said, in 2010? >> correct. supervisor avalos: was that actually on time? >> right. we did the r.f.p. in 2005 and got the contract negotiations finally approved and available in 2008. we actually did an 18-month implementation for this, which was, we felt it was on time and on budget, was very, very aggressive timelines, but we wanted to make sure that we could get the billing piece -- we have an older system that wasn't supported by any hardware or software vendor and it was over 20 years old. i was concerned that, you know, we didn't hit those timelines, then there would be potential -- if we couldn't generate bills, for instance, that would have been a big problem. so we brought the system up in 18 months and -- supervisor avalos: the board approved in 2008 and 2010

launched, that was when you actually conceptualized that going to launch? >> july 2010 is when we did the conversion, went live and the clinical users began using the system and we generated bills. supervisor avalos: i'm just kind of curious, since this is such an important system to have in our public health system, why wasn't the original contract longer? and we're doing an amendment to extend it another five years and it seems like it would make sense that we would have a longer contract frame. what was the rationale for having a shorter contract and seeking expectation whether there would be an amendment sought after before? how come there wasn't option agreements like we did with other contracts? >> it was part of the r.f.p. contracts when we did the original proposal, we proposed -- we do a five-year kind of projection on information technology every year.

at that point we were required to kind of spec it out for five years. and the five-year term was sort of a standard -- as far as i understood, a standard for contracts of this type with the idea that, you know, then if in fact there were problems with the system in year three or four, you weren't locked into a much longer timeline. now, of course, we're at the -- approaching the end of the five-year term, so it make sense for us for the implementation to expand it and we're linking it to all of the health care reform legislation as well. supervisor avalos: when it comes to the software system like this, we kind of go with the same contractor because they have proprietary information that leads to, needs to be in place for continuing that contract beyond the original scope of it. so i was just curious. >> there have been cases in the health care i.t. industry, especially when there is a

billing conversion when you're doing large accounts receivable conversion where venders haven't been able to fulfill totally what they needed to do on the accounts receivable side. it's not unusual for -- it's not unprecedented i should say for a system to be evaluated in year two or three if there is some significant revenue impacts going on. so with us, of course, that didn't happen, but in some historical areas, l.a. county i think years back had a problem with that. you see it from time to time, but, you know, generally speaking, we probably would expect that we would have the system delivered as we did and make sure that it was stwfl for -- successful for us. supervisor avalos: thank you. supervisor chu: just a question, i think this might be dating me. i remember the department of public health when we were implementing healthy san francisco, we went through the process of creating something called -- i don't know it was

creating or buying off the shelf something called 1 e app to make sure that all of the clinics and folks were verifying eligibility for folks entering into healthy san francisco would sort have been connected in that application process. does that feed into the avatar system for billing him? >> so 1 e app is an eligibility provider that is deployed electronically to our registration sites so that we can do an eligibility check for, let's say medicate eligibility, medicare eligibility, private insurance eligibilities. 1 e app allows an eligibility check for different types of programs that they may be -- patients may be eligible for like women and infant care type program, other social services programs and, yes, that's a deployed electronically through an entire network. so we currently have that live.

supervisor chu: i understand that it is live and in use. i'm wondering, how does it connect to your avatar system? is there a connection and does there need to be one? >> when patients are registered electronically, we generate electronic queries out to the provider organizations as i mentioned we have medicaid, medicare, and queries are sent via 1 e app to check on their potential qualifications for being signed up to various programs. so that's part of the standard eligibility check now for the patients. supervisor chu: right, i get that. but the avatar system i'm understanding is your maybe records information system and it sounds like you were age sage there is a component where that is connected to what you are able to bill, right? >> correct. supervisor chu: so that billing portion hypothetically, you have to have eligibility in order to draw down on certain

programs. i am wondering if your 1 e app kind of synched up with this system to the patients are build up. >> they can check on the eligibility status for those programs and behavioral health patients. choich thank you. why don't we go to the budget analyst's report. >> madam chair, members of the committee, supervisor olague, as we point out on page two of our report and as has been stated, this original agreement was awarded through a competitive process and it is a proprietary so that you are being asked to extend this agreement by four years and 11 months and to add $22 million to the original agreement without further competition and we understand that because it is a proprietary system and apparently the department has been satisfied with this system. i would also add on "page six"

of our report, we point out that the actual, the operation and maintenance clause for the proposed four year and 11 month extension period is actually 81,229 less than what has been paid over the prior five years. there is also about $1.6 million in enhancements or options and d.p.h. reports to us that they plan to use, obtain nongeneral fund revenues to pay for that $8 million worth of additional costs although they have not identified specifically the nongeneral fund revenues. also on page 7 of the report, we point out that they do anticipate incentive payments from the federal government to their psychiatrists and nurse practitioners, about $63,750 per eligible psychiatrist and

