HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-25-2014 Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee• , . , 1 I + hiliTINUIll
•11A FXCJ :10 11111.11111 q NK961- e
AD HOC SENIOR SERVICES COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
Saturday, October 25, 2014, 8:00 AM
Harvat Hall / City Hall
410 East Washington Street
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. DISCUSSION OF FINAL REPORT STRUCTURE AND DRAFTING PROCESS
a. Discussion of Remaining Report Sections
3. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE
November 12, 3:30 PM (Wednesday) Public Input on Draft Report
November 14, 3:00 PM (Friday)
November 24. 3:30 PM (Monday)
Special meetings if needed
4. PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA)
5. ADJOURNMENT
* Speakers are asked to limit remarks to five minutes and wait until
after everyone has had the opportunity to speak once before
approaching the podium again on the same topic
Draft prepared for discussion purposes from City Clerk notes of 10/22 meeting Page 2
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
I. Establishment of the Committee
The Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee ("Committee") was established by the Iowa City City
Council ("Council") on the 18`" day of February, 2014.
II. Committee Members
MemberBegins
Joe Younker -Chair
5/1/2014
12/1/2014
Mercedes Bern -Klug
5/1/2014
12/1/2014
Ellen Cannon
5/1/2014
12/1/2014
Jane Dohrmann
5/1/2014
12/1/2014
Rick Dobyns-Council Member
5/1/2014
12/1/2014
Jay H. Honohan
5/1/2014
12/1/2014
Hiram Richard Webber
5/1/2014
12/1/2014
III. Enabling Resolution and Committee Charge
Pursuant to the terms of Resolution No. 14-37 ("Resolution"), a copy of which is attached to this
Report as Exhibit _, Council has charged the Committee with three tasks:
A. To evaluate the current vision, mission, and programing, and recent accomplishments of
the Senior Center, as detailed in the 2013 Annual Report. Further, and to review the
current demographics of the participants served by the Senior Center Survey of
Members, Former Members, as well as other available data resources from the Senior
Center, and determine whether segments of the senior population are not accessing
available services. A summary of this committee evaluation and its final related findings
shall be included in the final written report to the City Council.
B. To make recommendations to the City Council on how Iowa City should use current
financial and physical resources to meet the needs of Iowa City seniors. These
recommendations should consider the City's use of existing resources and the vision,
mission, and programming required to more effectively serve the growing senior
population in the community in accordance with the inclusive and sustainable values
expressed in the City's Strategic Plan. Such recommendations shall include
commentary regarding the specific segments of the senior population that they intend to
serve.
C. To identify any obstacles, including facility considerations, which may be hindering the
City's ability to serve the senior population and to make recommendations that would
minimize or eliminate such obstacles.
IV. Meetings Conducted
The Ad Hoc Committee Chair Joseph Younker, vice chair Jane Dohrmann, members Mercedes
Bern -Klug, Ellen Cannon, Richard Dobyns, Jay Honchan, and Rick Webber, staff Marian Karr
and Geoff Fruin, convened on May 5, 2014.
Draft prepared for discussion purposes from City Clerk notes of 10/22 meeting Page 3
The committee adopted a meeting format as follows:
1. Call to order
2. Consider motion to adopt consent calendar as presented or amended.
a) minutes
b) correspondence
3. Discussion by the committee on selected items
4. Reports from contact members re local agencies
5. Public discussion (items not on the agenda)
Public comment at the meetings was extensive relating to the Committee's responsibilities, the
Center, and other local agencies providing services to seniors.
Draft prepared for discussion purposes from City Clerk notes of 10/22 meeting Page 4
Charge 1: Evaluation of the Center
Description of the Center
In 1981, the City completed the rehabilitation of the old Post Office building at 28 S. Linn, Iowa
City, Iowa. The original mail workroom is now the assembly room that hosts a variety of
informative and entertaining programs as well as the site for the senior dining program. A
mezzanine floor was added to make more efficient use of the vertical space above the assembly
room. The building has a variety of offices, meeting and exercise rooms.
It. Key Considerations
A copy of the full evaluation is attached to this report identified as Exhibit B. The following,
however, provides an overview of the Center's areas of excellence, opportunities for
improvement, and items for further review.
