SCOPE OF WORK
Task 1: Project Initiation and Initial Data Gathering
Project Kickoff: Urban Strategies Council (USC) will hold a kickoff meeting with the City to review the scope of work and project schedule, as well as to discuss the project goals related to engagement and project deliverables.
Initial Data Gathering: USC will review existing data, research, plans, and other relevant documents regarding community crisis response program development conducted by internal and external entities. USC will also review existing planning documents such as the City’s General Plan, Community Needs Assessments and Strategic Investment Plan issued on behalf of the Richmond Department of Children and Youth, and the Health in All Policies report.
Task 2: Community Engagement
Urban Strategies Council’s (USC) community engagement plan is focused on Richmond's most-impacted residents and neighborhoods and in partnership with Richmond (City) residents, political leaders, public systems representatives, community activists, private/civic sector stakeholders, and taskforce participants. USC will execute targeted stakeholder engagement strategies that are more representative than citywide engagement methods which tend to over- represent the most engaged community members. Although deeply engaged community members should not be ignored and their engagement results in thoughtful understanding and analysis of some city functions and challenges, USC seeks to gather a comprehensive understanding of the diverse views and experiences of residents. USC will work with stakeholders to plan the optimal combination of virtual, hybrid, and in-person and engagement that is not restricted to residents who are able to attend an event - through tabling at community events, in-person surveys, attendance at resident-organized community activities, collaborating with existing outreach efforts, etc. USC's implementation and engagement strategies will be based on the emerging best practices in other jurisdictions.
Resident and public systems stakeholders are essential in developing a program that reflects the needs, experiences, resources, and existing barriers to services in a community. These stakeholders help to identify people who need to be involved in the discussion, and/or key to effective outreach and engagement of the broadest range of community members. Stakeholder interviews, focus groups, and engagement with program development also help to inform the comprehensive understanding of the existing community assets, services and resources and identifying unaddressed needs. USC has experience with stakeholder engagement at both the municipal and county levels. USC expects to conduct interviews with Contra Costa County and county-wide stakeholders given the rapidly changing landscape of mental health and emergency response and for discussions that focus directly on the county services and countywide NGOs engagement with Richmond.
USC also expects to work with the consultant providing analysis of 911 data. Understanding the types of calls, outcomes, geographic areas, and the types of needs of high frequency users of emergency services will inform both outreach, research questions, and the program plan. We would hope to discuss with the consultant joint recommendations on the collection of additional data within dispatch that might be helpful in the evaluation of the program.
Examples of stakeholders include but are not limited to:
• Elected city officials
• City staff (i.e., public safety, dispatch, etc.)
• Contra Costa County
• Staff for specialized city and county programs serving underserved communities • Individuals and organizations that participated in the thoughtful, deeply researched, county-wide process to develop A3 and the Miles Hall Hub • Community-based/non-profit service providers (Housing and transitional housing programs, Legal Aid programs, re-entry programs, etc.)
• Houses of worship
• Local businesses
• Richmond Neighborhood Councils, Neighborhood Crime Prevention, and Richmond Boards, Commissions and Task Forces
• Representatives and members of underrepresented communities including youth, elders, unhoused, LGBTQIA, undocumented, immigrant, formerly incarcerated residents, and people living with mental health, substance abuse, communication, developmental, and physical challenges
Community Engagement Methods
USC's proposed engagement methods for the CCRP program development will include:
Outreach: Successful engagement begins with outreach. Outreach must include identification of languages to translate materials and organize multi-lingual events, discussions, focus groups and the use of other communication pathways, such as "ethnic" media and radio stations, WhatsApp or other social media and communication used by certain communities.
Successful outreach includes compensating community members to participate and the community members who are asked to organize participation in their communities. This shows value and appreciation for their engagement. USC commits to providing notice of en gagement events/meetings a minimum of 14 days in advance of the activity.
Effective recruiting for participation and community education on the program must include online and in-person organizing, social media, and traditional media. USC will develop accessible educational and outreach and event materials, including website content, social media posts, flyers, and FAQs to increase community confidence, participation, and the formal and informal sharing of materials. USC will also work with the city to distribute materials through existing city communications with residents. Materials must always be translated into appropriate languages, identified with input from community members. All program information should include contact information for any member of the public wishing to provide feedback on reports and program development or make suggestions. USC tracks interactions, using non- identifiable information, throughout the process to assess representation and makes changes to the approach based on stakeholder feedback and data.
