Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.1 Informational Report on the 2023 Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment 2 Agenda Item 8. I Ile STAFF REPORT DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL CALIFORNIA DATE: April 4, 2023 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.ECT: Informational Report on the 2023 Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment Prepared by: Shaun Chilkotowsky, Heritage& Cultural Arts Manager EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will receive an informational report on the 2023 Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment, including an overview of the project scope and status. This project is being completed in collaboration with the cities of Livermore and Pleasanton. STAFF RECOMMENDATION : Receive the report and provide feedback. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no impact associated with this report. The total cost of the project has a not-to-exceed amount of$234,467. This includes a base scope of service fee of$203,885 plus a 15% contingency. The total cost is shared equally amongst the cities of Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton. Dublin's one-third portion shall not exceed $78,155 ($67,962 plus contingency). Funding for this project is included in the Fiscal Year 2022-23 adopted operating budget. DESCRIPTION : Background In September of 2002, a Tri-Valley Human Services Needs Assessment was initiated to identify service gaps and provide a tool for non-profit service providers when seeking grants and additional financial support. The assessment was completed in 2003. In early 2011, following the release of 2010 census data, a broad-based assessment of Human Service needs in the Tri-Valley was conducted. This expanded upon the 2003 assessment, as much of the Tri-Valley had changed since the early 2000s. Page 1 of 4 225 Since its finalization in 2012,the City of Dublin has used the 2011 Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment to allocate grant funding to non-profit service providers.Additionally, the creation of a Human Services Task Force, followed by the creation of the Human Services Commission, has further assisted with identifying and prioritizing critical human service needs of Dublin residents. 2023 Needs Assessment In collaboration with the cities of Livermore and Pleasanton, Staff began planning an update to the 2011 Assessment in 2021. In February 2022, a Request for Proposals was issued seeking qualified consultants to lead the project. Staff from each City served on a selection committee that performed a review of submittals and in-person interviews. The selection committee determined that the firm JSI Research &Training Institute, Inc.was the most qualified to complete the tasks identified, particularly related to community outreach and collaboration with stakeholders. Specifically,the selection committee appreciated JSI's desire to develop an actionable narrative, supported by data of the Tri-Valley's human service needs. The City of Pleasanton serves as the project lead/fiscal agent and has entered into a professional services agreement with JSI.A Memorandum of Understanding, approved by the City Council in June 2022, formalizes the project and funding obligations among the three cities. Project Timeline &Scope The Eastern Alameda County Human Service Needs Assessment will culminate in final recommendations and implementation plans. These will include comprehensive research and analysis that describes current and anticipated human service needs over the next five to 10 years and innovative recommendations for addressing these needs. More specifically,the assessment will identify goals, strategies, and implementation plans that could include changes in delivery models and identify alternative partners and funding sources.A report will be developed for the Tri-Valley, and another, more specific report will be developed for each city to address individual needs. Final reports will address gaps in services and in infrastructure, and are intended to include an actionable, clear, concise narrative that will assist in engaging policymakers, alternative partners, and funding sources. The process of completing a comprehensive needs assessment is