be sent over to the school district for those services. we are creating a service there called public in engagement. strengthening our bedside to make sure that san francisco families can access services that be fun through the cbo's.

we also intend to make the bedside different languages and more user-friendly. that is currently only available in english, we have to make it multilingual -- we hope to make it multilingual. drawing on the needs for data, we would invest more in these efforts to restore it to a better level so that we can better assess and understand the investment. we have other support investments, like supporting the field for investment health and shelter services for traditional age youth. that concludes our budget. supervisor chu: in terms of process, maybe you can answer, this - 8% and positive 8%, does this go through a community vetting process? the allocation went through the

same? >> we started in november. november 2011. we have had monthly meetings at our citizens advisory council. going into details in each one of these areas. , the council approved this version here, of which is why we are willing to start talking with it the city commission we have to go back to the board in april to get approval. it includes the restoration's from the board, right? >> yes, that is the current budget for those services.

supervisor chu: now, there was a reduction in a - 8% scenario. why have we specialized out school time programming 14th? can you explain that -- for teenagers? can you explain that? what was your point in okaying this? >> i can start, in the area where they need the most support be skilled development along with programming is taken down. as even see there is improvement on so, instead of saying

specialized, it is shifting gears towards more skills involving rear development. >> yes. supervisor chu: with regard to discussions about state impact and subsidies for child care in the world of health care, where do you see -- how what would this budget in these medications respond to those sort of things. given our pot of money and what we provide, these are the priorities that we set forward. let's say that the state wants to reallocate, but with the process be? how do you adjust to different times in reality is that we see? >> if the state actually says that they are cutting out subsidies for child care, and

there is no way that they could be able to cover the cost for that. so, part of the development of this allocation plan, we did the range in a-and + 8 range. -- minus and plus 8 range. the easy answer is that hopefully we will be able to adjust our budgets accordingly to our available revenues. if, for example, in child care there were drastic cuts, there are strong commitments from the three funding human service agencies for san francisco to come together again in reevaluate our funding strategy. this document is a guiding document that will guide the

budget allocation. this should not live as if it were set in stone. of we do acknowledge that there are things that happen. no one projected or realize that the dot com, you know, that the economy was slowing to collapse a couple of years ago. that was a learning lesson for all of us to be as flexible as possible -- flexible as possible. we have had many conversations about what we would do if the state was born to continue to cut child care services. you will hear from the director in a minute about some of the pre-emptive things that she is going to do to make sure that our children will continue to have child care programs and services in the city. the other area -- the other things that our department -- most of these services are not connected or rely on state funds. we're very fortunate that a lot

of these are coming directly to us from the general fund or the children's fund. the only service areas and that we leverage in use state dollars in our our balance prevention service areas. at this moment in time, we do not see any indication from the state that they will produce them to us. supervisor chu: i am glad that you had the two scenarios on your budget. i guess i am not as concerned about what happens if you have revenue fluctuations within your budget, because it sounds like you folks have thought about it within the range. there is a question of changing dynamics outside of our own budget at the state or other things that might cause us to reevaluate what we fund, of what is the mechanism to do that? certainly, because we are not

paying for those subsidies at the moment, it does not mean that we do not prioritize or stacked against what we currently fund. i wonder if there is a mechanism or flexibility to reallocate what we see, based on the changing dynamics of the state or federal level. short of saying that you have my commitment to come together in reevaluate this, you have that commitment from us. ok, i guess we will move on to the next part of the presentation? >> thank you so much. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is laura. in the executive director. i am actually not going to present our strategic plan to you, although we do have anyone

that was approved in february. it is a three year strategic plan, from 2012 through 2016. this is the requirement of the state of california. after that strategic plan, it informed our allocation plan, which you will hear today. we have a strategic advisory committee that went through the proper channels. we also have the index of needs developed a dcys to determine allocations based on needs of the children. so -- [unintelligible] can you see the first slide? this is just, this is our budget. we have two major funding sources said the side.

