WEBVTT 1 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:00:08.655 --> 00:00:36.412 So Eileen, the the sheet is, is up, it's a little bit too big to fit everything on the screen all at once, so if you want I can just quickly go through the the four scenarios and then then we can come back to whichever one the committee wants to, to dive into deeper. 2 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:00:36.412 --> 00:00:40.175 Yeah, sure, great. 3 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:00:40.175 --> 00:00:44.014 Yeah, ok. Just one excuse. 4 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:00:44.014 --> 00:00:45.900 Yeah, I just want to say one thing. 5 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:00:45.900 --> 00:01:05.190 There, there's a chart that Liz Lizzie put together it's one of the other files and it lists the focus areas. And when I when I reviewed the. 6 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:01:05.190 --> 00:01:20.610 The applications for the new applicants there was one new applicant excuse me, engine ministries. That's 100 % food insecurity. 7 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:01:20.610 --> 00:01:37.976 Focused. And so that was, that's one of our, our goals from this past year on our, on our plan. And, so, you know, it's. 8 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:01:37.976 --> 00:01:48.115 Yeah Okay I'm sorry go ahead. Oh NO the sorry. I just to point out that that was under the old state plan. 9 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:01:48.115 --> 00:01:57.435 Yeah, I, you know, we're so behind on doing our plan. I I don't know if we decided we were gonna carry that forward or not. 10 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:01:57.435 --> 00:02:23.460 Well, in in terms of, in terms of the, the, so the, the committee has its annual plan, which I think is what you're, you're talking about, but the commission has its overall three year state plan and that new state plan just started at the beginning of this year, so January of 2026. 11 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:02:23.460 --> 00:02:41.970 And, that plan moved away from some of those specifics that had been in the previous plan. So let me just double check, check to make sure. 12 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:02:41.970 --> 00:02:57.274 That I'm not saying the wrong thing because it has been a little bit since I've looked at the, the actual plan. 13 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:02:59.357 --> 00:03:02.940 Yeah, so the, the. 14 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:03:02.940 --> 00:03:28.336 There there's NO longer a specific focus in the current three year plan on food and security. So that's NO longer part of the state plan. Now the the committee itself, if it wants to develop its own priorities and pursue those, it can, but it's not part of the overall full commission state plan. 15 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:03:28.336 --> 00:04:06.395 Okay, ok. Anyhow, in case it interests anybody and angelic industries, angelic, whatever it is, ministries is 100 % food and security focused. But I also noticed going through the risk spreadsheet that their their risk is is medium which might might have balanced that out but just FYI, and look let's just keep going. 16 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:04:06.395 --> 00:04:14.640 Yeah, sure. Well, I I I stopped sharing my screen for a bit while while we were having that conversation, but. 17 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:04:14.640 --> 00:04:32.219 I just put it back up on the screen. So just brief summary, scenario one is essentially not factoring in any unextended funds from the current year. 18 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:04:32.219 --> 00:04:47.639 And just using the, the base formula allocation of $3963146, so. 19 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:04:47.639 --> 00:05:05.519 That's the the funding amount. The strategy for each of the scenarios in terms of the reductions is pretty much the same. So for each scenario, the 1st step is to reduce programs. 20 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:05:05.519 --> 00:05:25.519 To eat the lower of either their current year request or their previous year request if that was lower. So essentially not allowing any existing program to request more money, so holding them steady at whatever the lower of those two numbers is. 2nd. 21 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:05:25.519 --> 00:05:47.179 Step is to adjust existing programs based on performance. So any program that is below the average level of performance gets reduced a little bit. And then the final step in all of the scenarios is to apply and across the board reduction to get us to the amount of money that. 22 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:05:47.179 --> 00:05:55.229 We have. So scenario two did you have a question now. 23 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:05:55.229 --> 00:06:02.893 Oh, NO, I was just NO I'm. 24 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:06:02.893 --> 00:06:23.759 Okay, NO, that's ok. So 2nd scenario, is essentially all of the same assumptions as scenario number one except that we assume that we can access some unexpended funds from the current fixed amount grant. 25 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:06:23.759 --> 00:06:39.929 Although we can get into it a little bit, but I I don't know that that's actually gonna be possible. All the other assumptions are the same. And in both scenario one and scenario two. 26 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:06:39.929 --> 00:06:59.099 But Neither of those scenarios include funding a brand new applicant. It's only funding existing programs. So scenario three goes back to assuming that we don't have any unexpended funds or carryover. 27 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:06:59.099 --> 00:07:17.099 Available and that we have the base at 3.9 million. But it does include funding one new applicant, the highest scoring applicant, which is future leaders of Excellence Academy. 28 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:07:17.099 --> 00:07:32.974 But the, the, the note about that is that they although they had 2nd highest review, average review score, they did come up in the risk assessment as high risk. Now that, that doesn'. 