extensive. The overall process is expected to take 15-18 months and kicked off in August 2022. The following bullet points highlight key components and milestones: • Project Phases - There are five project phases. Phases 1 and 2 are mostly complete and include the development of a project schedule,work plan, and quantitative data collection. Phase 3,which is underway, includes committee development and qualitative data collection. Phases 4 and 5 include data analysis, review, final recommendations, and implementation plans. • Steering Committee -A Steering Committee comprising Staff from each city,Alameda County Social Services, and Alameda County Public Health, as well as non-profit services providers and a Community Liaison, has been convened to assist with project Page 2 of 4 226 implementation. • Quantitative Data Collection - Early in the process, quantitative data collection began, leading to the development of a Community Profile and Social and Economic Profile (Attachment 1). These profiles will ensure JSI and each city is reaching all communities in their entireties. The quantitative data collection also included the development of a comprehensive human services provider inventory in the Tri-Valley. • Qualitative Data Collection - The collection of qualitative data is underway. This data is descriptive and collected through focus groups and key interviews. Qualitative data provides information that cannot be collected quantitatively and provides a space for community members and stakeholders to share their lived experiences. • Power&Action Committee - The Eastern Alameda Power &Action Committee (EAPAC) is guiding the development of qualitative data collection, ensuring that all groups are represented and the needs assessment is representative of the Tri-Valley. The EAPAC comprises community members with lived experiences accessing and/or providing health and human services. The graphic below summarizes how the roles interact. Graphic Summary ofRoles Guiding the Needs Assessment Power and Action Committee• 0 • Tri-Valley Communt�• • • • Community Liaison ■ • Member �• • Tri Valley Tri-Valley isi • • . Staff Government Nonprofit 5 Sta`f M Steering M aff •Committee i • Current Status and Next Steps Quantitative data collection is nearly complete. Qualitative data collection is underway,with the Steering Committee meeting regularly since November 2022 and the EAPAC having its first meeting in March 2023. Focus groups of non-profit executives, non-profit front-line staff, and first responders are being utilized, and individual key informant and stakeholder interviews are also underway. The project website www.mytrivalley.org provides a space to share information and collect feedback. The email eana@jsi.com is being utilized as the main point of contact for individuals to inquire or get involved. Page 3 of 4 227 In November 2022, a joint meeting of the three cities' Human Services Commissions was held to introduce the project and solicit feedback. During Phase 4,which includes data review and analysis, findings will be presented to each city's respective Human Services Commission. In Phase 5, final deliverables will return to the Human Services Commissions and City Councils for final review and acceptance. It is anticipated this will take place in Fall/Winter 2023. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH : The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Tri-Valley Community, Social, and Economic Profiles Page 4 of 4 228 Attachment 1 Community Profile The Tri-Valley Region Danvitte Blackha%vk Las Vaqueros Re$ervQir and Watershed San Ramon []a,l l r Liverrnare I.c # -n >' %\ San Antonia Watarshad Fremont ewark 1 © Mapbox©OpenStreetMap Q Tri-Valley People per square mile L__i 1 -<100 100-<2,500 - 2,500-<7,000 - 7,000-<15,000 - 15,000-21,000 Sources: US Census Bureau 2020, 2021 Geographies shown are census block groups 229 Attachment 1 San Ramon OOU0HERTY VALLEY Narris Canyon F Duljlin — Lerr km-LVlt PIea53ritori Pleasanton Rid e j RegianalPark © Mapbox©OpenStreetMap Q Tri-Valley Dublin,CA Pleasanton,CA Livermore,CA Geographies shown are city limits Population Trends • As of the 2020 Census, approximately 236,000 people reside in the Tri-Valley region. • Livermore is the largest municipality in the Tri-Valley, with