Skip to main content
File #: 25-3093    Name:
Type: Other Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 4/16/2025 In control: City Council Legislative Meeting
On agenda: 6/10/2025 Final action:
Title: Independent Evaluation of the Alexandria Fund for Human Services.
Attachments: 1. 25-3093_Attachment 1 Community Science Evaluation Alexandria Fund for Human Services AFHS Evaluation April 2025, 2. 25-3093_Attachment 2 - AFHS Memo from Councilwoman Alyia Gaskins, 3. 25-3093_PP_AFHS Report Council Presentation FINAL

City of Alexandria, Virginia

________________

 

MEMORANDUM

 

 

 

DATE:                     JUNE 4, 2025

 

TO:                                          THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL

 

THROUGH:                     JAMES F. PARAJON, CITY MANAGER                      

 

FROM:                     KATE GARVEY, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND     

HUMAN SERVICES 

 

DOCKET TITLE:                     

TITLE

Independent Evaluation of the Alexandria Fund for Human Services.

BODY

_________________________________________________________________

 

ISSUE: Transmittal of the City Council requested evaluation of the Alexandria Fund for Human Services (AFHS). 

 

RECOMMENDATION:  That City Council:

 

(1)                     Receive the AFHS Evaluation conducted by Community Science, an external evaluator Attachment I.

(2)                     Consider the recommendations as outlined in the Community Science AFHS Evaluation.

(3)                     Set the AFHS Evaluation for public hearing for Saturday June 14, 2025, subsequently accept evaluation recommendations, and provide related staff guidance. 

 

 

BACKGROUND:

After presenting the FY 2024 to FY 2026 AFHS grant cycle funding recommendations, the City Council requested a staff debriefing on the grantmaking process to include recommendations for improving ensuing grant cycles. Staff was subsequently advised to also use the FY 2024- FY 2026 grant cycle to review the key purpose of the AFHS.  A follow-up memorandum from then City Councilwoman Gaskins on behalf City Council, provided guidance on the key elements of review of the Fund, the needs in the City and the definition of essential services.  Councilwoman Gaskin’s memorandum also recognized that this research would require an outside consultant given the scope of the request and charged staff to determine the capacity needed, cost and the best approach to complete the assignment Attachment II.

As a result, DCHS staff contracted the services of Community Science to conduct the independent evaluation.  Community Science is a MWBE that has more than twenty-five years of experience providing consultation, research and evaluation and strategy development to foundations, nonprofit organizations and governments. Their research and evaluation approach has been rooted in a mission that uses science to promote equity and justice for communities of color and others that are historically disadvantaged and excluded.  

 

DISCUSSION: 

The attached independent evaluation report prepared by Community Science responds directly to the City Council guidance questions; provides a comprehensive analysis and recommendations on the impact of the current AFHS grantmaking practices; shares benchmarking of best and promising practices in human service grantmaking practices in neighboring jurisdictions with similar funding mechanisms and offers a framework to support Essential Human Services (EHS).

 

Methodology

Community Science, in partnership with staff, developed an evaluation and data collection process using a mixed method approach, integrating qualitative and quantitative data to analyze the essential questions guiding the evaluation. This included a landscape scan to review current AFHS practices, public data, literature review to provide context on AFHS’s scope and funding mechanism for essential human services. Focus groups were conducted in partnership with the City’s non-profit partners and key stakeholder interviews were also conducted with DCHS program staff to seek an understanding and perspective on essential service delivery and grant process.  Information was also gathered from neighboring jurisdictions to provide comparative insights into funding mechanisms and best practices. Finally, a survey of community partners was also administered to capture data to further explore essential services, their perception of the AFHS and funding recommendations.

 

Consultant Recommendations

1.                     Adopt the proposed Essential Human Services (EHS) definition.

                     Adopting the proposed definition will provide clear and consistent framework for funding. 

2.                     Restructure the AFHS for greater impact:

                     Use competitive grants to fund programs that focus primarily on stabilizing and advancing long-term community well-being.

                     Require AFHS recipients to provide service delivery that is not duplicative of other services offered in the community and partnerships amongst community partners.

                     Prioritize one to two key service areas per cycle: Instead of spreading funds too thin, focus on the most urgent community needs based on a data-driven assessment.

                     Make fewer and larger grants to maximize impact. Increase individual award amounts to maximize program impact rather than funding numerous small projects.

                     Continue and maintain a three (3)-year grant cycle.

                     Enhance performance monitoring and accountability to allow for data-informed decision making.

                     Employ direct contracts outside of the AFHS process for persistent conditions related to survival not otherwise available in the community. For communities and conditions where funding disruption would create instability for critical services.

3.                     Explore the feasibility of increasing the total amount of the AFHS funding to meet demand.

                     The AFHS funds have remained static for a decade while the demand and the cost of delivering essential services in the community have increased.

                     Introduce a Cost-of-living adjustment for multi-year grants to ensure service continuity.

4.                     Grant Application and Review Process

                     Publish a clear application rubric.

                     Enhance the review process transparency.

                     Ensure sufficient timeframe for the application process.

                     Provide structured post-application support.

 

These recommendations aim to support the grant making process and strategic decisions on the best use of limited resources.

 

FISCAL IMPACT: There are fiscal implications associated with the evaluation recommendations to increase the total amount AFHS base amount, and the use of cost-of-living adjustments for multi-year grants. Staff will await further guidance from the City Council in this regard, work with appropriate City Departments and propose the fiscal impact commencing with the FY 2027- FY 2029 grant cycle.  

 

ATTACHMENTS:

(1)                     Community Science Evaluation

(2)                     October 10, 2023, AFHS Memo from Councilwoman Alyia Gaskins

 

STAFF:

Alethea Predeoux, Deputy City Manager

Morgan Routt, Director, Office of Management and Budget

Federico Gutierrez, Deputy Director, DCHS