we have approximately $15 million from prop h. we see a little increase happening next year. we do not know what the allocation will be 413-14. this year, -- for 13-14. some of that i will discuss later, but this is because we will enroll more children and we have to set aside in case there are state cuts. we have $3.7 million special prop funds. that was one-you're only.

we also used for sustainability finance so we can find at a higher level. -- funds so we could fund at a higher level. we will use our sustainability funds for both of those years to bring it up to about 7.2, 7.3. the fiscal year 12-13 is the first year of our new strategic plan. in our new strategic plan, we cut $1.2 million. we do, though, anticipate that we may bring in more state money. i will talk to you a little bit about that. ok. so the next slide shows our

overall expenditures and how we use our sustainable plan. it is just another diagram. we will be using more and more of your fund balance. -- our fund balance. this slide is going to show you how the total of more spending, major allocation is to preschool. 70% of the overall budget. ? zthy resource centers, at 8% to health, to% to evaluation, 3% to evaluation. -- administration. we are seeing next year, we will have a 9.6 decrease in our staffing. we are not filling some of our positions.

the next slide will tell you more about our preschool investment. 63% of our investments go to reimbursement. those are either enhancements to the subsidies or they are actual reimbursement to families. we have about 8% as administration. we are allocating 10% of our budget to support children with special needs. 10% -- a 13% to capacity building and infrastructure. capacity building is our technical assistance and and the structure supports our databases -- infrastructure supports our databases. are reimbursements are growing every year.

we will serve more children. we have plans to serve about 600, 500, 600 children over the next few years. we are targeting the low income families, of course, and there are several large child care centers who have not entered into the family because of the quality. they're not meeting the guidelines. we have a special budget to get to those sites to improve their quality. >> you said you had 600? that is additional? >> that is correct. we are continuing to rollout. i did want to tell you that our biggest challenge or risk that might occur is that last year,

that would take about 50% of our reserves. what that meant for us is that $11 million of a refund balance would be slapped back to the state. -- fund balance would be swept back to the state. that was not a process that was approved by the legislators. if you are going to change anything about prop 10, it had to go back to the voters. we will know on march 19 whether the state will appeal. >> what is the level of money in your reserve at the moment? >> are prop 10 reserve has

about $20 million. $11 million are designated in our sustainability, the rest is our reserve. it will see us through as our funding declines, that money will see us through for the next several years. we will have to use it more and more. >> it is about $22 million as of when the state was trying to last sweep it. you have probably about 22, because the state did not sweep it just yet. >> right. >> 11 million of that was what? >> that is what they would sweep if they would take. >> it is going to be used for sustainability? >> are revenue has been declining every year -- or revenue has been declining every year. >> ok. currently, $22 million. in terms of the prop h

allocation, do you spend that the entire amount? >> we have had some savings, mostly because what has happened there is when we cannot get those centers into pfa because they do not meet the guidelines, we have some savings, but we do have a -- we are using them every year. as you can see on the first page, we plan to use those next year and a year after that. >> it sounds like we have a separate prope 10 reserved. >> yes. >> do you know what the balance for prop h? >> $9 million. >> 9 million? ok, thank you. supervisor kim: my question

was on the prop h reserved. when you say $9 million, that is how much since 2005-2006, the savings you have had from the allocations given by the city? >> i will introduce you to encourage -- ingrid. >> good afternoon. preschool was implemented in 2005. there was a specific rollout of neighborhoods. as the initiative was implemented, the target for enrollment was low. we were able to encourage savings from the first year for the implementation. every year, we have been able to save to save little bit. we have also received first five california funding, that has also helped deposit into our

fund balance. our fund balance is already allocated. we are supposed to be funded at a $20 million initiative and we are only being funded at 15. based on the proposition, we need additional revenue. supervisor kim: it sounds like it is supposed to be $20 million. the allocation we have been giving has not been used entirely because there is a $9 million balance. >> yes, those were in the initial years. >> $9 million is what you have saved since the 2005-2006 years. that is the money that is on spent? $9 million? >> yes. >> how do you plan on spending those on reserves? >> we have a sustainability fund. we go through this same process.

