September 22, 2026
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
None.
168
September 22, 2026
Community Development
DATE: September 22, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lina Velasco, Director of Community Development
Beatriz Guerrero, Transformative Climate Communities
(TCC) Project Coordinator
Matias Eusterbrock, TCC Project Analyst
Subject: Naming the Universally Accessible Community Garden in Honor of Joe Lee Fisher Sr.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item. The proposed naming does not require an appropriation, and
costs for the design, fabrication, and installation of
commemorative signage will be identified and presented
to the City Council at a later date.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
June 21, 2022
October 3, 2023
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
In recognition of the late Joe Lee Fisher's decades of
community service and leadership in Richmond, City
staff, with support of the Coronado Neighborhood Council and the City’s Recreation and Parks Commission,
request City Council approval to name the new
community garden at Unity Park adjacent to the 17th
Street entrance the "Joe Lee Fisher Sr. Universally
Accessible Community Garden.”
RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE the naming of the new community garden at Unity Park the ’Joe Lee Fisher Sr. Universally Accessible Community Garden’ – Community Development
Department (Lina Velasco/Beatriz Guerrero 510-620-
5450).
AGENDA
REPORT
169
September 22, 2026
DISCUSSION:
Project Description
On October 27, 2022, the City and six local partner organizations were awarded a $35 million Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) grant from the California Strategic Growth Council (SGC) to implement programs providing economic, environmental, and health benefits for the neighborhoods of Coronado, Santa Fe, and Iron Triangle. This award included $955,044.00 for local non-profit partner Urban Tilth to work with community members to design, construct, program, and maintain an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant community garden at Unity Park adjacent to the 17th Street entrance (Attachment 1). This project is intended to provide opportunities for residents to connect with nature, increase access to healthy food, and create an inclusive community space that can be used by residents of varying ages and abilities.
The garden was designed in partnership with Nurturing Independence Through Artistic Development (NIAD) Art Center, VisitAbility, a local non-profit that serves children and adults with developmental disabilities and mental health needs, and residents of the Harbour View Senior Apartments, located on Harbour Way, adjacent to the Richmond Greenway. Through a series of workshops and community engagement activities in 2024 and 2025, Urban Tilth worked with these organizations and community members to ensure the garden's design reflected the needs and priorities of its intended users.
The garden incorporates features designed to increase accessibility and encourage participation by seniors, individuals with mobility limitations, individuals with developmental disabilities or mental health needs, and others who may face barriers to accessing traditional community gardens. These features include raised planting beds accessible from a seated position or wheelchair; sensory garden elements that incorporate touch, sound, and smell to engage individuals with limited vision; and fully ADA-compliant pathways, accessways, and rest areas (Attachment 2).
Project Approval and Construction Timeline
The draft garden plans were presented for review and feedback to the City’s Recreation and Parks Commission on December 6, 2023. The project plans were subsequently presented to the City’s Design Review Board on August 28, 2024, which voted unanimously to approve the project, subject to recommended conditions of approval.
Final construction plans and permits were approved for construction by the City on June 1, 2026, and a groundbreaking ceremony was held on June 9, 2026. Construction is anticipated to be complete by September 10, 2026. The City and Urban Tilth will host an opening ceremony on September 29, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Once construction is complete, Urban Tilth will provide ongoing programming, maintenance, and volunteer engagement five days per week via its TCC grant funds. 170
September 22, 2026
Naming of "Joe Lee Fisher Sr. Universally Accessible Community Garden" Joe Lee Fisher Sr., a longtime Richmond resident, business owner, and community leader, passed away on July 1, 2026. Mr. Fisher served as president of the Coronado Neighborhood Council, where he advocated for improved neighborhood conditions and supported many community-based initiatives benefiting Richmond residents. He was also deeply involved in efforts to expand homeownership in Richmond, helping families establish neighborhood roots and build generational wealth. Mr. Fisher also had a direct connection to Unity Park, having played an important role in making the park entrance at 16th Street possible through the sale of a parcel of property he owned.
In recognition of his important contributions to Unity Park, as well as his broader legacy of neighborhood leadership and community service, City staff propose naming the community garden the "Joe Lee Fisher Sr. Universally Accessible Community Garden.” City staff worked with Mr. Fisher's surviving family and the Coronado Neighborhood Council to ensure the proposed name appropriately reflects his legacy. The Coronado Neighborhood Council provided a letter of support on August 28, 2026 (Attachment 3).
On September 2, 2026, City staff presented the proposed name to the Recreation and Parks Commission, which voted unanimously to recommend approval to the City Council (Attachments 4 and 5). Given the recency of his passing, a commemorative plaque and permanent signage will be funded, designed, and installed at a later date.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 - Location of Community Garden
Attachment 2 - Community Garden Schematic Plan
Attachment 3 - Coronado Neighborhood Council Signed Letter of Support Attachment 4 - Joe Lee Fisher Sr. Universally Accessible Community Garden Nomination Form
Attachment 5 - Recreation and Parks Commission Joe Lee Fisher Sr. UACG Naming Approval Recommendation - September 2, 2026
171
Location of
community garden
Attachment A: Location of community garden
172
Urban Tilth ADA Garden - Schematic Design February 2024 0 20 40
27 27
28 29
29 28
20 1
1 2
2 3
3 4
4 5
5 6
6 7
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
14 15
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 25
25 26
26 24
Stormwater/Bioretention Area
Mural Wall - 48” Height
Backed Benches with ADA Companion Seating
Main Entry Gate
ADA Picnic Tables
Shade Sails (3) Yellow, (2) Orange
Perimeter Fence - 48” Height
Possible ADA Parking Stall
Trash/Recycle Container
Rich City Rides e-Bike Lending Library Building
Roll Up Doors Open to Paved Corridor
Shared Restroom
Existing Paved Corridor
Concrete or Concrete Pavers
Decomposed Granite Paving
ADA Planters of Varied Heights
Sensory Garden
Veggie Wash Station and Drinking Fountain
Storage Container/Tool Shed and Compost Area
Gate
Raised Block Planters with Accessible Seating
Central Planter with Columnar Art Piece
Bollard Light
Espalier Fruit Trees (3)
Greenway Lights
Existing Decomposed Granite Paths
Realigned Decomposed Granite Path
Existing Edible Forest Trees
Columnar Deciduous Trees
GREENWAY
LAWN
LAWN
17TH STREET
1 1
6 2
5 7 9
14 14 15
16 16
16 16 16
17 21 18 18
21 17 17
22 24
23 3
19 173
co1<onano
oeic,bBoRboon council
-------�t!lr·-------
RICHMOND, CA
==��=::-=::-:::::::::::..:::::::-..:::::::-...:::::::-...:::::::--=--=--=--=-----_-40_1 �--_-- -
-
-
-
-
- • -----=----=----=------=-----=---=--=--=---=---=-�
August 28, 2026
Re: Support ofNaming Unity Park Community Garden to ''Joe Lee Fisher Sr.
Universally Accessible Community Garden"
Dear City of Richmond Recreation and Parks Commission,
We, the executive leadership of the Coronado Neighborhood Counci( have reviewed and are in full support of the City of Richmond's proposal to name the new community garden under construction in Unity Park the "Joe Lee Fisher Sr. Universally Accessible Community Garden'� We appreciate the City's concern and respect for the important legacy of Mr. Fisher's contribution to the City of Richmond and the residents of the Coronado neighborhood.
Please reach out with any additional questions.
Sincerely,
Do�wart (Aug 28, 2026 12:06:41 PDT)
Dorothy Stewart
Coronado Neighborhood Council President
AW'r.Aug 28, 2026 12:33:59 PDT)
Abdul Black
Coronado Neighborhood Council Vice President
=========-��
174 -·-�-:....===========
1 City of Richmond
Community Service-Recreation
Parks and Landscaping Division
POLICY AND APPLICATION FOR NAMING OR RE-NAMING OF PARKS,
FACILITIES, AND STREETS
NOTE: RED IS TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
BLUE DENOTES ADDITIONAL PROCEDURAL OR EXPLANATORY NOTES
I PREAMBLE
The naming of parks, facilities and re-naming of streets within the City of Richmond is an important task.
The policy statement contained herein will add meaning, significance and uniformity and will enhance the values and heritage of Richmond.
All eligible recognitions or contributions of individuals, groups or organizations shall be submitted for consideration to Richmond City Council after review and recommendation by the Recreation and Parks Commission.
STEP 1 - TYPE OF REQUEST (Check one of the following):
_____ 1. Donating and dedication of new park benches, tables, and monuments. _____ 2. Temporary memorials on public thoroughfares or city property for up to 90 days. _____ 3. Naming or re-naming of parks, facilities, and streets. _____ 4. Naming or re-naming of overpass walkways, observation overlooks as well as
STATEMENT OF POLICY GUIDELINES AND APPLICATION FORM
This application form is used in conjunction with the Statement of Policy and Guidelines for Naming and Renaming or acquiring monument “kiosks” or benches of commemoration honoring families or luminaries and friends of Richmond. These Guidelines may be found on the below link:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/57679/2021---Renaming-Procedures-forParks-Facilities-or-Streets • Donating and dedication of new park benches, tables and monuments. • Temporary memorials on public thoroughfares or city property for up to 90 days. • Naming or re-naming of parks, facilities and streets. • Naming or re-naming of overpass walkways, observation overlooks as well as subsets of parks or facilities (e.g. auditoriums or other rooms within a named facility, Baseball diamond or other individual field(s) within a named park). x
175
2 subsets of parks or facilities (e.g. auditoriums or other rooms within a named facility, Baseball diamond or other individual field(s) within a named park).
II JUSTIFICATION
It shall be the policy of the City of Richmond to have four categories of recognition or remembrance when considering the naming or re-naming of property within the city. It shall be the policy of the City of Richmond to name or re-name parks, City of Richmond facilities and streets in order to identify the character, location or special/unusual features of the area.
STEP 2 – CLASSIFICATION OF REQUEST (Check of the following):
_____ 1. Recognition of a loved one’s name as a gift is given to the city such as a new bench or table for a neighborhood park or a new garden for a Richmond designated park that will be enjoyed by all Richmond residents and guests.
_____ 2. Recognition of special civic or monetary contribution to the city by a group or individual.
_____ 3. Recognition of a person or group living or having lived in the city of Richmond who have received recognition on a local, national, or international level thereby bringing honor to the City of Richmond (local heroes).
_____ 4. Those brave individuals who have lost their lives during their service to the City of Richmond.
STEP 3 – APPLICANT INFORMATION (Fill in each of the following items):
Applicant Name: _________________________________________ Street _________________________________________
City, State, Zip _________________________________________ Phone home_______________ cell _______________ office_______________ Best time to reach: ________________ _______________
E-mail _________________________________________
• Location of request (be specific if within a park or existing facility):
_______________________________________________________________________ • Specific area or room within the park or facility (if appropriate):
x
The new community garden currently under construction as part of the Richmond Rising TCC grant.
Richmond Rising
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
510-685-8549 510-620-6905
[email protected]
M-F ; 8:30AM-5PM
The community garden currently under construction at Unity Park, nearest to the 17h Street entrance.
Rationale: The naming of this garden is being requested by the Community Development Department in order to honor Joe Lee Fisher Sr., a long-term Richmond resident and community leader. Joe Lee Fisher was deeply involved in the Richmond community, including deep support of first time Richmond homeowners to create neighborhood stability and generational wealth in the City, and also served as the President of the Coronado Neighborhood Council for many years. Aligning the community garden’s name with a longtime community advocate is intended to honor a legacy of community service, and build greater community support, visibility, and use of the community park as a shared neighborhood asset.
176
3 _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Wording for Plaque:
_____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ STEP 4 – SIGN, DATE, AND SUBMIT YOUR REQUEST:
1. Complete a petition of the residential and business owners on the street where the proposed name change is requested with names and signatures.
2. Submit to:
Via Email: [email protected]
Via Mail: Community Services-Recreation, 3230 Macdonald Avenue, Richmond, CA 94804 Date of Submission __________________Signature of Requestor _______________________ Once a request is received by Community Services-Recreation, your request will be reviewed for further consideration. Any request for a new park, capital improvements to any facility, and a name change for any facility will be discussed with the Police, Fire, Public Works, Planning and any other departments that may be necessary. The City of Richmond’s Municipal Code will be checked for compliance before further processing.
Upon recommendation by Department Heads, the request will be submitted for review and approval by the Recreation & Parks Commission. Upon their approval, the request will then require City Council approval before final actions can be taken.
APPLICANT - COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING STEPS AFTER SUBMITTING THE ABOVE
APPLICATION
STEP 5- PRESENTATION TO RECREATION AND PARKS COMMISSION:
1. Present your request to your local Neighborhood Council. Ask for a vote of approval and letter from them. For a contact list of Neighborhood Councils, click on the below link:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fJR4eTJzDSCbD83t5UCpANKfRA5VtoZgY7d9Z5eYxGo/edit
2. Conduct a walk-through with the Parks and Landscaping Division staff at the desired site, if applicable to a park facility.
8/28/26
177
4 3. Submit the approval letter of support from your local Neighborhood Council to Community Services-Recreation to request a date to present to the Recreation and Parks Commission:
Via email at [email protected] OR drop off at Community Services-Recreation’s Registration Office at 3230 Macdonald Avenue, Richmond, CA. To contact the Registration Office, call (510) 620-6793.
4. Acquire sponsorship of a City Official or City Department.
STEP 6 – RESOLUTION OF INTENT:
If approved by the Recreation and Parks Commission, work with your City Official or City Department sponsor to place this item on the City Council agenda, to adopt a Resolution of Intent and to schedule a Public Hearing.
This action is taken in order to:
o Notice residents, businesses, and property owners of the Resolution of Intent and Public Hearing date (Note: All costs incurred for postage shall be the burden of the individual group or organization submitting the proposed name.) o Notify the postmaster and/or all local post offices of Resolution of Intent and Public Hearing
o Consult with City Clerk to determine a date for the Public Hearing and request public notice disseminated 10 days prior to the scheduled Public Hearing o Request a response from Richmond Police Department and Richmond Fire Department about possible safety issues that may arise due to the proposed name change o Request a response and cost analysis from Public Works Attachments needed for this Agenda Item
▪ Minutes from the Recreation and Parks Commission Meeting ▪ Redacted application to request the name change
▪ Map of area
▪ Resolution of Intent
Date of Public Hearing:
STEP 7 – PUBLIC HEARING:
Work with your City Official or City Department sponsor to place this item on the City Council agenda to Hold a Public Hearing and adopt a resolution to change the name This action is taken in order to:
o Acquire an approved Resolution to indicate background, steps taken, authority of the council and direction to further notice Public Works to execute. o Allow the City Clerk to notice appropriate agencies
Attachments needed for this Agenda Item
▪ Minutes from the City Council meeting adopting the Resolution of Intent, if available
178
5 ▪ Minutes from the Recreation and Parks Commission Meeting ▪ Map of Area
▪ Resolution authorizing the name change
Outcome of Hearing: APPROVED / DENIED
STEP 8 – FINAL STEPS WITH PUBLIC WORKS:
Contact the Public Works Department for payment and execution of the required actions:
• Parks Division (510) 231-3004 – to pay vendors directly for the costs of materials. • Streets Division (510) 231-3011 - for installation of signs. 179
Facility Naming-Re-Naming Application doc
Final Audit Report 2026-08-28
Created: 2026-08-28
By: Matias Eusterbrock ([email protected]) Status: Signed
Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAyy7SoctMzwXrDOabZqMwFZ-wm_WvgQrb "Facility Naming-Re-Naming Application doc" History
Document created by Matias Eusterbrock ([email protected]) 2026-08-28 - 9:46:20 PM GMT
Document emailed to Lina Velasco ([email protected]) for signature 2026-08-28 - 9:46:25 PM GMT
Email viewed by Lina Velasco ([email protected]) 2026-08-28 - 9:47:06 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Lina Velasco ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2026-08-28 - 9:48:18 PM GMT - Time Source: server - Signature Appearance Selected: IMAGE Agreement completed.
2026-08-28 - 9:48:18 PM GMT
180
3230 MACDONALD AVENUE, RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA 94804 Telephone: (510) 620-6793 Fax: (510) 620-6583
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
RECREATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DIVISION
September 4, 2026
Lina Velasco
Community Development Department
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
Dear Ms. Velasco,
On September 2, 2026, the Richmond Recreation and Parks Commission received a presentation proposing to name the garden at Unity Park in honor of Joe Lee Fischer, Sr. I'm pleased to let you know that the Commission unanimously supported and approved this request, recognizing the significance of Joe Lee Fischer, Sr.'s contributions.
If you would like to review the details of the discussion, the official meeting minutes will be available after October 7, 2026. In the meantime, please feel free to reach out to me if you need any further information or have questions.
Thank you so much,
Sincerely,
Ranjana Maharaj
Deputy Director
Community Services-Recreation
Ranjana
Maharaj
Digitally signed by Ranjana
Maharaj
Date: 2026.09.04 14:59:41
-07'00'
181
1 CITY OF RICHMOND
Recreation & Parks Commission Meeting
AGENDA
Wednesday, September 2, 2026, 6:00 pm
Councils Chambers, 440 Civic Center Plaza
This meeting is held in a building that is accessible to people with disabilities.
Board Members: Chair, Jan Mignone; Vice Chair, Samantha Torres, Secretary, Jennifer Koscielniak; Treasurer, Mike Warren Commissioners: Vivian Gomez, Jake Rogers, Alexander Rony, Joey Smith Staff Liaison: Ranjana Maharaj, Deputy Director for Community Services-Recreation
1. Call to Order (3 min.)
▪Pledge of Allegiance
▪Land Acknowledgement
2. Mission and Roll Call (2 min.)
3. Welcome and Meeting Procedures (2 min.)
Individuals who would like to address the Recreation and Parks Commission on relevant matters not listed on the agenda or on Department Reports for Information items not pulled for discussion, may do so under Open Forum.
Public comments may be made on agenda items when the item is discussed. The standard amount of time for each speaker, in either instance, will be two (2) minutes.
4. Agenda Review and Adoption (1 min.)
The order in which items will be heard may be adjusted by Commission vote at this time. In addition, items may be removed from or placed on the Consent Calendar at this time. Individual items may be removed from Department Reports for Information for discussion, explanation, or continuance to a future meeting. In addition, the order in which items will be heard may be adjusted at this time.
5. Open Forum (10 min.; 2 min. per speaker)
Issues brought to the attention of the Commission in Open Forum cannot result in discussion or action at this meeting. Individuals who would like to address the Recreation and Parks Commission on relevant matters not listed on the agenda or on Department Reports for Information items not pulled for discussion, may do so at this time.
6. Announcementsthrough the Chair (5 min.)
182
2 7. Consent Calendar (2 min.)
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered matters requiring little or no discussion and will be acted upon in one motion.
a. APPROVE minutes of July 8, 2026, meeting
8. Department Reports for Information (10 min.)
Unless items are pulled for discussion during Agenda Review, all reports are considered received and accepted by the commission, requiring no further action. a. Public Works: Parks & Landscaping and Facilities Divisions – Jason Lacey, Parks and Landscaping Superintendent
b. Community Services-Recreation: Recreation and Neighborhood Services – Ranjana Maharaj, Deputy Director, Community Services-Recreation
C. Community Services-Recreation: Recreation and Neighborhood Services - Stephanie Ny, Associate Management Analyst; Jessica Walden, Lending Library Specialist; and Micah Brumfield, Lending Library Specialist
9. Presentations (15 min each)
a. None
10. Discussions and Action Items (15 minutes)
Following discussion of each item, the Commission may vote to make recommendations to Commissioners, staff and/or to the City Council.
a. Naming of the Universally Accessible Community Garden to honor Joe Lee Fischer, Sr. – Matias Eusterbrock and Beatriz Guerrero
11. Commissioner Liaison Reports/Comments (16 min; 2 min. per member) At 8:00 PM, any items remaining on the agenda that require immediate attention may be moved to this time. All other items will be tabled to another meeting or the following Commission meeting in order to make fair and attentive decisions. This meeting adjourns at 8:30 PM. The meeting may be extended by a majority vote from the commissioners.
12. Agenda Setting for Next Meeting and Future Topics (3 min.)
13. Adjournment (1 min.)
NEXT MEETING: Wednesday, October 7, 2026, at 6:00 p.m.
183
3 As presiding officer, the Recreation and Parks Commission Chair has the authority to preserve order at all Recreation and Parks Commission meetings, to remove or cause the removal of any person from any such meeting for disorderly conduct, or for making personal, impertinent, or slanderous remarks, using profanity, or becoming boisterous, threatening or personaly abusive while addressing said Commission, and to enforce the rules of the Commission. Any documents produced by the City and distributed to the Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available at Community Services-Recreation located at 3230 Macdonald Avenue, Richmond, California during normal business hours.
Record of all public comments: Properly labeled public comments will be considered a public record, put into the official meeting record, available after the meeting as supplementalmaterials, and will be posted as an attachmentto the meeting minutes when the minutes are posted: Archive Center • Richmond • CivicEngage
Procedures for Removing Consent Calendar Items from the Consent Calendar: Members of the public who request to remove an item from the consent calendar must first discuss the item with a staff member by phone or a email discussion and state the name of the staff member when requesting removal of the item from the Consent Calendar.
Any member of the Commission who would like to remove an item from the Consent Calendar must notify the appropriate staff person prior to the meeting. Although members of the Commission are encouraged to ask questions and share concerns with staff ahead of the meeting,they are not required to do so.
Community Services-Recreation staff must be informed of any requeststo remove itemsfrom the Consent Calendar. Accessibility for Individualswith Disabilities: Upon request,the City will provide for written agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or disability-relatedmodification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services and sign language interpreters,to enable individuals with disabilitiesto participate in and provide commentsrelated to public meetings. Please submit a request, including your name, phone number and/or email address, and a description of the modification, accommodation, auxiliary aid, service, or alternative format requested at least two days before the meeting. Requestsshould be emailed to [email protected] or submitted by phone at 510-620-6950. Requests will be granted whenever possible and resolved in favor of accessibility.
184
1 CITY OF RICHMOND
Recreation & Parks Commission
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, July 8, 2026, 6:00 PM
440 Civic Center Plaza – Council Chambers
This meeting is held in a building that is accessible to people with disabilities.
Board Members: Jan Mignone, Chair; Samantha Torres, Vice Chair; Jennifer Koscielniak, Secretary; Mike Warren, Treasurer Commissioners: Vivian Gomez, Jake Rogers, Alexander Rony, Joey Smith Staff Liaison: Ranjana Maharaj, Deputy Director for Community Services-Recreation
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Meeting called to order by Chair Jan Mignone at 6:01 pm
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Jan Mignone, Samantha Torres, Jennifer Koscielniak, Mike Warren, Vivian Gomez, Alexander Rony, Joey Smith, and Jake Rogers*
*Arrived after Roll Call at 6:03 pm
Chair Mignone provided a brief overview of the meeting procedures and the Mission of the Recreation & Parks Commission.
AGENDA REVIEW
Motion by Vice Chair Torres to approve the agenda as presented, seconded by Secretary Koscielniak, and carried unanimously by voice vote.
OPEN FORUM
• Cordell Hindler shared he informed the Richmond Youth Council of the openings on the Recreation & Parks Commission and reminded all the Contra Costa County Mayor’s Conference in San Pablo tomorrow evening, July 9th. Mr. Hindler continues to advocate for multi-language signage at the parks to address loitering after hours.
ANNOUNCEMENTS THROUGH THE CHAIR
a.) The balance of the Commission Trust Account is $413.08
CONSENT CALENDAR
Secretary Koscielniak motioned to approve the minutes for the June 3, 2026, meeting, seconded by Treasurer Warren, carried with an agreed voice vote.
DEPARTMENT REPORTS FOR INFORMATION
Parks & Landscaping Division
Alex White, Parks Supervisor, shared visual and verbal updates, specifically showcasing the Creely Pathway enhancements. Jason Lacey, Parks & Landscape Superintendent, provided verbal updates on the new fiscal year budget and the successes on the recent special events throughout the city.
Commissioner Rony would like an update for a future meeting on how the grant landscape has changed due to federal-level shifts and how these changes will affect upcoming projects.
Community Services– Recreation
Troy Porter, Recreation Supervisor, provided oral and visual reports on upcoming and recent Recreation activities, including the Shields Reid Park Grand Reopening on July 11th, the anniversary celebrations for the Richmond Tool Library 10th Anniversary on July 25th, and the Plunge 100th Anniversary on August 15th. 185
2 Commissioner Torres inquired about the opening of Shields Reid Park Field for rentals in which Mr. Porter will inquire further with Administration.
Further discussion ensued on the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) for Tom Bates Fields in Berkeley and Richmond soccer clubs not being given field access.
Treasurer Warren inquired about the Richmond Tool Library and would like information about how often this service is used by the community.
DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS
a.) RECEIVE update on the Point Richmond Historic Sign Project Jené Levine-Snipes, Development Project Manager with Recreation, shared details of the upcoming celebration to honor 100 years of the Plunge. In addition, she revealed the historic sign that will be posted to commemorate this milestone in Richmond.
b.) RECEIVE update on the Richmond Asset Inventory & Management (AIM) initiative Tawfic Halaby, Deputy Director of Public Works, shared the Asset Inventory & Management (AIM) project that will better assist staff to inventory and assess parks and city buildings with the help of new software. This project will help prioritize projects, extend taxpayers’ dollars and increase proactive management workflows. Mr. Halaby provided future phase goals over the next 3-5 years, that will phase in modules for all infrastructure assets.
DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS
a.) DISCUSS implementing an August recess for the Recreation & Parks Commission meeting to be in alignment with City Council’s recess.
Chair Mignone led the discussion with an open conversation between commissioners. Vice Chair Torres motioned for the Recreation & Parks Commission to recess in August 2026, seconded by Secretary Koscielniak, the item passes with Commissioners Mignone, Gomez, Koscielniak, and Rony in favor, Commissioner Torres opposed, and Commissioners Rogers, Smith, and Warren abstaining.
COMMISSIONER LIAISON REPORTS
Chair Mignone appreciated the Parks Tour in June and will attend the Shields Reid Park Grand Reopening.
Vice Chair Torres attended the July 3 Fireworks event and thanked staff. She will be attending the Shields Reid Park Reopening ceremony and she shared photos of MLK park in which broken soccer goals need to be removed.
Secretary Koscielniak thanked staff for the Parks Tour, as she learned about the history of some parks.
She hopes the parks listing can be updated to include the newly appointed commissioners.
Treasurer Warren shared some photos of Tiller Park concerns, including a safety issue in the sand that Mr.
White and his team addressed prior to the meeting.
Commissioner Gomez inquired about the next parks tour expected in October with more info to follow.
Commissioner Rony provided an update on the gate issue at Carroll Park that has been resolved.
Commissioner Smith voiced concern about after-hours park usage and was advised by staff to contact the police as they are the only enforcement for the city. In addition, she attended the parks tour and shared positive feedback on the many improvements.
186
3 AGENDA SETTING
Commissioner Rogers would like feedback from staff as to their wish list or priorities, as they prepare for the next budget cycle. Also, he would like a presentation on the parks assessment timeline. Darin Fitzpatrick and Jason Lacey recommended that both matters be considered in or around December, coinciding with preparations for the mid-year budget. This timing would allow for input before the items are submitted to City Council.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:17 pm
Respectfully Submitted,
Christine George
Executive Assistant
187
Item #10A
188
Item #10A
189
Item #10A
190
Item #10A
191
Item #10A
192
Item #10A
193
Item #10A
194
Item #10A
195
Recreation and Parks Commission
2026 Meeting Attendance
Term
Jan
2026
Feb
2026
Mar
2026
April
2026
May
2026
June
2026
July
2026
Aug
2026
(Recess)
Sept
2026
Oct
2026
Nov
2026
Dec
2026
Total
Absences
Vivian
Gomez Appt: 3/24/26 – 10/26/29 P P E P - 1
Jennifer
Koscielniak Appt: 9/22/25 – 10/26/26 - P E P P P P - 1
Jan
Mignone Appt: 10/07/25 – 10/26/28 - P P P P P P - 0
Jake
Rogers Appt: 12/16/25 – 10/26/26 - P P P P E P - 1
Alexander
Rony Appt: 1/20/26 – 10/26/28 P P P P P P - 0
Joey Smith Appt.: 5/02/17-10/26/19
Re-appt. 12/03/19-10/26/22
Re-appt. 11/01/22-10/26/25
- P P P E P P - 1
Samantha
Torres
Appt.: 12/20/22 – 10/26/25
Re-appt. 5/19/26 - 10/26/29 - P P P P P P - 0
Michael
Warren Appt: 8/19/25 – 10/26/28 - P P P P P P - 0
Legend
P = Present
A = Absent
E = Excused Absence
- = No Meeting
SM = Special Meeting
Excused absences are:
1. Military and related military service leave
2. Bereavement
3. Attendance of Commission related
conferences and meetings.
196
Naming of the Universally Accessible
Community Garden to honor
Joe Lee Fischer, Sr.
Recreation & Parks Commission Meeting
September 2, 2026
197
$35 million awarded to Richmond Rising in October 2022 by the California Strategic Growth Council to fund specific projects, programs, and transformative plans which provide environmental, health, and economic benefits in the Iron Triangle, Santa Fe, and Coronado neighborhoods (Project Area). Impacts from these programs will be evaluated by UC Berkeley Center for Global Healthy Cities.
Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Program
In addition, Richmond Rising partners have committed over $17.5 million in leverage funding to implement Richmond Rising and other key projects in the Project Area
4 198
All Projects:
1. Neighborhood Complete Streets
2. Richmond Wellness Trail
3. E-Bike Lending Library
4. Resilient Homes
5. Basins of Relations
6. Bosque del Barrio
7. Universally Accessible Community Garden
8. Orchard for All
9. Veggie Rx
10.E-Bike Share
Richmond Rising
199
• Design and construction of an edible, pollinator-friendly garden within Unity Park designed so that people of all ages and a wide range of physical, sensory, and cognitive abilities can comfortably access, navigate, experience, and participate in the space.