Along with supporting the development of a city web page on the CCRP program, USC will develop a list of organizations for outreach and education, starting with existing City outreach lists (including participants and attendees to the Taskforce events, if possible) and adding each outreach or referral to the list. During the outreach process, residents would be invited to sign up for updates. Additionally, at each outreach event, the CCRP web page and announcements should explain how to sign up for updates. USC will also support the City to develop a
recruitment list of people (both individual applicants and organizations who would share postings) who would like to be notified when team member jobs are posted, and a recruitment plan for project staffing.
Fellows: In Richmond, USC will recruit, train and deploy a minimum of 10 Richmond BIPOC residents to co-develop and implement a citywide resident survey/engagement project. These 'USC Research Fellows' will be engaged in developing the survey instrument, identifying in- person survey collection/community listening opportunities, driving survey participation via social media, and survey analysis. Fellows will also assist in community outreach events including tabling at events, identifying engagement opportunities, and organizing/supporting focus groups and neighborhood meetings. Fellows will be instrumental in assisting USC drive high levels of participation, produce accurate data that speaks accurately to public opinion, and mitigate barriers for participation.
Surveys: USC has found that conducting surveys is very important to understanding residents' unique experiences and perspectives with emergency services, service providers, informal supports, and barriers to care. USC will survey a minimum of 500 Richmond residents that are an appropriate geographic and demographic reflection of Richmond (perhaps using weighted analysis to address over-representation of some communities). We will collect qualitative and quantitative data. The opportunities for comment (qualitative) in the survey is very helpful in discovering issues and ideas that were not previously identified. Along with other outreach efforts, USC may canvass with paper surveys to successfully ensure participation of a representative sampling of residents most impacted by negative interactions or barriers to services or care.
Areas to explore in the survey include:
• Interactions with emergency services
• Accessing emergency and non-emergency services
• Barriers to access
• Outcomes
• Community Assets
• Unrecognized, under-developed, under-funded community resources • Informal and community support during crisis
• Where residents receive information about resources and services
USC will discuss with City representatives, other surveys that might provide useful data and insights. The CCRP survey data of will provide a baseline for future surveys which could be an important evaluation tool. USC strongly suggests survey police officers, fire fighters, OES, and dispatchers in advance of implementation and at regular intervals. First done in Olympia WA (only police), these surveys could provide actionable information on additional calls, call selection protocols, and how to support a mutually beneficial relationship between the existing emergency services and the new program.
Interviews: USC proposes to conduct a minimum of 20 in-depth interviews with a diverse group of public and community sector leaders who are key to the CCRP development and implementation. These interviews will help inform the identification of program opportunities and potential challenges.
Focus Groups: USC will facilitate 3-5 focus groups with specific constituent groups that have been historically disconnected from city planning processes.
Community Meetings: USC will convene 4-5 neighborhood/citywide meetings to expand outreach for community input in the CCRP design and implementation.
Reporting and Information Sharing: Richmond is well-positioned on public reporting and transparency. USC expects to use the current mechanisms and learn from the city’s experiences to provide the most accessible and useful public information both on the program, development, and planning for providing ongoing public information. USC will work with the city to determine the best way to share information about the process. This information sharing could come in the form of dashboards or usage of Transparent Richmond website.
USC will submit a weekly report to the program manager listing meetings, events held, tasks completed, total number of interviews, surveys, and residents contacted, to date. The report would also list upcoming meetings, plans, and the project timeline.
Task 3: Analysis of Program Options
Surveys of programs and summaries of the types of models abound. Less available are analyses of the impact on the residents' experience and outcomes based on the elements of the programs.
USC’s analysis will include but is not limited to the following components:
1. Landscape Analysis: USC proposes a comprehensive landscape analysis including community needs, available and needed resources, and funding opportunities. We will use the information on current resources, the county's immediate and future plans, the needs assessment, and community input to combine with secondary data and research to provide an analysis of the program options. Data needs/gaps will be identified through an assessment of quantitative data available from existing analyses/assessments.
We expect to integrate information from the analysis of 911 call data, the Community Needs Assessments by Richmond Department of Children and Youth, and the Community Needs Assessment for the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). USC will also partner with existing engagement efforts to gather complementary data for combined analysis. USC will coordinate and share any data/information that could help inform the work on the ARPA CNA, and other sources recommended by City staff.