a total population of nearly 88,000. • Dublin is the smallest, most densely populated, and fastest growing municipality in the Tri-Valley, with a total population 230 of approximately 73,000 as of the 2020 Census. Attachment' 2020 People in Institutionalized Group Quarters 2010 2020 - Adult A Total A Total A Correctional A Po V Geography Population V Population V Facilities V Livermore, CA 81,666 87,955 0 Pleasanton, CA 70,197 79,871 0 Dublin, CA 46,407 72,589 3,158 Sources: US Census Bureau 2010, 2020, 2021 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 C O 'a+ f0 a 20,000 O a M 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 • Livermore, CA Pleasanton, CA • Dublin, CA Age Trends • As of 2020, the median age in the Tri-Valley region (41 years) is 4 years older than in California overall (37 years) and nearly 3 years older than in Alameda County (38 years). 231 • All three municipalities in the Tri-Valley have approximatelAttachment 1y the same number of children (between 19,000 and 20,000) according to the 2020 Census. • Dublin is the youngest municipality in the region, where children make up more than a quarter of the population (27%) in 2020. It is the only municipality whose median age (36 years) is younger than the median ages of the state and the County. • Pleasanton is the oldest municipality in the region, where the median age is 42 years, nearly 5 years older than California's median age (37 years). People over age 65 account for just over 15% of Pleasanton's population and people over age 85 account for just under 2%. � 2017-2021 � 2017-2021 � 2017-2021 � v Geography Median Age v Under Age 5 v Under Age 18 v A Livermore, CA 40.4 6.9% 22.6% Pleasanton, CA 41.1 4.8% 24% Dublin, CA 36.5 7.6% 26.6% Alameda County, 38 5.6% 20.6% CA California 37 6% 22.8% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 232 25,000 Attachment 1 20,000 15,000 = 10,000 d i U C 5,000 E Z 0 I_ 1990 2000 2010 2020 • Livermore, CA • Pleasanton, CA + Dublin, CA 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 Yl 20,000 O d 10,000 E z 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 • Livermore, CA • Pleasanton, CA + Dublin, CA 233 r & Attachment 1 Sari Ramon DOUHERTY VALLEY Norris Canyon l Dublin Pleasanton Pleasanton kid Regional Park © Mapbox©OOpenStreetMap Median Age(Years) 27.8-<35.3 - 35.3 -<39 39- <43.9 - 43.9-<49.1 49.1 -56 Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 Geographies shown are census block groups Race & Ethnicity Trends • Since 2000, the white (non-Hispanic) population of the Tri- Valley region has declined both proportionally and by count. Even with this decline, the region remains substantially whiter (42%) than Alameda County (28%) and the state (35%). 234 • Dublin is the least white municipality in the region, where Attachment' non-Hispanic whites account for just 25% of the total population as of 2020, making it less white than both Alameda County (28%) and the state (35%). Livermore is the whitest municipality in the Tri-Valley, where whites account for 55% of the total population according to the 2020 Census. • At 2%, the proportion of Black (non-Hispanic) individuals living in the Tri-Valley in 2020 is substantially lower than in Alameda County (10%) and the state (5%). Dublin is home to the largest Black population in the region proportionally and by count (4%; 2,740) though the number and proportion of Black individuals in Dublin declined sharply in the last decade (9%; 4,222 as of the 2010 Census). • Proportionally, the population residing in the Tri-Valley region is significantly more Asian than the California population overall. Non-Hispanic Asians account for 15% of the state's total population, but they make up 34% of the population in the Tri-Valley; a proportion that is slightly higher than in Alameda County (32%). • The proportion of non-Hispanic Asians in the Tri-Valley region doubled between 2010 and 2020. Asians accounted for 34% of the total population in 2020, compared to 17% of the total population in 2010. At the regional (Tri-Valley) level, the proportion of all other racial groups declined during this period. • As of 2020, a majority of people (54%; 38,858) who live in Dublin identify as non-Hispanic Asians. Pleasanton is also home to a large number of non-Hispanic