29 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:07:32.974 --> 00:07:36.376 Doesn't mean that they can't or shouldn't be funded. It just means that. 30 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:07:36.376 --> 00:07:45.179 It is it is a potential risk for volunteer tendency to to invest funding in that particular agency. 31 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:07:45.179 --> 00:08:05.179 So scenario four keeps the assumptions under scenario three, which is to you know fund one new applicant, the highest scoring one, but it goes back to assuming that we do have the carryover fun. 32 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:08:05.179 --> 00:08:26.206 So that, that's kind of big picture the the what the scenarios look at. We can certainly talk about other possible funding scenarios. Sorry it looks like we lost Stephanie. 33 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:08:26.206 --> 00:08:27.676 Yes. 34 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:08:27.676 --> 00:08:28.496 It's. 35 "Elizabeth Lemieux" (557396480) 00:08:28.496 --> 00:08:34.555 Does look like we lost Stephanie. You don't think there's gonna be any carryover. 36 "Jessica Youngblom" (3175469312) 00:08:34.555 --> 00:08:36.793 Like you don't think there's gonna be any unexpended. 37 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:08:36.793 --> 00:08:57.329 What, well, so the challenges we, we do expect that there will be this 9390 3000 roughly $93000 in in fixed unexpended funds. So. 38 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:08:57.329 --> 00:09:20.488 Just really briefly, we have two different types of grants. We have a cost reimbursement grant, which is the 26 AFH, and then we have a fixed amount grant, which, and the the main difference between those two is the cost reimbursement. They spend, they have a detailed budget, they spend money from that budget. 39 "Jessica Youngblom" (3175469312) 00:09:20.488 --> 00:09:23.412 Grants. 40 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:09:23.412 --> 00:09:25.452 Yeah, while other folks on the call might. 41 "Jessica Youngblom" (3175469312) 00:09:25.452 --> 00:09:28.535 Not. Oh, ok. No that the. 42 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:09:28.535 --> 00:09:38.429 So the the cost reimbursement, they have a detailed budget, they spend money from that, but those budgeted funds, then they request reimbursement for us. 43 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:09:38.429 --> 00:09:58.429 They have to maintain documentation of how they spend the money and match is required. The fixed amount grant, they, they can get reimbursed a portion of the total grant that they've been awarded based on the number of members that they have enrolled. 44 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:09:58.429 --> 00:10:17.279 Americap members and the number of hours that those members have served. And they, and they can then use that money however they want to support the program. They don't have to keep financial records and NO matches required. So it's it's a streamlined process from their end. 45 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:10:17.279 --> 00:10:37.279 In terms of the financial records, but the amount of money is directly tied to the number of members that they enroll. So if they if they don't enroll any members, they can't get any money. If they enroll half the members, the max they can get is half the money. So it's just a, a different structure, but they are two separate. 46 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:10:37.279 --> 00:11:00.379 Federal grant awards. And unfortunately, once we put money in one or the other of those grant awards, we can't then move it back, back and forth. So the money that's in the 25 FXH has to stay in 25 FXH. We know that we're, we're gonna have roughly 93000. 47 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:11:00.379 --> 00:11:18.959 Of unexpended funds, but, we we aren't going to be able to carry that forward. And so, the sorry let me, let me stop sharing my screen. 48 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:11:18.959 --> 00:11:34.709 And I will pull up what is a somewhat confusing chart, but I think it it'll be helpful at least from the America requirements. 49 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:11:34.709 --> 00:11:56.951 On what we can and can't do, with the unexpended funds. So this is let me share my screen, and I'm sorry Eileen I I just realized this isn't something that we sent out because it's the, it's the guidance that the the Americaps agency provided us. 50 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:11:56.951 --> 00:12:00.633 Okay Related to. 51 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:12:00.633 --> 00:12:16.954 To the formula money, which is what we're talking about, and It's a fairly long document, but there's a chart in there that lays out the the different possibilities on whether or not you can use an extended money. 52 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:12:16.954 --> 00:12:18.032 Okay. 53 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:12:18.032 --> 00:12:45.959 So, again, this chart is a bit confusing and there's a bunch of rows and a bunch of columns, but I I think where we fall is the 1st row. So, the, the, the 1st column is the status of our current cost reimbursement grant, and. 54 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:12:45.959 --> 00:13:03.719 For the 2526 program year, our cost reimbursement grant was in year three. And then the next column is the status of our fixed and our fixed it it allows for, you know, year one, two or three. 55 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:13:03.719 --> 00:13:23.579 So, we're in year three of our cost reimbursement and our fixed is in year one, two or three. So both of those are true, and so we apply the the 1st row to our volunteer Tennessee situation and. 56 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:13:23.579 --> 00:13:43.579 The next column is can I carry forward an extended seat cost reimbursement? And the answer to that is NO. Can I carry forward unexpended fixed in FY 26? And the answer to that is NO. The next column is, can I request a NO cost extension on. 57 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:13:43.579 --> 00:13:59.729 On the cost reimbursement in FY 26. The answer to that is yes, so we could potentially use the old cost reimbursement grant, which. 