• Includes large pathways, supportive rails, raised planters, and other accessible design features
• Designed in partnership with community organizations including Urban Tilth, NIAD, VisitAbility, and Harbour View Senior Apartments
• Urban Tilth will support 5 days/week with programming, maintenance, and volunteer engagement
Universally Accessible Community Garden Project
200
Project Location
201
[INSERT PLANS]
Community Garden Site Layout and Key Features
Separate
project
202
- August 2023: $955K TCC grant for garden design and construction awarded - 2024 and 2025: 5 community design meetings held, as well as meetings with the City’s Recreation and Parks Commission and Design Review Board review - June 1, 2026: Building Permit Issued
- June 9, 2026: Construction Groundbreaking
- July 1, 2026: Mr. Joe Lee Fisher Sr. Passing
- Sep. 2, 2026: Rec and Parks Commission meeting on naming of garden - Sep. 15th or 22nd: Council Meeting to consider naming of the garden - Sep 29th: Opening Ceremony of the Garden @ 10AM
- More details to come!
Project Timeline
203
Project does not currently have a name - only referred to as Universally accessible community garden project
III. Criteria For Recognition of Individuals
A. Service Recognition
1. Living Or Deceased Individuals Who Were Not In A Pay Status For A Significant Service Contribution:
a. Contribution shall have been in a voluntary, non-pay status. b. Contributions shall have exceeded 5 years in duration. c. Contribution shall have been outside normal political duties if the individual was an appointed official.
d. Contribution shall have had a direct positive effect on the delivery of public services and/or quality of life for the citizens of Richmond.
City of Richmond Naming Criteria Policies
204
Nominating Mr. Fisher for the following reasons:
- Decades of neighborhood leadership
- Direct connection to Unity Park
- Greatly expanded homeownership and generational
wealth
- Legacy of community service and philanthropy
- Coronado Neighborhood Council Letter of Support
- Clear connection between
the garden, local residents,
and the community history
Joe Lee Fisher Sr. Nomination
205
Recommend to the City Council that the community
garden be named as “Joe Lee Fisher Sr. Universally
Accessible Community Garden” in recognition of his
significant service contributions
Recommended Motion
206
September 22, 2026
DocID #78596v1
Library and Community Services
DATE: September 22, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: LaShonda White, Deputy City Manager -
Community Services
Tamara Walker, Deputy Director of
Community Services, Employment and Training Division
Subject: Accept and Appropriate $1,790,303 in Workforce Development Grant Awards from U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Kaiser Permanente, and the U.S.
Department of Labor
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed $1,790,303 expenditure is funded by workforce development grants awarded by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Kaiser Permanente,
and the U.S. Department of Labor. The budget for the
Employment and Training Department will be increased
by $1,790,303, and the Employment and Training grant
revenue accounts will be increased by $1,790,303. There is no net change to the overall City budget.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
None.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
Department of Labor (DOL), and Kaiser Permanente
awarded the City of Richmond’s Employment & Training
Department grants totaling $1,790,303. The funds will be used for Brownfield training, employment and training
services for adults, youth, and dislocated workers, and to support Building Bridges to Career Opportunities to
support youth not going to college.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: ADOPT a resolution to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE $1,790,303 in workforce development grant funds
received from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Department of Labor, and Kaiser Permanente –
AGENDA
REPORT
207
September 22, 2026
DocID #78596v1
Community Services (Tamara Walker 510-307-
8006/LaShonda White 510-620-6828).
DISCUSSION:
The City of Richmond’s Employment and Training Department was awarded a total of $1,790,303 in grant funds from the following three entities:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ($500,000) – To provide brownfield training and services to participants of RichmondBUILD, a construction preapprenticeship program, through June 30, 2031 (Attachment 1). Kaiser Permanente ($25,000) – To provide tutorial assistance and stipends for youth participating in Building Bridges to Career Opportunities (Attachment 2). Department of Labor (1,265,303) – Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act allocation to support youth, adults, and dislocated workers with employment and training services (Attachments 3 and 4).
SYNERGISTIC POLICIES:
This action aligns with the City Council’s priorities to:
Advances the City of Richmond’s Workforce Development and Youth Opportunity policies by expanding access to job training, paid work experience, and career pathways for youth, young adults, and dislocated workers. Aligns with State and Federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) priorities, including rapid response, layoff aversion, employer engagement, and reemployment services funded through the State of California’s Employment Development Department (EDD).
Promotes equity and economic mobility by prioritizing underserved residents and individuals impacted by layoffs for workforce services and training opportunities.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Environmental Protection Agency Award Letter Attachment 2 – Kaiser Award Letter
Attachment 3 – Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act Allocation 1 Attachment 4 – Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act Allocation 2 Attachment 5 – Resolution
208
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 1
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
Cooperative Agreement
GRANT NUMBER (FAIN): 97T56901
MODIFICATION NUMBER: 0
PROGRAM CODE: 4J
DATE OF AWARD
07/09/2026
TYPE OF ACTION:
New
MAILING DATE
07/14/2026
PAYMENT METHOD:
ASAP
ACH#
90251
RECIPIENT TYPE:
Municipal
Send Payment Request to:
Contact EPA RTPFC at: [email protected]
RECIPIENT:
RICHMOND, CITY OF
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804-1630
EIN: 94-6000403
PAYEE:
RICHMOND, CITY OF
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804-1630
PROJECT MANAGER
Gilbert Pete
330 25th Street
Richmond, CA 94804
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 510-307-8018
EPA PROJECT OFFICER
Daniel Moher
75 Hawthorne Street, LND-2-1
San Francisco, CA 94105
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 415-972-3210
EPA GRANT SPECIALIST
Eric Tovar
Grants Branch, MSD-6
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 415-972-3396
PROJECT TITLE AND DESCRIPTION
Brownfields Job Training Cooperative Agreement - BIL
See Attachment 1 for project description.
BUDGET PERIOD
07/01/2026 - 06/30/2031
PROJECT PERIOD
07/01/2026 - 06/30/2031
TOTAL BUDGET PERIOD COST
$ 500,000.00
TOTAL PROJECT PERIOD COST
$ 500,000.00
NOTICE OF AWARD
Based on your Application dated 09/26/2025 including all modifications and amendments, the United States acting by and through the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hereby awards $ 500,000.00. EPA agrees to cost-share 100.00% of all approved budget period costs incurred, up to and not exceeding total federal funding of $ 500,000.00. Recipient's signature is not required on this agreement. The recipient demonstrates its commitment to carry out this award by either: 1) drawing down funds within 21 days after the EPA award or amendment mailing date; or 2) not filing a notice of disagreement with the award terms and conditions within 21 days after the EPA award or amendment mailing date. If the recipient disagrees with the terms and conditions specified in this award, the authorized representative of the recipient must furnish a notice of disagreement to the EPA Award Official within 21 days after the EPA award or amendment mailing date. In case of disagreement, and until the disagreement is resolved, the recipient should not draw down on the funds provided by this award/amendment, and any costs incurred by the recipient are at its own risk. This agreement is subject to applicable EPA regulatory and statutory provisions, all terms and conditions of this agreement and any attachments.
ISSUING OFFICE (GRANTS MANAGEMENT OFFICE)
ORGANIZATION / ADDRESS
U.S. EPA, Region 9, U.S. EPA, Region 9 Grants Branch, MSD-6 75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
AWARD APPROVAL OFFICE
ORGANIZATION / ADDRESS
U.S. EPA, Region 9, Land, Chemicals and Redevelopment, LND-1 R9 - Region 9
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco , CA 94105
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Digital signature applied by EPA Award Official Morgan Capilla - Grants Management Officer DATE 07/09/2026
209
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 2
EPA Funding Information
FUNDS FORMER AWARD THIS ACTION AMENDED TOTAL
EPA Amount This Action $ 0 $ 500,000 $ 500,000
EPA In-Kind Amount $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Unexpended Prior Year Balance $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Other Federal Funds $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Recipient Contribution $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
State Contribution $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Local Contribution $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Other Contribution $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Allowable Project Cost $ 0 $ 500,000 $ 500,000
Assistance Program
66.815 - Brownfields Job Training Cooperative
Agreements
Statutory Authority
CERCLA: Secs. 104(k)(7) & 104(k)(5)(E) &
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) (PL
117-58)
Regulatory Authority
2 CFR 200, 2 CFR 1500 and 40 CFR 33
Fiscal
Site Name Req No FY Approp.
Code
Budget
Organization PRC ObjectClass Site/Project CostOrganization Obligation /
Deobligation
- 2609QE0031 25 E4SD 0900BG7 000D79X89 4115 - - $ 500,000 $ 500,000
210
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 3
Budget Summary Page
Table A - Object Class Category
(Non-Construction)
Total Approved Allowable
Budget Period Cost
1. Personnel $ 134,324
2. Fringe Benefits $ 107,364
3. Travel $ 812
4. Equipment $ 0
5. Supplies $ 45,000
6. Contractual $ 37,500
7. Construction $ 0
8. Other $ 150,000
9. Total Direct Charges $ 475,000
10. Indirect Costs: 0.00 % Base : see General T/C $ 25,000
11. Total (Share: Recipient ______ % Federal ______ %) 0.00 100.00 $ 500,000
12. Total Approved Assistance Amount $ 500,000
13. Program Income $ 0
14. Total EPA Amount Awarded This Action $ 500,000
15. Total EPA Amount Awarded To Date $ 500,000
211
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 4
Attachment 1 - Project Description
This cooperative agreement provides funding under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) (PL 117-58) for City of Richmond to conduct eligible technical assistance-related activities as authorized by Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) 104(k)(7). The recipient will recruit, train, and place unemployed and underemployed residents of Richmond in environmental careers with skills needed to safely conduct remediation work at solid and hazardous waste-contaminated sites, as well as appropriate training in health and safety, lead and asbestos abatement, mold remediation, and CPR/First Aid. The proposed project will benefit the environment by increasing the number of local workers trained to participate in brownfield cleanup, hazardous materials handling, site safety, stormwater and low-impact development improvements, remediation-related construction, and redevelopment of contaminated or underused properties. By training local residents for this work, the program will expand the region’s environmental remediation capacity while reducing barriers to local hire.
This assistance agreement provides full Federal funding in the amount of $500,000. Preaward costs are approved back to 7/1/2026. Refer to Terms and Conditions. This project will train graduates to earn skills and certifications necessary to enter into environmental careers. Activities to be performed during under this project are training and certifications in HAZWOPER 40, OSHA 30, Confined Space Entry, Lead Abatement, Asbestos Worker, Mold Remediation, First Aid, CPR/First Aid, Traffic Control & Flagging.
Also, the recipient will report on interim progress and final accomplishments by completing and submitting relevant portions of the Property Profile Form using EPA’s Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES). This project will provide training to unemployed and underemployed adults in Richmond, California.
This project will provide training to unemployed and underemployed adults in Richmond, California.
The anticipated deliverables are:
150 of individuals recruited, trained, certified, and placed in environmental careers in communities impacted by solid and hazardous waste sites and facilities. 8 classroom style trainings, practical trainings, and curricula modules. 3 of appropriate certifications in environmental sampling and site cleanup methods. 125 of individuals that receive certifications in Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 29 CFR 1910.120 40-hour HAZWOPER training.
Expected outcomes from this project include:
-Help residents of communities take advantage of jobs created by the assessment and cleanup of brownfields and the assessment, cleanup, and management of solid and hazardous waste sites and facilities while addressing sustainable community revitalization concerns. -Provide training that leads to sustainable employment in the environmental field. -Improve community involvement and stimulate the development of constructive partnerships. 212
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 5
-Reduce exposures to hazardous substances and other contaminants and improve the health of workers, occupants, and residents.
-Foster self-sufficiency and enhance the skills and availability of labor for environmental remediation in particularly impacted communities, including those that are impacted by a variety of waste facilities, blighted properties, contaminated sites, and other environmental issues. -Enable residents to participate in the promotion of environmental health and occupational safety, both on the job and in their communities. No subawards are included in this assistance agreement. 213
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 6
Administrative Conditions
General Terms and Conditions
The recipient agrees to comply with the current EPA general terms and conditions available at: https:
//www.epa.gov/grants/epa-general-terms-and-conditions-effective-october-1-2025-or-later These terms and conditions are in addition to the assurances and certifications made as a part of the award and the terms, conditions, or restrictions cited throughout the award.
The EPA repository for the general terms and conditions by year can be found at: https://www.epa. gov/grants/grant-terms-and-conditions#general
A. Federal Financial Reporting (FFR)
For awards with cumulative project and budget periods greater than 12 months, the recipient will submit an annual FFR (SF 425) covering the period from "project/budget period start date" to June 30 of each calendar year to the EPA Finance Center in Research Triangle Park, NC. The annual FFR will be submitted electronically to [email protected] no later than September 30 of the same calendar year. Find additional information at https://www.epa.gov/financial/grants. (Per 2 CFR § 200.344(b), the recipient must submit the Final FFR to [email protected] within 120 days after the end of the project period.)
B. Procurement
The recipient will ensure all procurement transactions will be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with 2 CFR § 200.319. In accordance with 2 CFR § 200.324, the recipient and subawardee(s) must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with applicable procurement actions, including contract modifications. State and Tribal government entities must follow procurement standards as outlined in 2 CFR § 200.317. 214
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 7
Programmatic Conditions
FY26 Brownfields Job Training IIJA (4J) Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions I. General Cooperative Agreement Administrative Requirements A.] Terms of the Agreement
1.The term of this agreement is five (5) years from the date of award, unless otherwise extended by EPA at the cooperative agreement recipient's (CAR) request.
2. If after one (1) year from the date of award, EPA determines that the CAR has not made sufficient progress in implementing the cooperative agreement, EPA's Award Official or Grants Management Officer may terminate this agreement under 2 CFR § 200.340.
3. The term “sufficient progress” means the CAR has: 1) established a job training program and begun marketing the program; 2) hired all key personnel; and 3) has completed the first round of training.
4. Unless approved with the award of this cooperative agreement, the CAR must receive written approval by EPA's Award Official or Grants Management Officer of a final workplan within 60 calendar days following the date of the award. The CAR must receive documentation of written EPA approval of the final workplan from EPA's Project Officer prior to the expenditure of Federal funds under this cooperative agreement. Unless the EPA Award Official or Grants Management Officer grants a waiver, no funds may be drawn down without an EPA approved final workplan. If the CAR fails to obtain EPA approval of the final workplan within 60 days of award, EPA may terminate this agreement under 2 CFR § 200.340.
B.] Cybersecurity Grant Condition for CARs, Including Intertribal Consortia
1. The CAR agrees that when collecting and managing environmental data under this assistance agreement, it will protect the data by following all applicable State or Tribal Law cybersecurity requirements.
2. EPA must ensure that any connections between the CAR's network or information system and EPA networks used by the CAR to transfer data under this agreement, are secure. For purposes of this Section, a connection is defined as a dedicated persistent interface between an Agency Information Technology (IT) system and an external IT system for the purpose of transferring information. Transitory, user-controlled connections such as website browsing are excluded from this definition.
3. If the CAR's connections as defined above do not go through the Environmental Information Exchange Network or EPA's Central Data Exchange, the CAR agrees to contact the EPA Project Officer no later than 90 days after the date of this award and work with the designated Regional/ Headquarters Information Security Officer to ensure that the connections meet EPA security requirements, including entering into Interconnection Service Agreements as appropriate. This condition does not apply to manual entry of data by the CAR into systems operated and used by EPA's regulatory programs for the submission of reporting and/or compliance data.
4. The CAR agrees that any subawards it makes under this agreement will require the subrecipient to comply with the requirements in I.B.2 if the subrecipient's network or information system is connected to EPA networks to transfer data to the Agency using systems other than the Environmental Information 215
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 8
Exchange Network or EPA's Central Data Exchange. The CAR will be in compliance with this condition:
by including this requirement in subaward agreements; and during subrecipient monitoring deemed necessary by the CAR under 2 CFR § 200.332(e), by inquiring whether the subrecipient has contacted the EPA Project Officer. Nothing in this condition requires the CAR to contact the EPA Project Officer on behalf of a subrecipient or to be involved in the negotiation of an Interconnection Service Agreement between the subrecipient and EPA.
5. All geospatial data created must be consistent with Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) endorsed standards. Information on these standards may be found at www.fgdc.gov.
C.] Substantial Involvement
1. Cooperative agreements require substantial involvement between the EPA Project Officer and the CAR in the performance of the work supported. Substantial EPA involvement for this cooperative agreement may include:
a. Close monitoring of the CAR's performance to verify the results proposed by the applicant. b. Participation in periodic telephone conference calls to share ideas, project successes and challenges, etc., with EPA.
c. Review and approval of changes to the workplan and/or budget to the extent provided for in EPA's General Term and Condition “Transfer of Funds.”
d. Collaboration during performance of the scope of work. e. Reviewing proposed procurements in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.325, as well as the substantive terms of proposed contracts or subawards as appropriate. This may include reviewing requests for proposals, invitations for bids, scopes of work, and/or plans and specifications for contracts over the simplified acquisition threshold as defined in 2 CFR § 200.1 prior to advertising for bids. f. Approving qualifications of key personnel (EPA will not select employees or contractors employed by the award CAR).
g. Reviewing and commenting on quarterly and annual reports prepared under the cooperative agreement (the final decision on the content of reports rests with the recipient or subrecipient(s) receiving pass-through award(s)).
h. Review and comment on financial reports, monitoring all reporting, record-keeping procedures, and other program requirements.
D.] Cooperative Agreement Recipient Roles and Responsibilities
1. The CAR is responsible for ensuring that all training is protective of human health and the environment and complies with all applicable state and Federal laws. The CAR is also responsible for maintaining proper documentation of graduates' certifications. The CAR must ensure instructors delivering training, including training for certification programs, are certified by their states. EPA does not provide information on trainer certification and does not endorse specific instructors or training organizations. The CAR must comply with proper procurement standards in acquiring a contractor, if 216
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 9
applicable.
2. The CAR is responsible for ensuring that contractors and subaward recipients comply with the terms of their agreements with the CAR, and that agreements between the CAR and subrecipient(s) and contractor(s) are consistent with the terms and conditions of this agreement.
3. Funding may be used to acquire services or fund partnerships, provided the CAR follows procurement and subaward procedures, including under 2 CFR Parts 200 and 1500 as applicable and EPA's Subaward Policy. CARs must compete contracts for services and products, and conduct cost and price analyses to the extent required by these regulations. The regulations and EPA's General Terms and Conditions also contain limitations on consultant compensation. The fact that a CAR named a specific contractor or consultant in the application EPA approved for a JT cooperative agreement, does not relieve the CAR of its obligations to comply with competitive procurement requirements.
CARs, other than state or Tribal entities, that procure a contractor(s) (including consultants) where the contract will be more than the micro-purchase threshold in 2 CFR § 200.320(a)(1) must select the contractor(s) in compliance with the competitive procurement standards in 2 CFR Part 200 (including the requirements for full and open competition). Additionally, all CARs (including State and Tribal entities), regardless of the contract amount, must comply with EPA's regulations at 40 CFR Part 33 as applicable.
For additional information on these requirements, see Recipient/Applicant Information Notice (RAIN) 2025-G02 available at https://www.epa.gov/grants/rain-2025-g02 and the “Utilization of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises” General Term and Condition of this agreement. These requirements also apply to procurement processes that were completed before the award of this cooperative agreement if the CAR intends to submit payment requests for pre-award costs. Additional guidance on procurement is available in EPA's Best Practice Guide for Procuring Services, Supplies, and Equipment Under EPA Assistance Agreements and the Brownfields Grants: Guidance on Competitively Procuring a Contractor.
4. The CAR must make clear in any solicitation for private or public funding that the CAR's organization, and not EPA, is seeking funding. The CAR may not imply that EPA endorses any fundraising activities in connection with its cooperative agreement.
E.] Trainee Recruitment, Placement, and Monitoring
1. The CAR must recruit trainees from the target area specified in the workplan that are unemployed or under-employed individuals, including individuals from communities that are impacted by a variety of waste facilities, blighted properties, contaminated sites, and other environmental issues such as brownfield sites, Superfund sites, landfills, oil spills, recent disaster areas, or solid/hazardous waste facilities are located. The intention is to link local residents who have completed the training with local remediation and environmental companies in their respective communities, providing an opportunity for them to benefit from employment. The CAR shall demonstrate its progress in meeting this term and condition in the quarterly performance report and final project report as stated below. a. The CAR may, with written permission from the EPA Project Officer, extend recruitment outside of the target area, but priority shall be given to unemployed and underemployed residents living in the target area.
b. While the cooperative agreement funds may be used to train dislocated workers or provide refresher training, in HAZWOPER for example, the core training program must focus on those who have little or no advanced education, work experience, or who have various barriers to 217
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 10
employment, and are unemployed or underemployed.
c. Applicants who are providing dislocated workers refresher training or single environmental certifications must ensure these workers have adequate health and safety training.
2. The CAR is required to monitor and track all trainees for a minimum of one (1) year following the completion of the training program and must report the results of this monitoring in their quarterly and final performance reports. The CAR is responsible for ensuring that funding is allotted to cover this task in its budget and that accomplishments are reported in the Assessment, Cleanup, and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES), EPA's system for tracking Brownfields cooperative agreement accomplishments.
3. The CAR is required to complete all training cycles at least six (6) months before the cooperative agreement's expiration to assist with reporting results into ACRES before the close of the cooperative agreement award. The final year of the cooperative agreement is intended for the CAR to focus on final job placement for those not yet placed in employment or who have not retained sustainable employment, tracking graduates, and reporting accomplishments to EPA electronically through ACRES.
F.] Quarterly Performance Reports
1. In accordance with the regulations at 2 CFR Parts 200 and 1500 (specifically, 2 CFR § 200.329, Monitoring and Reporting Program Performance), the CAR agrees to submit quarterly performance reports to the EPA Project Officer within thirty (30) days after each reporting period. Initially, quarterly performance reports will be submitted via email or via the optional Quarterly Reporting function tool within ACRES. The EPA Project Officer will notify the CAR when use of the Quarterly Reporting tool within ACRES is required. Once the EPA Project Officer notifies the CAR of required use, the CAR agrees to use this tool to input quarterly performance reports directly into ACRES within 30 days after each reporting period. Quarterly reports are due according to the schedule outlined below. If a due date falls on a weekend or holiday, the report will be due on the next business day.
October 1 – December 31 Reporting Period: report due date is January 30 January 1 – March 31 Reporting Period: report due date is April 30 April 1 – June 30 Reporting Period: report due date is July 30 July 1 – September 30 Reporting Period: report due date is October 30 These reports shall cover work status, work progress, difficulties encountered, preliminary data results, and a statement of activity anticipated during the subsequent reporting period, including a description of equipment, techniques, and materials to be used or evaluated. A discussion of expenditures and financial status for each workplan task, along with a comparison of the percentage of the project completed to the project schedule and an explanation of significant discrepancies shall be included in the report. The report shall also include any changes of key personnel concerned with the project that was approved by the EPA Grants Management Officer or Award Official. (Note, as provided at 2 CFR § 200.308, Revision of budget and program plans, the CAR must seek prior approval from the EPA Grants Management Officer or Award Official for a change in a key personnel (including employees and contractors) that are identified by name or position in the workplan. The CAR requests this approval through the EPA Project Officer. Prior approval means the written approval obtained in advance of a recipient taking an action by an authorized official of a Federal agency or pass-through entity of certain costs or programmatic decisions.)
218
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 11
Note: ACRES reporting requirements may change over time, based on expansion of EPA's information collection authority, and the CAR is responsible for complying with the latest ACRES reporting requirements at the time of each quarterly performance report. The EPA Project Officer will notify the CAR when ACRES reporting requirements specific to Brownfields Job Training change.
2. Quarterly performance reports must clearly differentiate which activities were completed with EPA funds provided under the JT cooperative agreement, versus any other funding source used to help accomplish activities.
3. In accordance with 2 CFR § 200.329(e), the CAR agrees that it will notify the EPA Project Officer of problems, delays, or adverse conditions which materially impair the CAR's ability to meet the outputs/outcomes specified in the assistance agreement workplan. In addition, the report must include brief information on each of the following areas:
a. Documentation of progress in meeting the outputs/outcomes listed in the final workplan, deliverables completed to date as cited in the CAR's project narrative, and an explanation of any slippage in meeting these deliverables.
b. An update on meeting project milestones and progress in meeting project deadlines/timeline. c. A summary of the number of individuals entering training, number of veterans entering training, number of individuals completing training, the number of individuals obtaining employment, number of individuals that did not obtain employment, number of individuals that did not obtain employment but are pursuing further education, the average hourly starting wage of those who have obtained employment, leveraged funds to date, and beginning and end dates of each cohort trained.
d. Information regarding the location from where trainees were recruited and information regarding placement of graduates (i.e., job titles, starting salaries, and names of organizations where graduates were placed).
e. A summary of the training completed to date, including courses that were held and certifications provided.
f. A detailed budget summary with a table showing the approved budget for each task by budget category, including the funds used to date for each task, the funds remaining for each task, and explanation notes, if applicable. Examples of common/recommended (but not required) budget table column headings include: Current Approved Budget, Costs Incurred this Quarter, Costs Incurred to Date, and Total Remaining Funds.
The CAR shall include an explanation of any discrepancies in the budget from the EPA-approved workplan, cost overruns or high unit costs, and other pertinent information. If significant developments occur that negatively impact the Federal Award, the CAR shall include information on their plan for corrective action and any assistance needed to resolve the situation. The CAR shall include a statement on funding transfers among direct budget categories or programs, functions and activities that occurred during the quarter and cumulatively during the period of performance. Per EPA's “Transfer of Funds” General Term and Condition, the CAR must obtain prior approval from the EPA Grants Management Officer or Award Official for cumulative transfers of funds in excess of 10% of the total budget. 219
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 12
G.] Final Cooperative Agreement Performance Report with Environmental Results
1. In accordance with the regulations at 2 CFR Parts 200 and 1500 (specifically, 2 CFR § 200.329 and 2 CFR § 200.344(b), Closeout), the CAR agrees to submit to the EPA Project Officer within 120 calendar days after the termination or expiration of the approved project period a final performance report on the cooperative agreement via email; unless the EPA Project Officer agrees to accept a paper copy of the report. This report must clearly address the following items:
a. An overview of the project in terms of its overall process and outputs/outcomes completed. b. A summary of the results of the training program including the total number of persons recruited, the total number of persons entering and completing training, and the total number of persons placed in fulltime employment. Additionally, information regarding those trainees pursuing further education, and the number of persons entering the environmental field must be provided. c. A description of how the trainees were recruited from communities that are impacted by a variety of waste facilities, blighted properties, contaminated sites, and other environmental issues, such as brownfield sites, Superfund sites, landfills, oil spills, recent disaster areas, or solid/hazardous waste facilities.
d. A summary of the post-tracking and follow-up activities that the CAR conducted for each trainee. e. A summary of the cost per trainee and a description of the training provided. f. A description of how EPA involvement was referenced in outreach materials, if applicable. g. Problems encountered which prohibited the completion of the project goals or objectives, if applicable. h. Other pertinent information, including, when appropriate, analysis and explanation of cost overruns or high unit costs.
i. Future plans for continuation of the program following the expiration of the EPA cooperative agreement.
After review of the final report, the EPA Project Officer may request additional information from the CAR.
In addition to the final report, as provided in the General Term and Condition “Copyrighted Material and Data,” the Project Officer may direct the CAR to provide a copy of all tangible and intangible products that were created for the purpose of the funded project (i.e., videos, research findings, curriculum, presentations). If an exhibit or slide show was created or an item too large and/or expensive to duplicate, photos or transcripts of the product may be
substituted.
H.] Conflict of Interest
The CAR is also subject to the requirements in EPA's General Term and Condition “Disclosing Conflicts of Interests.”
I.] Public Awareness
220
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 13
1. The CAR agrees to clearly reference EPA investments during all phases of the project outlined in the EPA-approved workplan which may include the development of post-project summary or success materials that highlight achievements to which this project contributed. a. If any documents, fact sheets, and/or web materials are developed as part of this cooperative agreement, then they shall comply with the Acknowledgement Requirements for Non-ORD Assistance Agreements in the General Terms and Conditions of this agreement. b. If a sign is developed as part of a project funded by this cooperative agreement, then the sign shall include either a statement (e.g., this project has been funded, wholly or in part, by EPA) and/or EPA's logo acknowledging that EPA is a source of funding for the project. The EPA logo may be used on project signage when the sign can be placed in a visible location with a direct linkage to site activities.
Use of the EPA logo must follow the sign specifications available at https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/usingepa-seal-and-logo. To obtain the appropriate EPA logo or seal graphic file, the CAR should send a request directly to the EPA Office of External Affairs (OEA) and include the EPA Project Officer in the communication. Instructions for contacting OEA are available at https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/usingepa-seal-and-logo. c. EPA Logo: If the EPA logo is displayed along with logos from other participating entities on websites, outreach materials, or reports, it must not be prominently displayed to imply that any of the recipient's or subrecipient's activities are being conducted by the EPA. Instead, the EPA logo must be accompanied with a statement indicating that the City of Richmond received Federal financial assistance from EPA for the project. The recipient will ensure compliance with the sign specifications provided by the OEA available at https://www.epa.gov/stylebook/using-epa-seal-and-logo. As provided in the sign specifications from OEA, the EPA logo is the preferred identifier for assistance agreement projects and use of the EPA seal requires prior approval from the EPA. d. Procuring Signs: Consistent with section 6002 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6962, and 2 CFR 200.323, recipients are encouraged to use recycled or recovered materials when procuring signs. Signage costs are considered an allowable cost under this assistance agreement provided that the costs associated with signage are reasonable.
2. The CAR agrees to notify the EPA Project Officer listed in this award document of public or media events publicizing the accomplishment of the Job Training program as a result of this agreement and provide the opportunity for attendance and participation by Federal representatives with at least ten (10) business days' notice.
3. To increase public awareness of projects serving communities where English is not the predominant language, CARs are encouraged to include in their outreach strategies communication in non-English languages. This includes translating the language on signs (excluding the EPA logo or seal) into the appropriate non-English language(s). Translation costs for this purpose are allowable, provided the costs are reasonable.
4. All public awareness activities conducted with EPA funding are subject to the provisions in the General Terms and Conditions on compliance with section 504 of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
II. FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
A.] Eligible Uses of Funds for the Cooperative Agreement Recipient 221
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 14
The only required training for all students in the training program is OSHA 29 CFR § 1910.120 40-hour Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) which includes an in-person personal protective equipment (PPE) component. Applicants proposing an online OSHA 29 CFR § 1910.120 40-hour HAZWOPER course are responsible for making sure their computer-based training course meets all OSHA requirements and is supplemented with the required in-person training. Beyond this, the CAR should design a curriculum of eligible courses that meets the training needs identified by a local labor market assessment and/or employer survey.
