Cities Index.
Agenda

Richmond City Council
March 24, 2026

Document
Agenda
Meeting
March 24, 2026
Body
Richmond City Council
Pages
46
Original file
135.5 MB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on pub-richmond.escribemeetings.com. That file is the official record.

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
B10. Significance: (continued)
of Lee's design, it is strongly representational of Lee's design philosophies and shows innovation in his integration of an earlier Second Bay Tradition building with his new Second Bay Tradition addition. It is also one of few buildings in Richmond known to have been designed by Lee. Another is located nearby at 664 Ocean Avenue and was built for Josephine Miles in 1951. Miles was a poet and professor at U.C. Berkeley; another of Point Richmond's artistic academics. It seems likely that she and Haley were acquainted and that Roger Lee's work at 771 Ocean Avenue may have given him entree to designing Miles' house down the street a year or two later. Lee also designed a multi-unit housing project in Richmond for Basic Home Industries in 1956; however the location and status of that work are unknown. (U.C. Berkeley Environmental Design Archives) The property appears to be significant under criterion 5.

6. It is a structure, site, or other improvement which meets any of the above criteria at the highest level, and whose loss would be a major loss to the City
The property at 771 Ocean Avenue meets criteria 1, 2, 4, and 5. It represents the place where an influential artist lived and produced his significant work for nearly 60 years; contributes to a rich history of intellectual and creative community in Point Richmond; and embodies the characteristics of a distinctive regional architectural style as designed by a prominent and pioneering Bay Area architect. Therefore, its loss would constitute the loss of a cultural and architectural element of the Point Richmond neighborhood and the city as a whole.

Because the building also relates strongly to the near-identical building next door (775 Ocean Avenue) and the two have a shared history, the loss of one or the other would mean the loss of that relationship, which would further exacerbate loss to the neighborhood and city.

The property appears to be significant under criterion 6.

Integrity
Although integrity is not a qualifying factor for listing in the Richmond Historical Register, the property's retention of historic integrity is important to its ability to convey its historic significance. Therefore, it is noted that the property retains integrity of location and setting, the studio-house having never been relocated from or re-situated on its bay-side site in the residential neighborhood of Point Richmond. It continues to exhibit its original design, including the significant 1949 addition that supports and enhances its Second Bay Tradition architectural style, and has undergone few additional alterations. This contributes to retention of original materials and features, and expression of workmanship, in that the treatment and application of materials to the specifications of the intended design is still extant. Ultimately, the studio-house has integrity of feeling as a 1930s Second Bay Tradition building and is capable of expressing its significant associations with John Haley, his artistic work, its role in the Paint Richmond creative community, and the significant architectural character that references associations with a notable architect and contributes to the character of the surrounding environment.

Conclusion
The property at 771 Ocean Avenue was built in 1932 to serve as an art studio for John Haley, a U.C Berkeley art professor, influential Modern artist, and originator of the “Berkeley School” style of art. It was also the home of Haley and his wife, Monica. No original architect is known, but the building was designed in the Second Bay Tradition style, and was later enhanced with a living room addition in the same style designed by significant Midcentury Modernist architect Roger Lee. The studio-house is significant primarily for its associations with John Haley and his significant artwork, but also has connections to the broader Bay Area art world, other notable artists and their work, art education, and the rich creative and intellectual community that has historically been present in Point Richmond. Along with the physical character of the studio-house, itself; its association with a prominent Bay Area Modernist architect; and contribution to a neighborhood context of architect-designed Modernist architecture, the property is eligible for listing in the Richmond Historic Register and, subsequently, qualifies as a historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Sources
Casas, Angelic M. and Katherine Wei, 8 February 2016. “Five men, one town, four decades of art,” Richmond Confidential; https://richmondconfidential.org/2016/02/08/five-men-one-town-four-decades-of-art/ City of Richmond Municipal Code, 15.04.303.060
City of Richmond, 2012. “Richmond General Plan 2023: Chapter 14, Historical Resources.” City of Richmond. “Richmond Historic Register,” https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/2959/Richmond-Register.

California Digital Newspaper Collection; https://cdnc.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/cdnc. (continued) B10. Significance: (continued) B10. Significance: (continued)

ATTACHMENT A
290
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 14 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
B10. Significance: (continued)
Deutsch, Monroe V., Vice President, U.C. Berkeley to John C. Haley (telegram), 4 September 1930; Bancroft Library, U.C.

Berkeley, BANCMSS93/117, c.

Gautraud, Alexandra A., October 1984. “Cork Trees of Point Richmond,” This Point (Point Richmond History Association newsletter), vol. 3, no.3.

Ghent, Gregory 1993. Haley: A Retrospective, Richmond, CA: Richmond Art Center.

Ghent, Gregory 2022. to Emy Lafever (email), “Haley mural around fireplace.” Ghent, Gregory 20224. Interview by author, 27 August 2024, Richmond, CA. by telephone.

Google Maps/Google Street View. Google.com.

Haley, John C. 1982. To Glenn [Wessels] (letter), 2 December 1982; Bancroft Library, U.C. Berkeley, BANCMSS93/117, c.

Hill, Kimi Kodani 2000. Topaz Moon: Chiura Obata's Art of the Internment. Berkeley, CA: Heyday Books.

Hille, R. Thomas 1994. Inside the Large Small House: The Residential Design Legacy of William W. Wurster. New York:

Princeton Architectural Press.

John Haley Biographical Data (binder), Bancroft Library, BANCMSS93/117c, 2:2.

Krevsky Fine Art 2024. “John Haley Bio.” https://krevskyfineart.com/artists/john-haley/john-haley-bio/ Life Magazine 1949. “San Francisco Houses: They embody a new U.S. Regional architecture,” 5 September 1949.

NETR Online. “Historic Aerials.” https://www.historicaerials.com/ NewspaperArchive.com.

Newspapers.com
Online Archive of California, U.C. Berkeley Environmental Design Archives, Roger Lee Collection: Biographical Note; https://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf6t1nb2j4/admin/.

Riquelme, Kathleen and Melba Levick 2003. The Studio Book. United States: Universe.

Roselius, Donna 1985. “A Brief Unofficial History of Point Richmond.” Point Richmond, CA: Point Richmond History Association; https://www.pointrichmondhistory.org/history.html
Spake, Pierre 2023. “The Unrecorded Photographic Archive of John C. Haley: 'Berkeley School' artist, teacher, and photographer.”
Tanner, Ogden 1950. "How Living Space was Added on to a Studio House at Point Richmond," San Francisco Chronicle, 21 May 1950.

Treadway, Chris 2016. “A Child's View of War: Paintings produced by shipyard care program youths give a unique glimpse into Richmond history,” East Bay Times, 15 August 2016.

United States Federal Census records.

University of California Academic Senate 1991, “University of California: In Memoriam; John C. Haley, Art: Berkeley.” http://texts.cdlib.org/view?docId=hb4t1nb2bd&brand=oac4&chunk.id=meta University of California, Berkeley, Environmental Design Archives. Roger Lee Collection: 1949-1968; project index.

University of California, Santa Barbara, Library. Aerial Photographs collection; https://www.library.ucsb.edu/src/airphotos.

Walker, Lester 1996. American Shelter. New York: The Overlook Press. (continued) B10. Significance: (continued)

ATTACHMENT A
291
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 15 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
B10. Significance: (continued)
Weinstein, Dave. “8 Great Modern Masters,” EichlerNetwork.com; https://www.eichlernetwork.com/article/8-great-modern- masters?page=0,5.

Weinstein, Dave 2006. Signature Architects of the San Francisco Bay Area. Lyton, UT: Gibbs-Smith Publisher.

Wikipedia, “Hans Hofman,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Hofmann.

ATTACHMENT A
292
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 16 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information(con
Historic Images
John Haley, artist and owner/occupant of 771 Ocean Avenue. (Ghent 1993) View of rear facade of 771 Ocean Ave., early 1930s. Hollow clay tile wall separating 771 and 775 Ocean Ave. is still unstuccoed.

John Haley seated on top of wall. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)

ATTACHMENT A
293
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 17 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
Monica and John Haley at rear facade of 771 Ocean Avenue, early 1930s. Practice frescos visible on wall . (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)
Monica, John, and Hazel Haley on rear patio of 771 Ocean Ave., early 1930s. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)

ATTACHMENT A
294
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 18 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
Two paintings of 771 and 775 Ocean Avenue by John Haley.

Top: “Point Richmond Studios on SF Bay,” 1933.

Bottom: “Old Garage with New Studio,” 1932.
(MutualArt.com)

ATTACHMENT A
295
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 19 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Rear facade of 771 Ocean Ave., 1934. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History) Looking south down entry stair/walk at 771 Ocean Ave., 1934. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)

ATTACHMENT A
296
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 20 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Fresco around fireplace at 771 Ocean Ave. (prior to being covered), ca. 1935. (Ghent 2022) “770 Ocean Avenue,” by John Haley, 1936. (Ghent 1993)

ATTACHMENT A
297
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 21 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

“Our renters while we were in Europe” and Monica Haley (right), in front of fireplace mural, 1937. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)
Interior of first floor living area (before the 1949 addition), 1938. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)

ATTACHMENT A
298
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 22 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

View into guest room, as added/improved in 1938. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History) Interior of studio, rear sleeping porch, as added in 1938. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)

ATTACHMENT A
299
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 23 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

1949 Roger Lee-designed living room addition to south facade, looking east. (Bancroft Library, U.C. Berkeley) 1949 Roger Lee-designed living room addition to south facade, looking southwest. (Bancroft Library, U.C. Berkeley)

ATTACHMENT A
300
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 24 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Interior of 1949 Roger Lee-designed living room addition to south facade, looking west. (Bancroft Library, U.C. Berkeley) Interior of 1949 Roger Lee-designed living room addition to south facade, looking northwest at entry area.

Kitchen and bathroom (with Adam and Eve window) visible beyond. (Bancroft Library, U.C. Berkeley)

ATTACHMENT A
301
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 25 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Interior of 1949 Roger Lee-designed living room addition to south facade, looking south.

Chiura Obata's Japanese Black Pine visible outside window. (Bancroft Library, U.C. Berkeley) John and Monica Haley and some of their art collection, sitting in the “cozy corner” with the eastern gallery wall beyond; northeast corner of the 1949 living room addition, 1956. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)

ATTACHMENT A
302
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 26 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

John and Monica Haley seated on the rear patio of 771 Ocean Avenue, 1956. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History) Rear patio at west side of living room addition, 1956 (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)

ATTACHMENT A
303
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 27 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Monica Haley seated on original banquette along south wall of living room addition, 1957. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)
Monica and John Haley seated in front of eastern wall of living room addition, 1962. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)

ATTACHMENT A
304
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 28 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

“No. 29, Point Richmond, California,”by Henry Wessel, Jr., 1972. (771 Ocean Avenue, looking west) (MoMA.org)
Interior of second floor studio space, looking east, 1975. (Los Angeles Times “Home” magazine, 7 September 1975)

ATTACHMENT A
305
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 29 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

View west along Ocean Avenue, ca. 1975. 775 Ocean Avenue visible at left. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)
Rear facades of 775 (left) and 771 (right) Ocean Avenue from the water, looking northeast, ca. 1980. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)

ATTACHMENT A
306
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 30 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Marker sketch of 771 and 775 Ocean Avenue by John Haley, 1982. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)
View of 771 and 775 Ocean Ave., looking south from lot on north side of Ocean Avenue, 1987. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)

ATTACHMENT A
307
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 31 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

View of portion of living room addition, looking up from lower terrace or shore at southwest side of property, ca. 1990. (Haley collection, Richmond Museum of History)
Current Images
Front (north) facades of 771 (left) and 775 (right) Ocean Ave. looking southwest.

ATTACHMENT A
308
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 32 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Rear (south) facades of 775 (left) and 771 (right) Ocean Ave. looking northeast.

Rear (south) facade of 771 (right) Ocean Ave., looking northeast.

ATTACHMENT A
309
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 33 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Primary (north) facade of 771 Ocean Ave., looking southeast. 775 Ocean Ave. at right.

Primary (north) facade of 771 Ocean Ave., looking south.

ATTACHMENT A
310
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 34 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

View east along primary (south) facade of 771 Ocean Ave.

View south along west facade, down entry steps/walkway.

ATTACHMENT A
311
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 35 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Detail of primary entrance on west facade.

Wall at right is hollow clay tile wall that extends into entry and extends south to separate 771 from 775 Ocean Ave.

West facade of 1949 living room addition, looking east.

ATTACHMENT A
312
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 36 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Patio at west side of living room addition. Primary entrance is beyond wall at center.

Wall at left/center is hollow clay tile wall that extends into entry and extends south to separate 771 from 775 Ocean Ave.

West facade of living room addition and Chiura Obata's Japanese Black Pine at right.

ATTACHMENT A
313
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 37 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

South facade of 1949 living room addition.

View from lower rear terrace looking up (north) at rear of 775 (left) and 771 (right) Ocean Ave.

ATTACHMENT A
314
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 38 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

View northeast along east side of 771 Ocean Ave.; living room addition left foreground, garage/guest room projecting beyond.

East side of living room addition, looking southeast.

ATTACHMENT A
315
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 39 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

South facade of projecting garage/guest room, looking north from east side yard.

East facade of garage/guest room, looking west.

ATTACHMENT A
316
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 40 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

View west along front facade, from northeast corner of property; garage/guest room closest.

Interior of living room, looking west. Patio door center, primary entrance door on right.

ATTACHMENT A
317
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 41 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Interior of living room, looking south.

Interior of living room, looking northeast at “cozy corner” and eastern gallery wall at right, opening to kitchen at left.

ATTACHMENT A
318
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 42 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Eastern gallery wall of living room, looking south.

Interior of first floor bathroom, looking north. John Haley's Adam and Eve stained glass window above tub.

ATTACHMENT A
319
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 43 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Stairs to second floor, west side of kitchen space. Opening to living room at left, doorway to bathroom at right.

Interior of second floor studio space, looking east.

ATTACHMENT A
320
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 45 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

I
Interior of second floor studio space, looking north.

Interior of second floor studio space, looking west.

ATTACHMENT A
321
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 45 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Fireplace at east end of studio space, showing partially-restored John Haley fresco.

Interior of second floor studio space looking southwest. Wide opening denotes 1938 sleeping porch addition.

ATTACHMENT A
322
State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Page 46 of 46 ends

*Recorded by: Caitlin Hibma/Left Coast Architectural History *Date: October 2024  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

Interior of second floor studio space, looking west. Sleeping porch addition at left.

View southeast into sleeping porch addition from studio space.

ATTACHMENT A
323

STATEMENT
The property at 771 Ocean Avenue, in Point Richmond, is herein referred to as the John Haley Studio-House. It has commonly and historically been known by its street address, 771 Ocean Avenue, and was sometimes referred to as Haley Studio by its original owners.

John and Monica Haley were the original owners. The property was initially used as an art studio by John Haley, a professional artist and art professor, but within a few years of construction became both an art studio and home for the Haleys.

The Studio-House was built in 1932. No architect was involved with original design and construction of the house, as it was a Depression-era project, built inexpensively and based on John Haley's experience with the design of art studios in Europe. In 1949, a living room addition was made to the south side of the studio-house, which was designed by notable Midcentury modern architect Roger Lee. Although built in 1932 and 1949, respectively, both portions of the studio-house can be described as Second Bay Tradition style and exhibit characteristic features and philosophies of that design movement.

The studio-house is in good condition, currently being used as a residence, and sits on a 0.077 acre (3,361 square foot) parcel in the Point Richmond neighborhood of Richmond, California.

The John Haley Studio-House is being nominated to the Richmond Historic Register because it was owned and occupied by John Haley, who was a significant and influential figure in the Richmond, Bay Area, and California art world. Haley is credited with originating and proliferating the “Berkeley School” style.

Having trained with Hans Hoffman, a seminal figure in European Modern art, Haley brought revolutionary new artistic concepts and practice to U.C Berkeley and the Bay Area. His work is pioneering and distinctive in its break from traditional Beaux-Arts style painting, its exploration of regionalist subject matter, its later shift toward abstraction, and the more sedate and representational approach that differentiated it from the New York School of Modern art. Haley not only practiced his ground-breaking genre prolifically, but as a professor of art at U.C. Berkeley, he helped make that academic program one of the strongest art departments in the nation. He was a gifted teacher, who taught and disseminated Berkeley School style and philosophies to countless students, who then went on to have their own art careers, proliferating the Berkeley School style. Haley's career spanned over sixty years and he was well recognized by his representation in solo and group shows nationally and internationally, complimentary critical review, and a number of awards given to him by prestigious art institutions. His name and works remain well represented in Modern art circles, proving the longevity of his influence on Modern art locally and regionally, as well as extending to the national level. The property at 771 Ocean Avenue served as the studio where he practiced art and produced his extensive body of work. Because of this, and because the studio-house and its Point Richmond environs often factored into that work as subject matter, the property can be recognized as an embodiment of the City's cultural values, especially in relation to art, and has significance for association with a person of historical importance.

The Studio-House is also nominated for its architectural merit and association with an influential architect. It is a good local example of the Second Bay Tradition style of architecture, both in its original 1930s design and in the design of the living room addition madein 1949. The Studio-House embodies many physical characteristics of the Second Bay Tradition style, such as a simple form, use of basic affordable materials with a rustic aesthetic, a broadly sloped side-gable roof form with reverse shed dormer, lack of eves, banked fenestration and fenestration integrated into the roofline, and minimal decorative trim. It also demonstrates strong response to the design philosophies of the Second Bay Tradition style in its unusual angled siting, plan, and hillside integration, which followed the Second Bay Tradition tenant of design cooperating with site topography. The style also emphasized public versus private space, which is seen in the building's orientation away from the public realm, a non-interactive street facade, minimization of the primary entrance, and contrasting openness to the private patio and shoreline to the south. The openness to the private realm to the

ATTACHMENT A
324
south is facilitated by ample glazing in the living room, which also responds to the Second Bay Tradition concept of interaction between indoor-outdoor space.

Some of the characteristics described above can be attributed to the later living room addition, as well.

The Second Bay Tradition style continued until 1960 (later evolving into the Third Bay Tradition style) and the addition also falls within the style's period of significance and was designed by pioneering Chinese-American Modernist architect Roger Lee. Lee was responsible for designing over 100 buildings in the Bay Area and is credited with designing innovative and high-style houses affordably for middle-class clients. This made him one of the most prolific and financially successful of the Midcentury Modernists and put him at the fore of promoting and proliferating the Second Bay Tradition style. While the living room addition at 771 Ocean Avenue represents the modification of an existing structure that was not of Lee's design, it is strongly representational of Lee's design philosophies and shows innovation in his integration of an earlier Second Bay Tradition building with his new Second Bay Tradition addition. Therefore, the John Haley Studio-House represents the work of an architect who contributed the development of the Bay Tradition style over time and can be regarded as a good example of the Second Bay Tradition style at two different times during the style's period of popularity.

It also contributes to a notable concentration of Modernist architecture in Point Richmond and was one of the earliest Second Bay Tradition or Modernist buildings to be constructed within that neighborhood context.

Ultimately, this historic resource nomination finds that the John Haley Studio-House at 771 Ocean Avenue meets five of the six criteria for listing on the Richmond Historic Register (criteria 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6). It represents the place where an influential artist lived and produced his significant work for nearly sixty years; contributes to a rich history of intellectual and creative community in Point Richmond; and embodies the characteristics of a distinctive regional architectural style as designed by a prominent and pioneering Bay Area architect. Its designation as a historic resource in the City of Richmond would recognize important local history and encourage the continued preservation of a valuable cultural and architectural element of the Point Richmond neighborhood and the city as a whole.

ATTACHMENT A
325
Existing Zoning for 771 Ocean Avenue
City of Richmond
This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable.
2,509
© City of Richmond

0.1 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION
Miles0.10
Legend

0.04 1:

Notes
Parcel
Parcel Labels
Historic Resource
Historic Resource
Pt. Richmond Historic District Boundary
Water Bodies
Zoning District
RH Single-Family Hillside Residential
RL1 Single-Family Very Low Density Residential
RL2 Single-Family Low Density Residential
RM1 Multifamily Residential
RM2 Multifamily High Density Residential
CM-1 Commercial Mixed-Use, Residential
CM-2 Commercial Mixed-Use, Neighborhood
CM-3 Commercial Mixed-Use, Commercial Emphasis
CM-4 Commercial Mixed-Use, Gateway/Node
CM-5 Commercial Mixed-Use, Activity Center
LW Live/Work
CG Commercial, General
CR Commercial, Regional
CC Commercial, Coastal
IB Industrial, Business
ILL Industrial, Limited Light
IL Industrial, Light
IG Industrial, General
IW Industrial, Water-Related
PCI Public, Cultural, and Institutional
PR Parks and Recreation
OS Open Space
OS-H Hillside Open Space
SC Shoreline Conservation
ATTACHMENT B - Proposed Zoning Map Amendment
326
�- 7
,\�

0.1 0 0.04
© City of Richmond
Proposed Landmark Overlay District for
771 Ocean Avenue
IG

0.1 Miles
601
65·1
,567
66,!'
644
"
619
\. 613
6:l4
62§
6(0
V
'sc,s
S-43 •
I
SJ$
/
540. ,52()1 ' '
SJ 4 52)
I�- 524/�i
5'35 • 518 :>,_
/� · 483
511 5 05. 4�
Legend
0 Parcel
U Parcel Labels
Historic Resource
(ZJ HISb� Ruouoe
□ Pt R�•mo1d HISbOO OIJtr�aon
Water Bodies
Zoning District
• ■ ■ ■ •
• ■ ■
• •
RH s1,91e-fan '" HIISbe Ru� It
Rl1 Sllg►.-faU/VU/ Loo oust
RL2Sllg►.-fan I., Loll.I DUSI\' Re:

Rl.l1 u, tran ._, Rtiuml Rt.12 u,
tran ._, H�• Dtun,t Rtn Cll-1
COOlmtroblUktd-Ust, Ru cu�
Canmtrobl Uktd-Ult. ·� �
Cll..J Canmtrobl Uktd-Ust. com
CU-4 Canmtrobl Uktd-Ust, Galt
CU-6 COOlmtrobl Uktd-Ust, AcQ.

LW LlltN\lolk
CG comm t Cbl, Gt U 131
CR Can mt robl, Rtg bl al
cc can mt robl. coasu I
111,dutrBI. au1,us
ILL 1,d,nbl, Unltd L�U
IL i.dutral, Lgu
IG i.dutnal Gt ltl31
--• HO! hOUDBI Imn f:Bthta
1 2,509
0 :======:::::::

This map is a
user generated static output from an htemet mapping site and I
N Otes
is for reference only. Data la\@rsthat appear on 1his map mayor may not be acc:or at»? , w rrent, or otherwise re liable.

THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NA\/1GATIO N �-----------� ATTACHMENT B - Proposed Zoning Map Amendment327

Page 1 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026

Mayor's Office

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM:

Mayor Eduardo Martinez

Subject:

Proclamation for American Muslim Appreciation and
Awareness Month
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact on receiving this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

N/A

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The City Council is being asked to recognize April as
American Muslim Appreciation and Awareness Month
through the adoption of a formal proclamation. This
recognition provides an opportunity to acknowledge and
celebrate the diverse contributions of American Muslim
residents to the cultural, social, and economic fabric of the community, while promoting greater understanding,
inclusion, and respect among all residents.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

PROCLAMATION recognizing April as American Muslim
Appreciation and Awareness Month in the City of
Richmond – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez
510-620-6503) and Councilmember Soheila Bana (510-
672-3490).

DISCUSSION:

AGENDA
REPORT
328

Page 2 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026
American Muslim Appreciation and Awareness Month serves as an opportunity to recognize the rich cultural heritage, traditions, and contributions of American Muslims across the nation and within local communities. Observing this month reinforces the City’s commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion, and highlights the importance of fostering mutual respect and understanding among residents of all backgrounds.

The proclamation also acknowledges the importance of standing against discrimination, bias, and Islamophobia, while uplifting the voices and experiences of American Muslim individuals and families. By adopting this proclamation, the City of Richmond affirms its support for an inclusive community that values and celebrates its diversity.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

ATTACHMENT 1 – American Muslim Appreciation and Awareness Month Proclamation

329

American Muslim Appreciation and Awareness Month
City of Richmond

WHEREAS, enriched by the unparalleled diversity of its residents, the City of Richmond takes great pride in supporting individual religious freedoms and is strengthened by the many varied religious, political, and cultural traditions and contributions of its diverse populations, including those that practice Islam; and WHEREAS, the history of Islam in this country dates to before its founding, originating with enslaved Africans who brought their Muslim beliefs with them to the Americas and who later contributed in numerous ways to the founding of the nation, and there are today millions of American Muslims, both immigrant and native born, of diverse backgrounds and beliefs. Approximately 1,000,000 American Muslims currently reside in California, the highest number of any state in the United States; WHEREAS, over 30,000 Muslims live in Contra Costa County, and make innumerable contributions to the cultural, political, and economic fabric and well-being of California and the United States;
WHEREAS, in 2024, the Council on American-Islamic Relations received 8,658 complaints nationwide, the highest number in its 30-year history, reflecting a 7.4% increase from 2023;
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond’s mosques have played a pivotal role in supporting members of the Muslim community and others in this city; WHEREAS, Masjid Al-Rahman, founded in 1995, which hosts weekly congregational prayers for over 300 attendees and conducts food bank distribution twice a week for the Richmond community, regardless of faith;
WHEREAS, Masjid Al-Noor offers a range of services, including the five daily prayers and Jumu'ah prayers, providing a space for worship, spiritual connection, and programs designed to support individuals in deepening their knowledge and understanding of Islamic teachings;
WHEREAS, The Muslim Mission Center works to foster a better understanding of Islam locally through education and outreach programs, offering a variety of services for their congregants, such as an Islamic school, family counseling, funeral services, and more;
330

Soheila Bana
District 4 Councilmember
City of Richmond

Mayor Eduardo Martinez
City of Richmond
March 24, 2026

WHEREAS the city council acknowledges the importance of local government in advocating for peace and justice, understanding that Muslims everywhere deserve to live in peace and safety;

WHEREAS, it is appropriate to acknowledge and promote awareness of the myriads of invaluable contributions of American Muslims in California and across the country and extend to them the respect and camaraderie every American deserves; now, therefore, be it

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Richmond does hereby recognize the California State Designation of April 2025 as American Muslim Appreciation and Awareness Month to acknowledge the rich history, contributions, and guiding virtues of Muslims and to commend all Muslim communities in California for the lasting positive impact they have made toward the advancement of our city and country.

331

Page 1 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026

Mayor's Office

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Subject: Appointment of Kaelen Van Cura to the Arts & Culture Commission
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

N/A

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Kaelen Van Cura is applying for a vacant seat on the Arts & Culture Commission
RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPOINT Kaelen Van Cura to the Arts and Culture Commission with the term that expires on January 31,
2030 – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-
620-6503)

DISCUSSION:

Kaelen Van Cura is seeking an appointment to the Arts and Culture Commission. She is interested in supporting local artists by expanding opportunities for them to share their AGENDA
REPORT
332

Page 2 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026
work with the community. Her goal is to help streamline processes and improve access to grants and funding opportunities for eligible artists throughout the City of Richmond.

Kaelen has previously served on the commission and seeks to reconnect.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Kaelen Van Cura’s redacted application
333
334

Page 1 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026

Mayor's Office

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM:

Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Subject:

Reappointment of Ben Kellman to the Design Review
Board
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

N/A

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Ben Kellman is reapplying to the Design Review Board
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

REAPPOINT Ben Kellman to the Design Review Board
with a term that expires on March 17, 2028 – Mayor’s
Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503)

DISCUSSION:

Ben Kellman is seeking a reappointment to the Design Review Board. He is interested in contributing to the thoughtful design and development of Richmond and brings AGENDA
REPORT
335

Page 2 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026
experience working on several local projects, including the renovation of City Hall, the construction of the Richmond Transit Station and BART garage, and the development of Unity Park.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Ben Kellman’s redacted application.

336
337

Page 1 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026

Mayor's Office

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM:

Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Subject:

Appointment of Asfar Ali to the Economic Development
Commission
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

N/A

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Asfar Ali is applying for a vacant seat on the Economic Development Commission
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

APPOINT Asfar Ali to a vacant seat on the Economic
Development Commission with a term that expires on
March 30, 2029 – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo
Martinez 510-620-6503)

DISCUSSION:

Asfar Ali is seeking an appointment to the Economic Development Commission. He aims to bring a data-driven, execution-focused approach to economic strategy. Dr. Ali is a data scientist, holds a Doctor of Engineering degree, and is a local property owner AGENDA
REPORT
338

Page 2 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026
with a strong interest in applying proven analytics to support Richmond’s economic development efforts.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Asfar Ali’s redacted application.

339
340

Page 1 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026

Mayor's Office

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM:

Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Subject:

Appointment to Florence Wiley for the Macdonald Avenue
Corridor Task Force
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

N/A

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Florence Wiley is applying for a vacant seat on the
Macdonald Avenue Corridor Task Force
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

APPOINT Florence Wiley to the Macdonald Avenue
Corridor Task Force with the term that expires on
December 31, 2026 – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo
Martinez 510-620-6503)

DISCUSSION:

Florence Wiley is seeking appointment to the Macdonald Avenue Corridor Task Force.

As a veteran entertainment professional and downtown Richmond resident, she is interested in supporting opportunities to showcase local and emerging Richmond artists AGENDA
REPORT
341

Page 2 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026
across a variety of performance spaces, both traditional and repurposed. She is also interested in encouraging development that incorporates artist housing to help position Richmond as a welcoming place for artists to live and create.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Florence Wiley’s redacted application

342
343

Page 1 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026

Mayor's Office

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM:

Mayor Eduardo Martinez

Subject:

Appointment of Vivian Gomez to the Recreation and Parks Commission
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

N/A

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Vivian Gomez is applying for a vacant seat on the
Recreation and Parks Commission
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

APPOINT Vivian Gomez to the Recreation and Parks
Commission with a term that expires on October 26,
2029– Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-
6503)

DISCUSSION:

Vivian Gomez is seeking an appointment to the Recreation and Parks Commission. She hopes to contribute ideas and provide additional support for the local youth community, particularly in recreational baseball, where she has three years of experience.

AGENDA
REPORT
344

Page 2 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Vivian Gomez’s redacted application.

345
346

Page 1 of 2 ends

March 17, 2026

Mayor's Office

DATE: March 17, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM:

Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Subject:

Appointment of Michelle Bailey -Vaughn to the RFCY
Oversight Board
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

N/A

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Michelle Bailey-Vaughn is applying for a vacant seat on the RFCY Oversight Board
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

APPOINT Michelle Bailey-Vaughn to the RFCY
Oversight Board with the term that expires on Dec 02,
2028 – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-
620-6503)

DISCUSSION:

Michelle Bailey-Vaughn is seeking appointment to the RFCY Oversight Board. She is deeply committed to the well-being, safety, and rights of children and youth. Drawing on her professional background in nutrition, finance, and community service, she hopes to AGENDA
REPORT
347

Page 2 of 2 ends

March 17, 2026
support efforts that expand access to safe, supportive environments for young people.

Her vision is to help empower youth to reach their full potential through strong advocacy, informed oversight, and a focus on holistic well-being.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Michelle Bailey-Vaughn’s redacted application

348
349
350
351

Page 1 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026

Mayor's Office

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Subject:

Appointment Gabri el Saeyang to the Richmond Youth
Council
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

N/A

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Gabrial Saeyang is applying for a vacant seat on the
Richmond Youth Council
RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPOINT Gabriel Saeyang to an unexpired term on the Richmond Youth Council, term expires on October 1,
2026 – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-
620-6503)

DISCUSSION:

Gabriel Seayang is seeking an appointment to the Richmond Youth Council. He is interested in representing the voices and perspectives of local youth while contributing AGENDA
REPORT
352

Page 2 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026
ideas that support programs, initiatives, and opportunities that benefit young people in the Richmond community.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Gabrial Saeyang’s redacted application

353
354

Page 1 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026

Mayor's Office

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM:

Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Subject:

APPOINT Diana Benitez to the Planning Commission
FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

N/A

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Diana Benitez is applying to a vacant seat on the
Planning Commission
RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPOINT Diana Benitez to the Planning Commission with a term that expires on June 30, 2028 – Mayor’s
Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503)

DISCUSSION:

Diana Benitez has applied for an appointment to the Planning Commission. She brings professional experience as an Urban Planner with a focus on community development AGENDA
REPORT
355

Page 2 of 2 ends

March 24, 2026
and planning. She currently serves as Treasurer for the American Planning Association California Chapter – Northern Section and as a Council member for the MTC-ABAG Community Advisory Council. Diana holds a master’s degree in urban and Regional Planning from UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs, with a focus on Community Economic Development and Housing. Her application highlights her interest in contributing her expertise to support thoughtful and equitable development within the city.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Diana Benitez’s redacted application.

356
357

Page 1 of 3 ends

March 24, 2026

Public Works

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Daniel Chavarria, PE, Director of Public Works
Robert Armijo, PE, Deputy Director of Public Works /City Engineer
Darcie DeLashmutt, Capital Project Manager
Subject:

Construction Agreement with Azul Works Inc. for the
Shields-Reid Park and Community Center Projects
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed $400,000 amendment will increase the construction agreement to a not-to-exceed total amount
of $5,297,064.31 and is included within the approved
fiscal year 2025-2026 Shields-Reid Park and Community
Center Project budget (Account String: 20136031-
400642-23080).

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

October 19, 2022
May 7, 2024
June 24, 2025

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The Shields-Reid Park Improvement Project has
remaining grant funds near the end of construction. To utilize the funds, additional improvements focused on the Shields-Reid Community Center have been identified.

Maintenance related improvements are not eligible to
utilize the remaining grant funding and will require
supplemental City funding. City staff is requesting that the City Council adopt a resolution to amend the
construction agreement with Azul Works, Inc. for the
Shields-Reid Park and Community Center Project to
increase the not-to-exceed amount by $400,000. The
revised not-to-exceed contract amount of $5,297,064.31
will address maintenance related improvements to the
Community Center.

AGENDA
REPORT
358

Page 2 of 3 ends

March 24, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE a second amendment
to the construction agreement with Azul Works, Inc. to
increase the not-to-exceed amount by $400,000, for a
revised not-to-exceed total contract amount of
$5,297,064.31, to complete maintenance-related
improvements to the Shields-Reid Community Center as
part of the Shields-Reid Park and Community Center
Project – Public Works Department (Darcie DeLashmutt
(510) 672-3944/Robert Armijo (510) 620-5477).

DISCUSSION:

In December 2021, the City of Richmond was awarded $8,000,000 in grant funding through the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation’s Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program (SPP) to renovate the southern

5.17-acre portion of Shields-Reid Park (Capital Improvement Project No. 23028) (Attachment 1). The proposed layout highlights key park features, including recreation areas, pathways, landscaping, and areas designated for renovation. (Attachment 2)

On May 7, 2024, the City Council awarded a construction contract to Azul Works, Inc. in the amount of $4,088,240.31 and authorized a contingency amount of $408,824 for the Shields-Reid Park Improvement Project (Attachment 3). On June 4, 2025, Council approved Contract Amendment 1 to increase the construction contract agreement by $400,000 to $4,897,064.31 to address unforeseen circumstances and City requested changes (Attachment 4). Funds were utilized for a variety of changes including utility revisions, rubber play surfacing in lieu of fibar, renovating existing basketball courts, public art, and expanding planting and irrigation areas.

Park construction is 95 percent complete. The project is expected to have approximately $100,000 in remaining SPP grant funds at completion. The project team has identified additional improvements to support the Shields-Reid Community Center and utilize the remaining funds. While some of the improvements will be performed under the park project, other improvements need to be performed as part of a Community Center project. The maintenance-related improvements are not eligible under SPP grant stipulations. These include painting, roof repairs, gutter installation, and entry or sidewalk repairs. Because these items fall outside the allowable grant expenditures, additional City funding will be required, and the Shields-Reid Community Center Project (Capital Improvement Project No. 23080) was created to execute the improvements. Final improvements will be complete by early summer 2026.

Cit staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to approve an amendment to the construction agreement with Azul Works, Inc. to increase the not-to-exceed amount of $400,000 for not-to-exceed total contract amount of $5,297,064.31; and approving the prior reappropriation of $100,000 in surplus funding from the General Capital Fund FY2024-25 Q4 unspent funds and approving the prior reallocation of 359

Page 3 of 3 ends

March 24, 2026
$206,975 from the Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Project (Capital Improvement Project No. AR233) to the Shields-Reid Community Center Project.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Project Location
Attachment 2 – Site Plan
Attachment 3 – Construction Agreement
Attachment 4 – Contract Amendment 1
Attachment 5 – Proposed Contract Amendment 2
Attachment 6 – Resolution

360
Shields-Reid Park Improvements
1410 Kelsey Street
Richmond, CA 94801
361
PE

SSWMWVSSCO

SDCOSSCO
W
WVWV
SSCO
W
INT
PT
PE
SSSSSS

WMWVSSCO

SDCOSSCO

WWWW SSCO
WW
LANDSCAPECONSTRUCTION ANDMATERIALS PLANLC10119NORTH01020401" = 20'-0" All designs and ideas containedwithin these drawings are theproperty of PlaceWorks, Inc.PlaceWorks hereby reservesits common law copyright andother property rights in theseplans. These plans shall notbe reproduced, changed, assigned, orcopied in any form. Anychanges made by parties otherthan PlaceWorks, without first obtaining thewritten permissionand consent of PlaceWorks, shall relievePlaceWorks of responsibility for the projector effected portion thereof.

BID SET
Richmond Contra Costa County California2040 BANCROFT WAY #400BERKELEY, CA 94704PHONE: (510) 848-3815 Public WorksPROJECT TITLE:DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DATE: 2/9/2024REVISIONS:DRAWING NO:SHEETOFSHEETS SHIELDS-REID PARKIMPROVEMENTS 37 LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTNo. 6371STATE OF CALIFORNIASignatureDateRenewal DateJESSE JONES

ALAMO AVENUE

CHERRY STREET

KELSEY STREET
1ZA101PRE-MANUFACTUREDRESTROOM SCHEMATICS
1ZB101STAGE CANOPY
1 1
23 4
5A 5B

PUMP TRACK, NIC
A
B
C
DE
REPAIR EXISTINGGATES, SEE NOTE 1
REPAIR EXISTINGGATES, SEE NOTE 1
BID ALT 1: NATURE PLAY AREA:·ZIPKROOZ·FULL ROUND STEPPERS·ENGINEERED WOOD FIBER·MOWBAND·2 PICNIC TABLESBASE BID: TURF - SEEPLANTING PLAN PLAY AREA,AGES 5-12 YEARSREPAIR EXISTINGGATES, SEE NOTE 1 LC5022ENGINEERED WOOD FIBERLC5035REMOVABLE BOLLARDLC50254 FOOT STEEL FENCE, TYP.

LC5026 TRASH RECEPTACLE
LC5024SYNTHETIC SAFETYSURFACING, TYP.

LC5037ISLE SEATING
LC5034 TERRACED SEATINGLC5031 INTERPRETIVE SIGN, TYP.

1.AT EACH GATE, REMOVE TWO (2) EXISTING HINGES AND REPLACE WITH A PAIR OF 7-INCH HEAVY DUTY WELD ON BARREL HINGESUITABLE FOR UP TO 3,000 POUND PER PAIR (KING KONG OR OTHER APPROVED SUPPLIER) REMOVE EXISTING GATE CLOSUREAND REPLACE WITH NON-RUSTING HEAVY GATE LATCH (VIPERLATCH SLV-VIPER-X1 OR APPROVED EQUAL).2.REPLACE CHAIN LINK MESH AND ADJUSTABLE TRUSS ROD. UTILIZE EXISTING POSTS, REMOVE RUST AND PAINT BLACK. CHAINLINK MESH SHALL BE COATED BLACK. ADJUSTABLE TRUSS ROD SHALL BE 3/8” WITH TURNBUCKLE AT CORNER. CHAIN LINKMESH SHALL BE TIED 18” O.C. TO TOP, MIDDLE, AND BOTTOM RAIL.3.SEE HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN CH101 FOR PATHWAY WIDTHS 1ZC101
NOTES:LC5038GUARDRAIL, TYP.
1LC301
LC5036DRINKING FOUNTAIN
1S101STAGE SLAB2S1013S101
,
,
LC5029 PICNIC TABLE, TYP.,LC5029 PICNIC TABLE, ADA
REPLACE EXISTING CHAINLINKMESH, SEE NOTE 2, TYP.

ALIGN THIS ROW OFBOLLARDS WITHCENTER EXISTINGBACKFLOW BOLLARD,5' OC MAX SPACINGCL BID ALT 3: COURT REPAINTING·REPAINT AND RESTRIPE TWO (2)EXISTING BASKETBALL COURTS TOEXISTING DIMENSIONS AND COLORSUSING OUTDOOR COURT PAINT.BID ALT 4: COURT RESURFACING ANDPAINTING·PROVIDE 2" GRIND AND OVERLAY OFBLACKTOP AREA·REPAINT AND RESTRIPE TWO (2)EXISTING BASKETBALL COURTS TOEXISTING DIMENSIONS AND COLORSUSING OUTDOOR COURT PAINT.·PROTECT EXISTING STORM DRAININLETS AND PIPES.·PROTECT EXISTING POSTS AND NETS.

FITNESS AREA

FITNESS AREA

PROTECT EXISTINGCONCRETE PAVING ANDPLAYGROUND FENCE DURINGINSTALLATION OF SYNTHETICSAFETY SURFACING ANDPLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT

PROTECT EXISTING PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT DURINGINSTALLATION OF SYNTHETIC SAFETY SURFACING BID ALT 2:PERIMETER FENCELC5028 LOG SEATING, TYP.

SEE APPENDIX GFOR FOOTINGINFORMATIONSEE APPENDIX G FORFOOTING INFORMATION

SEE APPENDIX F FOR FOOTING INFORMATION
LC5033BIKE REPAIR STATIONLC5032BIKE RACK, TYP.LC5037ISLE SEATINGPUMP TRACK ACCESSIBILITYAND ETIQUETTE SIGN LC5012 VEHICULAR CONCRETE PAVING
362
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 363
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 364
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 365
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 366
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 367
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 368
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 369
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 370
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 371
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 372
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 373
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 374
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 375
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 376
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 377
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE Director of Public Works
Mayor
Eduardo Martinez
378
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 379
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 380
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 381
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 382
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 383
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 384
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 385
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 386
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 387
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 388
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 389
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 390
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 391
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 392
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 393
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 394
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 395
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 396
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 397
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 398
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 399
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 400
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 401
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 402
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 403
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 404
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 405
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 406
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 407
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 408
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 409
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 410
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 411
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 412
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 413
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 414
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE Director of Public Works
Mayor
Eduardo Martinez
415
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 416
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 417
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 418
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 419
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 420
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 421
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 422
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 423
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 424
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 425
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C5A90A8-59C9-4929-8C4C-12FEE1ABA0BE 426
Azul Works, Inc.

Contract #7001
Vendor #10491
Initial Contract Amount w/Contingency: $4,497,064.34
Contract Amendment #1: $400,000.00
Total Contract: $4,897,064.34
FIR

ST AMENDMENT TO

CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND AZUL WORKS, INC.

This First Amendment to the Construction Agreement (the “First Amendment”) is entered into as of June
24, 2025, by and between the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation and charter city (“City”) and Azul Works, Inc., a California corporation (“Contractor”), with reference to the following facts.

RECI
TALS
A. C ity and Contractor entered into that cer tain Construction Agreement dated July 11, 2023 (the “Agreement”) to furn ish c onstruction of Shields-Reid Park Revitalization (the “Project”)(Capital Improvement Project 23028).

B. The Parties now desire to enter into this First Amendment in order to increase the expenditures under the Construction Agreement by an additional not-to-exceed sum of $400,000.00 (the “Additional Expenditures”), for a total amended not-to exceed amount of $4,897,064.34 as set forth on Attachment 1 attached and incorporated hereto (the “First Amended Amount”).

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals
hereof, and other mutual covenants
and promises contained herein and for other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree to amend the Agreement as follows:

Section 1 Amendment to Payments.

The Construction Agreement is hereby amended by this First Amendment in order to increase the Original Amount by the Additional Expenditures to reflect a new total of authorized expenditures under the Construction Agreement, equal to the First Amended Amount.

Section 2. Amendment to Scope of Work.

The Construction Agreement is hereby amended by this First Amendment in order to add extra work for as described in change orders 1 and 2, and additional anticipated work to the Project as set forth in Attachment 1.

Sect
ion 3. Miscellaneous.
(a) Except as amended by this First Amendment, the Construction Agreement has not been modified and is in full force and effect.
(b) Each of the individuals executing this First Amendment on behalf of the Contractor and City individually represents and warrants that he or she has been authorized to do 427
Azul Works, Inc.

Contract #7001
Vendor #10491
Initial Contract Amount w/Contingency: $4,497,064.34
Contract Amendment #1: $400,000.00
Total Contract: $4,897,064.34
so and has the power to bind the party for whom they are signing. (c) Thi
s First Amendment may be signed in any number of counterparts with the same effect as it the signatures to each counterpart were upon a single instrument, and is intended to be binding when all parties have delivered their signatures to the other parties.

Signatures may be delivered by facsimile or electronic transmission. All counterparts shall be deemed an original of this First Amendment.
(d) WHE
REFORE, the Parties have executed this First Amendment on or as of the date first above written.

IN WITN
ESS WHEREOF, City and Contractor have executed this First Amendment duly authorized representatives, all on the date first written above.

CITY:

Reviewed By: CITY OF RICHMOND, a municipal
corporation and charter city
City Attorney By:

Name: Eduardo Martinez
ATTEST: Its: Mayor
City Clerk CONTRACTOR:

Azul Works, Inc., Inc., a Corporation
By:

Name:

Its:
428
Azul Works, Inc.

Contract #7001
Vendor #10491
Initial Contract Amount w/Contingency: $4,497,064.34
Contract Amendment #1: $400,000.00
Total Contract: $5,297,064.31

SECOND AMENDMENT TO

CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND

AZUL WORK
S, INC.

This Second Amendment to the Construction Agreement (the “Second Amendment”) is entered into as of March 24, 2026, by and between the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation and charter city (“City”) and Azul Works, Inc., a California corporation (“Contractor”), with reference to the following facts.

RECITALS
A. C ity and Contractor entered into that certain Construction Agreement dated July 11, 2023 (the “Agreement”) to furnish construction of Shields-Reid Park Revitalization (the “Project”)(Capital Improvement Project 23028).

B. The Parties now desire to enter into this Second Amendment in order to increase the expenditures under the Construction Agreement by an additional not-to-exceed sum of $400,000.00 (the “Additional Expenditures”), for a total amended not-to exceed amount of $5,297,064.31 as set forth on Attachment 2 attached and incorporated hereto (the “Second Amended Amount”).

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals hereof, and other mutual covenants and promises contained herein and for other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree to amend the Agreement as follows:

Section
1 Amendment to Payments.

The Construction Agreement is hereby amended by this Second Amendment in order to increase the Original Amount by the Additional Expenditures to reflect a new total of authorized expenditures under the Construction Agreement, equal to the Second Amended Amount.

Section 2. Amendment to Scope of Work.

The Construction Agreement is hereby amended by this Second Amendment in order to add extra work for as described in change orders 8 and 9, and additional anticipated work to the Project as set forth in Attachment 1.

Section 3. Miscellaneous.
(a) Except as amended by this Second Amendment, the Construction Agreement has been modified and is in full force and effect.
(b) Each of the individuals executing this Second Amendment on behalf of the Contractor and City individually repr esents and warrants that he or she has been authorized to do 429
Azul Works, Inc.

Contract #7001
Vendor #10491
Initial Contract Amount w/Contingency: $4,497,064.34
Contract Amendment #1: $400,000.00
Total Contract: $5,297,064.31
so and has the power to bind the party for whom they are signing. (c) This Second Amendment may be signed in any number of counterparts with the same effect as it the signatures to each counterpart were upon a single instrument, and is intended to
be binding when all parties have delivered their signatures to the other parties.

Signatures may be delivered by facsimile or electronic transmission. All counterparts shall be deemed an original of this Second Amendment.
(d) WHEREFORE, the Parties have executed this Second Amendment on or as of the date first above written.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Contractor have executed this Second Amendment duly
authorized representatives, all on the date first written above.

CITY:

Reviewed By: CITY OF RICHMOND, a municipal
corporation and charter city
City Attorney By:

Name: Eduardo Martinez
ATTEST: Its: Mayor
City Clerk CONTRACTOR:

Azul Works, Inc., Inc., a Corporation
By:

Name:

Its:
430
City of Richmond CA

CHANGE ORDER
CCO NUMBER SUPPL. NUMBER CONTRACT NO. PROJECT
7 Vendor#
10491
7001 Shields Reid Park Improvements Project CIP Project ID: #23028 PO#: 24201273
TO Azul Works, Inc. Contractor
You are directed to make the following changes from the plans and specifications or do the following described work not inclu ded in the plans and specifications for this contract.

Description of work to be done, estimate of quantities, and prices to be paid:

The following Work shall be furnished and installed, unless otherwise noted:
• All work shown in ESI 11 – Court Striping
• FDR paving scope as coordinated, described & noted for PCO 23.2 • BA#4 Credit for removed grind/pave scope
• Mulch scope as coordinated for Punchlist Item #21
• Remaining Credit due for BA#1B
Adjustment of Contract Value
The Contract value shall be adjusted by the NET CHANGE AMOUNT shown below:

PCO Item Amount

22.2 ESI 11 Court Striping $ 18,338.25

23.2 Paving (Full Depth Replacement Asphalt) $ 85,000.00 24 Bid Alt 4 Credit (for Grind/Pave) -$ 40,300.00

27.1 Nonfloat Mulch (Bioretention at Restroom) $ 388.35 30 Remaining Credit Due for Engineered Wood Fiber -$ 3,512.00 NET CHANGE AMOUNT $59,914.60
Original Contract value $ 4,088,240.31
Prior net change by change orders $607,250.94
Adjusted Contract value by this change order $ 4,755,405.85 By reason of this order the time of completion will be adjusted as follows: N/A

CITY OF RICHMOND APPROVAL BY

SIGNATURE (PRINT NAME & TITLE) DATE
We, the undersigned contractor, have given careful consideration to the change proposed and agree to provide equipment, furnish materials, and perform the work specified above, and will accept as full payment the prices shown above. NOTE: If you· do not sign this order, you are directed to proceed with the ordered work and follow procedures in accordance with the Construction Agreement.

CONTRACTOR ACCEPTANCE BY

SIGNATURE (PRINT NAME & TITLE) DATE
Eric Lang, Project Manager
1/7/2026
Daniel Chavarria
1/12/26
431

City of Richmond CA

CHANGE ORDER

CCO NUMBER SUPPL. NUMBER CONTRACT NO. PROJECT
8 Vendor#
10491
7001 Shields Reid Park Improvements Project CIP Project ID: #23028 PO#: 24201273
TO Azul Works, Inc. Contractor
You are directed to make the following changes from the plans and specifications or do the following described work not inclu ded in the plans and specifications for this contract.

Description of work to be done, estimate of quantities, and prices to be paid:

The following Work shall be furnished and installed, unless otherwise noted:

• All work as coordinated with the City for Painting of the Community Center

Adjustment of Contract Value
The Contract value shall be adjusted by the NET CHANGE AMOUNT shown below:

PCO Item Amount

20.1 Painting of Community Center $63,090.30

NET CHANGE AMOUNT $63,090.30

Original Contract value $ 4,088,240.31
Prior net change by change orders $667,165.54
Adjusted Contract value by this change order $ 4,818,496.15

By reason of this order the time of completion will be adjusted as follows: N/A

CITY OF RICHMOND APPROVAL BY

SIGNATURE (PRINT NAME & TITLE) DATE

We, the undersigned contractor, have given careful consideration to the change proposed and agree to provide equipment, furnish materials, and perform the work specified above, and will accept as full payment the prices shown above. NOTE: If you· do not sign this order, you are directed to proceed with the ordered work and follow procedures in accordance with the Construction Agreement.

CONTRACTOR ACCEPTANCE BY

SIGNATURE (PRINT NAME & TITLE) DATE

Eric Lang, Project Manager
1/7/2026
Daniel Chavarria
1/12/26
432
1400 Egbert Avenue
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94124
TEL 415-558-1507
CA LICENSE A, B, C5, C8, C10 #780074
DIR #1000003862
SUPPLIER CLEARING HOUSE WBE & MBE # 15040115

January 27, 2026

Tony Fuentes
mack5
1000 Broadway, Ste 260
Oakland, CA

RE: COR #26 – Additional Scope Requests

Dear Tony,

Thank you for the opportunity to provide pricing for the requested additional scope. Our cost proposal is as follows:

Description Cost

1. Grind and replace asphalt at
backflows/bollards per Exhibit A
N/A, separate change order

2. Remove benches at building entry $ 1,706.54,

3. Purchase and Install (1) Trash Receptacle at
building entry: Gretchen litter bin, side
opening, 25 gallon capacity, redwood siding,
Surface mount. Color: powdercoat gloss black
per Exhibit A
$ 5,572.99

4. Remove existing bike rack. Purchase and
Install (1) Wingra bike rack, inground mount
to match approved submittal. If lead times do
not allow, surface mount will be considered.