nurse practitioner for a cost of $1.8 million over the first three years of compliance, which would offset a portion of the system costs. we recommend that you do approve this resolution. supervisor chu: thank you, mr. rose. let's open up this item for public comment. are there any members of the public that wish to speak on item number two. supervisor chu: thank you. thank you. >> thank you. >> ♪ i know you want to wake up in a budget that doesn't sleep ♪ ♪ to find your king of the money hill, top of the monday heap ♪ ♪ and i know you're going to make it well, these 31 now ♪ and going to bring it through to you, new york incorporated ♪ ♪ and you can make it there, you'll fix the budget

everywhere ♪ ♪ it's up to you net smart new york, new york ♪ >> thank you. supervisor chu: thank you, next speaker. >> good morning, supervisors, my name is douglas yapp. the i did work at san francisco general hospital as an eligible worker for 20 years. i think i'm qualified to talk on this subject. the invasion system there was obviously a failure, so whatever system they have now must be better. i would also like to caution this committee that you have to keep a very close aye on computer systems. we have to thank supervisors ammiano and david chiu in the past to call attention to the past problems the city has had with its numerous computer system. this avatar system actually had a meeting a few months ago down

on -- >> my apologies. that was not reset. supervisor chu: go ahead. >> anyway, i did have a meeting down on howard street a few months ago to discuss the avatar system because in the course of my research, i ran across a couple of articles saying that the initial implementation was pretty faulty, so hopefully it's better and i guess by the questioning by the members of this committee, it looks like we are keeping an aye on it. for the record, i would also like to say that when it comes to spending $31 million, we have to remember two notable failures recently in regards to updating computer systems. i'm sure everybody here is aware that down the street, the california judicial council admitted to a nearly $500 million loss on their so-called

integration computer system which basically is a failure. in fact, if you talk to the different judges, the feuding was so bitter that there were discussions of lawsuits and investigations to see why the system failed. and, also, i hate to admit this, but even my buddies at the f.b.i. had to eat millions of dollars, i would say about four or five years ago when they tried to integrate their own computer system and it was an utter failure. obviously you're never going to get any exact figures from them because a lot of that information is considered classified. i would keep a very close aye on the computer systems that d.p.h. and if you want to refer to it, there was a 2003 report issued to the board of supervisors which i have been urging that be reviewed, but so far hasn't been reviewed. in that 2003 report to the board of supervisors, they did

discuss all the problems at san francisco general in regards to how the computer system failed to keep track of bills. supervisor chu: thank you. are there other members of the public that wish to speak on item number two? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, do we have a motion to send this item forward with recommendation? ok, we'll do that without objection. item three, please. >> item number three, resolution urging the mayor to launch a san francisco summer jobs plus campaign by identifying private and public sector funds, securing private sector job opportunities and developing infrastructure to manage internship ofs so as to increase the summer employment opportunities for san francisco's disconnected young people. supervisor chu: thank you very much. this item is brought to you us by a number of sponsors, sponsors including supervisors olague, supervisors campos, supervisor avalos, and supervisor kim. three of those sponsors are

here today, so i would like to open it up to any of the sponsors who like to say a few opening remarks. supervisor olague, did you want to say a few opening remarks? supervisor olague: yes. i'm excited to present this item today on the summer jobs plus program which would connect young san franciscans to summer employment opportunities and would open the door for many youth in san francisco to career pathways and opportunities that may have otherwise. summer jobs plus is an obama administration initiative that challenges business leaders to join with the federal government in providing hundreds of thousands of summer jobs for america's youth. it was established in 2010 and promotes successful partnerships with the private sector to make employment opportunities far more reachable for young people. subsequently, on january 31, 2012, this board of supervisors

adopted a resolution sponsored by supervisor elsbernd which called on the city to development and implement a local smuss plus jobs plan. in the past few months, mayor lee and others have met with private sector leadership among others to increase awareness and financial support for this program. i also want to note that mayor lee is expected to announce the launch of summers job plus tomorrow morning and he will issue the challenge to business leaders to pledge their commitment to summer jobs for san francisco's youth. i commend the mayor for his work around ensuring that san franciscans are gainfully employed and it is important to note that this goal applies to not only working aged adults, but even seniors and as well hear talking, it applies to youth as well. this resolution supports the mayor's work and also calls out specific metrics and goals for the program that will serve as

