Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/04/2025 - Meeting Materials S Food M *icrogrants — Selection Committee Orientation March 4, 2025 Agenda 1 . Welcome and roll call 2. Open & Public Meetings Act (OPMA) Training 3. Committee by-laws review & adoption 4. Overview of SLC Food Microgrant Program 5. Review of scoring process & rubric 6. Next steps & timeline 7. Adjourn • Name Introductions • Connection • Favorite food in SLC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNVBuXB7vkM • Draft of Committee By-Laws By= Laws • Review Co • Questions or concerns Review & Adopt • Vote to adopt • Vice Chair volunteer? Food 1 1 • Program history & purpose Pro • Nuts & bolts 9ra • Funding categories Why does this program exist? Nearly 1-in-4 (21%) Salt Lake City residents struggle to buy food, and more than 1-in-3 (41 %) residents are not able to access the types of food they prefer to eat, especially healthy foods, culturally relevant foods, or medically needed foods. Food insecurity is not spread evenly among Salt Lake City residents or neighborhoods. Grocery prices have risen an average of 30916 since 2019. Other food system challenges like avian flu and safety recalls have created food shortages. Salt Lake City provides access to resources and opportunities that support everyone in overcoming barriers to their success so that our community today, and generations tomorrow, can thrive. �b5-.4 Program Purpose To increase access to healthy, affordable, culturally relevant food and build an inclusive community around healthy food choices so individuals living in Salt Lake City have many opportunities to shape, participate in, and enjoy a sustainable, accessible, and resilient local food environment. IF✓ i S 4 - SLC Food Microgrant Program Overview Program Goals Program Basics 1 . Foster resilient, diverse, and inclusive • About $45,000 to distribute healthy neighborhood food environments. • Supported through General Fund 2. Support multiple pathways for • Grant types traditionally marginalized individuals o Home Food Production Grant ($250) and neighborhoods to consistently o Community Grant (up to $5,000) access and grow fresh, affordable, healthy, and culturally relevant food. • Eligibility 3. Increase the availability and accessibility 0 Salt Lake City residents/boundaries of food information and resources. 0 No political, media, government groups Key Funding Categories 1 . Growing Food - expanding opportunities & access to growing more food locally 2. Inclusive Outreach & Communications - supporting accessibility & availability of information about food resources 3. Dignified Food Access - improving access to healthy food opportunities that center & respect the agency & choice of individuals 4. Neighborhood Healthy Food Environments - supporting the availability and accessibility of healthy, fresh foods & enhancing the character of food environments near where people live Support for Impacted Groups This program aims to support projects led by and serving those who identify as members of groups that have been most negatively impacted by the food system. Identifying with one or more of these groups is not required to receive funding. • Black, Indigenous, and People of Color • Veterans • Historically marginalized or • Adults 65+ years under-resourced people and • Families with children under 18 years neighborhoods • Single parent households with children • People and households living in poverty • Nontraditional students. New Americans or with low- or moderate-incomes • Formerly incarcerated people • Unsheltered or informally housed • Groups for whom other funding people opportunities are or historically have • LGBTQIA2S+ individuals been limited • People with disabilities Impact of the Microgrant Program "(The grant] was so important to help achieve my growing goals this year, I was able to put up so much food to reduce my grocery bill, and provide a quality of plants that 1 wouldn't be able to afford otherwise. " "This was incredible. 1 would not have had the motivation or funds to complete this project if it weren't for the grant. I'm excited to have more opportunities to grow food for my home. Thank you so much!" Scoring Process Challenging traditional grant Power over & gatekeeping processes to promote e Worship of e word accessibility e Only one right way e Individualism & paternalism where issues surfaces in e Perfectionism grantmaking & how we can address them • Power over & gatekeeping o Shared decision-making and Challenging centering community leaders • Worship of the written word traditional grant o Scoring based on content and impact rather than writing skills processes to promote • Only one right way o Looking for creativity& diverse accessibility problem solving strategies • Individualism & paternalism surfaceswhere issues o Trust-based funding mindset • • = • Perfectionism how we canaddress 0 Learning approach Steps to Scoring & Recommending - Home Food HOME FOOD PRODUCTION GRANTS 1 . Receive a selection of applications 2. Review & score recommended/not ;,�d����•s.%� 3. Follow up discussion for any concerns , PROPOSED AWARD PROCESS 1 . 