successful as they should be. >> supervisor cohen: in the interest of time, i will just jump in and throw out questions to try to move this along. the presentation is pretty comprehensive. playing off what supervisor ronen was saying, why is there a 60-day cap? is that a policy you inherited when you came on board? >> no. again it is not a 60-day cap on all beds. it is some of the beds. the reason why is because we just don't have enough housing to let everybody stay indefinitely in the nav center. >> supervisor cohen: how do you determine which beds get capped? >> roughly we try to mix almost -- it is about 50/50. a little more weighted towards the more temporary beds. and it is balancing our need to be able to when i have a supervisor or a citizen call me and say i need to get this person off the streets, we need to be able to get them quickly

into a site. so we have the shorter-term beds so we could have turn-around. otherwise we would have filled up 1515 south van ness with 110 people and we would still have people on the streets. there's no science behind it -- ak dhul there is. -- actually there is a science. based on the number of units we have turning over, we would have 300 pathway to housing beds. that would be the ideal number. that would be the right number because that matches up to everybody staying for 90 days and then you get housing. >> supervisor cohen: how are people selected to move into the navigation center? >> flu a variety of ways. they are invitation only. and there is a couple of different ways people will get in. if the hot team identifies an individual who is a priority one client, they get prioritized for

a navigation center bed because we want to get them off the streets. some of the navigation center beds are set aside for the encampment resolution team like the one we worked on that polian street -- napoleon street. and some beds are available for the police or hot team to have beds based on an emergency. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. because of the time constraints, i would like to call up the representative from the department of public health. i have a couple of questions i wanted to ask. maybe stick around. don't leave just yet, jeff. how are you today? [indiscernible] >> supervisor cohen: you are

luis calderon, right? >> yes. >> supervisor cohen: i'm going to ask a couple of questions. >> that's fine. >> supervisor cohen: from a d.p.h. perspective, how do you measure success in the wrap around services? >> we are pretty much overseeing the hummingbird navigation center which is a psychiatric program with navigation center for admission. it is very low threshold. anybody who is dual diagnosed, we have seen the success in that program by reducing the number of people returning to p.e.s. psychiatric emergency services. we have seen the majority of our referrals coming from psychiatric emergency. those people that usually come on a day by basis, they come to this navigation center for up to 14 days.

in those 14 days they transition our side of the team, try to engage with them to offer them services, do motivational interviewing and offer treatment programs. many of those clients are offered services to discharge not just to the street, but to a program. either a dual diagnosed program with partners from different communities. they can do a.d.u.'s which is adult diversion unit or more long term placements. we can do referrals to the 90-day beds. when they are more stable, we can refer them to hotel rooms. we have a small number of hotel rooms. 15 only in the community. >> supervisor cohen: 15 rooms on a nightly basis or 15 rooms available for quarterly -- >> we are authorized for seven days at a time but for a maximum of three to four weeks. we have been able to extend it

for a period of time like other navigation centers where the clients are vulnerable and have psychiatric or health issues. we bring other services into the navigation center like in home support services to provide personal care. we have nursing staff that are psychiatrically trained. we have social workers that do the same thing and connect them to services. so, by the time they are discharged, we have a complete wrap-around services. we try to connect it with medi-cal, s.s.i. we have held a couple of people from the navigation centers like program homeward bound to return them back to their homes. these are folks that need to be accompanied to go home because of the nursing needs.

so, they are accompanied by a nurse to their state or country. we sent someone back to the philippines. that's the only way we are able to manage them in a safe environment and maintain so they don't disappear or go back to using and become unstable. >> supervisor cohen: how many beds are at homing bird? >> only 15 beds. >> supervisor cohen: and they just recently opened up? >> august 30th last year. we hope we will see more success. >> supervisor cohen: i realize you may not have data on this topic, but a number of community meetings i have heard time and time again about head injury and homelessness. is this a thing? is this real? i hear stories and concerns. maybe you can share your expertise and understanding. >> you are right. we don't have specific data but we have seen over the last few years an increased number of folks with brain injuries. which tends to happen with folks