targets for measuring outcomes. job creation is one of my legislative priorities and i am sure my colleagues agree that economic recovery depends on people getting back to work and the viability of san francisco's job market relies on preparing youth with training and experience too allow them to effectively participate in the job market as they become more adults. that's why our office has worked closely with the youth commission and the youth employment coalition to draft this resolution which calls on mayor lee with support and commitment from the board to meet the aggressive target of raising some $2.25 million for san francisco summer jobs plus. this is an ambitious goal, but the city has a history of success in creating public-private partnerships to provide summer youth workforce development programs. in 2000, mayor willie brown

raised over $1 million for subsidized youth employment opportunities through local corporations that partnered with the city in the say yes youth employment for the summer campaign. in 2004, mayor given newsom secured funding for over 120 youth jobs in his mayor's vocational program by making personal phone calls to local businesses. my goal with this legislation is to establish targets that we as a city can measure progress toward and exceed with support from our corporate partners. i encourage my fellow board members to work with the mayor and said use employment as a budgetary priority for the summer which is quickly approaching. i look forward to working with my colleagues and the mayor to make this happen. i did submit already a resolution and there are four additional where as clauses that i would like to add to

that. i hate to wait to spend more time with this but i feel like i have to state this for the record. where as through the leadership of may lee and the board of supervisors san francisco has bbc gun organizing an unprecedented nationally recognized summer jobs campaign in partnership with president obama and the united way of the bay area to provide high quality summer employment, paid internship and mentorship programs for san francisco young people ages 16 to 24 through the san francisco summer jobs plus initiative and where as mayor lee convened all city department heads and directed them to participate to the maximum extent possible in san francisco summer jobs plus through programs like youth works, project pool, and others to provide at least 2,500 summer jobs and paid internships for san francisco use and where as mayor lee asked democratic leader nancy

pelosi, school district superintendent carlos garcia and members of the board of supervisors are challenging san francisco's public sector companies to participate in the program by creating an unprecedented number of high quality summer jobs and paid internships for san francisco's young people to match or exceed the number of summer jobs and paid internships provided by city departments and finally where as through the partnership of the city, private sector companies and nonprofit community-based organizations, san francisco summer jobs plus seeks to create more than 5,000 high quality summer jobs and paid internship opportunities for our city's young people including work ready youth, at-risk youth, and young people from disadvantaged backgrounds and communities. i think that is very much in keeping with the city's commitment to keep families in the city if there are no

opportunities for youth, then i think that's an incentive to keep people, families here is by providing opportunities for their -- for the youth. so that being said, i would like to -- we have inviteded youth commission to present and really want to thank them for the leadership that they have shown on this and for all of the collaboration that has gone on between our office and you. so i really want to thank you guys for that. supervisor chu: thank you supervisor olague. before the youth commission does its presentation, we have a request from the mayor's office to say a few words. i believe jason elliott is here to say a few words and has to leave before 11:00. >> i appreciate you letting me speak very quickly. thank you to supervisor olague, to supervisors kim and avalos as well for being co-sponsors of this resolution and especially thank you not youth commission for raising this issue. it's an issue that the mayor

and the commissioners i think are of one mind on. that is that summer jobs, well, jobs in general, but summer jobs for youth is an important priority for the city. we have a number of programs as supervisor olague mentioned including p.u.c.'s project pool, the youth works and these provide paid internships and summer temporary employment for young people. as with anything, there are funding constraints to being able to continue to provide more and more and more slots and so what the mayor has tried to do and i appreciate supervisor olague's amendments there, is to work with and challenge the private sector to step up and supplement what the city is already doing. so to that end, we have taken the challenge from president obama to work with united way and tomorrow, the mayor is very excited to be announcing the summer jobs plus initiative for the city. supervisor olague mentioned some of the details. we will announce more details

tomorrow morning. we hope members of the board including supervisors kim, avalos, and olague and really all members of the board will participate in this. this is a challenge that the president issued to cities. we wanted to heed that call and do as much as we could. so the answer here is the summer jobs plus initiative that we'll be rolling out tomorrow. we're very lucky to be joined by democratic leader nancy pelosi at this event tomorrow. i think that underscores we're on the cutting edge here in san francisco and really putting resources forward and putting energy forward and getting jobs for youth this summer. thank you for raising the issue. thank you very much. supervisor chu: thank you, mr. elliott. go to the presentation by the youth commission. >> thank you very much chairwoman chiu.