Asians (31,500), who account for 40% of its total population. • Approximately 25% of the nearly 137,000 Indian Americans who live in Alameda County reside in the Tri-Valley according to the 2020 Census. Over half of these individuals (16,247) 235 live in Dublin, where they account for more than 22% of theta°"ment' municipality's total population. • As of 2020, the Tri-Valley's population is 15% Hispanic, a substantially lower proportion than in the state (39%) and Alameda County (23%). The largest Hispanic population in the Tri-Valley (by both proportion and count) is located in Livermore, where Hispanics account for 22% of the total population (a slight increase from 2010, when they represented 21% of Livermore's total population). • Although the total number of Hispanics living in the Tri- Valley has increased since 2010, proportionally the group has slightly decreased (15% in 2020 compared to 16% in 2010). • The overall population increase in the Tri-Valley in the last decade was mostly driven by 1) a dramatic increase in the number of Asian (non-Hispanic) individuals living in the region, particularly in Dublin and Pleasanton and 2) a slight increase in the number of Hispanic individuals living in the region, particularly in Livermore and Dublin. 2020 2020 2020 2020 � White (non- Black (non- Asian (non- V Geography Hispanic) V Hispanic) V Hispanic) V Tri-Val ley 42% 2.3% 34.5% Livermore, CA 55.1% 1.8% 14.4% Pleasanton, CA 43% 1.7% 39.4% Dublin, CA 25% 3.8% 53.5% Alameda County, 28.1% 9.5% 32.1% CA California 34.7% 5.4% 15.1% Sources: US Census Bureau 2020 236 Attachment 1 2020 2020 2020 A. Total AWhite (non- ABlack (non- v Geography Population v Hispanic) y Hispanic) Tri-Valley 236,040 99,042 5,543 Livermore, CA 87,955 48,449 1,604 Pleasanton, CA 79,871 34,332 1,332 Dublin, CA 72,589 18,149 2,740 Sources: US Census Bureau 2020 2010 2010 2010 2010 A White (non- A Black (non- A Asian (non- A V Geography Hispanic) V Hispanic) V Hispanic) V Tri-Val ley 58.5% 3.5% 17.7% Livermore, CA 64.9% 1.9% 8.1% Pleasanton, CA 61.1% 1.6% 22.7% Dublin, CA 44.6% 9.1% 26.1% Alameda County, 34.1% 12.2% 25.9% CA California 40.1% 5.8% 12.8% Sources: US Census Bureau 2010 2010 2010 2010 A Total A White (non- A Black (non- Geography Population V Hispanic) V Hispanic) Tri-Valley 194,436 113,816 6,818 Livermore, CA 81,666 52,979 1,548 Pleasanton, CA 70,197 42,859 1,102 Dublin, CA 46,407 20,680 4,222 Sources: US Census Bureau 2010 White (non-Hispanic) Population Trends 237 60,000 Attachment 1 50,000 Q. O d 40,000 U ._ R Q. 30,000 C O C v 20,000 10,000 d E z 0 L 1990 2000 2010 2020 • Livermore, CA • Pleasanton, CA + Dublin, CA 238 14 & Attachment 1 San Raman DnU HERTY VALLEY Norris Canyon LjUbIif1 L'IK Pleasanton Pleasanton Rid Regional Park ,i 1 © Mapbox©OpenStreetMap Percent of population that is White(non-Hispanic) = 9.4%-<31.3% - 31.3%-<47% - 47%-<59.3% - 59.3%-76.3% Sources: US Census Bureau 2020 Geographies shown are census block groups Black (non-Hispanic) Population Trends 239 5,000 Attachment 1 4,000 0 0 a 3,000 M C. = 2,000 C u M m G 1,000 CI E 3 z 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 • Livermore, CA • Pleasanton, CA + Dublin, CA 240 r + ! f±Ahment 1 Sari Ramon DOUHERTY VALLEY Norris Canyon -.------ _____________________ •/ \ - \\r--1 \ i ( _____ Dublin LVK L Pleasankan Pleasanton Rid e Regional Park T 'N © Mapbox©OOpenStreetMap Percent of population that is Black(non-Hispanic) 0.1%- <1.4% 1.4%- <3% 3%-<5.6% M 5.6%-10.5% Sources: US Census Bureau 2020 Geographies shown are census block groups Asian (non-Hispanic) Population Trends 241 40,000 • Attachment 1 D.0 30,000 - d a U a. 2 20,000 0 C C R Q 10,000 O i d E 3 Z 0 2000 2010 2020 • Livermore, CA • Pleasanton, CA + Dublin, CA 242 r & Attachment 1 San Raman DOUHERTY VALLEY Norris Canyon l - // \ I Dublin LVK L Pleasanton Pleasanton Rid 12 Regional Park © Mapbox©OpenStreetMap Percent of population that is Asian(non-Hispanic) = 4.5%- <21.9% - 21.9%- <43.7% - 43.7%- <63.9% - 63.9%-81% Sources: US Census Bureau 2020 Geographies shown are census block groups Asian Ethnic Groups Sources.' US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 Hispanic Population Trends 243 20,000 Attachment 1 15,000 d O 10,000 C, a -A•v ._ M a Yl 5,000 O C, E 3 Z 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 • Livermore, CA • Pleasanton, CA + Dublin, CA 244 Attachment 1 San Raman D HE RI? VALLEY Norris Canyon Cublln LVK Pleasanton Pleasanton kid ' Regional Park hIIIPuI! © Mapbox©OOpenStreetMap Percent of population that is Hispanic I 3.5%- <12.2% 12.2%-<22.3% - 22.3%-<48.2% - 48.2%-65.5% Sources: US Census Bureau 2020 Geographies shown are census block groups 0000 Empowered by mySidewalk Terms of Use 245 • El •iii• • • • • Neighborhood Economic Community and Health Care Stability and Physical Education Food ocial Context System Environment Employment Housing Literacy Food security ocial integration Health coverage Income Transportation Language Access to healthy pport syst Provider Expenses Safety Early childhood options Community availability Debt Parks education ngageme Provider linguistic Vocational tr and cultural Medical bills Playgrounds training competency xposure to Support Walkability Higher education Quality of care Zip code! geography Health Outcomes Mortality, Mortil Expectancy.Health Care Expenditures,Health Status,Functional Limitations • • • 1 i Attachment 1 Sari Ramon DOUHERTY VALLEY Norris Canyon Q,U�]lln L L Pleasanton Pleasanton kid Regional Park © Mapbox©OpenStreetMap People Below Poverty Level per capita - 0%-<2.7% - 2.7%-<6.3% = 6.3%-<13.2% - 13.2%- <22.8% - 22.8%-31% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 Geographies shown are census block groups 247 1 i Attachment 1 San Ramon DOUHERTY VALLEY Norris Canyon U�JLln LVK PLeasantan Pleasanton kidji Regional Park © Mapbox©OpenStreetMap Median Household Income $56,411 -<$97,888 $97,888-<$129,107 $129,107-<$164,833 $164,833-<$213,446 $213,446-$249,306 Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 Geographies shown are census block groups 248 $175,000 Attachment 1 $150,000 0 $125,000 D C 0 $100,000 1 :::::: 0 2 C $25,000 C) $0 1990 2000 2010 • Tri-Valley + Livermore, CA + Pleasanton,CA • Dublin,CA ! Alameda County,CA + California 2017-2021 2017-2021 Median 2017-2021 � Unemployment Household A 100% Federal A 20 v Geography Rate v Income y Poverty Level y Pc Tri-Valley 3.6% $150,118 4.2% Livermore, CA 3.3% $139,904 4% Pleasanton, CA 4% $167,932 4.8% Dublin, CA 3.7% $171,168 3.7% Alameda County, 5% $112,017 8.9% CA California 6.5% $84,097 12.3% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 Neighborhood & Physical Environment 249 Housing Attachment 1 2017-2021 Housing Cost A 2017-2021 A Burdened v Geography Renters y Renters Tri-Valley 32.1% 44.4% Livermore, CA 27.7% 49.9% Pleasanton, CA 32.5% 46.4% Dublin, CA 35.6% 36.4% Alameda County, CA 46.1% 46.5% California 44.5% 51.5% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 2017-2021 Housing Cost A 2017-2021 A Burdened v Geography Home Owners y Owners Tri-Val ley 67.9% 25.7% Livermore, CA 72.3% 27.7% Pleasanton, CA 67.5% 22.9% Dublin, CA 64.4% 25.4% Alameda County, CA 53.9% 28.1% California 55.5% 30.7% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 250 Attachment 1 2021 Residential Buildings with 2017-2021 A Potential for A Median A. v Geography Lead Paint y Building Age Tri-Val ley 39.2% 1986 Livermore, CA 56.1% 1978 Pleasanton, CA 47% 1983 Dublin, CA 20.4% 2002 Alameda County, CA 65.3% 1968 California 47.5% 1975 Sources: County Tax Assessors 2021; US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 251 Transportation Attachment 1 San Rar7 on DDUGHERT( VALLEY Norris Canyon / { Dublin L= PLeasanton PLeasantan Ri e R:gional Park LIIL © Mapbox©OpenStreetMap Percent of Households without a Vehicle 0%-<1.6% 1.6%-<5.4% - 5.4%-<14.5% - 14.5%-<19.8% - 19.8%-22.9% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 Geographies shown are census block groups 252 Attachment 1 2017-2021 2017-2021 Commuters 2017-2021 Commuters A who Drive A Commuters A who Take A. v Geography Alone v who Carpool y Public Transit Tr-Valley 77.3% 9.3% 8.6% Livermore, CA 80.4% 11.5% 3.6% Pleasanton, CA 76.6% 7.1% 10.2% Dublin, CA 73.4% 8.8% 14.2% Alameda County, 67.5% 10.4% 14.6% CA California 79.1% 10.8% 4.6% Sources.' US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021; US HUD & DOT LA! V3.0 2016 Motor Vehicle Fatalities 2020 Motor Vehicle 2020 2020 Crash Motor Vehicle Fatal Motor A PedestrianA Crash Cyclist A Vehicle v Geography Fatality v Fatality v Crashes Tri-Valley 1 1 11 Livermore, CA 1 1 3 Pleasanton, CA 0 0 4 Dublin, CA 0 0 0 California 986 129 3,558 Alameda County, CA 27 2 89 Sources:NHTSA FARS 2020 253 Internet Attachment 1 San Raman DDUGHERTY VALLEY Norris Canyon Lk Pleasankan PLeasantorr Ri e Regional rh\\ /4 , J 1.