Locate at building entry per Exhibit A
$ 5,231.22

5. Remove and replace concrete at building entry
per Exhibit A
$ 21,483.74

6. Repair pavers at Kelsey Street per Exhibit A $ 16,968.31

7. Patch concrete at Kelsey and Alamo street
ramp per Exhibit A
$ 9,565.52

8. Replace tiles with concrete at Kelsey and
Alamo Boulder Plaque per Exhibit A
$ 12,938.75
Attachment 1 -
Draft - Change Order Request in Progress
433
Azul Works Inc.
1400 Egbert Avenue | SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94124
TEL 415-558-1507
CA LICENSE A #780074

2 | Page

9. Clear/grub weeds and pavers and add DG to all
tree wells on Kelsey from Alamo to the mid-
park
sidewalk per Exhibit A
$ 6,500.00

10. No Item N/A

11. Add (3) Sentry Dog Waste Stations;
TerraBound Solutions, Inc. Black $269, per
Exhibit A
$ 3,010.87

12. Purchase and Install PalmShield Double Bay
Covered Dumpster Enclosure; Aluminum
Louvered; Color: Standard Black, per Exhibit
A – in lieu of four removable bollards. Install
per manufacturer recommendations
Excluded

13. Remove lawn and replace with approved
mulch per Exhibit A
N/A, separate change order

14. Remove strip of lawn under fence to 12”
inside of fence and replace with mulch per
Exhibit A
N/A, separate change order

15. No Item N/A

16. Replace perimeter sidewalk where it has been
determined not to be caused by course of
construction, per forthcoming exhibit
$ 124,000.00

434

Reso. No. xx-26

DocID #66310v1
RESOLUTION NO. xx-26

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND

AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT WITH AZUL WORKS, INC. TO INCREASE THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT BY $400,000

FOR THE SHIELDS-REID PARK AND COMMUNITY CENTER PROJECTS (PROJECT), FOR AN AMENDED TOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $5,297,064.31; AND APPROVE THE PRIOR REAPPROPRIATION OF $100,000 FROM THE GENERAL CAPITAL FUND FY2024-25 UNSPENT FUNDS, AND PRIOR THE REALLOCATION OF $206,795 IN FUNDING FROM THE HEATING,

VENTILATION, AND AIR CONDITIONING PROJECT TO THE PROJECT

WHEREAS, Shields Reid Park, a 5.17-acre park in the North Richmond neighborhood, is in need of renovation; and

WHEREAS, the City of Richmond was awarded $8,000,000 through the Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program (SPP) for improvements to Shields-Reid Park; and

WHEREAS, On May 7, 2024, the City Council awarded a construction contract to Azul Works, Inc. in an amount not-to-exceed $4,088,240.31; and

WHEREAS, on June 4, 2025, the City Council approved Agreement Amendment 1 increasing the contract authority to $4,897,064.31 to address unforeseen circumstances and City- requested changes; and

WHEREAS, Amendment 1 consisted of utility revisions, rubber play surfacing in lieu of fibar, renovating existing basketball courts, public art, and expanding planting and irrigation areas; and

WHEREAS, additional Community Center related improvements have been identified that are ineligible for the remaining SPP grant funding and require supplemental City funding; and

WHEREAS, staff has previously reappropriated $100,000 from the General Capital Fund FY2024-25 Q4 unspent funds; and

WHEREAS, staff has previously reallocated $206,975 in funds from the Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Project (Project # AR233) to the Shields-Reid Community Center Project (Project # 23080) (Project); and

WHEREAS, City staff recommends amending the construction agreement by $400,000 for additional Community Center related improvements to establish a revised not-to-exceed contract amount of $5,297,064.31; and

WHEREAS, improvements consist of paint, roof repair, gutter installation, sidewalk paving, and various miscellaneous items; and

WHEREAS, by the agenda report (“Agenda Report”) accompanying this resolution the City Council has been provided with additional information supporting this action.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richmond that:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby finds the above recitals are true and correct and have served, together with the Agenda Report, as the basis for this action.

SECTION 2. The City Council hereby authorizes an amendment to the construction agreement with Azul Works, Inc. to increase the not-to-exceed amount by $400,000, establishing a revised total not-to-exceed contract amount of $5,297,064.31.

435

Reso. No. xx-26

DocID #66310v1
SECTION 3. The City Council approves the prior reappropriation of $100,000 from the General Capital Fund FY2024-25 Q4 unspent funds to the Project.

SECTION 4. The City Council approves the prior reallocation of $206,975 from the Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Project to the Shields-Reid Community Center Project.

SECTION 4. The City Clerk is designated as the custodian of the documents comprising the record of proceedings relating to this action, which shall be maintained at Richmond City Hall, 450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, California 94804.

SECTION 5. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.

*************************

I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held March 24, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:

Mayor

Approved as to form:

City Attorney

436

Page 1 of 3 ends

March 24, 2026

Public Works

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Daniel Chavarria, PE, Director of Public Works
Robert Armijo, PE, Deputy Director of Public Works /
City Engineer
Dan Santos, Assistant Engineer
Subject:

Accept the 2024 Paving Project – Slurry Seal as
Complete
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Acceptance of the project as complete will authorize staff to release the contractor’s retention and bonds and to
formally close out the contract. The total construction contract was $2,957,768, with $191,234 in approved
change orders. Design, construction management, and
inspection costs totaled $249,306 resulting in a total
project cost of $3,398,308. The project was completed
within budgeted funds as appropriated by City Council in the Gas Tax Fund (Account String: 11931031-400645-
23056).

Authorized contingency funds were not fully expended,
and the remaining balance will be returned to the Gas
Tax Fund for future allocation.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

July 2, 2024

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Council action is required to approve a resolution
accepting the 2024 Paving Project – Slurry Seal as
complete. This acceptance will satisfy contract
obligations, authorize release of the contractor’s retention and bonds, and allow staff to formally close out the
project in accordance with City procedures.

AGENDA
REPORT
437

Page 2 of 3 ends

March 24, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

ADOPT a resolution to ACCEPT the 2024 Paving Project
– Slurry Seal as complete; DIRECT the City Clerk to
record the Notice of Completion with the Contra Costa
County Recorder; and AUTHORIZE the release of the
contractor’s bonds and retention payment – (Dan Santos
620-6645/Robert Armijo 620-5477).

DISCUSSION:

On July 2, 2024, City Council awarded a construction contract to Pavement Coatings Co. for the 2024 Paving Project – Slurry Seal in the amount of $2,957,768, plus $443,665 in authorized contingency funds. The scope of work included crack sealing, slurry sealing, and placement of traffic striping (Attachment 1).

The project improvement plans were designed by Nichols Consulting Engineers (NCE).

Two change orders were executed to address field conditions and expand the scope of work. These included additional slurry sealing, striping, and thermoplastic markings at Barrett Avenue & Key Boulevard intersection and 29th Street & Vale Road intersection and the placement of delineators.

Below is the status of the budget and project costs as follows:

A. Construction Contract Amount: $2,957,768
B. Approved Change Orders $191,234
Total Construction Cost $3,149,002
C. Design / Construction Management / Project
Management
$249,306
Total Project Cost $3,398,308

The revised budget for this construction phase of the project was $3,224,551; the total construction phase cost including change orders was $3,149,002 therefore the project was completed within the budget and the remaining unspent funds will roll into the fund balance for potential re-allocation to Fiscal Year 2025-26 Paving Program. The design and related costs were paid through the Paving Program budget.

The City’s public roadways received approximately 23 miles of slurry seal, improving pavement conditions and extending the service life of the streets by an estimated four to seven years. The project was completed within the available budget and within the time frame of the original contract.

As all construction items have been completed and inspected, City staff recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution accepting the project as complete, directing the City Clerk to record the Notice of Completion with the Contra Costa County Recorder, and authorizing the release of the contractor’s bonds and retention payment (Attachment 2).

438

Page 3 of 3 ends

March 24, 2026
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – As-Built Map of Slurry Locations.

Attachment 2 – Resolution

439
F-0

PRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

FOR REVIEW
DATE: 60% SUBMITTAL
05-01-2024
440

COLEMAN CIRCLE

MEADOW VIEW DRIVE

SELMI GROVE

WILDFLOWER WAY

MONARCH WAY

WOOD GLEN DRIVE

HIGHGATE DRIVETREESIDE WAY

RIDGEWOOD WAY

OAKMONT DRIVE

HILLTOP MALL

HILLTOP DRIVE

SAN PABLO AVENUE

PRIMROSE CIRCLE

REGENTS COURT

SUNLEAF WAY

HOMESTEAD CIRCLE

ROBERT MILLER DRIVE

GIANT HIGHWAY

PARK RIDGE DRIVE

TANGLEWOOD DRIVE
F-1

PRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

FOR REVIEW
DATE: 60% SUBMITTAL
05-01-2024
as-built removed
as-built added
441

PHILLIPS COURT

QUAIL HILL LANE

SAN PABLO DAM ROAD

MOYERS ROAD

SHANE DRIVE
80 80

CANTERBURY DRIVE

HILLCREST ROAD

BARTH AVENUE

MONTE CRESTA AVENUE
F-2

PRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

FOR REVIEW
DATE: 60% SUBMITTAL
05-01-2024
as-built removed
as-built added
442

MORNINGSIDE DRIVE

SHELDON DRIVE

FIESTA COURT

GREENRIDGE DRIVE

SAN PABLO DAM ROAD

ROCKY ROAD

DESERET DRIVEMAY ROAD

SANTA RITA ROAD

SANTA RITA ROAD

FRAN WAY

UTAH DRIVE

FULL MOON DRIVE

CANYON ROAD
F-3

PRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

FOR REVIEW
DATE: 60% SUBMITTAL
05-01-2024
as-built removed
as-built added

SUN COURT

MEADOWBROOK DRIVE

ESCALON
CIRCLE

PYRAMID DRIVE
443

TRAILSIDE DRIVE

RIDGEVIEW DRIVE

CANYON OAKS ROAD

CASTRO RANCH ROAD

SURREY LANE

DEER RUN DRIVE

WAGON WHEEL WAY

SAN PABLO DAM ROAD

COACH DRIVE

CARRIAGE DRIVE

CONESTOGA WAY

BUCKBOARD WAY
F-4

PRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

FOR REVIEW
DATE: 60% SUBMITTAL
05-01-2024
as-built removed
as-built added

CUTTER LANE
444
© 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS

MESA WAY
27TH STREET
32ND STREET
36TH STREET
44TH STREET
32ND STREET 32ND STREET
26TH STREET
34TH STREET

WILSON AVENUE

GARVIN AVENUE

KERN STREET

SONOMA STREET

SAN PABLO AVENUE
23RD STREET
80 80

GARVIN AVENUE

MCBRYDE AVENUE

BARRETT AVENUE

MCBRYDE AVENUE

MARICOPA AVENUE

MORAN AVENUE

RHEEM AVENUE

LINCOLN AVENUE

ROOSEVELT AVENUE

MACDONALD AVENUE

SOLANO AVENUE

GRANT AVENUE

NEVIN AVENUE

CLINTON AVENUE ESMOND AVENUE
F-5

PRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

FOR REVIEW
DATE: 60% SUBMITTAL
05-01-2024
Barrett Avenue & Dimm Street
as-built removed
as-built added
445

RICHMOND PARKWAY

TRIANGLE CIRCLE
26TH STREET

B STREET
1ST STREET

FOLLETT STREET

COLLINS STREET
16TH STREET
11TH STREET
5TH STREET
5TH STREET
6TH STREET
12TH STREET
13TH STREET

GROVE STREET

CIVIC CENTER PLAZA
30TH STREET
26TH STREET
27TH STREET
32ND STREET

PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE

CHANSLOR AVENUEBISSELL AVENUE

MACDONALD AVENUE

BARRETT AVENUE

LUCAS AVENUE

GRANT AVENUE
23RD STREET

MCBRYDE AVENUE

ROOSEVELT AVENUE

ESPEE AVENUE

RICHMOND PARKWAY

PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE
8TH STREET

NEVIN AVENUE
4TH STREET

WEST CHANSLOR
AVENUE

HARBOUR WAY

RIPLEY AVENUE

LINCOLN
AVENUE
29TH STREET

CHANSLOR AVENUE

BARRETT AVENUE
F-6

PRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

FOR REVIEW
DATE: 60% SUBMITTAL
05-01-2024
as-built removed
as-built added
446

SOTUTH HARBOUR WAY

WEST CUTTING BOULEVARD

B STREET
1ST STREET

FOLLETT STREET

COLLINS STREET

CHANSLOR AVENUEBISSELL AVENUE

MACDONALD AVENUE
580
580
580

RICHMOND PARKWAY

TEWKSBURY AVENUE

OCEAN AVENUE

MARINE STREET

GRANDVIEW COURT

WASHINGTON AVENUE

CASTRO STREET

NEVIN AVENUE
4TH STREET

WEST CHANSLOR
AVENUE

HARBOUR WAY

WESTERN DRIVE

WINE STREET

BARRETT AVENUE
F-7

PRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

FOR REVIEW
DATE: 60% SUBMITTAL
05-01-2024
as-built removed
as-built added
447

FLORIDA AVENUE

VIRGINIA AVENUE

VIRGINIA AVENUE

CUTTING BOULEVARDCUTTING FRONTAGE ROAD
SOUTH 42ND STREET
SOUTH 44TH STREET
SOUTH 32ND STREET
SOUTH 31ST STREET
SOUTH 30TH STREET
SOUTH 28TH STREET
SOUTH 20TH STREET
SOUTH 13TH STREET
SOUTH 12TH STREET

SOTUTH HARBOUR WAY

SOUTH MARINA WAY

CARLSON BOULEVARD
SOUTH 19TH STREET
SOUTH 33RD STREET

WALL AVENUE
SOUTH 23RD STREETMARINA BAY PARKWAY
580
580
580 CARLSON BOULEVARD

BAYVIEW AVENUE BERK AVENUE

CHANSLOR AVENUE
SOUTH 41ST STREET
SOUTH
45TH STREET
F-8

PRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

FOR REVIEW
DATE: 60% SUBMITTAL
05-01-2024
as-built removed
as-built added
448

SAN PABLO AVENUE

CARLSON BOULEVARD

SHASTA STREET

MONTEREY STREET

GATELY AVENUE

JEFFERSON AVENUE

COLUMBIA AVENUE

FLEMING AVENUE

CARL AVENUE

FALLON AVENUECREELY AVENUE

CUTTING FRONTAGE ROAD

BAYVIEW AVENUE

POTRERO AVENUE

CYPRESS AVENUE
80 80
580
580

CARLSON BOULEVARD

BAYVIEW AVENUE

BERK AVENUE

TEHAMA AVENUE

ELLS STREET
F-9

PRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

FOR REVIEW
DATE: 60% SUBMITTAL
05-01-2024
as-built removed
as-built added
449
Reso. No. xx-26

Page 1 of 2 ends

RESOLUTION NO. xx-26

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE 2024 PAVING PROJECT – SLURRY SEAL AS

COMPLETE, DIRECTING CITY STAFF AND THE CITY CLERK TO RECORD A

NOTICE OF COMPLETION WITH THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDER, AND AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF THE CONTRACTOR’S BONDS AND

RETENTION PAYMENT

WHEREAS, the City of Richmond City Council awarded a construction contract to Pavement Coatings Co. for the 2024 Paving Project – Slurry Seal in the amount of $2,957,768.00, with an additional contingency amount of $443,665 on July 2, 2024; and

WHEREAS, the project scope included crack sealing, installation of slurry seal resurfacing, thermoplastic traffic striping and markings, and roadway appurtenances; and

WHEREAS, two change orders were executed to provide for additional slurry seal placement at Barrett Ave nue & Key Boulevard intersection, additional slurry seal placement at 29th Street and Vale Road, increased placement of thermoplastic striping and delineators; and

WHEREAS, the slurry seal installation on 23 miles of roadways resulted in an improved roadway surface condition, contributing to increased skid resistance and enhanced aesthetic appearance; and

WHEREAS, the City’s roadways treated with slurry seal are proj ected to experience a pavement life expectancy improvement of approximately four to seven years, in alignment with the City’s pavement management goals; and

WHEREAS, the budget and project costs status are as follows:

A. Construction Contract Amount $2,957,768
B. Approved Change orders $191,234
C. Design, Construction Management, and Inspection $249,306 D. TOTAL PROJECT COSTS (A+B+C) $3,398,308
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Richmond as follows:

Section 1. The City Council finds the above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. The City Council accepts the construction of the 2024 Paving Project – Slurry Seal by Pavement Coatings Co. as complete.

Section 3. The City Council directs the City Clerk to record the Notice of Completion with the Contra Costa County Recorder.

Section 4. The City Council authorizes the City Engineer to release any applicable bonds and retention payments.

Section 5. The City Council designates the City Clerk as the custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the decision herein is based. Such records are available for public inspection at the Richmond City Hall, 450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, California 94804.

Section 6. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.

*************************

450
Reso. No. xx-26

Page 2 of 2 ends

I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held March 24, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:

Mayor

Approved as to form:

City Attorney
451

Page 1 of 3 ends

March 24, 2026

Public Works

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Daniel Chavarria, Director of Public Works
Darin Fitzpatrick, Assistant Deputy Director of Public
Works, Operations and Maintenance

Subject:

Contract with Enterprise Rent -A-Car for Passenger Van
Rentals Supporting Recreation Programs
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The total outstanding balance for invoices starting July 1, 2025, through December 2025, is $42,535.80. Projected
rental costs for January 2026, through June 30, 2026, are estimated at $42,535.80. The total contract amount
requested is not-to-exceed $90,000. Funds are available in the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Equipment Services operating budget (Account String – 01235031-400503).

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Due to operational urgency and increased program
enrollment, passenger van rentals through Enterprise
Rent-A-Car exceeded administrative approval thresholds
and now require City Council authorization. Approval of this after-the-fact contract will resolve outstanding
invoices, ensure uninterrupted youth transportation
services, and bring the arrangement into compliance;
therefore, staff seek approval of a contract with
Enterprise Rent-A-Car for three passenger vans used in
Recreation programs.

AGENDA
REPORT
452

Page 2 of 3 ends

March 24, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

APPROVE a contract with Enterprise Rent-A-Car in an
amount not-to-exceed $90,000 to cover outstanding
passenger van rental invoices from July 1, 2025, to
present and projected van rental costs through June 30, 2026, for Recreation programming – Public Works /
Community Services – Public Works (Daniel Chavarria
510-620-5478/Darin Fitzpatrick 510-231-3044).

DISCUSSION:

Background:

Since early 2025, the City of Richmond has expanded its passenger van fleet capacity from one vehicle to four vehicles to support Recreation programming city-wide.

The Department previously operated with a single 8-passenger van, which was insufficient to meet the operational needs of:

• Six (6) summer camps (Shields Reid, Nevin, Parchester, May Valley, BTA, and Recreation Complex)
• Five (5) after-school programs (Shields Reid, Parchester, May Valley, Nevin, and Recreation Complex)

To meet immediate program needs, additional passenger vans were secured through Enterprise Rent-A-Car. Due to operational urgency and enrollment growth, rentals continued beyond the initial short-term period. The cumulative rental amount exceeded administrative approval thresholds and requires City Council authorization through a formal contract.

This contract will formalize expenditures for the expanded passenger fleet and authorize continued rentals through the end of FY 2025-26.

Programmatic Impact
The expanded fleet has directly enabled:
 Enhanced Access
 Safe transportation of students from schools to after-school sites Addressing parental safety concerns related to walking distances  Program Growth
Increased enrollment across summer and after-school initiatives Expanded field trip and activity opportunities
 Educational Equity
Reliable transport to regional parks, museums, sports activities, pools, and festivals Access to enrichment opportunities for youth who would otherwise be isolated from regional resources

453

Page 3 of 3 ends

March 24, 2026
Without these vehicles, youth participation would be significantly reduced and access to essential childcare and enrichment programming would be compromised.

Operational Considerations
The three (3) rental vans remain in active daily use supporting Recreation programming.

Immediate discontinuation would materially impact service delivery.

City staff is evaluating long-term fleet options, including vehicle purchase versus continued rental analysis, to determine the most cost-effective strategy for future fiscal years.

CONCLUSION:

Approval of this contract will resolve outstanding rental invoices, ensure uninterrupted youth transportation services, and bring the rental arrangement into compliance with City contracting requirements; therefore, staff recommend that the City Council approve a contract with Enterprise Rent-A-Car in an amount not to exceed $90,000 to cover outstanding passenger van rental invoices from July 1, 2025, to present, as well as projected van rental costs through June 30, 2026, for Recreation programming.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Proposed Contract
Attachment 2 – Invoices

454

CITY OF RICHMOND

STANDARD CONTRACT
Department: City Project Manager:

City Project Manager E-mail: City Project Manager Phone No:

Vendor No: Contract No:

Description of Services:

The parties to this STANDARD CONTRACT do mutually agree and promise as follows:

1. Parties. The parties to this Contract are the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation (“the City”), and the following named Contractor:

Contractor Name:

Street Address:

City, State, Zip Code:

Contact Person:

Telephone: Email:

Business License No:
☐ A California corporation, ☐ limited liability corporation ☐ general partnership, ☐ limited partnership, ☐ individual, ☐ non-profit corporation, ☐ individual dba as [specify:] ____________________ ☐ other [specify:] _______________________________

2. Term. The effective date of this Contract is _______________________ and terminates _________________ unless terminated earlier as set forth herein.

3. Payment Limit. City’s total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $______________ (“Contract Payment Limit”) unless a Contract Amendment has been approved by the City Council or City Manager. If this amount includes a contingency, Contractor acknowledges that any use of such contingency shall be for work beyond the original scope of services and requires prior written authorization by the City. If noted below, Compensation for work done under this Contract, shall not exceed as follows:

FY _________ total compensation shall not exceed $_________________ FY _________ total compensation shall not exceed $_________________ FY _________ total compensation shall not exceed $_________________

4. Contractor’s Obligations. Contractor agrees to perform all work at its own cost and expense, to furnish all labor, tools, equipment, materials, except as otherwise specified, in accordance with the Service Plan set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein.

5. City Obligations. City shall make payments to the Contractor in accordance with the Payment Provisions set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.

Public Works
Darin Fitzpatrick
[email protected]
(510) 231-3044
2419
Vehicle Rentals City Wide
Enterprise Rent A Car
3000 Executive Parkway, STE 225
San Ramon, CA, 94583
Mechelle McKinnie
(539) 271-1026
[email protected]
40005870
July 1, 2025
June 30, 2026
90,000.00
455

6. Authorized Representatives and Notices. This Contract is subject to the Authorized Representatives and Notices Provisions (Exhibit C), attached hereto and incorporated herein.

7. General Conditions. This Contract is subject to the General Conditions (Exhibit D), which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.

8. Special Conditions. This Contract is subject to the Special Conditions (Exhibit E) (if any), which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.

9. Insurance Provisions. This Contract is subject to the Insurance Provisions (Exhibit F), which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.

10. Sanctuary City Compliance Statement. This Contract is subject to the Sanctuary City Compliance Statement (Exhibit G), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein.

11. Signatures. These signatures attest the parties' agreement hereto:

CITY OF RICHMOND,
a municipal corporation [BUSINESS NAME]
(* The Corporation Chairperson of the Board, President, or Vice President should sign below)

By: _________________________ By: ___________________________ Title: ________________________ Title: __________________________ Date Signed: _________________ Date Signed: ___________________

I hereby certify that this Contract (* The Corporation Chief Financial Officer or Assistant has been approved by City Council Treasurer, or Secretary or Assistant Secretary should or the City Manager. sign below)

By: _________________________ By: ___________________________ City Clerk Title: __________________________
Date Signed: ____________________
Approved as to form:
(NOTE: Pursuant to California Corporations Code Section By: _________________________ 313, if Contractor is a corporation or nonprofit organization, City Attorney this Contract (1) must be signed by (a) the Chairperson of the Board, President, or Vice-President and (b) the
Chief Financial Officer or Assistant Treasurer, or
Secretary or Assistant Secretary)

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:

Service Plan Exhibit A
Payment Provisions Exhibit B
Authorized Representatives and Notices Exhibit C
General Conditions Exhibit D
Special Conditions Exhibit E
Insurance Provisions Exhibit F
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement Exhibit G

Enterprise Rent A Car
456
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT A

SERVICE PLAN

Contractor shall, to the satisfaction of the Project Manager ( set forth in Exhibit B) , perform the following services and be compensated as outlined below [or attach service plan if necessary]:

Enterprise Rent A Car
Contractor shall, to the satisfaction of the Project Manager identified in Exhibit B, provide passenger vehicle rental services to support City of Richmond Department of Parks, Recreation and Community Services (DPRCS) programming and related City operations.Services shall include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Vehicle Rental and Specifications Contractor shall furnish up to three (3) passenger vans (8–15 passenger capacity or equivalent), suitable for transporting program participants and City staff. All vehicles shall be clean, safe, and maintained in good working order, and shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations.

2. Service Availability and Replacement Vehicles Contractor shall ensure continuous availability of rental vehicles throughout the term of the agreement. In the event a vehicle becomes unavailable due to mechanical failure, maintenance, or other issue, Contractor shall provide a comparable replacement vehicle within a commercially reasonable timeframe to prevent disruption to City operations.

3. Maintenance, Repairs, and Roadside Assistance Contractor shall be solely responsible for all routine maintenance, repairs, and inspections necessary to keep vehicles in safe operating condition. Contractor shall also provide roadside assistance services, including towing and emergency support, as required during the rental period.

4. Delivery, Pickup, and Account Management Contractor shall coordinate delivery and pickup of vehicles at locations designated by the City, as needed. Contractor shall provide account management support, including a designated point of contact for scheduling, service coordination, and issue resolution.

5. Insurance and Regulatory Compliance Contractor shall ensure all vehicles are properly registered and meet all applicable insurance and regulatory requirements. Contractor shall maintain insurance coverage consistent with the requirements set forth in the Agreement and in accordance with applicable laws governing passenger transportation.

6. Billing and Rate Structure Contractor shall invoice the City in accordance with agreed-upon rental rates, fees, and terms as established in the Contractor’s pricing schedule and incorporated into this Agreement. Invoices shall be itemized and submitted in a timely manner. The total compensation under this Agreement shall not exceed the not-to-exceed (NTE) amount approved by the City Council, which includes both previously incurred rental charges and projected costs through the term of the Agreement.

7. Term and Use of Services. Services shall be provided on an as-needed basis for the duration of the Agreement. Vehicles will be used to support DPRCS programming, including but not limited to summer camps, after-school programs, and transportation of participants, particularly serving youth in undeserved communities.

8. Performance Standard Contractor shall perform all services in a professional and workmanlike manner consistent with industry standards and to the satisfaction of the City’s Project Manager. 457
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT B

PAYMENT PROVISIONS

1. COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR:

a. Provided Contractor is not in default under this Contract, Contractor shall be compensated in the manner set forth herein.

b. All payments made pursuant to this Contract shall be subject to the Contract Payment Limit. The Payment Limit includes expenses (phones, photocopying, meals and travel, etc.). Invoices shall be adequately detailed, based on accurate records, and be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City. Contractor may be required to provide back-up material upon request.

c. All City vendors receiving new contracts shall sign up to receive electronic payments through the City’s Automated Clearinghouse (ACH) payments service/provider.

2. SUBMISSION OF INVOICES:

Contractor shall submit timely invoices by email to
[email protected] and/or to the following address:

Attention: City of Richmond Finance/Account Payable
Project Manager: _______________________
P.O. Box 4046
Richmond, CA 94804

3. All invoices that are submitted by Contractor shall be subject to the approval of the City Project Manager, _______________________, before payments shall be authorized.

a. The City will pay invoice(s) within 45 days after completion of services to the City’s satisfaction. The City shall not pay late fees or interest.

b. All appropriate permits, certificates, and licenses, including a City business license shall be obtained and maintained for the duration of this Contract before any payment is authorized.

4. All insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be provided by the Contractor before this Contract is executed by the City. The insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be maintained by Contractor for the duration of this Contract and must be in place before any payment is authorized.

Darin Fitzpatrick
Darin Fitzpatrick
Enterprise Rent A Car
458
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT C

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICES

1. All required written notices shall be delivered: (i) by hand; or (ii) sent by registered, express, or certified mail, with return receipt requested or with delivery confirmation requested from the U.S. postal service; or (iii) sent by overnight or same day courier service at the party’s respective address listed in this Section.

2. Each notice shall be deemed to have been received on the earlier to occur of:
actual delivery or the date on which delivery is refused; or three (3) days after notice is deposited in the U.S. mail or with a courier service in the manner described above (Sundays and City holidays excepted).

3. Either party may, at any time, change its notice address (other than to a post office box address) by giving the other party three (3) days prior written notice of the new address.

4. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from Contractor to the City shall be addressed to the City at:

City of Richmond
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
Email: ________________________________________________

5. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from the City to Contractor shall be addressed to Contractor at:

Attn:

Email: ________________________________________________ Darin Fitzpatrick
[email protected]
Enterprise Rent A Car
Enterprise Rent A Car
3000 Executive Parkway, STE 225
San Ramon, CA, 94583
[email protected]
459
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT D

GENERAL CONDITIONS

1. INDEPENDENT PARTIES:

Contractor hereby declares that Contractor is engaged as an independent business and Contractor agrees to perform the services as an independent contractor.

The manner and means of conducting the services and tasks are under the control of Contractor except to the extent they are limited by statute, rule or regulation and the express terms of this Contract. No civil service status or other right of employment will be acquired by virtue of Contractor’s services. None of the benefits provided by the City to its employees, including but not limited to unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation plans, vacation and sick leave, are available from the City to Contractor, its employees or agents. Deductions shall not be made for any state or federal taxes, FICA payments, PERS payments, or other purposes normally associated with an employer-employee relationship from any compensation due to Contractor. Payments of the above items, if required, are the responsibility of Contractor.

2. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE:

Contractor and the City agree that time is of the essence regarding the performance of this Contract.

3. STANDARD OF CARE:

Contractor agrees to perform all services hereunder in a manner commensurate with the prevailing standards of like professionals or service Contractors, as applicable, in the San Francisco Bay Area and agrees that all services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by the City.

4. IMMIGRATION REFORM AND CONTROL ACT (IRCA):

Contractor assumes all responsibility for verifying the identity and employment authorization of all of its employees performing work hereunder, pursuant to all applicable IRCA or other federal, or state rules and regulations. Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City harmless from and against any loss, damage, liability, costs or expenses arising from any noncompliance of this provision by Contractor.

5. NON-DISCRIMINATION:

Consistent with the City’s policy and state and federal law that harassment and discrimination are unacceptable conduct, Contractor and its employees, contractors, and agents shall not harass or discriminate against any job applicant, City employee, or any other person on the basis of any kind of any statutorily (federal, state or local) protected class, including but not limited to: race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, Enterprise Rent A Car
460
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
disability (both mental and physical) including HIV and AIDS, medical condition (e.g. cancer), genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, pregnancy, political affiliation, military and veteran status or legitimate union activities. Contractor agrees that any violation of this provision shall constitute a material breach of this Contract.

6. CITY PROPERTY:
a. Each and every report, draft, work product, map, record, applicable plans, drawings, calculation, data, specification, video, graphic, or any other material or document produced, prepared or caused to be prepared by Contractor pursuant to or in connection with this Contract shall be the exclusive property of the City.

b. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be obligated to provide to City proprietary software or data which Contractor has developed or had developed for Contractor's own use; provided, however, that Contractor shall, pursuant to Section 11 below, indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless from and against any discovery or Public Records Act request seeking the disclosure of such proprietary software or data.

c. No report, information or other data given to or prepared or assembled by Contractor pursuant to this Contract shall be made available to any individual or organization by Contractor without prior approval of the City Manager or their designee.

d. Contractor shall, at such time and in such form as City Manager or their designee may require, furnish reports concerning the status of services and tasks required under this Contract.

7. RECORDS:

a. Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the services, tasks, work, documents and data in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of Contractor’s performance under the Contract, as well as maintain books and records related to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by the City that relate to the performance of the services and tasks under this Contract (collectively the “Records”).

b. All Records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Contractor shall provide free access to the Records to the representatives of the City or its designees during regular business hours upon reasonable prior notice. The City has the right to examine and audit the Records, and to make copies or transcripts therefrom as necessary, and to allow inspection of all proceedings and activities related to this Contract. Such Records, together with supporting documents, shall be kept separate from other documents and records and shall be maintained by Contractor for a period of five (5) years after receipt of final payment.

Enterprise Rent A Car
461
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
c. If supplemental examination or audit of the Records is necessary due to concerns raised by the City’s preliminary examination or audit of records, and the City’s supplemental examination or audit of the records discloses a failure to adhere to appropriate internal financial controls, or other breach of this Contract or failure to act in good faith, then Contractor shall reimburse the City for all reasonable costs and expenses associated with the supplemental examination or audit.

8. PERMITS AND LICENSES:

Contractor, at its sole expense, shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Contract, all appropriate permits, certificates and licenses, including a City business license, required in connection with the performance of the services and tasks hereunder.

The failure to obtain such permits and licenses shall be a material breach of this Contract and grounds for immediate termination by City; provided, however, that City may waive the business license requirement in writing under unusual or extraordinary circumstances without necessitating any modification of this Contract to reflect such waiver.

9. TERMINATION:

a. Termination Without Default. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the City may, in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, terminate this Contract at any time prior to completion by Contractor of the project or services hereunder immediately upon transmission of written notice to Contractor as provided in Exhibit C “Authorized Representatives and Notices”.

b. Termination in the Event of Default. Should Contractor fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, within the time and in the manner provided or otherwise violate any of the terms of this Contract, City may immediately terminate this Contract by giving written notice of such termination, stating the reasons for such termination. Contractor shall be compensated as provided in Exhibit B; provided, however, there shall be deducted from such amount the amount of damage, including attorney's fees, expert witness fees and costs, if any, sustained by City by virtue of Contractor's breach of this Contract. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.

10. CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor shall avoid all conflicts of interest (as defined under any federal, state or local statute, rule or regulation, or at common law) with respect to this Contract. Contractor further acknowledges, represents and warrants that no City official or employee has any economic interest, as defined in Title 2, California Code of Regulations §§ 18703.1 through 18703.5, with Contractor that would invalidate this Contract. Contractor acknowledges that in the event that Contractor shall be found by any judicial or administrative body to have any conflict of interest (as defined above) with respect to this Contract, all consideration received under Enterprise Rent A Car
462
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
this Contract shall be forfeited and returned to City forthwith. This provision shall survive the termination of this Contract for one (1) year.

11. HOLD HARMLESS:

a. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City) and hold harmless the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents and volunteers (“Indemnitees”) from and against any and all loss, damages, liability, obligations, claims, suits, judgments, costs and expenses whatsoever, including attorney’s fees and costs of litigation (“Claims”), arising from or in any manner connected to Contractor’s performance of its obligations under this Contract or failure to comply with any of its obligations under this Contract or out of the operations conducted by Contractor even if the City is found to have been negligent. If the Claims filed against Indemnitees allege negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct on the part of Contractor, Contractor shall have no right of reimbursement against Indemnitees for the costs of defense even if negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct is not found on the part of Contractor. Contractor shall not have any obligations to indemnify Indemnitees if the loss or damage is found to have resulted solely from the negligence or the willful misconduct of the City. The defense and indemnification obligations of this Contract are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this Contract.

b. This indemnification obligation shall survive this Contract and shall not be limited by any term of any insurance policy required under this Contract; provided however, that if this Contract is for design professional services, this indemnity provision is limited to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the design professional (as defined in California Civil Code section 2782.8).

12. LIMITATIONS UPON SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENT:

a. This Contract binds the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of Contractor. The Contractor shall not enter into subcontracts for any work contemplated under this Contract and shall not assign this Contract, nor any portion hereof or monies due or to become due, without the prior written consent of the City Council or its designee.

b. Contractor shall not assign, sublease, hypothecate, or transfer this Contract, or any interest therein, directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise, without prior written consent of the City Manager. Contractor shall submit a written request for consent to transfer to the City Manager at least thirty (30) days in advance of the desired transfer.

The City Manager or their designee may consent or reject such request in their sole and absolute discretion. Any attempt to do so without said consent shall be null and void, and any assignee, sublessee, hypothecate or transferee shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer. However, claims for Enterprise Rent A Car
463
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
money against the City under this Contract may be assigned by Contractor to a bank, trust company or other financial institution without prior written consent.

c. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor (if applicable), or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member if Contractor is a partnership or joint- venture or syndicate, which shall result in a change of control of Contractor, shall be deemed an assignment. For this purpose, control shall mean fifty percent or more of the voting power or twenty-five percent or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint-venture.

d. Only those persons and/or businesses whose names and resumés are attached to this Contract shall be used in the performance of this Contract. However, if after the start of this Contract, Contractor wishes to use sub-contractors, at no additional costs to the City, then Contractor shall submit a written request for consent to add sub- contractors including the names of the sub-contractors and the reasons for the request to the City Manager at least five (5) days in advance. The City Manager may consent or reject such requests in their sole and absolute discretion.

e. Each sub-contractor shall be required to furnish proof of workers’ compensation insurance and shall also be required to carry general, automobile and professional liability insurance (as applicable) in reasonable conformity to the insurance carried by Contractor.

f. In addition, any tasks or services performed by sub-contractors shall be subject to each provision of this Contract. Contractor shall include the following language in their Contract with any sub-contractor: “Sub-Contractors hired by Contractor agree to be bound to Contractor and the City in the same manner and to the same extent as Contractor is bound to the City.”

g. The requirements in this Section 12 shall not apply to persons who are merely providing materials, supplies, data or information that Contractor then analyzes and incorporates into its work product.

13. SAFETY:

a. Contractor acknowledges that the City is committed to the highest standards of workplace safety. Contractor will be solely and completely responsible for conditions of all vehicles owned or operated by Contractor, including the safety of all persons and property during performance of the services and tasks under this Contract.

Contractor shall assume sole and complete responsibility for the safety of Contractor's employees and any of subcontractor's employees This requirement will apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours. In addition, Contractor will comply with all safety provisions in conformance with U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Act, any equivalent state law, and all other applicable Enterprise Rent A Car
464
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
federal, state, county and local laws, ordinances, codes, and any regulations that may be detailed in other parts of the Contract. Where any of these are in conflict, the more stringent requirements will be followed. Contractor’s failure to thoroughly familiarize itself with the aforementioned safety provisions will not relieve it from compliance with the obligations and penalties set forth herein.

b. Contractor will immediately notify the City (in no event less than 24 hours) of any incident of death, serious personal injury or substantial property damage that occurs in connection with the performance of this Contract. Contractor will promptly submit to the City a written report of all incidents that occur in connection with this Contract. This report must include the following information: (i) name and address of injured or deceased person(s); (ii) name and address of Contractor’s employee(s) involved in the incident; (iii) name and address of Contractor’s liability insurance carrier; (iv) a detailed description of the incident; and (v) a police report.

c. Contractor acknowledges that the City shall have the right to impose, at the City’s sole discretion, requirements that it deems are necessary to protect the health and safety of the City employees, residents, and visitors. Contractor agrees to comply with all such requirements, including, but not limited to, mandatory vaccinations, the use of personal protective equipment (e.g. masks), physical distancing, and health screenings.

Contractor also agrees to make available to the City, at the City’s request, records to demonstrate Contractor’s compliance with this Section.

14. INSURANCE:

Insurance requirements are set forth in Exhibit F to this Contract. Contractor shall abide by the insurance requirements set forth in said Exhibit F.

15. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS:

a. During the term of this Contract, Contractor shall keep fully informed of all existing and future state and federal laws and all municipal ordinances and regulations of the City of Richmond which affect the manner in which the services or tasks are to be performed by Contractor, as well as all such orders and decrees of bodies or tribunals having any jurisdiction or authority over the same. Contractor shall comply with all applicable laws, state and federal and all ordinances, rules and regulations enacted or issued by the City. Compliance under this provision includes compliance with all provisions of the Richmond Municipal Code ("Municipal Code"), including Chapters 2.50,

2.52, 2.56, and 2.60, if applicable.

b. Contractor acknowledges that under § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code ("Living Wage Ordinance"), Contractor is required to provide the City with documents and information verifying its compliance with the Living Wage Ordinance. Contractor shall notify each of its affected employees with regards to the wages that are required to be paid pursuant to the Living Wage Ordinance as prescribed in § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code.

Enterprise Rent A Car
465
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

c. Contractor shall comply with § 2.28.030 of the Municipal Code, obligating every Contractor or sub-Contractor under an agreement or sub-agreement with the City for public works, goods or services to refrain from discriminatory employment or practices on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religious creed, national origin or ancestry of any employee, any applicant for employment or any potential sub-contractor.

d. Contractor acknowledges that the City’s Drug Free Workplace Policy, Violence in the Workplace Policy and the Policy Against Workplace Harassment, are available on the City’s website at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/workplacepolicies.

Contractor agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of said policies.

16. INTEGRATED CONTRACT:

The Recitals and exhibits are a material part of this Contract and are expressly incorporated herein. This Contract represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties hereto, and all preliminary negotiations and agreements of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein. No verbal agreement or implied covenant shall be held to vary the provisions hereof. Any modification of this Contract will be effective only by written execution signed by both the City and Contractor.

17. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS:

In the event of a conflict between these General Conditions and those of any Exhibit or attachment hereto, these General Conditions shall prevail; provided, however, that any Special Condition as set forth in Exhibit E shall prevail over these General Conditions. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of any two or more Exhibits or attachments hereto, those prepared by City shall prevail over those prepared by the Contractor, and the terms and conditions preferred by the City shall prevail over those preferred by the Contractor.

18. FORCE MAJEURE:

Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligations hereunder to the extent that the performance of such an obligation is prevented or delayed by reason of acts of God, strikes, boycotts, lock-outs, inability to procure materials not related to the price thereof, failure of power, restrictive governmental laws and regulations enacted after the date of this Contract, riots, civil unrest, acts of terrorism, insurrection, war, declaration of a state or national emergency or other reasons of a like nature not within the reasonable control of such party.

19. CONFLICT OF LAW:

This Contract shall be interpreted under, and enforced by the laws of the State of Enterprise Rent A Car
466
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
California without regard to any choice of law rules which may direct the application of laws of another jurisdiction. The Contract and obligations of the parties are subject to all valid laws, orders, rules, and regulations of the authorities having jurisdiction over this Contract (or the successors of those authorities). Any suits brought pursuant to this Contract shall be filed with the courts of the County of Contra Costa, State of California.

20. CLAIMS:

Any claim by Contractor against City hereunder shall be subject to Government Code §§ 800 et seq. The claims presentation provisions of said Act are hereby modified such that the presentation of all claims hereunder to the City shall be waived if not made within six months after accrual of the cause of action.

21. INTERPRETATION:

This Contract shall be interpreted as if drafted by both parties.

22. WARRANTY:

If any product is be provided to the City as part of this Contract, Contractor warrants as follows: Contractor possesses good title to the product and the right to transfer the product to City; the product shall be delivered to the City free from any security interest or other lien; the product meets any specifications contained herein; the product shall be free from material defects in materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of one (1) year from the date of delivery; and the product shall be fit for its intended purpose(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, consumable and maintenance items (such as light bulbs and batteries) shall be warranted for a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of delivery. All repairs during the warranty period shall be promptly performed by Contractor, at Contractor's expense, including shipping.

23. SEVERABILITY:

In the event that any of the provisions or portions or applications thereof of this Contract are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, City and Contractor shall negotiate an equitable adjustment in the provisions of the Contract with a view toward effecting the purpose of this Contract, and the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions or portions or applications thereof, shall not be affected thereby.

24. AUTHORITY:

City warrants and represents that the signatory hereto (the Mayor of the City of Richmond or the City Manager) is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of City. The party signing on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that they are duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor, Enterprise Rent A Car
467
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
and shall be personally liable to City if they are not duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor.

25. WAIVER:

The waiver by City of any breach of any term or provision of this Contract shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach. Inspections or approvals, or statements by any officer, agent or employee of the City relating to the Contractor’s performance, or payment therefore, or any combination of these acts, shall not relieve the Contractor’s obligation to fulfill this Contract as prescribed; nor shall the City be thereby stopped from bringing any action for damages or enforcement arising from any failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this Contract.

26. COUNTERPARTS:

This Contract may be executed in any number of counterparts (including by fax, PDF, DocuSign, or other electronic means), each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.

27. SANCTUARY CITY CONTRACTING ORDINANCE (SCCO):

The Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 prohibits the City from granting and or retaining contracts with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor must submit the Sanctuary City Compliance Statement, attached hereto as Exhibit G.

Enterprise Rent A Car
468
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT E

SPECIAL CONDITIONS

The General Conditions are hereby amended to include the following modifications and/or provisions (if applicable, otherwise please state “NONE”):

Enterprise Rent A Car
NONE
469
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT F

INSURANCE PROVISIONS
☐ CHECK HERE IF RISK MANAGEMENT HAS APPROVED WAIVING INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS CONTRACT.

1. CERTIFICATES: Before the commencement of the terms of this Contract, and during the entire term of this Contract and any extension or modification thereof, Contractor shall furnish the City’s Risk Manager with certificates showing the type, amount, class of operations covered, effective dates and dates of expiration of insurance coverage in compliance with coverage requirements set forth by the City and incorporated herein.

Such certificates, which do not limit Contractor’s indemnification, shall also contain substantially the following statement:
“Should any of the above insurance covered by this certificate be canceled or coverage reduced before the expiration date thereof, the insurer affording coverage shall provide thirty (30) days’ advance written notice to the City of Richmond.

Attention: Risk Manager.”
Contractor shall maintain in force at all times during the performance of this Contract all appropriate coverage of insurance required by this Contract with an insurance company licensed to offer insurance business in the State of California with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII or Standard & Poor’s Rating (if rated) of at least BBB unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Contractor shall deliver updated insurance certificates to the City at the address set forth in Exhibit C prior to the expiration of the existing insurance certificate for the duration of the term of Contract.

Endorsements naming the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insured shall be submitted with the insurance certificates.

2. COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS: The City’s insurance requirements depend upon the type of service being provided and/or the provider. The City’s insurance requirements will fall into one of the following categories (unless otherwise provided by the City):

Consultants and Contractors – Type 1
Professional Services – Type 2
Environmental Risk/Hazardous Waste Material – Type 3
Lease of City Property – Type 4
Vendors, Suppliers, Small Grant Recipients & Nonprofit Organizations – Type 5 Transportation Providers – Type 6
Professional Services Pyrotechnics – Type 7
Cyber and I.T. Risks – Type 8
Enterprise Rent A Car
470
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
The insurance requirements classification applicable to this Contract shall be attached to this Exhibit F and made a part hereof.

3. FAILURE TO SECURE: If Contractor at any time during the term hereof should fail to secure or maintain the foregoing insurance, the City shall be permitted to obtain such insurance in Contractor’s name or as an agent of Contractor and shall be compensated by Contractor for the costs of the insurance premiums at the maximum rate permitted by law and computed from the date written notice is received that the premiums have not been paid.

4. SUFFICIENCY OF INSURANCE: The insurance limits required by the City are not represented as being sufficient to protect Contractor. Contractor is advised to consult Contractor’s insurance broker to determine adequate coverage for Contractor. The coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Contract; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of the coverage carried by or available to Contractor; whichever is greater.

INSERT INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CLASSIFICATION APPLICABLE TO THIS CONTRACT: (IF NECESSARY, CONFIRM WITH RISK MANAGER)
Enterprise Rent A Car
471
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements – Type 1:

Consultants and Contractors

Type 1 – Page 1 of 4

Revised: September 2011

In all instances where a CONTRACTOR or its representatives will be conducting business and/or providing services, the City requires the following MINIMUM insurance requirements and limits.

CONTRACTOR shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract, agreement, or other order for work, services or supplies, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder and the results of that work by the CONTRACTOR, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Maintenance of proper insurance coverage is a material element of the contract. Failure to maintain or renew coverage or to provide evidence of renewal may be treated by the City as a material breach of contract.

CONTRACTOR agrees that in the event of loss due to any of the perils for which it has agreed to provide Commercial General Liability insurance, CONTRACTOR shall look solely to its insurance for recovery. CONTRACTOR hereby grants to CITY, on behalf of any insurer providing Commercial General Liability insurance to either CONTRACTOR or CITY with respect to the services of CONSULTANT herein, a waiver of any right to subrogation which any such insurer of said CONTRACTOR may acquire against the CITY by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.

Original, signed certificates and original, separate policy endorsements, naming the City as an additional insured for general liability, as well as a waiver of subrogation for Workers’ Compensation insurance, shall be received and approved by the City before any work may begin. However, failure to do so shall not operate as a waiver of these insurance requirements.

City reserves the right to modify or require additional coverages for specific risk exposures depending on scope of CONTRACTORS work.

Minimum coverage is detailed below. The policy limits of coverage shall be made available to the full limits of the policy.

The minimum limits stated herein shall not serve to reduce the policy limits of coverage of CONTRACTOR.

Minimum Scope of Insurance – the following forms shall be provided and coverage shall be at least as broad as the following:

1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (ISO Occurrence Form CG 0001) including coverage for bodily and personal injury, property damage, and products and completed operations.

2. Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability coverage (ISO Form CA 0001, Code 1, Any Auto)

3. Original and Separate Additional Insured Endorsements for General Liability (ISO Form CG 20 10 11/85 or its equivalent) with primary and non-contributory language.

4. Workers’ Compensation Insurance as required by the State of California including Employer’s Liability coverage.

5. Original and Separate Waiver of Subrogation for Workers’ Compensation and Builder’s Risk/ Course of Construction Insurance.

6. Builder’s Risk/Course of Construction insurance covering all risks of loss less policy exclusions when the City of Richmond has a financial interest in the property. – (Only required for Construction Contracts involving property)

7. Contractor’s Pollution Liability (if applicable for Construction Contractors)

Required Coverage

Minimum Limits
Workers’ Compensation and
Employers’ Liability
Statutory limits as required by the State of California including $1 million Employers’ Liability per accident, per employee for bodily injury or disease.

If CONTRACTOR
is self-insured, provide a certificate of Permission to Self- Insure, signed by the California Department of Industrial Relations and Self- Insurance. If contractor is a sole proprietor (has no employees) than contractor must sign “Contractor Release of Liability” found at:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61.

472
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements – Type 1:

Consultants and Contractors

Type 1 – Page 2 of 4

Revised: September 2011

PROJECT COST R EQUIRED LIMIT
$0 - $5 million $2 million p/o
$5 million - $10 million $5 million p/o
Over $10 million $10 million p/o
Fireworks $5 million p/o
General Liability
(primary and excess limits
combined)

Includes coverage for bodily injury, personal injury, property damage and products and completed operations. The policy shall not exclude coverage for XCU perils (explosion, collapse, or damage to underground property).

If the policy includes a general aggregate, either the general aggregate shall apply separately to this project, service or location or the minimum required aggregate limit shall be twice the per occurrence limit ($4 million aggregate limit).

Policy shall be endorsed to name the City of Richmond as an additional insured per the conditions detailed below.

Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage.

Builders’ Risk/Course of
Construction – Covers property
under construction, repair or
renovation as well as equipment
and materials to be installed.

(Only required for Construction
Projects involving property and
equipment installation.)
Coverage shall include all risks of direct physical loss, excluding earthquake, for an amount equal to the full completed value of the covered structure or replacement value of alterations or additions, including soft costs and business interruption.

If the project does not involve new or major reconstruction, an Installation Floater may be acceptable. For such projects, a property installation floater shall be obtained that provides for the improvement, remodel, modification, alteration, conversion or adjustment to existing buildings, structures, processes, machinery and equipment. The Property Installation Floater shall provide property damage coverage for any building, structure, machinery or equipment damaged, impaired, broken or destroyed during the performance of the Work, including during transit, installation and testing at the City of Richmond’s site.

The City of Richmond shall be named as loss payee as its interest may appear. The insurer shall waive all rights of subrogation against City.

Contractor’s Pollution Liability (if
applicable)
Protects against:
unexpected/unintended release of
pollution resulting from contractors
covered operations such as:

HVAC, paving, carpentry, pipeline
& tank installation, drillers,
remediation contractors,
maintenance, mechanical,
demolition, excavation, grading,
street/road construction,
residential & commercial builders.

Same limits as General Liability.

Required Policy Conditions
A. M. Best Rating A:VII or Better. If the A.M. Best Rating falls below the required rating, CONTRACTOR must replace coverage immediately and provide notice to City.

Additional Insured Endorsement

Applicable to General Liability Coverage.

The City of Richmond, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be named as additional insureds for all liability arising out of the operations by or on behalf of the named insured, including but not limited to bodily injury, deaths and property damage or destruction arising in any respect directly or indirectly in the performance of this contract.

ISO form CG 20 10 (11/85) or its equivalent is required. The endorsement must not
exclude products and completed operations
coverage. If it does, then CG 20 37 (10/01) is also required. 473
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements – Type 1:

Consultants and Contractors

Type 1 – Page 3 of 4

Revised: September 2011
Additional Insured Endorsement
(continued)

SAMPLE Endorsements can be found at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61
Primary and Noncontributory The contractor’s insurance coverage must be primary coverage as it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self insurance maintained by the City is wholly separate from the insurance of the contractor and in no way relieves the contractor from its responsibility to provide insurance.

Waiver of Subrogation
Endorsement Form
Contractor’s insurer will provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City for Workers Compensation and Builder’s Risk/ Course of Construction coverage during the life of this contract.