and thank you supervisors avalos, olague, kim. honorable members of the committee. we have prepared a modest but hopefully to the point powerpoint presentation to give you guys a bit of context. this piece of legislation before you, so if we could turn everyone's attention to the computer. that would be great. i'm the director of the youth commission and i'm here with the commissioner appointed by mayor lee and my colleague. nick. >> hi, guys. my name is nicholas, i'm a sophomore and i'm the mayor appointee on the youth commission. i just wanted to give you guys a little bit of background on the summer plus jobs campaign. so as far as local contacts, something really important that our youth really need jobs. right now, our youth job rate is the lowest in more than 60 years. we have a 33% unemployment rate. that is an 33% unemployment of

youth, it's a 33% rate of youth of those that want employment. that's a major issue. and also san francisco youth constantly prioritized youth employment. for example, in the most recently data, it said that 29% of youth, their number one priority was a job and that was a landslide compared to all of the other, everything else they wanted. so really it shows how important youth employment is to all of us. you have heard about president obama's summer jobs plus campaign. just as far as on a national level and in the first days of january, he launched the summer jobs campaign, the department of labor and nonprofit industry and the private sector to come together to provide youth opportunities for 100,000 youth and i think mario is going to go more into detail on what

opportunities is. >> yeah, so opportunity youth is sort of a new locution that the obama administration is using. we know in san francisco very well, this board of supervisors, the mayor, the city family knows what, who opportunity youth are. we talk them transitionally aged young people. 16 to 24-year-olds disconnected, 16 to 24-year-olds who are involved in public systems. the quote on this slide is from san francisco's transitionally aged youth initiative. the screen shot at the bottom right is the title page from a 2007 mayor's task force that was the result of a year of work by city agencies and nonprofit contractors. we have multiple system involved, young people who are the people who they are trying to prioritize. we call them tay or disconnected tay. that's one of the same as

opportunity youth. >> so the reason why we're here today is that we're really, really ready to start this program. mayor lee as we know is really committed to jobs, not just jobs, but also youth jobs. so this is a really good time to start this type of program. also department of church youth and families is really ready to provided funding for all of this. they are super ready for this program. united way of the bay area, united way on a national level was an integral part of the summer jobs plus of obama's plan and united way of this area, they are the same and really supportive of local summer jobs plus in san francisco. and also the san francisco youth employment coalition which is a group of lots of youth employment programs is also supper ready to -- super ready to start this program right now. >> so the quick legislative history that got us here,

supervisor olague, and jason elliott spoke to this, the youth commission was on this early. president obama announced this january 5 of this year. we adopted a resolution january 9 of 2012 calling on the board to commend president obama's summer jobs plus plan. supervisor supervisor elsbernd enter diesed a resolution in kind which was adopted on january 21. after the youth employment coalition as was mentioned, 28 youth employment providers, many of who you will hear from in public comment, they are here today asked us to craft, to set these targets, these metrics that supervisor olague was talking about. so we adopted a subsequent resolution on march 19 and presently you have this piece of legislation before you. we were so excited that mayor lee and leader pelosi are going to be launching something tomorrow at 10:00. what is to ask before you?

how are we looking at these clauses in the resolution before this committee right now? well, we'll conclude with that. >> so essentially our ask is for the board of supervisors to reach out to private sector companies for contributions to get these jobs and not only for the supervisors to do that, but also the supervisors to urge the mayor to do that, to emphasize the private sector can provide contributions for these jobs. it's a really important priority for him to do. and then lastly, when this happens, we really want to make sure that it's for the young that need it the most, the disconnected youth that wouldn't be able to have these jobs otherwise. so we really hope you take this into consideration and we want to thank you for your time and if you have any questions about this, we would be happy to answer them. thank you. supervisor chu: thank you very much. supervisor olague. supervisor olague: yeah, i guess so we're well aware that

we have these goals around employment of youth, but i was wanting to get your take on how you think we can support those individuals once they're actually employed to stay employed. what type of support do you think people, youth need or you say in some instances as we saw the tay youth, the people who have challenging, have had faced some challenges in their past and also? some significances, it may be youth that are employed for the first time. so what are some of the soft skills that you think should accompany this type of, you know, goal? >> thank you for the question, supervisor. i think i'll leave a really robust description of those soft skills to the providers who are going to come to you, but on slide five, when we mentioned the portfolio and the millions of dollars that we spend through the children's fund on youth programming, the

youth employment coalition of 28-plus providers, they are culturally competent providers of youth workforce development programming. so there is a whole host of skills, a whole host of best practices that go into supporting 16 to 24-year-olds who haven't finished school, who zopet have jobs, who are largely black and brown young people in san francisco who are involved in multiple systems. there is so much that goes into that. you'll likely hear that in public comment today. supervisor olague: thank you. >> if i could add on to that, the youth commission, we haven't formally passed any resolutions of this type, but we really want to start some financial literacy programs because we know that these youth employment programs will be able to provide money, but if there is no way of educating what to do with that money, it really loses a lot of purpose of these jobs. supervisor chu: thank you very much. supervisor avalos.