2. Lessons from Similar Program Models: Will (a) provide a complete analysis of current program models, including the preliminary data on projects that will help inform the City of Richmond's evaluation of options; (b) Integrate, where useful, initial data and qualitative reporting from similar programs into Richmond's planning. Even programs that differ structurally offer experiences that can be helpful in planning and program development; (c) discuss the benefits and opportunities of crisis response programs that co-respond with and without police; and (d) research the need for an alternative number to address concerns that residents may prefer not to call 911. USC will provide the options for an alternative number, the costs of each, and other considerations.
3. Call Response Analysis: An initial focus on identifying and responding to calls that have broad agreement that they are appropriate for an alternative response. With experience, it will be possible to begin to identify additional situations that can be added.
4. Collaborations: Mechanisms for building and maintaining essential relationships with service providers in the city and county.
5. Date Collection: Optimal data collection strategies for evaluation (including identifying data needs/gaps) and ensuring program attention to equity and diversity, sharing comprehensible information with residents, and funding opportunities.
6. Engagement: Strategies for ongoing community engagement based on reporting of the best practices, current tools, and innovative approaches being used with other programs.
7. Funding: USC will research funding opportunities and considerations, including eligibility for Medicare reimbursement, ARPA funding, state funding, private funding sources, and others.
8. CCHS Collaboration: Opportunities for integration, collaboration, and mutual support with county programs, including the new A3 (Anyone, Anywhere, Anytime) Program and Miles Hall Hub. The impact of the implementation of the 988 hotline is an additional consideration that must be addressed.
It is essential that any city program work closely with the county programs, continually evaluate and jointly modify better strategies. During research, USC will seek to gain a thorough understanding from multiple perspectives about how Richmond interacts with the county, how current services are providing support, and how best to design a program that maximizes the relationship and fills gaps in service
9. Draft Report: USC plans to develop the community needs assessment by integrating the data and information from all of the outreach mechanisms with special attention to summarizing existing referrals and gaps in services. We would circulate a draft to appropriate city staff, interested stakeholders, and other relevant consultants to ensure that it is a complete and accurate reflection of Richmond
Task 4: Proposed Program Plan
USC has worked with jurisdictions to develop program plans on alternative emergency response, including the elements listed below. Oakland was the most challenging because it was completely new territory relying heavily on our experience with research, policy, and community engagement on other issues. We are proud to say that the model implemented remains close to the original design and the changes we recommended to the CAHOOTS model are supported by CAHOOTS. It is significantly easier to develop a comprehensive program plan now, with the advantage of the experience of a number of other programs already in place. USC has assisted in the development of implementation plans and often helped with aspects of the implementation, due to our depth of knowledge and access to implementation documentation, such as protocols, job descriptions, outreach materials, etc.
Other jurisdictions have identified the areas that consumed planning time to include:
1. Training: Identifying topics, developing curricula, finding trainers and programs. Having assisted in several trainings, USC is able to share our experiences in finding training programs, doing direct training, and the feedback of the team members of what was most useful in the field. Two areas of focus that have been important - programs that have a depth of experience with a non-police field response and specific trainings to strengthen appropriate responses for specific communities and residents. Fortunately, Contra Costa and the broader Bay Area have some great resources and organizations with deep experience. USC can also assist identifying as part of the training appropriate ride-alongs and site visits with other programs that serve Richmond or are similar in the Bay Area.
2. Dispatch: USC is well versed in the issues around how to dispatch and the specific dispatch training and protocols that seem to work best. We can provide an overview and analysis of the various approaches used by other programs, including a separate dispatch, integration into existing 911, using another hotline to dispatch the team, or (in its infancy) app-based dispatch (which would also be used for documentation).
3. Integration: Documentation and integration with social service databases, and exploring integration of 211 referrals, other hotlines, and 988.
4. Facilities: An important element to providing an analysis of program options is identifying potential program facilities.
5. Community education: Outreach and engagement of mental health and service providers for education, support, advice and referrals
6. Recruitment: USC will provide recommendations regarding recruitment to support the broadest pool of applicants to enable selecting the best team members (i.e., people who have lived experience)
7. Protocol: The development of program protocols, including dispatch protocols, as well as clinical oversight, analysis and evaluation of calls, training, group team meetings, and support for responders are key components of any program.
8. Equipment and supplies. USC will look lean on the experience of other programs to recommend the equipment supplies and other resources needed to support a CCRP program.