A. Areas of excellence
The Center is the primary, central resource for quality programs and services that
promote optimal aging for seniors in the Iowa City community. The Center's
programs promote active aging at a consistently high level. The Committee
agrees with the report completed by the National Council of the Aging National
Institute of Senior Centers, the Center accomplishes its Vision' and Mission .2
The Center is the only nationally accredited senior center in the state of Iowa.
The Committee agrees with the National Council on Aging's assessment that the
Senior Center meets all nine standards of national excellence, including program
development and implementation. In addition, results from the 2013 survey and
the comments from members during the Ad Hoc Senior Service committee
meetings indicate high satisfaction with the center. The Senior Center is a strong
community asset supporting thousands of persons a year to learn new skills,
make friends, share interests, and engage more fully in the community. The
Committee recognizes the Center leadership for using financial and other
resources well as it works toward fulfilling its mission of promoting optimal aging
in our community.
In 2013, 360 unique classes were offered at the Center. Volunteers donated
24,400 hours towards the operation. Persons benefited from services offered by
other agencies at the Center, including Visiting Nurses Association, AARP Tax
Aid, Elder Services Agency, volunteer lawyers, counseling, SHIPP, Honoring
Your Wishes, and English language learners' (ELL) classes. The Center Staff is
responsible for coordinating these programs, organizing registration and
appointments, in addition to organizing volunteers.
"'To be the community's primary resource for the highest quality programs, services, and opportunities
that promote optimal aging."
2 "To promote optimal aging among older adults by offering programs and services that promote wellness,
social interaction, community engagement, and intellectual growth."
Draft prepared for discussion purposes from City Clerk notes of 10/22 meeting Page 5
❖ Currently the Center has 1592 members. Membership dues are $33 for a single
Iowa City resident. Non Iowa City fees are higher. Scholarship fees are $10 for
low-income seniors. In addition to the members, many older adults and younger
people benefit from programs.
The Center staff consists of the, coordinator, program and community outreach
specialists, an operations assistant, two maintenance workers and three part
time staff assisted by the Senior Center Commission, the Steering Committee,
and senior volunteers. The current level of staffing does not permit providing
activities and services for people experiencing advanced dementia or other
cognitive impairments requiring supervision and assistance. However, the
Center does serve seniors who have disabilities and limited cognitive impairment.
B. Opportunities for improvement.
❖ The fees for participants in the Center are reasonable, but considering future
budget constraints, a review of fees and other ways to assist in the funding of the
Center should be considered. Scholarships for low-income participants should
be continued and encouraged.
Ethnic and racial diversity in the participants at the Center continues to be a
concern of the Senior Center Commission, Steering Council, and the staff.
Efforts are being made to increase ethnic, racial, economic, and other types of
diversity.
C. Data gaps and identification of matters for further review/study
The Senior Center Commission, Steering Council (composed of volunteers), and
staff are continuing their efforts to increase the racial and ethnic diversity at the
Center. Methods of supplementing and improving these efforts should be
reviewed.
The Senior Center Commission, Steering Council (composed of volunteers), and
staff should evaluate membership fees and other ways to assist in funding the
operational budget.
The Committee considered asking the staff to collect demographic characteristics
and usage information of nonmembers who participate in activities at the Center,
but decided against doing so because of the burden on the staff and the
discomfort that some participants may feel in disclosing personal information.
Center staff should consider ways to collect data to demonstrate community-
wide, multi -generational participation on activities and events.
Draft prepared for discussion purposes from City Clerk notes of 10/22 meeting Page 6
Charge 2: Physical and Financial Resources
I. Understanding of City Financials
In order to better understand the City's financial position, the Committee sought
information on existing resources as well as expected financial trends in the coming
years. Specifically, the Committee reviewed information on how the City funds the
Senior Center and supports non-profit agencies through the Aid to Agencies and
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) programs. The Committee also reviewed
previous correspondence from staff to the Council concerning the projected impacts of
the 2013 property tax reform legislation and heard directly on that issue from Finance
Director, Dennis Bockenstedt. Finally, the Committee reviewed funding trends in the
CDBG and HOME federal grant programs.
The Committee reviewed the FY 13, FY 14 and FY 15 Center budgets. At the time of
review, only the FY 13 budget reflected actual revenues and expenditures. The Center
operates with expenditures of $778,491 (FY 13) and revenues of $209,724 (FY 13). This
means the General Fund contributed $568,766 in FY 13. While FY 14 and FY 15 budgets
were not closed out, it appears from the Committee's review and staff comments that
the General Fund contribution tends to be in the 70-75°%0 of expenditures range. Similar
to other City operations, the vast majority of expenditures are personnel related.
