COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

Human Services Agency

DATE:

April 29, 2002

BOARD MEETING DATE:

May 21, 2002

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

Maureen D. Borland, Director, Human Services Agency

Yvonne Frazier, Administrator, Alcohol and Other Drug Services

SUBJECT:

Second amendments to eleven fee-for-service agreements, and execution of agreements with Daytop Village, Inc., Family and Community Enrichment Services, Inc., Horizon Services, Inc., and Youth and Family Assistance for the provision of alcohol and drug treatment services.

Recommendation

Adopt a resolution authorizing execution of:

1.

Second amendments to eleven fee-for-service agreements with various alcohol and drug treatment providers; and

2.

fee-for-service agreements with Daytop Village, Inc., Family and Community Enrichment Services, Inc., Horizon Services, Inc., and Youth and Family Assistance for the provision of alcohol and drug treatment services for the period May 1, 2002 through June 30, 2002.

Background

On August 7, 2001, the County of San Mateo entered into fee-for-service agreements with various service agencies to provide alcohol and drug treatment for Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA) probationers and parolees, and drug court eligible individuals. The Human Services Agency also entered into Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) with the Health Services Methadone and Prenatal-To-Three programs for the provision of SACPA services. The total aggregate SACPA funds allocated to the fee-for-service agreements was $700,000. The initial SACPA funding was allocated through a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process, which resulted in twelve fee-for-service agreements. Also included in the original fee-for-service agreements was funding for drug court alcohol and drug treatment services in the aggregate amount of $123,000. The drug court funds were allocated through a prior RFP process. The drug court agreements were renewed for fiscal year 2001-02.

On February 26, 2002, the County of San Mateo executed first amendments to the fee-for-service agreements to amend the fingerprinting language, and to add SB223 substance abuse testing funds and services under SACPA 2000 to those agreements containing SACPA alcohol and drug treatment services. SB223 funds are earmarked specifically for substance abuse testing of SACPA probationers and parolees.

Discussion

On November 1, 2001, the County's Alcohol and Other Drug Services (AOD) released a Request For Proposals (RFP) for additional SACPA services (see Attachment 1, RFP Matrix). Through this RFP, the original fee-for-service providers and the County Health Services Methadone and Pre-To-Three programs were awarded funding for additional SACPA services; in addition, four new service providers were awarded SACPA funding for alcohol and drug treatment services for the period May 1, 2002 through June 30, 2002. Contracts were then negotiated. The additional $643,913 in SACPA funds brings the aggregate total for SACPA alcohol and drug treatment services to a revised total of $1,343,913 for fiscal year 2001-02. Of this total, $185,924 is allocated for start-up costs; and $1,157,989 is allocated for ongoing contracted SACPA services. A total of $1,343,913 in SACPA funding is included in the approved Alcohol and Other Drug Services budget for fiscal year 2001-02.

Also included in the second amendments containing Comprehensive Drug Court Implementation (CDCI) services is an adjustment in the total aggregate contract obligation for the CDCI alcohol and drug treatment services for fiscal year 2001-02. The increase of $36,500 in CDCI funding is realized from unallocated CDCI funds in fiscal year 2000-01. A total of $159,500 in drug court funding is included in the approved Alcohol and Other Drug Services budget for fiscal year 2001-02.

These alcohol and drug treatment providers are reimbursed through the fee-for-service agreements for actual services provided based on an approved unit rate.

These agreements, amendments and resolution have been reviewed and approved by County Counsel as to form.

Submission of the second amendments and four fee-for-service agreements was delayed pending negotiation of the start-up costs and units rates for the SACPA/Proposition 36 services.

Vision Alignment

The fee-for-service agreements are consistent with the commitment to: Ensure basic health and safety for all and goal number 8: Help vulnerable people - the aged, disabled, mentally ill, at-risk youth and others - achieve a better quality of life. The amendments and agreements contribute to this commitment and goal by providing SACPA probationers/ parolees, and individuals referred for alcohol and drug treatment services through the drug court system with the skills and knowledge necessary to live alcohol- and drug-free lives, which in turn contributes to the health and safety of the communities in San Mateo County.

Fiscal Impact

The amended total aggregate contract obligation for SACPA services, funded through the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act, for the period July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2002 is $1,343,913. The amended total aggregate contract obligation for drug court services, funded through drug court funds, for the period July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2002 is $159,500. Funding for these services is included in the approved Alcohol and Other Drug Services budget for fiscal year 2001-02. There are no Net County Costs associated with this item.

1.