with drug, alcohol use or abuse tend to fall, hit their heads and become traumatic brain injuries. unfortunately, many of the folks already may have had already a psychiatric disability, a psychiatric condition, drug/alcohol condition and now they have a fiscal disability. -- physical disability. we are looking at this particular population that can do more medical issues. >> supervisor cohen: is it something we should begin to track with our coordinated entry system? >> that's a good question. i think database system would be able to answer that question that we can keep track more of that information. [audio indiscernible] >> the hummingbird referral is an inpatient unit. they are medically because they have a psychiatric disability but they are coming from the

medicine side. they are coming to the emergency department, being admitted and we are discharging them to a psychiatric navigation center. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. colleagues i don't know if you have any questions for mr. calderon. i appreciate you sitting through and sharing with us your opinions and your thoughts. >> you are welcome. >> supervisor cohen: thank you very much. >> thank you. i have one card but i think the individual isn't with us anymore. do we have anyone who would like to offer public comment? please. step up. and can you say your name. >> public: good afternoon. my name is annette leonard. i'm with community housing partnership and here in support of navigation centers in san francisco. since january 2016, the sifr vic

center has provided safe res -- civic center has provided safe respite for people. the 316 individuals that we have helped has includeded 109 women and nine trans women who are particularly vulnerable living on the streets. we know that housing takes time and is a limited resource. the average length of stay that folks have been with us while waiting for homeless placement and working on that pathway is 145 days. shelters don't often have the opportunity to offer the time that most participants need as they work on their housing paths. nav centers offer the opportunity for our resident to transition off the street into a more structured environment. at civic center, we are not time

limited so our problematic nature of the services helps to build the skills and behaviors necessary for future success. civic center hotel navigation center has housed 131 participants which is 56% of our 232 total exits. [bell]. >> public: we have also had a positive impact on the community and our neighbors have shared their thanks for changing the environment. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> public: good afternoon. i'm director of programming for e pis cable -- community services. we opened mission street back nearly three years ago. what we saw were guaranteed housing for everyone. and we were in a unique position

in that i also manage 534 single adult beds at next door sanctuary. and the nav centers get all the beds. there needs to be flow and we need to look at the system as a whole. the nav centers play a part in the homeless system. we can't forget folks at long term shelters. i agree there are people on the street that many of the folks don't want to go into the larger shelters. but to go back to the way it was, which was guaranteed housing for anyone that walks in the door of a nav center really isn't fair. and again, i strongly encourage that we look at the whole system and that includes large, small shelters along with nav centers.

thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> public: i would like to stand by the comments of the prior speaker. i think san francisco's program needs to include programs to exit from homelessness. we have model programs with partner organizations as well as the city. i think the navigation model is one that is working to extend that we have the beds to bring people off the street into that system. but this city needs to deal with emergency shelter up front. and i know it is not -- legally and humanely we can't move people off the street if you don't a place to put them. since the time of mayor feinstein, we have not had enough beds every night of the week to bring people off the street into shelter programs. i know we don't have as many s.r.o. rooms available. lots of things have changed in the economy of san francisco and the ability of you as supervisors to budget for the type of emergency upfront

shelter we need as part of the entire program of care for the momless. we stand willing -- homeless. we stand willing to work with you to deal with this because we have to have enough beds to humanely move people off the streets in front of your constituents' homes and businesses. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> public: good morning supervisors. good morning everyone. my name is alejandro. i'm the assistant program director at st. vincent, the largest homeless shelter in the city of san francisco and currently operationing the navigation center at 1515 south van ness in the mission district. what i can offer in terms of efficacy of navigation centers is aware there are major challenges that are beyond what happens on a day-to-day basis. the individuals that are coming in, we have to remember these

are individuals that have been on the streets for more than ten years in most cases. individuals that have lost trust in the system and individuals that need to continue working with us to be able the regain that trust. what happens at these navigation centers is work involved in creating the relationship from the first day they come to change that perspective about navigation centers themselves, about shelters and about being indoors. there was concerns about people being on the streets and having to go back on the street. indeed people are traumatized and that is a challenge. it is for that reason it will be important to improve the efficacy of the navigation centers. to have programs that will address substance abuse within the shelters. [bell]. >> public: it would be through these connections and