1. Eligible use of grant funds under this agreement, depending on the training identified in the CAR's EPA-approved scope of work, may include, but are not limited to:
Personnel or contract costs for instructors to conduct training, fringe benefits, and/or personnel costs for tasks associated with programmatic reporting requirements.
Personnel and data infrastructure costs to support the performance-management and program evaluation.
Costs for recruiting, screening, and placement of individuals in the training program.
Personnel costs for caseworkers or other specialists who work with participants to identify barriers they face to employment, connect them to resources, and support their success in the program and employment for up to one year following the training program.
Costs for training materials and work gear associated with the training curriculum.
Development and refinement of existing curricula for training.
Personnel costs for employer engagement activities, including building new employer relationships, working with employers to inform curriculum, involving employers in the training program, securing hiring commitments for graduates, and supporting trainee success in employment following the program.
On-the-job training insurance for trainees.
Mentorship associated with on-the-job training, such as peer mentors where an experienced employee is paired with a new trainee.
Costs associated with health exams (e.g., pulmonary function tests), drug testing, or licensing fees directly related to the training and/or the placement of graduates in environmental work.
Costs used to cover rental fees associated with training facilities that may include minor alteration (such as seating modifications, signage changes, storage solutions, or room reconfiguration) of existing facilities. (Construction costs are not allowable.) Training in the assessment, inventory, analysis, and remediation of sites or facilities at which hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, and petroleum are located, transported, or disposed, including training for jobs in environmental sampling, demolition, underground storage tank removal, groundwater extraction, and site remediation associated with brownfields.
Training in sustainable deconstruction in preparation of a brownfield site cleanup or redevelopment.
Training participants in the use of techniques and methods for cleanup of hazardous substances, petroleum, and pollutants, such as asbestos abatement; lead abatement; lead renovation, repair, and painting (RRP); mold remediation; and cleaning up sites contaminated by the manufacturing of illegal drugs (e.g., methamphetamine labs), abandoned gas stations, or mine-scarred lands.
Training in confined space entry.
Training in first-aid, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), and blood-borne pathogens. 222
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 15
Training in chemistry, toxicology, and geology to the extent necessary to inventory, assess, remediate, and clean up contaminated sites.
Training in the requirements and implementation of the All Appropriate Inquiries Final Rule, as required in CERCLA § 101(35)(B) and 40 CFR Part 312, and due diligence. Due diligence is the process for evaluating a property for the potential presence of environmental contamination, and for assessing potential liability for any contamination present at the property.
Training in radiation safety and the cleanup of uranium mine tailings.
Training in HAZMAT, commercial driver's license (CDL) (Commercial Driver's License must be incidental to an overall training course related to hazardous waste transportation. It may not be required or used for any other purpose), forklift, and machine operations associated with the transportation of hazardous waste.
Training in freon removal or the removal of hazardous substances from white goods such as refrigerators and freezers located on a brownfield site.
Training in the use of compost and soil amendments and associated sampling, testing, and design considerations, and management techniques to support the assessment, cleanup, and preparation of sites for urban agriculture and horticulture.
Training participants in planning and conducting ecological restoration of contaminated land, including general botanical classes or introductory horticultural classes related to land and stream restoration or indigenous species and native plant re-vegetation; landscaping; and soil science related to preparing sites for reuse and redevelopment.
Awareness training in Environmental Stewardship and sustainable community revitalization to promote community involvement in assessment, cleanup and reuse of brownfield sites.
Training in strategies for environmental mitigation, adaption and resiliency as they relate to preparing brownfield sites for cleanup and subsequent reuse.
Training in Green Infrastructure and Stormwater Management; and Erosion and Sediment Control for site remediation and preparation for reuse and redevelopment.
Training in building trades related to constructing beams, caps, synthetic barriers, pumping facilities, and similar structures to remediate contamination and site preparation.
Training in national historic preservation and tribal historic preservation regulations associated with cleanup projects.
Training in vapor intrusion testing and mitigation.
Training in site surveying, mapping, blueprint reading, computer-aided design and drafting (CADD), and geographic information systems (GIS).
Training in release detection methods, techniques, and practices at underground storage tank (UST) facilities where hazardous substances and/or petroleum products are or were located, in order to assess whether the tanks have leaked or may be leaking. This includes training for jobs that conduct activities such as tank or piping tightness testing; testing of spill prevention equipment and containment sumps; inspections of overfill prevention equipment; testing of release detection equipment; and walkthrough inspections.
Training in green remediation, such as phytoremediation, bioremediation, or soil amendments; advanced sampling instrument operator training; or training in the reuse of biosolids and other industry residuals.
Training in stormwater management, as it relates to the assessment and cleanup of brownfield sites; green infrastructure installation, management, and maintenance; or low impact 223
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 16
development (LID) training for the purpose of preparing a brownfield site for sustainable reuse.
Emergency planning, preparedness, and response training for emergencies leading to contamination on brownfields sites, such as organizing and implementing exercises; outreach to the public; spill response and cleanup, including industrial and environmental (e.g., oil spills, natural disasters, etc.); first responder, disaster site worker certification, and National Incident Management System (NIMS) training; Disaster Recovery.
Enhanced environmental health and safety training related to site remediation, such as promoting chemical (substance, mixture, or article) safety awareness and stewardship; safe work practices (including an overview of the content of material safety datasheets (MSDS), information on exposure guideline limits (Occupational Exposure Limits and Recommended Exposure Limits), information contained within the NIOSH pocket guide to chemical hazards, or the OSHA/EPA Occupational Chemical Database); isolation of work areas; safe storage and handling of chemicals; prevention of spills; and training that providesan overview of any existing chemicalspecific worker training and certification programs, including but not limited to: lead abatement; RRP; asbestos; diisocyanates (auto-refinishing and spray polyurethane foam); pesticide worker protection standards; PFCs; PBDEs/HBCD; and others.
Energy efficiency, and alternative energy technologies, such as training in retrofitting technologies, in order to prepare brownfield sites for renewable energy installation for reusing and redeveloping former brownfield sites.
2. If authorized in the EPA-approved scope of work and budget narrative, the CAR may use a portion of the grant funds for eligible participant support costs. Eligible participant support costs may include reasonable stipends to compensate program beneficiaries' time and travel costs for participating in technical assistance workshops and in-person events. Stipends must not duplicate support provided through other Federal, state, tribal, or local programs.
A CAR that uses participant support costs must follow the process described in their EPA-approved workplan (or in a separate process post-award that is approved by the EPA Grants Management Officer or Award Official) for determining the amounts of allowable stipend(s), procedures for accounting for participant support cost payments (including receipts), and documenting that the costs are allowable and do not duplicate other support for the individual(s). Additional information on these requirements for the use of participant support costs is available in EPA's Guidance on Participant Support Costs.
Costs associated with eligible participant support costs, including for:
Transportation for trainees for site visits during training or to transport trainees to and from class in the form of stipends or other allowable direct costs (e.g., transportation vouchers or vehicle rental).
Reasonable stipends to compensate trainees for participating in training. Note that stipends may only be paid for actual time spent in training classes or on-the-job training activities and must not duplicate training support provided through other Federal, state, tribal, or local programs.
Reasonable child-care subsidies. Note that child-care subsidies must not duplicate child-care support provided through other Federal, state, tribal, or local programs.
Reasonable cap and gown rental expenses or purchases not to exceed a total of $10,000.
Total amount of eligible participant support costs may not exceed 40% of the total award. 224
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 17
3. Under CERCLA § 104(k)(5)(E), CARs and subrecipients may use up to 5% of the amount of Federal funding for this cooperative agreement for administrative costs, including indirect costs under 2 CFR § 200.414. The limit on administrative costs for this agreement is $25,000. The total amount of indirect costs and any direct costs for cooperative agreement administration by the CAR or subaward administration by subrecipients paid for by EPA under the cooperative agreement may not exceed this amount. As required by 2 CFR § 200.403(d) and 200.412, the CAR and subrecipients must classify administrative costs as direct or indirect consistently and shall not classify the same types of costs in both categories. Eligible cooperative agreement and subaward administrative costs subject to the 5% limitation include direct costs for:
a. Costs incurred to comply with the following provisions of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards at 2 CFR Parts 200 and 1500 other than those identified as programmatic.
i. Record-keeping associated with equipment purchases required under 2 CFR § 200.313; ii. Preparing revisions and changes in the budgets, scopes of work, program plans, and other activities required under 2 CFR § 200.308;
iii. Maintaining and operating financial management systems required under 2 CFR § 200.302; iv. Preparing payment requests and handling payments under 2 CFR § 200.305; v. Financial reporting under 2 CFR § 200.328;
vi. Non-Federal audits required under 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F; and vii. Closeout under 2 CFR § 200.344 with the exception of preparing the recipient's final performance report. Costs for preparing this report are programmatic and are not subject to the 5% limitation on direct administrative costs.
4. The EPA has determined that the administrative cost limitation does not apply to “programmatic” costs, (i.e., costs for activities that are integral to achieving the purpose of the grant), even if the Agency considered the costs to be “administrative” under the prior Brownfields Program. a. The limitation does not apply to direct costs of training. For example, costs for instructor salaries, program management salaries (to the extent that such costs are included in the scope of work for Brownfields Job Training grants), materials (e.g., textbooks, equipment, and classroom supplies), necessary travel and transportation expenses, and medical tests required to qualify for hazardous substances related work are programmatic, not administrative. b. Costs for performance reporting required under 2 CFR Parts 200 and 1500 and the terms and conditions of this agreement are eligible programmatic costs as long as these costs are not included in the CAR's indirect cost pool.
c. Clerical costs may be eligible as programmatic costs if supported by time records demonstrating that clerical personnel performed programmatic functions (e.g., student registration, copying course materials for use by trainees) under the cooperative agreement and these costs are not included in the CAR's indirect cost pool.
225
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 18
B.] Ineligible Uses of Funds for the Cooperative Agreement Recipient
1. Funds awarded under CERCLA § 104(k)(7) are intended for job training activities and may not be used for:
Training in general construction skills and trades (e.g., carpentry, plumbing, electricity, etc. relating to constructing buildings).
Training in equipment repairs.
Training in natural resource extraction or related processes, such as hydraulic fracturing, oil refinery, or mining operations.
Training that seeks to test a product or is intended to expand a business, including training that seeks to expand construction and demolition debris recycling businesses for example, or training that is intended to only serve staff of an existing business who are employed with that business.
Training in leak prevention methods, techniques, and practices at underground storage tank (UST) facilities where hazardous substances and/or petroleum products are or were located.
Conducting actual site assessments or cleanups, except within the context of OJT.
Conducting response activities often associated with actual cleanups (e.g., landscaping, demolition, and groundwater extraction), except within the context of OJT assignments.
Assessment, cleanup, and associated activity costs must be funded through other means.
General or life skills, education activities, such as remedial classes in math and reading; job readiness training, such as developing resumes and acquiring interview skills; GED costs; website development; vehicle or medical insurance.
Scholarship funds to support students' enrollment in college courses.
Membership fees, such as fees required to join placement service organizations or environmental organizations.
Notwithstanding EPA's General Term and Condition “Light Refreshments and/or Meals,” providing food or light refreshments to employees, instructors, and trainees - except at graduation ceremonies - is not an allowable cost under this cooperative agreement.
Costs that are unallowable (e.g., lobbying, fundraising, alcoholic beverages) under 2 CFR Parts 200 and 1500, as applicable.
Costs for training individuals who are not citizens of the United States, the territories, or U.S. possessions or lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residency (i.e., Green Card holders) are unallowable in the Brownfields Job Training Program.
Matching or cost sharing for any other Federal funds (unless there is specific statutory authority for the match/cost share). Note, the statutory authority for the Brownfields Job Training Program at CERCLA 104(k)(7) does not provide the requisite authority. Cooperative agreement funds may be used to match state or local funds, if authorized by the relevant state statute or local ordinance.
Construction or substantial rehabilitation of buildings or other facilities to house training.
Foreign travel.
Application preparation costs. (Application preparation costs may be included in the CAR's indirect cost pool as provided by 2 CFR § 200.460.)
Administrative costs, including all indirect costs and direct costs for grant administration in excess of five (5) percent of the total amount of EPA grant funding, with the exception of financial and performance reporting costs (which are considered allowable programmatic costs and not subject 226
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 19
to the 5% limitation).
C.] Interest-Bearing Accounts and Program Income
1. The CAR must deposit advances of cooperative agreement funds and program income (i.e., fees charged to trainees or funds raised with EPA financial support) in an interest-bearing account. a. For interest earned on advances, CARs (as well as any subrecipients) are subject to the provisions of 2 CFR § 200.305(b)(12).
b. Any program income (e.g., fees charged to students) earned by the CAR will be added to the funds EPA has committed to this agreement and can only be used for eligible and allowable costs under the agreement as provided in 2 CFR § 200.307 and 2 CFR § 1500.8, as applicable. c. Interest earned on program income is considered additional program income. d. The CAR must disburse program income (including interest earned on program income) before requesting additional payments from EPA as required by 2 CFR § 200.305(b)(5).
2. As required by 2 CFR § 200.302, the CAR must maintain accounting records documenting the receipt and disbursement of program income.
3. The recipient must provide as part of its quarterly performance report and final technical report a description of how program income is being used. Further, a report on the amount of program income earned during the award period must be submitted with the quarterly performance report, final technical report, and Federal Financial Report (Standard Form 425).
III. LEVERAGING
A.] Leveraging
1. The CAR agrees to provide the proposed leveraged funding that is described in their application dated 9/26/2025. If the proposed leveraging does not materialize during the period of award performance, and the CAR does not provide a satisfactory explanation, EPA may consider this factor in evaluating future applications from the CAR. In addition, if the proposed leveraging does not materialize during the period of award performance, then EPA may reconsider the legitimacy of the award. If EPA determines that the CAR knowingly or recklessly provided inaccurate information regarding the leveraged funding the CAR described in its application dated 9/26/2025, EPA may take action as authorized by CERCLA 104(k)(8) (C), 2 CFR Parts 200 and 1500 and/or 2 CFR Part 180 as applicable.
IV. PAYMENT AND CLOSEOUT
For the purposes of these Terms and Conditions, the following definitions apply: “payment” is EPA's transfer of funds to the CAR; “closeout” refers to the process EPA follows to ensure that all administrative actions and work required under the cooperative agreement have been completed.
A.] Payment and Closeout
227
4J - 97T56901 - 0 Page 20
1. The CAR may request advance payment from EPA pursuant to 2 CFR § 200.305(b)(1) and the prompt disbursement requirements of the General Terms and Conditions of this agreement. The CAR must pay subrecipients in advance provided the subrecipient complies with the requirements of 2 CFR § 200.305 (b)(1).
This requirement does not apply to States which are subject to 2 CFR § 200.305(a).
B.] Schedule for Closeout
1. Closeout will be conducted in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.344. EPA will close out the award when it determines that all applicable administrative actions and all required work under the cooperative agreement have been completed.
2. The CAR, within 120 days after the expiration or termination of the cooperative agreement, must submit all financial, performance, and other reports required as a condition of the cooperative agreement.
a. The CAR must submit the following documentation:
i. The Final Cooperative Agreement Performance Report as described in Section III.F. of these Terms and Conditions.
ii. Administrative and Financial Reports as described in the General Terms and Conditions of this agreement.
b. The CAR must ensure that all appropriate data have been entered into ACRES or all hardcopy Property Profile Forms are submitted to the EPA Project Officer. c. As required by 2 CFR § 200.344, the CAR must immediately refund to EPA any balance of unobligated (unencumbered) advanced cash or accrued program income that is not authorized to be retained for use on other cooperative agreements.
### END OF DOCUMENT ###
228
From: Kaiser Permanente
To: Tamara Walker
Cc: Tamara Walker; Tamara Walker; Tamara Walker; Gilbert Pete; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Kaiser Permanente Grant Approved – Proposal #190981 Date: Wednesday, June 3, 2026 4:24:49 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Dear Tamara,
We are pleased to inform you that Kaiser Permanente has approved a $25,000.00 grant to City of Richmond in support of Building Bridges to Career Opportunities.
Required Next Steps
The grant agreement will be sent to [email protected] within the next 7 business days and requires an electronic signature (via DocuSign). A fully executed grant agreement is due by 6/12/2026. The payment will be issued after both parties have signed the grant agreement.
Due to IRS requirements, we need confirmation of receipt of payment through the Kaiser Permanente grants management system. After the payment has been issued, an automated email with instructions on completing this requirement will be sent to [email protected]. By depositing these funds, you warrant that there has been no change in your IRS tax classification as an organization described in the Internal Revenue Service Code sections 501(c)(3) and 509(a)(1), (2), or (3).
Grant Terms
Grant Start Date Grant End Date Approved Grant
Term
Total Approved
Amount
7/1/2026 6/30/2027 12 months $25,000.00
Required Reporting Schedule
Submission Portal: Kaiser Grants Management System
Final Narrative and Expenditure Report Due: 7/31/2027
If you have any questions or concerns regarding the grant terms, please contact me at [email protected]. If you have any questions about the grants management system, please contact Kara Links at [email protected].
We are pleased to be partnering with your organization on this project. Thank you for the important work you do meeting the health needs of the communities we serve.
Sincerely,
229
Leslie Brown
Kaiser Permanente Community Health
230
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act
Rapid Reponse and Layoff Aversion by Formula Allocations Program Year 2024-25
Attachment 1
Local Area Code
Rapid Response
GC 540
Alameda County ALA $ 100,533
Anaheim ANA $ 68,489
Contra Costa CON $ 45,568
Foothill FET $ 122,807
Fresno City/County FRS $ 95,733
Golden Sierra GSC $ 73,996
Humboldt HUM $ 40,483
Imperial IMP $ 66,211
Kern/Inyo/Mono KIM $ 92,987
Kings KNG $ 79,332
Los Angeles City LAI $ 255,874
Los Angeles County LAO $ 346,981
Long Beach LBC $ 69,477
Madera MAD $ 80,822
Merced MER $ 40,483
Mother Lode MLC $ 89,374
Monterey MON $ 97,840
North Bay NBY $ 123,966
North Central Counties NCC $ 86,122
NoRTEC NOR $ 167,604
NOVA NOV $ 688,753
Oakland OAK $ 87,469
Orange County ORA $ 297,932
Richmond RCH $ 40,483
Riverside County RIV $ 175,425
Sacramento SAC $ 76,364
Santa Ana SAN $ 59,018
Santa Barbara SBA $ 76,353
San Benito SBE $ 40,483
San Bernardino County SBO $ 279,404
South Bay SBY $ 190,781
Santa Cruz SCR $ 40,483
San Diego SDC $ 73,545
SELACO SEL $ 50,109
San Francisco SFO $ 154,338
San Joaquin SJC $ 55,177
San Jose/Silicon Valley SJI $ 82,353
San Luis Obispo SLO $ 47,130
Solano County SOL $ 75,092
Sonoma County SON $ 54,980
Stanislaus County STN $ 130,460
Tulare County TUL $ 71,597
Verdugo VER $ 46,270
Ventura County VNP $ 144,075
Yolo County YOL $ 52,860
Total $ 5,235,616
231
Attachment 1
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act
Youth, Adult, and Dislocated Worker Activities Final Allocations Program Year 2026-27
Round 1 Round 2
Local Area Youth Adult
Dislocated
Worker Adult
Dislocated
Worker Grand Total
Alameda $2,553,260 $426,169 $874,072 $1,853,725 $3,190,464 $8,897,690 Anaheim City $745,973 $137,079 $214,066 $596,256 $781,366 $2,474,740 Contra Costa $2,337,975 $416,066 $742,453 $1,809,779 $2,710,039 $8,016,312 Foothill $754,899 $150,198 $197,973 $653,323 $722,625 $2,479,018 Fresno $6,192,005 $1,078,075 $1,441,090 $4,689,350 $5,260,147 $18,660,667 Golden Sierra $1,044,806 $201,068 $384,291 $874,594 $1,402,706 $3,907,465 Humboldt $537,063 $86,075 $91,836 $374,403 $335,212 $1,424,589 Imperial $2,851,134 $517,556 $658,347 $2,251,237 $2,403,043 $8,681,317 Kern, Inyo, and
Mono $6,017,179 $1,100,572 $1,378,625 $4,787,204 $5,032,144 $18,315,724 Kings $856,164 $168,769 $208,815 $734,101 $762,198 $2,730,047 Los Angeles
City $16,791,941 $3,079,436 $3,538,179 $13,394,760 $12,914,767 $49,719,083 Los Angeles
County $14,184,081 $2,528,089 $2,765,566 $10,996,537 $10,094,637 $40,568,910 Pacific Gateway $1,770,550 $330,857 $376,044 $1,439,141 $1,372,603 $5,289,195 Madera $835,174 $156,841 $199,622 $682,217 $728,645 $2,602,499 Merced $2,029,941 $350,848 $468,861 $1,526,099 $1,711,399 $6,087,148 Mother Lode $417,724 $93,052 $111,021 $404,750 $405,240 $1,431,787 Monterey $2,288,215 $414,723 $701,751 $1,803,937 $2,561,473 $7,770,099 232
Workforce
Alliance of the
North Bay $1,252,177 $242,707 $368,522 $1,055,714 $1,345,149 $4,264,269 North Central
Counties
Consortium $1,293,034 $240,635 $347,917 $1,046,700 $1,269,939 $4,198,225 NoRTEC $2,590,010 $470,838 $563,725 $2,048,022 $2,057,662 $7,730,257 NOVA $1,805,468 $329,952 $865,311 $1,435,207 $3,158,487 $7,594,425 Oakland City $1,262,220 $247,604 $389,245 $1,077,015 $1,420,791 $4,396,875 Orange $4,310,600 $747,410 $1,458,968 $3,251,039 $5,325,402 $15,093,419 Richmond City $290,414 $58,861 $88,050 $256,029 $321,394 $1,014,748 Riverside $8,135,430 $1,453,107 $2,086,558 $6,320,642 $7,616,181 $25,611,918 Sacramento $4,382,133 $833,865 $1,172,193 $3,627,097 $4,278,641 $14,293,929 Santa Ana City $712,256 $127,362 $170,869 $553,993 $623,694 $2,188,174 Santa Barbara $1,589,281 $200,234 $308,957 $870,968 $1,127,728 $4,097,168 San Benito $271,546 $49,052 $81,508 $213,364 $297,513 $912,983 San Bernardino $7,386,323 $1,310,195 $1,697,059 $5,699,011 $6,194,464 $22,287,052 South Bay $2,028,769 $391,949 $512,381 $1,704,876 $1,870,249 $6,508,224 Santa Cruz $1,348,804 $184,895 $309,961 $804,248 $1,131,394 $3,779,302 San Diego $8,221,870 $1,473,751 $2,267,539 $6,410,439 $8,276,781 $26,650,380 SELACO $1,626,691 $300,107 $350,892 $1,305,387 $1,280,798 $4,863,875 San Francisco $2,022,156 $385,001 $718,539 $1,674,657 $2,622,752 $7,423,105 San Joaquin $3,183,875 $583,941 $844,284 $2,539,991 $3,081,737 $10,233,828 San Jose -
Silicon Valley $2,781,363 $463,562 $952,884 $2,016,373 $3,478,137 $9,692,319 San Luis Obispo $898,602 $114,492 $135,565 $498,011 $494,828 $2,141,498 Solano $1,245,606 $243,609 $358,461 $1,059,636 $1,308,425 $4,215,737 Sonoma $1,151,519 $205,941 $309,737 $895,791 $1,130,578 $3,693,566 Stanislaus $2,398,443 $442,577 $647,225 $1,925,094 $2,362,446 $7,775,785 Tulare $4,051,620 $724,500 $947,346 $3,151,389 $3,457,924 $12,332,779 Verdugo $1,195,871 $238,063 $315,527 $1,035,513 $1,151,711 $3,936,685 233
Ventura $2,090,070 $348,309 $637,454 $1,515,056 $2,326,780 $6,917,669 Yolo $1,109,566 $132,715 $189,304 $577,274 $690,982 $2,699,841 Total $132,843,801 $23,780,707 $33,448,593 $103,439,949 $122,091,275 $415,604,325 234
DocID #78601v1
RESOLUTION NO. ______
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING $1,790,303 IN WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT GRANT FUNDS AND AMENDING THE EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING DIVISION BUDGET BY $25,000 WHEREAS, the City of Richmond Employment and Training Division has been awarded a total of $1,790,303 in workforce development grant funds from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Kaiser Permanente, and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL); and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency awarded $500,000 to provide brownfield training and services to participants of RichmondBUILD, the City’s construction pre-apprenticeship program; and
WHEREAS, Kaiser Permanente awarded $25,000 to provide tutorial assistance and stipends for youth participating in Building Bridges to Career Opportunities; and WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Labor awarded $1,265,303 in Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) funding to support employment and training services for youth, adults, and dislocated workers; and
WHEREAS, the EPA and DOL/WIOA grant funds were included as part of the City’s adopted budget preparation and therefore do not require an additional budget adjustment; and
WHEREAS, the $25,000 Kaiser Permanente award was not included in the adopted budget and requires an increase of $25,000 in both revenue and expenditure appropriations for the Employment and Training Division; and WHEREAS, these funds support the City of Richmond’s workforce development priorities by expanding access to job training, paid work experience, employment services, and career pathways for youth, adults, and dislocated workers.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Richmond that the City Council hereby accepts and appropriates $1,790,303 in workforce development grant funds from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Kaiser Permanente, and the U.S. Department of Labor for the purpose of supporting the City of Richmond’s workforce development priorities by expanding access to job training, paid work experience, employment services, and career pathways for youth, adults, and dislocated workers
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Employment and Training Division budget is hereby amended to increase revenue appropriations by $25,000 and expenditure appropriations by $25,000 for the Kaiser Permanente grant. 235
DocID #78601v1
I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held ______________________, 2026, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
City Clerk
City of Richmond
(SEAL)
Approved:
Mayor
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
State of California }
County of Contra Costa : ss.
City of Richmond }
236
September 22, 2026
Human Resources
DATE: September 22, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Shannon Moore, Interim City Attorney
Nickie Mastay, Deputy City Manager – Internal Services
Sharrone Taylor, Director of Human Resources
Subject: Appointment of Retired Annuitant as the Interim City Manager
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no new fiscal impact or budget action necessary resulting from the recommended appointment. The
proposed expenditures will be funded by salary savings
in the respective département’s approved FY 2026/2027
budgets – (City Manager’s Office Budget – 400000)
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
None.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
City Council approval is required to appoint retired
annuitant Mark Scott to the role of Interim City Manager.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE the appointment of Mark Scott as interim city manager for a limited term not to exceed six (6) months; ADOPT a resolution approving the interim appointment;
APPROVE the employment agreement with Mark Scott
for service as interim city manager; and AUTHORIZE the
city attorney to execute the employment agreement on
behalf of the City – Human Resources/City Attorney’s
Office (Shannon Moore/Nickie Mastay/Sharrone Taylor
510-620-6602).
AGENDA
REPORT
237
September 22, 2026
DISCUSSION:
The City Council directed Human Resources to initiate the recruitment of an Interim City Manager. Following a thorough search and evaluation process, the City Council unanimously selected retired annuitant Mark Scott to serve as Interim City Manager for a term not to exceed six months (October 3, 2026 – April 3, 2027), as approved in closed session on September 15, 2026.
The City is actively recruiting for a permanent City Manager. During this period, Mr.
Scott will oversee daily operations and ensure continuity of leadership until the recruitment process concludes and a permanent appointment is made. Mr. Scott brings significant experience and expertise essential to fulfilling the responsibilities of Interim City Manager.
The requirements for retired annuitant appointments are based on California Public Employee Retirement Law (PERL) and federal tax law for post-retirement services provided by a retired annuitant. These laws allow employment of a retired annuitant in two (2) specific circumstances — (1) to provide "extra help"; or (2) to work in a vacant position on an interim basis during the recruitment process. The appointment of a CalPERS retiree serving as a retired annuitant in an interim vacant position (such as a city manager, department head, or director) must comply with California Government Code sections 7522.56 and 21221(h).
According to CalPERS requirements, retired annuitants in interim department head appointments must have:
Specialized skills
There must be an open, active, concurrent recruitment process underway. The position must be genuinely vacant, with no other employees working in the exact position.
The employment contract must specify a firm end date that aligns with the end of recruitment.
The appointment must be approved by the employer’s governing body via formal resolution during an open meeting (not on the consent calendar) The resolution must be filed with CalPERS before the retiree's first day of employment.
Additional restrictions for all retired annuitant appointments include:
Compensation may be no more than another employee would receive for similar work
The annuitant’s work must not exceed 960 hours in any fiscal year; and The assignment is a limited-term assignment
Accordingly, staff recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution appointing Mark Scott as Interim City Manager for a term not to exceed six months (October 3, 2026 – 238
September 22, 2026
April 3, 2027) and approve the employment agreement and authorize the City Attorney to execute the employment agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommend that the City Council:
1. Adopt the resolution approving the interim appointment of Mark Scott as Interim City Manager.
2. Approve the employment agreement between the City and Mark Scott and authorize the City Attorney to execute the employment agreement.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Interim Appointment Resolution for Mark Scott Attachment 2 – Employment Agreement for Mark Scott
239
RESOLUTION NO. _____
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA,
APPOINTING MARK SCOTT AS THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 7522.56 & 21221(h) WHEREAS, in compliance with Government Code section 7522.56 the City of Richmond City Council must appoint a retiree in an interim assignment; and WHEREAS, Mark Scott is a CalPERS retiree, effective June 2021; and WHEREAS, Government Code sections 21221(h) and 7522.56 requires that postretirement interim employment must not commence without this certification resolution; and WHEREAS, Government Code sections 21221(h) and 7522.56 provides that a retiree can work in an interim assignment on a limited term basis; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richmond and Mark Scott certify that he retired more than 180 days ago; and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby appoints Mark Scott as an interim retired annuitant to serve as the Interim City Manager for the City of Richmond under Government Code section 21221(h), effective October 3, 2026; and
WHEREAS, the entire employment agreement between Mark Scott and the City of Richmond has been reviewed by this body and is attached herein; and WHEREAS, no matters, issues, terms or conditions related to this employment and appointment have been or will be placed on a consent calendar; and WHEREAS, the employment shall be limited to 960 hours per fiscal year for all CalPERS employers; and
WHEREAS, the compensation paid to retirees cannot be less than the minimum nor exceed the maximum monthly base salary paid to other employees performing comparable duties, divided by 173.333 to equal the hourly rate; and
WHEREAS, the maximum monthly base salary for the City Manager position, which performs the most comparable duties, is $31,674.08/month and the hourly equivalent is $182.74, and the minimum base salary for this position is $17,137.10/month and the hourly equivalent is $98.87; and
WHEREAS, the hourly rate paid to Mark Scott will be $182.74; and WHEREAS, Mark Scott will not receive any other benefit, incentive, compensation in lieu of benefit or other form of compensation in addition to this hourly pay rate. 240
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Richmond hereby certifies the nature of the appointment of Mark Scott as described herein and detailed in the attached employment agreement and that this appointment is necessary to serve as the Interim City Manager to provide oversight to the City of Richmond because such appointment is essential to maintaining the basic ongoing operations and service delivery.