\\ ( © Mapbox©OpenStreetMap Percent of Households without Internet Access = 0%-<1.2% - 1.2%-<4.3% - 4.3%-<9.3% - 9.3%-<21.5% - 21.5%-26.8% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 Geographies shown are census block groups 254 Parks and Physical Activity Attachment 1 2018 2018 2018 Percent Area Tii A Park Area A Number of A Covered by A. v Geography (acres) v Parks v Parks v Arr Tri-Valley No data No data No data Livermore, CA 372.4 32 3.4% Pleasanton, CA 284 34 4.5% Dublin, CA 61 6 0.6% Alameda County, 49,830.3 735 5.5% CA California 22,444,791 16,644 6.5% Sources: CDC BRFSS PLACES 2019; openlCPSR NaNDA 2018 Education 255 1 & Attachment 1 San Ramon DOUHERTY VALLEY Norris Canyon - c _ \ \ JL\ L Pleasanton Pleasaritarr kid e Regional Park j ► © Mapbox©OpenStreetMap Percent of Population with a Bachelor's Degree 8.8%-<19.5% 19.5%-<27.4% - 27.4%-<35.1% - 35.1%-<42.2% - 42.2%-51.2% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 Geographies shown are census block groups 256 Language Spoken at Home Among People over age 5 Attachment 1 2017-2021 Other Indo- A A 2017-2021 � 2017-2021 A European v Geography English y Spanish y Language Tri-Valley 62.4% 7.8% 11.2% Livermore, CA 75.3% 11.4% 5% Pleasanton, CA 58.6% 5.7% 14.1% Dublin, CA 50% 5.1% 16.1% Alameda County, 54% 16% 8.4% CA California 56.1% 28.3% 4.6% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 Food 257 Percent of Population that is Low Income and has Low Attachment 1 Access to Healthy Food San Ramon D0UGHERTY VALLEY Norris Canyon DUibLin LV Li Pleasanton Ple s Mon Ridge Regio al Park © Mapbox©OpenStr O%-<3% 3%-<8% - 8%-<11% - 11%-<34% - 34% Sources: USDA ERS 2019 Geographies shown are census tracts 258 SNAP/EBT Recipients Attachment 1 2017-2021 Households Receiving Food A Stamps/SNAP v Geography per household Tri-Valley 2.9% Livermore, CA 3.3% Pleasanton, CA 2.4% Dublin, CA 2.7% Alameda County, CA 6.9% California 9.5% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 Health Care System 259 F + ! f±jhment 1 iii[[++■ San Ramon DOUHERI? VALLEY Norris Canyon Dublin LVK L Pleasanton Pleasanton kid ' Regional Park Ih © Mapbox©OpenStreetMap Uninsured Population 0%-<1.8% 1.8%-<4.5% - 4.5%- <10% - 10%- <21.4% - 21.4% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 Geographies shown are census block groups 260 Attachment 1 2017-2021 2017-2021 A. 2017-2021 A Uninsured APublic Health APri v Geography Uninsured v (people) y Insurance Tri-Val ley 2.6% 5,952 20.1% Livermore, CA 3.1% 2,720 23.3% Pleasanton, CA 2.3% 1,809 19.7% Dublin, CA 2.2% 1,518 15.5% Alameda County, 4.3% 71,358 30.4% CA California 7.2% 2,800,277 38% Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021 0000 Empowered by mySidewalk Terms of Use 261 I l S ee '*$h i ' : A . 1 a. a. xa.fit ,FSc' ►'•/ Y/ ff r Y 1 Background • 2003 Needs Assessment • 201 I Needs Assessment — 14 Areas of Concern — Human Services Task Force & Commission • 2015 Council Priority — Focus on Critical Human Service Needs • 2021 — Needs Assessment Update • June 2022 — MOU Approval � 263 Agenda • Introductions • Overview of the JSI Process and Timeline • Review Of Findings So Far • Questions __________ JSI Team 5\ Becky Reno, PhD, MS , MA Deanna Lewis MPH, RDN Carina Pinto, MS Project Director Qualitati ve Data. Lead & Conullulut` Co-Project Director She, her, hers She,her,hers Engagement Technical Advisor Slie,her,hers Nadia Syed, MPH Alison Salomon MPH, MCRP Naomi Miller-Altuner Anuparn Sharma Qualitative andCOi11nI7ur11tL� P Quantitative Data Lead Project Associate Project Associate Engagement Technical Advisor She, her, hers She, her, heir She, her, hers He,hirn,his 265 Equelty � CENTERING LIVED EXPERIENCE ICI Thoughtful and deliberate engagement of those with lived experiences EQUITABLE DATA PRACTICES Apply principles of accessible data collection and analysis - STRENGTHS-BASED APPROACH Centering individual and community assets, capabilities, resources, and strengths COMMUNITY CAPACITY BUILDING • Engaging in power sharing activities to support community members' capacity to