58 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:13:59.729 --> 00:14:14.849 We would only have about $23000, of unexpended funds in that grant and that's not enough to fund any of the cost reimbursement applicants. So it doesn't really help us. And then the final column. 59 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:14:14.849 --> 00:14:31.799 Is can I request a NO cost extension on the fixed? And it says yes for year three, but our fixed is not in year three, it's in year one and I'm sorry I know this is really confusing, but. 60 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:14:31.799 --> 00:14:47.429 So then the next thing in that box is fixed in year one or two can continue to spend on currently approved activities within the awarded budget and project periods. 61 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:14:47.429 --> 00:15:04.229 So, my understanding of what that means is that, we could potentially use that $93000, but only for currently approved activities. 62 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:15:04.229 --> 00:15:25.339 Which means only the currently awarded fixed grantees or sub recipients and only for the program, the projects that they've been approved for. So if I interpret this instruction correctly, we could go back to. 63 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:15:25.339 --> 00:15:43.499 To fixed applicants and say, we are going to add more month more funding to your 2526 program year and you can continue to use that funding into 2627. 64 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:15:43.499 --> 00:16:00.389 But the, the, all of the 2526 requirements would apply, so the amount that you have to pay the, the Americaps volunteers would be 2526 levels. 65 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:16:00.389 --> 00:16:19.079 Their educational award would be 2526 levels, all the other requirements would be essentially the current year, requirements and so that's, I think the only way that we could utilize that $93000. 66 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:16:19.079 --> 00:16:23.638 I don't know if that makes sense. 67 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:16:23.638 --> 00:16:36.584 Does it all, does it all have to go to one program? It can be split between split. 68 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:16:36.584 --> 00:16:46.834 I think it could be split, and so now I'm gonna go back to the chart, and, and specifically I'm gonna go to scenario two Eileen. 69 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:16:46.834 --> 00:16:48.017 Okay. 70 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:16:48.017 --> 00:17:03.689 And if you if we skip over to the final step in the three step process, and look at. 71 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:17:03.689 --> 00:17:19.559 The teach for America Nashville Chedniga, and then the relay graduate School of education. Where we get to in the funding reductions in step three, the two of those added together. 72 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:17:19.559 --> 00:17:39.479 It is 92600 ish dollars, so it's a little bit below the 93. So my understanding of what the Americaps agency is telling us we can do with those unexpended funds is that we could. 73 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:17:39.479 --> 00:17:55.739 Potentially fund relay graduate School of education and teach for America National Chadinuga with that money, but it would all be, we would have to add it to their current year. 74 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:17:55.739 --> 00:18:18.773 At 9596 grant contract and all of those requirements would need to stay at the 9596, requirements, and I I'm not entirely sure how we would be able to make that happen. 75 "Jessica Youngblom" (3175469312) 00:18:18.773 --> 00:18:26.287 So is that why you made the comment for the scenario two and scenario four that it's likely not gonna happen? 76 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:18:26.287 --> 00:18:34.670 I, I think it would be very challenging for us to be able to figure out how to actually utilize that $93000. 77 "Jessica Youngblom" (3175469312) 00:18:34.670 --> 00:18:44.120 Okay, so that's the point I was gonna make is if those, then we're really looking at scenario one and scenario three on recommendation. 78 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:18:44.120 --> 00:18:46.177 I I think so, but Lizzie. 79 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:18:46.177 --> 00:18:49.399 You had a question. 80 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:18:49.399 --> 00:18:52.738 You're muted. 81 "Elizabeth Lemieux" (557396480) 00:18:52.738 --> 00:19:27.356 Sorry, I was just gonna say that teach for America be really wants to preserve their education awards for their members. So if we were gonna go with scenario two or scenario four, I don't know if it's possible to tell them that they could still choose to accept the the federal award or because it sounded like they were potentially able to do that. They just want to maximize, you know, the benefits for their members and themselves, but they don't want to sacrifice their member benefits for themselves, if that makes sense. 82 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:19:27.356 --> 00:19:34.829 Yeah, yeah. So they they could, so what what Lizzie is saying is, so. 83 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:19:34.829 --> 00:19:50.699 I I'm sorry, one thing that I, I just kind of jumped into the, I just kind of jumped right into the formula part. 84 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:19:50.699 --> 00:20:07.559 And I I forgot that we needed to really quickly review the, the competitive results, which is that Americap. 85 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:20:07.559 --> 00:20:23.519 Has offered to fully fund city year and memphis teacher residency. They have offered NO money to teach for American National Chad Nuga, but their full request of a hundred and 30 members. And that's what Lizzie is talking about. 