I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held September 22, 2026 by the following vote:
-----------
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
_____________________________
CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
01337.0004/888736.1
Approved:
241
____________________
Mayor
Approved as to form:
____________________
City Attorney
01337.0004/888736.1
242
1 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
FOR INTERIM CITY MANAGER
This Employment Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into by and between the CITY OF RICHMOND, a California municipal corporation (“City”), MARK SCOTT effective October 3, 2026.
RECITALS
A. The City Manager position for the City of Richmond (“City Manager Position”) will become vacant effective October 3, 2026.
B. The City Council has determined that the City Manager Position requires specialized executive and administrative skills and that an experienced interim City Manager is necessary to provide continuity of municipal operations, leadership to City staff, and continued implementation of the City Council’s policies and priorities during the recruitment and selection of a permanent City Manager.
C. The City Council has authorized and/or initiated an open recruitment process for a permanent City Manager and intends to continue that recruitment process while Employee serves as Interim City Manager.
D. Employee is a retired member of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (“CalPERS”) and represents that Employee is eligible to serve as a retired annuitant under applicable provisions of the California Public Employees’ Retirement Law, including Government Code section 21221(h).
E. Government Code section 21221(h) permits the governing body of a contracting agency to make an interim appointment of a retired person to a vacant position during recruitment for a permanent appointment where the position requires specialized skills, subject to the limitations and requirements established by law.
F. The City Council has determined that Employee possesses the specialized skills, executive experience, institutional knowledge, and governmental management experience necessary to perform the duties of Interim City Manager.
G. The City Council desires to appoint Employee as Interim City Manager pursuant to Government Code section 21221(h), and Employee desires to accept that appointment subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
H. The parties intend that Employee's service under this Agreement constitute a temporary, limited-duration retired annuitant appointment and not reinstatement from retirement.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
243
2 1. APPOINTMENT
1.1 Appointment. The City hereby appoints Employee to serve as Interim City Manager, effective October 3, 2026, subject to approval by the City Council and all applicable requirements of California law.
1.2 Authority. Employee shall serve as the City's Interim City Manager and shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of the City Manager provided by the City's Charter, municipal code, ordinances, resolutions, applicable state and federal law, and policies adopted by the City Council.
1.3 At-Will Appointment. Employee shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council. Nothing in this Agreement creates a property interest in continued employment or guarantees employment for any particular period.
2. LIMITED-DURATION RETIRED ANNUITANT APPOINTMENT
2.1 Government Code Section 21221(h). The parties expressly acknowledge that this appointment is made pursuant to Government Code section 21221(h).
2.2 Vacant Position and Recruitment. The City Council has determined that the City Manager Position is vacant and that the City is undertaking recruitment for a permanent City Manager.
2.3 Single Appointment. Employee acknowledges that Government Code section 21221(h) provides that a retired person may only be appointed once to the vacant position under that subdivision.
2.4 No Permanent Appointment. Employee shall not be considered a permanent City Manager by virtue of this Agreement. The City retains complete discretion to select a permanent City Manager through its recruitment and selection process.
2.5 No Unemployment Insurance. By accepting this appointment and executing this Agreement, Employee acknowledges and certifies that Employee has not received unemployment insurance benefits arising out of previous annuitant employment in the past 12 months.
3. TERM
3.1 Commencement. Employee's appointment shall commence on October 3, 2026.
3.2 Expiration. Unless earlier terminated pursuant to this Agreement, the appointment shall continue until the earlier of:
(a) the appointment and commencement of employment of a permanent City Manager; (b) termination by the City Council;
244
3 (c) resignation by Employee; or
(d) the date on which Employee is no longer legally eligible to serve under Government Code section 21221(h) or other applicable law, April 3, 2027.
3.3 No Guaranteed Term. The parties acknowledge that the anticipated duration of the appointment is dependent upon the City's recruitment and selection process and applicable CalPERS restrictions.
4. HOURS OF SERVICE
4.1 Maximum Hours. Employee shall not work more than 960 hours during any fiscal year, including hours worked for any other CalPERS-covered employer to the extent required by applicable law.
4.2 Tracking of Hours. Employee shall accurately record all hours worked for the City.
Employee shall promptly notify the City if Employee performs services for another CalPERScovered employer that may affect the applicable annual limitation.
4.3 No Additional Hours Without Legal Authorization. Employee shall not work hours in excess of the applicable statutory limitation unless expressly authorized by law and approved by the City Council in a manner consistent with CalPERS requirements.
5. COMPENSATION
5.1 Hourly Rate. Employee shall be compensated at the rate of $182.74 per hour.
5.2 Salary Schedule Compliance. The hourly rate shall not exceed the maximum monthly base salary paid to employees performing comparable duties, as listed on the City's publicly available salary schedule, divided by 173.333, as required by Government Code section 21221(h).
5.3 No Additional Compensation. Consistent with Government Code section 21221(h), Employee shall not receive benefits, incentives, compensation in lieu of benefits, or any other form of compensation in addition to the permitted hourly rate.
5.4 Payroll. Employee shall be paid through the City's regular payroll system, subject to all legally required payroll deductions and withholdings.
6. CALPERS STATUS
6.1 Retired Annuitant Status. Employee shall remain a retired annuitant and shall not accrue additional service credit or otherwise become reinstated from retirement as a result of this appointment, provided the appointment remains compliant with applicable law.
6.2 Employee Responsibility. Employee shall provide the City with information reasonably necessary to establish and maintain compliance with CalPERS requirements. 245
4 6.3 Change in Eligibility. Employee shall immediately notify the City of any change in circumstances that could affect Employee's eligibility to serve as a retired annuitant.
7. BENEFITS
Employee shall not be entitled to the City's regular employee benefits, including, without limitation, vacation accrual, sick leave accrual, health insurance, dental insurance, vision insurance, life insurance, disability insurance, deferred compensation contributions, vehicle allowance, or other employee benefits, except to the extent a particular benefit is legally required and consistent with Employee's status as a retired annuitant.
8. DUTIES AND EXPECTATIONS
Employee shall:
(a) manage and administer the City's day-to-day municipal operations; (b) implement policies and directives adopted by the City Council; (c) supervise the City's department heads and executive management team; (d) prepare and administer the City's budget and financial operations consistent with Council direction;
(e) maintain effective communication with the Mayor and City Council; (f) attend City Council meetings and other meetings reasonably necessary to perform the duties of Interim City Manager;
(g) work collaboratively with the City Attorney, department heads, employees, labor representatives, and community stakeholders;
(h) provide continuity of leadership during the recruitment and transition to a permanent City Manager; and
(i) perform all other duties customarily assigned to the City Manager under the City's Charter, ordinances, resolutions, and applicable law.
9. CITY COUNCIL RELATIONSHIP
9.1 Employee shall report directly to the City Council.
9.2 Employee shall implement the lawful direction of the City Council and shall maintain appropriate communication with the Mayor and individual Councilmembers consistent with the City's council-manager form of government and applicable law.
9.3 Nothing in this Agreement authorizes an individual Councilmember to direct Employee to take action inconsistent with duly adopted City Council policy or applicable law. 246
5 10. CONFIDENTIALITY AND CITY PROPERTY
Employee shall comply with all applicable City policies concerning confidentiality, public records, information security, electronic communications, conflicts of interest, ethics, and use of City property and systems. These obligations shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. Upon expiration or termination of the appointment, Employee shall immediately return all City property, equipment, records, documents, keys, identification cards, access devices, electronic devices, files, passwords, and other materials in Employee's possession or control and shall cooperate with the City in terminating or transferring access to City systems and accounts.
Employee shall conduct City business using City-provided systems and accounts to the extent practicable and shall comply with all applicable records-retention, public-records, electronic communications, and information-governance requirements. Employee shall not intentionally use personal accounts or devices to circumvent City records-retention or public-records requirements.
Employee shall not use confidential, nonpublic, privileged, or otherwise protected City information for Employee's personal benefit or for the benefit of any third party, either during or after the Term.
11. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND ETHICS
Employee shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local conflict-of-interest and governmental ethics requirements, including applicable provisions of the Political Reform Act, Government Code section 1090, the City's conflict-of-interest code, and applicable AB 1234 requirements.
Employee shall complete all legally required ethics and conflict-of-interest disclosures and training applicable to the position.
12. OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITES
During the Term, Employee shall not engage in outside employment, consulting, business activities, or other professional activities that interfere with Employee's duties to the City, create an actual or potential conflict of interest, involve representation of another person or entity before the City, or reasonably create the appearance of a conflict. Employee shall disclose to the City Attorney any such activity before engaging in it.
13. INDEMNIFICATION
To the extent mandated by the California Government Code, the City shall defend, hold harmless, and indemnify Employee against any tort, professional liability, claim or demand, or other legal action arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of Employee’s services under this Agreement. This section shall not apply to any intentional tort or crime 247
6 committed by Employee, to any action outside the course and scope of Employee’s employment, or any other intentional or malicious conduct or gross negligence of Employee.
14. RESIGNATION
Employee may resign by providing the City Council with written notice. Unless otherwise agreed by the City Council, Employee shall provide at least fourteen (14) calendar days' notice.
15. TERMINATION
The City Council may terminate Employee's appointment at any time, with or without cause, consistent with Employee's at-will status and applicable law.
Upon termination, Employee shall be compensated only for authorized hours actually worked through the effective date of termination and shall have no entitlement to severance or other compensation, except as expressly required by law.
16. PERMANENT CITY MANAGER RECRUITMENT
Employee acknowledges that the City intends to recruit and appoint a permanent City Manager.
Employee shall cooperate reasonably with the recruitment and transition process, including providing information concerning City operations and assisting with an orderly transition to the permanent City Manager. Employee shall maintain current and reasonably complete records concerning significant City operations, pending matters, major projects, personnel matters, litigation, contracts, financial matters, Council directives, and other matters necessary for an orderly transition. Upon request of the City Council, Employee shall prepare or participate in preparing transition memoranda and shall brief the incoming permanent City Manager concerning pending and significant matters. Employee shall not participate in the City's final selection of the permanent City Manager except as specifically authorized by the City Council.
17. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW
This Agreement shall be interpreted and implemented consistent with Government Code sections 21221(h), 7522.56, and all other applicable provisions of the California Public Employees' Retirement Law.
If any provision of this Agreement conflicts with a mandatory provision of applicable law or CalPERS requirements, the applicable law shall control.
18. NO CONTRACTUAL RIGHT TO REINSTATEMENT
Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as an agreement or promise that Employee will be appointed as the permanent City Manager or otherwise reinstated to active membership in CalPERS.
19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
248
7 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties concerning Employee's appointment as Interim City Manager and supersedes prior oral or written understandings concerning the subject matter of this Agreement. Any amendment must be in writing and approved by the City Council to the extent required by law.
20. GOVERNING LAW
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
21. AUTHORITY
The parties represent that they have authority to enter into this Agreement and that the Agreement has been approved in accordance with applicable City law.
22. INDEPENDENT LEGAL ADVICE
The City and Employee represent and warrant to each other that each had the opportunity to receive legal advice from independent and separate legal counsel with respect to the legal effect of this Agreement, that each has carefully reviewed this entire Agreement, that each and every term thereof is understood, and that the terms of this Agreement are contractual and not a mere recital. This Agreement shall not be construed against the Party or its representatives who drafted it or who drafted any portion thereof.
CITY OF RICHMOND
By: ______________________________
Mayor
Date: ____________________________
Approved as to Form:
By: ______________________________
City Attorney
Date: ____________________________
EMPLOYEE
_________________________________
Mark Scott
Date: ____________________________
249
September 22, 2026
Mayor's Office
DATE: September 22, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: Mayor Martinez
Subject: Boards and Commissions Vacancies Report
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this item.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
May 26, 2026
June 23, 2026
July 28, 2026
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Several of Richmond’s boards, commissions and
committees have vacant seats. Residents that are
interested in serving on a board, commission, or
committee are invited to submit their applications to the Richmond City Clerk.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: ACKNOWLEDGE vacancies on City of Richmond boards, commissions, and committees as of September
22, 2026, and ask that interested individuals send
applications to the city clerk – Mayor’s Office (Mayor
Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503).
DISCUSSION:
The City of Richmond enjoys a long history of community involvement. Through a variety of volunteer boards, commissions, and committees, Richmond residents play an AGENDA
REPORT
250
September 22, 2026
important role in advising the Mayor, City Council, and City staff on important public policy issues.
Vacancies on City of Richmond Boards, Commissions, and Committees The mayor is seeking applicants for the following boards, commissions, and committees:
- Arts and Culture Commission
- Commission on Aging
- Community Crisis Response Program Advisory Board
- Community Police Review Commission
- Design Review Board
- ECIA Grant Review Ad Hoc Committee
- ECIA Transportation Oversight Committee
- Economic Development Commission
- Housing Advisory Commission
- Human Relations Commission
- Macdonald Avenue Corridor Task Force
- Planning Commission
- Recreation and Parks Commission
- Richmond-Shimada Friendship Commission
- Richmond Youth Council
- Richmond-Zhoushan Friendship Commission
- Urban Forest Advisory Committee
- Workforce Development Board
Residents can learn more details about each board/commission/committee and apply for a vacant seat by contacting the Richmond City Clerk or visiting the Richmond City Clerk’s website: http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/256/Boards-and-Commissions.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – September 2026 Boards, Commissions, and Committees Vacancies_Mayor Appointments
Attachment 2 – September 2026 Boards, Commissions, and Committees Vacancies_Councilmember and Staff Appointments
251
BOARD/COMMISSION
YEARS PER
TERM
LIMIT OF
CONSECUTIVE
TERMS
# OF SERVING
COMMISSIONERS
# OF
VACANCIES
TOTAL # OF
SEATS
Arts and Culture Commission 4 2 9 6 15
Black Resiliency Project
Community Advisory Committee* 1 N/A 1 0 1
Commission on Aging 4 N/A 11 2 13
Community Crisis Response
Program Advisory Board 3 N/A 9 4 13
Community Police Review
Commission 3 3 8 1 9
Contra Costa County Advisory
Council on Aging - Richmond
seat 2 N/A 1 0 1
Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector
Control Board Contra Costa
County Area Advisory Council on
Aging- Richmond seat 2 - 4 N/A 1 0 1
Design Review Board 2 4 5 2 7
ECIA Grant Review Ad Hoc
Committee 2 N/A 3 2 5
ECIA Transportation Oversight
Committee 3 3 2 3 5
Economic Development
Commission 3 3 8 7 15
Historic Preservation
Commission 4 4 7 0 7
Housing Advisory Commission 2 N/A 2 5 7
Human Relations Commission 3 3 6 3 9
Library Commission 3 2 5 0 5
Macdonald Avenue Corridor Task
Force N/A N/A 8 2 10
Planning Commission 2 4 5 2 7
Recreation and Parks
Commission 3 3 7 2 9
Richmond Fund Children Youth
Oversight Board** 1 - 2 N/A 3 0 3
Richmond Rent Board 2 4 5 0 5
Richmond-Shimada Friendship
Commission 3 3 6 5 11
Richmond Youth Council 1 N/A 8 3 11
Richmond-Zhoushan Friendship
Commission 2 N/A 6 5 11
Urban Forest Advisory
Committee 3 3 8 3 11
Workforce Development Board*** 4 N/A 11 12 39
Updated as of 9/22/26
City of Richmond, Boards, Commissions, and Committees Vacancies September 2026
(Mayor Appointments)
*Black Resiliency Project Community Advisory Committee - Mayor can recommend one member **Richmond Fund Children Youth Oversight Board - Mayor of Richmond shall appoint three City residents as members ***Workforce Development Board - Appointments are considered and approved based on recommendations from the Workforce Development Executive Committee
For more information, visit: www.ci.richmond.ca.us/256/Boards-and-Commissions 252
BOARD/COMMISSION
YEARS PER
TERM
LIMIT OF
CONSECUTIVE
TERMS
# OF SERVING
COMMISSIONERS
# OF
VACANCIES
TOTAL # OF
SEATS
Black Resiliency Project
Community Advisory Committee* 1 N/A 2 8 10
Richmond Fund Children Youth
Oversight Board** 1 - 2 N/A 6 6 12
Updated as of 9/22/26
City of Richmond, Boards, Commissions, and Committees Vacancies September 2026
(Councilmember and Staff Appointments)
*Black Resiliency Project Community Advisory Committee - Each councilmember can recommend one (1) member; and City staff, in collaboration with the Council-appointed Black Resiliency Project Ad Hoc Committee, will recommend two (2) members; the appointed committee will then also appoint two (2) members
**Richmond Fund Children Youth Oversight Board - Each member of the Richmond City Council shall appoint two (2) City residents as members — one over 24 years old, and one who is 15 to 24 years of age For more information, visit: www.ci.richmond.ca.us/256/Boards-and-Commissions 253
September 22, 2026
Mayor's Office
DATE: September 22, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: Mayor Martinez
Subject: Proclamation Commemorating Labor Day
FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Labor Day is a federal holiday observed annually on the first Monday in September to recognize the contributions of American workers and the labor movement. The City
of Richmond commemorates Labor Day by honoring the
workers whose dedication, innovation, and service have
strengthened the community and advanced economic
opportunity.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: PROCLAMATION commemorating Labor Day and recognizing the contributions of workers and the labor
movement – Mayor Eduardo Martinez (510-620-6503).
DISCUSSION: Labor Day, first observed as a federal holiday in 1894, recognizes the achievements of working people and the labor movement in securing many of the AGENDA
REPORT
254
September 22, 2026
workplace protections and rights enjoyed today. These include fair wages, safer working conditions, reasonable work hours, and the right to organize and collectively bargain.
Richmond has a longstanding history as a labor city. From the workers who helped build the Kaiser Shipyards during World War II to today's workforce in education, healthcare, manufacturing, construction, transportation, public safety, government, and service industries, generations of workers have contributed to the City's growth, resilience, and prosperity.
Organized labor has played an important role in advancing workplace safety, economic opportunity, and equity while strengthening communities throughout California and across the nation. The City of Richmond recognizes the continued contributions of workers whose efforts support essential public services, local businesses, infrastructure, and the regional economy.
Labor Day also provides an opportunity to reaffirm the City's commitment to supporting working families, promoting safe and equitable workplaces, and recognizing the dignity and value of work in building a stronger and more inclusive community.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
ATTACHMENT 1 – Labor Day Proclamation
255
Proclamation Recognizing Labor Day
WHEREAS, Labor Day is a time-honored national holiday that recognizes the social and economic achievements of workers and honors the labor movement’s enduring contributions to the strength, prosperity, and well-being of our nation; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond has a proud history rooted in labor, from its shipyards and manufacturing plants to its vibrant service, education, healthcare, and public sectors, where generations of workers have built and sustained our community with skill, dedication, and courage; and
WHEREAS, Richmond’s workforce reflects the city’s diversity, resilience, and innovation, and continues to lead in areas such as clean energy, community health, education, and infrastructure development; and
WHEREAS, organized labor has played a vital role in advancing workplace protections, fair wages, racial and gender equity, and the right to collective bargaining, values that align with Richmond’s commitment to justice and inclusion; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond recognizes the essential contributions of frontline workers, educators, caregivers, tradespeople, and public servants, especially in times of crisis and recovery, and recommits to policies that support safe working conditions, economic opportunity, and dignity for all; and WHEREAS, Labor Day is not only a celebration of past achievements but a call to action to ensure that all workers, regardless of background or status, have access to fair treatment, sustainable employment, and a voice in shaping their future;
256
Mayor Eduardo Martinez
City of Richmond
September 22, 2026
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, I, Eduardo Martinez, Mayor of the City of Richmond, on behalf of the Richmond City Council, do hereby proclaim September 7, 2026, as Labor Day in the City of Richmond and encourage all residents to honor the legacy of labor, support working families, and continue building a city where everyone thrives.
257
September 22, 2026
Mayor's Office
DATE: September 22, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: Mayor Martinez and Councilmember Zepeda
Subject: Latinx Heritage Month Proclamation
FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
Latinx Heritage Month Proclamation
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Latinx Heritage Month, observed annually from
September 15 through October 15, recognizes the
histories, cultures, and contributions of Latinx
communities throughout the United States. The City of
Richmond also recognizes the organizers of the 2026
Fiestas Patrias Parade and Celebration for their efforts in celebrating Latin American independence, cultural
heritage, and community unity.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: PROCLAMATION recognizing Latinx Heritage Month (September 15–October 15, 2026) and honoring the
organizers of the 2026 Fiestas Patrias Parade and
Celebration – Mayor Eduardo Martinez (510-620-6503)/
Councilmember Cesar Zepeda (510-620-6593)
AGENDA
REPORT
258
September 22, 2026
DISCUSSION:
Latinx Heritage Month is observed annually from September 15 through October 15 in recognition of the histories, cultures, and enduring contributions of Latinx communities in the United States. The observance begins on September 15 to coincide with the independence anniversaries of Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua, followed by Mexico on September 16, Chile on September 18, and Belize on September 21.
Richmond's Latinx community has played a vital role in shaping the City's history, economy, culture, and civic life. From business owners and educators to artists, public servants, labor leaders, and community advocates, generations of Latinx residents have strengthened Richmond through their leadership, resilience, and commitment to community.
The City also recognizes the historical significance of the region. Long before colonial settlement, the land now known as Richmond was home to the Huchiun Band of the Ohlone people. Following Mexico's independence from Spain in 1821, portions of present-day Richmond became part of Rancho San Pablo, a land grant awarded to Don Francisco María Castro in 1823. As political boundaries changed over time, the region's residents continued to shape the community's identity and legacy, laying the foundation for the diverse Richmond we know today.
In celebration of this rich heritage, the Cities of Richmond and San Pablo partnered to host the 2026 Fiestas Patrias Parade and Celebration. The event brought together residents, families, businesses, and community organizations to commemorate Latin American independence, celebrate cultural traditions, and promote unity through music, dance, food, art, and civic engagement.
The City of Richmond is proud to recognize Latinx Heritage Month and extend its appreciation to the organizers, volunteers, sponsors, and participants whose dedication made the 2026 Fiestas Patrias Parade and Celebration a meaningful community event that celebrates the City's diversity and reflects Richmond's ongoing commitment to inclusion, cultural understanding, and civic pride.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
ATTACHMENT 1 – Latinx Heritage Month and 2026 Fiestas Patrias Parade and Celebration Proclamation
259
Mayor Eduardo Martinez
City of Richmond
September 22, 2026
RecognizingLatino/X HeritageMonthand
HonoringtheOrganizersof2026FietasPatriasParade
WHEREAS, Latino/x Heritage Month, observed annually from September 15 to October 15, celebrates the histories, cultures, and contributions of Latino/x community; and WHEREAS, the City of Richmond proudly recognizes the vibrant Latino/x communities that have shaped the city’s cultural, economic, and civic life through generations of leadership, creativity, and resilience; and
WHEREAS, Latino/x communities are made up of people from a wide range of racial and ethnic backgrounds, including Indigenous peoples native to the Americas, descendants of African communities brought through the transatlantic slave trade, and European settlers, along with immigrants from Asia and the Middle East. This rich cultural and racial mixture reflects centuries of migration, resistance, and cultural fusion across Latin America and the Caribbean; and WHEREAS, long before colonial borders were drawn, the land now known as Richmond was home to the Huchiun Band of Ohlone Indigenous Natives, whose deep connection to the region continues to shape its cultural landscape; and
WHEREAS, over time, the blending of Indigenous peoples with Spanish settlers on the land, gave rise to a new mestizo identity, what we now recognize as Mexican; and WHEREAS, following Mexico’s independence from Spain in 1821, the Mexican government granted large tracts of land in California to military leaders and loyal citizens. In 1823, Don Francisco María Castro was awarded approximately 17,000 acres in what is now Contra Costa County, land that became known as Rancho San Pablo. Decades later, a portion of this historic land grant became the foundation for the City of Richmond. Though borders shifted, the people did not disappear, but became Mexican Americans, continuing to shape the region’s identity and legacy; and WHEREAS, in celebration of Latin American culture, rich history, and the many independence days observed throughout the month of September—including those of Brazil, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, Chile, and Belize— Richmond and San Pablo co-sponsored the third annual Fiestas Patrias celebration on Saturday, September 12, 2026, honoring the shared spirit of freedom, resilience, and cultural pride across the Americas; and WHEREAS, the event featured a lively parade beginning at Barrett Avenue and 23rd Street in Richmond, culminating in a community-wide festival, drawing families, neighbors, and visitors from across the region to celebrate shared heritage and pride; and WHEREAS, Fiestas Patrias 2026 was a free and family-friendly event, welcoming all to participate in the rich cultural expressions of unity; and
WHEREAS, the success of this historic celebration was made possible by the dedication and vision of its organizers, whose tireless efforts brought together two cities, multiple cultures, and hundreds of residents in a joyful and meaningful tribute to independence and identity; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Richmond does hereby recognize Latino/x Heritage Month 2026, September 15 and October 15, and extends its deepest appreciation to the organizers of 2026 Fiestas Patrias Parade for their outstanding contributions to cultural celebration, community building, and civic pride. Richmond celebrates the richness of Latino/x heritage and reaffirms its commitment to honoring the voices, traditions, and histories that make our city strong.
Councilmember Cesar Zepeda
District 2
September 22, 2026
260
September 22, 2026
Mayor's Office
DATE: September 22, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: Mayor Martinez and Councilmember Zepeda
Subject: Proclamation Recognizing September as Suicide
Awareness and Prevention Month
FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Proclamation recognizing September 2026 as Suicide
Awareness and Prevention Month in the City of
Richmond. The proclamation promotes mental health
awareness and encourages suicide prevention efforts -
being of first responders through its Peer Support Team.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: PROCLAMATION recognizing September 2026 as Suicide Awareness and Prevention Month – Mayor
Eduardo Martinez (510-620-6503)/Councilmember Cesar
Zepeda (510-620-6593).
DISCUSSION:
September is recognized nationally as Suicide Awareness and Prevention Month, providing an opportunity to raise awareness about mental health, reduce stigma AGENDA
REPORT
261
September 22, 2026
surrounding suicide, encourage early intervention, and promote access to behavioral health resources. Suicide continues to be a significant public health concern, affecting individuals, families, workplaces, and communities across the nation.
This proclamation affirms the City of Richmond's commitment to promoting mental wellness, preventing suicide, and supporting those affected by mental health challenges. It also recognizes the dedicated members of the Richmond Fire Department's Peer Support Team for their ongoing service, leadership, and commitment to the health and well-being of their fellow firefighters.
The proclamation also encourages Richmond residents to learn the warning signs of suicide, engage in open conversations about mental health, utilize available behavioral health resources—including the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline—and support efforts that foster hope, resilience, and recovery throughout the community.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Proclamation Recognizing September as Suicide Awareness and Prevention Month
262
WHEREAS, first responders, including firefighters, emergency medical personnel, law enforcement officers, and other public safety professionals, routinely experience traumatic events while serving their communities and face unique mental health challenges associated with their profession; and
WHEREAS, the Richmond Fire Department's Behavioral Health Program reflects the City's commitment to supporting the well-being of its workforce and aligns with statewide efforts to strengthen behavioral health resources for California firefighters and first responders; and
Recognizing Suicide Awareness and Prevention Month
September 2026
WHEREAS, Suicide Awareness and Prevention Month is observed each September to raise awareness about suicide prevention, promote mental health education, reduce stigma, and encourage individuals experiencing emotional distress to seek help; and
WHEREAS, suicide remains a significant public health concern, affecting individuals, families, friends, coworkers, and communities across the nation. Every life lost to suicide has a lasting impact, underscoring the importance of compassionate support, early intervention, and access to behavioral health resources; and WHEREAS, promoting mental wellness requires a community-wide commitment to fostering understanding, encouraging open conversations about mental health, expanding access to care, and ensuring that individuals know they are not alone; and WHEREAS, the Richmond Fire Department has demonstrated leadership by establishing a comprehensive Behavioral Health Program and Peer Support Team, providing confidential peer support, crisis response, and wellness resources to firefighters and emergency personnel while fostering a culture that prioritizes mental health alongside physical safety; and
263
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond encourages all residents to recognize the warning signs of suicide, support those experiencing mental health challenges, utilize available resources such as the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline, and work together to build a compassionate, connected, and resilient community; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, I, Mayor Eduardo
Martinez, do hereby recognize September 2026 as Suicide Awareness and Prevention Month in the City of Richmond and commend the Richmond Fire Department's Peer Support Team for its outstanding commitment to supporting the behavioral health and well-being of first responders. The City encourages all residents to help reduce the stigma surrounding mental health, promote suicide prevention, and support efforts that foster hope, healing, and resilience throughout our community.
___________________________
Mayor Eduardo Martinez
City of Richmond
September 22, 2026
___________________________
Councilmember Cesar Zepeda
District 2
September 22, 2026
264
September 22, 2026
Department
DATE: September 22, 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 & Maintenance
Hugo Mendoza, Public Works Abatement Division
Superintendent
Subject: August 2026 Abatement Report
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with receiving this report.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
None
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The Public Works Department is presenting City Council
the August 2026 Abatement Presentation, summarizing
illegal dumping removal, encampment abatement, graffiti removal, and related mitigation activities conducted Citywide RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECEIVE a report on the August 2026 abatement activities – Public Works Department (Daniel Chavarria
510-620-5478/Darin Fitzpatrick 510-231-3044/Hugo
Mendoza 510-231-3030). type only within the text box)
DISCUSSION:
AGENDA
REPORT
265
September 22, 2026
On a monthly basis, the Public Works Department provides City Council with a report outlining the activities of the Abatement Division. The Division is responsible for addressing illegal dumping, encampment abatement, graffiti removal, weed abatement, vehicle and vessel dismantling, conducting neighborhoods dumpster days, and other nuisance abatement activities within the public right-of-way and, when authorized, on private property.