both are interdependent. >> of last year's -- of this year's current crop h -- prop h, how much have you drawn down? >> we are planning on spending the full amount. >> it would be of great to get a break down. >> [inaudible] we can send you are sustainability plan because you can see as the reimbursements go up, or other program expenses are going down. we're using that to support other things, like our inclusion strategy. the other is that we are putting -- we are adding a million dollars a year for three years. so we can cover the cuts. those would be subsidies that we

would do to help with the safety net of the kids. >> thank you. >> this slide -- we just wanted to show you what we are doing interdepartmentally. [inaudible] sorry. for example, most of our funding is joint funded. for our family resource center and initiative, that we oversee, the first five contributes $2.8 million. that is a total of $10.3 million. for our mental health consultation, it is 1.2 from us, 645,000 from dcyf.

this is our new program, which will help low income subsidized centers for their operations. we contribute close to a million, $3.7 million from dcyf. this will be direct operational grants that centers can use for salaries and compensation benefits. this is our contribution to the center for inclusion that i mentioned before. $1.1 million from first five. hsa and first 5 put in money for health screening.

>> i am sorry, what type of screenings? >> addition, dental, obesity screenings. we are also supporting a lot of technical assistance and capacity building. we want to base our work on data and evaluation and we know we want to raise the capacity of our providers and teachers. we are investing about $120,000 to evaluate family resource centers. this year, we will do a lot of work with them around school attendance and navigating the school district for families. we put about $1.4 million into a quality rating system. that is where we are assessing all of our providers to see what

their quality is. then we have a quality improvement system that will target coaching as they needed, so they can maintain and keep getting a better in their quality. then we are putting another $145,000 into evaluation of or preschools. we will follow our kids into first, second, and third grade to see how they're doing. we are working in close partnership with the school district early education program. we're trying to align our investments. strategies that will improve school readiness. we are involved in may pre-k to 3rd grade initiative.

this talk a little bit about what we have committed. from our reserve, we are putting the million dollars away each year for the next three years to cover reductions in state subsidies. we are also putting 80,000 -- $800,000 to expand an additional preschool year. these are the children, because there will no longer be transitional kindergarten, we felt like we needed to invest over the next few years to keep them in preschool. we are also going to allocate $500,000 a year to increase the enrollment of children at sites with vouchers. this has been a challenge in our school readiness initiative because there are a lot of families that use vouchers, but not for licensed early education

centers. we are encouraging all of those centers to take vouchers, which they have not in the past. this $500,000 a year is when families are not working or going to school, their children lose their child-care slots. we will cover their preschool sloths even if they do lose their -- slots even if they do lose their vouchers. some other opportunities is that we have applied for a grant to enhance the quality of care for infants and toddlers. this would bring an $13.5 billion over the next three years. we're pretty likely to get it. we are playing a prominent role in the planning and implementation of a regional

quality rating for our race to the top. that would be $1 million over three years. race to the top grants have been based on first 5 throughout the state. this would be an enhancement. we are forming a lot of public and private funding partners. we have been sitting down with their private foundations, working with them to allocate money into the strategies. we have had some really promising results. thank you. supervisor kim: i had a quick question about the federal race to the top potential grant. i see that it is regional. which counties are we working with to apply for this grant? >> we are forming a regional consortium.

supervisor kim: how was this group of counties put together? >> the funding is going to the first 5 in those areas. iraq -- the executive directors and some of their partners in the communities are coming together. we are meeting regionally. we have been meeting with the california department of education. we have to submit a plan about what we're going to do. some of the things will help us -- we will invest in a data system that will track all the assessments that we do. how are sesame -- how our systems are doing. if they are moving up the quality latter. -- ladder. we will probably invest in people who will do the assessments and have it more diverse because we lack language

capacity. doing it regionally would strengthen what we are doing. supervisor kim: how is the selection process going to be? is it similar to other race to the top funding? >> there were nine that got grants a share. we were the ninth. we received the money. half of what we asked for -- supervisor kim: nine grants or given out. -- were given out. congratulations on that. thank you. >> i would like to talk to you about our fund balance. i think it is miss understood about how wee