86 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:20:23.519 --> 00:20:42.359 And when we, when we reached out to teach from America and said, the competitive results is all the members that you asked but none of the money that you asked for, we offered them because we we've done this in the past. 87 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:20:42.359 --> 00:21:02.359 We offered them the option to decline the $0 members and fall into the formula process because it it's it's only a hundred and $30000, but that money is helpful for them in order to. 88 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:21:02.359 --> 00:21:20.549 Be able to manage the program. And we've offered that same option to teach for America in the past and, and other programs that have been in the same scenario where Americap has offered them NO money but the full number of members. So. 89 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:21:20.549 --> 00:21:36.299 Lizzy's question is whether or not it might make more sense for a teacher for America to stay in the competitive at $0 but the full 130 or or to be funded out of the formula. 90 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:21:36.299 --> 00:21:56.299 Now, they can still request the full a hundred and 30 numbers even if we can only offer them $87000, they can still request the full 130, which is better than $0. It's not as good as a hundred and 30000. 91 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:21:56.299 --> 00:22:15.899 Thousand but it's better than NO money at all. If they, if they stay in the competitive, they wouldn't get any money at all. They would get the hundred and 30 members. Those members would earn the new 2627 educational award. 92 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:22:15.899 --> 00:22:34.889 If they stayed in the formula and we tried to use this 93000 unexpended, we could give them $87000 in funding and again they could request the full 130 members. 93 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:22:34.889 --> 00:22:53.189 Those members would be at the current year education award and not the new year Education award. It so it would probably be, maybe a hundred or $200 difference in that education award. 94 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:22:53.189 --> 00:23:12.149 That's under scenario two where we try and utilize the money. If we look at scenario one or three, which doesn't utilize the unexpended funds, then the the teach for America National Chad Nuga program. 95 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:23:12.149 --> 00:23:28.049 Would still get some money, they could request a hundred and 30 members and those hundred 30 members would be at the new year education award. So. 96 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:23:28.049 --> 00:23:45.209 So I think the bottom line is teach of America can get the hundred and 30 members that they need regardless of which scenario we use. The question is how much money they get. 97 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:23:45.209 --> 00:24:04.919 To run the program, and whether or not we want to try to utilize that 93000. And again, the th this scenario, the number two and number four is, kind of an ideal if we can use that money, what would it look like? 98 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:24:04.919 --> 00:24:28.212 And, again, I, I think it would be really challenging for us to try and figure out a way to utilize that because we would, we would have two grantees that we would have to go back to their current year grant, the 9596 grant. We'd have to extend that contract, add money to that contract, and then figure out how to get them. 99 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:24:28.212 --> 00:24:31.314 The members and the money. 100 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:24:31.314 --> 00:24:56.959 Through the federal grant system and and I don't, I don't know if it would be possible, and if it is possible, I think there are potentially risks involved for e.g. the Americap agency may come back to us and say, Yeah, you can use that money to extend to increase their 2526 per. 101 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:24:56.959 --> 00:25:14.939 Program year funding, but we we can't give you all the the member service years that you're requesting. We can only give you X amount compared to your, to your request. So in my opinion, trying to utilize that. 102 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:25:14.939 --> 00:25:30.732 Unspent funding presents a lot of risk that and a lot of unknowns that could come back and hurt programs more so than just doing the the straight cuts that we would need to do to not. 103 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:25:30.732 --> 00:25:34.493 Try and incorporate that 93000. 104 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:25:34.493 --> 00:25:57.027 But that's just that that's just the kind of the general recommended recommendation, obviously the grants committee, if you want to develop some other funding scenario or if you wanna explore one of the two scenarios that utilize that an extended funds, we can certainly dive into that more. 105 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:25:57.027 --> 00:26:05.390 What happens to that, that money if we select scenarios one and three or three? 106 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:26:05.390 --> 00:26:15.616 At at at the end of that three year grant period it would just be returned to the treasury. 107 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:26:18.294 --> 00:26:34.499 I'm and and that, that, that does happen pretty regularly that with any, any grant, any America grant that we have, that we have money at the end of the three year grant period that isn't spent and it goes back to treasury, the the amount varies. 108 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:26:34.499 --> 00:26:50.669 Because again, we're talking about aa3 year period, so that that an extended amount accumulates from year to year and we try and u utilize it, but the other thing that I I should explain. 109 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:26:50.669 --> 00:27:08.579 Is that the America Court agency, the reason that using this money is gonna be a challenge is because the America Court agency is changing the way they award the formula money. So they are NO longer going to do two separate awards. 110 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:27:08.579 --> 00:27:31.733 They're not gonna do a cost reimbursement grant and a fixed grant. They are only gonna do the cost reimbursement grant. And then they've told us that, that the state commission can then use that money to fund either cost reimbursement grants or fixed amount grants, but it's all gonna be under a single award. So. 111 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:27:32.593 --> 00:28:02.279 So we're not gonna have the 25 FXH grant. We can't add more money to that grant moving forward, although it's only in year one, and typically in the past what we would do is because that grant is only in year one, we would look at the fixed amount programs and we would add whatever of this, new allocation of 3.9 million. 