Approximately 1% of the City's General Fund is allocated to the Senior Center.
The Committee also reviewed the FY 13-15 allocations for the City's Aid to Agencies and
CDBG programs. As the Council understands, there is a prioritization process that guides
the allocation of these funds. Over the last three years the City's contributions have
ranged from approximately $375,000 to $400,000. Of those funds the FY 15 allocation
included $35,000 to two senior service providers, although the committee recognizes
that other agencies that received funds likely serve some seniors, albeit not exclusively.
CDBG funds are regularly used to support housing projects. While some types of senior
housing are eligible for CDBG funds, the Committee noted that the last senior housing
projects to receive funds were in 1999, 2000 and 2001.
Looking ahead, the Committee recognizes that property tax reform will put significant
pressure on the General Fund, which contributes both to the Center and the Aid to
Agencies program. Similarly, a ten year review of CDBG and HOME grants to the City
clearly show a downward trend of those funding sources. Both federal grant programs
have been reduced by several hundred thousand dollars over the last ten years. The
Draft prepared for discussion purposes from City Clerk notes of 10/22 meeting Page 7
political climate in Washington D.C. does not give City staff any reason to believe this
trend will reverse in the coming years. These financial pressures will impact the City's
ability to fund all programs, not just ones that serve seniors.
II. Overview of Process to Determine Needs of the Senior Population
Determining the needs of the City's senior population is a very difficult task to
accomplish in a short period of time. The Committee approached this task in two ways.
First, the Committee heard from City staff with the Senior Center, as well as with the
Library, Parks and Recreation and Transportation Services departments. - Secondly, the
committee attempted to identify several of the largest non-profit service providers in
the area to gain a better understanding of their operations, finances and general
challenges. Individually, Committee members met with the following agencies and then
shared their findings with the Committee as a whole:
o Elder Services
o HAAA
o Johnson County Livable Communities
o Shelter House
o Pathways
o Consultation of Religious Communities
o Iowa City Free Medical Clinic
o MECCA
o JC Mental Health
o VNA
o Compeer
o Iowa City Hospice
o SEATS
o Hispanic Community
Given the time constraints on the Committee, we feel this approach was the best
method for determining the needs of the senior population. However, we recognize this
was an informal approach and thus any conclusions should be treated as such.
Additionally, although the agencies surveyed by the Committee all provide services to
seniors in a general sense, the agencies are designed to serve various target
populations. For example, some agencies (e.g., Elder Services) are designed to target
certain segments of the senior population. Other agencies (e.g., Iowa City Free Medical
Clinic) provide services to seniors as part of servicing a larger target population. If the
Council wishes for a more scientific approach to determining the needs of seniors, it will
likely need to utilize professional assistance with a survey methodology.
Draft prepared for discussion purposes from City Clerk notes of 10/22 meeting Page 8
III. General Findings of Needs of the Senior Population
IV. Recommendations Regarding Financial Resources
1) The City's General Fund funds the majority (approximately 70-75%) of the
Center's budget. City Staff expects that property tax reform will put significant
pressure on the General Fund in the coming years. The Committee recommends
that the Center Commission and Staff, and the City Staff, continue to work on
goals to identify and utilize revenue sources, including reconsideration of the
fees for non -Iowa City residents.
2) In connection with Recommendation No. 1, the Center should assess
opportunities to generate revenue through the rental of meeting/gathering
space.
3) The Committee understands that the City is in the process of assessing how it
prioritizes the distribution of certain federal, state, and local funds among
various social service agencies. Through that the process, the City should
identify the needs of low-income seniors — especially needs relating to issues
concerning food and supportive services that allow people to remain safely in
their homes for as long as possible (e.g., Pathways Adult Day Health Center &
Elder Services) — as being in the highest prioritization category.
4) The Senior Center Commission and Center Staff, in coordination with the City,
should seek increased funding from Johnson County.
5) City Staff and Center Staff should continue to assess opportunities to share
space, funding strategies, and other resources with relevant community social
service agencies to increase efficiencies and leverage various funding
opportunities.