SAMPLE Endorsements can be found at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61
Deductibles and Self-Insured
Retentions
Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retention as respects the City or the CONTRACTOR shall procure a financial guarantee in an amount equal to the deductible or self-insured retention guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration and defense expenses.

Contractor is responsible for satisfaction of the deductible and/or self-insured retention for each loss.

Loss Payable Endorsement (only
required when Builder’s Risk
and/or Course of Construction
Insurance is required.)
Applicable to Builder’s Risk/Course of Construction naming the City of Richmond as Loss Payee.

SURETY BONDS
(If a Public Works/Engineering
Project)
The Contractor shall provide:

1. A Bid bond

2. A Performance Bond

3. A Payment Bond

Umbrella/Excess Liability Policies
If an Umbrella or Excess Liability Policy is used to meet the liability limits, coverage shall be as broad as specified for underlying coverages and cover those insured in the underlying policies.

Claims-Made Policies
If any insurance policy is written on a claims-made form: 1) the retroactive date must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work. 2) Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work. 3) If coverage is canceled or non- renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date prior to the contract effective date, the Contractor must purchase an extended period coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.

Subcontractors

CONTRACTOR
shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall furnish to the City for review and approval, separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.

CONTRACTOR agrees to defend and indemnify the City of Richmond for any damage resulting to it from failure of either CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor to take out or maintain the required insurance policies. The fact that insurance is obtained by CONTRACTOR, and/or CONTRACTOR’s subcontractors, will not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of CONTRACTOR, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this contract. Damages recoverable by CITY from CONTRACTOR or any third party will not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage.
474
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements – Type 1:

Consultants and Contractors

Type 1 – Page 4 of 4

Revised: September 2011

Verification of Coverage
All original certificates and endorsements shall be received and approved by the City before work may begin . The City
of Richmond reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies including endorsements affecting the coverage at any time.

Original insurance certificates and required policy endorsements shall be mailed, or delivered to the Designated Project Manager for the City of Richmond.

Insurance certificates and endorsements may be faxed to the Designated Project Manager. However, Contractor must mail the original certificates and endorsements to Designated Project Manager once faxed.

Continuous Coverage
CONTRACTOR shall maintain the required insurance for the life of the contract. Should the CONTRACTOR cease to have insurance as required during this time, all work by the CONTRACTOR pursuant to this agreement shall cease until insurance acceptable to the City is provided. In the event that CONTRACTOR fails to comply with the City’s insurance requirements, the City may take such action as it deems necessary to protect the City’s interests. Such action may include but is not limited to termination of the contract, withholding of payments, or other actions as the City deems appropriate.

If services or the scope of work extend beyond the expiration dates of the required insurance policies initially approved by the City, CONTRACTOR must provide updated certificates and endorsements indicating that the required coverage, terms and conditions are still in place. Renewal certificates and updated endorsements shall be mailed to the Designated Project Manager.

Cancellation

CONTRACTOR shall ensure that coverage shall not be cancelled, reduced or otherwise materially changed except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice has been given to the City.

Reporting Requirements

Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.

Consistent with Public Policy
The insuring provisions, insofar as they may be judged to be against public policy shall be void and unenforceable only to the minimum extent necessary so that the remaining terms and provisions herein may be consistent with public policy and thus enforceable.

475
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT G

SANCTUARY CITY COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

The undersigned, (hereafter "Contractor"), has had an opportunity to review the requirements of City of Richmond Ordinance 12-18 (hereafter "Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance" or “SCCO”).

Contractor understands and agrees that the City may choose with whom it will maintain business relations and may refrain from contracting with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor understands the meaning of the following terms used in the SCCO:

a. "Data Broker” means either of the following:

i. The collection of information, including personal information about consumers, from a wide variety of sources for the purposes of reselling such information to their customers, which include both private-sector business and government agencies;

ii. The aggregation of data that was collected for another purpose from that for which it is ultimately used.

b. “Extreme Vetting” means data mining, threat modeling, predictive risk analysis, or other similar services."

Contractor understands that it is not eligible to receive or retain a City contract if at the time the Contract is executed, or at any time during the term of the Contract, it provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to ICE.

Contractor further understands and agrees that Contractor's failure to comply with the SCCO shall constitute a material default of the Contract and the City Manager may terminate the Contract and bar Contractor from bidding on future contracts with the City for five (5) years from the effective date of the contract termination.

By executing this statement, Contractor certifies that it complies with the requirements of the SCCO and that if at any time during the term of the Contract it ceases to comply, Contractor will promptly notify the City Manager in writing. Any person or entity who knowingly or willingly supplies false information in violation of the SCCO shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a $1,000 fine.

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Printed Name: Title:

Signed: Date:

Business Entity:

Enterprise Rent A Car
476
Invoice Billing Date Renter First Name Renter Last Name RA # Ody Res No Rental Out Date 39566889 7/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 8SLCBW 017373 6/30/2025 39566889 7/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 8R9X0J 8R86DW 6/26/2025 39566889 7/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 8RB21V 8R8DYY 6/26/2025 39809438 8/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 94PWY0 8R86DW 7/24/2025 39809438 8/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 94Q884 017519 7/28/2025 39809438 8/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 94PLTP 8R8DYY 7/24/2025 40054857 9/30/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 9FDK63 8R86DW 8/21/2025 40054857 9/30/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 9GNLC8 017682 8/25/2025 40054857 9/30/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 9GXWSZ 8R8DYY 8/21/2025 40333587 10/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 9RCRLP 8R8DYY 9/18/2025 40333587 10/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 9RD5MP 8R86DW 9/18/2025 40333587 10/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 9SG0S1 017850 9/22/2025 40572117 11/30/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 13VB38 017993 10/20/2025 40572117 11/30/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 13D19D 8R86DW 10/16/2025 40572117 11/30/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 13CV1G 8R8DYY 10/16/2025 40797937 12/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 1D70G6 8R8DYY 11/13/2025 40797937 12/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 1D7708 8R86DW 11/13/2025 40797937 12/31/2025 CITY OF RICHMOND 1FWQ5H 018133 11/17/2025 477
Rental City Return Date Return City Car Type Plan Code Item Balance Bal Crncy Orig RA Amount E123M3 7/28/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 7/24/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 7/24/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 8/21/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 8/25/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 8/21/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 9/18/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 9/22/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 9/18/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 10/16/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 10/16/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 10/20/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 11/17/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 11/13/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 11/13/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 12/11/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 12/11/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 E123M3 12/15/2025 E123M3 XVAR 8506450 2363.100 USD 2363.10 42,535.80$
478
Unit Customer Contract Base Currency Final RA Invoice Multiplier 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108014258246 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108014255787 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108014255896 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108014643993 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108014706577 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108014716804 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108015104874 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108015154102 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108015104969 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108015620140 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108015620041 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108015645427 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108016117018 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108016043414 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108016043487 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108016528530 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108016504398 1.00000000 300NB 18329622 XZGV128 2363.100 USD 108016557335 1.00000000 479

Page 1 of 10 ends

March 24, 2026

City Manager's Office

DATE: March 24, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Shasa Curl, City Manager
LaShonda White, Deputy City Manager – Community
Service
Emily Combs, Finance Director
Patrick Seals, Administrative Chief
SUBJECT:

Charter Article 15 Review – Richmond Fund for Children
and Youth Review
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Per Article 15, Section 11 of the Richmond City Charter, the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (RFCY or
Fund) is scheduled for reauthorization at the end of
Fiscal Year (FY) 2027-28. Should the City Council
choose to reauthorize Article 15 without amendment, the Fund would continue to receive an annual allocation
equal to 3 percent of unrestricted General Fund
revenues, totaling approximately $99 million over the FY 2028-29 through FY 2037-38 period (ten-year period).

RFCY currently receives an annual transfer-in from the
General Fund to support its Charter-mandated activities (Account String: 13371018-391994).

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

January 22, 2019
July 16, 2019

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Article 15 of the Richmond City Charter authorizes the
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth and establishes
the process and timing for its extension. Pursuant to
Section 11, the City Council may extend the provisions of Article 15 for an additional ten-year term by majority vote and is required to act by December 31, 2027.

Accordingly, the City Council will receive a presentation AGENDA
REPORT
480

Page 2 of 10 ends

March 24, 2026
on Article 15 and provide policy direction regarding the renewal provisions for the Richmond Fund for Children
and Youth.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

RECEIVE a presentation on Article 15 of the Charter
regarding the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth and
PROVIDE DIRECTION regarding renewal provisions and
options – City Manager’s Office/Finance Department
(Shasa Curl/Patrick Seals 510-620-6512/Emily
Combs/Antonio Banuelos 510-620-6542).

DISCUSSION:

Background

In June 2018, Richmond voters approved of the Richmond Kids’ First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act, adding Article 15 to the City Charter and formally establishing the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (RFCY or Fund) (Attachment 1). The measure created a dedicated funding stream to expand and strengthen services for children, youth, and transitional-aged young adults living in Richmond and unincorporated North Richmond.

The initiative was rooted in equity, responding to long-standing disparities in access to education, health, safety, and opportunity that disproportionately affect low-income families, communities of color, immigrant households, LGBTQ+ youth, and youth impacted by trauma and system involvement.

The RFCY is supported by voter-approved revenue measures that increased the City’s unrestricted general-purpose revenues and enabled long-term investment in children and youth. In 2018, Richmond voters approved Measures E and K, supporting youth services, with 76.6 percent and 67.4 percent in favor, respectively, and Measure H, increasing the real estate transfer tax, with 64.9 percent voting yes:

 Measure E established the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth and embedded equity into the City Charter by prioritizing populations most impacted by harm, disinvestment, and barriers to services (Attachment 2).  Measure K expanded the City’s general fund base, helping make it possible to invest in prevention-oriented and culturally responsive services (Attachment 3).  Measure H strengthened general fund revenues through the documentary transfer tax, supporting community-based programs that serve youth and families facing economic and housing instability (Attachment 4).

Together, these measures reflect a community mandate to reduce disparities and improve outcomes for historically underserved children and youth.

481

Page 3 of 10 ends

March 24, 2026
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Major Components

The Fund’s purpose is to ensure that Richmond’s children, youth, and young adults are healthy, supported, successful in school, and able to thrive in safe and stable families and communities—particularly those who face systemic barriers to opportunity.

Description of the Department
The Charter created the Richmond Department of Children and Youth (RDCY or Department) within the City Manager’s Office to administer the RFCY. The Department ensures that equity is embedded in all aspects of implementation by:

 Managing competitive grant cycles that prioritize organizations rooted in and reflective of the communities they serve.
 Supporting the Oversight Board’s diverse, youth-inclusive membership.  Coordinating needs assessments that elevate voices of marginalized families and young people.
 Monitoring performance to ensure investments advance equitable outcomes.

RFCY Oversight Board
The Oversight Board consists of 15 members, with 7-8 seats held for youth ages 15-24.

The purpose of the Oversight Board is to help guide funding for youth-serving organizations by developing policies, monitoring, and ensuring that the Fund is managed in a manner accountable to the community.

General Fund Allocations
The Charter outlines a phased funding structure and clear implementation benchmarks:
 Initial infrastructure funding in FY 2018–19 and FY 2019–20 to launch the Department of Children and Youth and develop the first Strategic Investment Plan with a strong equity lens. There was no allocation in FY 2020-21.  A gradual increase in annual allocations from 1 percent, 2 percent, and 3 percent of the City’s unrestricted general purpose revenues respectively during FY 2021–22, FY 2022-23, and FY 2023–24. The 3 percent allocation remains until FY 2027-2028 (Table 1).
 A requirement that the Fund’s effectiveness be evaluated before the end of its initial ten-year term and presented for renewal or revision.

These timelines were designed to support long-term, stable investment in communities that have historically experienced underinvestment. These funds have enabled sustained investment in neighborhoods and populations experiencing the greatest inequities in health, education, safety, and economic stability.

Percentage for Grants, Administration, and Evaluation
The Charter establishes clear limits to ensure the majority of RFCY funds support direct services:

482

Page 4 of 10 ends

March 24, 2026
 A maximum of 10 percent may be used for administration, including staffing, infrastructure, and contract management needed to support community-based organizations serving high-need populations. Up to 10 percent of the administrative portion may be used for City overhead.
 A maximum of 5 percent may be used for independent evaluation to measure outcomes for priority youth groups.
 The remaining 85 percent is used to support eligible public agencies and non-profit community-based organizations for services provided to children and youth from birth to 18 years old and their caregivers, and disconnected transitional-aged young adults from ages 18 to 24 years

This structure ensures RFCY investments remain focused on programs and outcomes for young people facing the greatest barriers.

Community Needs Assessments
Consistent with Charter requirements, RDCY, in partnership with the RFCY Oversight Board, conducted a comprehensive Community Needs Assessments (CNAs) to inform funding priorities and ensure that investments respond to the lived experiences and needs of Richmond’s children, youth, and families.

The initial CNA, completed in 2020, relied on a combination of quantitative data (e.g., public health, education, and demographic indicators and qualitative input gathered through community forums, focus groups, interviews, and surveys (Attachment 5). This process identified key areas of need, including mental and behavioral health, educational support, violence prevention, basic needs, and out-of-school time programming.

A subsequent CNA was completed in 2024, to inform the next funding cycle (Attachment 6). While many core needs remained consistent with those identified in 2020, the 2024 assessment found that several challenges—particularly related to mental health, educational supports, and access to basic needs—had intensified. The CNA process emphasized inclusive community engagement, incorporating input from youth, caregivers, service providers, and other stakeholders to ensure that RFCY investments remain responsive, equitable, and community-driven.

Strategic Investment Plans
Findings from each CNA have directly informed the development of three-year Strategic Investment Plans (SIPs), which establish funding priorities, outline investment strategies, and guide the allocation of RFCY resources.

The first SIP covered Fiscal Years 2021–2024 and marked the Fund’s initial full grantmaking cycle (Attachment 7). The SIP identified priority areas aligned with the Charter’s goals and directed funding toward community-based organizations serving children and youth from birth through age 24, with an emphasis on populations most impacted by inequity and systemic barriers.

483

Page 5 of 10 ends

March 24, 2026
Building on lessons learned from the first funding cycle, the most recent SIP, covering FYs 2025–2028, refined priority areas and funding allocations based on updated community input and evaluation findings (Attachment 8). Across both plans, the SIPs have served as the primary policy and planning documents guiding RFCY investments and ensuring consistency with voter intent.

Evaluations and Evaluators
Independent evaluation is a core accountability feature of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth. Article 15, Section 7, subdivision d.4. of the Charter requires regular evaluation of funded programs by a third-party, external evaluator to assess program implementation, outcomes, and alignment with Fund goals.

For the Fund’s first full investment cycle (FYs 2021–2024), the City contracted with WestEd to conduct a comprehensive, mixed-methods evaluation of RFCY-funded programs. The evaluation examined program reach, service delivery, participant outcomes, and early system-level impacts across funded priority areas. Data sources included grantee reports, participant surveys, interviews, focus groups, and administrative data.

The evaluation found that RFCY-funded programs largely met or exceeded service targets, demonstrated strong cultural responsiveness, and produced positive outcomes for participants, particularly in education, social-emotional well-being, and safety (Attachment 9). The evaluator also identified opportunities for improvement, including strengthening data systems and expanding technical assistance to grantees. These findings have informed ongoing implementation and the development of subsequent Strategic Investment Plans. More specifically, based on feedback received at the January 20, 2026, City Council meeting, City staff will incorporate refinements to the evaluation framework, including unduplicated participant counts by organization, enhanced data accuracy and verification protocols to confirm residency, and the inclusion of select individual-level metrics by organization where appropriate. An annual review of 2025 grantees are anticipated to be presented to City Council in May 2026.

Priority and Core Need Areas Served
Over its initial funding cycle, RFCY investments have supported a broad range of services aligned with Charter-defined eligible uses and SIP priorities. Funded programs addressed core need areas such as mental and behavioral health, education and workforce development, out-of-school time and enrichment, violence prevention, access to basic needs, and information, guidance, and case management.

Between FYs 2021–2024, the Fund awarded grants to 46 community-based organizations and public agency partners, supporting dozens of individual programs across Richmond and North Richmond. The portfolio included both established providers and small or emerging organizations, reflecting the Fund’s commitment to equity, community representation, and capacity building https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4314/RFCY-Grant-Awardees.

484

Page 6 of 10 ends

March 24, 2026
During this same period, RFCY allocated approximately $9.1 million in grant funding to support direct services for children, youth, and families. Funding levels varied by priority area and program type, with investments distributed across multiple years to provide stability, support planning, and enable sustained service delivery.

CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS AND POLICY OPTIONS

The current ten-year Fund expires at the end of FY 2027-28, and the decision to extend the term of Fund for an additional ten years from FY 2028-29 through FY 2037-38, will be set before the City Council and/or voters.

Section 11 of Article 15 states that “if the City Council does not act to extend the provisions of this Article before December 31, 2027, the City Council shall be obligated to place a measure on a 2028 election ballot seeking voter approval of whether to extend the term for an additional ten years.” City staff is requesting City Council consideration and action in 2026 due to timing. The 2028 primary election in June 2028 is at the end of the current 10-year term and waiting until 2028 for voter action would cause planning and implementation issues and delays for RFCY staff and grant recipients.

Below are policy options for the City Council’s consideration related to the renewal of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth. Upon receipt of policy direction, City staff will return with additional analysis for the City Council’s consideration, including but not limited to the options below. The final options will be based on City Council direction.

City staff recommend hosting 2–3 community meetings regarding policy options, tentatively scheduled for April 13 and April 15, to provide opportunities for community discussion and input.

Option 1. City Council Reauthorizes the Article Without Amendment (Keep As-Is)

Under this option, the City Council adopts an ordinance or resolution reauthorizing Article 15 by a simple majority vote on or before June 13, 2026. This action would extend the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth for an additional ten-year term without amendment, consistent with existing Charter language. No voter action would be required under this option, and all provisions of Article 15 would remain unchanged.

Option 2. City Council Does Not Reauthorize; Measure Placed on Ballot Without Amendment (Voters Decide)

Under this option, the City Council does not act to reauthorize the Article by simple majority vote. As a result, the City would place a measure on the November 3, 2026, General Election ballot asking voters whether to reauthorize Article 15 for an additional ten-year term without amendment, as contemplated by the Charter. Under this scenario, continuation of the Fund would be subject to voter approval.

485

Page 7 of 10 ends

March 24, 2026
Option 3. City Council Proposes Amendments to the Article (Amendments Voters Decide)

 Under this option, the City Council elects not to reauthorize Article 15 in its current form and instead proposes one or more amendments to the Charter provisions governing the Fund. In this scenario, the proposed amendments would require voter approval and would be placed on the November 3, 2026, General Election ballot.

Potential amendment concepts may include, but are not limited to, the following (subject to legal review):

a. Adjusting the General Fund contribution, such as capping or reducing the allocation from the current three percent (3%) to a lower percentage (e.g., two percent or one percent).
b. Increasing eligibility and funding for specific programs or entities, in support of Advanced Life Support (Fire Department), coordinated after-school programs (including athletic teams, maintaining parks and sports spaces), Black Resiliency, Immigration Support, Richmond Promise, unhoused supportive services, or other policy matters to support children and healthy families in Richmond. c. Modifying allowable administrative or evaluation expenditures, including increasing the maximum percentage allocation for City administration, evaluation, or audit functions (e.g., increasing percentage for City administration from 10 percent to 14 -20 percent) to fully cover administrative costs.

Any amendment to Article 15 would require voter approval and could not be implemented solely by City Council action.

CURRENT & ONGOING INVESTMENT AND FINANCIAL IMPACT

Table 1 below illustrates the progression of Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (RFCY) contributions from the City’s General Fund from FY 2018-19 through FY 2027-

28. Initial fixed-dollar allocations of $250,000 in FY 2018-19 and $700,000 in FY 2019- 20 supported early program infrastructure, with no transfer in FY 2020-21. Beginning in FY 2021-22, RFCY funding transitioned to a percentage-based allocation calculated as a share of General Fund revenues, starting at 1 percent ($1.93 million), increasing to 2 percent in FY 2022-23 ($4.12 million), and reaching the full 3 percent allocation in FY 2023-24 ($7.19 million). The 3 percent allocation remains through FY 2027-28.

Year-over-year percentage changes in the early years reflect low or zero baseline funding and should be interpreted as part of a phased implementation rather than ongoing growth rates. The largest increase occurred in FY 2019-20 (180 percent) during the initial build-out phase, followed by a 114 percent increase in FY 2022-23 and a 74 percent increase in FY 2023-24 as the percentage allocation was fully implemented.

After FY 2023-24, growth moderates to approximately 2–3 percent annually, reflecting continued application of the 3 percent allocation and projected General Fund revenue 486

Page 8 of 10 ends

March 24, 2026
growth. Annual contributions are projected to reach approximately $9.06 million by FY 2027-28, based on assumptions in the General Fund Five-Year Forecast presented to City Council on January 27, 2026, and assuming the 3 percent General Fund contribution to the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth is unchanged.

Table 1: Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 10-Year Contributions Year over Year Growth from FY 2019 - 2028 Fiscal Year RFCY
Contributions
Allocation
Percentage of
General Fund
Year-Over-Year
Increase in Percentage
2019 250,000 - -
2020 700,000 - 180%
2021 - - -100%
2022 1,929,172 1% -
2023 4,121,294 2% 114%
2024 7,186,411 3% 74%
2025 7,575,272 3% 5%
2026 8,546,616 3% 13%
2027 8,836,913 3% 3%
2028 9,058,023 3% 3%
TOTAL $48,203,701

Table 2 below shows the projected contributions to RFCY from the General Fund if maintained at 3 percent annually, and if reduced to 2 percent or 1 percent annually. As noted, the City Council can determine to extend the provisions of Article 15 without amendments for an additional ten-year term by simple majority vote. This would retain the 3 percent annual contribution for ten years starting in FY 2028-29. If the City Council decides to amend the annual allocation of the Article, Table 2 below provides potential changes to consider.

Table 2: RFCY Contribution Scenarios
Fiscal
Year
RFCY
Contributions if
Maintained at 3%
RFCY
Contributions if
Changed to 2%
RFCY
Contributions if
Changed to 1%
2029 9,299,007 6,199,338 3,099,669
2030 9,533,415 6,355,610 3,177,805
2031 9,884,251 6,589,500 3,294,750
2032 10,090,107 6,726,738 3,363,369
2033 10,301,110 6,867,406 3,433,703
2034 10,517,387 7,011,592 3,505,796
2035 10,739,072 7,159,381 3,579,691
2036 9,316,299 6,210,866 3,105,433
2037 9,549,206 6,366,138 3,183,069
2038 9,787,936 6,525,291 3,262,645
TOTAL $99,017,790 $66,011,860 $33,005,930

487

Page 9 of 10 ends

March 24, 2026
Timeline

The proposed schedule establishes a clear sequence of actions to support timely City Council consideration of the RFCY renewal and potential placement of a measure on the November 3, 2026, General Election ballot. It identifies when Council direction is requested, when fiscal and legal analyses must be completed, when study sessions and formal actions would occur, and when required election materials, arguments, and Registrar submittals are due. The timeline also reflects statutory deadlines for ballot placement, voter guide preparation, and election administration. City staff will align work products and engagement activities to these milestones to ensure that City Council direction can be implemented efficiently and in compliance with all applicable requirements.

Milestone Proposed Date(s) (Subject to Change)
Introduce RFCY reauthorization item to
City Council; receive direction regarding
need for ballot measure
March 24, 2026
If City Council decides to extend the measure without amendments, then no ballot measure is required

If City Council decides to allow the voters to decide on the reauthorization or an amendment is requested, then the following timeline is in effect Fiscal analysis completed (tax/bond
statements, if applicable)
March 24 – April 16, 2026
Community Listening Session(s) –
Optional per Council Direction
April 13, 2026 (Daytime and Evening)
April 15, 2026
Study sessions held (Includes
opportunities for stakeholders to
participate in public meetings)
April – May 2026 (Proposed: April 28)
City Council adopts resolution placing
measure on ballot
June 13, 2026

Staff Actions Subsequently Required*:

Measure materials submitted to Registrar
(≤75 words; full text; impartial analysis
contact)
June 16 – Jun 30, 2026
Window to place measure on ballot July 7 – August 7, 2026 (last date)* Local measure letter signed July 10 – August 10, 2026
Primary arguments due (for/against) July 17 – August 19, 2026 Rebuttal arguments due July 24 – August 24, 2026
Voter Information Guide mailing
(estimated)
September 17 – September 24, 2026
General Election Day November 3, 2026

488

Page 10 of 10 ends

March 24, 2026

SYNERGISTIC POLICIES:

City of Richmond Charter, Article 15, Section 11 – Establishes the timeline and process for reauthorization or voter consideration of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth.

Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (Measures E & K) – Provides dedicated funding for programs that support youth development, education, health, and enrichment services for Richmond children and youth.

Health in All Policies (HiAP) – Integrates health considerations into City decision- making across departments to improve community health outcomes, particularly for children and families.

Race and Equity Action Plan (REAP) – Guides City policies and programs to advance racial equity and address disparities affecting Richmond residents, including youth and families.

Richmond General Plan – Includes policies that support youth well-being through access to education, safe neighborhoods, parks, recreation, and healthy environments.

Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Expands equitable access to recreation programs, safe play spaces, and youth activities that promote physical and mental health.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Article 15 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Attachment 2 – Measure E
Attachment 3 – Measure K
Attachment 4 – Measure H
Attachment 5 – Community Needs Assessment 2020
Attachment 6 – Community Needs Assessment 2024
Attachment 7 – Strategic Investment Plan 2021–2024
Attachment 8 – Strategic Investment Plan 2025-2028
Attachment 9 – Evaluation 2021–2024

489
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

ARTICLE XV - Richmond Fund for Children and Youth
(Added by election June 5, 2018)
Sec. 1. Fund: Beginning July 1, 2018 there is hereby established in the treasury of the City of Richmond (the "City") a special fund to expand children's services in the City, which shall be called the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (the "Fund"). (Added by election of 6-5-2018)
Sec. 2. Amount and Source of Funding. The City shall set aside a portion of the annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues of the City to be transferred to the Fund in the amounts specified below subject to the conditions set forth in subdivision (i).

During fiscal year 2018-2019 (July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019) there is hereby set aside for the Fund, the amount of $250,000 from the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for the express purpose of establishing and supporting the infrastructure of the Fund and the newly created Department of Children and Youth, as described in Section 7, including the development of the Strategic Investment Plan, as described in Section 8.

For fiscal year 2019-2020, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, the amount of $700,000 from the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for the express purpose of establishing and supporting the infrastructure of the Fund and the newly created Department of Children and Youth, including the development of the Strategic Investment Plan.

For fiscal year 2021-2022, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to one percent (1%) of the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.

For fiscal year 2022-2023, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.

For fiscal year 2023-2024, and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2027-2028, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to three percent (3%) of the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.

The Fund shall be maintained separate and apart from all other City funds and shall be appropriated annually at the time of the City's budget adoption, and by supplemental appropriation, when necessary as determined by the City Council. 2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 1/15490
g.
h.
i.
a.
b.
c.
d.

The annual amount of actual unrestricted general purpose revenues shall be calculated by the City Manager and shall fully include all of the following sources of revenue received by the City: (1) Property Taxes, (2) General Sales and Use Taxes (including locally approved general sales taxes and the City's portion of the Bradley-Burns Sales and Use Tax), (3) Utility Users Tax, (4) Property Transfer Tax, (5) Transient Occupancy Tax, (6) Fines, forfeitures and penalties, (7) Interest from general fund reserves, and (8) other revenues that the City can use for any lawful, municipal purpose. The City shall not define which revenues are to be considered unrestricted general purpose revenues in a manner inconsistent with the provisions of this section. Errors in calculation for a fiscal year shall be corrected by an adjustment in the set aside for the next fiscal year.

Before the end of the initial ten-year period, the Fund's effectiveness shall be evaluated and the funding and terms of the Fund shall be presented to the voters for renewal or revision, unless renewed by the City Council.

The requirements to set aside funds pursuant to subdivisions (c), (d) and (e) shall not become effective unless and until a general tax measure is approved after the effective date of this Act which levies a new tax or increases an existing tax to make additional funding available for the unrestricted general purposes of the City of Richmond. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to require the revenues from such a general tax measure to be dedicated to the purposes of this Act or the "Richmond Kids' First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act." In the event that a general tax measure meeting the requirements of this subdivision is not passed by December 31, 2020, the City Council shall pass enabling legislation to delay the effective dates in subdivisions (c), (d) and (e) until the fiscal year following the passage of a general tax measure, and making any other necessary adjustments to the times set forth in this Act.
(Added by election of 6-5-2018)
Sec. 3. Goals. The goals of expenditures from the Fund shall be:

To ensure that Richmond's children, youth and young adults are physically, emotionally, mentally and socially healthy, educated, successful in school, and live in stable, safe and supported families and communities; To increase safety for children, youth, young adults, their parents/guardians, families and the communities in which they live by preventing problems and enhancing the strengths of children, youth, young adults and their families; To ensure young people are provided with gender-responsive, trauma-informed, population-specific and culturally-competent services;
2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 2/15491
e.
f.
a.
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.

To strengthen collaboration among public agencies and community-based organizations around shared outcomes among all service providers for children, youth, young adults and their parents/guardians; To ensure an equitable distribution of resources to all of Richmond's young people in recognition of the importance of investment in their futures from birth through young adulthood;
To fill gaps in services and leverage other resources whenever feasible. (Added by election of 6-5-2018)
Sec. 4. Eligible Uses.

The City shall only use monies from the Fund for services provided to children and youth from birth to 18 years old and their caregivers, and, as defined in Section 4.b., disconnected transitional-aged young adults from ages 18 to 24 years and, when relevant, their caregivers, or as part of programs that predominantly serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults within those ages and their caregivers, including:

Violence Prevention and Response: including restorative and transformative justice; programs that support positive communication and relationships between young people and within families; programs that train young people, adult allies and parents/guardians in de-escalation; programs that address domestic and sexual violence, including child abuse prevention; emergency relocation; programs that address homophobia and bullying; alternatives to incarceration including diversion and re-entry programs.

Education and Job Training: including programs that help youth stay in school; promote academic success and college and career readiness; language services; support parents/guardians in advocating for their young people's education; assist in developing life skills and gaining work experience; and provide job training and placement.

Parent/Guardian Support: including fostering positive child-adult and youth-adult relationships that support young people's safety, self-esteem, well-being and positive futures.

Media, Arts, Culture and Technology: including artistic and cultural expression and education, and job and life skills development.

Youth and Family Leadership, Organizing and Civic Engagement: including community organizing and support that amplify the voices and engagement of children, youth and family in how Richmond prioritizes its resources; and builds youth civic engagement and leadership.
2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 3/15492
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Health and Well-Being: including physical, mental, emotional, behavioral and social health services that support health and well-being and reduce drug-related harm, violence and self-harm, and harmful and disrespectful sexual behavior.

Environmental Health and Justice: including programs that improve the environmental health of children and youth and their right to live free of pollution, toxins and lead, and increase access to healthy food, safe and accessible outdoor and recreational spaces and other places to be physically active.

Outdoor Education and Recreation: including sports, recreation centers, play, camps, gardening and urban agriculture.

Deportation Support: support for young people and families experiencing or being threatened with deportation.

The Fund will prioritize three groups of young people living in Richmond and adjacent unincorporated North Richmond: children ages 0 to 12; youth ages 13 to 17; and disconnected young adults ages 18 to 24, who are most impacted by harm, inequity and lack of access to support and services. The priority populations include but are not limited to: system-involved young people; young people who have been pushed out of school; young people who themselves or whose families are homeless or threatened by homelessness; young people living in poverty; immigrant and undocumented children, youth and families; Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) children, youth and families; teen parents and families, including single mothers; young people with poor physical, mental, emotional and behavioral health outcomes and disabilities; and families with children and youth who are impacted by the criminal justice system and/or who have family members who are incarcerated; and/or are involved in or transitioning from the foster care, juvenile justice, criminal justice or special education systems.

Entities eligible to receive funding shall be public agencies and non-profit community-based organizations, including organizations with a non-profit fiscal agent, that serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults.

Commencing in fiscal year 2021-2022 and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2027-2028, (1) a maximum of ten percent (10%) of the Fund can be used for costs related to administering the Fund, including staff support, basic infrastructure, support for the agencies administering the contracts, and overhead costs; and (2) an additional maximum of five percent (5%) of the Fund may be used to evaluate the results of this Article.

A maximum of ten percent (10%) of the amount used to administer the Fund (as described in Section 4.d.) can be used for City overhead.

Entities eligible to receive funding include those (1) located outside but in close proximity to Richmond to the extent that those entities serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults who reside in Richmond or unincorporated North Richmond, and (2) located in Richmond or unincorporated North Richmond that serve children, youth and disconnected 2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 4/15493
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
transitional-aged young adults in Richmond or unincorporated North Richmond, regardless of the residence of the children or youth. (Added by election of 6-5-2018)
Sec. 5. Excluded Services. The Fund shall not fund the following services or types of expenditures:

Services provided by the Police Department, Sheriff, other law enforcement agencies, Courts, District Attorney, Public Defender, City Attorney or Fire Department; detention or probation services mandated by state or federal law; or public transportation, except to the extent that transportation may be needed to access eligible services supported by the Fund; Services provided by the West Contra Costa Unified School District, Richmond libraries, Office of Neighborhood Safety, Richmond Promise College Scholarship Program, Richmond Housing Authority and Youth Works, except for collaborations between the above mentioned entities and community-based organizations and programs that meet the goals and eligible uses of the Fund; Any service that primarily benefits adults over 24 years; Any service for which a fixed or minimum level of expenditure is mandated by state or federal law, to the extent of the fixed or minimum level of expenditure;
Acquisition of any capital item not for primary and direct use by children or youth; acquisition, other than by lease for a term of ten years or less, of any real property; or maintenance, utilities or any similar operating costs of any facility not used primarily and directly by children or youth, or of any recreation or park facility, library, or hospital; Capital expenditures for housing, or rent subsidies;
Primary and specialized medical and direct mental health services; however, prevention, education, and other behavioral and mental health support services are eligible for funding; Income supports that supplant state or federal benefits or post-secondary tuition assistance; Administration of other funds; or
Replacing existing funding for children and youth services as set forth in the Children's Baseline Budget in Section 6, except to the extent that the City ceases to receive federal, state, county, or private foundation funds that the funding agency required to be spent only on these services.
(Added by election of 6-5-2018)
2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 5/15494
a.
b.
a.
b.
c.
d.
i.
ii.

1. 2.

Sec. 6. Children and Youth Baseline Budget. The City shall ensure that the Fund is used exclusively to increase overall City expenditures for eligible services for children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults.

The City Manager shall calculate the City's total actual unrestricted general purpose revenues in fiscal year 2017-2018, and shall calculate the percentage of those revenues that were allocated in fiscal year 2017-2018 to services that would be eligible uses for monies from the Fund, excluding allocations for services mandated by state or federal law (the "Base Percentage").

Commencing in fiscal year 2019-2020 and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2027-2028, the City shall allocate at least the Base Percentage of total actual unrestricted general purpose revenues to services that would be eligible uses of the Fund, excluding allocations for services mandated by state or federal law, and excluding any allocation of revenue required by this Article.
(Added by election of 6-5-2018)
Sec. 7. Administration and Oversight. The Fund shall be administered by staff in a newly established Department of Children and Youth within the City Manager's office. Oversight of the Fund shall be provided by a fifteen-member Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board (the "Oversight Board") that shall be composed as follows:

Each member of the Richmond City Council shall appoint two City residents as members — one over 24 years old, and one who is 15 to 24 years of age.

The Mayor of Richmond shall appoint three City residents as members, at least one of which shall be 15 to 24 years of age.

The Mayor and City Council members shall use their best efforts to coordinate their appointments so that the members of the Oversight Board represent Richmond's diverse geographic communities, including unincorporated North Richmond.

The Oversight Board shall have the following responsibilities, powers, and functions:

The role of the Oversight Board will be to develop written policies regarding the Fund, monitor the Fund, ensure that the Fund is managed in a manner accountable to the community, and ensure the highest standards of care and transparency.

Responsibilities of the Oversight Board shall be:

Strategic planning: (a) creating an initial Strategic Investment Plan as described under Section 8, and (b) updating the Strategic Investment Plan every three years.

Reviewing applications for funding from the Fund through a transparent and fair application process. 2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 6/15495

3. 4.

5. iii.
iv.
e.
f.
g.
h.

Recommending to the City Council a list of grants to be awarded for each funding cycle.

Facilitating an annual evaluation: working with a third-party, external independent evaluator to identify relevant evaluation measures and ensure that programs funded through the Fund are impactful and meet established outcomes. Evaluation reports shall be provided to the City Council and the Mayor's office and made available to the public.

Reviewing financial reports and audits to confirm that spending from the Fund is consistent with all provisions of this Article, and that the funds are being managed responsibly.

The Oversight Board shall adopt rules and regulations to govern its procedures, which shall, among other things, include the manner of calling and giving notices of meetings. The Oversight Board shall meet a minimum of six times per year. Its meetings shall be open to the public and subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act open meetings law. A majority of the regular members shall constitute a quorum. Minutes of the meetings shall be filed with the city clerk.

The Oversight Board shall be responsible for reporting to the public the services and outcomes supported by the Fund.

The Oversight Board members serve two-year terms, provided that members under age 24 may serve a one-year term. There shall be no limitation on the number of consecutive terms served. The terms of the initial appointees to the Oversight Board shall commence on the date of the first meeting of the Oversight Board, which may occur when at least ten members have been appointed and are present. Oversight Board members shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority.

If a vacancy occurs during the term of office of any Oversight Board member, the appointing authority shall appoint a successor to complete the unexpired term in the same manner as the selection of the initial member.

In order to provide for staggered terms, eight members shall be chosen by lot, from among those able to serve for two years, to serve for an initial term of two years, with the remaining members to serve for an initial term of one year. Except for appointments to fill a vacancy, all subsequent appointments shall be for a term of two years, provided that members under age 24 may serve a one-year term.

Oversight Board members that are over 24 years of age shall not be a paid employee of an organization funded from the Fund or applying for funding from the Fund.
(Added by election of 6-5-2018)
2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 7/15496
a.
b.
c.
d.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Sec. 8. Strategic Investment Plan. Each Strategic Investment Plan shall set forth funding priorities for a three-year period, and shall set forth a plan for overseeing and evaluating the Fund and the programs supported by the Fund. The Department of Children and Youth shall work with the Oversight Board to complete the Strategic Investment Plan and conduct a needs assessment.

The needs assessment shall involve community meetings throughout the City, gathering input on the service needs of various populations.

The funding priorities in the Strategic Investment Plan shall be based on the community needs assessment and input from the community.

The initial Strategic Investment Plan shall be approved by a majority of the Oversight Board and presented to the City Council for its review and approval by December 30, 2020. The Strategic Investment Plan shall take effect no later than June 1, 2021.

Any change in an approved Strategic Investment Plan shall be based on the community needs assessment and input from the community.
(Added by election of 6-5-2018)
Sec. 9. Application Process. In order to ensure a stable, fair and effective service delivery system, the Fund shall be implemented as follows:

There shall be three-year planning and funding cycles, with funding beginning in the 2021-2022 fiscal year.

Funds shall be allocated through an open and fair application process administered by the Department of Children and Youth in the City Manager's office in compliance with the policies adopted by the Oversight Board. Unless the conditions set forth in subdivision (i) of section 2 have not been met, the first application process shall begin no later than January 1, 2021 with funding available for encumbrance no later than July 1, 2021.

Recommendations for a list of grants to be awarded shall be made by the Oversight Board to the City Council. The City Council shall review and consider the recommendations of the Oversight Board. The City Council may reject the recommendations only if it determines that one or more recommendation is inconsistent with this Article or the priorities identified in the Strategic Investment Plan. The City Council shall accept or reject the Oversight Board's recommendations in their entirety and may not partially accept or partially reject the recommendations.

In the event the City Council rejects the list of grants proposed by the Oversight Board, it shall set forth its rationale for such rejection and recommend revisions to the Oversight Board for its consideration and action. 2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 8/15497
The City Council shall review and consider the amended recommendations of the Oversight Board, provide final approval of the list of grants to be awarded, and appropriate all necessary monies from the Fund. All grants and appropriations shall be consistent [with] the provisions of this Article and the Strategic Investment Plan.
(Added by election of 6-5-2018)
Sec. 10. Fiscal Emergencies. Commencing with fiscal year 2022-2023, if a moderate fiscal emergency, as defined in this section, or a severe fiscal emergency, as defined in this section, is deemed to exist by the City Council, the portion of the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues to be allocated to the Fund shall be reduced as provided in this section. The City Council may deem a moderate fiscal emergency to exist in the event that the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for a given fiscal year decrease by greater than ten percent (10%) but less than twenty percent (20%) from the level of such revenues during the previous fiscal year (defined as the "Benchmark Year"), and it may deem the moderate fiscal emergency to continue until the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues are no longer ten percent (10%) less than the level of such revenues during the Benchmark Year. If the City Council deems a moderate fiscal emergency to exist for a fiscal year, the amount required to be allocated to the Fund shall be reduced to two percent (2%) of the City's total annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for that particular fiscal year. The City Council may deem a severe fiscal emergency to exist in the event that the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for a given fiscal year decrease by twenty percent (20%) or more from the level of such revenues during the Benchmark Year, and it may deem the severe fiscal emergency to continue until the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues are no longer twenty percent (20%) less than the level of such revenues during the Benchmark Year. If the City Council deems a severe fiscal emergency to exist for a fiscal year, the amount required to be allocated to the Fund shall be reduced to one percent (1%) of the City's total annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for that particular fiscal year. Allocations to the Fund shall return to the level required in Section 2 for the first fiscal year in which a fiscal emergency no longer exists. There shall be no reductions in the allocation to the Fund pursuant to this Section 10 prior to fiscal year 2022-2023. (Added by election of 6-5-2018)
Sec. 11. Reauthorization. The provisions of this Article may be extended without amendments for additional ten-year terms by a simple majority vote of the City Council. If the City Council does not act to extend the provisions of this Article before December 31, 2027, the City Council shall be obligated to place a measure on a 2028 election ballot seeking voter approval of whether to extend the term for an additional ten years. This process shall be repeated every ten years, or until reauthorization is rejected by a vote of the electorate. (Added by election of 6-5-2018)
2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 9/15498

CERTIFICATE
Whereas, the City of Richmond a city containing a population of more than three thousand five hundred and less than ten thousand inhabitants on the twelfth day of October, 1908, at a special election held under and in accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article XI of the Constitution of the State of California, did elect F. E. Adams, C. L. Abbot, C. R. Blake, L. Boswell, L. D. Dimm, E. A. Gowe, E. J. Garrard, G. A.

Follett, L. S. Higgins, I. E. Marshall, I. M. Perrin, E. M. Tilden, H. H. Turley, H. E. Wyatt, and John Roth a Board of Freeholders to prepare and propose a charter for said city;
Be It Known, That pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution and within a period of ninety days after said election, said Board of Freeholders has prepared and does propose the foregoing as and for the charter for the City of Richmond.

In Witness Whereof, We have hereunto set our hands this 23rd day of December 1908.

H. E. WYATT
President of the Board of Freeholders
C. L. ABBOTT, E. A. GOWE,
F. E. ADAMS, I. E. MARSHALL,
L. BOSWELL, JOHN ROTH,
L. D. DIMM, H. H. TURLEY,
G. A. FOLLETT, E. M. TILDEN,
2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 10/15499
E. J. GARRARD, CHAS. R. BLAKE,
L. S. HIGGINS.

Attest:

J. S. CHANDLER,
Secretary Board of Freeholders
Filed this 28th day of December, 1908, at 12:30 p.m.

J. B. WILLIS
President of the
Board of Trustees of the
City of Richmond, California

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Contra Costa, ss.
2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 11/15500
City of Richmond
I, H. H. Turley, City Clerk in and for the City of Richmond, hereby certify that the Board of Trustees of said City, did by Resolution No. 158, order the foregoing charter published in the manner and form required by law.

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the corporate seal of the City of Richmond, this 29th day of December, 1908.

H. H. TURLEY
City Clerk
(SEAL)

MEMORANDUM
The first publication of the foregoing charter was made on Tuesday, December 29, 1908, in accordance with a resolution adopted by the Board of Trustees of the City of Richmond, in the "Richmond Record," a daily newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in said city.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Contra Costa, ss.

City of Richmond
I, J. B. Willis, President of the Board of Trustees of the City of Richmond, State of California, and I, H. H. Turley, Clerk of said Board, do hereby certify that the Board of Freeholders, whose names appear signed to the foregoing proposed charter, were on the 12th day of October, 1908, at a special municipal election held in said City of Richmond on said day duly elected by the qualified electors of said city to prepare and propose a 2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 12/15501
charter for said city; that each of said freeholders had been a qualified elector in said city for more than five (5) years previous to said election; that the foregoing is a true copy of said charter prepared and returned to the president of said Board of Trustees within ninety (90) days after said election, as required by Section 8 of Article XI of the Constitution of this State; that said proposed charter was then published in the "Richmond Record," which then was a daily newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in said city, and that publication was made for more than twenty (20) days, and that the first publication of said proposed charter was made within twenty (20) days after the completion of said charter; that within thirty (30) days after the publication of said charter, as required in said section 8, to-wit, on the 9th day of February, 1909, said charter was submitted at a special election duly called and held therein for the purpose of ratifying or rejecting said proposed charter; that by a majority of the votes of the qualified electors voting at said election said proposed charter was ratified as a whole; that the returns of said election were duly canvassed by the Board of Trustees of said City of Richmond on the 9th day of February 1909, and the result thereof declared as above set forth; and that in all matters and things pertaining to said proposed charter, all provisions of said section of the Constitution and the laws of the State of California pertaining to the adoption of the charter have been fully complied with in every particular.

In Witness Whereof, We have hereunto set our hands and caused the corporate seal of said City of Richmond to be affixed this 9th day of February, 1909.
(SEAL)       J. B. WILLIS
President of the Board of Trustees
of the City of Richmond
H. H. TURLEY,
Clerk of said Board of Trustees and
said City of Richmond.

And, Whereas, said proposed charter, so ratified, has been duly presented and submitted to the Legislature of the State of California for approval or rejection, without power of alteration, or amendment, in accordance with section 8 of Article XI of the Constitution of the State of California;
2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 13/15502
Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Assembly of the State of California the Senate thereof concurring (a majority of all the members elected to each house voting for the adoption of this resolution and concurring therein) that said charter of the City of Richmond, as presented to, adopted and ratified by the qualified electors of said city, be, and the same is hereby approved as a whole as and for the charter of said City of Richmond.

P. A. STANTON,
Speaker of the Assembly.

W. R. PORTER,
President of the Senate.

Attest:

C. F. CURRY,
Secretary of State.

Filed in the office of the Secretary of State the 4th day of March, A.D. 1909, at 10:50 o'clock A.M.

C. F. CURRY, Secretary of State
By J. HOSCH, Deputy

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Contra Costa, ss.

City of Richmond
I, J. B. Willis, President of the Board of Trustees of the City of Richmond and chief executive officer of said city, do hereby certify that the foregoing charter was submitted to the qualified electors of said city at a special election duly called and held therein for the purpose of ratifying or rejecting same on the 9th day of February, 1909, and that by a majority of votes of qualified electors, voting at said election, said charter was 2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 14/15503
ratified as a whole; that the returns of said election were duly canvassed by the Board of Trustees of the City of Richmond on the 9th day of February 1909, and the results thereof declared as above set forth; that in all matters and things pertaining to said proposed charter, all provisions of section 8 of Article XI of the Constitution of the State of California, pertaining to the adoption of the charter, have been fully complied with in every particular.

In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the corporate seal of the City of Richmond to be affixed this 24th day of March, 1909. ;b0;(SEAL);lf;J.B. WILLIS,
President of the Board of Trustees and
Chief Executive Officer of the City of Richmond.

Attest:

H. H. TURLEY
City Clerk of said City of Richmond.
2/24/26, 5:51 PM Richmond, CA Code of Ordinances
about:blank 15/15504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
1 REVISIONS TO RICHMOND KIDS FIRST INITIATIVE

Be it ordained by the People of the City of Richmond:

SEC. 1. Title. This Act shall be known as the “Revisions To Richmond Kids First Initiative” Act.

SEC. 2. Findings and Statement of Purpose. The People of the City of Richmond hereby make the following findings and declare their purpose in enacting the Act:

a. In order to further the purposes and goals of the ballot measure entitled the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act,” which will appear on the ballot for the City of Richmond at the June 5, 2018 election, it is essential to make several amendments to that Act.

b. In the event the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” is approved at the June 5, 2018 election, the Charter shall be further amended to:

i. Provide that the dates in the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” are adjusted to reflect the fact that that Initiative will appear on the June 5, 2018 ballot, rather than the November 8, 2016 ballot, as anticipated when that Initiative was drafted; and to provide that the requirements that the City set aside specified funding levels in specified years begin three years after passage of this Act;

ii. Provide that public entities may provide services under the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act,” without being subject to a limit of no more than 20% of the funding awarded to applicants, and without being subject to the requirement that the public agencies act in partnership with non-profit organizations; and

iii. Provide that the requirements that the City set aside specified funding levels in specified years be contingent upon the passage of a general tax measure that makes additional funding available for the unrestricted general purposes of the City.

c. This Act is intended to complement and supplement the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act.”

514
2 d. This Act will be given effect only if both this Act and the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” are approved by the voters at the June 5, 2018 election.

SEC. 3. Section 1 of Article XV of the Charter of the City of Richmond, as proposed to be added to the Charter by the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” at the June 5, 2018 election, is hereby amended and restated to read as follows:

Section 1. Fund: Beginning January 1, 2017 July 1, 2018, there is hereby established in the treasury of the City of Richmond (the “City”) a special fund to expand children’s services in the City, which shall be called the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (the “Fund”).

SEC. 4. Section 2 of Article XV of the Charter of the City of Richmond, as proposed to be added to the Charter by the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” at the June 5, 2018 election, is hereby amended and restated to read as follows:

Section 2. Amount and Source of Funding. The City shall set aside a portion of the annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues of the City to be transferred to the Fund in the amounts specified below, subject to the conditions set forth in subdivision (i).

a. For the last six months of fiscal year 2016-2017 (January 1, 2017 through June 30, 2017), During fiscal year 2018-2019 (July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019), there is hereby set aside for the Fund, the amount of $250,000 from the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for the express purpose of establishing and supporting the infrastructure of the Fund and the newly created Department of Children and Youth, as described in Section 7, including the development of the Strategic Investment Plan, as described in Section 8.
b. For fiscal year 2017-18 2019-2020, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, the amount of $700,000 from the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for the express purpose of establishing and supporting the infrastructure of the Fund and the newly created Department of Children and Youth, including the development of the Strategic Investment Plan.
c. For fiscal year 2018-2019 2021-2022, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to one percent (1%) of the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.
d. For fiscal year 2019-2020 2022-2023, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned 515
3 on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.
e. For fiscal year 2020-2021 2023-2024 and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2026-2027 2027-2028, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to three percent (3%) of the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.
f. The Fund shall be maintained separate and apart from all other City funds and shall be appropriated annually at the time of the City’s budget adoption, and by supplemental appropriation, when necessary as determined by the City Council.
g. The annual amount of actual unrestricted general purpose revenues shall be calculated by the City Manager and shall fully include all of the following sources of revenue received by the City: (1) Property Taxes, (2) General Sales and Use Taxes (including locally approved general sales taxes and the City’s portion of the Bradley-Burns Sales and Use Tax), (3) Utility Users Tax, (4) Property Transfer Tax, (5) Transient Occupancy Tax, (6) Fines, forfeitures and penalties, (7) Interest from general fund reserves, and (8) other revenues that the City can use for any lawful, municipal purpose. The City shall not define which revenues are to be considered unrestricted general purpose revenues in a manner inconsistent with the provisions of this section. Errors in calculation for a fiscal year shall be corrected by an adjustment in the set aside for the next fiscal year.
h. Before the end of the initial ten-year period, the Fund’s effectiveness shall be evaluated and the funding and terms of the Fund shall be presented to the voters for renewal or revision, unless renewed by the City Council. i. The requirements to set aside funds pursuant to subdivisions (c), (d) and (e) shall not become effective unless and until a general tax measure is approved after the effective date of this Act which levies a new tax or increases an existing tax to make additional funding available for the unrestricted general purposes of the City of Richmond. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to require the revenues from such a general tax measure to be dedicated to the purposes of this Act or the “Richmond Kids’ First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act.” In the event that a general tax measure meeting the requirements of this subdivision is not passed by December 31, 2020, the City Council shall pass enabling legislation to delay the effective dates in subdivisions (c), (d) and (e) until the fiscal year following the passage of a general tax measure, and making any other necessary adjustments to the times set forth in this Act.