partnerships, collaborations that we will be able to help individuals reach self-sufficiency. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you for your perspective. >> public: thank you. emily kahn. >> supervisor cohen: hold on. are you speaking for public comment? >> public: no. >> supervisor cohen: in you whether spoke you can only speak once. sorry. >> anyone else interested in testifying for public comment? seeing none, public comment is now closed. >> supervisor cohen: great, thank you. now, ms. cohen come up. >> public: sorry. i had two clarifying points i wanted to make. unfortunately, jeff had to step out. supervisor sheehy, to you question about youth being on the streets in terms of

assessment for placement, i want to make sure we are clear all families are assessed use a universal assessment tool. all adults and youth have separate assessment processes and are therefore prioritized based within their sub population. we are not prioritizing cross population. your concern for competing with an older adult for a bed is distinct systems with distinct categories. the second point i wanted to make around length of time in the navigation centers. just to point out and i know jeff didn't get to all the slides. but on slide 25 you will see only 8% of people exiting homelessness exit because their time was up. when we are talking about length of stay and the duration which people are able to stay in

navigati navigation centers or shelters, it is a conversation about the housing units on the back end. the more quickly we can move people out of shelters, the faster the better for the individual and we can serve more people coming off the street. our ability to resolve encampments is directly proportional to the beds we have able in the navigation centers and ability to move people through is directly tied to the exits we have on the back end. whether that's permanent supportive housing, short-term, problem solving and homeward bound, that's where we get the successes. only 8% of the folks exiting navigation centers have exited because of their time. >> vice chair ronen: i don't want to beleaguer the point, if that's true it is a bit of a red

herring for the director to talk about the thousands of people that are homeless in the region as a reason for not allowing longer stay. because if it is only 8% of the people, then we can achieve at a much smaller price tag the amount of additional beds we need in order to solve for that problem. i just want the make that point. i think it will be a continuing conversation that we have. but it's something that i know my colleagues and i really want to get -- have only answers here. our residents and our businesses. >> there are some national best practices and data that are important to infuse in this conversation because we have not seen success frsz other communities that have unlimited shelter stays -- successes from other communities that have unlamented shelter stays.

-- unlimited shelter stays. i would be eager to bring that information and continue this conversation. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. i'm happy with what i heard. i want to thank everybody who came out to participate in today's hearing. there was a lot of valuable information shared. you can file -- >> we can either continue to call the chair or file the hearing. >> supervisor cohen: why don't we file this hearing as heard. thank you. you have to make the motion. >> vice chair ronen: i make a motion to file this hearing. >> without objection. can we hear -- is item number five i think is going to be continued if -- thank you. >> we have to call it. >> please call it. >> clerk: number five is ordinance amending the health code to ban the sale and

manufacture in san francisco of animal fur products. >> we would like to ask for a continuance of the item. if your march 28th meeting is happening to that meeting. if not, then the prior meeting, march 12th -- or 14th i believe it is. we are weren'tly working with business community on a better economic impact study. thank you. >> can i get a motion -- well there is any public comment on this item? public comment is closed. can i get a motion to continue -- >> vice chair ronen: i would like to make a motion to continue it to march 14th. >> no objection and the meeting is adjourned? okay. meeting is adjourned. [meeting adjourned] .