100 grants reserved for HFP category ' 2. Selection can be further based on ;, F o Location o Income o Past funding 3. Send out award notifications Steps to Scoring & Recommending - Community COMMUNITY GRANTS 1 . Receive all grant applications �► ' 2. Review & score applications 3. Follow up discussion for questions, r '' concerns & scoring discrepancies s PROPOSED AWARD PROCESS y` r 1 . Total scores per category & overall 2. Determine category weights, then *math* • 3. Use score rankings &/or prioritization criteria (location, budget size, past funding) to recommend awarded organizations & determine funding levels Scoring Rubrics • 108 - Home Food Production Applicants o $27,000 requested • 26 - Community Overview o $104,388.14 requested • $131 ,388.14 - total requested Community Grant Applicants • Backyard Urban Garden Farms LLC (BUG Farms) • New American Goat Club* • Ben Ari Gerr L.C. • Odd Lots, LLC and The Community Surplus • Black Forest Homestead LLC Exchange • Camarilla Circle Community Garden • Orenda Urban Farm • Community Health Centers, Inc. • Proyecto Xilonen* • Fletcher Court Community • Raw Eddy's • Food Not Bombs Salt Lake City* • Riverjordan Network • Food, Movement and You, U.U. Center for • Rose Park Bee Club Community Nutrition • Rose Park Community Garden Share • Friends of Switchpoint • Scrumptious • Frog Bench Farms • HK Brewing Collective • Twig & Branch Gardens • Lauracares LLC • Urban Pepper Project • Neighborhood House • Utah Crisis Food Response 0 Vanavil Community Garden* • Maria - Eligibility & duplicate review of applications • Confirm training/orientation • Notify Maria of any potential Next Steps conflicts of interest Actions & Timeline • Receive HFP applications • Review & score HFP applications • March 10 - Submit scores through online form • March 12-24 - Review & score CG applications through online form • March 25 - Meet to discuss CG Next Steps scores & address discrepancies • April 1 - Continue discussions on Actions & Timeline CG scores • April 8 - Finalize funding recommendations Questions ? Salt Lake City Department of Sustainability 2025 SLC Food Microgrant Program Draft Selection Committee Bylaws Organization 1. Orientation: All new SLC Food Microgrant Selection Committee members are required to have an orientation meeting with Sustainability staff before reviewing grant applications. 2. Required Training: Sustainability staff shall schedule a training for Selection Committee members on compliance with the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act (OPMA). 3. Selection of Chair and Vice Chair: The Sustainability Department Director or Representative shall designate a Chair and Vice Chair who will be confirmed by a simple majority vote of the Committee. Should the Chair resign from the Committee, the Vice Chair shall serve in the interim until a new Chair and Vice Chair is selected. 4. Duties of the Chair: The Chair is to preside at Selection Committee meetings and shall provide general direction for the meetings. In addition to being the presiding member, the Chair shall have the following duties: a. To call the meeting to order on the day and the hour scheduled and proceed with the order of business in accordance with the posted agenda. The Chair shall announce each item of business in the agenda, in the order in which it is to be acted upon. Upon the completion of consideration of all agenda items, the Chair shall adjourn the meeting. b. To put to vote all questions which are presented by Selection Committee members that require Selection Committee vote. c. To move the agenda along, maintain order, set guidelines for public input, if permitted, and reference handouts and procedures during Selection Committee meetings. d. To recognize speakers prior to receiving comments and presentations. 5. Duties of the Vice Chair: During the absence of the Chair, the Vice Chair shall have and perform all the duties and functions of the Chair. Should the Chair resign from the Selection Committee, the Vice Chair shall serve as Chair until elections are held at the next available meeting. 6. Secretary: A Sustainability staff member shall serve as Secretary of the Selection Committee. 7. Secretary's Duties relating to the Selection Committee: a. To post public notices of Selection Committee meetings in accordance with the noticing requirements of OPMA. b. To attend every meeting of the Selection Committee, to take and record the roll, and to advise the Selection Committee of any administrative updates related to the meetings. c. To keep the minutes of the Selection Committee meetings and to record them in accordance with state law. d. To keep and maintain a permanent record of all documents and papers pertaining to the Selection Committee meetings in accordance with state law. e. To ensure Selection Committee members receive materials pertinent to Selection Committee meetings at least four(4) business days following such scheduled meetings. Rights and Duties of Selection Committee Members 1. Membership: The SLC Food Microgrant Selection Committee shall be made up of a total of at least five (5) members. The committee may include members from the following groups: (1) member from the Sustainability Department, one (1) member from the Mayor's Office, one (1) member from the former Salt Lake City Food Policy Council, and one (1) member who has participated in either the Resident Food Equity Advisors Program or a past year of the SLC Food Microgrant Program. Additional members may come from relevant community-based organizations, City departments, boards or commissions, or interested and knowledgeable individual residents and community representatives identified by the Department. 2. Meeting Attendance: Every member of the Selection Committee shall make an effort to attend each Selection Committee meeting either in person or virtually (if available), unless unable to attend due to extenuating circumstances. Any member desiring to be excused from the Selection Committee shall notify the Secretary. The Secretary shall inform the Chair and the Vice Chair of the resignation. a. If a Selection Committee member misses three (3) consecutive Selection Committee meetings, the Chair shall confer with the member regarding the ability, interest, and commitment of the member to continue membership on the Selection Committee. b. If the Selection Committee member continues to miss meetings, the Chair shall bring the matter to Sustainability staff and the Sustainability Director. The Chair and the Sustainability Director shall decide whether the Selection Committee member shall be removed. 