August 2026 abatement activities included:
Neighborhood Dumpster Days
o Collected 36 debris dumpsters and 7 recycling dumpsters o Assisted 298 seniors and disabled residents from May Valley, El Sobrante, Greenbrier, Quail Hill, Hasford Heights, Greenridge Heights, Fairmede Hilltop, Carriage Hills, Castro Heights, Hilltop District, Santa Fe, and Point Richmond neighborhoods
Illegal Dumping
o Removed 168 tons of illegally dumped material
o Targeted primary locations including Colusa Avenue and San Joaquin Street, 5th Street and Bissell Avenue, Spring Street, Portola Avenue, 2nd Street and Chanslor Avenue, and other recurring hotspot corridors City-wide o Disposed of specialized waste, including 272 mattresses, 242 tires, and approximately 300 gallons of paint/oil
Encampment Abatement
o Abated 24 encampment locations, removing 36.97 tons of debris o Notable locations included: 2500 block of Florida Avenue, Castro Street under Richmond Parkway, Greenway, West of San Pablo Avenue, South 1st Street and Cutting, Juliga Woods Street, and Macdonald Avenue Corridor Weed Abatement
o Abated weeds from 10 locations including City-owned properties, alleyways, vacant lots, and public rights-of-way
Graffiti Removal
o Removed 88 graffiti tags during the month
o Addressed graffiti on residential fencing, utility boxes, and public infrastructure at multiple City-wide locations
Private property Abatement
o Abated and boarded up two nuisance private properties through a warrant from Code Enforcement.
Coordinated with partner agencies, including Coordinated Outreach Referral Engagement (CORE), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Republic Services, and Sims Metal, on encampment response and Dumpster Days. 266
September 22, 2026
The attached report also includes year-to-date comparisons, monthly tonnage, staffhour summaries, hotspot maps, and partner coordination details to show operational workload and service trends.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – August 2026 Abatement Report
267
PUBLIC
WORKS/ABATEMENT
AUGUST 2026
ABATEMENT UPDATE
SEPTEMBER 22, 2026
268
NEIGHBORHOOD
DUMPSTER DAYS (5)
MAY VALLEY/EL SOBRANTE/GREENBRIER/QUAIL
HILL/HASFORD HEIGHTS/GREENRIDGE HEIGHTS
FAIRMEDE HILLTOP
CARRIAGE HILLS NORTH & SOUTH
CASTRO HEIGHTS
HILLTOP DISTRICT
POINT RICHMOND
SANTA FE
36 DUMPSTERS – 77.9 TONS
7 RECYCLING DUMPSTERS 269
NEIGHBORHOOD
DUMPSTER DAYS (5)
MAY VALLEY/EL SOBRANTE/GREENBRIER/QUAIL HILL/HASFORD
HEIGHTS/GREENRIDGE HEIGHTS
FAIRMEDE HILLTOP
CARRIAGE HILLS NORTH & SOUTH
CASTRO HEIGHTS
HILLTOP DISTRICT
POINT RICHMOND
SANTA FE
36 DUMPSTERS – 77.9 TONS
7 RECYCLING DUMPSTERS
270
298 SENIORS/DISABLED
PERSONS ASSISTED (44.7 TONS)
MAY VALLEY/EL SOBRANTE/GREENBRIER/QUAIL
HILL/HASFORD HEIGHTS/GREENRIDGE HEIGHTS
FAIRMEDE HILLTOP
CARRIAGE HILLS NORTH & SOUTH
CASTRO HEIGHTS
HILLTOP DISTRICT
POINT RICHMOND
SANTA FE
271
ILLEGAL
DUMPING
168 TONS REMOVED
5th Street & Bissell Avenue
272
ILLEGAL DUMPING
1480 LOCATIONS
South 13th Street & Potrero Avenue
273
ILLEGAL DUMPING
South 31st Street & Florida
Chanslor Ave & 36th Street
Macdonald Avenue & Marina Way
274
ILLEGAL DUMPING:
242 TIRES
272 MATTRESSES
300 GALLONS OF PAINT/OIL
Vernon Avenue
Hayes Street & Barrett Avenue
Willard Avenue
275
MATTRESSES COLLECTED PER MONTH (AUGUST)
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2022
August
2023
August
2024
August
2025
August
2026
August
276
ILLEGAL DUMPING TONNAGE COLLECTED PER MONTH - 2026
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
January February March April May June July Aug. Sep. October Nov. Dec. 277
ILLEGAL DUMPING TOTAL COST PER MONTH – 2026*
$-
$20,000.00
$40,000.00
$60,000.00
$80,000.00
$100,000.00
$120,000.00
$140,000.00
$160,000.00
$180,000.00
*Includes Labor and Equipment 278
Tonnage Collected Jan Feb March April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec YTD 2022 143.24 181.58 209.4 189.23 197.55 182.86 343.3 311.5 247.37 215.74 231.95 278.08 2731.80 2023 249.87 169.66 210.78 224.86 185.09 242.03 213.87 238.18 207.01 317.6 261.62 231.51 2752.08 2024 290.37 185.55 229.98 194.45 286.88 208.95 216.96 392.56 271.85 305.43 272.36 281.48 3136.62 2025 280.88 176.79 162.83 231.33 207.63 185.16 174.05 200.3 202.64 204.01 199.00 192.15 2417.77 2026 191.29 203.34 198.89 236.1 205.24 216.14 262 168 1681 Illegal Dumping (Tons) YTD Comparison
279
ENCAMPMENT
ABATEMENT (24)
36.97 Tons removed
South 1st Street & Cutting
Blvd
Greenway/Baxter Creek
280
ENCAMPMENTS
ABATEMENT
2500 Block of Florida Avenue
Barret Avenue Under Railroad
Tracks
281
ENCAMPMENTS TONNAGE COLLECTED PER MONTH - 2026
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 282
ENCAMPMENTS TONNAGE COLLECTED PER MONTH (AUGUST)
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 2022
August
2023
August
2024
August
2025
August
2026
August
283
GRAFFITI REMOVAL
88 Tags Removed
60 Locations
23rd Street & Broadway
284
GRAFFITI REMOVAL
HARBOUR WAY & BARRETT
285
GRAFFITI TAGS REMOVED PER MONTH
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2022
August
2023
August
2024
August
2025
August
2026
286 August
August Stats 2023 2024 2025 2026 2023 2024 2025 2026
Illegal Dumping 244.64 392.56 200.3 168 1765.18 2005.52 1618.87 1681.03 • Mattresses 302 247 272 272 1788 1803 1913 2077
• Tires 358 166 362 242 1837 1685 1915 1890
Encampments 8 14 18 24 46 83 141 189
• Tons 4.43 72.44 33.98 36.97 146.56 212.47 325.11 214.49 Graffiti Locations 132 185 140 60 844 995 1099 600
• Tags 188 260 280 88 1690 1523 1852 1226
YTD
287
WEED ABATEMENT (10
LOCATIONS)
13TH STREET & ROOSEVELT
AVENUE
288
WEED ABATEMENT
Barrett Avenue & Richmond Parkway
Burbeck Avenue Alleyways
289
PRIVATE PROPERTIES
CODE ENFORCEMENT
WARRANTS
1 VACANT LOT ABATED
IRON TRIANGLE NEIGHBORHOOD)
2 BOARD-UPS
PULLMAN NEIGHBORHOOD
290
VEHICLE
DISMANTLING (3):
CIVIC CENTER TOW YARD
1 BOAT – 1 BUS – 1
RECREATIONAL VEHICLE
291
ABATEMENT STAFF HOURS
Illegal Dumping 1292
Encampment Removal 156
Graffiti Abatement 80
North Richmond Mitigation 30
Weeds/leaves Abatement 88
Fencing, Private Board Ups & Clean-Ups 74
Seniors Assistance 140
Leave 356
Management 266
Transport/Misc.* 38
Total 2520
August Hours
Illegal Dumping
Encampment Removal
Graffiti Abatement
North Richmond Mitigation
Weeds/leaves Abatement
Transport/Misc*
Board Ups/Clean Ups/Fencing
Seniors Assistance
Transport/Misc. includes staff hours for removal of debris Management from vehicles, Point Molate trash removal, hazardous waste facility disposal, and Vehicle dismantling. 292
on
IRON TRIANGLE BELDING WOODS
W
Barre
tt Ave
NORTH & EAST RICHMO
HEIGHT
ATCHISO
N VILLAGE
Dim
St RICHMORE VILLAGEMETRO
SQUARE
Illegal Dumping
Hotspot (18)
February, 2025
Canal
PULLMAN PARK PLAZA
SANTE FE 580
CORONADO EL CERRITO
Lauritzen Canal
S 31st
St
CORTEZ-STEGE LAUREL PARK 80
EASTSHORE
Miller-knox
Regional
Shoreline
PARKVIEW
MARINA BAY POINT
RICHMOND
PANHAND
LE ANNEX
RICHMO
ND ANNEX
Richmond Inner Harbor
San
Francisco
Bay
SOUTHWE
ST ANNEX
0 1/4
1/21 Miles El
Cerrito Plz
ALBANY
293
PARTNERSHIPS
294
September 22, 2026
Police Department
DATE: September 22, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Timothy Simmons, Chief of Police
Subject: Contract Amendment with Axon Enterprise and Contract with Assure MSP, Inc. for Law Enforcement and City
Facility Video Technology, Surveillance, and Support
Services
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The estimated first year expenditure of up to $1,000,000 is included in the approved Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Police Department budget, and future years will be budgeted
appropriately. The recommended dual vendor approach
provides a cost benefit compared with continuing the
current configuration or purchasing similar technologies through separate standalone procurements.
Based on updated analysis from the Police Department,
transitioning the ALPR, CCTV, and drone systems from
Flock Safety to Axon is expected to reduce annual costs by approximately $200,000, which results in an estimated savings of about $1,000,000 over five years. The Axon
package also increases available drone capacity by
moving from a single leased drone to six purchased
drones, which adds operational value beyond annual cost comparisons. These efficiencies result from Axon’s
bundled pricing, integration with existing City technology, and the avoidance of duplicated software, installation, and maintenance costs associated with multiple
independent procurements. (Account String:
01191021-400209)
AGENDA
REPORT
295
September 22, 2026
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
October 18, 2016
December 22, 2020
December 17, 2024
March 3, 2026
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The proposed contracts support two distinct video
technology needs. The amendment with Axon Enterprise
will provide additional funding for the City-wide
automated license plate reader system and continued
maintenance and support of law enforcement technology
and equipment currently in use. The contract with Assure MSP, Inc. will provide Verkada closed-circuit television cameras, related infrastructure, installation, maintenance, and technical support at various City facilities.
Using two vendors allows the City to separately manage
law enforcement technology and general City facility
security systems. This approach helps ensure that law
enforcement data is accessible only to authorized law
enforcement personnel while allowing the City to retain ownership and control of its data.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE a contract amendment with Axon Enterprise to continue servicing body-worn cameras, taser devices, interview room equipment, and virtual reality training
equipment, and to add license plate reader and
surveillance equipment, increasing the contract amount
by $3,500,000, for a total amount not to exceed
$12,000,000, for the term of October 1, 2026, through
September 30, 2029, with two one-year extension
options through September 30, 2031; APPROVE a
contract with Assure MSP, Inc. for Verkada closed-circuit television camera equipment and related services at
various City facilities, in an amount not to exceed
$500,000, for the term of October 1, 2026, through
September 30, 2029; AUTHORIZE the City Attorney’s
Office to negotiate and finalize the contracts; and
AUTHORIZE the city manager, or their designee, to
execute the contracts – Police Department (Chief
Timothy Simmons 510-621-1802). This item was
continued from the September 15, 2026, meeting.
DISCUSSION:
The City of Richmond initially entered into an agreement with Flock Safety in February 2023 to purchase and deploy 30 Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) cameras.
Since that initial agreement, the City has amended the contract on four occasions to 296
September 22, 2026
expand the use of Flock Safety technology in support of public safety operations and security at City-owned facilities and infrastructure.
In November 2023, the City Council approved the first amendment to the Flock Safety agreement, authorizing the purchase and deployment of additional ALPR and closedcircuit television (CCTV) cameras. This amendment significantly expanded the City's initial ALPR program and added CCTV technology to the City's public safety camera network.
In April 2024, the City Council approved the second amendment to the Flock Safety agreement to further expand the system through the installation of additional CCTV and ALPR cameras at the Port of Richmond. This expansion was intended to enhance security and situational awareness at the Port and surrounding City infrastructure.
In January 2025, the City Council approved the third amendment to the Flock Safety agreement. This amendment further expanded the City's existing Flock Safety program to include Drone as a First Responder (DFR) technology, as well as additional camera systems to support the security and monitoring of City infrastructure and facilities.
As a result of these successive amendments, what began in 2023 as a deployment of 30 ALPR cameras evolved into a broader technology program consisting of ALPR cameras, CCTV cameras, facility and infrastructure security cameras, and DFR technology.
On March 3, 2026, staff presented a proposed amendment to the City's existing agreement with Flock Safety to extend the applicable contract terms through December 31, 2026. The City Council approved the amendment on March 17, 2026. The purpose of the extension was to allow the City to satisfy existing contractual payment obligations while providing staff with sufficient time to conduct a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) process and evaluate whether Flock Safety continued to represent the best technological, operational, and financial solution for the City of Richmond.
The contract amendment extending the agreement through December 31, 2026, was executed on May 5, 2026.
The decision to conduct a competitive procurement provided the City with an opportunity to comprehensively evaluate the current marketplace, compare available technologies, assess system performance and reliability, evaluate data management and privacy safeguards, consider interoperability with existing City technology, and determine whether alternative solutions could provide improved capabilities and value to the City.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND VENDOR EVALUATION
On February 26, 2026, City staff completed an RFP for Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR), closed-circuit television (CCTV), and related public safety technology solutions. The RFP was posted on February 27, 2026, with a closing date of March 27, 297
September 22, 2026
2026. A total of 830 vendors were notified of the solicitation, and an addendum was posted on March 1, 2026.
The City received proposals from six vendors:
Assure MSP
Axon Enterprise
Flock Safety
IREX
Motorola Solutions
Net Electric
Following an initial review of the six proposals, staff shortlisted Assure MSP, Axon Enterprise, and Flock Safety for additional evaluation.
Vendors Not Advanced for Further Evaluation
IREX was not advanced because its proposal lacked sufficient technical specifications for the equipment. Additionally, the proposed cost was approximately $1 million, and the proposal did not include a drone solution.
Motorola Solutions was not advanced primarily due to cost. Its proposal was approximately $3.5 million over five years, with individual drones costing approximately $500,000 each. As part of the City's due diligence, staff also conducted a reference check with a neighboring law enforcement agency, which reported that it was transitioning away from Motorola Solutions.
Net Electric was not advanced because the proposal lacked references, installation services, an integrated software solution, or a drone solution. Additionally, the proposed equipment consisted primarily of commercially available, off-the-shelf items rather than an integrated public safety technology platform.
EVALUATION COMMITTEE
A ten-member evaluation committee representing multiple City departments, including the Richmond Police Department (RPD), and operational perspectives participated in the review process:
Police Chief Timothy Simmons
Police Captain Elizabeth Bashan
Police Sergeant Enrik Melgoza
Police Sergeant Sarita Ellison
Police Systems Administrator Luan Trinh
Police Officer Michael Pagaling
Interim Chief Assistant City Attorney Kimberly Chin
Port Director Charles Gerard
Assistant Deputy Director of Public Works Darin Fitzpatrick Building Trades Worker (Abatement Team Leader) Fernando Chavez 298
September 22, 2026
The multidisciplinary composition of the committee was intended to ensure consideration of law enforcement operations, technology, legal compliance, city infrastructure, public works, City facilities, and citywide implementation requirements.
AXON ENTERPRISE
Axon Enterprise was shortlisted because it proposed a comprehensive, turnkey law enforcement solution that would integrate with technology already utilized by the Richmond Police Department (RPD). Under the proposed model, the City would own the deployed equipment and retain ownership and control of the equipment and its data.
The information would be maintained within the City's existing Axon Evidence.com environment, which currently houses all electronic digital evidence.
Axon partners with Skydio Co. for its drone technology and provides an integrated ecosystem encompassing ALPR, CCTV, digital evidence, drones, and other public safety technologies.
The evaluation committee met with Axon representatives on May 11, 2026. Among the advantages identified by the committee were:
Seamless interoperability with RPD's existing Axon hardware and software infrastructure;
Integration with the City's existing Evidence.com digital evidence environment; Bundled pricing opportunities associated with the City's existing Axon relationship;
Solar-powered equipment options, reducing the need for hardwired electrical installations and associated Public Works workload;
Integration with Skydio's drone technology;
Centralized management of law enforcement digital evidence and technology; A public-facing transparency portal like the transparency functionality currently available through Flock Safety; and
An internal Axon Ethics Commission that serves in an advisory capacity regarding technology and related ethical considerations.
City staff's evaluation also considered the platform's ability to support applicable California statutory requirements concerning auditing, immigration-related restrictions, and ALPR data management.
Prior to the issuance of the RFP, members of the City's technology team and Crime Analyst Assistant Sofia Ayala met with the Sacramento Police Department, an existing Axon ALPR/CCTV customer. Sacramento Police Department personnel provided favorable feedback regarding their experience with Axon's technology, data security, and customer support.
A primary implementation consideration associated with transitioning to Axon is the initial staff workload required to manage a large-scale technology deployment. This work would include site assessments, encroachment permit review, equipment staging 299
September 22, 2026
and configuration, installation coordination, system configuration, and employee training.
FLOCK SAFETY
Flock Safety was shortlisted because it is the City's current provider and because the City has already deployed a substantial Flock ALPR and CCTV infrastructure throughout Richmond and at certain City facilities, including the Port of Richmond, Corporation Yard, and portions of the City Hall parking areas.
The evaluation committee met with Flock Safety representatives on May 13, 2026. The committee identified several advantages associated with continuing with Flock Safety:
Minimal staff resources required to maintain the existing infrastructure compared with a complete system transition;
Existing Flock drone infrastructure;
Robust ALPR functionality, including advanced search capabilities; Ability to facilitate authorized information sharing with other law enforcement agencies;
Existing employee familiarity with the Flock platform; Solar-powered mobile trailers that can be rapidly deployed to temporary locations; and
Functionality is designed to support applicable California ALPR and datamanagement requirements.
The committee also identified several concerns based on the City's experience with the existing system. These included:
Reliability concerns involving certain CCTV equipment; Extended delays associated with equipment repairs and replacements; Difficulty obtaining firm repair or replacement timelines; Concerns regarding billing practices, including requirements for payment when portions of the contracted equipment had not yet been installed; Cameras that remained incorrectly positioned following the initial deployment and had not been corrected;
A camera at the Corporation Yard that, at the time of the evaluation, had reportedly been awaiting repair for approximately eight months; and Concerning whether certain equipment and software functionality consistently performed as represented, including questions involving the Network Lookup feature.
Although the committee recognized that Flock Safety has continued to improve its platform, staff determined that concerns about reliability, transparency, system performance, and public confidence warranted consideration in the City's overall evaluation.
300
September 22, 2026
ASSURE MSP / VERKADA
Assure MSP is a managed service provider and authorized installer of Verkada camera equipment. Assure MSP is based in Pleasanton, California, and Verkada is based in San Mateo, California.
The evaluation committee met with representatives from Assure MSP and Verkada on May 7, 2026. The committee found Verkada's camera platform to be robust and userfriendly, particularly for general City facility security applications.
However, the committee determined that the proposed Verkada solution was not the preferred platform for RPD's law enforcement ALPR/CCTV environment. Among the considerations were limitations identified during the evaluation concerning law enforcement auditing requirements, the absence of an integrated drone solution, and the absence of a comparable public-facing transparency portal. Additionally, the vendor's reference described the City of San Mateo's use of the technology in a nonlaw-enforcement capacity.
As with Axon, the implementation of Verkada equipment would require City coordination, including site reviews, permitting, equipment staging, configuration, installation, and training.
On May 27, 2026, Technology Supervisor Eric Tam visited Verkada's headquarters to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the company and its technology.
Following the visit, staff concluded that although Verkada was not the preferred solution for RPD's law enforcement technology needs, the platform was well suited for security applications at City-owned facilities.
Verkada manufactures a variety of camera types and technologies suitable for indoor and facility-based applications, whereas the proposed Axon CCTV cameras are primarily fixed-lens cameras designed for outdoor public safety applications. This distinction provides an opportunity for the City to select technology based upon the operational purpose and environment in which it will be deployed.
FINAL EVALUATION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION
On June 16, 2026, the evaluation committee reconvened to formally discuss and rate the three shortlisted vendors. To ensure compliance with City purchasing procedures, Finance Department Senior Buyer Ofelia Alvarez attended the meeting and provided guidance regarding the vendor evaluation and rating process.
Based on the competitive procurement process, vendor presentations, reference checks, operational considerations, technology capabilities, legal and policy considerations, implementation requirements, and committee scoring, staff recommends a dual-vendor approach:
1. Axon Enterprise for RPD's law enforcement technology environment, including ALPR, CCTV, drone, and associated public safety technology; and 301
September 22, 2026
2. Assure MSP/Verkada for security camera systems at non-law-enforcement City facilities, including locations such as Shields-Reid Park, the Civic Center campus, Corporation Yard, and Port of Richmond.
This approach creates an intentional separation between the City's general facilitysecurity camera network and RPD's law enforcement technology environment. Non-lawenforcement City personnel using the Verkada platform would not have access to RPD's Axon Evidence.com environment or law-enforcement information.
RPD staff believes this separation provides an appropriate balance between operational effectiveness, information security, access control, and the differing technology needs of law enforcement and general City facilities.
AXON PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY
The proposed Axon law enforcement package includes:
110 solar-powered ALPR cameras;
60 solar-powered dual fixed-lens cameras;
24 spare cameras;
6 Skydio X10 drones with docks;
3 Skydio X10 patrol drones;
2 R10 indoor drones;
Axon Dedrone radar and detection capabilities; and
Auror Retail Crime Hub.
RPD currently maintains an existing agreement with Axon for several public safety products and services, including body-worn cameras, TASER energy weapons, virtualreality training, and digital evidence storage. The proposed amendment would expand the City's Axon environment to include the additional law enforcement technologies described above.
ALPR Data Security and Interagency Sharing
An important consideration in RPD staff's evaluation is the City's ability to maintain control over its ALPR information and determine when, how, and with whom that information is shared.
Like Flock Safety, Axon's ALPR technology has the technical capability to facilitate information sharing between law enforcement agencies. However, once implemented, Axon’s ALPR environment would remain closed to outside agencies unless RPD affirmatively establishes an authorized sharing relationship or conducts a search in response to an authorized request.
Current RPD policy prohibits open or unrestricted sharing of the Department's ALPR data. The law in the State of California prohibits ALPR data from being shared with any agency outside of the state. Accordingly, implementation of Axon would not provide other jurisdictions with automatic access to Richmond's ALPR database. 302
September 22, 2026
Under RPD's intended operating model, an outside law enforcement agency investigating a qualifying criminal offense would be required to submit an appropriate written request to RPD. An authorized RPD team member would then evaluate the request and, when consistent with law, policy, and authorized law enforcement purposes, conduct the requested search.
This approach allows RPD to retain control over its ALPR information while still providing a mechanism to assist legitimate criminal investigations. The transition to Axon would therefore not result in unrestricted regional database access or provide outside jurisdictions with open access to Richmond's ALPR information.
AXON COST COMPARISON
The proposed Axon ALPR, CCTV, drone, software, and installation package is estimated at approximately $700,000 annually, or approximately $3.5 million over five years.
For comparison, the city currently pays approximately $1 million annually to Flock Safety for a system that includes:
110 solar-powered ALPR cameras;
60 CCTV cameras consisting of a combination of solar, hardwired, fixed, and pan-tilt-zoom cameras; and
One drone.
Based on current estimates, transitioning the City's law enforcement ALPR/CCTV and drone environment from Flock Safety to Axon is projected to reduce annual expenditures by approximately $300,000, representing potential savings of approximately $1.5 million over five years, while substantially increasing the City's drone capabilities and further integrating RPD's public safety technology environment.
CITY FACILITY CAMERA SYSTEM
RPD staff also recommend entering into an agreement with Assure MSP for the installation, maintenance, and support of Verkada security camera equipment at appropriate City facilities.
Potential locations include Shields-Reid Park, the Corporation Yard, the Port of Richmond, the Civic Center campus, and other City-owned facilities where security camera technology is appropriate.
Assure MSP will perform a site survey and design a robust CCTV system with Verkada equipment to meet the unique facility requirements. Afterwards, Verkada will perform the installation, configuration, maintenance, and support of the system.
Verkada provides a range of facility-security capabilities, including advanced analytics and the ability to activate alerts, sirens, or public-address notifications based upon defined conditions such as motion detection, location, or time parameters. Under the 303
September 22, 2026
proposed arrangement, Assure MSP would provide installation services as well as ongoing maintenance and repair support.
ASSURE MSP, INC. COST COMPARISON
Assure’s Verkada system will utilize CCTV cameras that are both fixed and Pan Tilt Zoom (PTZ) – no Verkada ALPR cameras will be utilized. For coverage at facilities like Shields Reid Park, the estimated 6 cameras and PA system, installation, wiring, and annual maintenance and support is roughly $33,000 for city-owned equipment. Since the new contract obligation will replace Flock’s current infrastructure, City departments utilizing Flock’s system will be able to convert their unspent budgeted balance to support the initial setup of Assure’s cameras. City departments included in the initial rollout will be Shields-Reid Park, the Port, Corporation Yard, and Civic Center Campus.
CONCLUSION
Following a competitive RFP process and multidisciplinary evaluation, RPD staff determined that no single platform provided the optimal solution for both law enforcement operations and general City facility security.
RPD staff therefore recommend utilizing Axon Enterprise for RPD's law-enforcement ALPR, CCTV, drone, and related technology needs, and Assure MSP/Verkada for City facility security cameras.
The recommended approach is intended to improve system reliability and interoperability, strengthen City control over law enforcement data, maintain strict limitations on external access to RPD ALPR information, separate law enforcement information from general City facility-security systems, expand the City's technological capabilities, and reduce the City's estimated law enforcement technology costs by approximately $300,000 annually compared with the existing Flock Safety solution.
Staff requests that the City Council authorize the City Manager to sign:
(1) a contract and/or contract amendment with Axon Enterprise to continue servicing Body Worn Cameras (BWC), Tasers, Interview Room Equipment, VR Training, and to add license plate reader and surveillance equipment in the amount of $3,500,000, for a total contract amount not to exceed $12,000,000 with an expiration of September 30, 2031 that will be finalized by the City Attorney’s Office; and
(2) a three-year contract with Assure MSP Inc. for Verkada’s CCTV solution to be utilized at various City facilities in an amount not to exceed $500,000 for the term October 1, 2026, to September 30, 2029, that will be finalized by the City Attorney’s Office.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – RFP
Attachment 2 – Addendum No 1
304
September 22, 2026
Attachment 3 – Bid summary
305
Request for Proposal
Video Surveillance Technologies
Release Date:
February 27, 2026
Deadline for Submittal:
March 27, 2026, 5:00PM
INTRODUCTION
The City of Richmond’s Police Department is currently soliciting proposals for video surveillance technology, specifically Automated License Plate Reader Technology (ALPR) and Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV).
This request for proposal (RFP) describes the project, the required scope of services, the consultant selection process, and the minimum information that must be included in the proposal. Failure to submit information in accordance with the RFP requirements and procedures may be cause for disqualification. The anticipated term of this contract will be for a period of a minimum of three (3) years and an option to renew for additional time and additional services by means of a mutual agreement of both parties.
Vendors are required to read and understand all information contained within this entire Proposal package. By responding to this RFP, the vendor agrees to read and understand these documents.
ABOUT THE CITY
The City of Richmond is a Charter City located in Contra Costa County, part of the San Francisco Bay Area, with a population of approximately 115,353 residents. Richmond is one of the region’s most diverse communities with 45.5 percent of residents identify as Hispanic or Latino, 16.4 percent identify as Black or African American alone, 21.2 percent identify as White alone (not Hispanic or Latino), and 13.8 percent identify as Asian alone.1 Richmond boasts a multi-modal transit hub that includes BART, Amtrak, and AC Transit, along with marinas, shopping centers, recreational and cultural amenities, and 32 miles of shoreline, making it one of California’s most desirable up-and-coming communities.
Richmond operates under a council-administrator form of government, with a Mayor and six council districts represented by elected Councilmembers. The City employs approximately 850 full-time equivalent and part-time employees. The City of Richmond provides a full range of municipal services including police and fire protection; construction and maintenance of highways, streets and infrastructure; library services; storm water and municipal sewer systems; operation of a wastewater treatment facility; and the administration of recreational activities and cultural events. Additionally, the City operates the Richmond Memorial Convention Center and the Port of Richmond, supporting economic development and regional connectivity.
Community Profile1
Median Household Income: ~$95,000
Foreign-born Residents: ~34.5%
Languages: Approximately 54% of residents speak a language other than English at home Housing: Median home value ~$668,000; owner-occupied housing ~55% Transportation: Average commute time ~34 minutes; strong public transit access
1 Quick facts Richmond city, California. U.S. Census Bureau. Based on 2024 estimates. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/richmondcitycalifornia 307
PROJECT BACKGROUND / DESCRIPTION
The City of Richmond Police Department currently uses Flock Safety ALPR and CCTV technology, and as part of its standard procurement process, is soliciting proposals from qualified professionals to determine if Flock Safety is still the best solution for the City of Richmond.
Currently the City of Richmond leases about 110 stationary Flock ALPR cameras, and about 65 stationary CCTV cameras consist of about 20 solar powered fixed cameras, and 45 pan, tilt, zoom (PTZ) cameras.