>> please note that executive director shireen mcspadden is present. at this time, we ask that you silence all sound producing devices for this meeting. >> thank you, before i ask for a motion to approve the agenda, there's a slight change in the ordering. under -- instead of taking item 8 first, under 7, we will take

item d first. so with that change, may i have a motion to approve the agenda. >> so moved. >> second? >> second. >> all in favor? any opposed? thank you. item 3, approval of the january 3rd, 2018 meeting minutes. do i have a motion to approve? >> so moved. >> second. >> any comments or corrections? comments or questions of the public? hearing none, all the question. all in favor? any opposed? thank you. the motion carries. you're on, shireen. >> okay. good afternoon, commissioners. so i'm going to start my report talking a little bit about the federal -- the president -- the president's budget -- proposed budget. just to -- i know that it's basically intent in policy, but i want to talk through some of the detail about what the administration is suggesting just to give you an idea of where they're going.

so eddyesterday, the president sent his vision of the 2019 budget. it does layout priorities for discretionary programs and the trajectory of mandatory programs over ten years. much like last year, the budget request includes steep increases for defense discretionary programs and deep cuts to nondefense discretionary programs. it funds those programs at $60 billion below what congress intends to spend. also, the president would cut discretionary spending by 2% over the next decade, which would slash current domestic spending to 42% below current spending levels by 2028. he also proposed deep cuts to medicaid, medicare, snap and

food stamps programs. it includes a $6 million boost for lunch programs. unfortunately, his program proposes to eliminate the state insurance assistance program, which we call ship, and request significant cuts to several acl disability programs, administration for community living programs. the budget includes a proposal to eliminate the senior community services employment program, which is run by salton institute in san francisco, and other programs on the chopping block include senior core programs such as faster grant programs, the social services block grant, and community services block grant, which provide wraparound services in a legal services corporation which administers some elder justice programs. the budget would eliminate funding within the department

of housing and urban development within the community block grant which many states and communities use to shore up programs such as home delivered meals, and also section 202, senior housing would take a 10% cut. obviously, we know the budget is far from complete, but i just wanted to give you an idea of what the administration is thinking and about the kind of way they're proposing to essentially make the budget work, so...i know it's not very up lifting, but i think it's really important that we as a city pay attention to this and really think about how we use this information in how we might advocate for adults and people with disabilities. so on february 22nd, the california association on ageing will be holding an

opportunity for us as triple 5's, as agencies on adults and ageing, to hear from others about what they're thinking about the budgets and opportunities with respect to older adults, and cindy cough man, deputy director of programs and i will be attending, so we'll bring back information from there. it's also a chance for us to visit scour own representatives, so bridget's helping us, and we're working to schedule visits with them as well that day. so locally, i just wanted to talk a -- well, just mention that the reframing ageing presentation that we had last -- in january hopefully some of you were able to be there. it was really well received. i think the presentation was short, and people wanted more, but it really -- i think really does give us a good framework for talking about ageing, how

we're all ageing, using different framework to make sure we're getting our message out about ageing and about the -- i guess looking at it in a more positive light, getting away from things like, you know, demographic cliffs, for instance, or silver tsunami and making this everyone's issue, so how do we age gracefully and help others to do so gracefully. i'm continuing to work with the medi fund and working with others to try to figure out how to start using this information in you believe approximate, how do we start letting people know about our services, and also doing something around a positive ageing campaign, so you'll hear more about that soon. i think turning a moment to our internal programming, we have a new inhome supportive services

director, do you want to standup fore a moment? -- for a moment. it's been since june, when megan elliott left, and we're happy krista has left. she's worked with ageing and disabled people for 15 years. most recently, she was the chief officer for home bridge, to provide contract mode services for ihss clients. she was responsible for overseeing the operations and growth of all of the programs and the client services, and prior to joining home bridge, she primarily worked in the area of supportive housing with multidiagnosed formerly homeless adults. she served as the deputy director of tenderloin housing clinic, and she's got a masters in social work from san

francisco state. so we're really happy to have you, krista. i wanted to talk a little bit about the home bridge tiered wage pilot, because this was something that was in the mayor's budget for this year, and it's just taken us a little while to roll it out. basically, what it means -- home bridge serves our clients under contract mode, and they're people who are unable to manage their own worker, generally speaking, so they're considered hardest to serve people in that program, and one of the things that's happenied is we're still in a good economy right now, and one of the things that's happened, it's been really, really hard to recruit workers. and again, because we need workers for this population, home bridge came to us and said hey, you know, is there something we could do to really