Task 5: Implementation Plan
Based on the results of the other tasks, USC will draft an implementation plan that will substantially build off of the proposed program plan. USC has extensive experience developing written plans, timelines and budgets for program implementation, and have developed job descriptions/staff requirements for crisis response programs. USC's broad knowledge and relationships in the alternative emergency response communities enables us to offer resources and connections to keep the implementation on track. Most issues that will arise have been confronted by other programs - documents, job descriptions, protocols, handbooks, and RFPs have been drafted for other programs. Using these resources can help prevent extra time spent on researching issues that have been addressed elsewhere.
Major Deliverables
• Develop weekly project reporting system in consultation with and for City staff. • Recruit, select and train USC Research Fellows
• Initial interviews with key stakeholders
• Engagement with internal and external partners (i.e., ride-alongs with public safety entities, discussions with CCHS, conversations with dispatch, etc.) • Sit-along to observe city dispatch
• Identifying existing outreach opportunities
• Support the development of a CCRP website with information, timeline, history, status, and updates
• Develop and disseminate a survey
• Survey/data analysis by Fellows
• Conduct focus groups
• Attend and disseminate information at city-wide community events • Development of draft Analysis of Program Options, Program Plan, and Implementation Plan for feedback from city staff, community and City Council. • Conduct community meetings #3 city-wide community event - virtual or hybrid (in consultation with the city's project manager and input from community representatives, to decide the optimal outreach event) presentation of report and recommendations.
Possible to supplement with additional presentations targeted to specific communities. • Community meetings in targeted neighborhoods (2-3).
• Deliver report to city council. Provide support in decision making. • Assist with establishing the relationship, depending on the selected program option (city, CBO, or county). If CBO, assist city in drafting the RFP/Q for implementing the program.
USC has participated in and observed multiple RFQ processes for new response models, can provide drafts, including suggestions around elements that created barriers to some CBOs applying.
• Develop protocols, job descriptions, (even if the program is contracted, the CBO will need guidance on the elements of the protocols and job descriptions that reflect the city’s model. USC can provide other jurisdictions approaches, feedback, and advise on drafting.)
• Publicity on upcoming RFQ to ensure broad response.
• Pre-implementation community awareness campaign - social media, meeting announcements, Community Advisory Board recruitment.
Project Timeline
The completion of Tasks 1-4 will take approximately 6 months to complete, beginning August 2022. The start and end date for Task 5 will depend on the recommendations and program option selected. The timing of the work may be subject to change based on the City Council’s meeting schedule or other factors.
Month August
2022
September
2022
October
2022
November
2022
December
2022
January
2023
February
2023 +
Task 1: Initiation and Data
Gathering
Task 2: Community
Engagement
Task 3: Analysis of Program
Options
Task 4: Proposed Program
Plan
Task 5: Implementation Plan
Project Budget
Urban Strategies Council expects to complete the scope of work outlined above for a fixed fee of $98,125, as outlined below. A contingency is being set aside of $14,719 to be used for expenses and for additional requests such as additional interviews, focus groups or community meetings. Urban Strategies Council must secure written approval prior to any use of the contingency. The total not-to-exceed fee for this project will be $112,844.
TASK Est. Staff Hours
Task 1: Project Initiation and Initial Data Gathering
Data Needs Analysis 150
Case Studies 20
Task 2: Community Engagement
Resident Survey 150
Stakeholder Interviews 75
Focus Groups 30
Neighborhood/Citywide Meetings 75
Dispatch/lnterrupter Observations 30
Task 3: Analysis of Program Options 50
Task 4: Proposed Program Plan 100
Task 5: Implementation Plan 150
TOTAL HOURS 830
CCRP Proposed Budget
SALARY/WAGES
Name
FTE or
Hours
Annual salary or
Hourly rate Amount
David Harris 175.00 $125.00 $21,875
Rania Ahmed 200.00 $100.00 $20,000
Anne Janks 300.00 $75.00 $22,500
Program Assistant (TBD) 155.00 $50.00 $7,750
Total Hours: 830.00
SALARY/WAGES SUBTOTAL $72,125
OPERATIONAL COSTS
Fellow Stipends 10 Fellows x $1000 each $10,000
Software/Technology Expenses
Projected expenses for social media
advertising, technology resources for
community/neighborhood meetings and
focus groups, web site expenses $1,500
Survey Participant Incentives Gift cards and contest awards $2,000 Project Materials/Supplies Office supplies, posters, printed materials $2,500 Outreach/Translation Expenses Print and media language translation $6,000 Meeting Expenses
Refreshments, facilities rental, meeting
facilitation
$4,000
OPERATIONAL COSTS SUBTOTAL $26,000
CONTIGENCY $14,719
TOTAL $112,844