516
4 SEC. 5. Section 4 of Article XV of the Charter of the City of Richmond, as proposed to be added to the Charter by the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” at the June 5, 2018 election, is hereby amended and restated to read as follows:

Section 4. Eligible Uses.

a. The City shall only use monies from the Fund for services provided to children and youth from birth to 18 years old and their caregivers, and, as defined in Section 4.b., disconnected transitional-aged young adults from ages 18 to 24 years and, when relevant, their caregivers, or as part of programs that predominantly serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults within those ages and their caregivers, including:
i. Violence Prevention and Response: including restorative and transformative justice; programs that support positive
communication and relationships between young people and within families; programs that train young people, adult allies and parents/guardians in de-escalation; programs that address domestic and sexual violence, including child abuse prevention; emergency relocation; programs that address homophobia and bullying; and alternatives to incarceration including diversion and re-entry programs. and preventing and responding to police violence against children, youth, young adults and their caregivers .
ii. Education and Job Training: including programs that help youth stay in school; promote academic success and college and career readiness; language services; support parents/guardians in advocating for their young people’s education; assist in developing life skills and gaining work experience; and provide job training and placement.
iii. Parent/Guardian Support: including fostering positive child- adult and youth-adult relationships that support young people’s safety, self-esteem, well-being and positive futures.
iv. Media, Arts, Culture and Technology: including artistic and cultural expression and education, and job and life skills development.
v. Youth and Family Leadership, Organizing and Civic
Engagement: including community organizing and support that amplify the voices and engagement of children, youth and family in how Richmond prioritizes its resources; and builds youth civic engagement and leadership.
vi. Health and Well-Being: including physical, mental, emotional, behavioral and social health services that support health and well-being and reduce drug-related harm, violence and self-harm, and harmful and disrespectful sexual behavior.
517
5 vii. Environmental Health and Justice: including programs that improve the environmental health of children and youth and their right to live free of pollution, toxins and lead, and increase access to healthy food, safe and accessible outdoor and recreational spaces and other places to be physically active.
viii. Outdoor Education and Recreation: including sports, recreation centers, play, camps, gardening and urban agriculture. ix. Deportation Support: support for young people and families experiencing or being threatened with deportation.

b. The Fund will prioritize three groups of young people living in Richmond and adjacent unincorporated North Richmond: children ages 0 to 12; youth ages 13 to 17; and disconnected young adults ages 18 to 24, who are most impacted by harm, inequity and lack of access to support and services. The priority populations include but are not limited to: system- involved young people; young people who have been pushed out of school; young people who themselves or whose families are homeless or threatened by homelessness; young people living in poverty; immigrant and undocumented children, youth and families; Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) children, youth and families; teen parents and families, including single mothers; young people with poor physical, mental, emotional and behavioral health outcomes and disabilities; and families with children and youth who are impacted by the criminal justice system and/or who have family members who are incarcerated; and/or are involved in or transitioning from the foster care, juvenile justice, criminal justice or special education systems. c. Entities eligible to receive funding shall be public agencies and non-profit community-based organizations, including organizations with a non- profit fiscal agent,; and public agencies, in partnership with non-profit organizations, that serve children, youth and disconnected transitional- aged young adults. In any fiscal year, public agencies shall not receive, in total, more than 20% of the funding awarded to applicants. d. Commencing in fiscal year 2018-2019 2021-2022 and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2026-2027 2027-2028, (1) a maximum of ten percent (10%) of the Fund can be used for costs related to administering the Fund, including staff support, basic infrastructure, support for the agencies administering the contracts, and overhead costs; and (2) an additional maximum of five percent (5%) of the Fund may be used to evaluate the results of this Article.
e. A maximum of ten percent (10%) of the amount used to administer the Fund (as described in Section 4.d.) can be used for City overhead. f. Entities eligible to receive funding include those (1) located outside but in close proximity to Richmond to the extent that those entities serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults who reside in Richmond or unincorporated North Richmond, and (2) located in Richmond or unincorporated North Richmond that serve children, 518
6 youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults in Richmond or unincorporated North Richmond, regardless of the residence of the children or youth.

SEC. 6. Section 6 of Article XV of the Charter of the City of Richmond, as proposed to be added to the Charter by the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” at the June 5, 2018 election, is hereby amended and restated to read as follows:

Section 6. Children and Youth Baseline Budget. The City shall ensure that the Fund is used exclusively to increase overall City expenditures for eligible services for children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults.

a. The City Manager shall calculate the City’s total actual unrestricted general purpose revenues in fiscal year 2015-2016 2017-2018, and shall calculate the percentage of those revenues that were allocated in fiscal year 2015-2016 2017-2018 to services that would be eligible uses for monies from the Fund, excluding allocations for services mandated by state or federal law (the “Base Percentage”).

b. Commencing in fiscal year 2017-2018 2019-2020 and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2026-2027 2027-2028, the City shall allocate at least the Base Percentage of total actual unrestricted general purpose revenues to services that would be eligible uses of the Fund, excluding allocations for services mandated by state or federal law, and excluding any allocation of revenue required by this Article.

SEC. 7. Section 8 of Article XV of the Charter of the City of Richmond, as proposed to be added to the Charter by the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” at the June 5, 2018 election, is hereby amended and restated to read as follows:

Section 8. Strategic Investment Plan. Each Strategic Investment Plan shall set forth funding priorities for a three-year period, and shall set forth a plan for overseeing and evaluating the Fund and the programs supported by the Fund. The Department of Children and Youth shall work with the Oversight Board to complete the Strategic Investment Plan and conduct a needs assessment.

a. The needs assessment shall involve community meetings throughout the City, gathering input on the service needs of various populations.

b. The funding priorities in the Strategic Investment Plan shall be based on the community needs assessment and input from the community.

c. The initial Strategic Investment Plan shall be approved by a majority of the Oversight Board and presented to the City Council for its review and 519
7 approval by September 30, 2017 December 30, 2020. The Strategic Investment Plan shall take effect no later than June 1, 2018 June 1, 2021.

d. Any change in an approved Strategic Investment Plan shall be based on the community needs assessment and input from the community.

SEC. 8. Section 9 of Article XV of the Charter of the City of Richmond, as proposed to be added to the Charter by the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” at the June 5, 2018 election, is hereby amended and restated to read as follows:

Section 9. Application Process. In order to ensure a stable, fair and effective service delivery system, the Fund shall be implemented as follows:

a. There shall be three-year planning and funding cycles, with funding beginning in the 2018-19 2021-2022 fiscal year.

b. Funds shall be allocated through an open and fair application process administered by the Department of Children and Youth in the City Manager’s office in compliance with the policies adopted by the Oversight Board. Unless the conditions set forth in subdivision (i) of section 2 have not been met, Tthe first application process shall begin no later than February 1, 2018 January 1, 2021 with funding available for encumbrance no later than July 1, 2018 2021.

c. Recommendations for a list of grants to be awarded shall be made by the Oversight Board to the City Council. The City Council shall review and consider the recommendations of the Oversight Board. The City Council may reject the recommendations only if it determines that one or more recommendation is inconsistent with this Article or the priorities identified in the Strategic Investment Plan. The City Council shall accept or reject the Oversight Board’s recommendations in their entirety and may not partially accept or partially reject the recommendations.

d. In the event the City Council rejects the list of grants proposed by the Oversight Board, it shall set forth its rationale for such rejection and recommend revisions to the Oversight Board for its consideration and action.

e. The City Council shall review and consider the amended recommendations of the Oversight Board, provide final approval of the list of grants to be awarded, and appropriate all necessary monies from the Fund. All grants and appropriations shall be consistent the provisions of this Article and the Strategic Investment Plan.

520
8 SEC. 9. Section 10 of Article XV of the Charter of the City of Richmond, as proposed to be added to the Charter by the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” at the June 5, 2018 election, is hereby amended and restated to read as follows:

Section 10. Fiscal Emergencies. Commencing with fiscal year 2019-20 2022-2023, if a moderate fiscal emergency, as defined in this section, or a severe fiscal emergency, as defined in this section, is deemed to exist by the City Council, the portion of the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues to be allocated to the Fund shall be reduced as provided in this section. The City Council may deem a moderate fiscal emergency to exist in the event that the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for a given fiscal year decrease by greater than ten percent (10%) but less than twenty percent (20%) from the level of such revenues during the previous fiscal year (defined as the “Benchmark Year”), and it may deem the moderate fiscal emergency to continue until the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues are no longer ten percent (10%) less than the level of such revenues during the Benchmark Year. If the City Council deems a moderate fiscal emergency to exist for a fiscal year, the amount required to be allocated to the Fund shall be reduced to two percent (2%) of the City’s total annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for that particular fiscal year.

The City Council may deem a severe fiscal emergency to exist in the event that the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for a given fiscal year decrease by twenty percent (20%) or more from the level of such revenues during the Benchmark Year, and it may deem the severe fiscal emergency to continue until the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues are no longer twenty percent (20%) less than the level of such revenues during the Benchmark Year. If the City Council deems a severe fiscal emergency to exist for a fiscal year, the amount required to be allocated to the Fund shall be reduced to one percent (1%) of the City’s total annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for that particular fiscal year. Allocations to the Fund shall return to the level required in Section 2 for the first fiscal year in which a fiscal emergency no longer exists. There shall be no reductions in the allocation to the Fund pursuant to this Section 10 prior to fiscal year 2019-20 2022-2023.

SEC. 10. Section 11 of Article XV of the Charter of the City of Richmond, as proposed to be added to the Charter by the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” at the June 5, 2018 election, is hereby amended and restated to read as follows:

Section 11. Reauthorization. The provisions of this Article may be extended without amendments for additional ten-year terms by a simple majority vote of the City Council. If the City Council does not act to extend the provisions of this Article before June 30, 2026 December 31, 2027, the City Council shall be obligated to place a measure on the November 2026 a 2028 election ballot seeking voter approval of whether to extend the term for an additional ten years. This process shall be 521
9 repeated every ten years, or until reauthorization is rejected by a vote of the electorate.

SEC 11. Enabling Legislation. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the event a ballot measure entitled the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act” is approved at the June 5, 2018 election, the City Council may pass enabling or clarifying legislation consistent with Article XV of the Charter, provided that such legislation is consistent with and furthers the intent of the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act”, as amended by this Act. The City Council shall adopt such legislation to be effective by July 1, 2019, and shall amend such legislation as necessary in the future.

SEC. 12. Severability. If any provision or part of this Act, or the application of any provision or part to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions and parts and their applications shall not be affected, but shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions and parts of this Act are severable. The People declare that they would have adopted this Act and each provision and part thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more provision or part may be declared invalid.

SEC. 13. Interpretation. This Act shall be liberally interpreted to affect its purposes. Nothing in this Act shall be interpreted or applied so as to create any requirement, power or duty in conflict with any State or federal law.

SEC. 14. Amendment or Repeal. This Act may only be amended or repealed by the affirmative vote of a majority of voters voting in a citywide election.

SEC. 15. Judicial Enforcement. Any aggrieved person or registered voter in the City of Richmond shall have the right to maintain an action for equitable relief to restrain any violation of this Act, or to enforce the duties imposed on the City by this Act.

SEC. 16. Complementary Measures. This Act is intended to complement and supplement the “Richmond Kids First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act,” which will appear on the ballot for the City of Richmond at the June 5, 2018 election. This Act is not intended to, and does not, conflict in any way with that Act.
522

MEASURE H

AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
AS APPROVED BY THE CITY’S QUALIFIED ELECTORS AT THE
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 6 , 201 8

TO INCREASE THE DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX

The People of the City of Richmond do ordain as follows:

SECTION 1

Section 13.40.020 of Chapter 13.40 of Article XIII of the City of Richmond Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

13.40.020 - Imposition of tax.

There is hereby imposed a tax on all transfers by deeds, instruments, writings or any other document by which lands, tenements, or other interests in real property are sold, located in the City of Richmond, which are, or is, granted, assigned, transferred or otherwise conveyed to or vested in a purchaser, or purchasers thereof, or any other person or persons, by his/her or their direction, when the value of consideration exceeds one hundred dollars ($100.00). The tax shall be levied at the following rates:

(a) Thirty dollars ($30.00) for each one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or fractional part thereof of the consideration exceeding ten million dollars ($10,000,000.00); (b) Twenty five dollars ($25.00) for each one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or fractional part thereof of the consideration equal to or less than ten million dollars ($10,000,000.00) and exceeding three million dollars ($3,000,000.00);
(c) Twelve dollars and fifty cents ($12.50) for each one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or fractional part thereof of the consideration equal to or less than three million dollars ($3,000,000.00) and equal to or exceeding one million dollars ($1,000,000.00);

(d) Seven dollars ($7.00) for each one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or fractional part thereof of the consideration less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00).

SECTION 2

The tax imposed by this Ordinance is a general tax for general governmental purposes and may be used for any usual and current expenses of the City of Richmond as declared by Richmond Municipal Code section 13.40.015.

SECTION 3

If any section, subsection, part, clause, sentence or phrase of this Ordinance or the application thereof is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of 523
competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, the application thereof and the tax imposed shall not be affected thereby, but shall remain in full force and effect, it being the intent of the People to adopt each and every section, subsection, part, clause, or phrase regardless of whether any other section, subsection, part, clause, or phrase or the application thereof is held to be invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 4

It is the intent of the People that City of Richmond Municipal Code Section 13.40.020 by this Ordinance shall not be considered repealed and reenacted in its amended form; that the portions which are not altered are to be considered as having been the law from the time when they were enacted; that the new provisions are to be considered as having been enacted at the time of the amendment; and that the omitted portions are to be considered as having been repealed at the time of the amendment.

SECTION 5

If a majority of qualified electors vote in favor of the ballot measure regarding this Ordinance, this Ordinance shall be adopted upon the date the vote therefor is declared by the City Council and shall go into effect ten (10) days thereafter in accordance with California Elections Code Section 9217 and article VIII of the Richmond City Charter.

SECTION 6

The People of the city of Richmond hereby authorize the Mayor and City Clerk of the city to execute this Ordinance to reflect its adoption at the November 6, 2018 election.

I hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was duly adopted by a majority of the voters of the City casting votes on the question on November 6, 2018.

524
Richmond Department of Children and Youth
2020 Community Needs
Assessment Report
525
Table of Contents
BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 ABOUT MEASURE E AND MEASURE K........................................................................................................................... 1 GOALS AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE RICHMOND FUND FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH ..................................2 OUTCOME AREAS ELIGIBLE FOR FUNDING.............................................................................................................................................. 3 WHO IS THE FUND DESIGNED TO SUPPORT?................................................................................................................ 4 LEARNING QUESTIONS...........................................................................................................................................................................................4 PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................... 5 COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT: ENGAGEMENT IN THE MIDST OF A PANDEMIC RESPONSE.............................5 WORKING WITH COMMUNITY TO INCLUDE MULTIPLE VOICES ..................................................................................................5 CO-DESIGN AND BUILDING ON EXISTING WORK ...............................................................................................................................5 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, DATA COLLECTION, AND ANALYSIS...........................................................................................6 SECONDARY QUANTITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS........................................................................................................................................ 6 KEY STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS.................................................................................................................................................................... 6 COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUPS AND COMMUNITY LISTENING ........................................................................................................6 COMMUNITY SURVEYS............................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 COMMUNITY FORUMS: REFINING ASSETS AND GAPS ANALYSIS AND MAKING MEANING........................................6 QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS........................................................................................................................................ 7 WHAT WE FOUND: DEMOGRAPHICS ........................................................................................... 8 ABOUT RICHMOND: OUR ASSETS AND DEMOGRAPHICS .................................................................................................................. 8 DEMOGRAPHICS .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 RACE AND ETHNICITY ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 10 AGE .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 11 LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME ...................................................................................................................................................................... 11 WHAT WE FOUND: PRIORITY POPULATIONS...........................................................................12 PRIORITY POPULATIONS OF FOCUS ............................................................................................................................................................. 12 YOUNG PEOPLE LIVING IN POVERTY........................................................................................................................................................ 12 CHILDREN, YOUTH, AND THEIR FAMILIES LIVING UNDER THE FEDERAL POVERTY LEVEL ................................ 12 EMPLOYMENT............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 14 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT FOR ADULTS............................................................................................................................................ 14 YOUNG PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS – BASIC NEEDS......................................................................................... 16 HOUSING....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 16 INDIVIDUALS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS.................................................................................................................................... 17 IMMIGRANT AND UNDOCUMENTED CHILDREN, YOUTH, AND FAMILIES .......................................................................... 20 LGBTQ+ CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES ...................................................................................................................................... 22 TEEN PARENTS AND FAMILIES, INCLUDING SINGLE MOTHERS ............................................................................................... 24 526

YOUNG PEOPLE WITH POOR PHYSICAL, MENTAL, EMOTIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH OUTCOMES AND DISABILITIES ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 26 YOUNG PEOPLE NOT IN SCHOOL................................................................................................................................................................. 27 DISCONNECTED YOUTH..................................................................................................................................................................................... 27

SYSTEM-INVOLVED YOUNG PEOPLE (FOSTER YOUTH AND TRANSITIONAL AGE YOUTH, JUSTICE- INVOLVED YOUTH) ......................................................................................................................................................... 28 JUSTICE-INVOLVED YOUTH.............................................................................................................................................................................. 28 YOUTH IN FOSTER CARE .................................................................................................................................................................................... 29 WHAT WE FOUND: PRIORITY AREAS THAT CROSS MULTIPLE POPULATIONS .............. 30 EDUCATION AND LEARNING: EARLY CHILDHOOD, K-12, COLLEGE AND CAREER (WITH COVID-19 REFLECTIONS) ..................................................................................................................................... 30 EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION ....................................................................................................................................... 30 EDUCATION AND COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS .................................................................................................................. 32 HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION RATE ............................................................................................................................................................ 34 CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 35 ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS................................................................................................................................................................... 35 OUT OF SCHOOL ENRICHMENT PARTICIPATION AND BARRIERS ............................................................................................. 36 NEEDS DURING COVID-19 SHELTER-IN-PLACE ............................................................................................................................... 39 COLLEGE ACCESS..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40 STUDENT AID FOR COLLEGE........................................................................................................................................................................... 40 COLLEGE GOING RATES .................................................................................................................................................................................... 40 HEALTH: MENTAL HEALTH, NUTRITION AND HEALTHY LIVING, ASTHMA AND TOBACCO/E- CIGARETTE RATES, STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES,AND COMMUNITY SAFETY...................................... . 42 MENTAL HEALTH .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 42 SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM....................................................................................................................... 43 HEALTHY EATING AND ACTIVE LIVING.................................................................................................................................................. 43 ASTHMA RATES ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 44 TOBACCO/E-CIGARETTE RATES ................................................................................................................................................................... 44 STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES......................................................................................................................................................................... 45 COMMUNITY SAFETY............................................................................................................................................................................................. 47 POLICE USE OF FORCE......................................................................................................................................................................................... 48 RECOMMENDED PRIORITIES...................................................................................................... 49 PRIORITIES EMERGING FROM THE COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT................................................................................ 49 #1 BEHAVIORAL HEALTH: MENTAL HEALTH AND WELLNESS ................................................................................................. 49 #2 EDUCATION SUPPORT AND EMPLOYMENT TRAINING/SUPPORT .................................................................................... 50 #3 OUT OF SCHOOL TIME, AFTERSCHOOL, SPORTS, AND ENRICHMENT ........................................................................... 50 #4 INFORMATION, GUIDANCE, AND CASE MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................................... 51 #5 YOUTH VIOLENCE PREVENTION .......................................................................................................................................................... 51 #6 ACCESS TO BASIC NEEDS ............................................................................................................................................................................ 52 THE LENS OF COVID 19 AND THE RICHMOND AND NORTH RICHMOND COMMUNITY ......................................... 52 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 53 APPENDIX .......................................................................................................................................... 60 527
Page | 1
Background
Introduction
This Community Needs Assessment Report has been designed to provide an overview of current data and findings related to children, youth, and their families in Richmond, California – specifically as related to the focus of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth. Most of these data are from publicly available and reliable sources such as the American Community Survey, the California Department of Education, the California Healthy Kids Survey, and the US Census.

The report also includes focus group, community forum, and survey data collected for the Richmond Department of Children of Youth.

About Measure E and Measure K
On June 5, 2018, Richmond voters approved Measure E and Measure K, known as the Richmond Kids First Initiative, which approved a City of Richmond Charter amendment (Article 15) and authorized the creation of the Richmond Department of Children and Youth (Department) and the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (Fund) to provide increased and dedicated funding for children, youth, and young adult services. The ballot initiative also authorized the establishment of a 15-member Oversight Board and required that the Department conduct a Community Needs Assessment which would guide the development of a Strategic Investment Plan and the first three-year grant cycle of the Fund.

As stated in the Charter of the City of Richmond, Article 15 Section 2, the City is required to allocate $250,000 from the City’s annual General Fund budget in Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19, and $700,000 in FY 2019-20 for the purpose of supporting the establishment of the Department and the Fund. There is no allocation in FY 2020-21. The Charter also requires the City to allocate one, two, and three percent of the City’s General Fund in FYs 2021-22, FY 2022-23, and FY 2023-24 respectively, and three percent each fiscal year thereafter through FY 2027-28 to support the implementation and ongoing needs of the Department and Fund. Additional information about the Department can be found at www.richmondyouth.org. 528
Page | 2
Goals and Guiding Principles of the Richmond Fund for
Children and Youth1
Per the Charter, the goals of the Department and Fund are:
• To ensure that Richmond’s children, youth, and young adults are physically, emotionally, mentally, and socially healthy, educated, successful in school, and live in stable, safe, and supported families and communities
• To increase safety for children, youth, young adults, their parents/guardians, families and the communities in which they live by preventing problems and enhancing the strengths of children, youth, young adults and their families
• To ensure young people are provided with gender responsive, trauma-informed, population specific and culturally-competent services;
• To strengthen collaboration among public agencies and community-based organizations around shared outcomes among all service providers for children, youth, young adults and their parents/guardians;
• To ensure an equitable distribution of resources to all of Richmond’s young people in recognition of the importance of investment in their futures from birth through young adulthood;
• To fill gaps in Services and leverage other resources whenever feasible Creation of this Community Needs Assessment (CNA) is one of the early tasks in the initial funding cycle for the Fund and will be followed by the development of a Strategic Investment Plan (“SIP”). The City of Richmond’s Department of Children and Youth has initiated a needs assessment and strategic planning process that honors community voice, includes a diverse range of youth and adults in order to develop a comprehensive, equitable investment plan that reflects community vision. The City has committed to guiding principles for creating the CNA and the SIP, as follows:
• We will communicate in a way that is accessible and easy to understand • We will be inclusive of all ages, races, ethnicity, gender expressions, languages, abilities/disabilities, and socioeconomic status
• We believe all voices should contribute and we encourage participants to bring their full authentic selves to this process
• We value collaboration and shared ownership
• We believe that community assets are our core strengths • We believe that considerations of race and equity are critical to this process 1City of Richmond. Charter, Article XV, Section 3 Retrieved from:
https://library.municode.com/ca/richmond/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeI d=CH_ARTXVRIFUCHY O 529
Page | 3
• We believe that Richmond and North Richmond residents are experts in their lived experience and have valuable insight to share, and
• We believe that it is important to be (1) innovative and flexible and (2) transparent and accountable
Outcome Areas Eligible for Funding
The legislation establishing The Fund has nine key investment priorities. While these areas are deeply interconnected, we are reporting on them in the following legislated categories. Eligible populations for funding include children birth to 18, their caregivers when applicable, or disconnected transitional aged young adults ages 18-24, and their caregivers when applicable.

Funding categories include:
• Violence Prevention and Response
• Education and Job Training
• Parent/Guardian Support
• Media, Arts, Culture and Technology
• Youth and Family Leadership, Organizing and Civic Engagement • Health and Well-Being
• Environmental Health and Justice
• Outdoor Education and Recreation
• Deportation Support - Support for those experiencing or being threatened with deportation
530
Page | 4
Who is the Fund designed to support?
The Fund will prioritize Richmond and North Richmond children (ages 0 -12); youth (ages 13 to 17) and disconnected young adults (ages 18-24) who are most impacted by harm, inequity and lack of access to support services.

The priority populations include, but are not limited to:
• System involved young people
• Young people who have been pushed out of school
• Young people who themselves are homeless, or whose families are homeless or threatened by homelessness
• Young people living in poverty; immigrant and undocumented children, youth, and families • LGBTQ children, youth, and families
• Teen parents and families, including single mothers; young people with poor physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes, and children with disabilities • Families with children and youth who are impacted by the criminal justice system and /or who have family members who are incarcerated; and/ or are involved in or transitioning from the foster care, juvenile justice, criminal justice, or special education systems Learning Questions
The Community Needs Assessment team created guiding learning questions to focus the CNA effort.
• What is working? What are the key assets for children, youth, and their families in Richmond and North Richmond?
• How are resources and services that support youth currently dispersed? • What are the barriers to accessing current and future services? • What resources do families in Richmond and North Richmond need to thrive? • Which families need these resources the most? Where do these families live? What makes these families unique?
• What are the needs of the most hard-to-reach groups?
531
Page | 5
Process and Methodology
Community Needs Assessment: Engagement in the Midst of a Pandemic Response
The Community Needs Assessment and Strategic Investment Planning process formally began in February of 2020. At this point, the City began to formally plan the needs assessment process with the assistance of consultants from Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates (HTA). This effort built upon the foundations laid by Department staff who had worked for months to build the new Department of Children and Youth and its essential infrastructure. shelter in place at their residence in response to the rising numbers of COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations. On March 17, 2020, the State of California also issued a shelter in place order.

What followed was an unprecedented shift in the way people, community based organizations and public entities conducted their daily work, engaged with the public and colleagues, and communicated. For the needs assessment process, this meant that the planning work continued but meetings normally conducted face-to-face could not be conducted in that manner. Many participants were able to continue working from their homes. Others were considered essential workers and were expected to continue going to their regular workplaces.

In order to adjust the CNA to meet the requirements of social distancing, we engaged the public using live video platforms which most groups became adept at using fairly quickly. The CNA team was able to conduct complex meetings with breakouts groups, interactive discussion, shared presentations, conversations, and multiple forms of shared on-demand data visualization and media such as word clouds and virtual white boards.

This CNA work had been planned as an intensely interactive process with strong community based interaction and hands-on engagement. The Department and HTA had to pivot from best practices in face-to-face community engagement and planning to community planning in online virtual spaces. Community Based Organizations (CBOs), the Department staff and HTA partnered to co-create the needs assessment, recruit participants, and engage the community in a series of virtual focus groups, listening sessions, and forums as part of the CNA process.

Working with Community to Include Multiple Voices
Co-Design and Building on Existing Work
Consultants engaged the CBO community early on with a virtual co-design process that allowed the CNA to be tailored to the community’s values and culture of inquiry at the same time that the pivot to virtual engagement while shelter in place orders were in effect. CBOs and service providers shared invaluable insight for the City staff and consultant team that wasincorporated into the CNA design and implementation.
532
Page | 6
The City of Richmond, CBOs, and additional organizations have done a significant amount of effective work in Richmond for many years, and there are multiple reports, needs assessments, transcripts, and data sets that were reviewed for the CNA. The CNA built on the work that was already done in the community. The CNA design has worked to reduce redundancy while ensuring that due diligence has been applied for the Department.

Community Engagement, Data Collection, and Analysis
Secondary Quantitative Data Analysis
The CNA data collection began with secondary data related to the priorities of the Richmond Kids First Initiative and the learning questions. The project sought to build on existing resources gathering and analyzing quantitative data from a variety of secondary sources and reviewing existing analysis and reports. As described below, this data was combined with qualitative data gathered by the CNA team some of which was presented to the community during a series of forums.

Key Stakeholder Interviews
The CNA team conducted key stakeholder interviews early on to help shape and inform the process and to deepen understanding of issue areas. Additional key stakeholder interviews were also held to gain a better understanding of resources and barriers to service.

Community Focus Groups and Community Listening
Community focus groups and small group listening sessions were incorporated as key components of the needs assessment. We used these sessions to gather qualitative data directly from groups that are representative of priority populations among local youth, their families, providers, and others. The focus groups drilled down into the themes emerging from the needs assessment, providing insight from the group interactions and feedback.

Stakeholders assisted with moderating these groups and partnered with the CNA team to identify participants and support logistics.

Community Surveys
The needs assessment included a survey that gathers input from a broad sample of youth and their parents and guardians. The survey was brief, digital, and sought to reach a broad subset of individual children, youth and their parents and guardians. The survey gathered input on strengths, needs, and preferences regarding services and programs.

Community Forums: Refining Assets and Gaps Analysis and Making Meaning As part of this analysis, Department staff worked with stakeholders to conduct four community forums that were accessible online to participants across Richmond and North Richmond.

Participants were asked to identify the greatest needs of Richmond children, youth, and their families and to prioritize resource areas.
533
Page | 7
Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis
All of the quantitative and qualitative data collected in surveys, interviews, focus groups and community forums were analyzed and synthesized. Particularly relevant information was shared at community forums and with governing bodies such as the Oversight Board to support community input and decision making. The resulting priorities found at the end of this document rose to the top after careful analysis that gave weight to community voice and found that the data aligned to support community voice.
534
Page | 8
What We Found: Demographics
About Richmond: Our Assets and Demographics
The City of Richmond is located 16 miles northeast of San Francisco on the western shore of Contra Costa County. Richmond was incorporated on August 7, 1905, and became a charter city on March 24, 1909.

Today, the City is a unique community with a vibrant culture, strong civic organizations and a number of unique community assets and community-based initiatives promoting community improvement and wellbeing. Civil society in Richmond and North Richmond has been flourishing for many years and networks, relationships and a sense of collective purpose are notable at the time of this needs assessment.

The Richmond and North Richmond community has a number of nonprofit and CBOs that are actively working to make Richmond and North Richmond a community where children, youth, and their families thrive.
535
Page | 9
The RMAP2 is a collectively generated map of assets in the Richmond and North Richmond Community.

Map 1: The Richmond Living Map
Source: East Bay Center for the Performing Arts. (2019). Richmond Living Map.

Demographics
Like many other places in the San Francisco Bay Area, the demographics of Richmond and North Richmond are changing as affordability and gentrification push some residents further out from the shoreline of the San Francisco Bay. That said, the Richmond and North Richmond community remains very diverse.

There are 37,209 households in Richmond, of which 24,474 (66%) are families. 29% of all households (or 44% of family households) have children under the age of 18. 2East Bay Center for the Performing Arts. (2019). Richmond Living Map. Retrieved from:
https://www.eastbaycenter.org/~/media/d74f364dc8eb4af2a196d65c3e5ce5ce.ashx?la=e n 536
Page | 10
Figure 1. Richmond Households
Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2018). American Community Survey 5-year estimates.

Race and Ethnicity
The population in Richmond is growing and shifting: from 2010 to 2018 the population increased from 102,264 109,340 with the African American population rate declining and the Latino/Latinx population rising. Richmond’s largest population is the Hispanic/Latino/Latinx population, which grew from 36% of all residents in 2010 to 41% in 2018. The second largest racial/ethnic group in Richmond is the Black/African American population. The Black/African American population dramatically decreased from 28% in 2010 to 20% in 2018. The White and Asian American populations remained about the same as a percentage of the population with white residents remaining at 18% of the population and Asian Americans declining slightly from 16% in 2010 to 15% in 2018.

Figure 2: Richmond Population by Race/Ethnicity 2010 to 2017 ‡
Source: Richmond Youth Demographic Profile. 2010 and 2017 American Community Survey Five Year Estimates ‡Individuals who identify themselves as American Indian/Alaskan Native, Pacific Islander/Native Hawaiian, or some other race comprise less than one percent of Richmond’s population and are not shown in this Figure. 66%
Family
Households
44%
Family Households with
Children Under 18 Years Old
37,209
Richmond Households
9%
Family Households with
Single Mothers and
Children Under 18 Years Old
537
Page | 11
Age
Richmond has a young population. Children and youth under age 24 make up 32% of Richmond’s residents. Children under five years of age make up 6% of residents while children between 5 and 19 made up 19% and young adults 20 to 24 were 7%. Richmond’s median age is

35.9, while this is an increase from 34.5 in 2010, Richmond is still below the median age of Contra Costa County residents (39.4).

Figure 3. Richmond Population by Age
Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2018). American Community Survey 5-year estimates.

Language Spoken at Home
Higher percentages of residents in Richmond were born outside of the US and speak a language at home other than English than in Contra Costa County overall. A third (35%) of Richmond Residents were born outside of the U.S., a small increase over 32% in 2010. Just under half of the residents, five years or older, speak English at home (46.6%), followed by 35.8% who speak Spanish at home, 11.6% who speak an Asian or Pacific Islander language at home, and 1.8% who speak some other language at home.3 In 2016, 12% of children and youth enrolled in the West Contra Costa Unified School District lived in linguistically-isolated households, that is, a household in which the adult members do not speak English.4 This often puts an additional burden on children to provide interpretation for family members and can be a barrier to navigating programs and services.
3U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Language Spoken At Home, Table S1601 (5-year estimate), 2014-2018, American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ 4As cited on kidsdata.org, “Children Living in Limited English-Speaking Households (65,000 Residents or More).” 2016 Table. Data origins: Population Reference Bureau, analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey files (Dec. 2017) Retrieved from https://www.kidsdata.org/ 538
Page | 12
What We Found: Priority Populations
Priority Populations of Focus
This needs assessment is informed by legislation that identifies priority youth populations understood to have higher levels of need. The identification of these particular populations and omission of others does not suggest that additional populations do not have needs. Nor does the absence of deep data on some of these populations suggest a lack of need. In most cases, this absence indicates a lack of available data. The populations identified in the legislation intersect and overlap and we share data we have collected relevant to these groups including but not limited to the following:
• Young people living in poverty
• Young people who themselves or whose families are homeless or threatened by • homelessness
• Immigrant and undocumented children, youth and families • LGBTQ children, youth and families
• Teen parents and families, including single mothers
• Young people with poor physical, mental, emotional and behavioral health outcomes • and disabilities
• System-involved young people and their families
Young People Living in Poverty
Children, Youth, and their Families Living Under the Federal Poverty Level Insufficient income has a negative impact on the health, academic achievement, personal development, and well-being of children in Richmond and North Richmond. The San Francisco Bay Area has a high cost of living and many families struggle to make ends meet. Sufficient household income and resources are critical to providing for basic needs of Richmond and North Richmond’s children and youth. As the cost of living has gone up, many households are struggling to provide for basic necessities.

Children and youth whose households are in poverty are one of the priorities of the Department. 15% of Richmond residents have incomes below the federal poverty line, including 22% of all children under age 18.5 Though significant percentages of children and youth in Richmond live below the poverty line, this measure actually underrepresents the number of young people and families struggling with basic needs given the high cost of living in Richmond and North Richmond.
5U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months, Table S1701 (5 -year estimate), 2014-2018, American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ 539
Page | 13
Figure 4: Percentage of households with income under 100% poverty by race/ethnicity and household structure
Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2017). American Community Survey 5-year estimates.

The Federal Poverty Level for a family of four is a combined income of $25,100 per year which is extremely low income in Richmond and North Richmond. In California’s San Francisco Bay Area, where the cost of living is significantly higher than the nationwide average, the more accurate low income threshold is that of a household living under 200% of the Federal Poverty Level. For this reason, many programs in the region provide support for families and youth who are living below 200% of Federal poverty level or a combined income of $50,200 per year for a family of four.
††
As noted in the chart below, single female headed households are more likely to face poverty than married households. The median household income in Richmond is $64,575 per year.

The map below shows the density of households with related children under eighteen years of age living at or below the (100%) federal poverty line or extremely low income. The Iron Triangle, Shields-Reid, Pullman, Park Plaza, Laurel Park, Eastshore, Park View, and Stege neighborhoods have the highest percentage of families with children living in poverty. ††The 2010 Census defined poverty level is based on the number and age of persons in household. For example, the poverty level for a household with two adults and two children is $24,250. (Federal Register, Vol. 80, No. 15, January 22, 2015, pp. 3236-3237. Also see aspe.hhs.gov/poverty). 540
Page | 14
Map 2. Map of Families with Related Children Under 18 Years of Age At or Below Federal Poverty Level
Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2018). American Community Survey 5-year estimates.

Employment
At this writing, the COVID 19 virus is surging, and the economy and families are suffering. There is significant uncertainty as to how and when the economy will recover. The unemployment rate on September 20, 2020, was 12.20% which is lower than it was at its recent peak of 17.10% on April 30, 2020, but much higher than what it was a year ago, September 2019 when it was

3.2% (California EDD). Unemployment has left many without the resources to pay for housing, food, and power, but the blow of this has been softened somewhat by resources in the community to support renters, provide food, and sustain the community. Richmond and North Richmond residents are likely to require support with basic needs as the economic shock from COVID 19 take their continued toll on the community.

Educational Attainment for Adults
Educational attainment for adults is closely correlated to their employment. Of Richmond residents age 25 years or older, 36% have earned a post-secondary degree, including 8% who received an Associate’s degree, 18% a Bachelor’s degree, and 10% who earned a graduate or 541
Page | 15
professional degree.6 Educational attainment varies by race with those who are Black/African American, White, or Asian most likely to have a bachelor’s or graduate degree.

Figure 5. 2017 Percent of Adults (25 years and Older) by Educational Attainment < 9th
grade
9th-12th
grade
High
school
diploma GED
Some
college
Associate's
degree
Bachelor's
degree
Graduate
degree
White 0% 6% 6% 3% 18% 9% 34% 25%
Hispanic/Latino 24% 13% 21% 3% 19% 6% 11% 3%
Some Other Race 21% 14% 30% 4% 18% 7% 7% 1%
Black /African
American 3% 6% 21% 4% 32% 10% 18% 6%
Asian 7% 9% 21% 1% 20% 13% 18% 10%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2018). American Community Survey 1-year estimate. 6U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Educational Attainment, Table S1501 (5-year estimate), 2014-2018, American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ “There’s a lot of gentrification and
that affects us in our community.”
- LGBTQ+ Youth Focus Group
“We are grownups and now we have to pay bills.”
- Justice-Involved Youth Focus Group
“Financial literacy. A lot of youth are born in low socioeconomic situations. They don’t come from money sometimes at all. When we receive money we don’t know how to manage it or how use it.”
- TAY/Foster Youth and Emancipated Focus Group
542
Page | 16
Young People Experiencing Homelessness – Basic Needs
Housing
The San Francisco Bay Area has been experiencing a housing crisis because the cost of housing has moved steadily higher over the last decade. Avoiding homelessness and maintaining healthy, safe housing were identified among the top community priorities in Kaiser Permanente’s 2019 Richmond Community Health Needs Assessment.7 Gentrification and rising rents are an increasing burden on low income residents in Richmond. While policy solutions have been proposed8 , the housing crises continues to grow.

Owner-occupied housing accounts for 51% of all households and renter-occupied housing accounts for 49% of all householders. Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino families are more likely to rent than White and Asian Families who are more likely to own their own home.

Housing units in Richmond are generally older, 45% of all housing units were built before 1960 and only 10% of housing units were built after 2000.

As rents have gone up, many Richmond and North Richmond residents have been dislocated. In Richmond, 51% of all units (houses and apartments) are renter-occupied. Additionally, 64% of all owner-occupied homes have a mortgage. In February of 2020, the average rent for an apartment in the U.S. was $1,468, whereas it was $2,648 in Richmond with the average apartment size of 1,152 square feet. About 32% of apartments were renting for between $1,501 and $2,000 per month at this time, while 68% of apartments rented for over $2,000.9 In Richmond, the median monthly mortgage payment is $1,662.10 The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development considers families who pay more than 30% of their income on housing to be cost-burdened, which means they will have difficulty affording necessities such as food, clothing, transportation, and medical care since so much of their income is committed to housing costs. In Richmond, median household income is $64,575 and over half of all renters and homeowners are cost-burdened: 58% of all renters are cost- burdened and 67% of all home-owners are cost-burdened.11 The result of rapidly rising costs in low income communities is that many households have to double up and triple up and are at risk of homelessness. In addition, the 2019 Richmond Community Health Needs Assessment found that recent increases in housing costs which particularly affect renters and low income residents were more likely to require mental health services – “indicating that the stress of maintaining housing is negatively impacting families including children.” 7Kaiser Permanente (2019). 2019 Community Health Needs Assessment, page 14. Retrieved from:
https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/content/dam/internet/kp/comms/import/uploads/2019/09/Richmond-CHNA-2019.pdf 8Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society, U.C. Berkeley (2018). January 2018 Housing Policy and Belonging in Richmond Research Report. Retrieved from: https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/56693/2020-Community-Needs- Assessment-Report
9RentCafe.com, (Accessed 7/19/2020). Richmond CA Rental Market Trends. Retrieved from:
https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/ca/richmond/ 10U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Median Selected Monthly Owner Costs (Dollars) by Mortgage Status, Table B25088 (5-year estimate), 2014-2018. American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ 11 U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Income In The Past 12 Months (In 2018 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars), Table S1901 (5-year estimate), 2014-2018. American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ 543
Page | 17
Figure 6: Increasing Cost of Rent
Source: Rent Jungle (2017). Average Rents in Richmond.

Individuals Experiencing Homelessness
The county-wide point-in-time count of homelessness12 identified the number of individuals experiencing homelessness and the number of individuals utilizing homelessness services.

There are many more individuals using homeless services than individuals who were identified as currently homeless, suggesting an undercount. The point-in-time count found within Richmond, 270 individuals experiencing homelessness in 2018, and 333 in 2019 representing 71% and 65% respectively of homeless individuals counted in West Contra Costa County. In 2018, there were an additional 1,119 individuals in Richmond who lost housing.

Kaiser Permanente’s 2019 Richmond Community Health Needs Assessment reports that professionals and residents alike “described concerns about the growing numbers of unstably housed and the displacement of families.”13
In 2020, there were 2,277 people experiencing homelessness across Contra Costa County.

Countywide, 7% of those experiencing homelessness were children under 18 and 5% were transitional age youth. There were 154 children experiencing homelessness identified in the county and 92 families with children.14 A 2018 review of data in the County continuum of care found that minors made up a third or more of individuals experiencing homelessness 12Contra Costa Health Services: Health, Housing and Homelessness (2018). Contra Costa County Homeless Continuum of Care 2018 Annual Report. Retrieved from: https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Annual-Report-2018.pdf 13Kaiser Permanente (2019). 2019 Community Health Needs Assessment. Retrieved from:
https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/content/dam/internet/kp/comms/import/uploads/2019/09/Richmon d- CHNA-2019.pdf
14Contra Costa Health Services: Health, Housing and Homelessness (2020). Contra Costa County Annual Point in Time County Report. Retrieved from: https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/PIT-report-2020.pdf Average Richmond Rental Costs 2011 to 2019
$2,648
$1,213
2011
2019
544
Page | 18
identifying as Native Islanders (35%), Hispanics/Latinx (33%), and persons of multiple races (34%).15
County-wide, not all groups access
homelessness services as much as others.

Most notably in 2018, African Americans
were more likely to access services. They
represented 10% of the overall homeless
population but 39% of those receiving
services in Contra Costa County. Key
informant interviewees shared that there
was a need for centralized, simple
information to assist those attempting to
transition from homelessness, and that
case management was critical. The
interviewee expressed that children are
often segregated from parents at shelters
and they also feared that children might
be taken away from the parent as a
consequence of accessing services16.

There are insufficient shelter beds to
meet the needs of individuals and families
experiencing homelessness. In 2018,
there were 558 shelter beds for
individuals and 60 shelter beds for
families Countywide. This leaves 72% of
individuals and 40% of families
experiencing homelessness without
shelter.
15Contra Costa Health Services: Health, Housing and Homelessness (2019). Race & Ethnicity Equity Assessment:

Review of consumer’s 2018 demographic and service utilization data by race and ethnicity across the Continuum of Care Report. Retrieved from: https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Race-Ethnicity-Assessment.pdf 16Richmond Department of Children and Youth (October 2020). Key Informant Interview: Youth and Families Experiencing Homelessness.
545
Page | 19
“The biggest fear for a parent experiencing
homelessness is that their child will be
taken away from them.”
- Key Informant Interview: Youth
and Families Experiencing Homelessness
“I would say personally the low income
subsidized housing that is what my family
used for almost all of our entire stay in
Richmond. From the age of ten, that is
when my family was able to afford a
house. We used to live in a small one
bedroom apartment and for a family of
five that was very crowded. Then when I
was ten we got approved for low income
housing, it took us three years being on
the waitlist.”
- Latinx Youth Focus Group
“I do think that rents are getting really high and cost is high and the reason why we stay here is because
Richmond is the most centered place, but everything
is so high like rent, food, and everything has been
raising their prices. It has been a challenge.”
- Parents/Guardians of Youth, Focus Group
“When I was younger I was adopted and they
promised my mom a lot of things for housing and
other resources. At the end they took them away so
once the youth turned eighteen it was as if they
were never in the system. I think this plays a big
part for foster youth, because even if they went to
a family we still need a lot of resources due to what
we went through.”
- Foster Youth and Emancipated, Focus group
“One of the downsides is that I’ve noticed
gentrification going up, prices increasing,
buildings looking more higher up in
comparison to others.”
- Latinx Youth, Focus Group
546
Page | 20
Immigrant and Undocumented Children, Youth, and Families Richmond and North Richmond has a large immigrant community that has grown in the last decade. The national climate for immigration has been even more difficult for families. Recent national efforts have created confusion as to whether accessing services will impact the pathway to citizenship for immigrants. For those that are undocumented, the threat of deportation has increased and threatened family well-being and mental health. This climate has added to the burdens faced by immigrants including language barriers, limitations on access to work, and discrimination.

Immigrant students reported in focus groups that they faced significant challenges in trying to do well in school while learning the English language. They felt that they needed additional support in order to succeed. Reportedly, this was particularly true of newcomers and unaccompanied minor immigrants who faced challenges not only with language but with navigating new systems often without sufficient family support. In terms of data, 53% of Richmond residents speak a language other than English and 20% of Richmond children and youth aged 5 to 17 speak a language other than English17 .

Figure 7: Foreign-Born Population, in California and WCCUSD by Age Group: 2012-2016 Age Groups
Foreign Born
California Population
Percent
Foreign Born
WCCUSD Enrollment
Percent
Ages 0-4 1.9% 1.6%
Ages 5-17 6.3% 8.1%
Ages 18-24 15.4% 22.0%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2018). American Community Survey. 17U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Language Spoken At Home, Table S1601 (5-year estimate), 2014-2018, American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ Youth Survey
24% said immigration services benefited them or their families 24% said that language translation and interpretation benefited them or their families
547
Page | 21
“Schools don’t see that there are a
lot of immigrant students who
recently arrived and they don’t put
much focus on them.”
- Immigrant Youth Focus Group
“There is a lack of work and if
there is work you need
documents. I think immigrant
people need a lot of financial
help, because they don’t have
support from a stable job.”
- Immigrant Youth Focus Group
“Something hard that has been because of my
identity. I am Mexican and my mom is
undocumented and when we got to that age
where we started to talk about detention centers
and ICE. All this stuff that is going on in the
community. It was really hard for me to think
what am I going to do if my mom is not here. As a
young person having to constantly think about
what if they take my mom away from me, what if
they take one of my relatives is a struggle.”
- Latinx Youth Focus Group
“A lot of youth come here alone and they don’t have a place to go. Sometimes they live with friends of their family and a lot of them are disoriented or feel alone… I would like to see more support for them and their mental health because a lot of youth that come here have lived through different experiences in their life. Here they are set aside and that is not right.” - Immigrant Youth Focus Group
“I have had bad experiences looking for jobs
being an immigrant. There are places that pay
cash. I haven’t been able to get a job because
we have that barrier of not being able to…
I am in college and trying to get by, but you
can’t.”
- Immigrant Youth, Focus Group
548
Page | 22
LGBTQ+ Children, Youth and Families
It is difficult to estimate the number of children and youth who are LGBTQ+ in Richmond and North Richmond even though children today are identifying their sexual orientation at a younger age than in previous decades. According to a report by the Trevor Project, which highlights data from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s 2017 Youth Risk Behavior Survey, 1.8% of the 118,803 high school students surveyed in ten states and nine large urban school districts identified as transgender. The transgender youth who participated in the survey reported “significantly increased rates of depression, suicidality, and victimization” as compared to their peers. One in three of the transgender youth reported having attempted suicide in the previous year18 . Data from the California Healthy Kids Survey shows that those who do identify as Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual in Richmond and North Richmond face a number of challenges. This group reported more harassment than other children and youth who identified their sexuality as straight or “not sure”. Youth participating in focus groups shared that they felt it was difficult to feel like they belonged and that spaces like the RYSE Center were an important but rare resource in Richmond and North Richmond.

Figure 8: WCCUSD Students that were Bullied/ Harassed by Sexual Orientation: 2015-2017 West Contra Costa Unified School District
Students
Percent reporting they were bullied and harassed at
school for any reason in the previous year
Sexual Orientation Some None
Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual 53.9% 46.1%
Straight 24.5% 75.5%
Not Sure 32.8% 67.2%
Source: WestEd, California Dept. of Education (March 2019). California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) and Biennial State CHKS.

Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual identifying students in grades 9, 11 and in non-traditional programs were more likely to have seriously considered attempting suicide in the previous year (42.5%) than students who identified as “straight” (10.8%) or “not sure” (28.1%). This is also double that of any racial group whose responses ranged from 11.3% to 21.2%.

Figure 9: WCCUSD Students in grades 9 and 11 with Suicidal Ideation by Sexual Orientation:
2017-2019
West Contra Costa Unified School District Percent
Sexual Orientation Yes
Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual 42.5%
Straight 10.8%
Not Sure 28.1%
Source: WestEd, California Dept. of Education (March 2019). California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) and Biennial State CHKS.
18TheTrevorProject.org (2019). The Trevor Project Research Brief: Data on Transgender Youth. Retrieved from:
https://www.thetrevorprojec t.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The -Trevor-Project-Research-Brief-February- 2019.pdf
549
Page | 23
“As a person in the LGBTQ, we were never
given a safe space before. To be
comfortable with one another and not
feeling like they have to fit in.”
- LGBTQ+ Youth Focus Group
“There’s a statistic where it says 25-30% of
LGBTQ youth are homeless and a good
percentage of that is youth of color and
Richmond is majority a community of color, and
one of my big dreams is to have a network of
people that can give resources for housing and
things like that for those in that have found
themselves in that situation. I think something
like that is important given it’s something that’s
been prevalent in our community for like
generations now and can be remedied through
networks in our community.”
- LGBTQ+ Youth Focus Group
550
Page | 24
Teen Parents and Families, including Single Mothers
The teen birth rate has been declining in much of the San Francisco Bay Area over the last decade. This is also true for Contra Costa County where teen births declined and remained under the state rate
Figure 10: California and Contra Costa County Teen Births per 1000: 1995 to 2016 Source: CDC WONDER, Natality Public-Use Data (Feb. 2019). California Dept. of Public Health, Birth Statistical Master Files.

There are many challenges faced by teen parents. Richmond does have a number of resources for parenting teens but focus group participants indicated there continue to be gaps such as child care support to enable teens to study and remain in school. As noted in Figure 4 on page 13, single mothers or all ages are also more likely to face poverty than households with more than one parent.
551
Page | 25
“Provide some sort of childcare
support for youth that have kids or
are single parents so they can go
study. Have it be for low income so
they can access it if they need it.”
- Immigrant Youth Focus Group
“[Need to have programs for single parent
households.] I would like to see a program were
there are male and female mentors and tutors
as well because as woman we can parent our
sons but we cannot father them and there is a
difference. So I would like to see a program in
place especially for ages twelve and up.”
- Parents/Guardians Focus Group
“In elementary school my mom couldn’t watch and
I had to be placed in an afterschool program. It
was really engaging, we had tutoring and got to go
to field trips sometimes. That is really beneficial for parents that have to work during the times
children get off of school.” –
- Asian Youth Focus Group
552
Page | 26
Young People with Poor Physical, Mental, Emotional and
Behavioral Health Outcomes and Disabilities
Kaiser Permanente’s 2019 Richmond Community Health Needs Assessment designated behavioral health, including mental health and substance abuse, as one of the top three needs of the Richmond community. They noted that “Community members from the service area emphasized depression and stress as well as the co-occurrence of mental health and substance abuse.”
Even before the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting economic crisis, many students responding to surveys reported feelings of depression and anxiety.

Figure 11: Percentage of WCCUSD Staff who Believe Student Depression or Mental Health Is a Problem at School: 2015-2017
West Contra Costa Unified School District Percent
Type of School Insignificant
Problem
Mild Problem Moderate
Problem
Severe
Problem
Elementary School 33.4% 45.6% 15.4% 5.5%
Middle School 13.7% 40.3% 30.0% 16.0%
High School 8.8% 39.2% 38.0% 14.1%
Non-Traditional 0.0% 20.7% 44.8% 34.5%
Source: WestEd, California Department of Education (March 2019). California School Staff Survey.

A large number of students reported thinking about suicide. Rates were particularly high for Asian students (21.2%) and multiracial students (19.1%). As noted above, rates for Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual students were more than double that of other groups at 42.5%.