incentivize this kind of work? it's really tough work and minimum wage isn't quite cutting it, even though the minimum wage is relatively high here, compared to other places. so the implementation was this week, and they're calling it steps, which is skills to employment, home, and pathways. all providers were classified as home care provider one, and they'll receive a $2 increase across the board. in july, all home bridge care providers will receive an additional $1 increase, from 16 to $17, and then, over the next 18 months, home bridge will identify and promote, kind of based on performance and seniority, and provide upscale training to approximately 70% of the workforce, providing the home care tier two and three tiers. so i just wanted to let you know that's happening. obviously, fair wages for these really important workers is an

important issue. when you think about the long-term care workforce, and so it'll be really interesting to see how this works. so the home bridge will be conducting an evaluation of the program's impact, and they'll be reporting back to us on how that works, so we're excited that that's finally launching. want to -- i'm sure that hopefully, all of you saw the articles in the chronicle -- there was one on sunday in the chronicle on conservatorship, and i think you know the conservator's office sits within the office of ageing and adult services, and while we weren't specifically called out in that article, i think we're listed as a partner. but really, this is senator weiner has taken the lead in frying to expand the powers conservatorship, and i think he's been really careful to note that we're really talking about a very, very, very small percentage of the homeless population in this case.

we're talking -- and i think the issue is that, i think not just san francisco but other cities are really grappling with how do you work with somebody who is decompensating on the street and really thinking about a combination of mental health issues, trauma, lifetime trauma, drug addiction, and those kinds of things, and they're trying to strengthen the language around conservatorship, so that when people go in and out of psych emergency, there could be a law that could compel them to seek treatment even if they don't want to. so it's going to be a long time, it's going to be a lot of work, but there's scott weiner's bill, and then there are some others that are coming

out. i guess the thought is these bills will finally come together into one or two bills that might give counties some more tools to work with our hardest to serve populations on the street. so you'll be hearing more about that. again, i think it's really important to say that this is focused on a really small percentage of the population. it's really people who are continually using our emergency services and not getting any better, and people who are at risk of diing on the street or who are diing on the street. so because the conservator's office sits in the department of ageing, you'll continue to hear about that. then on monday, there was an article about the support at home program, which you probably remember from our discussions around the budget, that this is a program that's aimed at more middle income people with disabilities and older people. and the thought was that if people need some home care to stay at home safely, but not

hours and hours, not people who need many, many hours, but people who need some home care and are able to contribute if money of their own to that home care, then maybe that helps them stay at home and helps them keep from using other services that are more expensive. so institute on ageing is actually running that program, and they are working with ucsf to evaluate the program, so we should get some really good information how this is working and whether it does save in other areas. i think the key to the article and the key for us right now is we really need to reach out to more people with disabilities who might use those services. those numbers are fairly low. we're getting a good response rate from older adults, but we'd really like to see more people with disabilities who are not older adults utilizing this program. so one thing you could do to help is let people know in your

network, if people are san francisco residents and want to get information, they can all our dos intake hotline or they can call institute on ageing. and then, i just wanted to mention the dignity fund needs assessment process, you know, we've been involved -- working with rda, our consultant, to develop a community needs assessment, and the report is going to be done and released in draft form on march 1st. so it includes the community engagement work that they've been doing, the equity analysis that they are finalizing now, and a gaps analysis that'll look at need for services versus how many -- you know, who services are really available. and i'm really looking forward to it. it's been a lot of work on their part, a lot of work on many of our staff's part, as well as community partners, and i think it'll be a really good product.

i think we've learned a lot in this process that we'll be able to take and keep for four years from now when we'll have to do this again. i think given this is our first time embarking on this process, that it's looking pretty good. and then in april, we will have a hearing, and i think bridget, did we decide it's going to be the same day as the commission meeting? yes? no [ inaudible ] >> okay. well, in april, there's a joint hearing, and this is legislative. there's a joint hearing between the commission and the oversight and advisory committee of the dignity fund, and so that's when we'll be hearing of the report and recommendations, so that's a really important meeting. hopefully, everyone will be here for that. i think that's the end of my report. >> thank you. any comments or questions from shireen from the commission? >> yes, i have a question.