develop, implement, and sustain local initiatives 266 T 'i' mel 'i* ne and D July-August 2022 September-October 2022 November 2022 -May 2023 June-August 2023 September-October 2023 Phase 1 - Project Phase 2 - Quantitative Phase 3: EAPAC and Qualitative Phase 4: Data Analysis Phase 5: Management a Data Collection Data Collection and Review Recommendation & Timelines Implementation Project Work Draft of existing EAPAC Meetin Summary Short term and longer term g human service needs Final report Plan services and (services & infrastructure) including inventory Public Meeting & Outreach recommendations Timeline Summary (Includes 1<II, Focus and Key trends Schedule of Groups, Council, Commission, implementation meetings and and Advisory Summaries) Peer Review Report plans for cities and Scope of region Services Draft Report for feedback from advisors and Report Commision Presentations 267 Publoic Meetings Phase 1 -2 (Fall 2022) 3 Joint Commission Meeting Phase 3 (November 2022 - May 2023) � Nonprofits meeting # ❑ Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore City Council Meeting # Phase 4-5 (June - October 2023) ❑ Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore Individual Commission Meetings ❑ Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore City Council Meeting #2 ❑ Nonprofits meeting #2 . 268 • ■ ■ DD.! SCAN ME DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Guiding Groups • Steering Committee • Community Liaison • Eastern Alameda Power & Action Committee Steering Committee • Oversight of the needs assessment • Inform and provide feedback on deliverables • Provide input on organizations across sectors to engage • Support the EAPAC as requested • Support communication and dissemination of findings 271 Steering & EAPAC Alcian Lingo Asiissa Basaco-Villarreal ralerie Josue Emily W. Chabot-Las Positas Alamedaa Count- Social -i is onurrunit:-Health Livermore One Stop Career Center Services Maria Z. Catherine Arthur Christine Beitsch- Pleasanton Lip-errnore LSD Becky Hopkins Bahmani comniui7itti Liaison City- of Pleasanton CitvSeri-e of the Tri-Waller Maria G. Dublin josh Thurman Evette Brandon City- ofLiverniore John Bast Francesca R. £-\lameda Count- Public Open Heart Kitchen! Pleasanton Health Depamnent Kind Watkins- Tartt Alameda Couxit..•Public Deidre S. Carolina Guzman Health Departniert ]ay Ingrain Pleasanton Alameda Count City of Pleasanton - Shaun hilkoto�sky Public Health .its- of Dublin Department - 272 Eastern Alameda Power and Action Committee ( EAPAC) • Support community connections and qualitative data process, co-facilitate focus groups, provide feedback on interview tools and preliminary data analysis and overall process . • Community members, human service providers, recipients of Tri-Valley services. • Compensation for community members. 273 Summaryof R Power and Action Committee Tri-Valley Community • Community• Liaison Member . — . — _ . .— — . JI Staff Tri-Valley Tri-Valley Government Ion profit £ • Staff Staff Steeñng Committee 274 Priority Groups • Youth • Disability Groups • Unhoused • Seniors/Older Adults • Indigenous Communities • Educators - work in TV but do not live there • Churches/Faith Based Leaders • First responders- • Non - English Speakers • Livermore Wine Agricultural Workers • LGBTQ Community • Female Heads of Households 275 Outreach EANA Muster Community Contacts Tracker tk m & File Edit View Insert Format Data Tools Extensions Help • i n g �toD�- 4 � � � t�a Defaul..-_ ,o + B � - A a. ® .. _ ;`_ �_ �_ �_ C- Thoroughly h o ro u g h I y track c Ie I l a I I the individuals and Rae Source Don umentat 5�tan Pplenlial Detq [ommunic ians lon t Gha4o1-Lds P95itd S One Stop GdrRRr Cen[Rr Program Mdndg Rr,Tri-VdllRy G drRer Center Interviewed Interviewed Spectrum e Assistant Agency Dreder of Alameda County Social Services Interviewed Interviewed organi zati ons we h ave ; An vi Ot Ste ter City Manager Interviewed Interviewed e Hirely,Oireuor of Community Services Interdewad Imerdawed Spectrum CommuNry Services.Meals on Wheels Program Manager Interviewed ImeKrewed H Livermore USO School Norse Interviewed Imerviewed reached out to o r ° CEO nonprofit alAance(referred by Valens Jonas b CiySer a of the Tri-Valley.CEO Trl-Veiny Haven Interviewed IMerviewed 1I Tri-Veiny Haven-CEO 'a