Minimum Requirements:
The respondent will be required to provide:
110 ALPR cameras
65 CCTV cameras
Software:
o Complies with all federal, state (SB-274), and local regulations and ordinances.
o Agency controlled and agency owned data.
o Maximum 30-day retention period for ALPR and CCTV data (auto-delete after 30 days).
Installation of equipment (respondent will not be required to tap into power on City owned light poles).
Maintenance and support for all equipment and systems for the duration of the contract.
Submitting the necessary encroachment permits and related documents to the City of Richmond (permit fees may apply).
Preferred:
Integration with Axon FUSUS Real Time Crime Center software. Proposed Software can be integrated with other video surveillance technologies, such as drones.
PTZ cameras preferred over fixed cameras.
Solar powered ALPR equipment.
Solar powered fixed CCTV camera.
Solar powered PTZ CCTV camera.
Flash Cam style (with audio messaging, flashing strobe, etc) Optional:
Portable ALPR equipment (such as in car devices, or portable trailer) Portable CCTV equipment (such as in car devices, or portable trailer) Law enforcement drone equipment (indoor and/or outdoor) Optional Drone Technology (Separate Line Item & Evaluation Category) The City is requesting optional pricing and technical information for Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) for law enforcement use. Drone equipment shall be evaluated independently from the 308
ALPR and CCTV base proposal.
Submission of drone equipment is optional and shall not impact eligibility for award of the base ALPR/CCTV contract. The City reserves the right to award drone equipment to a different vendor, decline to award drone equipment, or conduct a separate procurement at a later date.
A. Minimum Drone Requirements (If Proposed)
- FAA-compliant UAS platform
- Remote ID compliance
- Secure encrypted communications
- CJIS-compliant data transmission (if evidentiary)
- Secure storage of recorded video
- Ability to disable public cloud sharing
- Chain-of-custody controls
- Public Records Act export capability
B. Drone Capabilities (Describe in Detail)
- Indoor and/or outdoor deployment
- Flight time and battery life
- Wind resistance rating
- Night and/or thermal capability (if applicable)
- Obstacle avoidance
- Launch time
- Live-streaming capability
- Integration with Real Time Crime Center software
C. Separate Evaluation Category – Optional Drone Technology (Up to 10 Points) Regulatory Compliance – 3 Points
Operational Capability – 3 Points
Security & Data Protection – 2 Points
Integration & Scalability – 2 Points
Drone equipment will be evaluated independently from the base ALPR/CCTV proposal.
Any deployment of drone technology shall be subject to approval under applicable City surveillance ordinances and policy adoption requirements prior to operational use.
D. Separate Drone Cost Proposal Format
One-Time Costs:
- Drone platform
- Controllers
- Docking stations (if applicable)
- Software license
- Training
- Implementation
Recurring Costs (Years 1–5):
- Subscription
- Maintenance
- Support
- Escalation percentage disclosure required
309
Vendors may have access to confidential and sensitive data files and may be subject to a Department of Justice and Criminal History background check. Failure to pass the background check shall exclude any employees of the vendor from access to confidential and sensitive files. All employees of vendors who will participate at the level described above in the project will be required to provide a valid issued driver’s license or equivalent photo identification before they will be permitted to begin work on the project.
Respondent software solutions should be web based and Software as a Service (SaaS) in full compliance with California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) CJIS requirements. (Please see www.oag.ca.gov for latest updates)
TECHNICAL ARCHITECTURE, CYBERSECURITY & SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS A. System Architecture:
Cloud-hosted or hybrid deployment model
U.S.-based data centers only
Minimum 99% system uptime SLA
Redundancy and failover capability
B. Cybersecurity Requirements:
CJIS compliant
Encryption in transit (TLS 1.2+)
Encryption at rest (AES-256 or equivalent)
Role-based access controls
Multi-factor authentication
12-month audit log retention minimum
Breach notification within 72 hours
SOC 2 Type II report or equivalent
Documented incident response plan
C. Integration Requirements:
API availability and documentation
Compatibility with Axon FUSUS (if applicable)
Ability to integrate with City-approved systems
PROPOSAL FORMAT GUIDELINES
The proposal should be concise, well organized, and demonstrate the proposer’s qualifications and experience applicable to the Project.
Each proposal will adhere to the following order and content of sections. Proposal should be straightforward, concise and provide “layman” explanations of technical terms that are used. Emphasis should be concentrated on conforming to the RFP instructions, responding to the RFP requirements, and on providing a complete and clear description 310
of the offer. Proposals, which appear unrealistic in terms of technical commitments, lack of technical competence or are indicative of failure to comprehend the complexity and risk of this contract, may be rejected. The following proposal sections are to be included in the Vendor’s response:
A. Vendor Cover Letter
A cover letter should summarize key elements of the proposal and shall:
Confirm that all elements of this RFP have been reviewed and understood. Include a statement of intent to perform the services as outlined. Stipulate that the proposal price will be valid for the duration of the contract. Identify a single person for contact during the RFP review process; and Cover letter shall be signed by an authorized official of the company.
B. Background and Project Summary Section
Proposer must have the qualifications and skills necessary to perform the services described in this RFP in a competent and professional manner without the advice or direction from the Police Department. The Respondent warrants that all services and solutions provided meets or exceeds the CJIS Requirements.
C. Scope of Services
Proposer solution must have the ability to provide all of the following services and equipment in Minimum Requirements section
D. Cost Information
Mandatory Pricing Worksheet Template (Excel)
Proposers shall complete and submit the City-provided Pricing Worksheet Template in Excel format. The worksheet includes the following mandatory tabs:
Tab 1 – Instructions
Overview and completion requirements.
Tab 2 – One-Time Costs
Hardware, installation, permitting, training, and project management. Extended cost formulas are pre-programmed. Total One-Time Cost auto-calculates.
Tab 3 – Recurring Costs (Years 1–5)
Annual subscription, hosting, maintenance, and support. Proposer must disclose annual escalation percentage.
Tab 4 – Cost Per Camera
Unit cost per ALPR, CCTV Fixed, and CCTV PTZ camera.
Tab 5 – Cost Per Site
Installed cost for new site and relocated equipment site.
Tab 6 – Three-Year Summary
Auto-summary of total One-Time and Years 1–3 recurring costs.
Tab 7 – Five-Year Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
Auto-summary of total One-Time and Years 1–5 recurring costs. The Five-Year TCO will be used as the primary cost evaluation metric.
E. Contractor Assignment of Sub-Contract
The resulting contract shall not be assigned, transferred, or sublet, in whole or in 311
part, without the prior written approval of the Police Department. If Offerors intend to subcontract any portion of the resulting contract, they must describe their process for selecting such subcontractor(s) and the quality control measures that the Offeror will employ to ensure that any subcontractor complies with the provisions of Offeror’s contract with the Department.
F. Exceptions to this Request for Proposals
The proposer shall state whether it takes exception(s) to this RFP, including but not limited to the City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement – RFP (Attachment B). If the proposer does take exception(s) to any portion of the RFP or contract, the specific portion to which exception(s) is taken must be identified by section number and explained. Requests for changes or additions to sections of City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement must be shown by requesting deletion of specific words and/or by providing new requested contract language.
Requests for complete replacement of the City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement for another contract will not be granted. Failure to make exceptions to the RFP or Standard Services Agreement within the proposal will be deemed a waiver of any objection. Exceptions will be considered during the proposal evaluation process.
G. Statement of Impartiality and Disclosure
This proposal shall include a statement declaring that the proposer’s and subconsultants are not currently, and will not, during the performance of these services, participate in any other similar work involving a third-party with interests currently in conflict or likely to conflict with City of Richmond’s interests.
Additionally, proposer is required to disclose any pending or active investigations or litigation that may affect the reputation or ability of the proposer to carry out the Project.
H. Sanctuary City Contracting and Investment Ordinance 12-18NS_2018, and Resolution 86-21 (Disclosure Statement of Limited Liability Companies Form.
The City of Richmond’s Sanctuary Contracting Ordinance certification requires the City to refrain from doing business with vendors who provide Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). In addition, City of Richmond Resolution 86-21 requires disclosure of beneficial and responsible owners of Limited Liabilities Corporation (LLC).
I. IMPLEMENTATION REQUIREMENTS
Proposer must submit:
Detailed project schedule
Deployment phases
Permitting timeline
Risk mitigation plan
Staffing plan
Estimated time to full operational deployment
312
PROCESS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS
Questions Concerning Request for Proposals
Please do not contact staff directly regarding this Proposal which will not be answered.
All questions will be answered promptly and must be submitted via the electronic BidsOnline system on the Q&A tab no later than March 13, 2026, 5:00pm PST. If the City finds it necessary to issue an addendum, prospective Offerors will receive e-mail notification of addendum. It is the proposer’s responsibility to periodically check the BidsOnline website www.ci.richmond.ca.us/ bids for any possible Addenda to the RFP that may have been posted.
Any party submitting a proposal shall not contact or lobby any City Council member, City officials, employee (except those specified for contact) or agent regarding the RFP. Any party attempting to influence or circumvent the RFP, bid submittal, and review process may have their proposal rejected for violating this provision of the RFP.
Interested parties may download copies of the above-mentioned proposal by visiting the City's web site, and to download RFP, new vendors will be required to register. Once the vendor downloads any documents relative to a solicitation, that vendor's name will appear on the Prospective Bidders list for that project and will receive any addenda or notifications relating to the RFP.
Submission of Proposals
Please submit your proposal via the City of Richmond's BidsOnline system. Proposals submitted by facsimile or e-mail are not acceptable and will not be considered.
The proposal and any required certifications shall be signed by an individual or individuals authorized to execute legal documents on behalf of the proposer.
Proposer is responsible for submitting its entire package with all required submittal documents and any modifications or revisions, to reach the City of Richmond’s office as designated in the RFP by the time specified below. Any proposal, modification, or revision received by the City of Richmond after the exact time specified for receipt of proposals is “late” and will not be considered.
The proposal must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time, on March 27, 2026.
The City of Richmond reserves the right to waive inconsequential irregularities. 313
GENERAL GUIDELINES
This RFP does not commit the City of Richmond to award a contract, to defray any costs incurred in the preparation of a proposal pursuant to this RFP, or to procure or contract for work. The City of Richmond may reject a proposal without providing the reason(s) underlying the declination. A failure to award a contract to the proposer with the lowest cost proposal shall not constitute a valid cause of action against the City of Richmond.
The City shall not be responsible for work done, even in good faith, prior to final approval of the proposed contract. The City may investigate the qualifications of any respondent under consideration, require confirmation of information furnished by the respondent, and require additional evidence or qualifications to perform the Services described in this RFP.
The City reserves the right to:
1. Reject any or all proposals.
2. Issue subsequent Requests for Proposal.
3. Postpone opening for its own convenience.
4. Remedy technical errors in the Request for Proposal process.
5. Negotiate with any, all, or none of the Respondents.
6. Solicit best and final offers from all or some of the Respondents.
7. Select one or more Respondents.
8. Accept other than the lowest proposed fees.
9. Waive informalities and irregularities in proposals.
Public Records
All proposals submitted in response to this RFP will become the property of the City of Richmond and public records and, as such, may be subject to public review. Documents protected by law from public disclosure will not be disclosed by the City of Richmond if clearly marked with the word "confidential" on each applicable page. Trade secrets may be marked as confidential only to the extent they meet the requirements of California Government Code section 6254.7. Only information claimed to be a trade secret at the time of submittal to the City of Richmond and marked as "confidential" will be treated as a trade secret.
Insurance Requirements
The City of Richmond requires consultants doing business with it to obtain insurance, as shown in Attachment A. The required insurance certificates must comply with all requirements of the standards as shown and must be provided within fifteen (15) days of issuance of the Notice of Intent to Award and prior to the commencement of any work on the Project.
Business Licenses
The successful Contractor and all subcontractors used in the work will be required to hold or to obtain a City of Richmond business license for which the fee will not be waived.
Compliance with City Ordinances
The contractor and all subcontractors shall comply with the City of Richmond Nondiscrimination Clauses in City Contracts Ordinance (Richmond Municipal Code (RMC) Chapter 2.28), Business Opportunity Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.50), Local 314
Employment Program Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.56), Living Wage Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.60) and Ordinance Banning the Requirement to Provide Information of Prior Criminal Convictions on all Employment Applications (“Ban the Box”) (RMC Chapter
2.65), which are incorporated into the Contract Documents by this reference.
Collusion
By submitting a proposal, each respondent represents and warrants that its proposal is genuine and not false or collusive or made in the interest of, or on behalf of any person not named therein; that the respondent has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other person to submit a false proposal, or any other person to refrain from submitting a proposal; and that the respondent has not, in any manner, sought collusion to secure any improper advantage over any other person submitting a proposal.
Withdrawal of Proposals
A respondent may withdraw their proposal before the expiration of the time for submission of proposals by delivering to the Finance Department a written request for withdrawal signed by, or on behalf of, the respondent.
Ownership of Documents
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems, and any other materials produced for the Project shall be the sole and exclusive property of the City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part for the Project shall be subject to private use, copyrights, or patent rights by Respondent in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of the City. The City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright, or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced for this project.
PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS
All proposals shall be reviewed to verify that the Respondent has met the minimum requirements. Proposals that have not complied with requirements do not meet minimum content and quality standards or take unacceptable exceptions to the General Terms and Conditions of the Service Agreement, which will be eliminated from further consideration.
Proposals will be reviewed and evaluated by an evaluation committee comprised of City of Richmond personnel.
The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, or to make no award. The City also reserves the right to require modifications follow‐up with requests for additional information, including, but not limited to, follow‐up interviews. The City may request Best and Final offers based upon improved understanding of the offers or changed scope of service. The City will negotiate with that vendor to determine final pricing and contract form. Because this proposal is negotiable, all pricing data will remain confidential until after award is made, and there will be no public opening and reading of Proposals. Overall responsiveness to the RFP is an important factor in the evaluation process.
Vendors that meet the minimum qualifications may be invited to a “Phase II” meeting/demonstration for the evaluation committee for further clarification and consideration. The criteria upon which the evaluation of the proposals will be based include, but are not limited to, the following:
315
Vendor Qualifications and Experience – Up to 15 Points
The Proposer shall demonstrate sufficient experience, organizational capacity, and financial stability to successfully deliver, implement, and support the proposed solution.
Evaluation under this criterion will consider the Proposer’s demonstrated history of successfully providing similar products and/or services to organizations of comparable size, scope, and operational complexity.
The Proposer’s response shall include, at a minimum, the following:
1. Organizational Background
Legal name of the firm and years in business
Corporate structure (public, private, subsidiary, etc.) Location of headquarters and primary offices
Description of core business and area (s) of specialization
2. Relevant Experience
Experience working with similar agencies, industries, or public sector entities (if applicable)
Demonstrated expertise in delivering solutions of similar size and complexity Outcomes achieved and measurable results (if available) References (preferably three within a 100-mile radius)
3. Key Personnel
Identification of key project staff and their roles
Qualifications, certifications, and years of relevant experience Resumes of proposed project leads and subject matter experts Scope of Work, Methodology and Proposal – Up to 10 Points This category will evaluate the respondent’s ability to take upon itself the responsibilities set forth in the Scope of Services and produce the required outcome in a timely manner.
Consideration will be given of the overall quality of the proposal, including a demonstrated understanding of the purpose, scope, and objective of the services to be performed. It is the intention of the City of Richmond to award a contract to the Respondent who furnishes satisfactory evidence that the Respondent has the requisite experience and ability to enable the Respondent to execute the work successfully and properly, and to complete services in a timely manner. To determine the degree of responsibility to be credited to the Respondent, the City of Richmond will weigh the evidence that the Respondent has performed other contracts of like nature, magnitude and comparable difficulty and comparable rates of progress.
Usability and User Experience – Up to 25 Points
The proposed solution should be intuitive, efficient, and accessible user experience that minimizes training time and supports high-volume operational environments. The system should enable users to perform core functions accurately and efficiently with minimal complexity.
316
Evaluation of Usability & User Experience will include, but is not limited to, the following:
Overall intuitiveness and logical workflow design
Ease of navigation and task completion
Screen layout clarity and information hierarchy
Customization of dashboards, views, and user preferences Reduction of unnecessary clicks or redundant data entry Accessibility compliance (e.g., WCAG 2.1 AA standards) Mobile responsiveness (if applicable)
Context-sensitive help and tooltips
Reporting and data visualization usability
Demonstrated ease of use during product demonstration Cost Proposal – Up to 30 Points
Vendors are encouraged to submit multiple cost proposals to include optional services and equipment.
The Proposer shall submit a complete and itemized Cost Proposal covering all costs necessary to provide the goods and/or services described in this RFP. Pricing should be clear, detailed, and presented in a manner that allows for comprehensive evaluation.
All costs associated with delivery, implementation, training, documentation, project management, travel, taxes (if applicable), and ongoing support shall be included unless otherwise specified.
Proposer shall indicate the period for which pricing shall remain firm, any annual escalation rates, conditions under which pricing may change, and renewal of pricing methodology.
Failure to provide a complete and transparent cost proposal may result in disqualification.
One-Time Costs: Software licensing fees, hardware costs (if applicable), implementation and configuration, data migration services, training, project management, travel and related expenses, etc.
Recurring Costs: Annual or monthly subscription fees, user or site license fees, maintenance and support, hosting or cloud service fee, upgrade, ongoing licenses, etc.
Option Costs: Optional modules or enhancements, additional training, extended warranties, professional services beyond the base scope, etc.
City may elect to conduct negotiations with the highest ranked proposal respondents for purposes of resolving minor differences and information, clarifying necessary details and responsibilities, emphasizing important issues and points, or receiving assurances from respondents.
Selection may be made without further discussion, negotiations, or Offeror’s presentations; therefore, Offeror shall offer the most favorable terms in response to this RFP. Offeror must demonstrate an understanding of the scope of service to be provided and the ability to accomplish the tasks set forth. Offeror should include information that will enable the City to determine the Offeror’s overall qualifications.
The City reserves the right to request additional information or clarification on any matter included in the proposal response, to enable the City to arrive at the final award decision. 317
Technical Architecture & Security – 20 Points
The Proposer must demonstrate that the proposed solution meets the City’s operational, cybersecurity, data protection, and regulatory compliance requirements. Evaluation under this category will assess the robustness, security posture, reliability, and scalability of the proposed system.
A. System Architecture & Infrastructure (Up to 6 Points) - Deployment model (cloud, hybrid, on-premise)
- U.S.-based data center locations
- Redundancy and failover capabilities
- Disaster recovery procedures (RTO/RPO)
- Minimum 99% uptime SLA
- Scalability for future expansion
- Network and performance standards
- System architecture diagram required
B. Cybersecurity Controls & Risk Management (Up to 6 Points) - CJIS Security Policy compliance
- Encryption in transit (TLS 1.2+)
- Encryption at rest (AES-256 or equivalent)
- Role-based access control (RBAC)
- Multi-factor authentication (MFA)
- 12-month audit log retention minimum
- Documented incident response plan
- Breach notification within 72 hours
- SOC 2 Type II or equivalent certification
- Penetration testing and vulnerability management practices C. Data Protection & Compliance (Up to 4 Points)
- Compliance with California Civil Code §1798.90.5
- CLETS and CJIS compliance
- SB-34 / SB-741 (if applicable)
- City ownership of all data
- No resale or secondary use of data
- Automatic 30-day data deletion
- Public Records Act export capability
- Data portability upon termination
- Written data destruction certification
D. Integration & Interoperability (Up to 4 Points)
- Documented APIs
- Compatibility with Axon FUSUS (if applicable)
- Integration with City-approved systems
- Future interoperability readiness
Evaluation will consider technical soundness, cybersecurity maturity, regulatory compliance, scalability, and completeness of documentation. The City reserves the right to request additional technical clarification prior to final scoring.
318
Interviews and Final Selection
The City of Richmond will evaluate written proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in this RFP. Following completion of the written proposal evaluation, the City will rank the proposals and reserves the right to invite the highest ranked proposers to participate in oral interviews and/or presentations.
After completion of interviews, the City will re-evaluate and re-rank proposers based on interview performance, demonstrated understanding of the scope of work, qualifications, and overall ability to meet the City’s needs. Interview results may confirm or change the initial rankings based on written proposals.
The proposer ranked highest after completion of the interview process will be recommended for award, subject to successful contract negotiations, verification of proposer responsibility, and approval by the City as required. Participation in interviews does not guarantee selection or award of a contract.
The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to waive informalities, and to take any action deemed to be in the best interest of the City.
Pre-Award Negotiations
After the proposals are opened, but prior to award, the City may elect to conduct negotiations with the highest ranked respondent for purposes of:
Resolving minor differences and information
Clarifying necessary details and responsibilities
Emphasizing important issues and points
Receiving assurances from respondents
Cost/budget clarifications
If the City cannot successfully negotiate a contract with the highest ranked respondent, the City may begin negotiations with the second highest ranked respondent.
Award
When the Review Panel has completed its work, Police Department personnel will then work with the Respondent to complete the administrative paperwork.
Attachments
A. Insurance Requirements
B. Standard Contract
C. Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
D. Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18
E. Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) Resolution No. 86-21 F. Limited Liability Corporation Form
- END -
319
1701 REGATTA BLVD, RICHMOND, CA 94804
www.ci.richmond.ca.us
POLICE DEPARTMENT
ADDENDUM NO. 1
March 9, 2026
VIDEO SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY
This Addendum shall be considered as a part of the RFP documents though it has been issued at the same time and shall be incorporated integrally therewith.
The revised RFP includes an additional request on page 5, under Preferred section to include additional proposed equipment.
Flash Cam Style (with audio messaging, flashing strobe, etc.) _________________________________________________________________ ERIC TAM DATE: 03-09-2026
TECHNOLOGY SUPERVISOR
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
320
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
321
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
322
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
323
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
324
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
325
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
326
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
327
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
328
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
329
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
330
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
331
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
332
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
333
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
334
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
335
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
336
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
337
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
338
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
339
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
340
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
341
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
342
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
343
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
344
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
345
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
346
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
347
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
348
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
349
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
350
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
351
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
352
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
353
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
354
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
355
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
356
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
357
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
358
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
359
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
360
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
361
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
362
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
363
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
364
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
365
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
366
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
367
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
368
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
369
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
370
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
371
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
372
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
373
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
374
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
375
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
376
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
377
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
378
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
379
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
380
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
381
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
382
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
383
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
384
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
385
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
386
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
387
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
388
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
389
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
390
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
391
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
392
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
393
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
394
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
395
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
396
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
397
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
398
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
399
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
400
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
401
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
402
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
403
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
404
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
405
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
406
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
407
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
408
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
409
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
410
Video Technology
Equipment
Richmond Police Department
411
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Recommended Action
• AUTHORIZE the City Manager to sign a contract and/or contract amendment with Axon Enterprise to continue servicing Body Worn Cameras (BWC), Tasers, Interview Room Equipment, VR Training, and to add license plate reader, closed circuit television (CCTV), and drone as a first responder (DFR)equipment in the amount of $3,500,000, for a total contract amount not to exceed $12,000,000 with an expiration of September 30, 2031, that will be finalized by the City Attorney’s Office.
AND
• AUTHORIZE the City Manager to sign a three-year contract with Assure MSP, Inc. for Verkada’s CCTV solution to be utilized at various City facilities in an amount not to exceed $500,000 for the term October 1, 2026, to September 30, 2029, that will be finalized by the City Attorney’s Office. 412
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
ALPR/CCTV/DFR Administrative Record
• February 2023, City Council approved an agreement with Flock to lease and deploy 30 Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) cameras.
• November 2023, the City Council approved the First Amendment to the Flock Safety agreement, authorizing the lease and deployment of additional ALPR and closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras. • April 2024, the City Council approved the Second Amendment to the Flock Safety agreement to further expand the system by installing additional CCTV and ALPR cameras at the Port of Richmond • January 2025, the City Council approved the Third Amendment to the Flock Safety agreement. This amendment further expanded the City's existing Flock Safety program to include Drone as a First Responder (DFR) technology, as well as additional camera systems intended to support the security and monitoring of City infrastructure and facilities.
• February 2026, staff requested an additional amendment to the existing agreement with Flock Safety to extend the applicable contract terms through December 31, 2026. The purpose of the extension was to allow the City to satisfy existing contractual payment obligations while providing staff with sufficient time to conduct a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) process and evaluate whether Flock Safety continued to represent the best technological, operational, and financial solution for the City of Richmond. 413
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Request For Proposals (RFP)
• February 26, 2026, staff completed an RFP for Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR), closed-circuit television (CCTV), and related public safety technology solutions. The RFP was posted on February 27, 2026, with a closing date of March 27, 2026. A total of 830 vendors were notified of the solicitation, and an addendum was posted on March 1, 2026.
• Evaluation Committee: A ten-member city evaluation committee representing multiple City departments and operational perspectives participated in the review process. (Police, City Attorney’s Office, Port, Public Works, Abatement)
414
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
RFP Continued
• The city received proposals from six vendors:
1. Assure MSP (Selected for city infrastructure needs)
2. Axon Enterprise (Selected for law enforcement needs)
3. Flock Safety (camera reliability & repair & public trust)
4. IREX (did not meet the full needs of the RFP)
5. Motorola Solutions (associated cost and reference checks)
6. Net Electric (did not meet the full needs of the RFP) 415
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Axon Enterprise
Video Surveillance Technology 02
Proposed public safety technology
platform
• Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR)
• Closed Circuit Television Camera (CCTV)
• Drone As A First Responder (DFR)
ALPR / Fixed CCTV Camera
Drone as First Responder
416
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Axon Outpost
• An Axon Outpost is a fixed, rugged, and solar-powered outdoor camera that combines automated license plate recognition (ALPR), vehicle attribute recognition, and real-time CCTV live video into a single unit.
417
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
AXON Outpost ALPR: Camera Function
Video Surveillance Technology 03
• Captures vehicle detections from fixed or mobile cameras, including plate images, vehicle context images, basic vehicle attributes, time, and location. (Does not capture people) • Compares vehicle plates against agency-approved hotlists, such as the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) or agency-created lists.
• Supports authorized investigative searches on the platform using known information such as a plate, partial plate, or vehicle description.
• Provides authorized law enforcement personnel with a review of prior detections of a specific plate within the agency retention period in support of a legitimate investigation. • Tracks individual access, searches, and activity where enabled, and configuration changes with user, action, time, and stated reason.
• Requires a specific offense category to conduct ALPR searches, requiring users to enter an authorized purpose before results are returned.
418
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
AXON Outpost ALPR: What the system does NOT do
Video Surveillance Technology 04
• Does not use facial recognition or perform live registered-owner lookups. • Does not place agency ALPR data into a national or pooled database. • Does not share agency ALPR data automatically or by default. • Does not allow agencies that receive shared data to re-share it. • Does not provide federal agencies automatic, standing, or built-in access to agency ALPR data. • Does not automate enforcement. Every alert requires human review before action. • Does not allow Axon to pool, resell, or disclose agency ALPR data except where legally required. • Does not continuously monitor individuals or maintain a real-time location feed on any person. 419
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Data Sharing
Video Surveillance Technology 05
• Data Sharing is off by default. If Richmond shares ALPR data, it is explicit, invite-only, publicly visible in the transparency portal, and to the agency. • Sharing does not copy agency ALPR data into a shared repository, transfer ownership of it, or connect it to a national pool.
• Visibility changes only when the agency makes it change. 420
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Whom do we share with?
Video Surveillance Technology 06
• The Richmond Police Department will not openly share
its ALPR and CCTV data.
421
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Axon Data Access
Video Surveillance Technology 07
• Axon has no standing access to agency ALPR data.
Access occurs only when an agency initiates a specific
support request. When that happens, access is
temporary, limited to the stated purpose, logged, and
auditable by the agency.
422
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
What does Richmond use ALPR for?
Video Surveillance Technology 08
• The Richmond Police Department uses license plate
reader data to investigate crimes, including but not
limited to homicide, assaults, missing persons, property crimes, and other authorized criminal investigations.
Vehicle used in a crime
+ =
ALPR Camera Vehicle identification and arrest
423
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
How long is ALPR data kept for?
Video Surveillance Technology 09
• ALPR data is automatically purged after 30 days. If license plate data is used as evidence, the specific license plate data is kept indefinitely with the case file in
Evidence.com.
424
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Public-Facing Transparency Portal
Video Surveillance Technology 11
• Axon’s public-facing transparency portal discloses RPD’s data retention policies and available aggregate ALPR program information. It publishes only aggregate information, with no plate numbers, images, individual records, or camera locations. If an agency has sharing enabled, the portal can also disclose the partner agencies with whom data is shared. 425
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
ALPR Prohibitions?
Video Surveillance Technology 12
• Richmond Police Department does not use license plate reader data for nonlegitimate law enforcement purposes, personal or unauthorized tracking, immigration enforcement, medical tracking, such as abortion-related tracking, or religious tracking. All allegations of misuse will be investigated by the Office of Professional Accountability.
• RPD policy section 433 ALPR regulations.
426
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Sensitive Locations
Video Surveillance Technology 13
• License Plate Reader and fixed cameras will not be
installed near churches, medical clinics, schools, or
other sensitive locations.
427
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Richmond’s Data Be Part Of A National Database?
Video Surveillance Technology 15
• No!
• Data stays within the City of Richmond unless Richmond chooses to share it. There is no automatic cross-agency access, and the system does not place agency ALPR data into a national or pooled database. Visibility does not expand unless the agency takes deliberate action to add an outside entity.
428
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Audits
Video Surveillance Technology 18
• For auditing and transparency purposes, when sharing is enabled, access to shared ALPR data is logged and reviewable. The audit record includes recipient activity against and changes to sharing relationships over time, so the agency can review who had access during a specific period.
****Richmond PD does not share ALPR data***
• For auditing and transparency purposes, the system logs and records are shared with the Community Police Review Commission.
429
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Can federal agencies access the data?
Video Surveillance Technology 21
• There is no automatic, standing, or built-in federal access to agency ALPR data through the Axon platform. The City of Richmond owns and controls the data; a lawful request is directed to the agency and its legal counsel for handling. If Axon receives such a request, it will direct it to the owning agency, which is the data owner. 430
431
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Axon Compliance
Video Surveillance Technology 29
trust.axon.com
Compliance certifications
are maintained in Axon
Trust Center.
432
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Compliant
Video Surveillance Technology 31
• Axon Cloud Services (ACS) is designed and operated to ensure compliance with the FBI CJIS Security Policy (CJISSECPOL).
