their top-ten for those bills, we have the legislature has until february 21st to submit bills. we're starting a brand-new -- as most of you know two-year state legislative session. so what i thought i do was to give you a very high-level what we're looking at and as we move through 2015 we'll have more details. this is kind of the overview at what we're looking at for 2015. so on the state level, three of the six major areas focused on adults and seniors. and those were in the area of health care reform and medical, aging and adult services and long-term care and i'm not going spend time on long-term care, because there is a report after mine. and self-sufficientcy for seniors and persons with disabilities. medical, concerned about

funding with the affordable care act. numbers have grown, so we need to look at funding and making sure that the systems are updated and all of the support programs. a lot of them don't have legislation with them yet. so we'll look at them again. and again ensuring that seniors and persons with disabilities are identified during the implementation process with the affordable care act and as we move through this second round of sign-ups. and then homeless and at-risk populations, and service advocates. we'll be monitoring those through the year. aging and adult services, a

priority and concern is protective services and looking for an increase in caseworker, mandated reporter, conservator and we need the money to implement those and also support legislation and regulation that protection elders and dependented adults from all forms of abuse and neglect and mrs. perini also noted in the record financial abuse. while that is not part of this, we do keep that in front of us. in-home supportive services, supporting legislationings that allows the consumer, the ihss consumer to delegate an authorized representative. as was pointed out in deputy director's report, there has been a lot of work because of the overtime and new regulations as she pointed out

in recognizing miss hogan. so we need to be on top of that and looking at designating a consumer representative, somebody that can help move through. the concern is that the devil is in details on that and we don't know what that legislation looks like yet, but that was an area that we want to be watching. so on behalf of purposes for program application, eligibility maintenance and execution of employer functions and again, long-term care and there will be a report. self-sufficiency and that the state supplemental payments should be increased above poverty levels and looking for legislation that would support annual cost adjustment. so as things go up and others are decreased, that people aren't able to stay even and slip further and further into poverty. and also areas in this to

support the ombudsman program, and strengthening -- we're responsible to resolve and investigate complaints. also areas of computer literacy to help seniors and disabled adults to become more computer literate. as i mentioned the senior -- california senior legislature has their top-ten proposals. there are some sponsors for those bills, but not in all cases. so that will be the work moving forward as the early part of this process moves forward in 2015. the first one is prescription drug labeling and that is basically to tell you what the medicine is for and tell the side effects and what to take it, but not what it's specifically for and it will help. voluntary contributions for filing and supporters of the senior legislature tax returns.

senior alert program. there is a repeal in the law that gets -- that would sunset the senior alert program and we want the senior legislature would like that repealed and the senior alert program is similar to an amber alert program, but for seniors. california death with dignity, false-risk screening. so education for health workers on how to be more alert to that. identity theft. looking at the imposing a two-year punishment, enhancement for anybody that has a felony conviction for a crime against anyone/someone 65 years or older and the whole identity theft area. elder-friendly courts. medical long-term care and personal needs allowance and looking to raise that from $35 a month to $80 a month. alzheimer disease prevention and early detection programs and look for funds that would

be used to provide education, prevention and as the population ages that becomes a bigger and bigger issue. on the federal law, looking at four areas requiring the department of veterans affairses to identify and acknowledge veterans who participated in weapons testing and housing priority for senior veterans, elder justice act to be fully funded and a comprehensive drug trial act that would eliminate the upper limits. so when drug trials are done, there are age limits and this would look to raise those where possible. there were 60 proposals, 52 supported senior poverty and these were the top-tens and we'll look for sponsors and keep you posted as we move through the year. as president schmidt noted we

don't meet in december. so our january, 2015 meeting we'll have more details on that. one of the other things that we discussed was reaching out to local legislative reps where necessary to gain their support. that is done at the federal level and we're talking about possibly doing that at the state level as well. >> commissioner. >> thank you very much. it was a very comprehensive report and ambitious agenda. one observation and one question, i was very happy for you to raise the use of elder financial abuse and one thing that is important to notice it covers all socioeconomic levels. yesterday's new york times carried an obituary, who was convicted of elder abuse