112 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:28:02.279 --> 00:28:17.759 We would add whatever we needed to the fixed grant to fund the fixed programs, and then the the amount that's left over would go to the cost reimbursement or, you know, so we we would utilize all the allocation, but we would split it up. 113 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:28:17.759 --> 00:28:35.009 Based on where the money needed to be for either the cost reimbursement or the fixed. But because they're only gonna do the cost reimbursement grant, we can't add more money to that fixed grant and we can't. 114 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:28:35.009 --> 00:28:50.789 Add new programs to that fixed. And that's why I said that if we try to use that 93000, the programs would have to, it would have to be under their current 9596 program year. 115 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:28:50.789 --> 00:29:05.939 And not a new 9697 program year because we can't add new money and new pro NO new program years to that, that fixed grant. So we're kind of stuck. 116 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:29:05.939 --> 00:29:21.539 Because of the way they're doing the awards now, and, and this should be a one time thing, they're they're changing the process this year going forward, we expect that they'll. 117 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:29:21.539 --> 00:29:51.832 They'll award everything in the cost reimbursement and then volunteer Tennessee can split that money up however it wants between cost reimbursement and fixed, sub recipients but it'll all be under the same federal grant. And so we wouldn't have to worry about whether or not the unexpended is in the fixed grant or the cost reimbursement, all of the unexpended would be under the cost reimbursement and we would be able to use it from year to year going forward. 118 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:29:51.832 --> 00:30:24.150 Well, my, my feeling is that trying to use that money is is too risky and too complicated and and that we should go with either scenario or we should recommend either scenario one or scenario three. 119 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:30:24.150 --> 00:30:27.691 And Lizzie you Lizzy's got her hand up again. 120 "Elizabeth Lemieux" (557396480) 00:30:27.691 --> 00:30:34.094 I just wanted to check. Jessica, Eileen, are you able to stay on a little bit longer? 121 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:30:34.094 --> 00:30:40.104 Oh yeah, we have we're coming up on time. Yeah, sorry that that delay in getting people on. I just. 122 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:30:40.104 --> 00:30:47.955 I can I can stay a little bit longer, but I'm I have a hard stop at 1230. 123 "Elizabeth Lemieux" (557396480) 00:30:47.955 --> 00:30:50.293 Okay. He can do that. 124 "Jessica Youngblom" (3175469312) 00:30:50.293 --> 00:30:53.106 Same for me, so. 125 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:30:53.106 --> 00:30:54.832 Okay, thanks Lizzie for the. 126 "Terry Silver" (3042176256) 00:30:54.832 --> 00:30:58.675 I've gotta get off here by noon guys, so I'm gonna slip out when I need to go. 127 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:30:58.675 --> 00:31:12.599 Okay, thanks Terry. Well, so I Eileen, I agree. I mean that that would be my recommendation is that we focus on scenario one or two or sorry, one or three, which doesn't include. 128 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:31:12.599 --> 00:31:31.109 Unexpended funds. The, and again the the main difference between those two is scenario one does not propose funding any brand new programs. Scenario three proposes funding the highest scoring. 129 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:31:31.109 --> 00:31:46.409 Applicant, which is the future leaders of Excellence academy. I again the the general recommendation that I would. 130 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:31:46.409 --> 00:32:02.759 Provided Lizzie and Letshifa can step in is that because, because this issue of changing how the, the federal grant is awarded is a one time hit to our ability to carry forward money. 131 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:32:02.759 --> 00:32:20.549 And that it is gonna, it is gonna cause I mean, the in scenario one, the across the board cuts is just a little bit under 15 %. That, so that's a significant across the board cut. 132 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:32:20.549 --> 00:32:37.109 So my my recommendation would be not to fund a brand new applicant because if we fund that just one new applicant that future leaders of, of excellence, that results in. 133 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:32:37.109 --> 00:32:52.409 Instead of a 15 % cut, a 16 % cut, so it's a, you know, I know it's only 1 %, but, when you're talking about tens of thousands of dollars, 1 % can, can add up pretty quickly. 134 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:32:52.409 --> 00:33:12.409 And instead of trying to fund that new applicant that we instead put that funding into the existing applicants, which is what's proposed in scenario one, and then, you know, next year we should be in a better position related to. 135 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:33:12.409 --> 00:33:34.649 Being able to use unextended funds and, we could potentially consider funding new applicants. The other thing that I'll note is that, this year we had a really large number of continuation programs. 