Figure 12: Suicidal Ideation (Student Reported), by Race/Ethnicity: 2017-2019 West Contra Costa Unified School District Percent
Race/Ethnicity Yes
African American/Black 11.3%
American Indian/Alaska Native 11.8%
Asian 21.2%
Hispanic/Latino 14.1%
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 15.6%
White 15.4%
Multiracial 19.1%
Other 12.5%
Source: WestEd, California Dept. of Education (August 2020). California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) and Biennial State CHKS.
553
Page | 27
Young People Not in School
Graduation rates in Richmond indicate that many youths are not completing school. The schools that primarily serve youth from Richmond have the lowest graduation rates in WCCUSD which include De Anza High School (90%), Richmond High School (82%), and Kennedy High School (71%). This suggests that many young people are not in school and many of those youth are also not employed and therefore defined as “disconnected youth.” Disconnected Youth
Disconnected youth are defined as youth ages 16-19 who are not enrolled in school and not employed. This measure has significant implications for well-being. In 2018, 15% of Richmond youth were disconnected from school and work.19
Figure 13: Percent of Disconnected Youth in Richmond and Contra Costa County Source: Bay Area Equity Atlas (2015). Percent of Disconnected Youth in Richmond and Contra Costa County. 19For more information, see: U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Sex By School Enrollment By Educational Attainment By Employment Status For The Population 16 To 19 Years, Table B14005 (5 -year estimate), 2014-2018 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ 554
Page | 28
System-Involved Young People (Foster Youth and Transitional Age Youth, Justice-Involved Youth)
Justice-Involved Youth
The Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA) and the Youthful Offender Block Grant (YOBG) Consolidated Annual Plan demographics show that 72% of cases referred to the Probation Department between 2015 and 2017 were high school aged youth between the ages of 14 and 17 with over 75% of these being male. The disparities in these data are dramatic. For example, in 2016 approximately 9% of youth in Contra Costa County were Black while 46% of cases referred to Probation in that year were Black.20
The number of youths in Contra Costa County served by probation declined since 2015 from 1,295 to 509 in 2019. The decline is largely attributed to the decrease in misdemeanor probation cases. The Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA) and the Youthful Offender Block Grant (YOBG) Consolidated Annual Plan used a review of quantitative data, and a series of focus groups and interviews with juvenile justice stakeholders to identify the following needs and gaps in services that are key to successful reentry and rehabilitation for Contra Costa youth.

These include the following gaps by issue area:

Behavioral health services
• Insufficient capacity and availability of mental health services that are both culturally and gender-responsive
• Limited youth-appropriate substance use treatment services Housing
• Limited affordable housing for youth and transitional housing for transitional age youth Geographic service accessibility
• Disparities in services by region
Prosocial supports and personal development
• Limited number of and access to prevention programs for youth • Limited mentoring and peer support opportunities for youth Diversion and prevention services
• Limited county-wide approach to informally and formally divert youth • Limited information about available juvenile justice system prevention options 20Contra Costa County Probation Department (2020-21). JJCPA-YOBG Consolidated Annual Plan FY2020-2021, page

12. Retrieved from: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/64393/JJCC-3-12-20-Packet?bidId= 555
Page | 29
Systemwide coordination
• Limited service coordination and information sharing among juvenile justice system partners • Limited data collection at the County and program level Systemic barriers
• Youth experience barriers to employment opportunities • Re-entering youth experience barriers enrolling into traditional schools • Racial disparities exist at various points in the juvenile justice system21 Youth in Foster Care
The number of foster youths enrolled In West Contra Costa Unified School District has been declining for the last four years. There were 119 foster youth enrolled in West Contra Costa Unified School District in 2019 and 157 in 2016.22 In Contra Costa County the rate of children and youth (birth to age 20) in foster care is 3.7 per 1,000. The rate decreases for Asian/Pacific Islander children (0.9 per 1,000), White children (2.7 per 1,000) and Hispanic/Latino children (2.8 per 1,000). The rate more than quadruples for Black/African American children (17.3 per 1,000).23 From 2009 to 2017 the number of African American/Black Children in foster care declined. At the same time, the number of Hispanic/Latino children in foster care has increased.

It is well known that youth in foster care often experience difficulty in transitioning out of foster care given the probability that there may not be ongoing family support as they become independent adults. Transitional age youth are at increased risk of homelessness and are an important priority population.
“I agree that people should be screened if they are working with youth that have certain experiences. There are some people that do care, but there are others that are just there...Through [this] program I felt more supported as a foster youth.”
“At times kids go into the juvenile system because of things they are not able to deal with. Sometimes they are able to become successful but in order to get resources and help it seems like they need to be in the system first. These
resources should be available to them without having to go into the system.”
- TAY/Foster Youth and Emancipated, Focus Group
- TAY/Foster Youth and Emancipated, Focus Group
“Have more connectedness between programs; connecting
juvenile system-involved youth to programs for schooling, jobs, mental health, and mentorship.”
- Justice-Involved Youth Focus Group
21Contra Costa County Probation Department (2020-21). JJCPA-YOBG Consolidated Annual Plan FY2020-2021, page 19-22. Retrieved from: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/64393/JJCC-3-12-20- Packet?bidId=
22As cited on kidsdata.org, “Foster Youth in Public Schools.”, 2015-2019 Table. Data origins: California Dept. of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) Unduplicated Pupil Count (UPC) Source Files (Sept. 2019). Retrieved from: https://www.kidsdata.org/ 23As cited on kidsdata.org, “Children in Foster Care, by Race/Ethnicity.”, 2018 Table. Data origins: Webster, D., et al. California Child Welfare Indicators Project Reports. UC Berkeley Center for Social Services Research (Jul. 2019).

Retrieved from: https://www.kidsdata.org/
556
Page | 30
What We Found: Priority Areas that
Cross Multiple Populations
Education and Learning: Early childhood, K-12, college and career (with COVID 19 reflections)
In the 2019 National Community Survey of Richmond, residents were asked what areas the City should prioritize in order to best support young people in Richmond. Education and Job Training received the highest response rate selecting this as a priority (82% of 308 responses) 24 .

Early Childhood Care and Education
In Richmond, access to early learning is inadequate with insufficient availability of placements for infants, children 3-4 years old, and school aged children. The percentage gap in childcare seats is biggest for infant care though infants make up the smallest group of children in need of care. The gap is biggest for school age children by quantity of seats needed.

Figure 14: Percentage of Child Care Demand Met
Source: Contra Costa County (2018). Contra Costa County Comprehensive Child Care Needs Assessment 2017 - 2027.
24National Research Center and ICMA (2019). The National Community Survey, Richmond, CA Technical Appendices. Retrieved from: https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/52256/The-NCS-Technical- Appendices---Richmond-2019
557
Page | 31
Beyond access to early learning and childcare resources, there are many factors that contribute to a child's readiness for school including getting enough sleep, attending kindergarten and preschool, having higher family income and high maternal education levels, having a two parent household, and activities that prepare the child with information about kindergarten. Black and Hispanic children, English language learners, and children with special needs tend to have lower levels of preparedness. The interplay of these factors suggest that resources targeted to low income households may have a “pronounced impact on school readiness”.25 Figure 15: Percent of West Contra Costa Kindergarten Students who are Ready for School Source Data: First 5 Contra Costa County (2017). “Ready or Not Here We Come!: An Assessment of Kindergarten Readiness in Contra Costa County 2017.” Note: “ready” is defined as a combination of kindergarten academic skills, social expression and self-regulation.
25First 5 Contra Costa County (2017). “Ready or Not Here We Come!: An Assessment of Kindergarten Readiness in Contra Costa County 2017.” Retrieved from: http://www.first5coco.org/ 558
Page | 32
Education and College and Career Readiness
The Diversity of the Student Population in Richmond and North Richmond. The West Contra Costa Unified School District (District) serves 32,143 students, 48% of whom attend a Richmond-based school. The majority of the students are Hispanic/Latino youth (56%), followed by Asian/Pacific Islander (15%), Black/African American (14%), White (10%), and Two or More Races (4%). For a complete breakdown of race and ethnicity by school see Figure A.1 in Appendix A.

Figure 16. 2019-20 WCCUSD District Student Demographics (N=32,143) Source: California Department of Education (2019-20). 2019-2020 Enrollment by Ethnicity table.

Academic Success
Two commonly-cited predictors of a young person’s academic success are 3rd grade literacy and 8th grade math proficiency. The California Assessment of Student Performance and Academic Progress determines whether students are performing at grade level; results are reported as Standard Exceeded, Standard Met, Standard Nearly Met, and Standard Not Met. In Figure 17 and 18, we see that in both math and literacy measures, students who were socioeconomically disadvantaged, homeless, Black/African American, Hispanic/Latinx, or Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander did not meet the standards.

In the 2018-19 school year, 32% of 3rd graders across the District met or exceeded the English Language Arts standard. Only 21% of students who were socioeconomically disadvantaged and 18% of students who were homeless met the standards. The highest performing subgroup were White students, of whom 60% met or exceeded the standards. Additionally, Asian, Filipino, and students of Two or More Races had higher percentages than the District average. Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander students had the smallest percentage, 12%, of students meeting or exceeding the English Language Arts standards of any racial/ethnic subgroup, followed by Black/African American students at 16%, and Hispanic/Latino students at 23%. 559
Page | 33
Figure 17. 2018-2019 Met or Exceeded 3rd Grade English Language Arts Standards (Districtwide)
Socio-
economically
Disadvantaged
Homeless Black / African
American
Asian Filipino Hispanic /
Latino
Native
Hawaiian /
Pacific Islander
White Two or More
Races
Source: California Department of Education (2018-19). 2018-2019 Met or Exceeded 3rd Grade English Language Arts Standards (Districtwide).

In the 2018-19 school year, 17% of 8th graders across the District met or exceeded the Math standard but only 10% of students who were socioeconomically disadvantaged and 7% of students who were homeless met the standards. Black/African American students were the lowest performing racial/ethnic subgroup with only 3% meeting or exceeding the English Language Arts standard, followed by Hispanic/Latino students at 10%. The highest performing subgroup were White students, of whom 45% met or exceeded the standards. Additionally, Asian, Filipino, and students of Two or More Races had higher percentages than the District average.
54%
44%
54%
60%
21%
12%
16%
18%
23%
560
Page | 34
Figure 18: 2018-2019 Met or Exceeded 8th Grade Math Standards (Districtwide) Socio-
economically
Disadvantaged
Homeless Black / African
American
Asian Filipino Hispanic /
Latino
White Two or More
Races
Source: California Department of Education (2018-19). 2018-2019 Met or Exceeded 8th Grade Math Standards (Districtwide).

High School Graduation Rate
The 2018-19 high school graduation rate by school is in Figure 19 below. The schools that primarily serve youth from Richmond have the lowest graduation rates; De Anza High School (90%), Richmond High School (82%), Kennedy High School (71%). Middle College High is co- located at Contra Costa College and allows students to earn high school and college credit.

Students must apply to attend Middle College High and their graduation rate is 99%.

Figure 19. 2018-2019 Graduation Rate by School
Middle Hercules Pinole Valley De Anza High El Cerrito Richmond Vista High John F. Greenwood College High High High High High (Alternative) Kennedy Academy High (Alternative)
Source: California Department of Education (2018-19). 2018-2019 Graduation Rate by School. 7%
3%
22%
33%
38%
45%
10%
10%
99% 93.7% 90.1% 90.5% 87.0% 82.0% 77.6% 70.5%

45.0%
561
Page | 35
Chronic Absenteeism
Chronic absenteeism is defined as students who have missed 10% or more of the school days.

The data below refers to the 2018-2019 school year. Districts and schools are rethinking attendance and chronic absenteeism for the 2019-2020 school year as many students missed days due to the COVID-19 shelter in place orders and subsequent distance learning.

Overall, the District has a chronic absenteeism rate of 17%. Pacific Islander students have the highest rate of chronic absenteeism at 32% followed by Black/African American students (26%) and American Indian/Alaskan Native students (24%), see Figure 20 below. Homeless youth and youth in the foster care system also have high rates of chronic absenteeism, 38% and 34%, respectively. Socioeconomic disadvantaged youth have only a slightly higher, 20%, rate than the Districtwide rate. See Appendix A Figure A2. for the chronic absenteeism rate by school.

Figure 20. 2018-2019 Chronic Absenteeism (Districtwide) by Race/Ethnicity Black /
African
American
American
Indian or
Alaska
Native
Asian Filipino Pacific
Islander
Hispanic or
Latino
White Two or
More
Races
Source: California Department of Education (2018-19). 2018-2019 Chronic Absenteeism (Districtwide) by Race/Ethnicity.

English Language Learners
Students are classified into four primary language groups: English only; Initial fluent English proficient, English learner, and Reclassified fluent English proficient. Districtwide there are 10,045 students classified as English learners, 83% of which speak Spanish. Arabic, Portuguese, Filipino (Tagalog), Urdu, Punjabi, Vietnamese, Cantonese, and Mandarin (Putonghua) are each spoken by 1% of the English Learners with dozens of other languages each spoken by fewer than 1% of the English Learners.

Students experiencing homelessness (53%) and foster youth (77%) are more likely to speak English-only compared to the District average (44%). Socioeconomically disadvantaged students (40%) are more likely to be English Learners than the District average (31%). Socioeconomically 8%
19%
11%
16%
8%
24%
26%
32%
562
Page | 36

17.1%

28.1%

39.8%

33.3%

52.8%

77.1%
disadvantaged students (23%) are slightly more likely to be designated as Reclassified Fluent English Proficient than the District average (20%). See Figure 21 below.

Figure 21. 2019-2020 English Learners (District) by Subgroup

43.7%
Socio Economic
Homeless
Foster
District

4.0%

4.8%

2.7% 1.9%

31.3%

20.1%

3.8%
English Only (EO) Initial Fluent English
Proficient (IFEP)
English Learner (EL) Reclassified Fluent
English Proficient
(RFEP)
Source: California Department of Education (2018-19). 2019-2020 English Learners (District) by Subgroup.

There are 52 schools in the West Contra Costa Unified School District that meet the 15% and above threshold for translation support, all of these schools qualify for Spanish translation.

Out of School Enrichment Participation and Barriers
In the fall of 2019 and January of 2020, Information Technology Academy students at Kennedy High School took part in a collaborative research project with Y-PLAN (Center for Cities + School, UC Berkeley). In total, Kennedy High School students conducted surveys and received 572 English survey responses and 85 Spanish survey responses. Despite the supply of afterschool enrichment activities, many students surveyed as part of Y-PLAN at Kennedy Highschool were not participating in extracurricular activities. When asked if they would if they could, 74% of respondents said they were likely or very likely to participate. When asked what barriers they faced to participation, barriers such as costs, lack of information about the programs, and transportation were some of the top reasons. The figures on the following page are examples from the Y-PLAN Student Survey conducted at Kennedy High School in the fall of 2019 and January of 2020. Students indicated they would participate in after-school programs if they were able to, indicating a need to increase access as well as awareness.

15.9%

22.7%
563
Page | 37
Figure 22. Participation in After School Programs among English and Spanish Speaking Students
Source: Kennedy High School, IT Academy (2020). Y-Plan Student Survey. 564
Page | 38
Figure 23. Barriers to Participation among English and Spanish Speaking Students Source: Kennedy High School, IT Academy (2020). Y-Plan Student Survey. 565
Page | 39
Needs During COVID-19 Shelter-in-Place
During this needs assessment, youth and families in Richmond and around the world were subject to a shelter-in-place and social distancing order. On March 15, 2020, all West Contra Costa Unified Schools closed at noon. The schools moved to distance learning for the remainder of the 2019-20 school year. The Youth Truth Survey administered in the Spring of 2020 during shelter-in-place school closures found the following obstacles to learning among youth surveyed.26
Figure 24. What Resources or Supports Does your Family Still Need Source: YouthTruthSurvey.org (2020). Spring 2020 Youth Truth Survey.

The District has provided several online resources for families, including mobile hotspots via families’ smart phones, however, there are more applicants than mobile hotspots. The District is providing support for staff and families that request technology needs. The District has also aimed to provide Chromebooks and tablets to students and has established a Tech Support Hotline.
“We lack a lot of resources compared to nearby
communities. Teachers leave halfway through
[the school year].”
“I would have to say a lack of funding for
school supplies, like books especially,
because at our school we have used books
from Kennedy High School and De Anza
High School. And sometimes the books are
really damaged so we don’t really have
good adequate books.”
- Asian Youth Focus Group
- Black Youth Focus Group
“Academics now that I work with an
organization that helps students go to college. I
definitely see the difference in what I learned in
school and the classes they offered in my school
versus what they get offered.”
- Latinx Youth Focus Group
26 YouthTruthSurvey.org and West Contra Costa Unified School District (2020). Students Weigh In: Learning and Well-Being During COVID-19 Report. Retrieved from: https://youthtruthsurvey.org/student-weigh-in/ 566
Page | 40
College access
Student Aid for College
In West Contra Costa Unified School District, 61% of all youth in the 2013-14 school year submitted a FAFSA -- an increase of almost 20% from the 2011-12 school year (45%). 75% of youth in the West Contra Costa Unified School District applied for Cal Grants, which is a significant increase from 38% in the 2011-12 school year.

College Going Rates
In the West Contra Costa Unified School District, 82% of the 2018 high school graduating class enrolled in college full time after their senior year (2018-19 academic year). This is an increase from the previous 2017 high school graduating class where only 51% enrolled in college after their senior year. This is in part due to the partnership between the District and Richmond Promise to College, an academic supports and scholarship program for students living in the City of Richmond.

Overall, the 2017 high school graduating class was more likely to attend a two-year college (66%) than a four-year university (34%). The 2017 high school graduating class enrolled full- time were more likely to attend a four-year university (60%) than a 2-year college (40%). The top five schools attended by the 2017 high school graduating class are Contra Costa College, Diablo Valley College, Berkeley City College, San Francisco State University, and University of California, Davis.27
27National Student Clearing House (2017). Richmond/West Contra Costa College Success Learning Convening data.

Retrieved from: https://www.studentclearinghouse.org/
567
Page | 41
“Education and career guidance
because a lot of people who I know are
first generation going to college and
need support services. Like counseling
and college preparation. I know a lot of
students miss out on that because we
don’t have people to tell us about it.”
- Asian Youth Focus Group
“Programs like college prep or can
help you find mentors in the career
you want to be in really helps you. It
can help people create a network.”
- Asian Youth Focus Group
“In high school …they don’t have programs
that guide or support them so they can go
to college. Because at times they need
some motivation to attend college and they
end up finishing only high school then they
might end up becoming involved in drugs
and stuff like that. I think having programs
for the youth to give them motivation to go
to college or guide them.”
~Immigrant Youth Focus Group
“I want there to be a training program
that helps you apply for college and
scholarships. When I applied I didn't’
know what I was doing. So they can let
you immigrant youth know what you
need to do or have. A lot of people
think that if they are immigrants they
think that they don’t qualify because
they don’t have a social or green card.”
~Immigrant Youth Focus Group
568
Page | 42
Health: Mental Health, Nutrition and Healthy Living, Asthma and Tobacco/E-Cigarette Rates, Students with Disabilities, and Community Safety
Richmond as a city has made a commitment to health equity, adopting the Health in All Policies Ordinance and Strategy (HiAP) in 2014. The ordinance commits the city to evaluating and prioritizing services that promote health equity.28 Health in All Policies takes the approach of addressing the social determinants of health with multiple departments addressing the stressors that are related to the zip code residents live in. Health in All Policies also provides a piece of the foundation that the Department of Children and Youth can build upon to reduce disparities and promote equity for children and youth.

In 2019, Kaiser Permanente conducted a Richmond Community Health Needs Assessment which included children, youth, and their families in Richmond and the surrounding cities/towns of Crockett, El Cerrito, El Sobrante, Hercules, Pinole, Rodeo, and San Pablo in Contra Costa County, as well as the nearby unincorporated areas29 . Overall Richmond accounts for just under half of the population of the needs assessment area. The Kaiser report found that the priority health needs were Economic Security, Health Care Access and Delivery, Behavioral health including mental health and substance abuse.

Mental Health
The Spring 2020 YouthTruth Youth COVID Survey showed that 41% of Elementary and Middle School students and 62% of high school students in Richmond felt depressed, stressed or anxious and that was making it difficult for them to do the at-home learning opportunities.

The stress being felt by children and youth during the COVID-19 pandemic is the most recent manifestation of an ongoing challenge with trauma and mental health among children and youth in Richmond and North Richmond. In the 2019 Kaiser report 30 , a local health expert is quoted as saying, “If young people are coming to school dealing with their own trauma in their neighborhood, it impacts their ability to thrive. The report notes that expulsions in the Kaiser Foundation Hospital- Richmond service area were 375% higher than the state average according to 2016-17 California Department of Education data. 28City of Richmond (2014-2015). Health in All Policies Report. Retrieved from:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/36978/HiAP_Report_Final?bidId = 29Kaiser Permanente (2019). 2019 Community Health Needs Assessment. Retrieved from:
https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/content/dam/inter net/kp/comms/import/uploads/2019/09/Richmon d- CHNA-2019.pdf
30Kaiser Permanente (2019). 2019 Community Health Needs Assessment. Retrieved from:
https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/content/dam/internet/kp/comms/import/uploads/2019/09/Richmon d- CHNA-2019.pdf
569
Page | 43
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
In Richmond. 67% of families with children under the age of 18 receive the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). 30% of individuals who are Hispanic/Latinx participate in SNAP. Overall, 11% of all households in Richmond receive SNAP.

Healthy Eating and Active Living
Many areas of Richmond are food deserts with limited access to fresh healthy foods. According to a study by Social Compact, Richmond has a ‘grocery gap’ wherein many residents are underserved by food retailers and have to travel longer than average distances to find a store.31 • About 33% of the Richmond study area total population (or 30,878 people) reside in “critical food access areas” - areas considered underserved when compared to the study area as a whole. Their data indicates that many communities demonstrate market potential that could support additional grocery retail development • 18% of the Richmond study area population (or 16,832 people) reside in areas considered underserved – when compared to the study area as a whole – again, these communities demonstrate market potential to support additional grocery retail development. These areas are characterized as “critical food access and market opportunity areas”
Children and youth who attend schools in West Contra Costa Unified School District participate in California Department of Education’s Annual Physical Fitness Test of 5th , 7th and 9th graders.

Districtwide in 2018, 50% of all 5th graders, 45% of all 7th graders, and 43% of all 9th graders were overweight or obese.32
Figure 25. Percent of District Youth Who Are Overweight or Obese by Grade and Race/Ethnicity.

Source: California Department of Education (2018-19). Annual Physical Fitness Test. 31Social Compact (Accessed July 17, 2020). Richmond Grocery Gap. Retrieved from :
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/7976/FINAL -GroceryGap_Report_Richmon d 32As cited on kidsdata.org, “Children’s Physical Fitness in California”. Data origins: California Department of Education, 2018-2019 Physical Fitness Testing Research Files downloaded. Retrieved from:
https://www.kidsdata.org/
570
Page | 44
Districtwide in the 2018-19 school year, 13% of 5th graders met all six of the physical fitness standards as defined by the California Department of Education. 27% of 7 th graders and 9th graders also met all six standards.33 Districtwide in 2018, 60% of 9th graders and 61% of 11th graders reported exercising for at least sixty minutes per day.

Figure 26. Percent of District Youth Who Reported Exercising for at least sixty minutes by Number of Days
0 days 1 day 2 days 3 days 4 days 5 days 6 days 7 days
Grade 9 14% 6% 7% 15% 12% 19% 8% 21%
Grade
11 24% 7% 10% 13% 13% 15% 5% 28%
Source: California Department of Education (2017-18). California Healthy Kids Survey School Reports.

Asthma Rates
In 2016, 15.2% of all children in California were diagnosed with asthma. The percent of children with asthma (23.6%) is significantly higher in Contra Costa County, which has the state’s fourth highest county asthma rate.34 The asthma hospitalization rate in Contra Costa County is

9.8/10,000. Children ages 0-4 are the most impacted with an asthma-related hospitalization rate of 17.6/10,000.35 It is likely that asthma in Richmond and North Richmond is linked to the overall air quality which is impacted by the location of Richmond and North Richmond near major freeways and the siting of polluting industries in the area.

Tobacco/E-cigarette Rates
The California Healthy Kids Survey is distributed to every school in the West Contra Costa Unified School District. The survey asks students to self-report the number of times they have smoked or vaped on school property. Districtwide, the rates are relatively low. Only 2% of 5th graders reported smoking a cigarette or vaping on school property. The vast majority of 5th graders (92%) reported that cigarettes were very bad for your health, and 79% indicated that vaping was very bad for your health. In 7th , 9th , and 11th grades, 2-3% of students reported 33As cited on kidsdata.org, “Children’s Physical Fitness in California”. Data origins: California Department of Education, 2018-2019 Physical Fitness Testing Research Files downloaded. Retrieved from:
https://www.kidsdata.org/
34As cited on kidsdata.org, “Childhood Asthma in California”. Data origins: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research (Mar. 2018), California Health Interview Survey. Retrieved from: https://www.kidsdata.org/ 35As cited on kidsdata.org, “Childhood Asthma in California”. Data origins: California Dept. of Finance, and U.S.

Census Bureau: California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (Feb. 2019), California Breathing.

Retrieved from: https://www.kidsdata.org/
571
Page | 45
Native Pacific Hispanic Black /
Asian Multi African- White
having smoked a cigarette on school property. The percentage of older students who reported vaping were higher; 5-6% of 7th , 9th , and 11th graders.36 Students with disabilities
In the 2018-19 school year, the District served 4,167 students with disabilities. Students who identify as Black/African American represent 22% of all students with a disability; however, they represent only 14% of students’ Districtwide. Approximately, 29% of all students with a diagnosed intellectual disability are Black/African American more than double their representation in the total student body.

Figure 27. 2018-2019 Students with Disabilities by Race American Islander / Latino American
Intellectual Disability * 21 * * 148 75 12
Hard of Hearing 0 20 0 * 53 13 *
Deaf 0 * 0 * 13 * *
Speech or Language
Impairment * 75 * 57 610 149 81
Visual Impairment 0 * 0 0 20 * *
Emotional Disturbance 0 * 0 * * 27 *
Orthopedic Impairment 0 * * * 37 14 *
Other Health Impairment 0 12 * 13 92 80 33
Specific Learning Disability∗ * 83 * 47 1,005 437 151
Deaf- Blindness 0 0 0 0 * 0 *
Multiple Disability * * 0 0 * * *
Autism * 131 * 41 260 125 77
Traumatic Brain Injury 0 * 0 0 * * *
* Denotes values of 10 or less
Source: 2018-19 California Department of Education
36West Contra Costa Unified School District and California Department of Education (2017 -18). California Healthy Kids Survey, 2017-18: Main Report, San Francisco: WestEd Health & Human Development Program for the California Department of Education. Retrieved from:
https://www.wccusd.net/cms/lib/CA01001466/Centricity/Domain/11/West_Contra_Costa_Unified_1718_Sec_CH KS.pdf
∗Specific Learning Disability means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in an imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations, including such conditions as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. 572
Page | 46
“Another program that I would like to see
in the Asian community is one where we
talk more about mental health and mental
health awareness. I feel like mental health
is still a very taboo topic and some Asian
American communities.”
- Asian Youth Focus Group
“I think having health resources
like psychologists for the youth
because sometimes they are
dealing with different things in
their life like problems at home,
or experiencing bullying at
school, and depression.”
- Immigrant Youth Focus Group
“We need more mental health services for
children, in California a lot of them qualify
for ACES. My younger daughter scored ten
out of ten in ACES and that is the highest
you can go. It was hard navigating and
finding support for her so our kids need
that.”
- Parents/Guardians Focus Group
“There are oil refineries near
the schools which kind of affects
the students and their health.

One time it exploded and we
couldn’t leave school because of
that.”
- Asian Youth Focus Group
573
Page | 47
Community Safety
In the Kaiser 2019 Community Health Needs Assessment, participants prioritized community and family safety. “Crime, violence, and intentional injury are related to poorer physical and mental health for the victims, perpetrators, and community at large.” Participants expressed concern for children and youth in particular because of issues such as witnessing or being a victim of violence, trauma, and bullying/cyber bullying. The 2019 National Community Survey of Richmond asked residents what areas the City should prioritize in order to best support young people in Richmond. Violence prevention and response received the second highest response rate with 73% of respondents (275 responses) selecting this as a priority37.

We know that exposure to violence can result in trauma for children and can interfere with their development and their learning. Violence was reported by focus group participants as a negative factor impacting the ability of children and youth to access resources, move freely, and to feel safe. In North Richmond, the 2019 Quality of Life Plan identified the need for “supportive environments that are conducive to their learning and education” and “that promote message of social cohesion and belonging. The North Richmond Quality of Life Plan (Plan) process also identified public safety as a priority. As stated in the Plan, "Ultimately we envision a safe and prosperous environment that is home to healthy and engaged residents and creates positive opportunities and outcomes for young people."38 37National Research Center and ICMA (2019). The National Community Survey, Richmond, CA Technical Appendices. Retrieved from: https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/52256/The-NCS-Technical- Appendices---Richmond-2019
38Healthy Richmond (2019). North Richmond Quality of Life Plan, (Richmond , CA). Retrieved from:
https://healthyrichmond.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/QoL-digital-english.pdf 39Aran Watson, Kanwarpal Dhaliwal, and Kimberly Aceves (2016). The RYSE Center’s Listening Campaign:

Community-engaged inquiry of young people’s experiences and articulations of trauma, violence, coping, and healing report. Retrieved from:
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58ece61644024383be911a95/t/593e57012e69cf4a3e12ec6d/1497257742 081/RYSE+Listening+Report+2016.pdf
The RYSE Center’s Listening Campaign Report from 2016 identified 56 types of violence that participating youth identified as most significant in Richmond.39 The RYSE report identified “five categories of violence most commonly identified by youth as most impactful”. Of the 1020 responses, the following were the most frequent.
• Gun violence and gang or turf related forms of violence (456 responses) • Peer-based forms of violence, including fighting, getting jumped, bullying, dating violence, and forms of harassment (147 responses)
• Drug-related violence, including violence connected to the use and sale of drugs as well as violence seen as committed because of using drugs (155 responses) • Family-based or in-home forms of violence, including intimate partner violence, physical, sexual, verbal and emotional abuse, as well as neglect (139 responses) 574
Page | 48
The documentation of youth voices in the RYSE reports also describes continuing threads shared by youth in the listening sessions: the familiarity with violence and the consistent presence of tension created by the risk of violence.
“From self-harming and giving up on oneself through larger forces of violence and oppression, youth shared repeated themes of feeling overwhelmed and marginalized at every level of exposure. One of the most significantly challenging aspects of exposure to ongoing and multi- formed violence is attempting to address one’s trauma/s while still relationally and ambiently submerged in a context of violence.”41
Police Use of Force
In 2016-2017 there were 18 incidents of Police use of force per 100,000 people in Richmond.

The rate is slightly higher at 20 incidents per 100,000 people who are Latino/Hispanic and more than doubles at 41 incidents per 100,000 people who are Black/African American. The rate decreases by half at 10 incidents per 100,000 people who are White.42 40Aran Watson, Kanwarpal Dhaliwal, and Kimberly Aceves (2016). The RYSE Center’s Listening Campaign, ibid, p.

15. 41Aran Watson, Kanwarpal Dhaliwal, and Kimberly Aceves (2016). The RYSE Center’s Listening Campaign, ibid, p.

19. 42Bay Area Equity Atlas (2016-2017). Police use of force. Retrieved from:
https://bayareaequityatlas.org/indicators/police-use-of-force#/ ““The safety in some areas, it is
sad that the majority of low
income areas the parks are
unsafe and it is the area where a
lot of families are but we have to
go farther away to parks or other
safer places. Throughout the
years I’ve been here I have seen
this.”
- Parents/Guardians Focus Group
“I just went back home to Richmond and
saw some of my close friends at the park
where I grew up and they told me about
nearly being shot during a police raid
and/or have been caught during the
crossfire of a shoot-out. It truly broke my
heart hearing their stories. In my ideal
Richmond, I would like to see less police
militarization and more mental health
counselors. I would like to make the
mindset of going to college a reality and
not a far-fetched goal.”
- Latinx Youth Focus Group
• Sexual violence, including sexual harassment, sexual molestation, rape, date rape, sexual abuse, incest, and larger community and societal pressures on female sexuality (80 responses)40 Source: RYSE Center Listening Campaign
575
Page | 49
Recommended Priorities
Priorities Emerging from the Community Needs Assessment Youth and Family Voices: surveys, focus groups, forums and secondary data The Community Needs Assessment (CNA) included interviews, focus groups, community forums, secondary data review, and a synthesis of multiple existing reports and resources in the community. It was challenging to adapt the process to a virtual environment and, like much under the conditions of social distancing and virtual interaction, the result is imperfect.

Nevertheless, there is significant convergence within the data and among the youth and community voices that participated in and guided the process.

We listened carefully and noted that there was strong convergence around a number of topics.

The following are the top priorities emerging from the CNA. #1 Behavioral Health: Mental Health and Wellness
The issue of mental health and well-being was a concern across all of the focus groups that were conducted. Given high levels of violence and need across Richmond and North Richmond, we would expect many children and youth in Richmond and North Richmond to score high on the Adverse Childhood Experience Assessment (ACES) signaling high levels of trauma. This is particularly true for Black and Latinx residents who are disproportionately exposed to violence leading to long term impacts on health and well-being. Trauma-informed programming, as well as mental health programs, emerged as a significant need for children youth and families along with the need for that programming to consider the rich diversity of residents, many of whom are experiencing the trauma of the constant threat of family deportation, violence in the community, discrimination and more. Coinciding with these stressors on youth, there is a concern that some youth are turning to alcohol and drug abuse. Also, the need for culturally fluent approaches is central to filling this gap as many of Richmond and North Richmond’s children, youth, and families come from non-western cultures where there may be barriers and stigma attached to western approaches to mental health and wellness programming. 576
Page | 50
#2 Education Support and Employment Training/Support
The need for education support and employment training emerged across surveys, focus groups, forums and other sources. Richmond and North Richmond children and youth want the chance to excel in school and move successfully to college and career. There was a strong desire for college access programs, tutoring, wraparound support for those who may be struggling such as transitional age youth or new immigrants arriving as unaccompanied minor children. The latter group also needs accelerated language learning. In addition, participants identified mentoring, internships, and job skills training as key to their success. In addition, access to resources such as high-speed internet and computer equipment such as tablets has become a priority in the current distance learning environment. Participants often pointed to disparities between nearby, wealthier districts outside of Richmond and North Richmond that are better resourced and have programs, tools, and infrastructure that allow for students to excel.
#3 Out of School Time, Afterschool, Sports, and Enrichment Low cost or no cost out-of-school and after-school sports and enrichment programming scored high as both desired and needed for youth to thrive across groups. Sports were a popular suggestion as were outdoor activities such as gardening and hiking. The arts were very often mixed in with responses to sports but also were often singled out as highly desirable (music, dance, visual arts were all mentioned). Culturally relevant arts and other programming to help them to build awareness, strengthen self-esteem, and create a sense of belonging. Some groups stated there were few or no respectful and safe spaces to be with others like them. For example, Asian focus group participants felt that they were marginalized in many programs where their cultural differences were not recognized. This group discussed the solution of a “club” or space where multiple Asian cultures could be celebrated, practiced, and shared.

A persistent challenge facing youth in North Richmond is the scarcity of places where they can experience joy and happiness. Youth need supportive environments that are conducive to their learning and education and promote messages of social cohesion and belonging. Indoor and outdoor gathering spaces should provide for the civic, educational, social, and recreational needs of the community.
577
Page | 51
#4 Information, Guidance, and Case Management
For children, youth, and families, there were a number of voices across the spectrum of youth residents that reported on how difficult it is to navigate the Richmond and North Richmond environment of youth services. Almost all community engagement activities during the CNA identified the need for support that would assist community members in understanding what resources were out there and whether they qualified to access them. Many of those surveyed said they did not access services because they did not know about them. Young people expressed the need for help, including coaching or case management, in navigating the turn toward independence or the journey to college success. Case management or at the very least guidance from a caring adult is needed so that children, youth, and their families can understand and access the services available. Parents and guardians need more support with understanding what was offered and how to make the best use of these programs and services for their children. Information and case management was also mentioned as critical to individuals experiencing homeless successfully regaining housing. This information needs to be in multiple languages with extra effort to reach marginalized children, youth, and their families. #5 Youth Violence Prevention
Violence in the community came up as a barrier to participation and even as a significant barrier to everyday activity for all priority populations. This came out most strongly in the focus groups with African American youth saying they couldn’t go to many places in Richmond out of fear. They expressed that they couldn’t comfortably go out with groups of friends, often because someone felt they were not safe in a particular neighborhood. Others spoke of witnessing violence and being afraid to be in particular locations. Bullying is also a concern for a number of populations. Some participants also reported the fear of gender-based violence as a barrier to movement and participation in the community. 578
Page | 52
#6 Access to Basic Needs
Many of the focus group participants reported that they had difficulty or needed support with meeting basic needs (housing, food, medicine, utilities, and transportation) for their families:
for homeless participants housing and wraparound support was identified; for TAY the need for assistance in supporting their own household after they turned 18 was mentioned (see #3); for immigrant children, the need for financial support for families who were often barred from working full time was mentioned; justice-involved youth suggested that they needed access to support that they said was often contingent on having been in Juvenile Hall; and for some parents and youth who wanted to access particular programs, transportation was identified as a barrier.

The Lens of COVID 19 and the Richmond and North Richmond Community With COVID 19 and the resulting economic disruption influencing the lives of California residents for upcoming months and possibly years, the issues of the digital divide, mental health, education, basic needs, and many of the above priorities have been exacerbated, and solutions may need to take on new forms and meaning. This situation and its impacts are likely to persist for some time and systemic changes are likely to result. The Richmond and North Richmond community is deeply engaged in both action and ongoing conversations related to this new challenge. Ongoing collaboration, community engagement, and partnership will be essential in moving to the Strategic Investment Planning and Implementation phase. 579
Page | 53
References
Footnotes:
1City of Richmond. Charter, Article XV, Section 3 Retrieved from:
https://library.municode.com/ca/richmond/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=CH_ARTXVRIF UCHYO
2East Bay Center for the Performing Arts. (2019). Richmond Living Map. Retrieved from:
https://www.eastbaycenter.org/~/media/d74f364dc8eb4af2a196d65c3e5ce5ce.ashx?la=en 3U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Language Spoken At Home, Table S1601 (5-year estimate), 2014- 2018, American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from:
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
4As cited on kidsdata.org, Children Living in Limited English-Speaking Households (65,000 Residents or More).” 2016 Table. Data origins: Population Reference Bureau, analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey files (Dec. 2017) Retrieved from https://www.kidsdata.org/
5U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months, Table S1701 (5-year estimate), 2-14-2018, American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from:
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
6U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Educational Attainment, Table S1501 (5-year estimate), 2014-2018 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ 7Kaiser Permanente (2019). 2019 Community Health Needs Assessment, page 14. Retrieved from:
https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/content/dam/internet/kp/comms/import/uploads/2019/0 9/Richmond-CHNA-2019.pdf
8Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society, U.C. Berkeley (2018). January 2018 Housing Policy and Belonging in Richmond Research Report. Retrieved from:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/56693/2020-Community-Needs- Assessment-Report
9RentCafe.com, (Accessed 7/19/2020). Richmond CA Rental Market Trends. Retrieved from:
https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/ca/richmond/ 10U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Median Selected Monthly Owner Costs (Dollars) by Mortgage Status, Table B25088 (5-year estimate), 2014-2018, American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ 580
Page | 54
11U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Income In The Past 12 Months (In 2018 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars), Table S1901 (5-year estimate), 2014-2018. American Community Survey 5-year estimates Retrieved from:
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
12Contra Costa Health Services: Health, Housing and Homelessness (2018). Contra Costa County Homeless Continuum of Care 2018 Annual Report. Retrieved from:
https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Annual-Report-2018.pdf
13Kaiser Permanente (2019). 2019 Community Health Needs Assessment. Retrieved from:
https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/content/dam/internet/kp/comms/import/uploads/2019/0 9/Richmond-CHNA-2019.pdf
14Contra Costa Health Services: Health, Housing and Homelessness (2020). Contra Costa County Annual Point in Time County Report. Retrieved from: https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/PIT- report-2020.pdf
15Contra Costa Health Services: Health, Housing and Homelessness (2019). Race & Ethnicity Equity Assessment: Review of consumer’s 2018 demographic and service utilization data by race and ethnicity across the Continuum of Care Report. Retrieved from:
https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Race-Ethnicity-Assessment.pdf 16Richmond Department of Children and Youth (October 2020). Key Informant Interview: Youth and Families Experiencing Homelessness.
17U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Language Spoken At Home, Table S1601 (5-year estimate), 2014- 2018, American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from:
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
18TheTrevorProject.org (2019). The Trevor Project Resear ch Brief: Data on Transgender Youth.

Retrieved from: https://www.thetrevorproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-Trevor- Project-Research-Brief-February-2019.pdf
19U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Sex By School Enrollment By Educational Attainment By Employment Status For The Population 16 To 19 Years, Table B14005 (5-year estimate), 2014- 2018 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from:
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
20 and 21Contra Costa County Probation Department (2020-21). JJCPA-YOBG Consolidated Annual Plan FY2020-2021, page 12, 19-22. Retrieved from:
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/64393/JJCC-3-12-20-Packet?bidId= 22As cited on kidsdata.org, “Foster Youth in Public Schools.”, 2015-2019 Table. Data origins:

California Dept. of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) Unduplicated Pupil Count (UPC) Source Files (Sept. 2019). Retrieved from:
https://www.kidsdata.org/
581
Page | 55
23As cited on kidsdata.org, “Children in Foster Care, by Race/Ethnicity.”, 2018 Table. Data origins: Webster, D., et al. California Child Welfare Indicators Project Reports. UC Berkeley Center for Social Services Research (Jul. 2019). Retrieved from: https://www.kidsdata.org/ 24National Research Center and ICMA (2019). The National Community Survey, Richmond, CA Technical Appendices. Retrieved from:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/52256/The-NCS-Technical-Appendices-- -Richmond-2019
25First 5 Contra Costa County (2017). “Ready or Not Here We Come!: An Assessment of Kindergarten Readiness in Contra Costa County 2017.” Retrieved from:
http://www.first5coco.org/
26YouthTruthSurvey.org and West Contra Costa Unified School District (2020). Students Weigh In: Learning and Well-Being During COVID-19 Report. Retrieved from:
https://youthtruthsurvey.org/student-weigh-in/
27National Student Clearing House (2017). Richmond/West Contra Costa College Success Learning Convening data. Retrieved from: https://www.studentclearinghouse.org/ 28City of Richmond (2014-2015). Health in All Policies Report. Retrieved from:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/36978/HiAP_Report_Final?bidId= 29 and 30Kaiser Permanente (2019). 2019 Community Health Needs Assessment. Retrieved from:
https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/content/dam/internet/kp/comms/import/uploads/2019/0 9/Richmond-CHNA-2019.pdf
31Social Compact (Accessed July 17, 2020). Richmond Grocery Gap. Retrieved from:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/7976/FINAL- GroceryGap_Report_Richmond
32As cited on kidsdata.org, “Children’s Physical Fitness in California”. Data origins: California Department of Education, 2018-2019 Physical Fitness Testing Research Files downloaded.

Retrieved from: https://www.kidsdata.org/
33As cited on kidsdata.org, “Children’s Physical Fitness in California”. Data origins: California Department of Education, 2018-2019 Physical Fitness Testing Research Files downloaded.

Retrieved from: https://www.kidsdata.org/
34As cited on kidsdata.org, “Childhood Asthma in California”. Data origins: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research (Mar. 2018), California Health Interview Survey. Retrieved from:
https://www.kidsdata.org/
582
Page | 56
35As cited on kidsdata.org, “Childhood Asthma in California”. Data origins: California Dept. of Finance, and U.S. Census Bureau: California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (Feb. 2019), California Breathing. Retrieved from: https://www.kidsdata.org/ 36West Contra Costa Unified School District and California Department of Education (2017-18).

California Healthy Kids Survey, 2017-18: Main Report, San Francisco: WestEd Health & Human Development Program for the California Department of Education. Retrieved from:
https://www.wccusd.net/cms/lib/CA01001466/Centricity/Domain/11/West_Contra_Costa_Uni fied_1718_Sec_CHKS.pdf
37National Research Center and ICMA (2019). The National Community Survey, Richmond, CA Technical Appendices. Retrieved from:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/52256/The-NCS-Technical-Appendices-- -Richmond-2019
38Healthy Richmond (2019). North Richmond Quality of Life Plan, (Richmond, CA). Retrieved from: https://healthyrichmond.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/QoL-digital-english.pdf 39, 40, 41Aran Watson, Kanwarpal Dhaliwal, and Kimberly Aceves (2016). The RYSE Center’s Listening Campaign: Community-engaged inquiry of young people’s experiences and articulations of trauma, violence, coping, and healing report. Retrieved from:
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58ece61644024383be911a95/t/593e57012e69cf4a3e1 2ec6d/1497257742081/RYSE+Listening+Report+2016.pdf
42Bay Area Equity Atlas (2016-2017). Police use of force. Retrieved from:
https://bayareaequityatlas.org/indicators/police-use-of-force#/ Figure, Graph, Map Sources:

Map 1.

East Bay Center for the Performing Arts (2019). Richmond Living Map. Retrieved from:
https://www.eastbaycenter.org/~/media/d74f364dc8eb4af2a196d65c3e5ce5ce.ashx?la=en Map 2.

U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months, Table B17001(5-year estimate), 2-14-2018, American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from:
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
Figure 1.

U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Households and Families, Table S1101 (5-year estimate), 2014-2018 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ 583
Page | 57
Figure 2.

U.S. Census Bureau (2013-2017). Hispanic or Latino Origin by Race, Table B03002, 2013- 2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
Figure 3.

U.S. Census Bureau (2018). ACS Demographics and Housing Estimates, Table DP05 (5-year estimate), 2014-2018 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
Figure 4.

U.S. Census Bureau (2017). Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months of Families, Table S1702 (5- year estimate), 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
Figure 5.

U.S. Census Bureau (2017). Sex by Educational Attainment for the Population 25 Years and Older, Tables B15002, B15002A, B15002B, B15200D, B15002H, B15002I (1-year estimate), 2018 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
Figure 6.

Rent Jungle (2017). Average Rents in Richmond. Retrieved from:
https://www.rentjungle.com/average-rent-in-richmond-ca-rent-trends/ Figure 7.

As cited on kidsdata.org, “Foreign-Born Population, by Age group (10,000 Residents or More).” 2012-2016 Map. Retrieved from https://www.kidsdata.org/ Figure 8.

WestEd, California Dept. of Education (March 2019). California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) and Biennial State CHKS. Retrieved from https://www.kidsdata.org/ Figure 9.

WestEd, California Dept. of Education (August 2020). California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) and Biennial State CHKS. Retrieved from https://www.kidsdata.org/ Figure 10.

CDC WONDER, Natality Public-Use Data (Feb. 2019). California Dept. of Public Health, Birth Statistical Master Files; California Dept. of Finance, Population Estimates and Projections, 2000- 2009, 2010-2060.

Figure 11.

WestEd, California Department of Education (March 2019). California School Staff Survey. 584
Page | 58
Figure 12.

WestEd, California Dept. of Education (August 2020). California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) and Biennial State CHKS.

Figure 13.

Bay Area Equity Atlas (2015). Percent of Disconnected Youth in Richmond and Contra Costa County. Retrieved from: https://bayareaequityatlas.org/indicators/disconnected-youth#/ Figure 14.

Contra Costa County (2018). Contra Costa County Comprehensive Child Care Needs Assessment 2017-2027. Retrieved from Contra Costa County Comprehensive Child Care 2017-2027 Figure 15.

First 5 Contra Costa County (2017). “Ready or Not Here We Come!: An Assessment of Kindergarten Readiness in Contra Costa County 2017.” Retrieved from http://www.first5coco.org/
Figure 16.

California Department of Education (2019-20). 2019-2020 Enrollment by Ethnicity table.

Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/
Figure 17.

California Department of Education (2018-19). 2018-2019 Met or Exceeded 3rd Grade English Language Arts Standards (Districtwide). Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/ Figure 18.

California Department of Education (2018-19). 2018-2019 Met or Exceeded 8th Grade Math Standards (Districtwide). Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/ Figure 19.

California Department of Education (2018-19). 2018-2019 Graduation Rate by School. Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/
Figure 20.

California Department of Education (2018-19). 2018-2019 Chronic Absenteeism (Districtwide) by Race/Ethnicity. Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/ Figure 21.

California Department of Education (2018-19). 2019-2020 English Learners (District) by Subgroup. Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/
Figures 22. and 23.

Kennedy High School, IT Academy (2020). Y-Plan Student Survey. Retrieved from 2020 Y-Plan Policy Brief
585
Page | 59
Figure 24.

YouthTruthSurvey.org (2020). Spring 2020 Youth Truth Survey. Retrieved from https://youthtruthsurvey.org/
Figure 25.

California Department of Education (2018-19). Annual Physical Fitness Test. Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/
Figure 26.

California Department of Education (2017-18). California Healthy Kids Survey School Reports.

Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/
Figure 27.

California Department of Education (2018-19). Students with Disabilities by Race. Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/
586
Page | 60
Appendix: Acknowledgments
The Richmond Department of Children and Youth would like to thank all Richmond and North Richmond community members that participated in the co-design and development of the 2020 Community Needs Assessment Report. The Department would especially like to extend its gratitude to all youth, parents and guardians, and service providers that voiced their input for the purpose of envisioning a Richmond and North Richmond in which all children, youth, and their families may thrive.

Richmond Department of Children and Youth Staff
LaShonda White
David Padilla
Patrick Seals
Guadalupe Morales
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board Members (Current and Former) Geselle Alvarado
Khalieghya Dandie-Evans
Guadalupe Enllana
Teyona Galloway
Angel Godinez
Carol Hegstrom
Kapris James
Zeonta Johnson
Katherine Lee
Kristin Kilian Lobos
Madiha Qader
Stephanie Sequeira
Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
Lorene Allio, PhD
Kweli Kitwana
Aurelio Rivera
Nandi Peterson
Jes Montesinos
Chandreve Clay
Sahar Petri
587
Page | 61
Richmond Department of Children and Youth Interns
Cali Luke
Dante Angel Miguel
Jonathan Alvarado Salinas
Letitia Carpenter
Anna Leversee
Sarah Ferrell
Peter Godslaw
Yessica Gonzalez Reyes
Nabil Aziz
Community Needs Assessment Partners
Service Provider Working Group
Interdepartmental Working Group
Richmond Kids First Committee
Information Technology Department, City of Richmond
West Contra Costa Unified School District
Department Partners
Oakland Fund for Children and Youth
San Francisco Department of Children, Youth, and Their Families Community Services Department, City of San Pablo
Richmond City Council
Tom Butt
Nathaniel Bates
Ben Choi
Demnlus Johnson, III
Eduardo Martinez
Jael Myrick
Melvin Willis
Consultants and Student Researchers
Y-PLAN (Youth – Plan, Learn, Act, Now), Center for Cities + Schools at UC Berkeley Information Technology Academy, Kennedy High School
AnnMarie Baines
Lujain Al-Saleh
Jamon Franklin
Kekoa Lopez
Enrique Ramirez
Grace Sheeran
Rafael Velazquez
588
Page | 62
Appendix: Summary of Community Input
As part of the development of the Community Needs Assessment and Strategic Investment Plan, the Department conducted a community engagement process, as outlined below. The goal of gathering community input was to identify gaps and opportunities in programming for children and youth in addition to soliciting perspectives on community strengths and barriers for children, youth and their families in Richmond and North Richmond.

Community and Stakeholder Input Activities
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board meetings to provide Community Needs Assessment updates and receive feedback on community engagement best practices.

Service Provider Working Group meetings to provide a focus group training for community partners and receive feedback on the development of Strategic Investment Plan priorities.

Community forums to provide all Richmond and North Richmond community members an opportunity to participate in the Community Needs Assessment development and provide their feedback on what services are needed for youth and their families to thrive.

Focus groups for the following areas:
• Asian Youth
• Black Youth
• Parents and Guardians of Children
• Latinx Youth
• LGBTQ+ Youth
• Justice System-Involved Youth
• Immigrant Youth
• Youth with Foster Care Experience: Transitional Age & Emancipated Youth The Department would like to thank the following community partners for their support with focus group recruitment and/or facilitation:
• Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN)
• Literacy for Every Adult Program (LEAP)
• Building Blocks for Kids Richmond (BBK)
• RYSE Center
• Office of Neighborhood Safety, City of Richmond
• YES Nature to Neighborhoods
• Independent Living Skills Program
• Richmond YouthWORKS
• Richmond Promise
Community surveys through the following methods to deepen understanding of community strengths and barriers as identified by community members. • Youth survey (25 responses)
• Parent/Guardian survey (89 responses)
589
Page | 63
Key Stakeholder Interviews with community-based organizations, West Contra Costa Unified School District staff, and community leaders to help shape and inform the process and to deepen understanding of issue areas.