>> commissioner lang. >> was there a compendium bill at the local level that commissioner farrell was -- >> yes. i left that out of my talk. so mayor farrell and london breed -- president breed -- i think today president breed was going to introduce legislation to move the representation -- the legal representation for conservatorship from the district attorney's office to the city attorney's office. and essentially that's because it's her feeling that -- you know, and rightfully so -- that people who are facing conservatorship or on conservatorship are doing so because it's not a criminal thing. it's not a crime, it's a civil proceeding, so it just seems to make hence to mo makes sense to move it to city attorney and changes the whole

flavor for her. in addition, it could codify a multidisciplinary, multidepartmental, i should say, group that's working on, kind of working on trying to figure out how to work with our hardest to solve cases, meaning, people who are really kind of failing in the system and this is just a codifying departments together to work together to coordinate so that people don't continually cycle out and fall out of the system and fail. >> thank you. commissioner pappas? >> commissioner pappas: i hadn't intended to say this, but listening to your first rendition of the federal budget, it might be something we want to keep an eye on. you know that in march, the city attorney in conjunction with santa clara county brought a case on sanctuary and was

successful in the northern district court. i know that the federal government is appealing that, and filed a brief yesterday. i'm just curious, if for some strange reason, the federal government prevails, and money is at risk for agencies that we do work with, because we are a sanctuary city, has any analysis on that been done and is that something that maybe we should take a look at as we're looking at all these different issues? >> yeah. it's certainly something to keep in mind, and as we get more information, we can bring that to. there's been a lot of conversations about what it means to be a sanctuary city and how we handle certain situations, and so i'm glad you brought that up. thanks. >> thanks certain certain thank y you -- skbl if you. any other comments or questions

from the public? [ inaudible ] -- will recognizely ain a petrosyan, and mark veter from das's independent assistance services center, ipac division. [applause] >> hey, you guys. hi. how are you? so i'm guessing there are a lot of people from inhome supportive services here, is that right? [applause]. >> okay. you guys, i think you should standup. so after this, it's going to get really quiet in here. so i just wanted to say a little about ihss as a whole.

we hear about it a lot, and we hear about it a lot because it's dos's biggest program, so we have a lot of different things staff is doing to make things work for 25,000 people annually who are receiving inhome services. it's pretty amazing. we're here to recognize our independent provider assistance center officers because they're the people who are really focused on making things work for the providers, so we often hear about the clients, but they're here to make things work for the providers. one of the things they have to do often is adapt to change, because the state always, always, always changes the rules and changes the way that they have to do things and sends us new -- just, what do you call those things? regulations, okay. so they're always having to adapt to that, and i think one of the great things that i

continually hear about these four is they work together so well as a team, and it takes a team to be able to react to these -- like, these really detailed regulations, because a really detailed regulation might just read one way on paper, but when you have to put it on practice, and you have to let providers and clients know, and then you have to deal with things that maybe come out of it, like a provider overpayment or something that you didn't think would happen, they have to figure out how to do all of that, so these guys are rock stars, and we're really, really, really, really, really thankful and unfortunate to have each of you surprising ipac, so i just want to thank all of you, and i'm going to give you what somebody wrote. one of you can take it and go make copies. this goes into a lot more detail, and you'll understand but some of these people in this room might not, so i want to make sure you have it because it's how great you are.

so thank you so much. appreciate it. [applause] >> oh, and we have to make sure -- oh, mark, she put them in order. awesome. ken. saba. sure it's right. liana. thanks so much. sure. go ahead. >> so i don't want to miss the opportunity to say a few words of gratitude. i'd shireen mentioned, the independent living assistance center, we provide services to seniors, disabilities, and we are public servants with a very noble cause, and this acknowledgement is actually a testimony to the work we do and also to the services we provide to our consumers.