1212 out of our total portfolio of. 136 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:33:34.649 --> 00:33:50.609 Programs are continuation, and, and typically we only send programs to compete at the national level when they're at the end of their three year grant cycle and. 137 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:33:50.609 --> 00:34:10.609 These, these twelve are not at the end of their three year grants that they're in the middle, that's why they're a continuation. So it reduced the number of programs that we were able to send out to the competitive process and next year we'll be able to send some more up and so potentially we'll be able to get some additional competitive dollars that'll free up some form. 138 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:34:10.609 --> 00:34:33.349 Dollars. I mean, all of that's kind of a bit speculative, but it does, I think increase our chances of being able to have some additional federal formula dollars next year to potentially fund new programs compared to this year. This this year is. 139 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:34:33.349 --> 00:35:00.110 Just a very tight year for, for a lot of reasons. Not the least of which, which I didn't mention is we NO longer have access to the American Rescue Plan Act money. Last year was the last year that we had any of that money available, so it's it's all gone as well. 140 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:35:00.110 --> 00:35:10.970 So, scenario one is our most conservative approach. 141 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:35:10.970 --> 00:35:13.811 Yes, it looked like. 142 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:35:13.811 --> 00:35:26.614 I sure would like to see a new program get in though. 143 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:35:26.614 --> 00:35:55.139 Yeah, well again I mean we we can certainly look at that. When you then get into which new program to fund, again, the future leaders of Excellence Academy had the highest review score, but they also have a high risk score. College Possible scored about roughly five points lower, but they have a low. 144 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:35:55.139 --> 00:36:11.189 Risk or and it is a, it is a proven Americap model. They have college Possible is active in other states, it just isn't active in Tennessee. 145 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:36:11.189 --> 00:36:26.969 So, but they're asking for twice the amount of money that future leaders of Excellence Academy is asking, so to include the college possible, in either. 146 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:36:26.969 --> 00:36:48.851 Scenario three or four would result in even more reductions the the across the board reduction would, would go up in order to be able to try and accommodate them over future leaders of excellence. 147 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:36:48.851 --> 00:36:51.135 Yeah. 148 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:36:51.135 --> 00:37:18.949 So anyway, there there's challenges and then obviously there are other new applicants that had lower scores, a line nine angelic ministries, black lemonade, willowe tree, Learning Center, but you you can see the Eileen looking at the chart, you can see the combination of scores versus and and risk. 149 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:37:18.949 --> 00:37:26.290 Assessment makes some of those less attractive as possible applicants. 150 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:37:26.290 --> 00:37:27.953 So. 151 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:37:27.953 --> 00:37:56.009 I think in general the staff would not recommend funding any of those new applicants belo certainly the ones that are below the average of 71, which has been a pretty typical cutoff mark for the grants committee in the past not to consider any applicant below the average score. So that would that would eliminate the the two at the bottom Black lemonade and willow Treet Learning Center Corp. 152 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:37:56.009 --> 00:38:16.009 Yeah. But would leave the other four future leaders college possible, a line nine and angelic member ministries for consideration but again the a line nine, their request is for 207 and and. 153 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:38:16.009 --> 00:38:41.909 Galic is for 203. So they're asking for even more than than college possible. So including either one of those would result in, even steeper across the board reductions than, the, the 16 % in scenario three, which is the one that doesn't look at, at any carryover. 154 "Latiyfa Fields" (1895952384) 00:38:41.909 --> 00:39:01.260 And if I could just add a quick comment, that doesn't really help necessarily because you know, this is a tough situation when thinking about new applicants cause I definitely agree with you Eileen and we've talked about this as a team, I think maintaining those opportunities for the applicants it's just gonna help. 155 "Latiyfa Fields" (1895952384) 00:39:01.260 --> 00:39:34.812 Yeah Ensure kind of support the portfolio continues to evolve and address a variety of issues, you know, emerging community needs etc. So I think that it would definitely be to the benefit of the commission to consider this, you know, support pipeline development, just and prevent the portfolio from becoming just stagnated or eliminate limited, I think to the organizations who we've just historically worked with. 156 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:39:34.812 --> 00:39:56.100 Yeah, and and that's all true. The, the one thing that I would add is that, that that's all fine and dandy when we've got more money, but when we're already talking about doing significant reductions to programs cause the base reduction. 157 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:39:56.100 --> 00:40:12.420 Under scenario three is 16 % that's across the board, but when you look at because we've already reduced in step one and step two. 158 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:40:12.420 --> 00:40:29.910 12345677 of the applicants have already been reduced in step one or two, and then everybody gets reduced in step three. So if you're looking at literacy mid south, e.g.. 159 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:40:29.910 --> 00:40:46.530 From their request for 2627 of, sorry, I'm gonna, sorry I'm trying to get rid of the. 160 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:40:46.530 --> 00:41:05.550 The page thing there to make it easier to see. So their their 2627 request was 216. Last year they received 205, but this scenario provides them with only 97. So. 161 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:41:05.550 --> 00:41:25.550 That's an over 50 % reduction for that program under this scenario that only includes one, one new applicant. So that's that's a pretty significant reduction to an existing program just so that we can include one. 162 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:41:25.550 --> 00:41:50.130 New applicant. So the other thing that that we haven't discussed yet and should be part of the discussion though, if you're, if you want to talk more about funding new programs is Tennessees Community Assistance Corporation scored below two of the new applicants. So if you're looking at just just a strictly objective, who do we fund? 163 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:41:50.130 --> 00:42:07.170 From new applicants because generally the continuation that are at the top, the general understanding is that if you're in a continuation year, you get funded to the best of our ability and and we're not gonna eliminate a continuation program. 