Collaboration with Y-PLAN and 12th Kennedy High School students who developed and conducted their own survey (~650 responses) among Richmond students 590
Appendix A: Educational Data By School
Figure A1. 2019-20 District Demographics by School
Richmond Schools
School Total
Black /
African
American
American
Indian or
Alaska
Native
Asian /
Pacific
Islander
Hispanic
/ Latino White
Two or
More
Races / Not
Reported
Aspire Richmond Ca. College
Preparatory Academy 549 13% 0% 10% 74% 1% 2%
Aspire Richmond Technology Academy 375 12% 1% 6% 63% 1% 17% Cesar E. Chavez Elementary 524 3% 0% 2% 92% 2% 1%
Coronado Elementary 401 24% 0% 3% 67% 3% 3%
De Anza High 1,401 21% 0% 19% 49% 8% 3%
Ford Elementary 452 3% 0% 11% 81% 3% 1%
Grant Elementary 550 4% 0% 4% 88% 3% 2%
Greenwood Academy 288 20% 0% 7% 65% 7% 1%
Highland Elementary 472 21% 0% 15% 58% 3% 4%
John F. Kennedy High 953 25% 0% 7% 67% 2% 1%
Lincoln Elementary 381 16% 1% 2% 79% 1% 1%
Lovonya DeJean Middle 446 19% 0% 6% 72% 0% 2%
Martin Luther King, Jr. Elementary 473 26% 0% 10% 56% 4% 3% Middle College High 279 11% 0% 32% 50% 7% 2%
Murphy Elementary 449 19% 1% 20% 41% 11% 8%
Nonpublic, Nonsectarian Schools 89 27% 0% 8% 27% 33% 6% Nystrom Elementary 490 17% 0% 4% 75% 4% 1%
Olinda Elementary 371 15% 1% 30% 30% 17% 8%
Peres Elementary 553 13% 1% 3% 81% 1% 2%
Richmond Charter Academy 267 2% 0% 3% 94% 0% 1%
Richmond Charter Elementary-Benito
Juarez 488 4% 0% 3% 90% 2% 1%
Richmond College Preparatory 554 24% 0% 1% 73% 0% 1%
Richmond High 1,494 6% 0% 6% 86% 1% 1%
Sheldon Elementary 315 18% 0% 21% 39% 14% 8%
Stege Elementary 268 48% 1% 13% 30% 3% 5%
Stewart Elementary 432 16% 1% 22% 40% 16% 6%
Summit Public School: Tamalpais 446 13% 0% 14% 60% 4% 8% Valley View Elementary 364 18% 0% 17% 32% 26% 6%
Verde Elementary 348 9% 0% 2% 87% 1% 1%
Vista High (Alternative) 239 25% 0% 16% 46% 10% 3%
West County Mandarin 211 10% 0% 34% 32% 8% 17%
Wilson Elementary 421 13% 1% 17% 59% 6% 6%
Non-Richmond Schools
Bayview Elementary 496 22% 0% 15% 57% 4% 3%
Collins Elementary 304 20% 0% 25% 37% 11% 7% 591
Crespi Junior High 371 19% 0% 21% 47% 9% 5%
District Office 44 9% 0% 7% 61% 18% 5%
Dover Elementary 655 3% 0% 4% 89% 2% 1%
Edward M. Downer Elementary 542 7% 0% 4% 86% 2% 1%
El Cerrito High 1,605 16% 0% 19% 30% 31% 4%
Ellerhorst Elementary 376 8% 1% 10% 46% 28% 7%
Fairmont Elementary 504 6% 0% 28% 33% 20% 12%
Fred T. Korematsu Middle 708 16% 0% 19% 29% 31% 6%
Hanna Ranch Elementary 419 13% 0% 44% 25% 8% 10%
Harding Elementary 454 6% 0% 22% 21% 40% 12%
Helms Middle 851 8% 0% 6% 82% 4% 1%
Hercules High 856 22% 0% 46% 23% 5% 4%
Hercules Middle 601 17% 0% 41% 26% 7% 9%
John Henry High 328 3% 0% 1% 95% 0% 0%
Kensington Elementary 506 3% 0% 15% 12% 56% 14%
Lake Elementary 390 9% 0% 11% 76% 3% 2%
Leadership Public Schools: Richmond 599 2% 0% 2% 94% 0% 3% Lupine Hills Elementary 416 15% 1% 40% 25% 9% 10%
Madera Elementary 480 6% 0% 21% 17% 42% 15%
Manzanita Middle 119 6% 0% 0% 87% 5% 3%
Mira Vista Elementary 608 16% 0% 12% 38% 24% 9%
Montalvin Manor Elementary 539 15% 0% 13% 66% 5% 1%
Ohlone Elementary 468 16% 0% 37% 24% 9% 15%
Pinole Middle 514 20% 0% 18% 43% 14% 5%
Pinole Valley High 1,261 17% 1% 20% 47% 13% 3%
Riverside Elementary 367 19% 1% 17% 55% 5% 4%
Shannon Elementary 365 11% 1% 30% 43% 10% 6%
Tara Hills Elementary 429 19% 1% 14% 53% 9% 5%
Voices College-Bound Language
Academy at West Contra Costa County 172 2% 0% 2% 94% 0% 2% Washington Elementary 453 10% 1% 2% 70% 14% 3%
Source: 2019-20 California Department of Education
592
Figure A2. 2018-2019 Chronic Absenteeism by School
Richmond Schools
School Chronic Absenteeism
Eligible Enrollment
Chronic Absenteeism
Count
Chronic Absenteeism
Rate
Cesar E. Chavez Elementary 612 167 27.3%
Coronado Elementary 468 116 24.8%
De Anza High 1,439 219 15.2%
Ford Elementary 476 110 23.1%
Grant Elementary 564 116 20.6%
Greenwood Academy 436 309 70.9%
Highland Elementary 479 51 10.6%
John F. Kennedy High 977 304 31.1%
Lincoln Elementary 459 116 25.3%
Lovonya DeJean Middle 507 160 31.6%
Martin Luther King, Jr. Elementary 512 135 26.4%
Middle College High 288 5 1.7%
Murphy Elementary 507 94 18.5%
Nonpublic, Nonsectarian Schools 0 0 0.0%
Nystrom Elementary 558 163 29.2%
Olinda Elementary 379 28 7.4%
Peres Elementary 593 134 22.6%
Richmond High 1,640 244 14.9%
Sheldon Elementary 369 52 14.1%
Stege Elementary 296 118 39.9%
Stewart Elementary 470 66 14.0%
Valley View Elementary 367 48 13.1%
Verde Elementary 368 79 21.5%
Vista High (Alternative) 309 120 38.8%
West County Mandarin 140 20 14.3%
Wilson Elementary 417 81 19.4%
Non-Richmond Schools
Bayview Elementary 564 158 28.0%
Collins Elementary 330 46 13.9%
Crespi Junior High 484 79 16.3%
Dover Elementary 682 104 15.2%
Edward M. Downer Elementary 621 120 19.3%
El Cerrito High 1,557 209 13.4%
Ellerhorst Elementary 364 24 6.6%
Fairmont Elementary 547 63 11.5%
Fred T. Korematsu Middle 715 100 14.0%

593
Hanna Ranch Elementary 469 24 5.1%
Harbour Way Elementary Community Day 14 12 85.7%
Harding Elementary 471 32 6.8%
Helms Middle 917 168 18.3%
Hercules High 897 115 12.8%
Hercules Middle 615 49 8.0%
Kensington Elementary 485 14 2.9%
Lake Elementary 410 58 14.1%
Lupine Hills Elementary 435 55 12.6%
Madera Elementary 485 15 3.1%
Mira Vista Elementary 600 71 11.8%
Montalvin Manor Elementary 524 67 12.8%
Ohlone Elementary 465 45 9.7%
Pinole Middle 574 112 19.5%
Pinole Valley High 1,191 185 15.5%
Riverside Elementary 423 68 16.1%
Shannon Elementary 369 71 19.2%
Tara Hills Elementary 485 106 21.9%
Washington Elementary 476 78 16.4%
Source: 2018-2019California Department of Education
594
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.

ARTICLE XV - Richmond Fund for Children and Youth
(Added by election June 5, 2018)
Sec. 1. Fund: Beginning July 1, 2018 there is hereby established in the treasury of the City of Richmond (the "City") a special fund to expand children's services in the City, which shall be called the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (the "Fund").
(Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 2 . Amount and Source of Funding. The City shall set aside a portion of the annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues of the City to be transferred to the Fund in the amounts specified below subject to the conditions set forth in subdivision (i).

During f iscal year 2018-2019 (July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019) there is hereby set aside for the Fund, the amount of $250,000 from the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for the express purpose of establishing and supporting the infrastructure of the Fund and the newly created Department of Children and Youth, as described in Section 7, including the development of the Strategic Investment Plan, as described in Section 8.

For f iscal year 2019-2020, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, the amount of $700,000 from the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for the express purpose of establishing and supporting the infrastructure of the Fund and the newly created Department of Children and Youth, including the development of the Strategic Investment Plan.

For f iscal year 2021-2022, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to one percent (1%) of the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.

For f iscal year 2022-2023, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.

For f iscal year 2023-2024, and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2027-2028, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to three percent (3%) of the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.

The F und shall be maintained separate and apart from all other City funds and shall be appropriated annually at the time of the City's budget adoption, and by supplemental appropriation, when necessary as determined by the City Council.

The a nnual amount of actual unrestricted general purpose revenues shall be calculated by the City Manager and shall fully include all of the following sources of revenue received by the City: (1) Property Taxes, (2) General Sales and Use Taxes (including locally approved general sales taxes and the City's portion of the Bradley-Burns Sales and Use Tax), (3) Utility Users Tax, (4) Property Transfer Tax, (5) Transient Occupancy Tax, (6) Fines, forfeitures and penalties, (7) Interest from general fund reserves, and (8) other revenues that the City can use for any lawful, municipal purpose. The City shall not define which revenues are to be considered unrestricted general purpose revenues in a manner inconsistent with the provisions of this section. Errors in calculation for a fiscal year shall be corrected by an adjustment in the set aside for the next fiscal year.

Before t he end of the initial ten-year period, the Fund's effectiveness shall be evaluated and the funding and terms of the Fund shall be presented to the voters for renewal or revision, unless renewed by the City 595
i.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
a.
i.
ii.

Council.

The r equirements to set aside funds pursuant to subdivisions (c), (d) and (e) shall not become effective unless and until a general tax measure is approved after the effective date of this Act which levies a new tax or increases an existing tax to make additional funding available for the unrestricted general purposes of the City of Richmond. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to require the revenues from such a general tax measure to be dedicated to the purposes of this Act or the "Richmond Kids' First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act." In the event that a general tax measure meeting the requirements of this subdivision is not passed by December 31, 2020, the City Council shall pass enabling legislation to delay the effective dates in subdivisions (c), (d) and (e) until the fiscal year following the passage of a general tax measure, and making any other necessary adjustments to the times set forth in this Act. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 3 . Goals. The goals of expenditures from the Fund shall be:

To e nsure that Richmond's children, youth and young adults are physically, emotionally, mentally and socially healthy, educated, successful in school, and live in stable, safe and supported families and communities; To i ncrease safety for children, youth, young adults, their parents/guardians, families and the communities in which they live by preventing problems and enhancing the strengths of children, youth, young adults and their families;
To e nsure young people are provided with gender-responsive, trauma-informed, population-specific and culturally-competent services;
To s trengthen collaboration among public agencies and community-based organizations around shared outcomes among all service providers for children, youth, young adults and their parents/guardians; To e nsure an equitable distribution of resources to all of Richmond's young people in recognition of the importance of investment in their futures from birth through young adulthood; To f ill gaps in services and leverage other resources whenever feasible. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 4 . Eligible Uses.

The C ity shall only use monies from the Fund for services provided to children and youth from birth to 18 years old and their caregivers, and, as defined in Section 4.b., disconnected transitional-aged young adults from ages 18 to 24 years and, when relevant, their caregivers, or as part of programs that predominantly serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults within those ages and their caregivers, including:

Violence P revention and Response: including restorative and transformative justice; programs that support positive communication and relationships between young people and within families; programs that train young people, adult allies and parents/guardians in de-escalation; programs that address domestic and sexual violence, including child abuse prevention; emergency relocation; programs that address homophobia and bullying; alternatives to incarceration including diversion and re-entry programs.

Education a nd Job Training: including programs that help youth stay in school; promote academic success and college and career readiness; language services; support parents/guardians in advocating for their young people's education; assist in developing life skills and gaining work experience; and provide job training and placement.
596
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Parent/Guardian Support: including fostering positive child-adult and youth-adult relationships that support people's safety, self-esteem, well-being and positive futures.

Media, Arts, Culture and Technology: including artistic and cultural expression and education, and job and life skills development.

Youth and Family Leadership, Organizing and Civic Engagement: including community organizing and support that amplify the voices and engagement of children, youth and family in how Richmond prioritizes its resources; and builds youth civic engagement and leadership.

Health and Well-Being: including physical, mental, emotional, behavioral and social health services that support health and well-being and reduce drug-related harm, violence and self-harm, and harmful and disrespectful sexual behavior.

Environmental Health and Justice: including programs that improve the environmental health of children and youth and their right to live free of pollution, toxins and lead, and increase access to healthy food, safe and accessible outdoor and recreational spaces and other places to be physically active.

Outdoor Education and Recreation: including sports, recreation centers, play, camps, gardening and urban agriculture.

Deportation Support: support for young people and families experiencing or being threatened with deportation.

The Fund will prioritize three groups of young people living in Richmond and adjacent unincorporated North Richmond: children ages 0 to 12; youth ages 13 to 17; and disconnected young adults ages 18 to 24, who are most impacted by harm, inequity and lack of access to support and services. The priority populations include but are not limited to: system-involved young people; young people who have been pushed out of school; young people who themselves or whose families are homeless or threatened by homelessness; young people living in poverty; immigrant and undocumented children, youth and families; Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) children, youth and families; teen parents and families, including single mothers; young people with poor physical, mental, emotional and behavioral health outcomes and disabilities; and families with children and youth who are impacted by the criminal justice system and/or who have family members who are incarcerated; and/or are involved in or transitioning from the foster care, juvenile justice, criminal justice or special education systems.

Entities eligible to receive funding shall be public agencies and non-profit community-based organizations, including organizations with a non-profit fiscal agent, that serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults.

Commencing in fiscal year 2021-2022 and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2027-2028, (1) a maximum of ten percent (10%) of the Fund can be used for costs related to administering the Fund, including staff support, basic infrastructure, support for the agencies administering the contracts, and overhead costs; and (2) an additional maximum of five percent (5%) of the Fund may be used to evaluate the results of this Article.

A maximum of ten percent (10%) of the amount used to administer the Fund (as described in Section 4.d.) can be used for City overhead.

Entities eligible to receive funding include those (1) located outside but in close proximity to Richmond to the extent that those entities serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults who reside in Richmond or unincorporated North Richmond, and (2) located in Richmond or unincorporated North 597
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
a.
b.

Richmond t hat serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults in Richmond or unincorporated North Richmond, regardless of the residence of the children or youth. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 5 . Excluded Services. The Fund shall not fund the following services or types of expenditures:

Services p rovided by the Police Department, Sheriff, other law enforcement agencies, Courts, District Attorney, Public Defender, City Attorney or Fire Department; detention or probation services mandated by state or federal law; or public transportation, except to the extent that transportation may be needed to access eligible services supported by the Fund;
Services p rovided by the West Contra Costa Unified School District, Richmond libraries, Office of Neighborhood Safety, Richmond Promise College Scholarship Program, Richmond Housing Authority and Youth Works, except for collaborations between the above mentioned entities and community-based organizations and programs that meet the goals and eligible uses of the Fund; Any s ervice that primarily benefits adults over 24 years; Any s ervice for which a fixed or minimum level of expenditure is mandated by state or federal law, to the extent of the fixed or minimum level of expenditure;
Acquisition o f any capital item not for primary and direct use by children or youth; acquisition, other than by lease for a term of ten years or less, of any real property; or maintenance, utilities or any similar operating costs of any facility not used primarily and directly by children or youth, or of any recreation or park facility, library, or hospital;
Capital e xpenditures for housing, or rent subsidies;
Primary a nd specialized medical and direct mental health services; however, prevention, education, and other behavioral and mental health support services are eligible for funding; Income s upports that supplant state or federal benefits or post-secondary tuition assistance; Administration o f other funds; or
Replacing e xisting funding for children and youth services as set forth in the Children's Baseline Budget in Section 6, except to the extent that the City ceases to receive federal, state, county, or private foundation funds that the funding agency required to be spent only on these services. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 6 . Children and Youth Baseline Budget. The City shall ensure that the Fund is used exclusively to increase overall City expenditures for eligible services for children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults.

The C ity Manager shall calculate the City's total actual unrestricted general purpose revenues in fiscal year 2017-2018, and shall calculate the percentage of those revenues that were allocated in fiscal year 2017-2018 to services that would be eligible uses for monies from the Fund, excluding allocations for services mandated by state or federal law (the "Base Percentage").

Commencing i n fiscal year 2019-2020 and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2027-2028, the City shall allocate at least the Base Percentage of total actual unrestricted general purpose revenues to services that would be eligible uses of the Fund, excluding allocations for services mandated by state or federal law, and excluding any allocation of revenue required by this Article. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
598
a.
b.
c.
d.
i.
ii.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. iii.
iv.
e.
f.
g.

Sec. 7. Administration and Oversight. The Fund shall be administered by staff in a newly established Department of Children and Youth within the City Manager's office. Oversight of the Fund shall be provided by a fifteen-member Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board (the "Oversight Board") that shall be composed as follows:

Each member of the Richmond City Council shall appoint two City residents as members — one over 24 years old, and one who is 15 to 24 years of age.

The Mayor of Richmond shall appoint three City residents as members, at least one of which shall be 15 to 24 years of age.

The Mayor and City Council members shall use their best efforts to coordinate their appointments so that the members of the Oversight Board represent Richmond's diverse geographic communities, including unincorporated North Richmond.

The Oversight Board shall have the following responsibilities, powers, and functions:

The role of the Oversight Board will be to develop written policies regarding the Fund, monitor the Fund, ensure that the Fund is managed in a manner accountable to the community, and ensure the highest standards of care and transparency.

Responsibilities of the Oversight Board shall be:

Strategic planning: (a) creating an initial Strategic Investment Plan as described under Section 8, and (b) updating the Strategic Investment Plan every three years.

Reviewing applications for funding from the Fund through a transparent and fair application process.

Recommending to the City Council a list of grants to be awarded for each funding cycle.

Facilitating an annual evaluation: working with a third-party, external independent evaluator to identify relevant evaluation measures and ensure that programs funded through the Fund are impactful and meet established outcomes. Evaluation reports shall be provided to the City Council and the Mayor's office and made available to the public.

Reviewing financial reports and audits to confirm that spending from the Fund is consistent with all provisions of this Article, and that the funds are being managed responsibly.

The Oversight Board shall adopt rules and regulations to govern its procedures, which shall, among other things, include the manner of calling and giving notices of meetings. The Oversight Board shall meet a minimum of six times per year. Its meetings shall be open to the public and subject to the Ralph M.

Brown Act open meetings law. A majority of the regular members shall constitute a quorum. Minutes of the meetings shall be filed with the city clerk.

The Oversight Board shall be responsible for reporting to the public the services and outcomes supported by the Fund.

The Oversight Board members serve two-year terms, provided that members under age 24 may serve a one- year term. There shall be no limitation on the number of consecutive terms served. The terms of the initial appointees to the Oversight Board shall commence on the date of the first meeting of the Oversight Board, which may occur when at least ten members have been appointed and are present. Oversight Board members shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority.

If a vacancy occurs during the term of office of any Oversight Board member, the appointing authority shall appoint a successor to complete the unexpired term in the same manner as the selection of the initial member.

In order to provide for staggered terms, eight members shall be chosen by lot, from among those able to 599
h.
a.
b.
c.
d.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
serve f or two years, to serve for an initial term of two years, with the remaining members to serve for an initial term of one year. Except for appointments to fill a vacancy, all subsequent appointments shall be for a term of two years, provided that members under age 24 may serve a one-year term.

Oversight B oard members that are over 24 years of age shall not be a paid employee of an organization funded from the Fund or applying for funding from the Fund. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 8 . Strategic Investment Plan. Each Strategic Investment Plan shall set forth funding priorities for a three-year period, and shall set forth a plan for overseeing and evaluating the Fund and the programs supported by the Fund. The Department of Children and Youth shall work with the Oversight Board to complete the Strategic Investment Plan and conduct a needs assessment.

The n eeds assessment shall involve community meetings throughout the City, gathering input on the service needs of various populations.

The f unding priorities in the Strategic Investment Plan shall be based on the community needs assessment and input from the community.

The i nitial Strategic Investment Plan shall be approved by a majority of the Oversight Board and presented to the City Council for its review and approval by December 30, 2020. The Strategic Investment Plan shall take effect no later than June 1, 2021.

Any c hange in an approved Strategic Investment Plan shall be based on the community needs assessment and input from the community.
(Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 9 . Application Process. In order to ensure a stable, fair and effective service delivery system, the Fund shall be implemented as follows:

There s hall be three-year planning and funding cycles, with funding beginning in the 2021-2022 fiscal year.

Funds s hall be allocated through an open and fair application process administered by the Department of Children and Youth in the City Manager's office in compliance with the policies adopted by the Oversight Board. Unless the conditions set forth in subdivision (i) of section 2 have not been met, the first application process shall begin no later than January 1, 2021 with funding available for encumbrance no later than July 1, 2021.

Recommendations f or a list of grants to be awarded shall be made by the Oversight Board to the City Council. The City Council shall review and consider the recommendations of the Oversight Board. The City Council may reject the recommendations only if it determines that one or more recommendation is inconsistent with this Article or the priorities identified in the Strategic Investment Plan. The City Council shall accept or reject the Oversight Board's recommendations in their entirety and may not partially accept or partially reject the recommendations.

In t he event the City Council rejects the list of grants proposed by the Oversight Board, it shall set forth its rationale for such rejection and recommend revisions to the Oversight Board for its consideration and action.

The C ity Council shall review and consider the amended recommendations of the Oversight Board, provide final approval of the list of grants to be awarded, and appropriate all necessary monies from the Fund. All grants and appropriations shall be consistent [with] the provisions of this Article and the Strategic Investment Plan.
(Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
600
Sec. 10. Fiscal Emergencies. Commencing with fiscal year 2022-2023, if a moderate fiscal emergency, as defined in this section, or a severe fiscal emergency, as defined in this section, is deemed to exist by the City Council, the portion of the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues to be allocated to the Fund shall be reduced as provided in this section. The City Council may deem a moderate fiscal emergency to exist in the event that the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for a given fiscal year decrease by greater than ten percent (10%) but less than twenty percent (20%) from the level of such revenues during the previous fiscal year (defined as the "Benchmark Year"), and it may deem the moderate fiscal emergency to continue until the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues are no longer ten percent (10%) less than the level of such revenues during the Benchmark Year. If the City Council deems a moderate fiscal emergency to exist for a fiscal year, the amount required to be allocated to the Fund shall be reduced to two percent (2%) of the City's total annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for that particular fiscal year. The City Council may deem a severe fiscal emergency to exist in the event that the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for a given fiscal year decrease by twenty percent (20%) or more from the level of such revenues during the Benchmark Year, and it may deem the severe fiscal emergency to continue until the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues are no longer twenty percent (20%) less than the level of such revenues during the Benchmark Year. If the City Council deems a severe fiscal emergency to exist for a fiscal year, the amount required to be allocated to the Fund shall be reduced to one percent (1%) of the City's total annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for that particular fiscal year. Allocations to the Fund shall return to the level required in Section 2 for the first fiscal year in which a fiscal emergency no longer exists. There shall be no reductions in the allocation to the Fund pursuant to this Section 10 prior to fiscal year 2022-2023. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 1 1. Reauthorization. The provisions of this Article may be extended without amendments for additional ten-year terms by a simple majority vote of the City Council. If the City Council does not act to extend the provisions of this Article before December 31, 2027, the City Council shall be obligated to place a measure on a 2028 election ballot seeking voter approval of whether to extend the term for an additional ten years. This process shall be repeated every ten years, or until reauthorization is rejected by a vote of the electorate. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )

CERTIFICATE
Whereas, t he City of Richmond a city containing a population of more than three thousand five hundred and less than ten thousand inhabitants on the twelfth day of October, 1908, at a special election held under and in accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article XI of the Constitution of the State of California, did elect F. E. Adams, C. L. Abbot, C. R.

Blake, L. Boswell, L. D. Dimm, E. A. Gowe, E. J. Garrard, G. A. Follett, L. S. Higgins, I. E. Marshall, I. M. Perrin, E. M. Tilden, H. H.

Turley, H. E. Wyatt, and John Roth a Board of Freeholders to prepare and propose a charter for said city; Be I t Known, That pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution and within a period of ninety days after said election, said Board of Freeholders has prepared and does propose the foregoing as and for the charter for the City of Richmond.

In W itness Whereof, We have hereunto set our hands this 23rd day of December 1908.

H. E. WYATT
President of the Board of Freeholders
601
C. L.

ABBOTT,
E. A. GOWE,
F. E.

ADAMS,
I. E. MARSHALL,
L.

BOSWELL,

JOHN ROTH,
L. D.

DIMM,
H. H. TURLEY,
G. A.

FOLLETT,
E. M. TILDEN,
E. J.

GARRARD,
CHAS. R. BLAKE,
L. S. HIGGINS.

Attest:

J. S. CHANDLER,
Secretary Board of Freeholders
Filed this 28th day of December, 1908, at 12:30 p.m.

J. B. WILLIS
President of the
Board of Trustees of the
City of Richmond, California

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
602
County of Contra Costa, ss.

City of Richmond
I, H. H. Turley, City Clerk in and for the City of Richmond, hereby certify that the Board of Trustees of said City, did by Resolution No. 158, order the foregoing charter published in the manner and form required by law.

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the corporate seal of the City of Richmond, this 29th day of December, 1908.

H. H. TURLEY
City Clerk
(SEAL)

MEMORANDUM
The first publication of the foregoing charter was made on Tuesday, December 29, 1908, in accordance with a resolution adopted by the Board of Trustees of the City of Richmond, in the "Richmond Record," a daily newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in said city.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Contra Costa, ss.

City of Richmond
I, J. B. Willis, President of the Board of Trustees of the City of Richmond, State of California, and I, H. H. Turley, Clerk of said Board, do hereby certify that the Board of Freeholders, whose names appear signed to the foregoing proposed charter, were on the 12th day of October, 1908, at a special municipal election held in said City of Richmond on said day duly elected by the qualified electors of said city to prepare and propose a charter for said city; that each of said freeholders had been a qualified elector in said city for more than five (5) years previous to said election; that the foregoing is a true copy of said charter prepared and returned to the president of said Board of Trustees within ninety (90) days after said election, as required by Section 8 of Article XI of the Constitution of this State; that said proposed charter was then published in the "Richmond Record," which then was a daily newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in said city, and that publication was made for more than twenty (20) days, and that the first publication of said proposed charter was made within twenty (20) days after the completion of said charter; that within thirty (30) days after the publication of said charter, as required in said section 8, to-wit, on the 9th day of February, 1909, said charter was submitted at a special election duly called and held therein for the purpose of ratifying or rejecting said proposed charter; that by a majority of the votes of the qualified electors voting at said election said proposed charter was ratified as a whole; that the returns of said election were duly canvassed by the Board of Trustees of said City of Richmond on the 9th day of February 1909, and the 603
result thereof declared as above set forth; and that in all matters and things pertaining to said proposed charter, all provisions of said section of the Constitution and the laws of the State of California pertaining to the adoption of the charter have been fully complied with in every particular.

In Witness Whereof, We have hereunto set our hands and caused the corporate seal of said City of Richmond to be affixed this 9th day of February, 1909.
(SEAL) J. B. WILLIS
President of the Board of Trustees
of the City of Richmond
H. H. TURLEY,
Clerk of said Board of Trustees and
said City of Richmond.

And, Whereas, said proposed charter, so ratified, has been duly presented and submitted to the Legislature of the State of California for approval or rejection, without power of alteration, or amendment, in accordance with section 8 of Article XI of the Constitution of the State of California;
Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Assembly of the State of California the Senate thereof concurring (a majority of all the members elected to each house voting for the adoption of this resolution and concurring therein) that said charter of the City of Richmond, as presented to, adopted and ratified by the qualified electors of said city, be, and the same is hereby approved as a whole as and for the charter of said City of Richmond.

P. A. STANTON,
Speaker of the Assembly.

W. R. PORTER,
President of the Senate.

Attest:

C. F. CURRY,
Secretary of State.

Filed in the office of the Secretary of State the 4th day of March, A.D. 1909, at 10:50 o'clock A.M.

C. F. CURRY, Secretary of State
By J. HOSCH, Deputy

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Contra Costa, ss.
604
City of Richmond
I, J. B. Willis, President of the Board of Trustees of the City of Richmond and chief executive officer of said city, do hereby certify that the foregoing charter was submitted to the qualified electors of said city at a special election duly called and held therein for the purpose of ratifying or rejecting same on the 9th day of February, 1909, and that by a majority of votes of qualified electors, voting at said election, said charter was ratified as a whole; that the returns of said election were duly canvassed by the Board of Trustees of the City of Richmond on the 9th day of February 1909, and the results thereof declared as above set forth; that in all matters and things pertaining to said proposed charter, all provisions of section 8 of Article XI of the Constitution of the State of California, pertaining to the adoption of the charter, have been fully complied with in every particular.

In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the corporate seal of the City of Richmond to be affixed this 24th day of March, 1909. ;b0;(SEAL);lf;J.B. WILLIS, President of the Board of Trustees and
Chief Executive Officer of the City of Richmond.

Attest:

H. H. TURLEY
City Clerk of said City of Richmond.
605

RFCY COMMUNITY

NEEDS ASSESSMENT
REPORT
606
2 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS | ORDER OF REPORT

1. Executive Summary

2. Snapshot of Richmond

3. Methodology of Community Needs Assessment

4. Poverty and the Child Opportunity Index

5. Richmond Children and Youth Needs
A. Mental and Behavioral Health
B. Physical Health
C. Learning Needs
D. Safety, Belonging and Community
E. Connective Supportive Services

6. Children and Youth Community-Based Services: Current State

7. Community Investments & Resource Needs: Current State

8. Envisioning Ideas to Address Needs: Next Steps

9. Acknowledgements

Appendix A: COI Indicators
Appendix B: Community Engagement Learnings

1. Summary and Survey Results

2. RFCY Survey Template
Appendix C: Richmond Children and Youth Organizations by Priority Areas/Domains Appendix D: Richmond Based Community Organizations Census Tract Analysis by Priority Area 607
3 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive Summary
Why a Community Needs Assessment?
The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (RFCY or
Fund) plays a crucial role in guiding the distribution
of the City’s three-percent allocation of general funds dedicated to improving the lives and addressing the
needs of Richmond’s children and youth under 24.

To ensure that their guidance and grant-making are
informed and strategic, RFCY conducts Community
Needs Assessments every 3 years as mandated by
Article XV of the City of Richmond Charter. These
assessments engage community members, including
youth, agencies, and organizations that serve children
and youth in Richmond, to identify needs through
their knowledgeable lived-experiences. Additionally,
data analysis, reports, and research further enhance
understanding of the pressing needs that the Fund and
its Oversight Board Committee seek to address.

How We Identified Children and Youth Needs
The principle of “Nothing About Me, Without Me”
was central to this community needs assessment,
emphasizing the importance of listening to and
learning from youth, their families, and organizations
serving them. Through a highly interactive community
engagement process, spanning from January to July
2024, the voices of approximately 400 individuals
are reflected in this report. The assessment began
with interviews of 24 thought leaders experienced in
working with children and youth and those involved
in policy, allocation, and program decisions within
city departments and public offices. These interviews
framed questions for focus groups involving more than
100 individuals from the Priority Populations identified by RFCY per the charter: African American Youth, Asian
American Pacific Islander Youth, Immigrant Family
Youth, Justice Impacted Youth, Latinx Youth, LGBTQIA+
Youth, Transitional Age Youth, and Youth Experiencing
Homelessness. Youth participants received dinner and
a gift card in appreciation for their time. Additional
focus groups included a Parent/Caregiver Group and a
Teacher/Counselor Group.

A 14-question survey developed from focus
group insights was distributed to 33 youth-serving
organizations, resulting in 200 completed surveys
from youth, service providers, parents/caregivers, and
community members. The findings were presented at a
two-hour Community Visioning Event attended by over
70 people, generating nearly 50 ideas for consideration in the next phase of this project, a Strategic Investment Plan.

Investing in Children and Youth
The City of Richmond’s commitment to enhancing
the lives of its children and youth is evidenced by its creation of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth.

By harnessing the community’s assets of non-profits
and community partners in both the public and private
sectors along with the City dedicating millions of dollars towards programs that advance opportunities for
children and youth to thrive, RFCY is building futures
and the community’s capacity to assure that those
futures are bright.

A Resource Gap
The City and its robust network of community partners
offer a wide array of programs and services to address
the needs of children and youth. In so doing, they fully recognize that these needs persist and are substantial
requiring continued and increased resources while
creatively finding ways to achieve the best return on
investment for children, youth and their families. This Community Needs Assessment is a foundational step in
giving voice to these needs and developing a roadmap
to address them.

Envisioning Ideas to Address Needs: Next Steps
The commitment and innovative ideas generated from
the Community Visioning Event show that community
members are ready to tackle the core needs identified.

RFCY will engage the consulting team of Public
Works LLC to develop a Strategic Investment Plan,
addressing connectivity issues, transportation, and
holistic family support. The plan will identify benchmarks and outcomes to guide RFCY’s grant-making process,
ensuring that funded programs provide a return-on-
investment worthy of Richmond’s children and youth.
608
4 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
What We Learned
As a result of nearly 400 community and youth voices
informing the consulting team and RFCY leadership on
the needs of children and youth along with conducting
research on the extent and impact of those needs within the Richmond community, five core needs emerged:

Five Core Needs Emerge from Community
Engagement

1. Mental & Behavioral Health Needs
Stressors from living in poverty, bullying,
discrimination, and safety concerns
were repetitive themes. Youth report
high levels of anxiety and depression
among their peers and a lack of access
to counseling and therapy sessions.

Parents/caregivers seek guidance on
recognizing mental and behavioral
health issues and supporting their
children. Social isolation from the
pandemic remains a significant issue.

2. Physical Health & Access
The need for safe parks, open spaces,
and access to healthy foods, nutrition,
and fitness programs is high. Concerns
over healthcare access were repeatedly
cited, with Richmond designated as a
Medically Underserved Area, lacking
primary care physicians, mental health
professionals, and dentists. There is
a high demand for drug awareness,
prevention, and treatment programs.

3. Learning Needs
Learning loss from the pandemic
continues to impact students, with
third-grade reading levels and other
benchmarks negatively affected.

There is a significant need for career
and college preparation, one-on-one
mentoring, and guidance. Schools are
seen as under-resourced, with high
demand for homework assistance,
after-school programs, and quality early
childhood education.

4. Safety, Community & Belonging
Needs
Fear of lack of safety is extremely high
among youth, with violence becoming
normalized. Priority populations report
harmful stereotypes and isolation.

Justice-impacted youth and LGBTQIA+
groups particularly report feeling
othered.

5. Connective Supportive Services
Navigation of available services is
challenging, and many families lack
transportation to access after-school
programs and other activities. Youth
organizations would benefit from
connecting with the whole family to
support and uplift children and youth.
609
5 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

2. SNAPSHOT OF RICHMOND
On June 5, 2018, Richmond voters approved Measure
E and Measure K, known as the Richmond Kids First
Initiative, which approved a City of Richmond Charter
amendment (Article 15) and authorized creation of the
Richmond Department and Fund for Children and Youth
to provide increased and dedicated funding for children, youth, and young adult services for those under 24 years of age.

Richmond has significant strengths and assets. Despite the challenges of over one-third of children and youth living in poverty, limited access to health care, high mental health needs, and concerns about neighborhood safety, the community highly values the resources provided by the City. Youth attending focus groups spoke highly of the programs supported by RFCY and expressed a desire for more of what community-based organizations offer, with services available closer to their homes.
111,441
Since 2020, population
has decreased by 4.3%
1 52%
Homeowners
$88,594
Median household income
35%
Households with
children under 18

2.9 people
Average
household size
37%
Children living in poverty
(200% FPL)

4.7%
Unemployment rate
(April 2024)

79.5%
High school
graduates

34.4%
Born outside U.S.

A young, diverse city
Richmond is a young city, relative to cities
across California with 24% of residents under
the age of 20 years.
44% Hispanic/Latino

24.2% White

18.3% Black

14.2% Asian

13.3% Multiracial
1https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/richmond-ca-population 610
6 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

3. BACKGROUND
About Measure E and Measure K
On June 5, 2018, Richmond voters approved
Measure E and Measure K, known as the Richmond
Kids First Initiative, which approved a City of
Richmond Charter amendment (Article 15) and
authorized creation of The Richmond Fund for
Children and Youth City of Richmond Department.

The ballot initiative also authorized establishment
of a 15-member Oversight Board and required
the Department to conduct a Community Needs
Assessment to guide the development of a Strategic
Investment Plan.

Under Section 2 of Article 15, the City is required
to allocate 3% of the City’s General Fund to the
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth each fiscal
year, starting FY 2023-24 through FY 2027-28 to
support the ongoing needs of the Department and
Fund (Additional information about the Department
can be found at
www.richmondyouth.org).

Goals of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth
• To ensure that Richmond’s children, youth, and young adults are physically, emotionally, mentally, and socially healthy, educated, successful in school, and live in stable, safe, and supported families and communities;
• To increase safety for children, youth, young adults, their parents/guardians, families and the communities in which they live by preventing problems and enhancing the strengths of children, youth, young adults and their families;
•
To ensure young people are provided with gender responsive, trauma-informed, population specific and culturally-competent services;
•
To strengthen collaboration among public agencies and community-based organizations around shared outcomes among all service providers for children, youth, young adults and their parents/ guardians;
•
To ensure an equitable distribution of resources to all of Richmond’s young people in recognition of the importance of investment in their futures from birth through young adulthood; • To fill gaps in services and leverage other resources whenever feasible.

The City of Richmond’s
Department of Children and
Youth has initiated a needs
assessment and strategic
planning process that honors
community voices and includes a
diverse range of youth and adults
to develop a comprehensive,
equitable investment plan that
reflects community vision.
611
7 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

3. BACKGROUND
Vision Statement
The City of Richmond’s Department
of Children and Youth has initiated
a needs assessment and strategic
planning process that honors
community voices and includes a
diverse range of youth and adults
to develop a comprehensive,
equitable investment plan that
reflects community vision.

Richmond Department of Children
& Youth Guiding Principles
• Community assets are our core strength.

Richmond residents are experts in their
lived experience and have valuable insight
to share;
We center the needs and dreams of
children and youth;
•
We value collaboration and shared
ownership;
We believe considerations of race and
equity are critical to this process;
•
We will be inclusive of all ages, races,
ethnicities, gender expressions, languages,
and abilities/disabilities;
• We will communicate in a way that is
accessible and easy to understand;
• We believe all voices should contribute and
encourage participants to bring their full,
authentic selves to this process; and
•
We believe it is important to be (1)
innovative and flexible and (2) transparent
and accountable.
612
8 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

3. BACKGROUND
Who is the Fund Designed to Support?
The Fund prioritizes Richmond and North Richmond children (birth 0-12); youth (ages 13 to 17) and transitional age youth (ages 18-24) who are most impacted by harm, inequity and lack of access to support services.

The priority populations include, but are not limited to:

Funding Categories
• Violence Prevention/Response
• Education/Job Training
• Parent/Guardian Support
• Media, Arts, Culture & Technology
•
Youth/Family Leadership, Organizing
& Civic Engagement
• Health and Well-Being
• Environmental Health & Justice
• Outdoor Education/ Recreation
• Deportation Support
• Justice-impacted youth;
• Young people who have been pushed out
of school;
• Young people who themselves are
homeless, or whose families are homeless or
threatened by homelessness;
• Young people living in poverty; immigrant
and undocumented children, youth, and
families;
• LGBTQIA+ children, youth, and families;
• Teen parents and families, including single
mothers; young people with poor physical,
mental, emotional, and behavioral health
outcomes, and children with disabilities;
• Families with children and youth who are
impacted by the criminal justice system, and/ or
who have family members who are incarcerated,
and/or who are involved in or transitioning from
the foster care, juvenile/ criminal justice, or
special education systems.

This Community Needs Assessment (CNA) will be used by the Richmond Department of Children and Youth to develop of a Strategic Investment Plan, which will guide the Department’s grant decisions for the Fund from January 1, 2025 through December 31, 2027. 613
9 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

4. METHODOLOGY OF COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Methodology of the Community Needs
Assessment
To develop a Community Needs Assessment that reflects
the community’s concerns and priorities, Public Works LLC public policy consulting firm conducted individual and group interviews, focus groups, and brainstorming sessions to identify key issues and gaps in services impacting Richmond’s children and youth and their families.

Throughout this highly interactive community-engagement process, Public Works partnered with the leadership team of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (RFCY) to ensure that representatives from the Priority Populations, community- based organizations and community members would inform
the research, findings and recommendations of the Community Needs Assessment.

Key Informant Interviews
• Public Works launched this project in Mar ch 2024 by conducting initial interviews with the Department’s project management team and senior staff about the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth’s current grantees, the communities they serve, and their perception of the unmet needs of Richmond’s children and young people.

Based on those interviews, the consulting team developed a list of diverse interest holders, including City officials and employees, community-based organizations, providers, business leaders, educators, and Richmond youth and their families. Interviews were held with twenty-four individuals in one-on-one and group interviews conducted in person, over the phone, and via Zoom.

Community Surveys and Focus Groups
• Based upon the insights shared by community members resulting fr om interviews, combined with extensive research on demographic, economic, and other data related to Richmond and its residents, Public Works developed, distributed, and administered a 14-question community survey made available in English and Spanish. A survey link was sent via email to 33 community organizations to distribute among their constituencies generating 200 completed surveys over a two-month period. The survey received over 300 open-ended comments in addition to the multiple-choice questions they answered. •
Ten focus groups were held involving 104 participants representing priority youth populations identified in the City of Richmond Charter Article 15, as detailed on the previous page. In addition to the youth groups, two others were held: one with parent and caregivers and the other with school counselors and teachers. These sessions were designed to give young people a chance to speak directly about their needs and those of their friends and family, how they view living in Richmond, what their goals are and what type of support they need to reach them.

The participants were referred by 33 community organizations serving Richmond’s children and youth. Most were held in-person at community centers; each participant received dinner and a stipend in appreciation for their time. Youth also discussed the types of activities and programs they attend and shared perspectives on obstacles they face in accessing youth-oriented programs and services that are most valuable to them. 614
10 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

4. METHODOLOGY OF COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Public Visioning Event
After gathering and analyzing insights on children and
youth needs from over 300 community members, the
consulting team partnered with RFCY leaders to co-
design and present a public “visioning” event. The
event held at the Richmond Auditorium provided
dinner while diverse groups of participants were seated at round tables for break-out discussions following
5-minute Ted-Talk type “briefings” covering three
topics: Mental & Behavioral Health Needs, Learning
Needs and Safety, and Community and Belonging
during the two-hour event. Participants spent break-
out sessions at their tables generating ideas on how
to address each of the three topics and then reported
on their ideas to the entire group. The event created
a highly interactive, social opportunity for members of the Richmond community to share their experiences,
insights and perspectives on the needs of children and
youth and offer experienced and innovative ideas on
how to address them. Nearly fifty ideas were generated
and will become part of the research in developing the
Strategic Investment Plan, the second component to the
Community Needs Assessment.

The “Visioning” event drew more than 70 community
members (both adult and youth) with representatives
from 17 organizations. An interactive feature of the
evening was the live illustration of the ideas that
participants reported at the plenary sessions. An artist (Graphic Recorder) drew these ideas on a large white
board in real-time creating an eight-foot mural shown
at the end of this report. This method is highly useful in revealing key ideas, highlighting diverse perspectives, and creating an engaging record of participants’
collective input. Using this type of creative, dynamic, visual record has proven especially helpful in sparking input from younger participants – as shown by a group
of youth taking selfies and pictures in front of the mural at the end of the event.

Data Analysis
• All responses and comments gleaned from surveys,
interviews, focus groups and community forums
were collected and analyzed. The consulting team’s
research drew from a wide range of validated
sources, including: the U.S. Census and its American
Community Survey, local, regional, and state
governmental reports, and whitepapers published
by foundations and nonprofit organizations.

Dashboards, Scorecards and Data Depositories, Bills
and Legislative Documents, Surveys (e.g. Juvenile
Detention Profile Survey; CA Healthy Kids Survey),
Child Opportunity Index by DiversityDataKids.org
and GIS Mapping were also reviewed as part of the
secondary research component of the Community
Needs Assessment.
•
The consulting team has looked for patterns across
all elements of its data analysis enlightened and
informed by over 400 voices heard through the
community engagement process. The needs and
priorities laid out in this document represent careful
validation and synthesis of community voices
supported by independent data and research.
(Section of mural from Visioning Event)
615
11 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

5. IMPACTS OF POVERTY ON CHILDREN AND YOUTH
Impacts of Poverty on Children
and Youth
In its simplest terms, poverty is an economic state in
which an individual’s or family’s income cannot cover
the basic needs of everyday life. They struggle to pay
for necessities such as housing, food utilities, child-care and transportation. The fear of losing their housing as they struggle between paying rent/mortgage versus
medications, food, a child’s school supplies, clothing or an unexpected repair bill, all lead to high stress levels for the entire family unit. The state of experiencing
poverty both causes and worsens hardships.

Poverty can be situational, due to a life event such as a death of a main income earner, job loss, divorce,
health condition, recession or pandemic that throws
one into poverty. Sometimes it is chronic when at least two generations have been born into poverty and there
is no wealth to share among family members during
difficult times or hand down. Eight determinants that
interconnect, cause and sustain poverty are shown in
this graphic to illustrate the multiple factors that impact families, children and youth who must contend with
poverty every day.

Concentrated Poverty
Many children live in concentrated poverty in which high numbers of people living in a neighborhood or census tract are poor. A common benchmark used to determine a concentrated poverty area is generally 30% or more of the residents living in poverty.
1 Richmond has five such census tracts ranging from 29% to 47% of children living at or below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) within their neighborhood.2 1 https://www.aecf.org/topics/concentrated-poverty
2 ACS 5-Year Estimates. Census Tracts 3740.00,3760.00,3820.00,3810.00, 3770.00 616
12 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

5. IMPACTS OF POVERTY ON CHILDREN AND YOUTH
Children and adults living in highly disadvantaged neighborhoods face poorer health, food insecurity, lack of access to quality health care, attend schools that are resource challenged and underperforming and are often exposed to crime and environmental pollution. 3 Most often, People of Color are overly
represented within such communities which holds true for the five highly concentrated tracts in Richmond just referenced. This speaks to the consequences of structural racism when laws, rules, regulations and practices in society unfairly treat certain racial groups differently. This kind of racism is essentially “built into” the systems that run or oversee, for example, schools, workplaces, housing, local governments, and healthcare resulting in perpetuating racial disparities.

Research shows that, “children who experience the disadvantages of growing up in and surrounded by poverty will continue to bear the burden of those disadvantages into adulthood.
4 Measuring Poverty. How poverty is defined and measured has a powerful impact on how a community marshals its resources (or not) to address and prevent it. The measure draws the line as to who is eligible for services, who must wait and who will be turned away. The current Federal Poverty Level (FPL) was created sixty years ago and significantly underestimates the true costs of meeting basic needs of everyday life in today’s economy. Most federal and state programs use 150% to 200% of FPL as a marker of need for eligibility of services. As was recommended in RFCY’s 2020 Community Needs Assessment, we also recommend that RFCY use a threshold of twice the FPL (200%) to determine the numbers of children living in poverty within Richmond in need of services.

Currently, more than one-third (37%) of youth and children under the age of 18 years in Richmond are below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level while 35% of adults are below this threshold.
5 This means that a family of four in 2024, for example, lives on an income of $5,200 per month and an individual at $2,510 per month. 6 Most of these individuals and families are cost-burdened by paying more than thirty percent of their income ($1,560) towards their monthly rent. This leaves the remaining $3,640 dollars to cover all expenses for a family of four.

Housing costs are significantly impacting middle income families, as well. Richmond, where median household income is $88,594,
7 is the second most housing cost-burdened city in the
Bay area, with 42% of residents paying more than 30% of their income on housing costs. Over half (54%) of all renters and 38% of homeowners in Richmond are housing cost burdened. 8 Access to affordable and secure housing has been consistently identified as a community need impacting health in Richmond.
9 37% of
Richmond
youth
living in
poverty.

Half of Richmond
renters are
cost-burdened.

3 https://www.aecf.org/topics/concentrated-poverty
4 https://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/11-3-15hous2.pdf 5 https://data.census.gov/table?q=s1701%20Richmond,%20Californi 6 https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty-economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines 7 U.S. Census Bureau. “Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2022 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars).”American Community Survey, ACS 1-Year Estimates Subject Tables, Table S1901, 2022, https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST1Y2022.

S1901?q=median household income&g=160XX00US0616000,0660620,0681666. Accessed on March 9, 2024. 8 https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/housing-costs-rent-mortgage-18535110.php 9 https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/content/dam/kp/mykp/documents/reports/community-health/Richmond- CHNA-2019.pdf, https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/content/dam/kp/mykp/documents/reports/community-health/ richmond-chna-2022.pdf
617
13 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

5. IMPACTS OF POVERTY ON CHILDREN AND YOUTH
Beyond Poverty: Geography & Opportunity. We’ve applied a tool known as the Childhood Opportunity Index (COI) to assess the level and breadth of need among Richmond’s children and youth. This index is based on the premise that a neighborhood’s resources and conditions matter and that children growing up in neighborhoods with “quality schools, safe housing, access to healthy food, parks, clean air and economic opportunities are more likely to grow into healthy, productive adults than children who do not have access to these resources.” 10 Using a set of 44 indicators in the domains of Education, Health and Environment, and Social and Economic, the COI measures and maps the quality of resources and conditions in the neighborhoods where children and youth live. The COI groups all neighborhoods via census tracts into five Opportunity levels: Very Low, Low, Moderate, High, and Very High-opportunity neighborhoods.

Children living in “low opportunity” neighborhoods experience few of the conditions necessary to thrive as compared to their counterparts living in “High Opportunity” communities. Black, Hispanic and Native American children are especially likely to live in very low-opportunity neighborhoods. A complete listing of all 44 indicators is provided in Appendix A. The table below shows the three domains of the Child Opportunity Index and the sub-domains of indicators assessed by each.
10 https://www.diversitydatakids.org/child-opportunity-index

EDUCATION SOCIAL & ECONOMICHEALTH & ENVIRONMENT
Early Childhood Education
Elementary Education
Secondary & Post-
secondary Education
Educational Resources
Pollution
Healthy Environment
Safety Related Resources
Health Resources
Socioeconomic Inequity
Housing Resources
Social Resources
Wealth
Employment
Economic Resources
Table of Childhood Opportunity Index Neighborhood Indicator Domains and Sub-domains
618
14 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

5. IMPACTS OF POVERTY ON CHILDREN AND YOUTH
11 https://www.diversitydatakids.org/child-opportunity-index The graphic chart above shows the percentage
of census tracts distributed among the five Child
Opportunity Index levels and cites the census tracts
below each level. This illustrates that nearly half
(45%) of Richmond’s neighborhoods show “Very Low”
and “Low” opportunities for children and youth to
thrive. In contrast, thirty-eight percent experience
High and Very High Opportunities while seventeen
percent fall between them.

While the COI incorporates income and non-income-
based factors, a correlation can be seen between
Richmond census tracts with higher levels of child
poverty and lower COI scores. Like poverty rates, there is a wide disparity in COI across the different census tracts in Richmond, ranging from Very Low to Very High Opportunity.

And like national trends, there is a stark disproportionate number of Black and Hispanic children living in the low COI neighborhoods.

If you are interested in learning more about the Child
Opportunity Index and using their dashboard, go to Diversity Data Kids by going to https://www.diversitydatakids.org/child- opportunity-index.

Percentage of COI Ratings Among Richmond Census Tracts on Education, Health & Environment, Social & Economic Indicators Percentage of COI Ratings Among Richmond Census Tracts on Education, Health & Environment, Social & Economic Indicators 17%28%17%28%10%0% 100%%
379000
373000
377000
381000
376000
367200
367100
375000
365002
382000
374000
360200
371000
372000
369002
365003
370000
378000
362000
363000
364002
360101
361000…
384000
360102
356002
Very Low
17%
Low
28%
Moderate
17%
High
28%
Very
High
10%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
%
619
15 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

5. IMPACTS OF POVERTY ON CHILDREN AND YOUTH
The following map shows
the Child Opportunity
Index (COI) level and the
number of children and
youth residing within
each of the twenty-
six census tracts and
their corresponding
neighborhoods as they
geographically appear on a
census map of Richmond.
2,147
1,203
1,308
934 482
428
1,015
689
670
948
810
843
1,454
2,798
1,450
943
1,523
1,790
1,714
341
1,417
1,092
866
1,838
2,340
3,906
794
1,758
1,110
1,113

VERY HIGH

CHILD OPPORTUNITY INDEX
HIGH

MODERATE
LOW

VERY LOW
KEY:
1 mi © MapTiler © OpenStreetMap contributors
Zip Codes Percent Families at < 200% of Poverty
Source: Census
Year: 2018-2022
Insufficient Data

9.57% or less

9.58% - 17.35%

17.36% - 26.37%

26.38% - 39.44%

39.45% or greater
Shaded by: Census Tract, 2022
Estimated percent of families at less than 200% of poverty, between 2018-2022.

CHILD OPPORTUNITY

INDEX (COI) LEVELS

AND CHILD/YOUTH

POPULATION

DISTRIBUTION IN

RICHMOND CENSUS
TRACTS

ESTIMATED PERCENT

OF FAMILIES LIVING
AT LESS THAN 200%
FPL – RICHMOND
(2018-2022)
620
16 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
Five core needs emerged that significantly impact
children and youth in Richmond resulting from
interviews, focus groups, surveys and research. This
section of the needs assessment reviews each of the
five: Mental & Behavioral Health, Physical Health,
Learning, Safety, Belonging & Community and
Connective Supportive Services.