concerning his philanthropic mother. he and the lawyer were convicted of physically abusing her, as well as financially abusing her. and they were at the most prestigious levels of new york society. so it crosses all lines and it's very important for people to remember that. secondly i have a question regarding the california death with dignity. is this in lay terms along the lines of physician-assisted suicide. >> yes, that is the initiative, exploring something similar to what the state of oregon does. >> thank you. >> i have one comment, is that commissioner roy is now on serving on that legislative committee. so be sure to make sure that gets notice. he is replacing me. >> okay. >> madame chair? >> i will get your email and

send things you to. >> can i ask a question? >> commissioner. >> the 60 items, that you go down the items that we can really work on and support. my suggestion that you named 60 items to work on for the benefit of the seniors. i hope that you will pare down the items that we can work on. >> the senior legislature started with 60 and narrowed to 10. >> can i say this? i was invited monday, december 1st to the swearing-in of david chiu, our legislator and the first item he put on his sponsorship

is $400 million for the repairing of the sfo residence for seniors. i hope we can support david chiu's legislation. $400 million for repair to the sro throughout the state to have a better facility. >> we'll look it up. thank you. >> thank you. >> now tacc report. >> long-term care. >> long-term care. >> good morning, president james and members of the commission and miss mcspadden. i'm a member of the long-term care coordinating council and i want to give you highlights of the meeting that we had last month. we have several work groups

that are basically spending energy and time on a specific subject-matter. so one of the work groups is the communications committee. we just hired a consultant, because we got a grant from the scan foundation, and we hired rick crane to work with us and the whole objective of the grant is to build capacity and sustainability of the long-term care coordinating council. so he will be conducting town hall meetings with external and internal stakeholders, and also start working on the updating of the website of the council. we also will be meeting with the board of supervisors, which we do every year, when it comes to budget time. we'll try to look at some of the priorities in terms of the seniors and aging and disability community. the other committee that we have a very activity committee is the aging and disabled-friendly san francisco work group. this work group is really going

to come to you, hopefully in the beginning of 2015, to bring a potential policy issue to you as a policy for the [skpha-urpbs/] city and county of san francisco to be disability and senior-friendly, which means a lot of things. so they will come to you with that and i think you will find it quite an exciting potential policy for the city and county of san francisco. we also have a financial and policy committee. this group is actually working on a special study with the controller's office. which i think is a very -- is going to be very interesting, because they are looking at individual seniors, who are above the medical eligibility. focusing on consumers and caregivers. because they are going to define the income brackets for this particular group and basically we're talking about middle-income people, and as you know in the city and county of san francisco, there is a

larger number of people in the middle-income that are kind of getting left behind. and so the controller's study is going to really try to collect the data for this and come to our council for some potential policy issues. we also have another committee and this our newest committee, the hiv aging committee and this group will determining some very concrete policy issues to bring us to and then to ourselves. the other committees that we have, or other work groups or palliative care, dementia work group and they do the nitty gritty substantive work of the council and we feel it's a very important way to structure our

council, so there is particular attention to these subject-matters. we also had a legislative update. all of the city departments have presented their priorities for 2015, in terms of legislation. and i just want to highlight a few of those. one of them is to look at reforming the ssp state portion of ssi with the goal of moving above the poverty level. l also to look at any legislation to support the ombudsman office statewide. funds for aps training all over the state. as you may know, prop 41 did pass during the last election and that is the state-level issue for the veterans. and this is allocating $600 million for rental housing for veterans. so this is an

important legislationion that passed -- a ballot measure that passed. we're continually trying to look at how we do our agenda-setting for the council. so we're looking at how to do that in an efficient manner and we'll continue that discussion, because it takes quite a bit of discussion in terms of trying to figure that out. so we'll continue to come to you every month to give you updates of the council. thank you. if you have any questions, i would be happy to answer. >> questions, commissioners? >> i just wanted to -- you are going to have a town hall meeting, the time and date, to let our secretary know, so she can inform us. many of us want to attend. >> absolutely, we'll do that. >> thank you.