433
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Axon Data Encryption
Video Surveillance Technology 30
• Evidence data is encrypted in transit and while at rest in storage. Axon maintains mature, audited encryption key management procedures.
• Data Encryption in Transit: FIPS 140-2 validated, Certificate #4642; TLS 1.2 implementation with 256-bit connection; RSA 3072-bit key exchange; Perfect Forward Secrecy. • Evidence Data Encryption at Rest: CJIS compliant, AES 256-bit encryption. 434
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Drone As a First Responder (DFR)
435
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
DFR Continued….
• DFR provides officers with real-time aerial information before they arrive on scene, improving situational awareness and response planning.
• Enhances officer, firefighter, and community safety by identifying weapons, hazards, escape routes, fire conditions, and other potential threats expeditiously.
• Reduced the need for officers to engage in prolonged vehicle or foot pursuits by tracking suspects from the air.
436
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
DFR Continued….
• Strengthens police accountability by providing objective aerial overwatch and recorded documentation of rapidly evolving incidents, major events, and critical responses. • Assists firefighting operations by providing aerial views of fire spread, access points, evacuation needs, hot spots, and risks to nearby structures. • 6 DFR docks, which will increase coverage throughout the city, including the Hilltop and Carriage Hills areas. Exploring the placement of docks at existing city locations, such as fire stations.
437
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
AXON Unique Features
• Ownership of the equipment VS. leasing the equipment. • Designed as a “closed” system, and sharing requires explicit action. • Solar-powered and does not require hard wiring, allowing for cameras to be easily moved and relocated.
• Integrates all CCTV video feeds into a single view.
• Six drones as first responder nests for citywide coverage VS. only one. 438
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Assure/Verkada
+
439
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Assure MSP & Verkada
• Assure MSP is a Northern California-based technology integrator specializing in video surveillance, access control, and intelligent monitoring systems. • Headquartered in Pleasanton, Assure MSP has an operational footprint in Bay Area counties such as Contra Costa County, Alameda County, San Mateo County, and Santa Clara County. • Assure MSP is a premier system integrator for the Verkada CCTV platform. • Camera solutions specifically designed for non-law enforcement purposes. 440
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Assure MSP & Verkada Continued
• Design a Verkada CCTV solution based on a specific city facility’s needs.
• City Hall
• Libraries
• Vehicle Maintenance and Sign Shop
• Port
• Etc….
441
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Assure MSP & Verkada Continued
• Installation, maintenance, repairs, and extended warranty service on all Verkada cameras installed at a city facility. 442
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Types of Verkada Cameras
443
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Cost Analysis
AXON
• Replacement and continuation of City’s law enforcement ALPR/CCTV program • Ownership of equipment
• No city cost for replacement due to vandalism or accidental damage • Five (5) drones and six (6) docking stations for wider emergency reach • 240 camera views
• Bundling will save over $500,000 and the City will receive $1,780,000 of additional equipment
• The first payment will be made in FY28
• The additional annual cost before tax is $876,313 with the final year expenditure being $1,829,003 which covers the City through FY31
444
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Cost Analysis
ASSURE MSP INC.
• Replacement and continuation of City infrastructure ALPR/CCTV program • Vendor specializes in interior camera systems
• Small footprint, utilizes City’s low-voltage data cabling for power and data transmission • Ownership of equipment
• Camera’s range in price from $1031.14 to $1977.14
• Additional costs include set up and mounting hardware • Analyze current CCTV coverage to determine ideal locations • Approval will allow up to $500,000 over three-years
• Shields Reid Park, Civic Center, Port, Library, BTA Community Center, etc. • Estimate for Shield Reid Park is $33,737.22
• Annual license $945.14 per camera
445
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
QUESTIONS?
446
September 22, 2026
City Council
DATE: September 22, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Vice Mayor Doria Robinson
Councilmember Claudia Jimenez
Subject: Create a Financial report to the council
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
Budget presentations
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Council needs a clear and consistent understanding of
the City of Richmond’s current financial position to make informed decisions regarding the City’s fiscal health and future direction.
Staff is requested to complete the attached financial
template showing revenue, one-time/short-term revenue,
expenses, surplus/deficit, allocated surplus, and reserves for FY2023-24 through FY2026-27, including budget,
revised budget, year-end, actual, and audited financial data where available.
This information will provide Council with a
comprehensive view of the City’s financial position and help identify any potential structural deficit requiring immediate attention.
AGENDA
REPORT
447
September 22, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
DIRECT the City Finance Department to bring for the
next council meeting the following information and fill out the attachment with this information and to
● Revenue
● Short term / one time revenue
● Expenses
● Surplus / Deficit
● Allocated Surplus
● Reserves
using the following criteria :
● PREVIOUS YEAR BUDGET PROJECTION
● COUNCIL APPROVED BUDGET
● MID TERM BUDGET REVISION
● BUDGET at CLOSE
● ACTUALS at CLOSE
● AUDITED FINANCIALS
and DIRECT Finance Department to engage the
municipal advisor HNA to peer review this temple and
confirm that they agree with the numbers -
Councilmember Doria Robinson (510-620-
6568)/Councilmember Claudia Jimenez (510-620-6565).
DISCUSSION:
A clear understanding of the City’s financial position is essential for the Council to make informed decisions about the City’s current and future priorities. Recent Council discussions have highlighted the need for a consistent, comprehensive view of revenues, expenditures, reserves, and the use of one-time funding.
The requested financial information will allow Council to compare projected budgets, adopted budgets, budget revisions, year-end results, actuals, and audited financials for FY2023-24 through FY2026-27. Presenting this information in one standardized format will help Council identify financial trends, understand the City’s use of one-time resources, and determine whether there are ongoing structural budget challenges that require attention.
448
September 22, 2026
Having this information available at the next Council meeting will provide Council with a shared factual foundation for evaluating the City’s financial condition and determining appropriate next steps.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 — Excel template to fill the information
449
Financial Summary FY23-24 - FY26-27
City of Richmond
Updated 9/16/26
*Please add whatever is currenty available
PREVIOUS
YEAR
BUDGET
PROJECTION
COUNCIL
APPROVED
BUDGET
MID TERM
BUDGET
REVISION
BUDGET at
CLOSE
ACTUALS at
CLOSE
AUDITED
FINANCIALS
Revenue
Short term / one
time revenue
Expenses
Surplus / Deficit
Allocated
Surplus
Reserves
FY2023-24
450
PREVIOUS
YEAR
BUDGET
PROJECTION
COUNCIL
APPROVED
BUDGET
MID TERM
BUDGET
REVISION
BUDGET at
CLOSE
ACTUALS at
CLOSE
AUDITED
FINANCIALS
PREVIOUS
YEAR
BUDGET
PROJECTION
FY2024-25
451
COUNCIL
APPROVED
BUDGET
MID TERM
BUDGET
REVISION
BUDGET at
CLOSE
ACTUALS at
CLOSE
AUDITED
FINANCIALS
PREVIOUS
YEAR
BUDGET
PROJECTION
COUNCIL
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY2025-26 FY2026
452
MID TERM
BUDGET
REVISION
BUDGET at
CLOSE
ACTUALS at
CLOSE
AUDITED
FINANCIALS
FY2026-27
453
September 22, 2026
City Manager's Office
DATE: September 22, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Patrick Seals, Administrative Chief,
Jora Atienza Washington, Senior Management Analyst
Nicholas Delgado, Associate Management Analyst
SUBJECT: Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (RFCY) 2025 Evaluation
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact related to this item.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
None.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (RFCY) is
a City-managed grant program that funds communitybased organizations serving Richmond and North Richmond children, youth, and families. Under Article 15 of the City Charter, the Fund is required to undergo
regular independent evaluation to confirm that funded
programs are producing meaningful outcomes for the
community. WestEd, the City's contracted third-party
evaluator, has completed its evaluation of RFCY-funded
programs for Calendar Year 2025, the first year of the
Fund's 2025–2027 three-year grant cycle, and will
present its findings directly to City Council. This report is part of the Fund's ongoing annual evaluation cycle,
meant to keep fund expenditures accountable to the
Charter and to give Council, grantees, and
the Richmond community a clear picture of how the
Fund's grant programs are performing.
AGENDA
REPORT
454
September 22, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECEIVE a presentation from WestEd, the Richmond Fund for Children & Youth’s independent third-party
evaluator, on the Calendar Year 2025 Evaluation Report
on the Richmond Fund for Children & Youth – Richmond
Department of Children (Patrick Seals/Jora Atienza
Washington/Nicholas Delgado 510-620-6523).
DISCUSSION:
In 2018, Richmond voters approved Measures E and K, collectively known as the "Richmond Kids First Initiative," which amended the City Charter to establish the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (RFCY) and the Richmond Department of Children and Youth (RDCY) to administer it. The Fund was established to support programs that promote the health and success of Richmond's children and youth.
The Charter requires that the Fund undergo regular evaluation and assigns this responsibility to the RFCY Oversight Board. The Oversight Board is charged with retaining an independent, third-party evaluator on an annual basis to assess the implementation and effectiveness of funded programs. This requirement ensures that the City Council, grantees, and the public receive an independent assessment of the Fund's performance, distinct from self-reported information from the Department or its grantees.
WestEd, the evaluator retained for this purpose, previously conducted the Fund's evaluation for Fiscal Years 2021 through 2024, its first grant cycle. This report covers Calendar Year 2025, the first year of the Fund's current grant cycle, which spans 2025 through 2027. For this cycle, the Oversight Board approved 37 grants totaling $6,734,835 annually for three years, to 36 community-based organizations, for a cycle total of $20,204,505. As the first year of implementation, Calendar Year 2025 included a startup period in which several grantees experienced contract delays, with full implementation across all grantees expected by 2026.
In Calendar Year 2025, funded programs delivered 29,534 hours of service and recorded 15,774 participant encounters across 107 program sites in Richmond and North Richmond.
Grantees described the Fund's multiyear structure as a stabilizing source of support for their organizations, helping them retain staff, expand services, and plan over a longer term.
The RFCY Oversight Board received the evaluation report at its special meeting on August 24, 2026. WestEd will present these findings to City Council. WestEd will continue to serve as the Fund's evaluator through the remainder of the current grant cycle, with subsequent reports to be presented in 2027 and 2028.
Key Evaluation Findings
455
September 22, 2026
Evaluation is an important component of the RFCY’s accountability structure and provides an independent assessment of the programs and services supported through the Fund. The prior evaluation was guided by questions concerning grantee capacity, program implementation, expansion of program reach, reduction of service gaps, program quality, and positive outcomes for participants. For the Fiscal Years 2021 through 2024 evaluation, WestEd utilized a mixed-methods approach combining quantitative information from grantee reports and participant surveys with qualitative information gathered through interviews, focus groups, and administrative data review.
For Calendar Year 2025, WestEd continued their evaluation efforts with the new 3- year grantees and completed its required analysis and compiled the results into the attached evaluation report. The attached report provides the detailed evaluation results and serves as the independent evaluator’s assessment of RFCY-funded programs for the reporting period.
RFCY-funded programs demonstrated positive outcomes across key areas:
Academic Success: Increased engagement, motivation, and positive attitudes toward learning.
Health and Wellbeing: Improved healthy decision-making, coping, and stressmanagement skills. Career and Postsecondary Readiness: Increased knowledge of career, employment, and educational pathways.
Social Connections and Leadership: Stronger peer relationships, leadership skills, and community awareness.
Life Skills: Improved goal setting, future planning, and personal development. Supportive Services: Increased connections to educational, food, counseling, and other family resources.
Overall, findings indicate that current RFCY-funded programs are supporting the academic, social, emotional, and future success of Richmond children, youth, and families.
Recommendations
Based on the 2025 evaluation findings, several opportunities were identified to strengthen implementation and maximize the impact of RFCY investments over the remainder of the 2025–2027 funding cycle. Recommended actions include:
Improve access and engagement by reducing participation barriers and continuing flexible, culturally responsive, and community-based services. Strengthen program quality through clear performance improvement processes and targeted technical assistance based on grantee needs. Support organizational sustainability through capacity building, sustainability planning, and enhanced support for small and emerging organizations. Strengthen school-community partnerships to improve coordination, service delivery, and data sharing.
456
September 22, 2026
Improve data and grant monitoring by refining reporting systems, standardizing requirements, monitoring data quality, and providing ongoing technical assistance.
These actions will support continuous improvement, strengthen accountability, and maximize RFCY investments over the remainder of the funding cycle.
Conclusion
The first year of the Fund’s 2025–2027 funding cycle demonstrates meaningful progress in reaching Richmond communities with significant needs and supporting positive outcomes for children, youth, and families. In 2025, funded programs provided substantial direct services, with participants and caregivers reporting improvements across academic, health and wellbeing, social connection, leadership, and college and career readiness outcomes. RFCY funding also provided organizational stability for grantees, supporting staff retention, expanded services, and longer-term planning.
The evaluation also identified opportunities to strengthen Fund administration, data infrastructure, organizational capacity, and school-community partnerships. As these findings represent early indicators from the first year of a three-year funding cycle, continued attention to program quality, grantee capacity, partnerships, and continuous improvement will help strengthen accountability and maximize the impact of RFCY investments over the remainder of the funding cycle.
ATTACHMENTS:
457
Richmond Fund for
Children and Youth
2025 Evaluation Findings
Prepared for Richmond City Council
September 22, 2026
D
R
A
F
T
458
The RFCY Evaluation Team
Nicole Tirado-Strayer, PhD
Co-Director
Alexis Grant, PhD
Co-Director
Cynthia Huynh Tuyet Tran Alex Briar
459
3 Agenda
Introduction
2025 Evaluation Findings
Recommendations
Looking Forward
460
Question Section
Why is the term “encounter” used
instead of “participants”?
Expanding program reach
and/or coverage
How do we know the Fund is serving
Richmond residents?
Expanding program reach
and/or coverage
How are grantees held accountable? Facilitating high-quality programming
Why not measure outcomes like test
scores to assess impact?
Promoting positive
outcomes for program
participants
4 Top Questions
461
RFCY Theory of Change
5 462
Outcomes
Expanding program
reach and/or
coverage
Reducing service
gaps
Facilitating highquality programming
Promoting positive
outcomes for program
participants
Building the capacity of
grantees 6 463
Evaluation Methods
7 464
2025 Evaluation
Findings
465
Summary of the RFCY
Allocated Funds:
$6,734,835 in 2025
$15,859,092 to date
9 “By having consistent
funding, organizations
can plan for
sustainability over time
and focus on
continuously improving
programs.”
—Grantee focus
group member
466
2025 RFCY Implementation at a Glance
467
2025–2027 Funding Areas
11 468
Expanding
program
reach
and/or
coverage
12 469
In 2025, there were over 100 program
sites.
13 470
14 Grantees provided over 29,500 hours of
programming to Richmond residents.
“My experience was amazing. I
met some of my closest friends
through this program and
people I can talk to and [I
learned] many skills.”
—YES Nature to
Neighborhoods participant,
age 15
471
• Unduplicated counts within programs due
to client-level tracking
• Participant identifiers not shared across
organizations under the current reporting
structure
• Not possible to determine whether the same
person participated in multiple programs
• Participant encounters describe duplicated
counts across programs
• Grantees instructed to report only Richmond
residents
15 What is a participant encounter?
472
RFCY grantees had over 15,000
encounters with Richmond children
and youth.
16 473
Reducing
service
gaps
17 474
Needs Addressed by 2025–2027 Grants
Mental and Behavioral Health
Physical Health and Wellness
Learning Needs
Safety, Belonging, and Community
Connective and Supportive Services
475
Consistent
programming
Supports for
diverse needs
Geographic
accessibility
“
19 Reducing Service Gaps
Families responded strongly to services that were
flexible, multilingual, and delivered with cultural
humility… Access isn’t just about availability; it’s
about design that respects lived reality.”
—Greater Richmond Interfaith Program Report
476
The Fund is reaching communities with the
highest needs.
20 Geographically Accessible Programs
“The unmet need for safe,
free youth programming is
profound in a community
where 6,620 children lack
access to quality summer
programs—the demand for
enriching, free activities is
huge.”
—Pogo Park report
477
Facilitating
high-quality
programming
478
Grantee Performance Measures
Domain Measure Benchmark
Program
participation
Number of participants served as a percentage of
the program’s projected number of participants
85%
Program
satisfaction
Percentage of surveyed youth who agreed or
strongly agreed, “I would recommend this
program to a friend.”
50%
Program
environment
Percentage of surveyed youth who agreed or
strongly agreed, “I feel physically safe when I am
at this program.”
70%
Caring adults
Percentage of surveyed youth who agreed or
strongly agreed, “There is an adult at this
program who cares about me.”
70%
Sense of
belonging
Percentage of surveyed youth who said it was
somewhat, mostly, or completely true that “I
have a strong sense of belonging to a community
at this program.”
50%
22 479
Percentage of Grantees Who Met
Performance Benchmarks
23 Note. Totals for survey-derived performance measures account for 28 grantees with at least 10 participant surveys, which make up 76% of funded programs. 480
• Caring Adults
• Program Environment
24 Variation Across Measures
• Program Satisfaction
• Sense of Belonging
Higher Benchmark Lower Benchmark
Why is there variation, and
how will the RDCY respond?
481
• Early and frequent performance monitoring
• Growth and Improvement Planning (GIP) is the
process conducted with grantees who do not meet
performance benchmarks.
- Root cause?
- Action plan
• Technical Assistance and Capacity Building
(TA/CB) is designed to help programs improve in
areas they need support.
- Intensive
- Targeted
- Universal
25 Responding to Low Performance
482
Promoting
positive
outcomes for
program
participants
483
Positive Outcomes Across Every
Domain Measured
85%
Academic Success
say the program helps them
succeed in school
86%
Health & Wellbeing
learned to deal with
problems in positive ways
90%
Career Readiness
learned to work
independently with focus
88%
Building Connections
made new friends through
the program
92%
Leadership Development
say they better understand
solutions to community
problems
83%
Life Skills
learned skills that help them
achieve their goals
Findings should be read as early indicators—Year 1 of a 3-year cycle. 27 484
65% surveyed youth connected to at least one resource
70% surveyed parents connected to at least one resource Programs Connect Families to
Broader Supports
Types of Resources Participants Reported Being Connected To 28 485
Organizational and
Systems-Level Impact
How RFCY funding is strengthening Richmond’s youth-serving ecosystem
486
Building
the
capacity
of
grantees
487
• Organizational sustainability
• Partnerships, collaboration, and collective
impact
RFCY Strengthened Organizations’ Capacity
to Provide High-Quality Programming
“RFCY is the largest and most stable source of funding for the community—it really allows us to change our thinking about how we’re planning for the future.”
—Grantee focus group member
31 488
• School and district partnerships
• Recruitment, retention, and attendance
• Space and infrastructure limitations
• Organizational capacity for administration and
compliance
• Staffing constraints
• Resource limitations and community stressors
32 Despite Many Successes, Some
Challenges Remain for Grantees
489
Fund Administration
490
2025 coincided with significant growth and
transition within the RDCY—closing out the
prior cycle while launching the new one.
34 Fund Administration:
Strengths and Opportunities
86%
of grantees felt
comfortable reaching
out to RDCY when
challenges arose
74%
of grantees received
helpful guidance and
feedback from RDCY
staff
46%
of grantees rated RDCY
worse than other
funders on processing
agreements/invoices
491
In 2025, RDCY implemented a new grants
management platform.
35 Required Reporting
66%
reported that the grants management
system is easy to navigate
The use of Submittable is a big improvement.
However, the amount of reporting for any given
year is challenging.”
—RFCY grantee
“
492
Clear expectations
36 RFCY Evaluation
91%
100%
97%
WestEd is responsive to questions
Well-supported to complete evaluation activities
76% Easy to collect service provision data
Requested Evaluation TA
• Internal program evaluation
• Survey development
• Qualitative data collection
• Data analysis for program improvement
493
Conclusions
494
Recommendations
Improve Access & Engagement
Strengthen Program Quality Through Targeted Technical Assistance Strengthen Organizational Capacity & Sustainability
Strengthen School and Community Partnerships
Strengthen Data Infrastructure & Build Grant Monitoring Capacity 38 495
• 2026 and 2027 evaluations will track whether
outcomes and program quality strengthen as the
cycle matures.
• A cumulative report in 2028 will speak to longer
term impacts and trends over time.
39 Looking Ahead
496
Special thanks to our evaluation partners
13 youth co-evaluators
RFCY Oversight Board
RFCY grantees
RDCY staff
497
Questions?
Alexis Grant
[email protected]
Nicole Tirado-Strayer
[email protected]
498
2025
Richmond Fund for
Children and Youth
Annual
Evaluation
Report
Photo courtesy of The Black Neighborhood. ©2026 499
This report was prepared under Contract 6896 from the City of Richmond, CA, Department of Children and Youth. The content does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the City of Richmond or the Department of Children and Youth. © 2026 WestEd. All rights reserved.
WestEd is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that aims to improve the lives of children and adults at all ages of learning and development. We do this by addressing challenges in education and human development, increasing opportunity, and helping build communities where all can thrive. WestEd staff conduct and apply research, provide technical assistance, and support professional learning. We work with early learning educators, classroom teachers, local and state leaders, and policymakers at all levels of government. 500
iii
Executive Summary
The Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (RFCY, also referred to as “the Fund”), overseen by the Richmond Department of Children and Youth, invests in community-based organizations that support the health, wellbeing, safety, learning, and long-term success of Richmond, California, and Unincorporated North Richmond children, youth, and families. This report presents findings from calendar year 2025, the 1st year of the grant program’s 2025–2027 funding cycle. The report examines program implementation, participant experiences, emerging outcomes, and organizational and community-level outcomes associated with RFCY investments. organizations
funded
36 grants
37 program
sites
107
dispersed
$6,734,835
participant
encounters
15,774
hours of
services
29,534
Key Findings
Photo courtesy of The Hidden Genius Project. ©2026 501
The Fund Expanded
Access to Services and
Opportunities.
In 2025, RFCY-funded organizations delivered a
wide range of services and supports to Richmond
and North Richmond residents. Funded programs focused on academic enrichment, youth leadership development, behavioral health services, mentoring, workforce development, family support services, violence prevention, and recreational programming. Programs operated in schools, community centers, parks, libraries, and
other neighborhood-based locations, helping to
reduce barriers related to transportation, cost,
and accessibility. These programs were concentrated in areas of Richmond with lower levels of child opportunity, indicating that RFCY investments are reaching communities most in need of programming for children and youth.
Participants Reported
Positive Experiences
and Outcomes.
Participants consistently reported positive experiences across RFCY-funded programs. Many youth described programs as safe, welcoming environments where they felt supported by caring adults and connected to their peers. Most participants
reported high levels of satisfaction with their program experience and indicated that they would recommend their program to others.
Findings also suggest that RFCY-funded programs
are contributing to positive program-aligned outcomes. Participants consistently reported growth related to social connectedness, leadership development, wellbeing, preparation for adulthood, and access to supportive resources. Youth frequently
reported that programs helped them build relationships, develop leadership skills, strengthen coping strategies, and feel more prepared for
future educational and career opportunities.
While findings were generally positive across outcome areas, results also revealed opportunities to continue strengthening program quality to better
support positive outcomes for all program participants. These findings can be used to inform continuous improvement and future technical
assistance efforts.
The Fund Strengthened
Community Organizations
and Local Support Systems.
Beyond participant-level outcomes, findings suggest that funding is helping to strengthen the broader network of organizations and partnerships that support Richmond youth and families.
In focus groups, grantees consistently described
RFCY funding as flexible, stabilizing, and community centered. Many organizations emphasized that multiyear funding allowed them to reduce
service disruption, strengthen staffing capacity,
expand access to programs and services, build
community relationships, and plan for the future.
Organizations also highlighted the value of collaboration with schools and other local partners. Many described the Fund as helping to create stronger connections across Richmond’s youth-serving ecosystem and supporting coordinated efforts
to address the complex needs of children, youth,
and families.
At the same time, grantees reported ongoing
challenges related to their organization’s staffing,
administrative capacity, and data reporting requirements and related to an increase of community need. These findings underscore both the importance of investments and the continuing need to build the capacity of funded organizations.
iv Photo courtesy of Bay Area Girls Club. ©2026 502
Opportunities for Improvement and
Recommendations
The evaluation identified several opportunities to strengthen implementation and maximize the long-term impact of investments. z School and Community Partnerships:
Strengthen coordination through clearer
processes, aligned calendars, data-sharing
agreements, and designated points of contact
to reduce disruption from staff turnover.
z Data Infrastructure and Grant Monitoring:
Refine the grant management system and
reporting processes, standardize metric
definitions, and build routine data-quality
monitoring to improve accountability while
easing grantee burden.
z Access and Engagement: Continue
monitoring geographic service gaps and
expand transportation and flexible, culturally
responsive program models to reduce
participation barriers.
z Program Quality: Use survey and
performance data to inform the development
of technical assistance, training, and peer
learning that build grantee capacity in youth
development and evidence-based practices.
z Organizational Capacity and Sustainability:
Support programs’ efforts to diversify their
funding, build administrative infrastructure,
and grow evaluation capacity building, with
tailored support for small and emerging
organizations facing operational challenges.
Photo courtesy of Growing Together Bay Area. ©2026 v
503
Conclusion
Findings from the 1st calendar year of the 2025–2027 funding cycle provide encouraging evidence that RFCY-funded programs are reaching Richmond youth and families, delivering high-quality services, and contributing to positive participant experiences and outcomes. While opportunities remain to strengthen fund administration, data systems, and organizational capacity, the findings suggest that the Fund is helping to build the relationships, supports, and community infrastructure needed to advance positive outcomes for children, youth, and families across Richmond and North Richmond. vi Photo courtesy of Things That Creep. ©2026 504
Table of Contents
Executive Summary iii
Key Findings iii
Opportunities for Improvement and Recommendations v
Conclusion vi
Introduction 1
The Fund Theory of Change 2
The RFCY Evaluation 3
2025 RFCY-Funded Program Implementation 5
The Funded Programs 6
Program Sites 12
RFCY Service Provision, Youth Encounters,
and Participant Demographics 14
Participant Experiences
and Program Quality 16
Participant Outcomes and
Early Indicators of Impact 26
Academic Success 27
Physical, Mental, and Emotional Health 28
Career Readiness, Employment, and
Postsecondary Success 29
Building Connections 30
Leadership Development 31
Life Skills 32
Connective Supportive Services 33
Overall Patterns in Participant Outcomes 35
Organizational, Community, and
Systems-Level Findings 36
Reducing Service Gaps 37
Strengthening Organizational Capacity
and Sustainability 39
Strengthening Community Engagement,
Partnerships, and Collective Impact 42
Summarizing Early Organization-, Community-,
and Systems-Level Impacts 43
Implementation Challenges 44
vii
505
Fund Administration 45
Administrative Capacity 45
Data and Reporting Infrastructure 47
Evaluation and Continuous Learning 47
Recommendations for Strengthening
RFCY Implementation and Impact 48
Improve Access and Engagement 48
Strengthen Program Quality Through
Targeted Technical Assistance 48
Strengthen Organizational Capacity and Sustainability 49 Strengthen School and Community Partnerships 49
Strengthen Data Infrastructure and Build Capacity
for Grant Monitoring 49
Conclusion 50
References 51
Appendix A. Funded Programs by Priority Area 54
Appendix B. List of Program Sites
by Organization 57
Appendix C. List of Program Sites by
City Council District 62
District 1 62
District 2 63
District 3 64
District 4 65
District 5 66
District 6 66
North Richmond 67
Outside of Richmond 67
viii
506
Youth (RDCY) manages the Fund grant program.
RDCY staff also provide direct support to grantees through grant-writing workshops and other technical assistance.
The Fund supports a diverse portfolio of programs
that address a wide range of community needs.
Funded organizations provide programs that include
mental and behavioral health services, academic
enrichment, career and workforce development,
violence prevention, arts and recreation programming, mentoring, family support services, and resource navigation. Together, these programs aim
to strengthen protective factors, expand access
to opportunities and supports, and address barriers that can negatively affect youth development and wellbeing.
The Fund is grounded in principles of positive youth
development, which emphasize the importance of
providing young people with supportive relationships, opportunities for skill-building and leadership, safe and inclusive environments, and meaningful engagement in their communities. Research consistently demonstrates that access to these
developmental supports contributes to improved
academic, social, emotional, and health outcomes
and helps young people build the skills and resilience
needed to thrive (Child Trends, 2009; Gootman &
Eccles, 2002; Mathematica, 2019; Naftzger, 2025;
Sandoval & Bowers, 2025).
This report presents findings from the 2025 RFCY
evaluation, covering the 1st calendar year of the
Fund implementation for the 2025–2027 grant
cycle. In 2025, the Fund awarded 37 grants to 36
organizations serving children, youth, young adults,
and families across Richmond and North Richmond.
The grant funds are being distributed over 3 years.
WestEd is contracted to conduct annual evaluations of the Fund and to report on findings through 2027. As the first report in the current funding cycle, this evaluation report focuses primarily on program
implementation, reach, participant experiences,
and emerging outcomes. Because many funded
programs are in the early stages of implementation,
and systems-level change takes time to materialize, findings related to participant and community outcomes should be viewed as preliminary indicators of progress rather than measures of long-term impact. In response to interest holder feedback, this
report includes expanded information on program
reach, participant demographics, service delivery,
performance measures, and emerging outcomes
across RFCY-funded programs.
Introduction
The Richmond Kids First Initiative
was created to be a sustainable
funding stream for improving
outcomes for children, youth,
and families in Richmond and
Unincorporated North Richmond.
T hrough the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (RFCY, also referred to as “the Fund”), the City of Richmond invests in organizations
and agencies that provide programs and services designed to support young people’s health, wellbeing, safety, learning, and long-term success. The Richmond Department of Children and 1 Photo courtesy of The Practice Space. ©2026 507
The following are the six goals of the Fund:
1 To ensure that Richmond’s children, youth,
and young adults are physically, emotionally,
mentally, and socially healthy; educated and
successful in school; and live in stable, safe,
and supported families and communities
2 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
3 To ensure young people are provided with
gender-responsive, trauma-informed, populationspecific, and culturally competent services 4 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
5 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
6 To fill gaps in services and to leverage
other resources whenever feasible
The Fund Theory of Change
The Fund theory of change (Figure 1) visualizes
how the Fund is expected to positively impact
Richmond residents in the long term. By funding Richmond-serving organizations, the Fund aims to reduce service gaps, deliver more highquality and equitable services, and promote stronger collaboration between service providers across the city. Over time, these short-term outcomes are expected to lead to increased
availability of services and safety supports for
Richmond children and youth. Through these
positive short- and intermediate-term outcomes,
the Fund aims to ensure that Richmond children,
youth, and young adults are healthy, educated,
and successful in school and live in stable, safe,
and supportive communities.