A. MENTAL AND BEHAVIORAL

HEALTH SECTION
What do we mean by Mental and Behavioral Health?
Mental health involves our emotional, psychological
and social well-being affecting how we think, feel, and act. It influences how we handle stress, relate to others and make choices. Biological and environmental factors, family history and life experiences play significant roles in maintaining one’s mental health. Behavioral Health,
on the other hand, involves how our actions influence
our health and well-being. Engaging in unhealthy
behaviors such as smoking, vaping, drinking, abusing
substances, or consuming a diet of largely fast-foods will negatively impact mental health and well-being.

Among all categories of needs impacting children and
youth, mental and behavioral health rose to the top.

Youth, parents, grandparents, caregivers and those
working with children and youth all agree that young
people are facing high levels of stress that negatively affect their mental well-being. Richmond youth are
struggling with poverty, bullying, racial discrimination, safety concerns in neighborhood and schools, trauma
and stress associated with exposure to violence which are taking a serious toll on Richmond’s children and youth.

Depression and Anxiety. Most youth in focus groups
commented that the two most common mental health
issues facing young people -- even grade schoolers -- are depression and anxiety. They report experiencing growing levels of anxiety and depression exacerbated by the loss of learning and social isolation due to the pandemic’s
closure of schools, cancellation of socio-recreational
activities and the practice of social-distancing.

The Impact of COVID-19 Continues. Many children and
teens missed out on vital opportunities to develop social skills that would aid them in peer interactions, ability to work in teams, and leadership development. Due to the
need for masking, young children missed out in learning how to interpret body language, facial expressions and
social ques. Focus group youth shared that the pandemic also set the stage for excessive use of “screen time”
influenced by the shift from in-person teaching to remote learning. Beyond hearing these concerns from over one-
hundred youth participating in focus groups, two-hundred respondents to the RFCY Community Needs Assessment
Survey echoed similar views as shown below.

Impact to Children and Youth
How much do the following impact children
and youth in Richmond?
RFCY awarded $1,045,923 in grants
addressing Mental & Behavioral
Health to 10 organizations during
2021-2023.”
621
17 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
Overall, three out of four survey respondents rated
the following 5 impacts as having “Very High and
High” degree of impact on children and youth’s mental
wellbeing: poverty (86%), bullying (80%), learning
loss (79%), general anxiety (78%), racial and ethnic
discrimination (76%).

California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS). Data
collected by the California Department of Education
through the CHKS among students in 5th, 7th, 9th and
11th grades validate the sentiments expressed during
the community engagement process of this needs
assessment. The table below shows the results of three
key mental health measures among West Contra Costa
County Unified School District students.

One of the more concerning trends revealed by this
table, is among fifth graders. In the school year when fifth graders were first asked about feelings of sadness:
one in five (20%) of fifth graders reported being “sad
most or all of the time.” Today, one in four (25%) of
ten-to-eleven-year-olds in fifth grade say they feel
sad “most or all of the time.” Nearly 40% of eleventh
graders frequently say they feel sad, as do at least
one-third of 7th and 9th graders. On average, 30%
– nearly one-third -- of 7th through 11th graders are
experiencing “social and emotional” distress and on
average 15% have considered suicide.
1California Department of Education. California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS). https://calschls.org/my-surveys/4954886f-dbfa-469b-ad47-9452d4e2efda/ and https://calschls.org/my-surveys/f882f1e2- dfc0-4448-b90b-f49cef6e6d3f/. Accessed on February 22, 2024.

Chronic Sadness
Mental Health Measure Percent
2022 | 2023
5th Graders
Percent
2022 | 2023
7th Graders
Percent
2022 | 2023
9th Graders
Percent
2022 | 2023
11th Graders
Socio-Emotional Distress
Considered Suicide
21% 36% 34% 39%
30% 29% 31%
15% 17% 15%
25% 33% 35% 39%
27% 26% 35%
14% 14% 13%
Not Asked on
Survey
Not Asked on
Survey
California Healthy Kids Survey (2022-2023) on Mental Health Measures Among West Contra Costa County Unified School District 5th, 7th, 9th and 11th Graders.
1 Today, one in four (25%) of ten-to-eleven-year-
olds in fifth grade say they feel sad most or
all of the time.
622
18 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
2 CHKS, Percent of youth under age 19 years insured by Medi-Cal (2022) 3 Kaiser Permanente Medical Center 2022 Community Health Needs Assessment.

Two Key Areas of Need Identified. Among the
hundreds of comments offered on mental and
behavioral health, two major challenges emerge:
• Need for Increased Awareness and Education.

Parents, grandparents, teachers, and caring adults
report needing support and education regarding
how to recognize the signs of mental and behavioral
health needs, how to respond to someone who
needs help, assistance with accessing mental
behavioral health resources, and how to respond
to the youth or child experiencing these issues in a
sensitive and culturally-appropriate manner.
• Lack of Access to Mental Health Resources. Even
though 96.5 % of children and youth are insured
in Richmond through Medi-Cal
2 ; focus group
participants, key informant interviewees and survey
respondents report long wait times associated with
scheduling appointments for mental and behavioral
health services. There is also a mental health
provider workforce shortage.
3 Schools often lack
sufficient mental health professionals to adequately
address the mental and behavioral health needs of
students.

When survey respondents were asked whether they
think the mental health needs of children and youth are being met in Richmond, more than half (52%) felt “Not
So Well or Not Well at All.”
Mental Health Needs
Overall, how well do you think the mental health needs of youth are being met in Richmond? Addressing Needs
Another way of assessing needs is asking youth,
community members and key informant interviewees
what types of programs and initiatives they believe
are needed to address the impacts on the mental and
behavioral health of children and youth.

The top three programs and services to address
mental and behavioral health needs among survey
respondents and community visioning event attendees
were:
• Affordable 1:1 Mental Health Counseling
(In-person or Virtual)
•
Access to Behavioral Health Services (e.g.
anger management)
•
Programs that address youth trauma and
exposure to violence (later addressed in the
Safety Section of this report).

Overall, mental and behavioral health needs were front
and center throughout the community engagement
process. Efforts and strategies to address mental and
behavioral health needs will remain a priority in the
next phase of this project: the development of the
RFCY Strategic Investment Plan.
623
19 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
B: PHYSICAL HEALTH &

WELLNESS SECTION
The physical well-being of children and youth is strongly influenced by what public health experts refer to as
social determinants of health (SDOH). These are “the
conditions in the environments where people are born,
live, learn, work, play, worship, and age that affect a wide range of health, functioning, and quality-of-life
outcomes and risks.”
1 Access to quality health care, a
living wage job, good schools, safe neighborhoods,
affordable quality housing and living in a welcoming
and thriving community – all make up the social
determinants that impact one’s health.

If children grow-up in neighborhoods where they
witness or hear gun shots, are exposed to lead or mold
in run-down housing or exposure to pollution from
traffic or industrial sites near dense neighborhoods,
don’t have playgrounds or open space to safely play
or exercise, lack access to dental and primary health
care, or live in “food deserts” with limited access to
affordable, healthy foods often over-populated with fast food paving a path towards obesity, their health will
suffer. Living under these conditions fuels a constant
state of stress that robs children and youth of physical well-being vital to their growing bodies and cognitive
development.

Through focus groups with youth, parents and
caregivers, school counselors and a general public
survey, we explored whether or not children and
youth are being impacted by these types of social
determinants of health.

Childhood Opportunities Index (COI) and Health
Indicators. As shown in the “Poverty and Childhood
Opportunities Index” section of this report, 45%
of children and youth live in neighborhoods of
concentrated poverty. The overall rate of children and
youth at 200% of FPL accounts for 37% impacted by
poverty which is a social determinant of health.

The COI measures physical health and health care
access among four categories: Pollution, Healthy
Environment, Safety Related Resources and Health
Resources. Within these categories, the index includes
measuring factors such as air pollution, living near
hazardous waste sites, how many fast-food chains vs.
fresh produce, meats, fish grocery stores are in the
neighborhood, walkability and open spaces, vacant
housing, health care resources provided by non-profits
and health insurance. Thus, those neighborhoods
rated by the COI as “Very Low and Low” indicate low
opportunities to foster and achieve physical well-being resulting from the high incidence of negative outcomes
among the factors analyzed by the index.

Barries to Access: Findings on
Shortages
A consistent theme among the 400 voices we listened
to during our community engagement, centered on
access. Youth, parents, school counselors and survey
respondents raised the need for better access to health care services and resources. And it’s no wonder. Beyond COI indicators verifying Richmond faces four shortage
areas in health care that clearly explains why access
to health care and health resources is significantly
inadequate and is negatively impacting thousands of
children and youth in Richmond. It also speaks as to
why the “Resource Needs” described in this report is
so wide when it comes to meeting the physical health
needs of children and youth.
2 1 https://health.gov/healthypeople/priority-areas/social-determinants-health 2 https://www.transparentrichmond.org/stories/s/Quality-and-Accessible-Health-Homes- Services/y8gx-ywn5
Richmond’s Four
Designated Professional
Health Shortage Areas
• Medically Under-served Area (MUA)
• Primary Care Health Professional
Shortage
• Mental Health Professional Shortage
• Dental Health Professional Shortage
RFCY awarded $218,000 in grants
addressing Basic Needs to 4
organizations during 2021-2023.

Source: CA Statewide Office of Health Planning & Development, 2024. 624
20 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
One youth shared how her
mother was forced to hold-
off getting her an x-ray for an
injured foot until she received
her paycheck a week later.

Two Resounding Themes. Among the hundreds of
comments shared through the community engagement
process and responses to multiple-choice questions
exploring specific social determinants of health, two
essential areas of needs related to physical health and access emerged.
(1) Healthy Food Access, Fitness & Nutrition
Programs. There is a strong interest within the
Richmond community in finding ways to live more
healthily. Ninety percent of survey respondents rate the need for access to affordable healthy foods as “Very
High and High,” while eight out of ten rate the need for Food Banks and Food Vouchers at the same levels.

Eighty-six percent feel there’s a “Very High or High
Need” for fitness and nutrition programs for youth
while 84% feel the same way towards providing children
and youth outdoor activities such as hiking, gardening
and camping. Youth focus group participants voiced
these same sentiments towards the high need for
these types of healthy lifestyle programs. Youth want
to be more active outside and socialize in open spaces
but are hesitant because they are not feeling safe in
many neighborhoods. Parents and grandparents report
keeping young children at home for the same concerns.

This is discussed in more detail in the Safety, Community and Belonging section of this report.
(2) Access to Clinics, Urgent Care and Drug Awareness
and Treatment Programs.

As with Mental and Behavioral Health, children and youth are mostly insured through Medi-Cal, however, the wait
to getting into seeing a specialist can be long. Receiving 625
21 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
care at an Urgent Care Center can require a co-pay
that a low-income individual or family can ill-afford.

Overall, those responding to the survey expressed a
“Very High and High” need for easily accessible free
clinics and walk-in centers (86%) without long wait
times. Focus group participants also felt the same while older youth favored the idea of being able to seek
services and education on their own. Urgent Care was
seen as a preferable way of receiving care without the
necessity of going to an Emergency Department. Some
respondents, however, express concerns that their
insurance does not cover co-pays which they felt were
rather high and pose a barrier to seeking urgent care.

One of the more concerning physical health issues
facing children and youth, as cited by focus group
youth and survey respondents, is the growing incidence
of substance abuse, especially related to drugs. They
raised concerns about the fentanyl crisis; Contra Costa County reported 181deaths due to the drug, accounting
for 15.6 deaths per 100,000 population in the past
twelve months.
3 Though this rate is low compared
to other communities throughout the state, news
reports about the dangers of this drug were alarming.

It may explain why 85% of survey respondents, rate
85% rate drug prevention &
education as a High Priority.
2024 RFCY Community Needs Assessment Survey
3 Data is preliminary for the last 12 months, as of 2023 Q1. County is based on place of residence. https://calmatters.org/explainers/california-opioid-crisis/#1ceb3f93-f2a1-44fc-a556- 4c039bd4861b
4 https://calschls.org/my-surveys/f882f1e2-dfc0-4448-b90b-f49cef6e6d3f/ “preventive education and awareness of drug usage (e.g. vaping)” as a “Very High or High Need.”
Not just older adults raised concerns about the growing use of vaping, but so did youth who were beginning to
question, “if it’s really that safe” despite all the hype that it’s much better than smoking a cigarette. According to California School Climate, Health, and Learning Surveys, 11% of eleventh graders report electronic cigarette/vaping and 14% are using marijuana in Contra Costa County.
4 Overall, the most overarching need raised by community members is addressing the multiple barriers to accessing health-related care and resources that will better enhance the physical well-being of Richmond’s children and youth.

And that includes living in healthy neighborhoods.
626
22 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
C. LEARNING NEEDS SECTION
Understanding Learning Needs. The scope of learning
reviewed in preparation for this Community Needs Assessment spans a wide spectrum from pre-kindergarten, elementary, middle and high school to post-secondary education through youth 24 years of age. The learning needs of children and youth were also a leading discussion topic among focus
group participants, survey respondents, key informants and Community Visioning event attendees.

Key learning benchmarks were identified and reviewed along this spectrum to assess whether children and youth are falling behind indicating a “learning need” to address. Needs were discussed along this learning spectrum providing deeper, lived- experience insights to the data and benchmarks reviewed.

The following information, data, benchmarks and insights from community members provide a fuller understanding as to the learning needs of Richmond’s children and youth.

Richmond’s Diverse Student Population. The West Contra
Costa School District (WCCUSD) consists of 54 schools and serves a student population of 26,312 students.
1 Families in
the school district speak more than 50 different languages2; 36% of students are English Language Learners. The
district’s minority enrollment is 90% and 31% of students are economically disadvantaged.
3 Pandemic-Related Learning Loss. Among over 100 youth attending focus groups, many shared how they’ve experienced learning loss and have found it challenging to make up for lost time. Nearly 80% of survey respondents feel the learning loss due to COVID-19 is having a “Very High or High Impact” upon children and youth in Richmond.

Access to Quality Childcare. Richmond has the largest number of children in Contra Costa County; more than half (53%) of the preschool-aged children countywide are income-eligible for subsidized preschool programs. Childcare providers, that receive funding for state and federally-subsidized childcare programs, served 40% of eligible preschool- aged children, leaving the childcare and pre-school needs of 60% of eligible children unmet. 4 This unmet need is
significantly greater than the 47% of unmet need cited in 2017. 1 https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/california/districts/west-contra-costa-unified-104246 2 https://www.wccusd.net/domain/2594
3 https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/california/districts/west-contra-costa-unified-104246#:~:text=Students%20at%20West%20Contra%20 Costa,Hawaiian%20or%20other%20Pacific%20Islander.
4 https://cdnsm5-ss16.sharpschool.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_1077313/File/Final%20Contra%20Costa%20County%20Child%20Care%20Needs%20 Assessment%202022%20Report.pdf p.10
Hispanic/Latino
54%
Multiracial
2%
Asian
10%
African American
18%
Filipino
6%
White
10%
627
23 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
Readiness for Kindergarten. A School Readiness
Assessment by the West County First Five Center, a non- profit family resource center for 0-5 year old children, found that only 29% of WCCUSD kindergartners are prepared for school.
5 Forty-four percent of kindergarteners are partially
ready, and 27% are not ready for school. This is the most recent school readiness assessment available, but this
data has not been updated since 2018. Notably, children born between September 2, 2019 and June 2, 2020 will
be eligible for Universal Transitional Kindergarten (UTK) , a new grade level preceding kindergarten that all children in California will be eligible for.
6 Chronic Absenteeism. Chronic absenteeism is defined
as the percentage of students who are absent more than
10% of instructional days they are enrolled. WCCUSD has a chronic absenteeism rate of 32% (2022-23). This is a
marked improvement from the year prior (2021-2022) which was at 42% and influenced by the pandemic. However, the 2021-2022 rate was nearly double that of 2017-2018 (17%), suggesting that chronic absenteeism has not returned to pre- pandemic levels. Chronic absenteeism is highest among the following groups
7 :
5 April 2018. Applied Survey Research. Ready or Not Here We Come: An Assessment of Kindergarten Readiness in Contra Costa County. 6 https://cauniversalprek.org/families/
7 blob:https://caschooldashboard.org/7cfd0219-5919-4418-807a-39b9d6a72320 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
Foster Youth (35%)
Hispanic Students (40%)
African American Students (44%)
American Indian Students (49%)
Students Experiencing Homelessness (59%)

CHRONIC ABSENTEE RATES
628
24 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
English Language Learners. Over one third (36%) of
WCCUSD students are English Language Learners (ELL).8
The majority of ELL students speak Spanish (83%), however approximately 50 languages are represented among ELL
students. About 40% made progress (increasing one level) on the English Language Proficiency exam in 2023 (down from 44% in 2022).
9 Predictors of Future Success in School.Third grade literacy and eighth grade math proficiency are benchmarks used to predict how well a child will do throughout their school years.

Both of these current benchmarks are below pre-pandemic levels in Richmond. In 2023, less than a third (29%) of third graders met or exceeded grade-level reading standards -- down from 32% in 2018-2019. A mere 14% of 8th graders

met or exceeded grade-level math standards.10
Disparities in Learning. There are significant disparities in academic achievement across student racial/ethnic groups in WCCUSD.
• In 2022-2023 only 20% of African American students and 21% of Hispanic students met or exceeded English Language Arts standards.

• Only 9% of African American students and 12% of Hispanic students met or exceeded mathematics standards.12
Prepared to Graduate. Nearly half of the graduating class of WCCUSD in 2023 (48 %) was NOT considered prepared for college or a career, according to the College/Career Indicator (CCI), one of several indicators used by the California Department of Education. Just over a third (34 %) were “prepared” and nearly one in five (18%) were “approaching prepared.”
13 14

8 https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/california/districts/west-contra-costa-unified-104246#:~:text=Students%20at%20West%20Contra%20Costa,Hawaiian%20or%20other%20Pacific%20Islander. 9 https://www.caschooldashboard.org/reports/07617960000000/2023/academic-performance#english-learner-progress 10 Ibid, 8th Grade Math Scores
11 https://webutil.csac.ca.gov/Dashboard/
12 https://www.ed-data.org/district/Contra-Costa/West-Contra-Costa-Unified 13 https://www.caschooldashboard.org/reports/07617960000000/2023/academic-performance#college-career 14 The College/Career Indicator (CCI) is one of several state indicators that the California Department of Education (CDE) reports on the California School Dashboard. It represents the percentage of high school graduates who are prepared for college or a career. This indicator is reported for any local educational agency (LEA) and high school that enrolls students in grade twelve. 71% OF 3RD GRADERS

ARE NOT READING AT
GRADE LEVEL,11 AND 86%
of 8th GRADERS ARE

BELOW THE STANDARD
LEVELS IN MATH.

HALF OF HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS ARE NOT
PREPARED FOR COLLEGE OR CAREER.
629
25 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
Graduation Rate. Graduation rates at WCCUSD have been
relatively steady (84 - 86%) since 2018 except for the 2020- 2021 school year during the pandemic.15 The graduation rate among students who attended high school together (cohort rate) was 85% in the 2022-2023 school year according to Ed Data Education Data Partnership
16 Groups of students at risk of not graduating with their high-school classmates are: Foster Care Youth (40%), Youth Experiencing Homelessness (26%), Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Youth (19%), English Language Learners (29%) and Students with Disabilities (43%).

Racial/Ethnic Breakdown - Students
Not Graduating Within 5 Years of
Entering Ninth Grade
17 College/Career
The percent of students in the
Class of 2023 that qualify as Not
Prepared, Approaching Prepared,
and Prepared.
15 https://www.ed-data.org/district/Contra-Costa/West-Contra-Costa-Unified 16 https://www.ed-data.org/district/Contra-Costa/West-Contra-Costa-Unified 17 https://www.caschooldashboard.org/reports/07617960000000/2023/academic-engagement#graduation-rate 0 20
40 60
80 100

34.1%

17.7%

48.2%
Not Prepared
Approaching Prepared
Prepared
Class of 2023
0 5 10 15 20
Percent Did Not GraduateRace/Ethnicity
African American 17.9%
Asian 11.2%
Hispanic/Latino 19.7%
Two or More Races 13.5%
Two or More Races 11.5%
630
26 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
Student Aid for College. In the West Contra Costa
Unified School District, 65% of graduating high school
seniors in 2023 submitted a FAFSA and 59% applied for
Cal Grants.
18 The percent of students that applied for
CalGrants in WCCYSD is significantly lower than the 70% of WCCUSD students that applied for it a decade ago.
19 Overall, 40% of students are not applying for financial aid. Most of those who aren’t applying for financial
aid fall into the category of the Priority Populations
that RFCY addresses. These students have a high
likelihood of qualifying for financial aid if they apply.

This is a lost opportunity for these students who could receive assistance to attend college. This speaks to the fact that 85% of survey respondents cited a “Very
High or High” need for “College and Career Prep
Assistance.”
Key Areas of Need Identified. Overall, the learning
needs of children and youth in Richmond are significant as demonstrated not only by facts and figures, but also through the more than 400 individuals who participated
in this needs assessment and voiced their ideas and
concerns regarding theirse needs.

Among the hundreds of responses and comments
related to learning needs, these two areas surfaced:
(1) High Need for Career and College Preparation.

Schools were seen as under-resourced in helping
students explore careers, learn how to prepare for
those careers, and acquire training after graduating
from high school. Youth interested in college, reported needing access to college preparatory courses and 1:1
guidance that assists them in searching for and applying to colleges along with finding financial aid. High-speed broadband for all ages was seen as strongly needed to
support learning at home.
(2) High Need for Mentors, Parental Support, After
School Programs, Summer Jobs and Camps. Nine out
of ten survey respondents felt that each of these types of programs and initiatives are vital to support learning.

Caring adult mentors, especially those who can relate
and “look like me” were seen as crucial, for youth of
color, Justice-Impacted Youth and LGBTQIA+ youth.

Ninety percent of survey respondents cite educating
parents/caregivers on how to support children’s
learning needs as “Highly Needed.” Teachers also
felt that aiding parents in methods to further their child’s learning is an extremely valuable partnership to form and skill to impart to parents and caring adults. Youth and adults would like to see additional after-school programs, summer camps and summer jobs for teens.
18 https://webutil.csac.ca.gov/Dashboard/
19 https://webutil.csac.ca.gov/Dashboard/
85 percent of survey
respondents cited a
“Very High or High” need
for “College and Career
Prep Assistance.”
RFCY awarded $1,136,150 in grants addressing
Education, Employment, Training to 13
organizations during 2021-2023.”
631
27 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
D. SAFETY, BELONGING AND

COMMUNITY SECTION
A recurrent theme among those interviewed, focus group
participants, and hundreds of survey respondents was
that residents are proud to live in Richmond. While they embrace its diversity, sense of community, and believe in its promise, they are also aware of their city’s challenges and are willing to roll up their sleeves to take them on.

Safety
Concerns about safety is one of the most pressing
challenges raised by all groups engaged in this needs
assessment. Youth made it very clear that they long for a community where everyone can feel safe everywhere in
Richmond. When asked, “How much do you think youth
worry about their safety in their neighborhoods,” nearly all respondents believe youth are worried (95%) about
safety.

Three out of four respondents believe that the “fear for safety,” among children and youth is having a “Very High or High” impact on their well-being. It explains why 92% of respondents rate “Creating safe and quality spaces for 13-year plus age group” as a “Very High or High Need.”
Major themes arising from open-ended survey comments
and focus groups with youth include: varying levels
of safety by neighborhoods, with some considered
dangerous; youth viewing violence as normal due to their daily experiences; the urgent need to address the lack
of safe, public spaces; inadequate safety in and around schools; and the need for community policing to deter
crime. They cautioned, however, against profiling racial and ethnic populations or justice-impacted youth.

In West Contra Costa County Unified School District
fewer than half of high school students perceive
their school as “safe” or “very safe,” according to
the 2023 California Healthy Kids Survey
1 (Only 43%
of 9th graders, 38% of 10th graders, 42% of 11th
graders, and 44 % of 12th graders said they felt safe
at school.) While in 2023 the number of homicides
in Richmond reached its lowest point in a generation,
evidence also suggests that many youth in Richmond
have experienced cumulative exposure to violence,
specifically gun-violence over the past decade. Of the
2,300 gunshots fired in Richmond since 2013, 41% took
place within a half-mile of a school, and 81% of those
took place near an elementary school.
1 https://www.caschooldashboard.org/reports/07617960000000/2023/conditions-and- climate#priority6
65 % say youth are “Extremely or Very Worried” about
safety in their neighborhoods.

RFCY awarded $339,625 in grants addressing
Youth Violence Prevention to 5 organizations
during 2021-2023.
— RFCY Community Needs Assessment Survey 2024.
632
28 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
The campuses with the most incidents nearby were those
in neighborhoods with lower median incomes than the
rest of the city, census data showed. One elementary
school has seen an average of six nearby shootings per
year over the past decade.
2 According to the 2021 National Community Survey (NCS) 73% of people in Richmond say they feel safe in their
neighborhood during the day and 43% say they feel safe
in the commercial/downtown area during the day. Fewer
people report feeling safe in their Richmond community
than 99% of communities surveyed nationally.

Crime Trends in Richmond
Richmond recorded eight homicides in 2023, — the
fewest since officials started keeping track in 1971.

This represents a 64% reduction from the 22 homicides
the city recorded in 2020 and a 56 % reduction from
the 18 logged each during both 2021 and 2022. This
is consistent with nationwide trends, with major U.S.
metro areas reporting a roughly 12% decrease in 2023.
3 Four types of crimes that increased over the last year are: burglaries at 30%; vehicle theft at 18%; robberies and aggravated assault each at 10%. Decrease in types
of crime were seen in Larceny Theft (29 %) and sexual
assault (12%) while the remaining crimes showed slight
decreases.
2 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/26/children-gun-violence-schools-bay-area- ptsd-richmond-california
3 AH Datalytics. https://www.ahdatalytics.com/dashboards/ytd-murder-comparison/ 4 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4010/Crime-Statistics-Reports There have been many
incidents involving
gang disputes, physical
altercations, and drug
sales around and even
within my school campus.

Just recently, there had
been a shooting in front
of my school campus
which had left many
of my fellow students
appalled.
— Youth Survey Respondent, RFCY
Community Needs Assessment Survey 2024
YEAR OVER YEAR 2021 20232022
Crime Trends in Richmond
2021-2023
4 Homicide
Sexual Assault
Robbery
Aggravated Assault
Larceny-Theft
Arson
Burglary
Vehicle Theft
Index Crime Totals
Year Over Year Crime Statistics
Source: Richmond Police Department
18 18 8
86 86 100
243 258 298
832 857 941
1,849 1,993 1,696
44 34 30
311 262 343
1,044 1,068 1,258
4,471 4,604 4,674
633
29 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
Police Use of Force
Justice-impacted youth and young adults between the
ages of 18-24 years are considered Priority Populations by the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth. Justice-
impacted youth are those who “are at risk of being
incarcerated or have been formally incarcerated, have
had a sibling, parent or extended family member
impacted by the justice system, or have been arrested,
convicted or involved in the juvenile justice system. All too often, they have “been affected by law enforcement
to the point where such an involvement has altered their life.”
5 Justice-impacted youth are also more at-risk of
experiencing encounters with police, especially those
living in poor communities and are youth of color.
6 In a
focus group with justice-impacted youth for this needs
assessment, participants expressed concerns over
interactions with police that had or could evolve into
use of force.

From 2018 to 2022 the number of annual arrests made
by Richmond Police Department fell by 58% from 2,376
arrests to 999 arrests and use of force fell by 23%. In 2021 and 2022 the use of force rate per one hundred
arrests averaged about 10%, a significant increase from the two years prior that averaged six percent.
7 Three demographic groups (gender, race, and age)
made up half of all use of force subjects: Black and
Hispanic males between 18 and 39 years of age.

Insights from Justice-Impacted
Youth Focus Group
In a focus group of 22 justice-impacted youth,
participants shared experiences of being unfairly
targeted by law enforcement. They believe race factors
into why they are pulled over for traffic stops and that they are treated differently due to their involvement with the justice system. They shared that they value programs that support them in moving away from or steering clear of gang culture in Richmond. Mentors that have “walked
in their shoes” are extremely important to them. They
are concerned about limited job opportunities, low
wages and the need for more vocational training and
employment. They feel that there’s a need for greater
community collaboration to ensure safe communities,
foster unity and reduce violence. Access to education, social services, and mental health counseling focused on helping them cope with the amount of violence they’ve
experienced; substance abuse counseling and treatment
are all vitally needed. They would also like to know their rights when approached by police officers.
5 https://www.csusb.edu/educational-opportunity-center/information-resources/justice- impacted-students
6 https://www.lsac.org/data-research/research/justice-impacted-individuals-pipeline-national- exploration-law-school
7 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/65620/Second-Summary-Use-of-Force- Report---Richmond-PD---April-2023?bidId=
GENDER AGERACE %

OF FORCE

INCIDENTS
NUMBER
OF

SUBJECTS
Most Common Characteristics
of Use of Force Subjects
2018 – 2022
Male Black
HispanicMale
All Other Demographic
Groups & Unknown
Total
Source: Richmond Police Department
18-39 161 26%
18-39
18-39
147 24%
302 50%
610 100%
PTSD is one of the
biggest causes of stress
for us.
— Focus Group Participant
634
30 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
Belonging
Children and youth thrive from a feeling of belonging
among their family and friends, their neighborhoods,
schools, and community. A true sense of belonging
requires appreciation for who someone is and not
being seen through a lens of harmful stereotypes. As
one justice-impacted youth, who wasn’t made to feel
like he belonged, put it: “The way they see me is how
they treat me.”
Article 15 tasks RFCY with identifying and addressing
the needs of vulnerable priority populations among
children and youth in Richmond. To better understand
their needs, sense of belonging and perspectives, focus groups were held with priority populations youth and
one survey question asked, “How well do you think the
needs of the following groups of youth are being met?”
The chart below shows seven such groups illustrating
that 50% of over 200 survey respondents felt that
Justice-Impacted and LGTBQIA+ youth’s needs are
not being met. (Not so Well and Not Well at All) as are the needs of African-American youth (44%), Immigrant
Family Youth (33%) and Latinx, Asian and Second
Language Youth at (30%).

All priority population groups face the five categories of needs presented in this report, each struggling with their unique challenges and often navigating them
alone.

Priority Youth Populations
How well do you think the needs of the following groups of Youth are being met? As one justice-impacted
youth, who wasn’t made
to feel like he belonged,
put it: “The way they
see me is how they treat
me.”
635
31 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
Two Other Populations in Need of
Belonging & Support
Two vulnerable populations are discussed throughout the 2024 Community Needs Assessment:

Disconnected Youth are defined as youth between 18
and 24 years of age who are out of school, are on their own without jobs or support and/or have transitioned
out of the Foster Care System. These youth require a
great deal of support as they transition into adulthood.

One of the most highly needed services they require is
training and job placement along with support in gaining a secondary education should they want to pursue it.

They also need assistance in securing stable housing,
mentoring and support from a caring adult.

Youth Experiencing Homelessness are those without
a stable sleeping/living arrangement or living in
shelters. This includes what is referred to as “hidden
homelessness,” for example, when a single mom and
her children repeatedly live for short stays at friends or relatives; often disrupting where the children attend
school.

The most current count of people experiencing
homelessness in Contra Costa County is 2,843 persons,
marking an increase from 2,372 persons in 2023. Among
those numbers, Richmond shows a decrease from the
year prior while the East County accounts for most of the increases. This number is a result of the Point in Time (PIT) Count taken of people experiencing homelessness
on a given night in the County. This count is a nationwide initiative of the federal Housing and Urban Development agency.

As illustrated below, 14% of the homeless population
were under the age of 24, and half of these individuals (7%) were under the age of 18.
8 The number of younger
persons experiencing homelessness has increased by 2%
since 2023.

Students who are experiencing homelessness are at
greater risk of underperforming in school largely due to high rates of chronic absenteeism. Nearly sixty percent (59%) of unhoused students in 2023 attending WCCUSD
were chronically absent placing them at significant risk of not graduating or moving up to the next grade-level. 9 In a focus group to gather insights from youth and
families experiencing homelessness, several needs
were identified: accessing basic necessities such as
transportation, laundry services, clothing and food;
mental health support for youth struggling with
depression and anxiety due to being without a stable
homelife and the stigma of being unhoused; loss of
access to school activities and remaining with their
peers when they’ve moved out of the school district;
and the impact of their family’s loss of income due to
COVID-19.

Source: West Contra Costa Point in Time Count 2024
8 West Contra Costa County Point in Time Count 2024, https://www.cchealth.org/home/ showpublisheddocument/30271/638525089151900000
9 https://www.cde.ca.gov/homelessyouth.asp
636
32 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

6. RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE CORE NEEDS
Building Community
One of the most popular types of programs that youth
and parents view as valuable in both fostering child
and youth development and building “community” are
neighborhood and community centers that offer multiple
enrichment programs (performing arts, music, STEM
programs) along with social, sports and recreational
activities. They envision these centers also offering
programs and resources for parents and families that
uplift the whole family, often times intergenerational
families, in raising their children and youth.

These would include services to help parents navigate
social and health care services, parenting classes, or
teach caring adults how to help children with homework.

Youth in focus groups spoke highly of the multi-purpose neighborhood centers that exist in Richmond but say
waiting lists and transportation issues prevent youth from participating. Affordable after-school programs, summer camps and summer jobs for youth also rate high in need.

At the Community Needs Assessment Visioning Event
involving over 70 community members and youth, there
was high interest in creating community events with
residents and families throughout the year and in using locations throughout the city to build a stronger sense of community all over Richmond.
85% rate the need for
neighborhood centers as
“Very High or High Need.”
RFCY awarded $1,361,200 in grants addressing
After School Sports, & Enrichment to 18
organizations during 2021-2023
637
33 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

7. RESOURCE NEEDS: CURRENT STATE
E. CONNECTIVE SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES SECTION
Throughout the entire community engagement process
with over 400 individuals sharing insights on needs of
Richmond’s children and youth, three connective and over- arching needs stand out:

1. Transportation. The need for transportation to connect families and individuals to jobs, schools, childcare, job training, education, health care and after-school programs that enrich their children is central to moving beyond
poverty. Most low-income individuals and families can’t afford reliable transportation and if they do, can’t afford costly car repairs. Public transportation isn’t conducive to schedules when juggling getting to childcare, jobs and
after-school programs. This may explain why only 10% of workers in Richmond use public transportation to get to their jobs while 63% drive alone.
1 Youth often cited that
there are neighborhood centers and programs they’d love to attend but there’s no reliable source of transportation that allows them to get there from school and then back home. As a result, they simply don’t have access to these valuable resources that could enrich their lives.

2. Navigation Support. There is a need to assist families and individuals in navigating social services, housing, educational services and health care delivery systems that could connect them to resources needed to address the
numerous challenges they face. Parents and grandparents who attended the “Parent and Caregiver” focus group
raised this as a very high need. They find that the eligibility criteria and application process to receive services is complex and overwhelming with every organization
demanding its own set of requirements. It is a time-
consuming task to track down much-needed resources,
determine whether you’re eligible and then provide the
documents required to apply. This is why participants
at the Community Needs Assessment Visioning event
viewed the idea of “Developing a city-wide universal
application for health and social services” as a high
priority.

3. It Takes Two Generations. There is a need for
children and youth service providers and organizations
to embrace a multi-generational approach (2-GEN) to
support children and youth. This approach is based
on the premise that if they uplift parents, they uplift children. Two-generation (2Gen) approaches “build
family well-being by intentionally and simultaneously
working with children and the adults in their lives
together. 2Gen begins with the mindset that by
designing pathways to educational and economic
success that support children and families together,
the resulting structure is stronger and better for both generations.”
2 For example, if a center offers teens
socio-recreational activities and homework help, they
could arrange for assistance with resume writing, job-
hunting or financial literacy to their parents to ensure the whole family’s economic security. The 2Gen approach
engages all organizations working with children to think of offering services that promote a family’s well-being which secures the well-being of every member in it and
community as a whole. This 2-Gen approach includes
grandparents raising grandchildren, as well.
1 U.S. Census Bureau. “Selected Economic Characteristics.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles, Table DP03, 2022, https://data.census.gov/table/ ACSDP5Y2022.DP03?g=040XX00US06_160XX00US0660620. Accessed on March 16, 2024. 2 https://ascend.aspeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Ascend_ FactSheet_2Gen_1.18.2024.pdf

CONNECTIVE

SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES
Transportation
Navigating Services
2Gen Approach
RFCY awarded $300,000 in grants addressing
Information, Guidance, & Case Management to 5
organizations during 2021-2023
638
34 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

7. RESOURCE NEEDS: CURRENT STATE
Child and Youth Community-Based
Services in Richmond: The Current State
The City of Richmond seeks to ensure that all children
and youth within the community are given the resources
and opportunities they need to thrive, prosper, and
grow within their vibrant and diverse hometown. One
way of addressing those needs is through organizations
from the public, private, non-profit, education and faith- based sectors offering a wide-range of quality services to children, youth and their families.

The 2022 Resource Guide that the Richmond
Department of Children and Youth (RDCY) developed
following the 2020 Community Needs Assessment and
the Strategic Investment Plan for Fiscal Years 2021-2024, provides a framework of what the community-based
services delivery system for children and youth looks like in Richmond. This is especially relevant to RFCY’s focus on providing funds to community-based organizations
seeking to enhance the lives of children and youth.

The goal of the guide is in response to community
members needing a centralized list of organizations
to easily find basic information on what resources
and services are available to address their needs.

Organizations have also found it useful as an “Information & Referral” guide for the youth and families they serve and as a means of learning about other organizations with which they can partner and collaborate to better serve
their constituencies.

The 2022 RDCY Resource Guide identified 52
organizations that offer services to Richmond children and youth and their families. The Resource Guide provides
the following information for each listed organization:
name, address, phone number, description of services,
age group, and link to its website. Among the 52
organizations listed in the Resource Guide, one-third are in the Health and Well Being Category and nearly one-
quarter in the Education and Job Training Category while about ten percent are in each of the remaining Category.

CATEGORY PERCENT OF ORGANIZATIONSNUMBER OF ORGANIZATIONS The 2022 RDCY Resource Guide
Health and Well Being
Education and Job Training
Media, Arts, and Culture
Youth & Family Leadership/Organizing and
Civic Engagement
Parent and Guardian Support
Outdoor Education and Recreation
TOTAL
A list of the 52 organizations in the Resource Guide by Priority Area is shown in Appendix C. 17 32.7%
12 23.1%
6 11.5%
5 9.6%
7 13.5%
5 9.6%
52 100%
639
35 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

7. RESOURCE NEEDS: CURRENT STATE

RFCY COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
In response to the needs identified by RFCY in its
previous 2020 Community Needs Assessment, the Fund
has invested nearly 4.5 million dollars into services,
programs and activities within Richmond. These have
been delivered through non-profit community-based
organizations to address needs identified by the
community and cited in Article XV among the following
six priority areas: School Time, After School, Sports & Enrichment; Employment/Training Support; Behavioral
Health, Mental Health and Wellness; Youth Violence
Prevention; Information, Guidance & Case Management;
and Access to Basic Needs.

In the three years following the 2020 Community Needs
Assessment and the development of the Strategic
Investment Plan, RFCY has awarded 55 grants to
community organizations ranging from $15,000 to
$150,000. The largest number of grants was awarded
in the areas of: School Time, After School, Sports &
Enrichment (18); Employment/Training Support (13); and
Behavioral Health, Mental Health and Wellness (10). The remaining three areas were awarded four to five grants
over the past three years: Youth Violence Prevention (5); Information, Guidance & Case Management (5); and
Access to Basic Needs (4).
$4.5 million dollars
invested in children
& youth programs.

RFCY DISTRIBUTION OF GRANTS
2021-2023
Number Of Grants & Range: 55 Grants $15k – 150k
Total Amount: $4,400,902
Percent Of Total Funds Awarded: 100%
Behavioral Health, Mental Health & Wellness:

Number Of Grants & Range: 10 Grants
Range: $41,000-$150,000 Total: $1,045,923
Education Support & Employment/Training Support:

Number Of Grants & Range: 13 Grants
Range: $22,000-$150,000 Total: $1,136,150
Out-Of-School Time, After School, Sports & Enrichment:

Number Of Grants & Range: 18 Grants Range: $15,000-
$150,000 Total: $1,361,200
Youth Violence Prevention: Number Of Grants & Range: 5 Grants Range: $35,000-$100,000 Total: $339,625
Basic Needs: Number Of Grants & Range: 4 Grants
Range: $25,000-$75,000 Total: $218,004
Info, Guidance, Case Management: Number Of Grants &
Range: 5 Grants Range: $20,000-$110,000
Total: $300,000
640
36 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

7. RESOURCE NEEDS: CURRENT STATE
To appreciate the breadth and type of organizations receiving funds from RFCY to address the multi-faceted needs of Richmond’s children and youth, the following table presents the names of organizations receiving grants from RFCY by Priority Area and Year. It was very common to hear youth and survey respondents identify their participation in programs offered by these organizations and they did so in a very positive light.

RFCY GRANTEE ORGANIZATIONS

PRIORITY
AREA 2021 2022 2023

1. Behavioral Health,
Mental Health and
Wellness

2. Education Support
& Employment/
Training Support

3. Out-of-School
Time, After
School, Sports &
Enrichment

4. Youth
Violence
Prevention

6. Information,
Guidance & Case
Management

5. Access to Basic
Needs
Familias Unidas Mindful Life Project West County Mandarin School; Early Childhood Mental Health Program New Life Movement Greater Richmond Interfaith Group (GRIP) Bridges from School to Work; College is Real (CIR) Richmond Art Center Seneca Family of Agencies
None
Richmond Promise
Community Violence Solutions
Rosie the Riveter Trust D.R.E.A.M. Financial Academy Envisioneers Inc.

East Bay Center for the Performing Arts Aim High for High School ABLE Community Development Foundation
Child Abuse Prevention Council of CCC
Community Services Department
Recreation
Oshiana Unique Thompkins Foundation Community Education Partnerships RYSE Rosie the Riveter Trust Community Services-Recreation Project Avery
West County Digs Pogo Park Easter Hill United Methodist Church Youth Code Now The Practice Space Social Progress Inc. (SPI) 18 Reasons
Contra Costa Youth Service Bureau
Greater Richmond Interfaith Program
(GRIP)
Fresh Approach
Fresh Lifelines for Youth (FLY)
Youth Finance Institute of America (YFIA);
None
Richmond Police Activities League
Bay Service Area Community Services Richmond Community Foundation (RCF) Improve Your TomorrowUrban Tilth The Watershed Project
Bay Area Community Resources;
Healthy Contra CostaRichmond Build Things That Creep
City of Richmond Employment & TrainingRichmond Promise
Richmond Public Library Black Fighters Association (BFA) 641
37 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

7. RESOURCE NEEDS: CURRENT STATE
Resource Gaps: Current State
Overall, the Richmond community offers a wide array of
programs and services focused on strengthening and
enhancing children, youth and their families. Centers that offer comprehensive enrichment, recreational, sports and performing arts programs are highly regarded by parents and youth, alike. So are the many programs listed in the Resource Guide featuring what 52 community-based
organizations offer in the community.

Yet, despite all the good works and initiatives being
provided, community members feel there’s substantial
work that remains in meeting the needs identified and
reviewed in this 2024 Community Needs Assessment.

Overall Rating on Meeting Needs of Children and
Youth. Survey respondents were asked using a five-star
rating with five as best and one as least, “Overall, how many stars would you give the Richmond community in
meeting the needs of children and youth?” Nearly 40%
gave a 1or 2 star rating, while an equal number gave a 3 star rating. Nineteen percent chose a 4 or 5 star rating.

The weighted average among all ratings yielded 3 stars.

Source: 2022 RDCY Resource Guide.

Source: COI – Child Opportunity Index for Richmond Census Tracts. *Health & Wellness has 11 Richmond-based organizations; however, one of them only has a mailbox for an address; no census tract was identified for this organization. **The census tract list cites 3690.02.

Ratings
Overall, how many stars would you give the Richmond community in meeting the needs of children and youth? (One star being the lowest and five the highest).
(2.7)
642
38 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

7. RESOURCE NEEDS: CURRENT STATE
Many of the open-ended comments throughout the
survey suggest that community members and youth
participating in focus groups find the services that
are available helpful and believe there’s a genuine
commitment among organizations and civic leaders
to meet the needs of children and youth. The
problem is that the needs of children and youth are
significant, escalating and remain unmet because
the demand for services and resources exceeds the
supply. The stark number of “Very Low” and “Low”
Childhood Opportunity Index neighborhoods, the high
concentration of poverty census tracts, a near 40%
poverty rate (200% FPL) among children and youth, and
Richmond’s four separate designations as Medically
Under-served Area (MUA), Primary Care Health
Professional, Dental Health Professional, and Mental
Health Professional shortage areas are all indicative as to why demand for services is so difficult to meet.
1 This
is especially true among the two core areas of Mental & Behavioral Health Needs and Physical Health & Access
Needs.

This overall “Resource Gap” impacts all five of the
Core Categories of Needs identified in this report.

Addressing them will require– not one program or
category at a time – but a systemic community-wide
level to create a collective impact.

What does this mean? The Richmond Fund for
Children and Youth in its role as a catalyst and convener, could bring together community-based organizations,
anchor institutions like medical centers, major
employers, and the school district along with fellow
City departments to identify how they can find ways to
collaborate to maximize the resources each brings to
bear on the Five Core Needs.

To close the Resource Gap, it will be vital to collectively strategize, invest, and develop ways to stretch dollars and find new sources of funding through collaborative
efforts such as grant writing and partnerships.

Addressing the core need of “Connective Supportive
Services” is also essential. Additionally, solving the
1 CA Office of Statewide Health Planning & Development: https://www.transparentrichmond.org/ stories/s/Quality-and-Accessible-Health-Homes-Services/y8gx-ywn5

RICHMOND CHILDREN AND YOUTH FIVE

CORE NEEDS
access barrier posed by lack of transportation, which
prevents youth from attending after-school programs,
summer camps, clubs, sports, STEM, music, and arts
programs, will require a systemic response to achieve a community-wide impact.

The City of Richmond recognizes that needs persist and are substantial and require continuous investment. The next phase of this project is to develop a Strategic Investment Plan that will explore, analyze and recommend steps in
achieving collective impact through prudently investing in programs, services and systemic solutions that reduce the Resource Gap and Five Core Needs described throughout
this Community Needs Assessment.

FIVE
CORE
NEEDS
Mental/Behavioral
Health & Wellness
Physical Health &
Wellness
Learning Needs
Safety
Belonging
Community
Connective
Supportive Services
643
39 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

8. ENVISIONING IDEAS TO ADDRESS NEEDS: NEXT STEPS
The energy, commitment, resilience and innovative
ideas generated from community members and youth
participating at the Community Visioning Event, gives
every indication that community members are up for
the challenge in addressing the core needs reviewed in
this Community Needs Assessment. And they believe
in the promise and aspirations of Richmond’s children
and youth despite the resource gaps in the community.

The mural below is a testament to the innovative and
thoughtful ideas generated by over 70 community
members to change the course of the resource gap
impacting children and youth in Richmond.

During the next phase of this project, RFCY will engage the consulting team of Public Works LLC to facilitate the development of a Strategic Investment Plan to address
the needs assessed in this report, including those
that involve the connectivity issues of navigation of
services, transportation and “2generational” programs
that holistically uplift families as a means of supporting children. The plan will also identify benchmarks and
outcomes to guide the application and award process
of RFCY grant-making to assure that the programs it
chooses to fund realizes a return-on-investment worthy
of Richmond’s most treasured resource – its children and youth.
644
40 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Richmond Department of Children and Youth deeply values the participation of Richmond community members and interest holders in the collaborative creation of the 2020 Community Needs Assessment Report. Special thanks go to the youth, parents, guardians, and service providers who contributed their insights. Their input was crucial in shaping a vision where children, youth, and families in Richmond and North Richmond are equipped with the opportunities and resources they need to thrive.

Richmond Department of Children and Youth Staff
LaShonda White
Patrick Seals
Guadalupe Morales
Nicholas Delgado
Abdul Black
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board
Members
Khalieghya Dandie-Evans
Guadalupe Enllana
Teyona Galloway
Carol Hegstrom
Zeonta Johnson
Katherine Lee
Stephanie Sequeira
Geselle Alvarado
Madiha Qader
Public Works LLC Team
Eric Schnurer
Ester Smith
Jenni Wall
Jeanette Sanchez
Linda Rhodes
Kristi Guillory Reid
Elizabeth Austin
Community Needs Assessment Partners
City of Richmond West Contra Costa Unified School District Department
Fresh Lifelines for Youth
Contra Costa Youth Service Bureau
The Practice Space
Community Health For Asian Americans (CHAA)
West County DIGS - Mira Vista School
City of Richmond YouthWORKS
West Coast Chess Alliance
Things That Creep
YES Parent Fellows
Love Your Block
Mira Vista School of Art
Park Plaza Neighborhood Council
The Watershed Project
Literacy for Every Adult Program (LEAP)
College is Real
Social Progress Inc
Richmond Fire Youth Academy
The Berkeley Baby Book Project
Science Adventures for Girls
Mindful Life Project
Fierce Advocates
Seneca Family of Agencies
RYSE
Yes Nature to Neighborhoods
East Bay Center of the Performing Arts
West Contra Costa Public Education Fund (WestEd Fund)
New Life Movement
Familias Unidas
Greater Richmond Interfaith Program (GRIP)
Early Childhood Mental Health Program
Latina Center
Family Justice Center
Richmond Police Activities League
City of Richmond Office of Neighborhood Safety
Life-Long Medical Center
POGO Park
Bay Area Rescue Mission
Fresh Approach
18 Reasons
City of Richmond Library Department
NIAD
Men & Women of Valor
GroundWork Richmond
Urban Tilth
Contra Costa County Independent Living Skills Program

Richmond City Council
Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez
Council Member Soheila Bana
Council Member Gayle McLaughlin
Council Member Doria Robinson
Council Member Melvin Willis
Council Member Cesar Zepeda
645
41 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX
Child Opportunity Index (COI) by Domain, Subdomain, Indicators

EDUCATION
SUBDOMAIN (4) INDICATOR (12) INDICATOR (13) INDICATOR (19)SUBDOMAIN (4) SUBDOMAIN (6)

SOCIAL & ECONOMICHEALTH & ENVIRONMENT
Early childhood
education
Pollution
Socioeconomic
inequity
Wealth
Healthy
environment
Healthy
environment
Health resources
Housing
resources
Social resources
Employment
Employment
Elementary
education
Secondary and
post-secondary
education
Educational
resources
Private pre-K enrollment Airborne microparticles
Adults with advanced
degrees
Homeownership rate
Fast food restaurant
density
Employment Rate
Median household
income
Reading and math test
scores
Advanced Placement
course enrollment
Adult education
attainment
Industrial pollutants in
air, water or soil
Adults without high
school degrees
Aggregate capital
income
Extreme heat exposure
Full-time year-round
earnings
Public assistance rate
Poverty-adjusted
reading and math test
scores
High school graduation
rate
Teacher experience
Eligible for Free/
Reduced Lunches
Public pre-K enrollment Ozone concentration
Very-high income
households
Aggregate home values
Healthy food retailer
density
Community safety-
related non-profits
Health-related non-
profits
Broadband access
Mobility-enhancing
friendship networks
Crowded housing
Single-parent families
Non-profit organizations
Vacant housing
Health insurance
coverage
High-skill employment
rate
Poverty rate
Reading and math test
score growth
College enrollment in
nearby institutions
Child enrichment-related
non-profits
Hazardous waste dump
sites
Very-low income
households
Aggregate real estate
taxes
Source: Diversity Data Kids.Org
To learn about the Child Opportunity Domains, Subdomains, Indicators and their definitions, please go to https://www.diversitydatakids.org/research-library/child-opportunity-index-30-indicators Access to Open Spaces
Walkability
Appendix A:
646
42 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX
Appendix B: Community Engagement Learnings

1. Summary and Survey Results

2. RFCY Survey Template
Source: 2022 RDCY Resource Guide.

Appendix C: 2022 RDCY Resource Guide List of Organizations by Priority Areas/ Domains
Health and Well Being
18 Reasons
Brighter Beginnings
Child Abuse Prevention Council of Contra Costa County
(CABC)
Multicultural Institute
Project Marc
Rotacare Bay Area
Rubicon Programs Inc. (Reentry Success Center)
Ryse Center
Shelter Inc.

The Latina Center
The Pinkney Foundation
Urban Tilth
West County Digs
West County Digs (Earth Island Institute)
YMCA of the East Bay
James Morehouse Project
Greater Richmond Interfaith Program (GRIP)
Media, Arts and Culture
Big Picture Anthems
East Bay Center for the Performing Arts
The Quinan Street Project
Los Cenzontles Cultural Arts Academy
Maya’s Music Therapy Fund
Rosie the Riveter Trust
Outdoor Education and Recreation
Wheelhouse Academy of Baseball
Hercules Running Rebels
It Takes A Village Resource Center
Lead2Play
Mira Vista (elementary) PTA
Education and Job Training
10,000 Degrees
After-School All Stars Bay Area
Bay Area Community Resources (BACR)
Bright Future Growth and Development Center
Calculus Roundtable
City of Richmond- Library and Cultural Services
City of Richmond - Youth Works
Coco Kids, Inc.

College is Real, Inc.