Spectrum and OHK S p e a Ic to th rough out Is Ltvermora Area Raaaa on and Park Distr d-Commun ty Outreach Supervzor Feudedz u Open Heart Kitchen.CEO Interviewed IMerdewed i7 Sunflower Hill.CEO re Livermore Hamokss Refuge.Board Chair th is process ° L-Vaaey Nonprofit Pance.President GE0 I LVS3 Valley s Commmunity Foundation CEDIRetired LUSD recommended so by Becky Hopkins On Diener of Alameda County CHIP Interviewed Interviewed 22 Referred by Stave as someone active in API community Emaied 20 lively.CEO zr Tri-Valey Haven Os Open Heart Kitchen.Operations Diener ze Open Heart Kitchen.Street Outreach Team Member Interviewed an CEO of Pxts Community Health. m 2° Puns Community Health-Chief Development Dlrrcec Axis Community Heath Interviewed Interviewed Acting Executive Diecter.Td-valley Herren thy recommends + = Hon Profit Contact List • Faith Based Orgy - •EAPAC Recruitment • Current EAPAC Members • FGIKII Tracker - 276 Preliminary Interview Themes About the Interviews • Thirteen preliminary interviews — Executives and staff from nonprofits, county agencies, and schools in the Tri Valley — Community members from Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore • Interviewees were asked about — Areas of greatest need in the TV — How the Needs Assessment can thoughtfully include underrepresented voices • Notes were taken during interviews and subsequently coded independently by two JSI team members to identify significant themes . 278 Nonprofits Workload and the Need for Collaboration Pandemic Sense that nonprofits are siloed, not • Increased need for services collaborative during and after the Lack of understanding of what other Pandemic nonprofits are doing duplication of services • Increased workload for # Some improved collaboration during nonprofits —> can be the pandemic, but more challenging and demotivating coordination/collaboration is needed 279 Major Community Needs I . Housing and services for 2. Food unhoused people • Intersects with • The need for housing is felt homelessness most acutely in Livermore • Major need, especially • Need for affordable housing during the pandemic • Related to substance use • Some feel there are already and employment enough (or perhaps too • People fell behind on rent many) organizations during COVID working on food insecurity in the TV . 280 _____MMajor Community Needs 3. Mental Health Services 4. Specialty Health Services • Lack of awareness of services • Lack of access to specialty services in • Stigma as a barrier the Tri-Valley • Telehealth can be a great tool, but — Eg. Dental doesn't work well for everyone — Eg. Reproductive health especially for • Child / adolescent behavioral health teens challenges during pandemic • Transportation as a barrier to — Parents are overwhelmed accessing services outside of the Tri- - Need more intensive services Valley 281 Major Community Needs 5.Transportation 6. Changing Racial/Ethnic • Especially important for people DemographicA with disabilities and seniors • Increased racial and ethnic • Difficult to get bus passes and diversity since 2011 bus routes recently changed • Some newer, smaller • Some people with disabilities organizations have been created (under age 60) don't qualify for to address the needs of these services communities, but don't • Tri-Valley population is aging necessarily have a "seat at the faster than the rest of the table county . 282 GovernmentalConsiderations Geographical & City Relationships Funding • In relation to Pleasanton and Dublin, • TV cities provide a lot of funding for local Livermore has nonprofits — More need for human services • Many (smaller/newer) organizations are — Higher rate of poverty unaware of or lack capacity to complete grant — More Spanish speakers applications • Geographically Livermore is home to many • Multiple grant application processes for each services/organizations that serve the TV city, rather than a common application, is region. difficult and time-consuming County Relationships • Need for more focused equity work and an • Feeling of TV being left out of county funding opportunity for community education and data collection efforts. • There is burgeoning interest from the county and Tri-Valley to engage with one another. D 283 Thanl< You Reach out at any time eana@jsi . com Questions ?