3. Conflict of Interest: No member of the Selection Committee shall participate in or be present in the determination of any grant application or any other matter in which that member has any conflict of interest prohibited by Chapter 2.44 of the Salt Lake City Code. If a Selection Committee member suspects they may have an actual, apparent, or reasonably foreseeable conflict of interest with any grant applicant or the applicant's partners or owners, the Selection Committee member shall alert the Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary of the potential conflict in writing. A City attorney shall determine as to whether a conflict of interest exists to disqualify such member from participating in the Selection Committee or discussion of the applicant. Upon a determination of a conflict of interest, the Selection Committee member shall not participate in the discussion, evaluation of the application, or attempt to use influence with other Selection Committee members before, during or after the meeting, or during any consideration period. The following are additional guidelines for conduct: a. There may be a conflict of interest if there are personal, familial, or financial ties between a Selection Committee member and any partner, owner, guarantor, or executive of a grant applicant. b. A Selection Committee member must not sell or offer to sell services or solicit prospective clients or employment by stating an ability to influence the Selection Committee's decisions. c. A Selection Committee member must not use the power of membership to seek or obtain a special advantage that is not in the public interest, nor any special advantage that is not a matter of public knowledge. d. A Selection Committee member shall not have any ex parte discussions regarding a grant application to be heard by or in consideration with the Selection Committee. For the purpose of these bylaws, ex parte discussions include any communication regarding an applicant with interested parties of the SLC Food Microgrant application prior to issuance of the final decision. e. An applicant or a member of the public may raise a question of a conflict of interest, after first obtaining the Chair's permission to speak. Meetings 1. Place: All meetings of the Selection Committee shall be held in a room as determined appropriate in the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah, or at such other place, or by means of an electronic meeting held in accordance with OPMA. Proper notice of the meeting location, including any publicly accessible electronic link in the event of an electronic meeting, shall be posted for the general public. 2. Electronic Meetings: Selection Committee meetings will be accessible electronically in accordance with OPMA and State Code Title 52-4-207. Board members, staff, guests, and the public may choose to attend the meetings electronically if they so wish. 3. Notice and Agenda: The Secretary shall publicly notice the time and purpose of every meeting of the Selection Committee at least twenty-four(24) hours prior to such meeting. Such notice shall be delivered to each member of the Selection Committee via email. The Secretary shall publicly post a written agenda for each meeting and send it to the Selection Committee via email in conjunction with notice of each meeting. a. Where written minutes of a prior meeting are ready for Committee approval, the agenda shall include an item to review and vote for approval of the prior meeting minutes. 4. Frequency: The Selection Committee will convene at least three times or until funding recommendations have been submitted for each grant category, after which time the Selection Committee will meet on an as-needed basis to review program implementation for applicants awarded funding or to review program process adjustments. The first meeting will be used as the orientation and training session for the Selection Committee. Meetings may be canceled by the Chair if it is determined there is no new business to bring before the Selection Committee. 5. Closed Meetings: The Selection Committee does not hold closed meetings at this time. The Committee retains the option to hold closed meetings in the future in accordance with OPMA and any other applicable State and City laws regarding when closed meetings are allowed and appropriate. 6. Quorum: A quorum of the Selection Committee must be present to call a meeting to session and vote on applications. A quorum shall be a simple majority of the Selection Committee, or at least three (3) Selection Committee members. Any member disqualified because of a conflict of interest shall not be considered when determining whether a quorum is constituted. 7. Voting: Where a vote is required of the Selection Committee, such action set to a vote shall pass upon a simple majority of the quorum present at the meeting. Those disqualified for conflict of interest do not count towards the voting quorum requirements. Any member attending a meeting electronically may still vote on actions as if they were attending in-person. All votes will be taken by roll call. 8. Grant Application Evaluation: Selection Committee approvals or denials can only be made when a minimum of three (3) Selection Committee members submit evaluations/scores to Sustainability staff. 