Desarrollo Familias Unidas
Girls, Inc. Of West Contra Costa
Go Public Schools
Youth & Family Leadership/Organizing and Civic
Engagement
Fierce Advocates (Formerly, BBK)
Healthy Richmond Schools and Neighborhoods Action Team (SNAT) Raising Youth Resilience
Richmond Community Foundation (SPARKPOINT)
Safe Return Project
Parent and Guardian Support
Contra Costa County First Five: Richmond Center
Contra Costa Family Justice Center
Dreamcatchers Empowerment Network
Rich City Rides
Tandem, Partners in Early Learning
West Contra Costa Public Education Fund (West County Reads) West Contra Costa Unified School District - Expanded Learning 647
43 | COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX
Source: 2022 RDCY Resource Guide.

Source: COI – Child Opportunity Index for Richmond Census Tracts. *Health & Wellness has 11 Richmond-based organizations; however, one of them only has a mailbox for an address; no census tract was identified for this organization.
**The census tract list cites 3690.02.

Appendix D: Richmond Based Community Organizations Census Tract Analysis by Priority Area
CENSUS
TRACTS
COI

LEVEL BY

CENSUS TRACT

PERCENT OF

CHILDREN IN

POVERTY

PARENT &

GUARDIAN

SUPPORT
(4)

OUTDOOR

EDUCATION &

RECREATION
(4)

YOUTH &
FAMILY

LEADERSHIP

AND CIVIC

ENGAGEMENT
(3)
MEDIA. ARTS,

CULTURE &

TECHNOLOGY
(2)

EDUCATION &

JOB TRAINING
(6)

HEALTH &

WELLNESS
(11)*

NUMBER OF

ORGANIZATIONS
BY
CENSUS
TRACT
3620
3780
3630
3790
3650.02
3800.02
3690.01**
3810
3710
3770
3700
3820
3740
TOTAL

2.4% 1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 High

7.0% 1High

19.3% 3 1
1 2
Low

9.7% 1 1
1 Low

8.0% 1 1Moderate

28.7% 4 1

2.0% 2

25.0% 3 2
2 21.9% 1 1
1 29.4% 6 3

29.8% 2
2 29 10 6 2 3 4 4
Very Low
High
Very Low
NA
Very Low
Low

0.0% 1 1High

46.6% 3 1Low
648
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 1
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth
Strategic Investment Plan
Fiscal Years 2021 - 2024
649
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 2
Table of Contents
Executive Summary............................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction............................................................................................................................................................ 6 Goals of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth ................................................................................................ 6 Service Providers Working Group.................................................................................................................. 9 Process and Methodology................................................................................................................................... 10 Learning Questions ......................................................................................................................................... 10 Community Needs Assessment: Engagement in the Midst of a Pandemic ........................................... 11 Working with Community to Include Multiple Voices ............................................................................. 11 Co-Design and Building on Existing Work .................................................................................................................. 11 Community Engagement, Data Collection, and Analysis ......................................................................... 12 Secondary Quantitative Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 12 Key Stakeholder Interviews ............................................................................................................................................. 12 Community Focus Groups and Community Listening............................................................................................... 12 Community Surveys .......................................................................................................................................................... 12 Community Forums: Refining Assets and Gaps Analysis and Making Meaning ................................................... 13 Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis and Identification of Priorities ..................................................................... 13 Priority Areas for Investment ............................................................................................................................ 14 Cross-Strategy Approaches.............................................................................................................................................. 15 Priority 1: Support Behavioral Health: Mental Health and Wellness for Children and Youth............ 16 Options for Supported Programming............................................................................................................................ 16 Priority Populations .......................................................................................................................................................... 16 Desired Results .................................................................................................................................................................. 17 Priority 2: Provide Education Support and Employment/Training Support so that Youth Can Move to College and Career...................................................................................................................................... 18 Options for Supported Programming............................................................................................................................ 18 Priority Populations .......................................................................................................................................................... 18 Desired Results .................................................................................................................................................................. 19 Priority 3: Support Out-of-School Time, After-school, Sports and Enrichment .................................. 20 Options for Supported Programming............................................................................................................................ 20 Priority Populations .......................................................................................................................................................... 20 Desired Results .................................................................................................................................................................. 21 650
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 3
Priority 4: Expand Youth Violence Prevention Efforts ............................................................................ 22 Options for Supported programming............................................................................................................................ 22 Priority Populations .......................................................................................................................................................... 22 Desired Results .................................................................................................................................................................. 23 Priority 5: Strengthen Access to Basic Needs ............................................................................................. 24 Options for Supported Programming............................................................................................................................ 24 Priority Populations .......................................................................................................................................................... 24 Desired Results .................................................................................................................................................................. 24 Priority 6: Strengthen Access to Guidance and Information about Resources Available for Children and Youth ......................................................................................................................................................... 26 Options for Supported programming............................................................................................................................ 26 Priority Populations .......................................................................................................................................................... 26 Desired Results .................................................................................................................................................................. 27 Evaluation: Measuring Our Progress ................................................................................................................ 27 References ............................................................................................................................................................. 28 Appendix............................................................................................................................................................... 29 651
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 4
Executive Summary
On June 5, 2018, Richmond voters approved Measures E and K, known as the Richmond Kids First Initiative, which approved a City of Richmond charter amendment (Article 15). The Charter Amendment (1) required the creation of a Department of Children and Youth (Department), (2) provided for increased and dedicated funding for youth programs and services through the establishment of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (Fund), (3) established a 15 -member Oversight Board to oversee the Fund, and (4) required the development of a community needs assessment that would inform a three-year Strategic Investment Plan which will guide a “fair and open” grant-making process.

Community Needs Assessment
The Community Needs Assessment (CNA) and Strategic Investment Planning (SIP) process formally began in February of 2020, and in March 2020, the City selected Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates (HTA) to assist in this effort. This effort built upon the foundations laid by staff who had worked for months to build the new Department and its essential infrastructure.

The Department initiated a needs assessm ent process that sought to honor community voice and include a diverse range of youth and adults in order to develop a comprehensive, equitable investment plan that reflects community vision. This CNA work had been planned as an intensely interactive process with strong community -based interaction and hands -on engagement. The Department and HTA had to pivot from best practices in face -to-face community engagement and planning to community planning in online virtual spaces. Service providers, Department staff and HTA partnered to co-create the assessment, recruit participants, and engage the community in a series of virtual focus groups, listening sessions, and forums as part of the CNA process.

In order to develop the CNA and inform the SIP to understand the strengths and gaps in services for youth and their families, the following guiding learning questions were developed to focus the CNA effort.
• What is working? What are the key assets for children, youth, and their families in Richmond and North Richmond?
• How are resources and services that support youth currently dispersed? What are the gaps? • What are the barriers to accessing current and future services? • What resources do families in Richmond and North Richmond need to thrive? • Which families need these resources the most?
• What are the needs of the most hard-to-reach groups?
The Community Needs Assessment process provided an overview of current data and findings related to children, youth, and their families in Richmond. Community input was gathered through focus groups and interviews with youth and providers, surveys, forums, and the review of multiple reports and secondary data resources. Participants in the Community Needs Assessment were offered 652
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 5
multiple opportunities to weigh in, responding to questions regarding their thinking on where the greatest need was, and what kind of programming would be most valuable in each issue area.

Strategic Investment Plan: Priority Areas, Strategies, and Allocations Based on the information collected from diverse sources, six areas were identified as priorities, albeit recognizing that there was significant overlap in these conceptual categories. Finally, programmatic strategies were attached to each of the priority areas. Priorities were i dentified by synthesizing these data sources and surfacing issues that were raised across multiple groups and subgroups and within the framework of the legislation informing the Richmond Kids First Initiative.

The six priority areas were then assigned a percentage allocation based on considerations of the urgency of the need and potential for equity impact. The priority areas are as follows along with the allocations.

PRIORITY AREAS % ALLOCATION

1. Behavioral Health: Mental Health and Wellness 20%

2. Education Support and Employment/Training Support 20%

3. Out-of-school Time, After-school, Sports and Enrichment 20%

4. Youth Violence Prevention 20%

5. Access to Basic Needs 10%

6. Information, Guidance and Case Management 10%
The Strategic Investment Plan builds on the priority areas identified through the Community Needs Assessment and focuses on a range of related strategic investment opportunities in each priority area.

This plan will guide the Department’s grant cycle between 2021 and 20 24. The first round of grant funding for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 (July 1, 2021 – June 30, 2022) is estimated to total approximately $1.5 million. Estimated funding is approximate for the strategy areas. The available funds for grants in years two and three will increase based on the funding allocations outlined in the Charter. 653
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 6
Introduction
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (Fund)
On June 5, 2018, Richmond voters approved Measures E and K, known as the Richmond Kids First Initiative, which approved a City of Richmond charter amendment (Article 15) to create a Department and Fund of Children and Youth, require that a portion of the General Fund be set aside to fund youth programs and services, establish a 15 -member Oversight Board, conduct a Community Needs Assessment (CNA), and develop a three -year Strategic Investment Plan (SIP) which guides a 3 -year grant-making process.

Per the ballot measure’s Statement of Purpose, “Children, youth and young adults under the age of 24 comprise approximately 35% of the City of Richmond’s overall population, and young people in Richmond experience extremely high rates of violence, trauma, poor health and social outcomes, and stress.” The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth was set up to provide a dedicated funding source to help address some of the issues facing Richmond’s young people.

Richmond and North Richmond’s children and young people demand consistent and equitable access to healthy, safe, supportive, and inspiring environments at home and in community to foster their learning, growth, empowerment, and fulfillment. The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth focuses on community -based initiatives and interventions that improve the community institutions and environments that our children and young people interact with and navigate daily.

As stated in the Charter of the City of Richmond - Article 15 Section 2, the Fund will be maintained separate and apart from all other City funds and shall be appropriated annually at the time of the City’s budget adoption. The City of Richmond is required to set aside a portion of the annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues of the City to be transferred in the amounts specified below:
• For Fiscal Year 2021-2022, set aside for the Fund is an amount equal to one percent (1%) of the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues • For Fiscal Year 2022-2023, set aside for the Fund is an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues • For Fiscal Year 2023-2024, and each fiscal year thereafter through Fiscal Year 2027 -2028, set aside for the Fund is an amount equal to three percent (3%) of the City’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues
Goals of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth
Per the Charter, the Fund will support services for young people that fulfill the following goals:
• To ensure that Richmond’s children, youth, and young adults are physically, emotionally, mentally, and socially healthy, educated, successful in scho ol, and live in stable safe and supported families and communities
• To increase safety for children, youth, young adults, their parents/guardians, families and the communities in which they live by preventing problems and enhancing the strengths of children, youth, young adults and their families
654
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 7
• To ensure young people are provided with gender responsive, trauma -informed, population specific and culturally competent services
• To strengthen collaboration among public agencies and community -based organizations around shared outcomes among all service providers for children, youth, young adults and their parents/guardians
• To ensure an equitable distribution of resources to all of Richmond’s young people in recognition of the importance of investment in their futures from birth through young adulthood
• To fill gaps in services and leverage other resources whenever feasible The Fund will prioritize Richmond and North Richmond children (ages 0 -12); youth (ages 13 to 17) and disconnected young adults (ages 18-24) who are most impacted by harm, inequity and lack of access to support services. The priority populations include but are not limited to:
• System involved young people
• Young people who have been pushed out-of-school
• Young people who themselves are homeless, or whose families are homeless or threatened by homelessness
• Young people living in poverty; immigrant and undocumented children, youth, and families • LGBTQ children, youth, and families
• Teen parents and families, including single mothers; young people with poor physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes, and children with disabilities • Families with children and youth who are impacted by the criminal justice system and /or who have family members who are incarcerated; and/ or are involved in or transitioning from the foster care, juvenile justice, criminal justice, or special education systems 655
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 8
Richmond Department of Children and Youth (Department)
The purpose of the Department is to facilitate the allocation of funds for youth- serving organizations by administering an open and fair application process that is in compliance with the policies adopted by the Oversight Board. Furthermore, the Department supports the Oversight Board in the development of a Strategic Investment Plan and conducts a community needs assessment.

The roles and responsibilities of the Department include but are not limited to:
• Administrator: Administering the grant program in alignment with Measures E & K and Oversight Board direction
• Advocate: Working to advocate for services and adequate funding for children and youth supported by this Fund
• Collaborator: Collaborating with various governmental, faith- based, community -based organizations, and philanthropy to support work in the community and ensure that children and youth needs are met
• Convener: Holding space for City interdepartmental meetings, as well as cross-entity meetings to discuss service delivery, opportunities for collaboration, etc. • Evaluator: Developing and implementing a process to evaluate and/or support the evaluation of grantees, the grant process, collaborative work with other entities, and the program. The Department will help collect and analyze meaningful data and use the eva luation process to document the collective impact of the Fund.
• Funder: Developing and administering the grant program in alignment with the Community Needs Assessment and Strategic Investment Plan
• Supporter: Providing support to the Oversight Board (e.g., assist with recruitment, retention, development, training, agenda setting, meeting facilitation, etc.) 656
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 9
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board (Oversight Board) The purpose of the Oversight Board is to help guide funding for youth- serving organizations by developing policies, monitoring, and ensuring that the Fund is managed in a manner accountable to the community. Oversight of the Fund is provided by a fifteen- member Oversight Board composed of adults and youth appointed by the Mayor and City Council. The members of the Oversight Board have been carefully chosen to represent Richmond and North Richmond’s diverse geographic communities.

Board members are responsible for overseeing the annual grant -making process of the Fund, monitoring the Department to ensure it operates in the best interests of the community, developing a Strategic Investment Plan every three (3) years, and facilitating an annual evaluation of the Fund and funded programs. The Oversight Board wil l ensure the highest standards of care and transparency between the community and Department.

Service Providers Working Group
The Service Provider Working Group, which consists of representatives from both public agencies and community-based organizations, engages a broad cross -section of service providers to provide input to the Oversight Board and is open to all those who provide services to children, youth, young adults, and their families in Richmond and North Richmond.

The Service Provider Working G roup provides input to the Oversight Board on community engagement and data collection, and uses their expertise and knowledge of the Richmond and North Richmond community to serve as subject matter experts to both the Board and Department. The Service Provider Working Group also provides feedback on various Department -related documents and any issues of concern relating to the Department and Fund. 657
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 10
Process and Methodology
The City of Richmond’s Department of Children and Youth initiated a needs assessment and strategic planning process in 2020 that sought to honor community voice, include a diverse range of youth and adults in order to develop a comprehensive, equitable investment plan that reflects community vision.

The City has committed to guiding principles for creating both the Community Needs Assessment and the Strategic Investment Plan, as follows:

Learning Questions
Guiding learning questions were developed to focus the CNA effort. • What is working? What are the key assets for children, youth, and their families in Richmond and North Richmond?
• How are resources and services that support youth currently dispersed? What are the gaps? • What are the barriers to accessing current and future services? • What resources do families in Richmond and North Richmond need to thrive? • Which families need these resources the most?
• What are the needs of the most hard-to-reach groups?
658
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 11
Community Needs Assessment: Engagement in the Midst of a Pandemic The Community Needs Assessment and Strategic Investment Planning process formally began in February of 2020. At this point, the City began to formally plan the assessment process with the assistance of consultants from Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates (HTA). This effort built upon the foundations laid by Department staff who had worked for months to build the new Department and its essential infrastructure.

It is notable that on March 16, 2020, Contra Costa County issued an order for residents to shelter-in - place at their residence in response to the rising numbers of COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations.

On March 17, 2020, the State of California also issued a shelter -in-place order. What followed was an unprecedented shift in the way people, community -based organizations (CBOs), and public entities conducted their daily work, engaged with the public and colleagues, and communicated. For the needs assessment process, this meant that the planning work continued but meetings normally conducted face-to-face could not be conducted in that manner. Many participants were able to continue working from their homes. Others were considered essential workers and were expected to continue going to their regular workplaces. In order to adjust the CNA to meet the requirements of social distancing, we engaged the public using live video platforms which most groups became adept at using fairly quickly.

The CNA team was able to conduct complex meetings with breakouts groups, interactive discussion, shared presentations, conversations, and multiple forms of shared on- demand data visualization and media such as word clouds and virtual white boards.

This CNA work had been planned as an intensely interactive process with strong community -based and hands-on engagement. The Department and HTA had to pivot from best practices in face-to- face community engagement and planning to community planning in online virtual spaces. Service providers, the Department and HTA partnered to co- create the assessment, recruit participants, and engage the community in a series of virtual focus groups, listening sessions, and forums as part of the CNA process.

Working with Community to Include Multiple Voices
Co-Design and Building on Existing Work
Consultants engaged service providers, including the CBO community and public agencies, early on with a virtual co -design process that allowed the CNA to be tailored to the community’s values and culture of inquiry at the same time that the pivot to virtual engagement while shelter in place orders were in effect. CBOs and public agency service providers shared invaluable insight for the City staff and HTA that was incorporated into the CNA design and implementation.

The City of Richmond, community-based organizations, public agencies, and other stakeholders have done a great deal of work in Richmond and North Richmond for many years, and there are multiple reports, assessments, transcripts, and data sets that were reviewed for the CNA. The CNA built on the work that was already done in the community. The CNA design has worked to reduce redundancy while ensuring that due diligence has been applied for the Department. 659
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 12
Community Engagement, Data Collection, and Analysis
Secondary Quantitative Data Analysis
The CNA data collection began with secondary data relat ed to the priorities of the Richmond Kids First Initiative and the learning questions. The project sought to build on existing resources gathering and analyzing quantitative data from a variety of secondary sources and reviewing existing analysis and reports. As described below, this data was combined with qualitative data gathered by the Department and HTA, some of which was presented to the community during a series of forums.

Key Stakeholder Interviews
We conducted key stakeholder interviews early on to help shape and inform the process and to deepen understanding of issue areas. Key Stakeholders included community leaders, program experts, and agency leads with experience serving youth in the community, as well as individuals from priority populations.

Community Focus Groups and Community Listening
Community focus groups and small group listening sessions were incorporated as key components of the assessment. We used these sessions to gather qualitative data directly from groups that are representative of priority populations among local youth, their families, providers, and others. The focus groups drilled down into the themes emerging from the assessment, providing insight from the group interactions and feedback. Stakeholders assisted with moderating these groups and partnered with the CNA team to identify participants and support logistics. Through this process, the Department was able to hear from 73 stakeholders.

Focus Groups
Asian Youth
Black Youth
Parents and Guardians of Children
Latinx Youth
LGBTQ+ Youth
Justice System-Involved Youth
Immigrant Youth
Youth with Foster Care Experience: Transitional Age & Emancipated Youth Community Surveys
The needs assessment included a survey that gathered input from 114 youth and their parents and guardians. The survey was brief, digital, and sought to reach a broader subset of individual children, youth and their parents and guardians. The survey’s aim was to gather input on strengths, needs, and preferences regarding services and programs.

The Department also gathered over 650 surveys through a partnership between UC Berkeley’s Y- PLAN’s (Youth – Plan, Learn, Act, Now) project and West Contra Contra Unified School District’s (WCCUSD) Kennedy High School during the 2019 -20 school year. Through Y -PLAN, which is an action research initiative that engages young people to tackle real-world problems in their communities through project-based civic learning experiences, the Department served as a client for 60 12th grade Information Technology Academy (ITA) students at Kennedy High School. 660
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 13
Community Forums: Refining Assets and Gaps Analysis and Making Meaning As part of our analysis, we worked with stakeholders to conduct four Community Forums that were accessible online to participants across Richmond and North Richmond. Participants were asked to identify the greatest needs of Richmond children, youth, and their families and to prioritize resources areas. Over 57 individuals attended the forums.

Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis and Identification of Priorities All of the quantitative and qualitative data collected in questionnaires/surveys, interviews, focus groups and listening sessions was analyzed and synthesized. Information from participants was prioritized and focus group conversations, forum comments, and input via surveys and feedback forms was coded and cross referenced with existing data reports and quantitative analyses. Information of particular relevance can be found in the Community Needs Assessment Report.

Themes emerging from multiple data sources were identified. Participants in the Community Needs Assessment were offered multiple opportunities to weigh in, responding to questions regarding their thinking on where the greatest need was, what kind of programming would be most valuable in each issue area, and so on. Six areas were identified as priorities with this information, albeit recognizing that there was significant overlap in these conceptual categories. Finally, programmatic strategies were attached to each of the priority areas. These programmatic strategies were developed from qualitative feedback provided throughout the Community Needs Assessment process as well as from meetings with the Service Providers Working Group.
661
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 14
Priority Areas for Investment
Allocation to Priority Areas and Strategies
The Community Needs Assessment process provided an overview of current data and findings related to children, youth, and their families in Richmond, and North Richmond, California – specifically as related to the focus of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth. The Community Needs Assessment identified six priority areas for investment. Community input was gathered through focus groups and interviews with youth and providers, surveys, forums, and the review of multiple reports and secondary data resources. Priorities were identified by synthesizing these data sources and surfacing issues that were raised across multiple groups and subgroups and within the framework of the legislation informing the Richmond Kids First Initiative.

The six priorities areas, not listed in order of importance, were then assigned a percentage allocation based on considerations of the urgency of the need and potential for equity impact. The priority areas are as follows and include the allocation.

PRIORITY AREAS % ALLOCATION

1. Behavioral Health: Mental Health and Wellness 20%

2. Education Support and Employment/Training Support 20%

3. Out of School Time, Afterschool, Sports and Enrichment 20%

4. Youth Violence Prevention 20%

5. Access to Basic Needs 10%

6. Information, Guidance and Case Management 10%
This plan will guide the Department’s grant cycle between 2021 and 2024. The first round of grant funding for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 (July 1, 2021 – June 30, 2022) is estimated to total approximately $1.5 million (based on the City’s Fiscal Year 2020- 21 revenue amounts). Estimated funding is approximate for the strategy areas. The available funds for grant awards in years two and three of the SIP will increase based on the funding allocations outlined in the Charter.

Once grant award decisions are finalized, the allocation amounts, as shown above, may vary slightly depending upon the type and number of grant applications submitted and grants a warded in each priority area. Also, it is important to note that per the Charter, any change in an approved SIP, which could include the priority areas and allocations, shall be based on the community needs assessment and input from the community.
662
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 15
Cross-Strategy Approaches
This plan provides further information related to these priorities and begins to detail options regarding programming, approaches and populations that will benefit from investment. There were also several approaches identified related to programming that could cross several of the six inter - related areas identified above. These cross-cutting approaches include but are not limited to:
• Trauma informed programming
• Healing
• Caring adults participating in the lives of youth
• Trusting relationships with providers
• Meeting children and youth where they are (e.g. school or neighborhood) • “Push in” supports rather than “opt in” supports for those hard to reach (e.g. reaching out to our most marginalized students
• Valuing and recognizing identity while building belonging • Staffing programs with individuals with lived experience or cultural fluency who can effectively engage youth – “Gave staff who can not only represent a culture but can be restorative and beneficial to the culture”
• Providing culturally competent programming and services which reflect the diversity of Richmond and North Richmond
• Improving translation and language equity
• Improving access by robustly sharing information out to the community • Equity in place
• Including and valuing youth voice in the design and implementation of programming There are numerous options for programmatic strategies identified under each priority. Realistically, it is likely that not all of these programmatic strategies will be put forward and that not all of them could be funded in this initial year of the Fund. The staff of the Richmond Department of Children and Youth is committed to using an equity perspective in its grant programs to ensure that the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth fills gaps in services, provides resources to those populations that have been identified as under-resourced, and strategically contributes to meaningful results for children and youth.
663
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 16
Mental Health and wellness for Richmond and North Richmond children and youth clearly stood out in the Community Needs Assessment. The community has identified stress and trauma as an issue for children and youth in the community. Given the many health stressors in the community, there are children at risk of mental health and developmental impact given their exposure to “adverse childhood experiences.” At the same time, youth express that they have experienced depression.

Programs that support mental health and wellness and that address mental health needs will help Richmond and North Richmond children and youth to thrive. Included in this priority is mental health education which will be targeted toward reducing stigma and increasing understanding of mental health and wellness issues.

The issue of mental health and well-being was a concern across all of the focus groups that were conducted. This is particularly true for Black and Latinx residents who are disproportionately exposed to violence leading to long term impacts on health and well-being. Trauma-informed programming, as well as mental health programs, emerged as a significant need for children, youth, and families along with the need for that programming to consider the rich diversity of residents many of whom have are experiencing the trauma of the constant threat of family deportation, violence in the community, discrimination and more. Also, the need for culturally fluent approaches is central to filling this gap as many of Richmond and North Richmond’s children, youth, and families come from non-western cultures where there may be barriers and stigma attached to western approaches to mental health and wellness programming.

Options for Supported Programming
• Integrate behavioral health strategies into programming that support mental health and wellness
• Provide a “safe space” and support mental health along with social and emotional well-being for young children and youth
• Provide supportive relationships, including counseling and support for children and youth • Strengthen school-based and group programming (e.g., anxiety or anger management) • Diversify access (e.g., by opening access to short term needs and those not being served) • Address trauma and support healing skills
Behavioral and mental health education for children, youth, and families; build access and openness to receiving support
Priority Populations
• Disconnected youth
• Young people who themselves are homeless, or whose families are homeless or threatened by homelessness
• Young people living in poverty
• Immigrant and undocumented children and youth
• LGBTQ+ children, youth, and families
Priority 1: Support Behavioral Health: Mental Health and Wellness for Children and Youth
664
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 17
• Youth who have experienced trauma
• Young people with poor physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes Desired Results
• Increased access to mental or behavioral health programs and services (Indicator: number of unique and new participants)
• Decreased stigma about receiving mental health services • Reduced reliance on substances to deal with mental and behavioral health issues • Increased awareness of available mental or behavioral health services 665
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 18
Richmond and North Richmond youth participating in the Community Needs Assessment consistently expressed the desire to be successful in school and go on to college or employment. In the 2019 Richmond Community Survey, residents were asked what areas the City should prioritize in order to best support young people in Richmond. Education and Job Training received the highest response rate with 82% of respondents (308 responses) selecting this as a priority1 .

In the Community Needs Assessment, participants also identified the need for programs that support children and youth along their journey toward educational success, college, career, and employment.

These needs emerged across surveys, focus groups, forums, and other sources. Richmond and North Richmond children and youth want the chance to excel in school and career. There was a strong desire for more tutoring, broader college access programs, and extra support for those who may be struggling with a range of barriers such as tran sitional age youth (TAY) or new immigrants arriving as unaccompanied minor children. The latter is also an example of a group that needs accelerated or intensive language learning support.

Many older youth participants wanted support in moving toward employment and identified the need to learn more about employment requirements and career options via mentoring, internships, and, in some cases, job skills training as key to their success.

It is also notable that reliable access to resources such as high-speed internet and computer equipment, such as tablets, has become even more important in the current distance learning environment.

Participants often pointed to disparities between nearby, wealthier districts outside of Richmond and North Richmond that are better resourced and have programs, tools, and infrastructure that allow for students to excel.

Options for Supported Programming
• Programs that improve educational outcomes for high-need young children • Targeted educational support (e.g. tutoring, language, homework assistance) for children and youth facing multiple challenges in moving forward to post -secondary education and employment (e.g. populations such as unaccompanied minor immigrants, system involved youth, or very low-income students)
• Career and college exposure at earlier ages (e.g. middle school programs) • Internships to provide experience, skill building and exposure for youth • Outreach and strategies directed to disconnected youth and systems -impacted youth who are not engaged in community programming
• Expand access to West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD) career readiness resources to students not in pathways
Priority populations
• Youth of color
1National Research Center and ICMA (2019). The National Community Survey, Richmond, CA Technical Appendices.

Priority 2: Provide Education Support and Employment/Training Support so that Youth Can Move to College and Career
666
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 19
• System involved young people and TAY
• Disconnected youth
• Young people who themselves are homeless, or whose families are homeless or threatened by homelessness
• Socioeconomically disadvantaged children and young people • Immigrant and undocumented children and youth
• Students with disabilities
• Youth from under-resourced neighborhoods (e.g. North Richmond, Iron Triangle) Desired Results
Education Support
• Increased access to early learning
• Kindergarten readiness
• Improved third grade reading levels
• Improved school attendance
• Improved High School graduation rates
• College entry and success rates
• Reduction in chronic absenteeism
• Black and Latinx college enrollment and persistence
Employment
• Increased numbers of youth with work experience opportunities • Increased numbers of youth accessing career and college • Increased knowledge of programs
• Increase in earnings/income for youth and young adults 667
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 20
Priority 3: Support Out-of-School Time, After-school, Sports and Enrichment This strategy builds on and expands available out -of-school and afterschool programming.

Participation in afterschool and out -of-school programs is linked to better academic outcomes. For Richmond and North Richmond’s priority populations, targeted afterschool programming could improve their chances of completion and success in school as well as their connection to caring adults with whom they feel a connection. Programs must be provided in a safe space with safe access for students.

Low-cost or no-cost out-of-school and after-school sports and enrichment programming scored high as both desired and needed for youth to thrive across groups. Sports were a popular suggestion as were outdoor activities such as gardening and hiking. The arts were very often mixed in with responses to sports but were also often singled out as highly desirable (music, dance, visual arts were all mentioned).

This is in addition to culturally relevant arts and other programming to help them to build awareness, strengthen self-esteem, and create a sense of belonging. Some groups stated there were few or no respectful and safe spaces to be with others like them. Existing after -school resources should be leveraged so that funding from the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (Fund) bring in those not participating and engage students who have barriers to participation.

Options for Supported Programming
● Programming specific needs of children and youth at their age and stage ● Support youth voice to support diverse programming for students in later grades to develop their strengths and interests
● Free or very low-cost programming
● Funding to also engage parents to understand barriers to participation ● Enrichment programming (e.g. music & arts, science & technology, sports & recreation) ● Culturally relevant and fluent programming
● Academic support such as tutoring, homework support, etc. ● Outdoor programming
● Accessible programming for students with disabilities ● Youth development and leadership opportunities for positive youth engagement Priority Populations
This could include all of the priority populations and programs should be targeted toward including these hard to reach/underserved groups.
● Young people living in poverty
● Immigrant and undocumented children and youth
● Young people with poor physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes ● Children with disabilities
● Students experiencing homelessness
● Students who are not engaged in out-of-school extracurricular activities ● Students at schools with high levels of free and reduced lunch ● Students in very high need locations
668
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 21
Desired Results
• Expanded access to out of school, afterschool, sports, and enrichment programming (Indicator: number and demographics of unique participants ) • Increased learning opportunities year round
• Increased and more diverse offerings of culturally relevant programming • Increase in caring adult relationships
• Increased number of hours of academic support provided • Increased number of no-cost or low-cost/fully subsidized programs • Improved attendance
669
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 22
Priority 4: Expand Youth Violence Prevention Efforts
Violence in the community came up as a barrier to participation and even as a significant barrier to everyday activity for priority populations. Violence manifests itself in many forms including gun violence, domestic violence, and more. In the focus groups, youth stated they couldn’t go to many places in Richmond and North Richmond out of fear and that they were frequently uncomfortable to go out with groups of friends when one of them did not feel safe in a particular neighborhood. Others participating in the needs asses sment spoke of witnessing violence or dangerous spots in their neighborhood. Bullying is also a concern for children. In addition, some participants also reported the fear of gender-based violence as a barrier to movement and participation in the community.

The 2019 Richmond Community Survey asked residents what areas the City should prioritize in order to best support young people in Richmond. Violence prevention and response received the second highest response rate with 73% of respondents (275 responses) selecting this as a priority2 . Other plans and reports including the 2019 Kaiser Community Health Needs Assessment and the North Richmond Quality of Life Plan also identified community safety as a priority.

Options for Supported programming
• Programs supporting healthy development for children
• Mentorship and other programs for youth that feature a caring adult • Programs that support connection to after-school activities and reduce exposure to community risks
• Programs outside of school
• Peer-to-peer groups
• Whole family/parent support
• Anti-bullying programs
• Programs focusing on African American and Latino/Latinx youth • Youth skills programs: non-violent coping and communication skills • Street outreach and community norm changes
Support for families experiencing domestic violence
• Access to programs that are “close to home” or that provide safety support or community travel support that reduces risk of violence for youth (e.g. transportation vouchers or programs located next to public transportation)
Priority populations
• African American youth
• Latino/Latinx youth
• System-involved young people
• Young people who have been pushed out-of-school
• Young people living in poverty
2National Research Center and ICMA (2019). The National Community Survey, Richmond, CA Technical Appendices. 670
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 23
• Children and youth who are impacted by the criminal justice system and/or who have family members who are incarcerated
Desired Results
• Reduction in the number of youths involved in criminal activity • Reduction in the numbers of youth homicides for those aged 0-24. • Reduction in the numbers of youth that perpetrate violence • Increase in the number of students who feel safe at school • Reduction in bullying
• Reduction in the number of children and youth that witness violence • Increase in services that support whole-family violence prevention 671
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 24
Priority 5: Strengthen Access to Basic Needs
The Community Needs Assessment identified that many Richmond and North Richmond children, youth, and their families were struggling and needed support with meeting one or more of their basic needs (e.g., housing, food, medicine, utilities, and transportation) for their families. For homeless participants, housing and wraparound support was identified. For TAY, the need for assistance in supporting their own household after they turned 18 was mentioned. For immigrant children, the need for financial support for families who were often barred from working full time was mentioned.

Justice-involved youth suggested that they needed access to support that they said was often contingent on having been in Juvenile Hall. For some parents and youth who wanted to access particular programs, transportation was identified as a barrier.

Given that this planning work was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, basic needs issues were heightened beyond the norm. It is widely expected that many families will face ongoing economic hardship as the pandemic wanes and the economy moves toward recovery.

Options for Supported Programming
• Childcare support including childcare to provide relief to youth caring for siblings or parenting youth
• Meal and nutrition support
• Rental support
• Navigation of available basic needs resources
• Support for family resource centers
• Support for families with barriers to access
• Expanded homelessness prevention resources to identify and support children and youth at risk of homelessness in Richmond and North Richmond
• Support for children and youth experiencing homelessness including coordination between outreach workers, after-school providers, schools, and shelter/housing resources Priority Populations
• Young people who themselves are homeless, or whose families are homeless or threatened by homelessness
• Young people living in poverty
• Immigrant and undocumented children and youth
• Teen parents and families, including single mothers
• Families with children and youth who are involved in or transitioning from the foster care, juvenile justice, criminal justice, or special education systems Desired Results
• Fewer children, youth and their families will experience homelessness in Richmond and North Richmond
• Increased housing security
• Increased access to childcare
672
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 25
• Increased food security
• Increased access to services by mitigating financial or resource barriers • Improved transportation to service locations
• Increased access to high-speed internet and Wi-Fi
• Decreased rates of poverty in Richmond and North Richmond, particularly for households of color
673
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 26
For children, youth, and families, there were a number of voices across the spectrum of youth residents that reported on how difficult it is to navigate the Richmond and North Richmond environment of youth services. Almost all community engagement activities during the Community Needs Assessment identified the need for support that would assist community members in understanding what resources were out there and whether they qualified to access them. Many of those surveyed said they did not access services because they did not know about them. Young people expressed the need for help, including coaching or case management, in navigating the turn toward independence or the journey to college success. Case management, or at the very least guidance from a caring adult, is needed so that children, youth, and their families can understand and access the services available. Parents and guardians need more support with understanding what was offered and how to make the best use of these programs and services for their children. Information and case management was also mentioned as critical to individuals experiencing homeless successfully regaining housing. This information needs to be in multiple languages with extra effort to reach marginalized children, youth, and their families.

Options for Supported programming
• Fund the creation and hosting of an inclusive web resource that can provide robust information on children and youth programming in multiple languages • Fund navigation support or case management for children, youth and their families who face complex challenges
• Support mentorship and guidance that helps disadvantaged children and youth with understanding and accessing resources that will move them forward on their path toward college and/or employment
• Social media strategies and outreach
• Provide resources and capacity for guidance and case management in programming for those who most need it
• Make sure that staff providing guidance and case management reflects the diversity of the clients
Priority populations
This priority will support children and youth across Richmond and North Richmond inclusive of all priority populations.
• System-involved young people
• Young people who have been pushed out-of-school
• Young people who themselves are homeless, or whose families are homeless or threatened by homelessness
• Young people living in poverty
• Immigrant and undocumented children, youth, and families • LGBTQ+ children, youth, and families
• Teen parents and families, including single mothers; young people with poor physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral health outcomes, and children with disabilities Priority 6: Strengthen Access to Guidance and Information about Resources Available for Children and Youth
674
Prepared by Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
December 2020
Page | 27
• Families with children and youth who are impacted by the criminal justice system and/or who have family members who are incarcerated; and/or are involved in or transitioning from the foster care, juvenile justice, criminal justice, or special education systems.

Desired Results
Information
• Increased access to information: (Indicators: Number of inquiries and posts on one stop shop platform)
• Increased access to information in multiple languages other than English (Indicator:

Increased number of requests for information that are made in other languages) • Increase in the number of children and youth and their families that are aware of programming and know how to access information needed to participate • Increased access to Wi-Fi connectivity
Navigation Support, Guidance, and Case Management
• Increase in number of case management spots available for high need youth or those with complex situations
• Increase in number of mentors available for high-need youth • Increased navigation support for youth who want to access post-secondary education or who are transitional aged youth moving to independence
• Increased numbers of youth have connection to caring adults • Increased number of programs or collaborations that offer wraparound services/programming targeted at high need youth
Evaluation: Measuring Our Progress
In accordance with the requirements set forth in the City Charter, the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board, in collaboration with Department staff, will facilitate an annual evaluation to identify relevant evaluation measures and ensure that programs funded through the Fund are impactful and meet established outcomes. Department staff may contract with a third-party, external independent evaluator to prepare annual evaluations and other relevant reports. Evaluation reports shall be provided to the City Council and made available to the public.

The Oversight Board will also review financial reports and audits to confirm that spending from the Fund is consistent with all provisions of Article 15 of the Charter, and that the funds are being managed responsibly. Department staff will continue to collect data from young people, their families, the community and service providers throughout the year to ensure we have the best understanding of the needs of the children, youth and their families in Richmond and North Richmond.
675
Page | 28
References
1,2National Research Center and ICMA (2019). The National Community Survey, Richmond, CA Technical Appendices. Retrieved from:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/52256/The-NCS-Technical-Appendices--- Richmond-2019
For a complete list of resources utilized in our 2020 Community Needs Assessment Report, please visit www.richmondyouth.org.
676
Page | 29
Appendix: Acknowledgments
The Richmond Department of Children and Youth would like to thank all Richmond and North Richmond community members that participated in the co- design and development of the 2020 Community Needs Assessment Report. The Department would especially like to ex tend its gratitude to all youth, parents and guardians, and service providers that voiced their input for the purpose of envisioning a Richmond and North Richmond in which all children, youth, and their families may thrive.

Richmond Department of Children and Youth Staff
LaShonda White
David Padilla
Patrick Seals
Guadalupe Morales
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board Members (Current and Former) Geselle Alvarado
Khalieghya Dandie-Evans
Guadalupe Enllana
Teyona Galloway
Angel Godinez
Carol Hegstrom
Kapris James
Zeonta Johnson
Katherine Lee
Kristin Kilian Lobos
Madiha Qader
Stephanie Sequeira
Hatchuel Tabernik and Associates
Lorene Allio, PhD
Kweli Kitwana
Aurelio Rivera
Nandi Peterson
Jes Montesinos
Chandreve Clay
Sahar Petri
Richmond Department of Children and Youth Interns
Cali Luke
Dante Angel Miguel
Jonathan Alvarado Salinas
Letitia Carpenter
Anna Leversee
Sarah Ferrell
Peter Godslaw
Yessica Gonzalez Reyes
Nabil Aziz
677
Page | 30
Community Needs Assessment Partners
Service Provider Working Group
Interdepartmental Working Group
Richmond Kids First Committee
Information Technology Department, City of Richmond
West Contra Costa Unified School District
Department Partners
Oakland Fund for Children and Youth
San Francisco Department of Children, Youth, and Their Families Community Services Department, City of San Pablo
Richmond City Council
Tom Butt
Nathaniel Bates
Ben Choi
Demnlus Johnson, III
Eduardo Martinez
Jael Myrick
Melvin Willis
Consultants and Student Researchers
Y-PLAN (Youth – Plan, Learn, Act, Now), Center for Cities + Schools at UC Berkeley Information Technology Academy, Kennedy High School
AnnMarie Baines
Lujain Al-Saleh
Jamon Franklin
Kekoa Lopez
Enrique Ramirez
Grace Sheeran
Rafael Velazquez
678
Page | 31
Appendix: Summary of Community Input
As part of the development of the Community Needs Assessment and Strategic Investment Plan, the Department conducted a community engagement process, as outlined below. The goal of gathering community input was to identify gaps and opportunities in programming for children and youth in addition to soliciting perspectives on community strengths and barriers for children, youth and their families in Richmond and North Richmond.

Community and Stakeholder Input Activities
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board meetings to provide Community Needs Assessment updates and receive feedback on community engagement best practices.

Service Provider Working Group meetings to provide a focus group training for community partners and receive feedback on the development of Strategic Investment Plan priorities.

Community forums to provide all Richmond and North Richmond community members an opportunity to participate in the Community Needs Assessment development and provide their feedback on what services are needed for youth and their families to thrive.

Focus groups for the following areas:
• Asian Youth
• Black Youth
• Parents and Guardians of Children
• Latinx Youth
• LGBTQ+ Youth
• Justice System-Involved Youth
• Immigrant Youth
• Youth with Foster Care Experience: Transitional Age & Emancipated Youth The Department would like to thank the following community partners for their support with focus group recruitment and/or facilitation:
• Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN)
• Literacy for Every Adult Program (LEAP)
• Building Blocks for Kids Richmond (BBK)
• RYSE Center
• Office of Neighborhood Safety, City of Richmond
• YES Nature to Neighborhoods
• Independent Living Skills Program
• Richmond YouthWORKS
• Richmond Promise
679
Page | 32
Community surveys through the following methods to deepen understanding of community strengths and barriers as identified by community members. • Youth survey (25 responses)
• Parent/Guardian survey (89 responses)
Key Stakeholder Interviews with community-based organizations, West Contra Costa Unified School District staff, and community leaders to help shape and inform the process and to deepen understanding of issue areas.

Collaboration with Y-PLAN and 12th Kennedy High School students who developed and conducted their own survey (~650 responses) among Richmond students 680
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.

ARTICLE XV - Richmond Fund for Children and Youth
(Added by election June 5, 2018)
Sec. 1. Fund: Beginning July 1, 2018 there is hereby established in the treasury of the City of Richmond (the "City") a special fund to expand children's services in the City, which shall be called the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (the "Fund").
(Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 2 . Amount and Source of Funding. The City shall set aside a portion of the annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues of the City to be transferred to the Fund in the amounts specified below subject to the conditions set forth in subdivision (i).

During f iscal year 2018-2019 (July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019) there is hereby set aside for the Fund, the amount of $250,000 from the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for the express purpose of establishing and supporting the infrastructure of the Fund and the newly created Department of Children and Youth, as described in Section 7, including the development of the Strategic Investment Plan, as described in Section 8.

For f iscal year 2019-2020, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, the amount of $700,000 from the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues for the express purpose of establishing and supporting the infrastructure of the Fund and the newly created Department of Children and Youth, including the development of the Strategic Investment Plan.

For f iscal year 2021-2022, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to one percent (1%) of the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.

For f iscal year 2022-2023, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.

For f iscal year 2023-2024, and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2027-2028, there is hereby set aside for the Fund, an amount equal to three percent (3%) of the City's annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues, together with any interest earned on the Fund and any amounts unspent or uncommitted by the Fund at the end of any fiscal year.

The F und shall be maintained separate and apart from all other City funds and shall be appropriated annually at the time of the City's budget adoption, and by supplemental appropriation, when necessary as determined by the City Council.

The a nnual amount of actual unrestricted general purpose revenues shall be calculated by the City Manager and shall fully include all of the following sources of revenue received by the City: (1) Property Taxes, (2) General Sales and Use Taxes (including locally approved general sales taxes and the City's portion of the Bradley-Burns Sales and Use Tax), (3) Utility Users Tax, (4) Property Transfer Tax, (5) Transient Occupancy Tax, (6) Fines, forfeitures and penalties, (7) Interest from general fund reserves, and (8) other revenues that the City can use for any lawful, municipal purpose. The City shall not define which revenues are to be considered unrestricted general purpose revenues in a manner inconsistent with the provisions of this section. Errors in calculation for a fiscal year shall be corrected by an adjustment in the set aside for the next fiscal year.

Before t he end of the initial ten-year period, the Fund's effectiveness shall be evaluated and the funding and terms of the Fund shall be presented to the voters for renewal or revision, unless renewed by the City 681
i.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
a.
i.
ii.

Council.

The r equirements to set aside funds pursuant to subdivisions (c), (d) and (e) shall not become effective unless and until a general tax measure is approved after the effective date of this Act which levies a new tax or increases an existing tax to make additional funding available for the unrestricted general purposes of the City of Richmond. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to require the revenues from such a general tax measure to be dedicated to the purposes of this Act or the "Richmond Kids' First Initiative: The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Act." In the event that a general tax measure meeting the requirements of this subdivision is not passed by December 31, 2020, the City Council shall pass enabling legislation to delay the effective dates in subdivisions (c), (d) and (e) until the fiscal year following the passage of a general tax measure, and making any other necessary adjustments to the times set forth in this Act. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 3 . Goals. The goals of expenditures from the Fund shall be:

To e nsure that Richmond's children, youth and young adults are physically, emotionally, mentally and socially healthy, educated, successful in school, and live in stable, safe and supported families and communities; To i ncrease safety for children, youth, young adults, their parents/guardians, families and the communities in which they live by preventing problems and enhancing the strengths of children, youth, young adults and their families;
To e nsure young people are provided with gender-responsive, trauma-informed, population-specific and culturally-competent services;
To s trengthen collaboration among public agencies and community-based organizations around shared outcomes among all service providers for children, youth, young adults and their parents/guardians; To e nsure an equitable distribution of resources to all of Richmond's young people in recognition of the importance of investment in their futures from birth through young adulthood; To f ill gaps in services and leverage other resources whenever feasible. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 4 . Eligible Uses.

The C ity shall only use monies from the Fund for services provided to children and youth from birth to 18 years old and their caregivers, and, as defined in Section 4.b., disconnected transitional-aged young adults from ages 18 to 24 years and, when relevant, their caregivers, or as part of programs that predominantly serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults within those ages and their caregivers, including:

Violence P revention and Response: including restorative and transformative justice; programs that support positive communication and relationships between young people and within families; programs that train young people, adult allies and parents/guardians in de-escalation; programs that address domestic and sexual violence, including child abuse prevention; emergency relocation; programs that address homophobia and bullying; alternatives to incarceration including diversion and re-entry programs.

Education a nd Job Training: including programs that help youth stay in school; promote academic success and college and career readiness; language services; support parents/guardians in advocating for their young people's education; assist in developing life skills and gaining work experience; and provide job training and placement.
682
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Parent/Guardian Support: including fostering positive child-adult and youth-adult relationships that support people's safety, self-esteem, well-being and positive futures.

Media, Arts, Culture and Technology: including artistic and cultural expression and education, and job and life skills development.

Youth and Family Leadership, Organizing and Civic Engagement: including community organizing and support that amplify the voices and engagement of children, youth and family in how Richmond prioritizes its resources; and builds youth civic engagement and leadership.

Health and Well-Being: including physical, mental, emotional, behavioral and social health services that support health and well-being and reduce drug-related harm, violence and self-harm, and harmful and disrespectful sexual behavior.

Environmental Health and Justice: including programs that improve the environmental health of children and youth and their right to live free of pollution, toxins and lead, and increase access to healthy food, safe and accessible outdoor and recreational spaces and other places to be physically active.

Outdoor Education and Recreation: including sports, recreation centers, play, camps, gardening and urban agriculture.

Deportation Support: support for young people and families experiencing or being threatened with deportation.

The Fund will prioritize three groups of young people living in Richmond and adjacent unincorporated North Richmond: children ages 0 to 12; youth ages 13 to 17; and disconnected young adults ages 18 to 24, who are most impacted by harm, inequity and lack of access to support and services. The priority populations include but are not limited to: system-involved young people; young people who have been pushed out of school; young people who themselves or whose families are homeless or threatened by homelessness; young people living in poverty; immigrant and undocumented children, youth and families; Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) children, youth and families; teen parents and families, including single mothers; young people with poor physical, mental, emotional and behavioral health outcomes and disabilities; and families with children and youth who are impacted by the criminal justice system and/or who have family members who are incarcerated; and/or are involved in or transitioning from the foster care, juvenile justice, criminal justice or special education systems.

Entities eligible to receive funding shall be public agencies and non-profit community-based organizations, including organizations with a non-profit fiscal agent, that serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults.

Commencing in fiscal year 2021-2022 and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2027-2028, (1) a maximum of ten percent (10%) of the Fund can be used for costs related to administering the Fund, including staff support, basic infrastructure, support for the agencies administering the contracts, and overhead costs; and (2) an additional maximum of five percent (5%) of the Fund may be used to evaluate the results of this Article.

A maximum of ten percent (10%) of the amount used to administer the Fund (as described in Section 4.d.) can be used for City overhead.

Entities eligible to receive funding include those (1) located outside but in close proximity to Richmond to the extent that those entities serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults who reside in Richmond or unincorporated North Richmond, and (2) located in Richmond or unincorporated North 683
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
a.
b.

Richmond t hat serve children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults in Richmond or unincorporated North Richmond, regardless of the residence of the children or youth. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 5 . Excluded Services. The Fund shall not fund the following services or types of expenditures:

Services p rovided by the Police Department, Sheriff, other law enforcement agencies, Courts, District Attorney, Public Defender, City Attorney or Fire Department; detention or probation services mandated by state or federal law; or public transportation, except to the extent that transportation may be needed to access eligible services supported by the Fund;
Services p rovided by the West Contra Costa Unified School District, Richmond libraries, Office of Neighborhood Safety, Richmond Promise College Scholarship Program, Richmond Housing Authority and Youth Works, except for collaborations between the above mentioned entities and community-based organizations and programs that meet the goals and eligible uses of the Fund; Any s ervice that primarily benefits adults over 24 years; Any s ervice for which a fixed or minimum level of expenditure is mandated by state or federal law, to the extent of the fixed or minimum level of expenditure;
Acquisition o f any capital item not for primary and direct use by children or youth; acquisition, other than by lease for a term of ten years or less, of any real property; or maintenance, utilities or any similar operating costs of any facility not used primarily and directly by children or youth, or of any recreation or park facility, library, or hospital;
Capital e xpenditures for housing, or rent subsidies;
Primary a nd specialized medical and direct mental health services; however, prevention, education, and other behavioral and mental health support services are eligible for funding; Income s upports that supplant state or federal benefits or post-secondary tuition assistance; Administration o f other funds; or
Replacing e xisting funding for children and youth services as set forth in the Children's Baseline Budget in Section 6, except to the extent that the City ceases to receive federal, state, county, or private foundation funds that the funding agency required to be spent only on these services. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
Sec. 6 . Children and Youth Baseline Budget. The City shall ensure that the Fund is used exclusively to increase overall City expenditures for eligible services for children, youth and disconnected transitional-aged young adults.

The C ity Manager shall calculate the City's total actual unrestricted general purpose revenues in fiscal year 2017-2018, and shall calculate the percentage of those revenues that were allocated in fiscal year 2017-2018 to services that would be eligible uses for monies from the Fund, excluding allocations for services mandated by state or federal law (the "Base Percentage").

Commencing i n fiscal year 2019-2020 and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2027-2028, the City shall allocate at least the Base Percentage of total actual unrestricted general purpose revenues to services that would be eligible uses of the Fund, excluding allocations for services mandated by state or federal law, and excluding any allocation of revenue required by this Article. (Added b y election of 6-5-2018 )
684
a.
b.
c.
d.
i.
ii.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. iii.
iv.
e.
f.
g.

Sec. 7. Administration and Oversight. The Fund shall be administered by staff in a newly established Department of Children and Youth within the City Manager's office. Oversight of the Fund shall be provided by a fifteen-member Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board (the "Oversight Board") that shall be composed as follows:

Each member of the Richmond City Council shall appoint two City residents as members — one over 24 years old, and one who is 15 to 24 years of age.

The Mayor of Richmond shall appoint three City residents as members, at least one of which shall be 15 to 24 years of age.

The Mayor and City Council members shall use their best efforts to coordinate their appointments so that the members of the Oversight Board represent Richmond's diverse geographic communities, including unincorporated North Richmond.

The Oversight Board shall have the following responsibilities, powers, and functions:

The role of the Oversight Board will be to develop written policies regarding the Fund, monitor the Fund, ensure that the Fund is managed in a manner accountable to the community, and ensure the highest standards of care and transparency.

Responsibilities of the Oversight Board shall be:

Strategic planning: (a) creating an initial Strategic Investment Plan as described under Section 8, and (b) updating the Strategic Investment Plan every three years.

Reviewing applications for funding from the Fund through a transparent and fair application process.

Recommending to the City Council a list of grants to be awarded for each funding cycle.

Facilitating an annual evaluation: working with a third-party, external independent evaluator to identify relevant evaluation measures and ensure that programs funded through the Fund are impactful and meet established outcomes. Evaluation reports shall be provided to the City Council and the Mayor's office and made available to the public.

Reviewing financial reports and audits to confirm that spending from the Fund is consistent with all provisions of this Article, and that the funds are being managed responsibly.

The Oversight Board shall adopt rules and regulations to govern its procedures, which shall, among other things, include the manner of calling and giving notices of meetings. The Oversight Board shall meet a minimum of six times per year. Its meetings shall be open to the public and subject to the Ralph M.

← All documents from this meeting