164 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:42:07.170 --> 00:42:25.320 But when you recompete, the point of that is that you compete against other existing programs that are at the end of their three year period grant cycle and any new applicant, and that it is not a given that you will get refunded just because you have been funded in the past. 165 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:42:25.320 --> 00:42:42.210 So, the other possibility is to not fund Tennessees Community Assistance Corporation at all because they've scored lower than two new applicants, and instead of funding them to fund one of the new applicants. 166 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:42:42.210 --> 00:43:01.020 Now that's a pretty serious harm to an existing program because we're talking about zero funding for them, complete elimination. So I I'm not suggesting that, that that be what you all do and recommend to the executive committee, but it is a possibility. 167 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:43:01.020 --> 00:43:21.020 That we should at least discuss if you want to seriously talk about funding a new applicant because there's NO way to fund a new applicant that doesn't harm existing programs. Just flat out. There's, there's NO way to do that. There's NO way to fund all of our existing programs without hurting those existing programs because we just don't have enough money. 168 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:43:21.020 --> 00:43:53.711 To fund them all at the amount that they've requested. So we're already harming existing programs. The question is, how much do you want to harm existing programs in order to bring on a new, a new applicant? And and that that that's a, that's not a rhetorical question. That is a that that is an actual question for the the two remaining committee member members to. 169 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:43:54.829 --> 00:43:59.313 To weigh in on. 170 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:43:59.313 --> 00:44:29.070 Well, if, if we were to decide that we want to fund future leaders of excellence, they were asking for $75000. And so if we deducted $75000 from Tennessees community systems, that that would. 171 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:44:29.070 --> 00:44:45.650 Take them down three msys. So they'd be at 29 point twelve msy's. 172 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:44:45.650 --> 00:44:50.160 Yeah well so I I would I would say. 173 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:44:50.160 --> 00:45:18.388 If, but because any of these scenarios involve reducing exist existing programs and not fully funding them, that it, it wouldn't be equitable to fully fund a brand new program just because they're new. So I I would say it it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to fully fund them at 75000. 174 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:45:18.388 --> 00:45:20.747 Just because they're new. 175 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:45:20.747 --> 00:45:43.620 And so that if if you do want to consider funding them, that it should be in line with the across the board reduction that all of the existing programs are facing to get us to the amount of funding and and that the scenario three does that it it. 176 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:45:43.620 --> 00:46:03.620 It applies the, let's see, 16.01 % reduction to their application in addition to applying that to all the all the other programs. And again, keeping in mind that several of the existing programs were already reduced in step one and step. 177 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:46:03.620 --> 00:46:14.833 Step two but everybody gets the across the board reduction at the end of, at the end of step three. 178 "Elizabeth Lemieux" (557396480) 00:46:14.833 --> 00:46:43.474 To, to piggyback off that question and also to give a 15 min time check So yes, Jim, we could fund the, in this scenario, we could fund future leaders at like that adjusted amount, but Eileen had also brought up taking that amount not from like the total portfolio and reducing the rest of, but like just taking that out of tcacs. 179 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:46:43.474 --> 00:46:59.130 Is that possible? That that would be possible if what you're saying is, so right now. 180 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:46:59.130 --> 00:47:18.587 It it becomes, it becomes a bit of recursive math because the, if we're talking about taking whatever funding that we give to College Possible from TCAC. 181 "Elizabeth Lemieux" (557396480) 00:47:18.587 --> 00:47:21.132 Well future leaders, right? 182 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:47:21.132 --> 00:47:36.680 Oh, yeah, sorry. Feature leaders. If we're talking about taking that money from TCAC, what they both both the numbers in this step three column and I. 183 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:47:36.680 --> 00:47:56.820 I'm looking right now in scenario three column W Okay. Both both of those numbers have, been applied the across the board cut has been applied. So, to reduce. 184 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:47:56.820 --> 00:48:13.020 To reduce TCAC would then provide additional money to put into future leaders, but if you take the full amount. 