CONNECTICUT COUNCIL ON DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
PROPOSAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
Minutes of July 6, 2018 meeting (DRAFT)
The meeting was called to order at 2:07 p.m. The following committee members were in attendance: Alicia Kucharczyk, Pat Richardson, Jim Rosen, James Hexter and Megan O’Neill (by phone). Shelagh McClure, Chair of the Council, also attended. Walter Glomb, Council Director, also was present.
The purpose of the meeting was to review the Council’s RFP format, discuss six (6) potential RFPs and make decisions on which RFPs to recommend to the Council for funding.
The RFP format was discussed as part of the discussion of the RFP for the Council’s initiative for a Statewide Self Advocacy Group for Parents with Cognitive Limitations. A thorough discussion of the format took place, with recommendation made to alter the format as follows: move the Schedule section close to the beginning of the RFP document; add clarifying language in the Cost section to indicate the dollar amount is for the first year of the project; add Schedule as an Evaluation Criteria and have all evaluation criteria equally weighted; and under Proposal Instructions, narratives were expanded to 2 pages each and Resumes were added to the items that may be in an Appendix.
The Cost Proposal document will now be a fillable Excel spreadsheet. Walt needs to develop a separate form for grantees located in urban poverty areas that qualify for 10% (instead of 25%) mandatory matching funds.
(1) With regard to the content of the RFP for Parents with Cognitive Limitations, the committee was in favor of recommending to the Council that an RFP be issued, but directed the following changes to the draft: that language be added that the contractor would act as a mentor to the organization as it was developing; that the contractor would deliver a sustainability plan, describing future steps to maintain the sustainability of the new organization; that among the contractor’s Qualifications should be experience acting as a fiscal agent; and that the contractor should identify the key person on the project.
(2) Objective 1.2 re: self-directed services: Siobhan Morgan from DDS spoke at our public forum on under-utilized waiver services, and a desire to collaborate with our Council to get the word out about these services, of which self-direction is just one. The proposal discussed is to hire a contractor to thoroughly investigate state services that enable people with developmental disabilities live great lives in their communities—including services managed by DDS, DSS, BRS and other state agencies. After compilation of this comprehensive roster, recommend educational and promotional activities to better inform people with developmental disabilities of services available to them. The Committee was in favor of recommending to the Council that an RFP be issued.
(3) Objective 1.3 re: supported decision making: Disability Rights Connecticut has informed Walt that it wishes to take the lead on this issue. Since it is a legal issue, and the Council has numerous other RFPs to work on, the committee agreed to recommend to the Council that it take a funding role in support of DRCT rather than issue an RFP on this objective.
(4) Objective 3.2 re: livable communities: this objective is still being fleshed out. Walt had a meeting with AARP’s executive director, and Walt and Shelagh will be meeting soon with AARP leadership to further discuss ways to work together. Livable communities will be on the agenda of that meeting. The committee agreed to recommend that discussion of this initiative should be postponed until after the meeting with AARP.
(5) Objective 3.4 re: On-demand transportation: due to lack of time and resources, Walt has not been able to devote sufficient attention to this. Instead, a contractor would be retained to do the initial work to determine the suitability and limitations of the Uber and Lyft type models, including cost, vehicle specifications and driver qualifications. Also, acceptability, and permissibility of payment methods used by people living with developmental disabilities, including cash, EBT and Medicaid funds. Provide any research on the business case--$$ lost due to unreliability of current transportation modes. Committee was in favor of recommending to the Council that an RFP be issued.
(6) Objective 3.6 housing policies: Shelagh agreed to come back to the Council by November for a discussion on housing policies. In the interim, she will meet with affordable housing experts for their input on policies that could make an impact on housing accessibility and affordability and that have a chance of passage in the state legislature. The Committee agreed to recommend to the Council that it put off any action on an RFP on this objective until after the November discussion.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:30.