>> commissioner loo? >> i am just interested in the financial group that worked with the controller's office. so the gap, the middle group -- >> we're trying to look at, commissioner loo, the demographics of that group; who are seniors and younger disabled. to see where there are gaps or where there are holes in terms of resources or in terms of services? and so we need the demographics though. we need data to even start looking at this whole population. i don't -- we do -- our understanding is that there has never been a study done on this. so the controller's office is putting a high priority on this, which is really great. we have wonderful people from the controller's office working with us.

we've always had very good staff from the controller's office working with our councilmembers. so the chair of our financial and policy committee is knowle simmons and she is as you know, one of the deputies for the hsa agency. so she is the chair of that work group on behalf of the long-term care coordinating council. >> so maybe based on the study, you might want to develop some program to help them? >> yes. >> and you have to look for money? >> yes. everything is about money. >> that is correct. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> any other questions? thank you very much for your report. next is tacc. she is not here. >> she is in a meeting in sacramento. >> okay. she is not here, so "case

report." anybody here representing case? >> i thought we had-- >> so no report? okay. now we're down to "public comment?" any comments from the public? please come forward. >> i'm director of golden gate senior services and we operate the richmond senior center and the castro senior center and i'm here kind of out of a bit of frustration with the add-backs. we received news of two add-backs and we had about three weeks to do our two rfps.

then we turned them in kind of at the end of the october. then on november 17th we received a congratulations letter on one of our programs and we were asked to submit in budget information, which we did. with the idea that it would be coming to this commission meeting and we received a phone call saying no, it's not going to be coming to this commission meeting. so it's really -- we have lost six months' worth of services to our senior population. and it's just a little bit frustrating. i have talked to some of the other service providers, and it's just frustrating for us. we have a two-year granted, , but, in fact we'll only be able to provide 18 months' of services. so it just seems there would be a way to streamline the process where it doesn't take six months or more and we may not receive it until

the january meeting and may not actually be able to receive the money until the january. it's frustrating that this process would take so long. >> does anyone from the staff want to speak to this first? >> mr. curto. >> good morning, president james, commissioners, dave curto, director of contracts and facilities, yes the board of supervisors add-back process has always been a troubling process from a procurement standpoint. we understand the well-intentions of our supervisors by identifying groups and constituencies and making promises and then when it comes through the budget, we have to go through a formal procurement process. we cannot just make the awards based on the supervisors. as many of you are ware of aware that the grand jury says

you could not do targeted add-backs, but there is some great benefit to providing targeted funding to specific neighborhoods and we all acknowledge that, but from the procurement standpoint we have to first of all get the funding and get feedback from the supervisors' office of what they really intended for the funding and then we have to fit that into our normal procurement schedule. so often times board of supervisors add-backs as well-intentioned take 3-4 months to fast-track and this particular one, because we were fortunate to get a number of add-backs and greater amounts to put out notices of funding of availability for these various areas to try to fit the supervisors' desires with the needs that we have identified for those communitis that were receiving the funding. so we have to go through the process. we tried to streamline it.

we're trying to get the awards out the door, but quite frankly, it puts a lot of work on the staff, at a time that we're also renewing contracts and as you see from the next item, we're adding domestic cost of doing business. and in the circumstances where the additional services once an award has been made, we have been very flexible about using the existing funds in the grant to go ahead and start the service and back fill the funding as soon as we get through the entire process. yes, it's taken a little longer and it's always troubling when it comes into the holiday system because stuff does slow down. so we apologize for that, but in my 18 years' of doing this, we have never found a really good way to incorporate these add-backs. so i don't mean that as a

rationalization, but it's just the factors. >> commissioner. >> three questions, how much is the add-back? and what are the monies going to be used for? are they getting the money and if not today, when do you expect them to get the check? >> is that? >> three questions, yes. >> the add-backs are varied. first of all, we have to go back to the supervisors, and get a little feedback of what they intended the funding to be for. and then we have to fit that into our existing service categoris and compare with it our gap analyses of the needed services that the department feels are prioritized. so there is that little dance that going on about where is best place to put the funding? and how to make sure this intended