so on behalf of myself, my colleagues, and the people we serve, i'd like to say thank you for this award and i'm kind of a little nervous. the thing is we live in a world that's where people work extremely hard without the benefit of being recognized, so having received this opportunity, i'd like to honor those, but also the people who led me to this point. first, i'd like to thank my supervisor, miss brenda mcgregor for -- [applause] >> -- for noticing the work that we do and also for being supportive. we're so privileged to have very supportive management. they really provide us with good guidance. they listen to our cares and concerns, but also, they ask for our feedback to improve services and also to handle any

challenge that come in the way of doing our job. so this provides the encouragement and incentive to become who we are. around the office, we have very, very diligent staff no know what they're doing, care about the people they serve, and do their daily activities with compassion and respect. therefore, i'd like to say thank you to our staff, to our management, and to our colleagues who are here to support that, so thank you very much, everyone.

. >> thank you. and the next item on the agenda is advisory council report,

leon schmidt. >> -- on january >> [ inaudible ] -- on january 17th, and at that meeting, we had two presentations. director mcspadden came and gave a brief overview of the upcoming budget, and we also had a presentation of executive director mcspadden and rose donn. we also had a presentation from mta, and they are going to come back. we had a time constraint, and they're going to come back to finish doing that. i had the privilege, along with other council members, to attend the changing language narrative that was at the

library, and that was excellent. and i'd like to thank miss mcspadden for allowing us and inviting the council members to come. it was very interesting. i also had the privilege to attend the next day, which was very informative, also. the upcoming event from our daas community training, which will take place on friday, february 23rd, at the institute on ageing. the presentation will be suicide and depression, what we need to know, and our presenter will be patrick arbor. we didn't have any other business because of the length of the two presentations, and that's my report. any questions? >> thank you very much. any comments or questions? thank you. any comments or questions from the public? thank you very much, leon. >> thank you. >> next item is the joint

legislative committee report, diane laurent. >> good afternoon, commissioners. we did not have a joint legislative committee meeting in january . we're lacking a few members, so -- but i wanted to give you an update. i had two action items to take back, and there are about seven bills that have, i guess, died, to be perfectly blunt, and will not be moving forward that we have been tracking, so i wanted to give you an update on those while we had a bit of time. commission commission commissioner, you had a question on this. the actual statement is they sent the bill back because the bill lowered the standard of proof for claims of elder abuse and neglect, and we didn't feel it was strong enough. and then, commissioner pappas,

you asked about the president's scaling back of regulations. basically, what they're doing is they're scaling back the use of fines for populations against nursing homes that harm residents, and that's according to a new york times article at the time. protocols are medicare protocols, but what they basically wanted to do was scale back the fines, and that had been requested by the nursing home industry. so february -- february 16th, rather, was the last day to introduce bills, and the following rules died in various committees, and that's because -- anyone's in appropriations if they had not been carried over by the end of january , they're sent back and basically are dead, according to appropriations. so the -- i'm going to go a bit out of order.

the bicycle bill for yielding has been pulled. it is no longer moving forward. i just thought i'd point that out since many of us are happy about that. another bill that's been pulled back is income tax credits for low income housing for farm workers, that's been pulled back. that would have changed how deductions were done on second homes. the public service social services for ssi and ssd was pulled back. that's something we've tracked for a couple of sessions now. personal income tax credit for family caregivers was also pulled back. that would have allowed up to $1,000 deduction for expenses for family caregiving, which would be about half of the expenses. there was a bond measure that was proposed for el ders living

with dignity, empathy, respect and support. that would have been a 200 million bond effort. that was pulled back. caregiver resource centers was died -- and then, the medi-cal beneficiary maintenance needs personal needs allowance, which proposed raising the personal needs allowance from $35 a month, which is what it's been since 1985, up to $80, that was pulled back again. so next month, i will have a much more robust report because we'll have a lot more information. >> thank you, diane. two questions that i have. one, it doesn't necessarily -- we don't know the immediate effect on our services, but the president's -- the new tax bill adversely affects high tax states by limiting deductions. >> mm-hmm. >> and it's been proposed, both in new york and california, that donations can be made to

