At the 7-month period, the category had expenditures equaling 33% of the total dollars expended in FY 2009.
2
Fiscal:
This category is overspending and over performing.
Program:
Target expenditures at the 7-month period at 58.33 percent. The category has expended 59.74 percent at this point.
Program:
Should funds be added now?
Fiscal:
The category expended 98.94 percent of its funding. Category received a $20,312 in reprogramming at the 7-month period.
3
Fiscal:
The category performed within tolerance leaving a 1.06 percent variance at year end. How did EFA food bank perform?
Program:
The value of food vouchers is determined by the service provider.
Program:
The provision of service units for bags of groceries, liquid supplements and delivered meals significantly exceeded projections. Can category serve more clients with increased funds?
Funding Adjustments
Reprogramming
Date
Amount
November 09, 2010
$20,312
*
This is the difference between the current expenditures and where the current expenditures should be at this point in the year based upon
the total allocation (plus carryover) and the assumption that expenditures are spread evenly over the year.
As of the last (2010) consumer survey
43 percent of the
113 respondents reporting a need for
Food Bank/Home-delivered Meals said they could not get it.
Clients survey year (FY 2009):
617
Est. percent of need met:
57%
Est. clients needing service:
1,082
Clients served (2010):
809
Est. clients not served (2010):
273
Cost per client (2010):
$316
Cost to meet need:
$86,268
Other Funding Streams
RW
Part A
EMA
$258,483
MAI (EMA and Counties)
$58,047
RW
Part A
EMA
Other Funding
Final Analysis
Unspent (including carryover/adjust.): $2,742
Performance Summary:
Category performed well. The category received reprogrammed funds and expended within tolerance by year end.
Compared to Last Year:
Allocation levels to category have increased as well as the number of clients served. The category provided significantly more non-emergency food services.
Unmet Need:
Service category provided significantly more units of home delivered meals, bags of groceries, and liquid supplements.
Questions:
Have the needs of clients changed? Could this category absorb additional funding and serve more clients?
Comments:
In FY 2010, the ESD report did not parse out the funds spent on emergency financial assistance for the category. FY 2010 was the first year that unduplicated client and unit data were given; duplicated data were used in previous years.
To report a problem with the mechanics of the web site, please click here.
All content-related comments should be referred directly to the planning council support office
at +1 (410) 662-7253.