9. Public Comment Guidelines: Public comments may be allowed at the discretion of the Chair. Public comments are expected to comply with Committee Decorum rules as outlined in Section 11. 10. Committee Discussion: Committee Members may discuss applications, evaluations/scores, or other items related to the review and consideration of the grant applications. The Committee may ask questions of applicants at the discretion of the Chair. 11. Decorum Rules: Please observe the following rules of civility to maintain the decorum of the Selection Committee meetings. Meetings are a place for people to feel safe and comfortable in participating in this grant process. A respectful and safe environment allows a meeting to be conducted in an orderly, efficient, effective, and dignified fashion, free from distraction, intimidation, and threats to safety. We welcome everyone so please be mindful and keep comments free of discriminatory language referring to a person or group based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, color, descent, gender, sexual orientation, disability, age or other identity factor. Items or comments that disrupt the meeting, intimidate Committee members or other participants or that may cause safety concerns are not allowed. Notification of Decision 1. After the Selection Committee submits its scores on the SLC Food Microgrant application, Sustainability staff shall compile the results and take actions to finalize the determination. Sustainability staff shall communicate with applicant identifying the determination and outlining any subsequent action the applicant must take. 2. The SLC Food Microgrant Selection application results shall be a noticed agenda item to be announced at a future Selection Committee meeting. Approval and Amendment of Bylaws 1. These bylaws may be amended at any meeting of the Selection Committee held upon a vote of a simple majority of the quorum present at the Selection Committee meeting. Recording of Bylaws 1. These bylaws and all subsequent amendments shall be recorded by the Selection Committee Secretary and copies shall be furnished to each member of the Selection Committee in electronic form. Approved by the SLC Food Microgrant Selection Committee on March 4, 2025. Signed —/ffawla f Se,4-awz 3.4.2025 SLC resident Does the applicant have land use permission? Does the project comply with relevant City/County/State Code? Is the proposed project an approved fund use? Is this application a du licate? Project proposal is feasible Project proposal seems Project proposal is not and clearly connected to feasible but may be unclear feasible and/or doesn't Description: Please describe how this grant the goal of supporting how it will support the describe how the project will will supportyou in producing your own food. individual residents, applicant in support the applicant infamilies,and neighbors in producing,growing,or Producing/growing/raising producing,growing,or raising their own food. their own food. raising their own food. Provides clear and Provides an understandable Does not provide a good Impact:Why is this project important to you? compelling reason for reason for taking on this reason for the project or isn't p Y P 1 P Y p g project, but only has an p t What impact will this grant have? importance of project to adequate connection to the clear about impact of the food access impact on food access project for food access Project incorporates Project may include some Project doesn't use Sustainable Practices: How would, sustainable/environmentally sustainable practices, but it sustainable practices or a project incorporate sustainable and/or poor or inaccurate beneficial practices as a isn't a core part of the environmentally beneficial practices? core part of the project. project description of sustainable practices is provided. Budget for project is laid Budget for project lacks No real budget or Budget: Please provide a brief budget or out clearly,project proposal some clarity, it is uncertain description of spending is general estimate of how you will spend the is feasible with the funding if project proposal is provided or the proposal $250 grant on your proposed project. offered,and identifies how feasible with the funding does not seem feasible or all funds will be spent. offered,and/or unclear how reasonable within requested funds will be spent. budget. Additional Information(optional): If desired, please use this space to briefly share anything else that you would like the Evaluation No points awarded for this question but information added here can inform scoring Committee to know or consider about your projectthat the application questions did not address. Location-City Council District Household Income Level Past Funded Project RM • Use this space to indicate any notes, questions,or concerns you have about the No points awarded for this question but information added here can inform scoring application that might give you pause in recommending them for funding How well does this applicant meet the goals of the grant program? OMMUNITY GRANTS QUESTION SCORING CRITERIA Project EliqibilljlI��MM Yes No Unclear Is the project/organization located within SLC boundaries? Does the applicant have land use permission? Does the project comply with relevant City/County/State Code? Is the type of qroup applying eliqible for the program? Is the proposed project an approved fund use? Is this a duplicate application Organization type No points given for this qua tion Clear description of Adequate description of Unclear or minimal description of organization and mission given organization and mission is given organization and mission given or Mission