6) The Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee recommends that agencies and
organizations that serve older adults should be encouraged to apply for AID TO
AGENCY funds for their specific programs that address current areas of high
priority as decided by the City Council, including in particular programs serving
older adults that address: substance abuse emotional health services,
employment training, housing services for persons experiencing homelessness,
and transportation.
7) The Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee recommends that the City commission a
professional survey to collect unbiased, representative information regarding
Draft prepared for discussion purposes from City Clerk notes of 10/22 meeting Page 9
gaps in services and barriers to access for seniors on which to base subsequent
recommendations.
8) The Committee received information from City staff regarding the funding
practices of other Iowa communities concerning nonprofit agencies, including
those offering services to seniors. The Committee recommends City staff do a
more detailed analysis and include comparable senior centers outside Iowa and
repot to Council on how other communities fund senior service centers.
9) Many seniors face barriers to participating in social networks in our community
because of physical conditions, cognitive impairment, emotional challenges,
language and/or poverty. To aid these seniors, the Committee proposes that the
City Council initiate a program "Full Participation Awards' for the next three
years of four grants of $10,000 each to non profits for programs to enhance
social programing for these seniors.
V. Recommendations Regarding Physical Resources
1) Maintain the current location of the Center.
2) The Center should take steps to increase the accessibility of its building. Steps to
consider include, but are not limited to: a) a general ADA audit; b) requesting a
public bus stop be added in front the ADA accessible entrance on Washington
Street; c) and increase signage in the Tower Place parking ramp to assist visitors
in locating the Center's skyway.
Page 10
Memorandum
To: Ad Hoc Committee
From: Jay
Subject: suggestions
Date: October 23, 2014
I will be brief. Hard to type without the right index finger.
Obstacles:
The Senior Center building being a remodeled Post Office limits what
programs and services can be offered. Recommendation: The Center staff
and City staff should continue to explore avenues to improve the use of
the Center.
Available funding from both Federal and City may decrease for both the
Center and the non-profit agencies. Recommendation: Avenues should be
explored to increase contributions from other cities in Johnson County
and from the Board of Supervisors.
Conclusion:
The Iowa City community in general serves seniors well. In addition to
the Senior Center there are ninety senior services providers. The City
of Coralville has eighteen. Of these twenty two are governmental,
thirty are for profit, and fifty six are non-profit. Forty providers
do not charge, in thirty six the fees are paid by medicare and
medicaid. Seventy five are paid through private pay and private
insurance. Financial aid is available with twenty agencies.'
The Senior Center meets all nine standards of national excellence,
including program development and implementation. There is high
satisfaction with the Center by the participants.
Source Johnson County Livable Community. I think it is important for
the council and others who read the report to get and idea of the scope of
the governmental and other agencies that serve seniors in the community.
1
Draft prepared for discussion purposes from City Clerk notes of 10/22 Page 11
Charge 3: Recommendations
Identify Obstacles
["identify[ing] any obstacles, including facility considerations, which may be hindering the City's
ability to serve the senior population and to make recommendations that would minimize or
eliminate such obstacles." ]
A. Obstacle: Transportation.
Recommendation: Transportation -related issues — especially in light of the reduced funding
to SEATS — are problematic for certain segments of the senior population. The City should
assess the transportation -related issues in more detail.
B. Obstacle: Lack of Diversity.
Recommendation: The Committee recognizes that the Center has taken steps to address
issues related to diversity (e.g., forming a working committee to focus attention on diversity
issues exclusively). The Center Staff, Steering Council, and Commission, however, should
adopt a more formal strategy to increase diversity.
C. Obstacle: Lack of Available Programming.
Recommendation: City Staff and Center Staff should continue to engage in a dialogue with
appropriate organizations to better understand any gaps in services. The dialogue should
include the identification of possible areas of further collaboration between the Center and
various agencies.
D. Obstacle: Barriers to access The Center.
Recommendation: Assess the challenges with accessing The Center (e.g. time allotted to
cross streets at the corner of Linn and Washington; timely snow and ice removal in the
winter; slippery paint on crosswalks; public bus stop in front of ADA entrance on Washington
St.).
E. Obstacle: Lack of community awareness of the inclusivity of The Center programs.
Recommendations: Increase emphasis on the availability of multi -generational
programming that benefits everyone in the community, not just seniors.
F. Obstacle: Lack of downtown affordable housing for low and middle-income seniors.
Recommendation: The City explore ways to increase downtown affordable housing and
universal design for low and middle-income seniors.