some form of nonprofit so that people can still claim the tax deduction. do we know where that stands? >> no, but we can -- we'll check on that one. >> okay. thank you. and then secondly, director mcspadden referred to the bill that state senator scott weiner is working on giving more flexibility with skefsh to h e conservatorship issues. >> i've already noted that. >> okay. thank you, are there any questions? >> president, i have a copy -- an electronic form of the powerpoint that was presented, in layman's terms, and i'm happy to make that available. >> thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> just a quick question. do you have a sense, diane, of

the politics were some of these were pulled in terms of personal care tax credit, the personal needs, the dignity -- living with dignity bonds? are these being tabled for potential hearing at a later date this session for a spot bill or -- [ inaudible ] >> according to the rule. i went and looked up the rule because i thought this might be asked. >> yeah. >> if you haven't -- if a bill that's introduced during the first year and is not passed on or before january 31st of the following year as a carryover bill, then, it dies, and they didn't vote to carry it over. >> okay. thank you. >> any other comments or questions from the public? okay. tacc report, cathy russo.

haven't seen cathy in a while. case report. okay. hearing none, seeing none. okay. is there any other general public comment at this point? hearing none, any o busineld b? new business? informational amendment of amendment 12 cbd hicap contract, and corresponding funding levels for the health insurance counseling advocacy program, icap, this is informational only, no action is required. >> good morning, commissioners -- or good afternoon, commissioners, rather. yes, this is an informational item. as this hicap contract predates -- i'm here to update the commission as to the amendment to this contract we received from the california department of ageing. as this contract predates many of the commissioners, i thought

this would be an opportunity to talk briefly about what the hicap program does and what this update means from the california department of ageing. briefly, our hicap program, it stands for. [ inaudible ] -- it's a medicare focus program, providing community education, one to one counseling and advocacy to medicare beneficiaries as well as people soon to be medicare beneficiaries. services within that are explanation of medicare benefits, explanation of health care insurance terminology, a review of insurances available to consumers such as medigap pals and medicare pals, health with claims and procedures, as well as counseling around long-term care insurance. i want to note that the work that the counselors does is just above and beyond education.

it's also helping people make educated decisions about their services. they will work people around what their decisions are and help them make the best decisions related to medicare benefits. we subcontract or funds to self-help for the elderly who administers hicap. they then serve the community through the use of 27 counselors, 21 of whom are volunteers. the counselors go through extensive training, originally 31 training hours and seven counseloring hours before they reach that status. then once they reach that status, they're asked to have 12 hours of continuing education right now. right now they have counseloricounselors on staff with several languages. in just fiscal year 16-17, we

saw this program serve over 2,000 clients with one to one counseling services. they also do a series of advocacy on behalf of clients, which results in financial savings, as -- as medical bills are reduced or medicare agrees to pay for medical services for clients. so that brings us to our hicap contract. a majority of the funding for this program comes through the california department of ageing. within that chunk of money, two thirds is from the state, one-third is from the federal government. the administration of community living is a federal agency who provides that funding to the state, which is then passed on. they have announced that they are reducing funding available over the next three years. this is something that has been in the works for a little while. the new news that executive

director mc135den had about questioning the entire federal existence of this program is still kind of up in the air, so we're not sure of what we have, just the facts in fron of us. we're looking at a cut right now of about $13,000 for this fiscal year. daas was able to find funding to cover that, so there will be no impact on services this year. the services next year, it's interesting. the budget kind of actually increases, but then has a cut in it, so the impact, we're still looking at. the big impact is going to be in fiscal year 18-19, when those cumulative cuts really hit. so that's the bad news. the good news is that we have a little bit of time to try to see what may happen between -- between now and then. this is certainly a program that is very important to daas. it's something we're going to keep an eye on, and we'll do

our best to try to maintain services for folks in san francisco. with that, this item will -- this contract will come before the commission again in a couple of months as we renew it with our subcontractor. i'll provide an updata's that point as well as other -- update at that point, as well as any other things that come up on down the line. >> thank you. commissioners, any questions? >> commissioner, thank you speak into the mic. >> yeah, there's some hipaa, hicap adjacent programs, so they'll kind of work together. i'll talk about that during that presentation, but