and organization is directly and organization has at least organization is not connected to purpose of connected to purpose of the some demonstrated connection to grant program grant program purpose of grant program. Organization is led by groups Organization closely collaborates that are directly impacted by with individuals impacted by the the issue that they are issue that they are addressing and Organization is not led by people directly addressing.Those that are leadership has close relationships impacted by the issue they are addressing directly impacted or benefit and may not appear to acknowledge the Leadership&Structure from the program serve in to the communities that they importance of bottom-up leadership.Cunent decision-making roles.Current serve.Impacted people are programs and history do not demonstrate programs and recent members in the organization; potential to executive their goals.No accomplishments demonstrate history/programs and the a indicate co- accomplishments are mentioned. strong history and potential to creation and the ability to achieve executive their goals. goals. Populations served/engaged by Populations served/engaged by populations served/engaged by Populations Served&Engaged organization strongly match organization somewhat match with priority populations with priority populations identified organization do not include priority identified for this grant program for this grant program populations identified for this grant program Funding �Wm Strong Adequate Weak Funding amount requested No points given for this question No points given for this question Funding priority category Project proposal is strongly Project proposal is connected to connected to one or more of at least one of the priority funding Project proposal does not seem to be the priority funding categories categories connected to the priority funding categories Budget for project is laid out Budget for project lacks some No clear budget or description of spending clearly,project proposal is clarity,it is uncertain if project is provided or the proposal does not seem Budget Description feasible with the funding proposal is feasible with the feasible or reasonable within requested offered,and identifies how all funding offered,and/or unclear budget. funds will be spent. how funds will be spent. P Strong Adequate Weak Project proposal is feasible, project proposal seems feasible, states a strategy(ies)to but strategies may be unclear Project proposal does not seem feasible Project Description improve food access,and is how they will effectively improve and the project does not apepar to improve clearly connected to the food access. food access. purpose of this grant Impact of the project is clearly Impact of the project seems good positive and well aligned with and project is connected to the The impact of the project is not clear or is the purpose and goals of this purpose and goals of the grant not aligned with the purpose and goals of Impact grant program.Improving food the grant program.Project does not access is addressed in a program.Improving food access meaningfully address or engage with food meaningful and actionable way is addressed by the project accem blity. by the project proposal. proposal. Provides clear and achievable Provides timeline but with limited Does not provide timeline or is outside the Timeline timeline within the the scope of details and/or is unclear. scope of this work. this grant. Provides clear goals and Provides an unclear expectation No goals or expectation for success Success realistic expectations for for success. provided. success. Outcomes and strategies for Strategies for measurement are measurement are clear and Outcomes and strategies for measurement Evaluation achievable and project has unclear or unachievable,and/or are rwl clearly identified or impact of capability to have a positive and capability for project impact is project seems weak. meaningful impact. Unsure. Organization works with a few Organization does rat have any Organization works with a partners that are representative of organizational community relationships with diverse set of partners from impacted communities and or Partnerships&Community Support partners from impacted communities and impacted communities. demonstrates close community Demonstrates close community relationships.If community buy-in demonstrates no or very liftle collaboration with otters.There is rw community buy-in relationships and strong is not present,there is a clear for the project or the ability to develop community buy-in. strategy to develop community community support. support. Project incorporates Project may include some Project doesn't use sustainable practices or Sustainable Practices sustainable/environmentally sustainable practices,but it isn't a a poor or inaccurate description of beneficial practiceste a core core part of the project. sustainable practices is provided part of the protect Additional Information(optional):If desired,please use this space to briefly share anything else that you would like the Selection No points awarded for this question but information added here can inform scoring in other sections Committee to know or consider about your work that the application questions did not address. Location where organization serves Overall budget sizelAccess to other funding opportunities Pastfunded project Use this space to indicate any notes,questions,or concerns you have about the application that might give you pause in No points awarded for this question but information added here can inform scoring recommending them for funding How well does this applicant meet the goals of the grant program?