General Description of RFP

Alcohol and drug treatment services funded through the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA) of 2000, also known as Proposition 36; for the periods May 1, 2002 through June 30, 2002, and July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003.

2.

List key evaluation criteria

1. Submission of documentation of current license or certification;

2. Collective and individual staff qualifications and experience, and plans to enhance staff's ability to serve diverse clients through hiring, training, internships and collaborations;

3. Ratio of staff directly involved in treatment to clients;

4. Identify special needs of the target population(s), how proposed services will meet these special needs, and staff qualifications and experience in serving the special population(s);

5. Quality of program design and proposed service delivery objectives; and

6. Costs associated with the delivery of services.

3.

Where advertised

San Mateo County Times/ANG Newspapers

Funding alert faxed to current alcohol and drug treatment and prevention contractors, distributed at provider meeting, community meetings and the Drug and Alcohol Advisory Board, and Proposition 36 Implementation Committee.

4.

In addition to any advertisement, list others to whom RFP was sent

1. Adolescent Counseling Services: Donna Lera

2. Asian American Recovery Services: Leo Takata

3. Avalon Counseling Services: Lyn Scott

4. Bernice Straub, Drug and Alcohol Advisory Board

5. Butte County Alcohol and Drug Services: Rich McKay

6. Cabrillo Unified School District

7. Catholic Charities

8. College of San Mateo

9. Daytop Village, Inc.: Orville Roache/Joe Williams/Larry Thomas/Allen Wilson

10 Dr. Doris Sims

11. EPA Christian Counseling Services: Deidre Wan

12. El Centro de Libertad: Judy Goddess/Michael Akana

13. Family and Community Enrichment Services: First Chance/Victoria Hunt/ Ed Long

14. Free At Last: Ronald Caracter

15. Horizon Services, Inc.: Palm Avenue/Linda Moisoff

16. MHN Services: Occupational Health Services/Judy Iverson

17. Millbrae School District: Karin Philip

18. New Leaf Counseling Services

19. Pacific Union Alliance of Prison Evangelist (PUAPE): Phillip Matthews/ Sheryl San Filippo

20. Professional Services

21. Project Ninety, Inc.: Jim Stansberry/Marc Sabin/Intermission House/David Meads

22. Pyramid Alternatives: George Torney/Marcia Avila/Susan Gallagher/Jeanne George

23. Recovery Concepts:Tony Romero/Grant Davis

24. San Mateo County AIDS Program

25. San Mateo County Juvenile Probation

26. San Mateo County Methadone Clinic: Donna Dean

27. San Mateo County Pre-To-Three Initiative

28. Saint Vincent de Paul

29. Service League of San Mateo County: Elizabeth Gheleta/Toby Coates/Hope House

30. Sitike Counseling Center: Rhonda Ceccato/Charles Tyson

31. The Latino Commission: Debra Camarillo/Terry Giovannini

32. Walden House, Inc.: Don Frazier

33. Women's Recovery Association: Jolie Bou/Michele Wray Khateri/Susie Finch

34. Youth and Family Assistance: Archway, Sara Miech/Melissa Morgan/Insights/Crisis Center/Redwood City Youth Center

5.

Total number sent to prospective proposers

56

6.

Number of proposals received

Proposals were submitted by modality (specific service). A total of 44 proposals were received from 19 applicants organizations.

7.

Who evaluated the proposals

Lynn Anderson

Joe Caruso

Judy Davila

Richard Livermore

William Lowell

Tom Maloney

Susan Montana

Gian Osorio

Ken Pesso

Cliff Rubenstein

Cheryl Walker

Ellen Wolfe

8.

In alphabetical order, names of proposers (or finalists, if applicable) and location

1. Asian American Recovery Services, Daly City

2. Avalon Counseling Services, Redwood City

3. Daytop Village, Inc., Redwood City

4. El Centro de Libertad, Redwood City

5. Family and Community Enrichment Services, Inc., San Carlos

6. Free At Last, East Palo Alto

7. Horizon Services, Inc., Hayward

8. Project Ninety, Inc., San Mateo

9. Pacific Union Alliance of Prison Evangelist, Foster City

10. Pyramid Alternatives, Pacifica

11. Recovery Concepts, Menlo Park

12. San Mateo County Health Services, Methadone Services

13. San Mateo County Health Services, Pre-to-Three

14. Service League of San Mateo County, Redwood City

15. Sitike Counseling Center, South San Francisco

16. The Latino Commission, South San Francisco

17. Walden House, Inc., San Francisco

18. Women's Recovery Association, Burlingame

19. Youth and Family Assistance, Redwood City