district gets a fair didn't opportunity to compete for it? there has to be a full and open competitive process. you are can't just give the money that. is one. once we make the awards they have to fit it into the budget coordinate with the staff to make sure we're getting accountability for the public dollars. that is the process and sometimes it takes a little longer than we will all would like. i will say that the add-back funding is available for the year. the encumbrances essentially we can't get all of the awards in front of you until january. once you approve these modifications, based on nofas,

we'll add it in. if it's an urgent case we have the ability to pre-fund them ahead of your authorization from the existing funding that that organization gets. now the add-back funding is good for this fiscal year, and next fiscal year. they are all good for the immediate fiscal year, and the next one. and we'll see what comes out in the budget, because we're on a two-year budget cycle. so the expectation is for those truly urgent and i don't know of too many that we put in that category, but those funds have been available. it's funding that we're taking out of the existing grants that we'll back-fill once the process is complete. we have have to go through a whole process that takes time. >> i asked you three questions and you answered one. how much are we talking about? half a million dollars? i know, you don't have a definite. >> i don't have the exact amount in front of me.

>> not exacty. >> overall, $2.5 million. >> $2.5 million. >> okay. my second question, how are you going to use the $2.5 million? >> that was the subject of our notices of funding availability, where the non-profit partners submitted proposals of how they were going to spend the money and how it was going to serve their clients. that goes through a review and a whole process. once we make an allocation of a specific set of funds based on a proposal received, then the daas, the staff sits down and works out details of how they are going implement or expand on the services that they are providing to use this funding. >> commissioner serina. >> thank you, dave, we'll be able to have a full discussion next month when those are put before the commission. >> that is correct. >> and the emergency

procedures that the department has made available to the contractors so essential services are not denied because of the process themselves. so i think we can have the discussion next month. >> in most cases it was addition of services that we already have in place. there are new locations and of course, those take longer to identify the site and identify the contractor and put the parameters into place. >> i'm sure that is why the financial committee they've been trying to look for a date and coordinate with the staff. so they can get this going. thank you very much. you have one other question, commissioner loo. >> since the money is coming in late, and if they can't spend the money, can the money be carried over to another year? >> it's basically a two-year funding amount. so yes, in certain cases we can request it to be fund ed or allow

acceleration. they still have the full fiscal year amount to use this and some of it we may be able to roll over into next year. they have gotten total funding for a two-year period. >> thank you. >> commissioner sims. >> just quickly, i want to say that while i have great sensitivity for non-profits and ngos operating on limited budgets and stretched beyond imagination to accomplish the good work that they are working on, i am as a kind of good government advocate, comforted to know that your department is as thorough as you are, and as careful as you are in the allocation of these funds and not -- we're not at-risk as the general public to see those funds being pushed around by the whim of any single elected official. so thank you for doing the good work. >> thank you, we appreciate that thought as well. >> i remember that process.

thank you. any other general comment from the public? hearing none, we'll move on. old business? we don't have any. new business? so here we are. the last item, the department requests authorization to modify the grant agreements with the non-profit service providers for the record period of july 1, 2014, through june 30, 2015 in an aggregate amount not to exceed $393,993. the purpose of this increase is to help compensate the non-profit service providers for the increased costs associated with providing the services on behalf of the department of. could i have a motion to discuss? >> so moved. >> second.

>> commissioners, dave curto again we're asking your authorization to modify the non-profitgants that we have under the daas portfolio for a cost of doing increase -- a cost of doing business increase of 1.5% granted by the mayor's office in the budget process. traditionally, the board of supervisors usually matches this every year. this year, the board of supervisors did not. so our contractors had an expectation of getting one around 3%. but daas was again very fortunate to get other add-backs and allows to us modify grants by 1.5% that carries forward into the future. this process we're in the process now, we have notified the contracts. they have to go in and allocate 1.5% throughout the existing budgets. so the total amount