185 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:48:13.020 --> 00:48:30.450 Out the the that across the report board reduction is NO longer 16 %. It's some other percentage that would then have to be applied to future leaders that then. 186 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:48:30.450 --> 00:48:49.805 Changes the amount that TCAC has, which then changes the amount that, so I mean we could probably figure that out with a little bit more time than what we have left on this call. 187 "Elizabeth Lemieux" (557396480) 00:48:49.805 --> 00:48:53.850 Okay, I see Jessica doesn't, yeah. 188 "Jessica Youngblom" (3175469312) 00:48:53.850 --> 00:49:00.592 What have we done in the past in situations like this? Like what's the precedent that we've set in the past? 189 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:49:00.592 --> 00:49:06.210 I well I I would say there's not a clear precedent, so. 190 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:49:06.210 --> 00:49:21.930 The, there has been at times a general preference from the grants committee to do their best to maintain existing programs over new programs. And so if there were a situation similar to this where. 191 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:49:21.930 --> 00:49:38.940 You know, the, the only way to fund a new program would be to apply additional cuts to existing programs. They would say, well, let's not do that. But that hasn't been, that hasn't been something that's been constant. I mean, there have been times where the grants committee has. 192 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:49:38.940 --> 00:49:53.940 Like the discussion you're having right now, wanted to fund a new applicant, but I don't think that the grants committee has ever said, well, let's take all of that money from. 193 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:49:53.940 --> 00:50:12.950 A recompeting applicant that didn't score well, that that hasn't typically been the way the grants committee has approached it, I mean not saying that you can't approach it that way, but that they haven't typically that money just comes out of the pool of money for available for everyone. 194 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:50:15.132 --> 00:50:31.770 Well, I I think that what we should do is since since we we're having the executive committee this afternoon, right? 04:00. So I I think. 195 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:50:31.770 --> 00:50:51.450 You know, given the lack of time to do very much of anything between now and then, I think I think we should that our recommendation should be either scenario one or scenario three and have a discussion at the executive committee. 196 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:50:51.450 --> 00:51:07.605 About, you know, how does the executives committee feel about funding a new program or not funding a new program? What is what does the executive committee think should be the priority there? 197 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:51:07.605 --> 00:51:24.692 Sure, yeah, I mean that that certainly is fine if if the grants committee wants to make that recommendation that is essentially the executive committee consider either one or two, one or three. Yeah. 198 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:51:24.692 --> 00:51:30.192 How does, how does that sit with you, Jessica? 199 "Jessica Youngblom" (3175469312) 00:51:30.192 --> 00:51:33.533 I'm in agreement with that. Okay. 200 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:51:33.533 --> 00:51:41.051 Okay, well I I again you don't have a quorum, so I don't think there's. 201 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:51:41.051 --> 00:51:42.004 In the. 202 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:51:42.004 --> 00:52:08.631 To take a vote, so what what we'll do is we'll go ahead and send this this version out that has all of the scenarios on it. But we'll I'll ask for folks who have time that they particularly look at scenario one and three. 203 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:52:08.631 --> 00:52:11.349 Yeah. 204 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:52:11.349 --> 00:52:22.770 And the recommendation of the grants committee is for the executive committee to consider one of those over the other scenarios. 205 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:52:22.770 --> 00:52:40.640 Yeah. Okay, that that sounds like a good plan to me. Okay. I have to I'm at home, but I need to leave to go to the main library and do my volunteers. 206 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:52:40.640 --> 00:52:57.132 Everything library and and get home and get back here by four. Although I may just bring my laptop down to the library and if I run into a time crunch, I'll find a spot there. 207 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:52:57.132 --> 00:52:58.452 Okay. 208 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:52:58.452 --> 00:53:03.443 But I'm I'm concerned about not getting into Webex again. 209 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:53:03.443 --> 00:53:11.293 Yeah, yeah, I don't know. Unfortunately, I don't, I I don't have any good advice for you on that. 210 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:53:11.293 --> 00:53:13.547 Because it's not clear. 211 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:53:13.547 --> 00:53:30.291 It's not clear to me why some people are having trouble like Terry didn't have trouble joining, but you did and we've had other meetings where people have different people have had trouble joining. So I, I don't know what to say other than. 212 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:53:30.291 --> 00:53:32.569 If you can start trying to join. 213 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:53:32.569 --> 00:53:34.549 Wayne about 15 min before he. 214 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:53:34.549 --> 00:53:44.210 And yeah, yeah, I will do that and if you could, if you can make sure that I'm listed as a panelist. 215 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:53:44.210 --> 00:53:49.654 Yeah, you're definitely list I'll double check that. 216 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:53:49.654 --> 00:53:50.973 I'm sure. 217 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:53:50.973 --> 00:53:57.329 That you're listed as a panelist for the 04:00 meeting. Okay. Because I just caught. 218 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:53:57.329 --> 00:54:15.506 Yeah, so that way I can at least fall back on the telephone if I have to. Yeah. Okay. Thanks everybody. 219 "Jim Snell" (1548700672) 00:54:15.506 --> 00:54:21.754 Thank you both. Or it was staff too. Thanks. Bye bye. All right. Bye. 220 "6155****08" (24994816) 00:54:21.754 --> 00:54:29.376 Bye.