Figure 1. The Fund Theory of Change
Service gap reduction
High-quality, equitable
service delivery
Strengthened
collaboration between
service providers
Increased availability
of services
• Increased safety
supports for
children and youth
Results In Community
Impact
Fund
Impact
Richmond’s children,
youth, and young
adults are physically,
emotionally, mentally,
and socially healthy;
educated and
successful in school;
and live in stable, safe,
and supported families
and communities.
Richmond
Fund for
Children
and Youth
2 508
The RFCY Evaluation
The RFCY evaluation is designed to assess how RFCY funding contributes to improving services, opportunities, and outcomes for children, youth, and families in Richmond and North Richmond. The evaluation examines implementation, program reach, participant experiences, emerging outcomes, and broader systems-level impacts associated with RFCY investments.
Because the Fund supports a diverse portfolio of programs with varying goals, target populations, and service models, the evaluation focuses on understanding the collective impact of the Fund as a community investment strategy rather than evaluating any single program in isolation. The evaluation is designed to support accountability, continuous improvement, and decision-making by providing information about who is being served, what services are being delivered, how participants experience those services, and the extent to which funded programs are positively impacting Richmond’s children and youth.
The evaluation plan was developed over a 10-month period in collaboration with the RDCY, the Fund Oversight Board, RFCY grantees, and Richmond youth. The evaluation design is grounded in the Fund’s theory of change and includes measuring outcomes related to youth wellbeing, access to supportive services and opportunities, program quality, community safety, and systems collaboration.
Many RFCY-funded programs are designed to influence long-term developmental, educational, behavioral health, and community outcomes that may take multiple years to fully materialize. In addition, funded programs vary substantially in their intended goals and populations served. Accordingly, this evaluation measures crosscutting outcomes that are relevant across programs as well as outcomes that are aligned with each program’s intended goals.
Data Sources
The evaluation draws on multiple sources of quantitative and qualitative data, including participant surveys, parent/guardian surveys, grantee surveys, quarterly program reports, and grantee focus groups. Data collected and analyzed within this evaluation are consistent with the broader field of youth development research and evaluation (Henderson et al., 2005; Roth & Brooks-Gunn, 2016; Yohalem & Wilson-Ahlstrom, 2010) and the design of similarly sized youth programming evaluations (Kramer et al., 2026; San Francisco Department of Children, Youth, and Their Families, 2026). Together, these data provide a comprehensive picture of how RFCY-funded programs are being implemented, who they are reaching, how participants are experiencing services, and the extent to which programs are contributing to the Fund’s broader goals. 1,692
Participant
Surveys
128
Quarterly
Reports
35 Organization
Surveys
3 Grantee
Focus
Groups
1,344 Youth surveys
348 Parent/guardian surveys
3 509
Data Limitations
This report has two main data limitations tied
to the startup period of the Fund and its grantees. The first relates to participant survey data.
WestEd collected three times as many surveys in
2025 than in 2024. All funded programs that had
served survey-eligible participants in 2025 collected participant or parent survey data for this report. However, survey data do not reflect all eligible participants served. The discrepancy between the total number of participant surveys and the
total number of participants served is attributable to several factors. Participant surveys were not administered to participants under the age
of 11, and parent/guardian surveys were administered exclusively for programs with direct parent/ guardian contact. Programs without eligible participants, as well as programs offering certain types of large-scale, onetime programming (such
as tabling or hosting a large onetime event), were
exempt from survey administration requirements.
In addition, in 2025, survey administration was limited to programs with active contracts that had commenced programming. Programs that experienced contract delays missed key data collection windows for participant survey administration,
resulting in fewer completed surveys for those programs. Separately, as programs built capacity to meet grant requirements, some did not meet the
stated expectation of surveying all eligible participants—an expected challenge during the 1st year of grant administration. With programs now in full
implementation in 2026, survey data collection for
2026 began in February, and targeted support is
being provided to improve survey response rates.
In addition, the RDCY plans to conduct site visits
to observe program quality directly, ensuring that
all funded programs are adequately monitored.
The second limitation relates to the ability to
calculate an unduplicated count of participants
across the fund. Grantees track participants using
client-level identifiers and report unduplicated participant counts within their own programs, which is an improvement from previous years when grantees reported unduplicated counts for the quarter rather than the entire year. Because participant
identifiers are not shared across organizations,
it is not possible to determine whether the same
participant was served by multiple RFCY-funded
programs. As a result, this report presents unduplicated participant counts at the grantee level and uses the term “encounters” to describe total
participation across the RFCY-funded programs.
Encounter totals may include duplicate individuals who participated in more than one program.
Analytic Approach
Prior to carrying out analyses, WestEd conducted
a structured review of grantee-reported data to
assess completeness, consistency, and plausibility. This process included reviewing quarterly submissions, identifying potential inconsistencies
or missing information, and conducting follow-up
with the RDCY and grantees to clarify or reconcile
reported values where necessary. Only data that
met minimum standards for consistency and plausibility were included in the analyses presented in this report.
Evaluation data were analyzed using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods.
Quantitative analyses consisted primarily of
descriptive statistics, including frequencies, percentages, and comparisons across RFCY strategic priority areas and across participant groups where
sample sizes were sufficient to support stable
interpretation. Due to variation in response rates
and small cell sizes for some groups, subgroup
findings should be interpreted descriptively and
with appropriate caution.
Qualitative data from grantee focus groups,
open-ended survey responses, and administrative reporting narratives were coded using an axial coding framework and analyzed to identify
common implementation themes, successes,
and challenges across funded programs.
Photo courtesy of The Practice Space. ©2026 4
510
2025 RFCYFunded Program
Implementation
For the 2025–2027 funding
cycle, 37 grants were awarded
to 36 distinct organizations.
Appendix A has a complete list
of grantees and their funding
amounts. Accompanying profiles
provide more information
about each grantee’s
programming and feature
photos from each program.
F unded programs represent a diverse portfolio of investments spanning behavioral health, violence prevention, education and workforce development, enrichment and recreation, basic needs, and case management. Across the
Fund portfolio, funding enabled organizations
to increase service availability, maintain free or
low-cost programming, and respond to evolving
community needs.
organizations
funded
36 grants
37 program
sites
107
dispersed
$6,734,835
participant
encounters
15,774
hours of
services
29,534
5 511
6 The Funded Programs
Programs were funded under one of four prior-
ity areas that were identified through the 2024
Community Needs Assessment and Strategic
Investment Plan (Figure 2): mental and behavioral
health needs; physical health and access; learn-
ing needs; and safety, community, and belonging
needs.
1 Although each program was funded under
a single priority area, many grantees offered pro-
gramming related to additional priority areas.
Programs were also encouraged to provide con-
nective services such as case management,
transportation, and food access.
Figure 2. Program Funding by Priority Area 1 See Appendix A for full list of programs by priority area.
Profiles of each funded program can be found in a supple- mental file.
$2,243,475
11 Grants
$2,011,200
11 Grants $1,420,814
8 Grants $1,059,346
7 Grants
Learning Needs Mental & Behavioral
Health Needs
Safety, Community &
Belonging Needs
Physical Health
& Access
Photo courtesy of Bay Area Community Resources. ©2026
“[This fund] is helping … support
thriving children that grow up
to be thriving, productive adults
with no expectations about, oh,
college, whatever it is they decide
to do. I want them to be able to do
that with their basic needs met, to
be healthy, to be safe, to be able
to take care of children of their
own one day. … Every little dollar,
every program, it all matters to
help support our youth into being
healthy adults.”
—Grantee focus group member
512
Organization size varied: Some funded organizations were small, with annual budgets less than $500,000; others were large organizations that serve the entire Bay Area and have annual budgets greater than $50 million (see Figure 3). RFCY funds made up less than 1 percent of the large organizations’ budgets and higher proportions of the small and medium-sized organizations’ budgets. The Fund covered three programs’ annual operating budgets at the time of application. See Appendix A for a complete list of funded programs and their annual award size.
“The stability is really critical for small community-based nonprofits just to be able to invest in programming and solidify partnerships, which are really critical to our existence.”
—Grantee focus group member
Figure 3. Grant Award Size Relative to Organization and Program Budgets Annual budget Number of grantees
Percentage of the program supported by the
Fund (average)
Percentage of overall organization budget
supported by the Fund
Less than $500,000 5 76% 70%
$500,000 to $5 million 20 52% 27%
$5 million to $50 million 8 47% 8%
More than $50 million 2 48% 0%
Photo courtesy of the Richmond Public Library. ©2026 7
513
8 Mental and Behavioral
Health Needs
2025 Funding Amount: $2,011,200
Hours of Service: 5,707
Participant Encounters: 5,047
Key Services and Activities z Individual, group, and family therapy/ counseling
z Parent education and behavioral health
training
z Connective supported services for youth
affected by violence
z Social and emotional education z Social and emotional learning (SEL) coaching for educators
“Children are flourishing and
learning new skills to deal with
emotions, traumas and ways
to handle ways to express
themselves. Staff express
excitement when seeing growth in
youth and providing a brave space
for them to be open and share.”
—Greater Richmond Interfaith Program report
Program Highlight
Desarrollo Familiar was supported by
the Fund to deliver the Trauma-Informed
Care in Schools Program, providing com-
prehensive, culturally responsive mental
health services for students at Richmond
High School and Lovonya DeJean Middle
School. The program offered individual
and family counseling, group therapy
(including Grupo de Mujeres for young
Latina students), restorative justice cir-
cles, and case management. The Fund
supported on-site clinical services 5 days
per week at Richmond High School and
2 days per week at Lovonya DeJean
Middle School and supported key per-
sonnel and clinical supervision. The
program reached students and caregiv-
ers, expanded access for uninsured and
underinsured youth, and provided ser-
vices for Spanish-speaking families.
2 2 Program highlights are developed by WestEd with infor- mation from grantee quarterly and annual reports and
grantee focus groups. Beginning in 2026, grantees are
required to report quantitative outcome data.
Photo courtesy of Mindful Life Project. ©2026 514
9 Physical Health and Access
2025 Funding Amount: $1,420,814
Hours of Service: 11,821
Participant Encounters: 6,067
Key Services and Activities
z Cooking and nutrition classes
z Food distribution
z Physical activity at parks and gardens
z Football and cheer programs
z Outdoor education (food systems,
environmental justice)
Program Highlight
18 Reasons was supported by the Fund
to deliver Food as Medicine for Kids nutrition and cooking education for families, offered in both English and Spanish. The
program provided weekly Zoom-based,
hands-on cooking and SNAP-Ed nutrition
education paired with doorstep delivery
of nutritious groceries. In addition, the
program built community capacity by
recruiting and training peer health educators. The Fund supported staffing and food distribution, helping families develop
practical skills and access resources to
support healthy eating at home.
Photo courtesy of Growing Together Bay Area. ©2026
“There are very few activities or third spaces that participants can access that are free. Our spaces and program allow Richmond residents to connect and have fun with each other while learning life-long nutrition, cooking, and budgeting skills, and also enjoying a nourishing meal.” —18 Reasons report
515
10 Learning Needs
2025 Funding Amount: $2,243,475
Hours of Service: 5,975
Participant Encounters: 4,295
Key Services and Activities
z Summer camps
z Job training
z Shadowing experiences
z Part-time employment and/or internships
z Mentorship
z College and career support
z After-school tutoring
z Delivery of science, English language arts,
and health education lessons
z Curriculum resources for educators
Program Highlight
The City of Richmond Recreation Division
was supported by the Fund to implement
Camp Achieve, a summer learning program delivering academic enrichment, literacy support, and SEL for elementary
and middle school students across four
Richmond community centers. In 2025,
the program recruited and trained certified West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD) teachers and site coordinators. They also delivered daily literacy education, STEM education, arts education, physical activity, and field trips or swim days, serving more than 300
students. RFCY funds supported core
implementation costs—staffing (recreation staff and teacher stipends), supplies and instructional materials, and field trip
transportation and admissions.
Photo courtesy of Project Avary. ©2026
“Many students shared that traditional school environments did not meet their learning needs, but the combination of construction training, individualized support, and clear career pathways helped them regain confidence and develop a stronger sense of purpose.”
—City of Richmond, Employment and Training Department report 516
11 Safety, Community, and
Belonging Needs
2025 Funding Amount: $1,059,346
Hours of Service: 6,032
Participant Encounters: 365
Key Services and Activities z Mentorship z Visual and performing arts programs z Law-related education z Youth public safety academy z Volunteer and public service activities “[Our program] enables young
adults facing significant
barriers to achieve stability
and independence. ... Holistic,
relationship-based support can
interrupt cycles of instability
and create pathways toward
long-term self-sufficiency.”
—Fresh Lifelines for Youth report
Program Highlight
The Fund supported Nurturing Indepen-
dence through Artistic Development
(NIAD) in expanding its Young Artist
Leaders (YAL) initiative. NIAD had not
previously focused on youth. The Fund
grant provided dedicated resources to
strengthen outreach and leadership sup-
ports for young adult artists (ages 19–24)
with intellectual and developmental dis-
abilities. As a new program, in 2025, the
YAL initiative focused on targeted out-
reach at regional transition/resource
fairs and community events and youthled tours and workshops. Using RFCY funds, the YAL initiative also created a
YAL Advisory Group that provided a ded-
icated forum for younger artists to build
community, share feedback, and help
shape programming. Over the course of
the year, NIAD doubled the number of
Richmond-based Young Artist Lead-
ers (from two to four) and strengthened
peer connection and leadership among
emerging artists across the broader
intergenerational studio community.
Photo courtesy of Touch of New Life. ©2026 517
Program Sites
RFCY-funded programs operated at 107 sites.
See Appendix B for a full list of sites by funded organization, and see Appendix C for a full list of program sites by city council district. The majority of program sites were located in Richmond and North Richmond (60 sites), where programming was delivered in
z schools (26 sites, 22 of which were WCCUSD schools);
z publicly funded locations such as community centers, parks, libraries, and recreation facilities (18 sites);
z organization-run facilities (12 sites); and
z other locations used for outreach or training (4 sites).
The geographic distribution of program sites across Richmond and North Richmond helped ensure that programs were accessible to Richmond residents who otherwise had limited access.
Some activities took place at sites outside Richmond and North Richmond (47 sites). None of the funded programs had sites exclusively outside of Richmond.3 Of the 47 sites outside of Richmond, 38 (80%) only had short-term programming such as field trips or a weeklong summer camp, and 9 (20%) had long-term programming (multiple sessions occurring over a month or more). Sites outside of Richmond were
z organization-run facilities (5 sites),
z publicly funded locations such as community centers and libraries (5 sites), z outdoor and cultural excursion sites used for field trips and camps (25 sites), 3 Article XV does not prohibit programming from taking place outside of Richmond. Article XV states that “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.” Photo courtesy of YES Nature to Neighborhoods. ©2026
z WCCUSD schools (8 sites), and
z colleges (4 sites).
These activities provided opportunities for children, youth, and families who reside in Richmond and North Richmond to engage in educational, recreational, and enrichment experiences beyond their immediate communities.
12 518
Schools That Partnered With RFCY-Funded Programs in 2025 N Nystrom Elementary School
P Peres Elementary School
R Richmond College Preparatory
Richmond High School
S Salesian College Preparatory
Sheldon Elementary School
V Verde Elementary School
Vista Virtual Academy
Voices College-Bound Language
Academy at West Contra Costa County
W Washington Elementary School
In Surrounding Area
B Betty Reid Soskin Middle School
C El Cerrito High School
Contra Costa College
E Edward M. Downer Elementary School
I Invictus Academy of Richmond
M Montalvin Manor Elementary School
O Olinda Elementary School
P Pinole Valley High School
S Santa Clara University
U University of California, Berkeley
University of California, Davis
W Walter T. Helms Middle School
In Richmond and North Richmond
A Aspire Richmond Technology Academy
C Cesar E. Chavez Elementary
Coronado Elementary School
D De Anza High School
F Ford Elementary School
G Golden Gate Community School
Grant Elementary School
H Highland Elementary School
J John F. Kennedy High School
L Leadership Public Schools: Richmond
Lincoln Elementary School
Lovonya DeJean Middle School
M Making Waves Academy
Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary School
Michelle Obama Elementary School
Mira Vista Elementary School
The Fund
dispersed
$3,176,386
to
19 grantees
who offered
7,221 hours
of programming
at
30 WCCUSD
schools.
13 519
RFCY Service Provision,
Youth Encounters,
and Participant
Demographics
Grantees provided 29,534
hours of programming to
Richmond children, youth,
and families in 2025.
The majority of this time (78% of total program
hours) reflected programming offered in group
settings and included a variety of activities such
as workshops, classroom activities, field trips,
and group mentoring (see Figure 4). Individual programming (17% of total program hours) included activities such as individualized case management,
mentorship, homework help, and therapeutic
services. Programming categorized as “other”
included internship hours and community events
such as information nights and giveaways (5%).
4 Grantees track participants using client-level identifiers and report unduplicated participant counts within their own programs. Because participant identifiers are not shared across organizations, it is not possible to determine whether the same participant was served by multiple RFCY-funded programs. As a result, this report presents unduplicated participant counts at the grantee level and uses the term “encounters” to describe total participation across the Fund-supported programs. Encounter totals may include duplicate individuals who participated in more than one program. The number of participants served by program can be found in Appendix A.
Figure 4. Breakdown of Service
Provision Activities
Most service activities (85% of total program
hours; see Figure 5) were offered on a recurring
basis, meaning that the same group of individuals
participated in multiple sessions, such as multiweek after-school programs, summer camps, or workshop series.
Figure 5. Cadence of Service Provision Activities
RFCY programs served children, their guardians,
and educators. In total, RFCY-funded programming
provided 28,546 hours of services directly to children and youth participants. Some of the service hours included programming for parent/guardian
(2,716 hours) and educator (6,831 hours) participants. Because some activities served multiple participant groups simultaneously, these hours are
not mutually exclusive and should not be summed.
In 2025, RFCY grantees had 15,774 encounters
with children, youth, and adults.4
Program structure varied—ranging from intensive
programming for a small number of participants
to programs that served entire schools. Many
grantees reported that the Fund enabled them
to offer consistent programming and to expand
programming during a year of limited funding from
other sources.
The majority of participants in RFCY-funded programs resided in the following zip codes: 94803 (35%), 94801 (26%), and 94804 (26%). Program
participants were about evenly split between male
and female (Figure 6).
Figure 6. RFCY-Funded Program
Participant Gender
Individual
Other
Group
17%
5%
78%
Breakdown of Service Provision Activities
Onetime
Recurring
15%
85%
Service Provision Activities by Participant Type
Female
51%
Male
49%
Unknown or
Nonbinary <1%
RFCY Participant Gender Identity
14 520
15 The majority of participants (69%) were between 6 and 12 years old (Figure 7). Programs also served children ages 13–17 (12%) and youth ages 18–24 (3%); these programs tended to focus on internship and employment training. Programs also served guardians (8%); these programs were often case management and parenting workshops.
Figure 7. RFCY-Funded Program Participant Ages
Grantees served a racially and ethnically diverse population of children and youth. RFCY participant demographics mirror that of Richmond’s overall population (Figure 8). To best serve the large percentage of Spanish-speaking participants, many programs were offered in Spanish. Several programs also offered services and/or materials in more than two languages.
Figure 8. RFCY-Funded Program Participant Race/Ethnicity Birth–5
8%
6–12
69%
13–17
12%
18–24
3%
Guardians
8%
RFCY Participant Ages
Hispanic/Latino 62%
Black 15%
Other 11%
White 4%
Mixed Race 4%
Asian 4%
RFCY Participant Race/Ethnicity
Photo courtesy of 18 Reasons. ©2026
“There are not a lot of funders that are
dedicated to funding in what’s Contra
Costa. ... A lot of people are like, ‘It’s messy.
We’re going to stay out of the area.’ The city
of Richmond is one of very few sustained
funding sources. ... Knowing that they
have consistent year-over-year funding
is game-changing.”
—Grantee focus group member
521
16 Participant Experiences
and Program Quality
A central goal of the Fund is to ensure that funded
programs provide safe, supportive, engaging, and
culturally responsive experiences for children and
youth. This section examines multiple indicators of
program quality during the 1st year of the 2025–
2027 grant cycle. Findings are based on participant
and parent/guardian surveys administered across
RFCY-funded programs and provide insight into
how participants experienced services during the
2025 reporting period.
Why Program
Quality Matters
Research consistently demonstrates that posi-
tive developmental outcomes are more likely to
occur based on the quality of programming, rather
than just attendance or participation. Positive
outcomes are more likely in programs in which par-
ticipants feel safe, supported by caring adults, and
have a sense of belonging, regardless of the spe-
cific goals of the program (Agans et al., 2015; Boat
et al., 2024; Ratner et al., 2023; Roth & BrooksGunn, 2016; Serido et al., 2011).
The evaluation measured program quality using
four widely used domains in the Fund participant
survey, drawing on established practices in the
field of youth development (The Forum for Youth
Investment, 2023; Leonard & Moore, 2017; Moore
et al., 2010; Yohalem & Wilson-Ahlstrom, 2010).
These measures were validated with Richmond
youth through the evaluation’s youth advisory
group and the Fund Oversight Board, whose mem-
bers informed the selection of items they felt were
the most critical indicators of program quality. Full
survey item text and per-item scores are available
in a supplemental file. The four domains of pro-
gram quality are as follows: z Program Satisfaction: Within the field of youth development, program satisfaction is a
key predictor of program effectiveness and is
widely used as a measure of program quality
(Sabatelli et al., 2005; Simmons et al., 2014;
Watts et al., 2008).
Photo courtesy of Pogo Park. ©2026 522
z Program Environment: Participants who
feel physically and emotionally safe are
more likely to engage in activities, develop
trusting relationships, and benefit from
program supports (Gootman & Eccles, 2002;
Yohalem & Wilson-Ahlstrom, 2010)—all of
which are key characteristics and outcomes
of high-quality programs. Maintaining safe
and supportive environments is particularly
important because of the high impact
of poverty, bullying, and fears for safety
described in Richmond’s 2024 Community
Needs Assessment.
z Caring Adults: Supportive relationships with
adults are among the strongest predictors
of positive youth development and key
indicators of program quality. Research
consistently demonstrates that caring and
positive adult relationships can strengthen
resilience, increase engagement, and
promote social, emotional, and academic
growth (Greene et al., 2013; Ratner et al.,
2023; Serido et al., 2011). Caring adults are
particularly important because of the high
impact of social isolation described in the
2024 Community Needs Assessment.
z Sense of Belonging: A sense of belonging is
defined as the extent to which participants
feel accepted, valued, and connected to a
program community. Feelings of belonging
are associated with stronger engagement,
increased participation, and positive
developmental outcomes (Barber & Olsen,
1997; Naftzger, 2025). Sense of belonging
is particularly important in Richmond
because of the high impact of bullying
and discrimination described in the 2024
Community Needs Assessment.
Photo courtesy of Contra Costa Family Justice Alliance. ©2026 17 523
Quality of RFCY-Funded
Programs
Evaluation findings show that the Fund has invested in
programs that the majority of participants enjoy and
that provide participants with a feeling of safety. While many programs received high ratings across most program quality indicators, some received lower ratings, especially related to caring adult relationships and
sense of belonging. This highlights the need for sustained investment, ongoing technical assistance, and continuous improvement efforts to further strengthen
all aspects of program quality over time.
Program Satisfaction
The majority of participants agreed or strongly agreed
that they liked the program (80%) and would recommend it to a friend (78%) (Figure 9). The majority of participants also agreed or strongly agreed that they
were interested in what they did in the program (76%)
and that they tried new things in the program (79%). A
lower percentage of youth agreed or strongly agreed
that the things they did in the program made a difference (59%).
Parent and caregiver feedback reflected similarly high
levels of satisfaction (Figure 10). The vast majority of parent survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed
that they liked the program (90%) and would recommend it to another parent or caregiver (89%), that their child was interested in what they did at the program
(87%), and that they developed new skills because of
the program (86%).
Figure 9. Youth Satisfaction With RFCY-Funded Programs
I would recommend this program
to a friend.
I do things that make a
difference at this program.
14% 52%
15% 47%
9% 28% 29%
6% 15% 33% 43%
14% 37% 42%
I like this program.
I am interested in what we do at
this program.
In this program, I try new things.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree 30%
28%
31%
Note. This figure reflects 1,323 participant surveys from 35 programs. Participants who did not respond to the question or selected “Does Not Apply” were categorized as “N/A.” Fewer than 5 percent of participants fell into the “N/A” category for each item. Bars without data labels had 3 percent or fewer participants.
“My experience was amazing. I met some of my closest friends through this program and people I can talk to and [I learned] many skills.” —YES Nature to Neighborhoods participant, age 15
18 524
Figure 10. Parent Satisfaction With RFCY-Funded Programs Note. This figure reflects 347 parent surveys from 11 programs. Participants who did not respond to the question or selected “Does Not Apply” were categorized as “N/A.” Fewer than 5 percent of participants fell into the “N/A” category for each item. Bars without data labels had 3 percent or fewer participants.
I would recommend this program to
another parent.
6% 70%
7% 72%
9% 19% 68%
11% 24% 62%
I like this program.
My child is interested in what they
do at this program.
My child developed new skills because
of this program.
Parents’ Satisfaction With the Funded Programs
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree 19%
17%
“My child has been very happy
at camp this summer. I feel
very grateful that this program
exists for our community and
our children.”
—Camp Achieve parent
19 Photo courtesy of City of
Richmond Department of
Recreation- Camp Achieve. ©2026 525
Program Environment
Most surveyed participants reported feeling physically and emotionally safe while participating in programming (Figures 11–12). They agreed or strongly agreed that they felt physically safe when at the program (78%), the place was a comfortable one to hang out (80%), adults at the program understood their family’s culture (72%), and adults at the program encouraged respect for others who are different from them (85%). Parent and caregiver feedback reflected similarly positive experiences. The majority of parent survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed that their child felt physically safe when at the program (88%) and that program staff understood their family’s culture (84%).
Figure 11. Participants’ Satisfaction With Program Environment Note. This figure reflects 1,301 participant surveys from 35 programs. Participants who did not respond to the question or selected “Does Not Apply” were categorized as “N/A.” Fewer than 5 percent of participants fell into the “N/A” category for each item. Bars without data labels had 3 percent or fewer participants. 46%
47%
52%
39%
I feel physically safe when
I am at this program.
Adults at this program encourage respect
for others who are different from me.
Adults at this program understand
my family’s culture.
This place is a comfortable
place to hang out.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree 16%
13%
11%
22%
32%
33%
33%
33%
“This is a lot like a second home
to me. I feel so safe here in who I
can be and physically too.”
—RYSE participant, age 17
20 526
Figure 12. Parent Satisfaction With Program Environment Note. This figure reflects 341 parent surveys from 11 programs. Participants who did not respond to the question or selected “Does Not Apply” were categorized as “N/A.” Fewer than 5 percent of participants fell into the “N/A” category for each item. Bars without data labels had 3 percent or fewer participants. 62%
62%
Staff at this program understand my
family’s culture.
My child is physically safe when they are
at this program.
13%
9%
22%
26%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree “Everything is excellently well taken
care of, from the staff who work at
the complex to the maintenance
provided to the space where my
children ... have fun safely.”
—Pogo Park parent
Photo courtesy of Bay Area Community Resources. ©2026 21 527
Caring Adults
There was greater variation in whether participants indicated their program fostered strong, supportive networks of adults through programming that centered on youth wellbeing (Figure 13). The majority of participants agreed or strongly agreed that there was an adult at the program who cared about them (82%), there was an adult in the program who believed they would become a success (82%), there was an adult in the program who always wanted them to do their best (85%), and they could talk to program adults about things that bother them (72%).5 Parents and caregivers shared similar sentiments (Figure 14). The majority agreed or strongly agreed that there was an adult at the program who cared about their child (85%). Caring adult relationships are a key indicator of program quality, and these findings point to a clear area for future technical assistance.
Figure 13. Participants’ Experience With Program Staff
Note. This figure reflects 979 participant surveys from 35 programs. Participants who did not respond to the question or selected “Does Not Apply” were categorized as “N/A.” Fewer than 5 percent of participants fell into the “N/A” category for each item. Bars without data labels had 3 percent or fewer participants. 5 The reported percentages reflect the total number of survey respondents. There were two programs with particularly low ratings for caring adults, which led to a low average score. Excluding these two programs results in the percentages increasing between 1 and 3 percentage points.
There is an adult at this program
who cares about me.
There is an adult in this program who
believes I will become a success.
There is an adult in this program who
always wants me to do my best.
I can talk to adults at this program
about things that bother me.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree 14% 30% 52%
14% 32% 50%
10% 32% 53%
5% 6% 18% 33% 39%
“I also loved the way all the adults
working there made everyone feel
included and not left out.”
—Bay Area Community
Resources participant, age 15
22 528
Figure 14. Parent Experience With Program Staff
Note. This figure reflects 270 parent surveys from 11 programs. Participants who did not respond to the question or selected “Does Not Apply” were categorized as “N/A.” Fewer than 5 percent of participants fell into the “N/A” category for each item. Bars without data labels had 3 percent or fewer participants.
There is an adult in this program who
cares about my child.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree 11% 24% 61%
Sense of Belonging
More than two thirds of participants said it was somewhat, mostly, or completely true that they had a strong sense of belonging to a community at the program (70%), could usually be themselves in the program (73%), and felt like they mattered in the program (71%) (Figure 15).6 Sense of belonging is another important indicator of program quality, and these findings highlight a clear area for future technical assistance.
Figure 15. Participants’ Sense of Belonging in Their Programs Note. This figure reflects 939 participant surveys from 35 programs. Participants who did not respond to the question or selected “Does Not Apply” were categorized as “N/A.” Fewer than 5 percent of participants fell into the “N/A” category for each item. Bars without data labels had 3 percent or fewer participants. 6 The reported percentages reflect the total number of survey respondents. There were two programs with particularly low ratings for sense of belonging, which led to a lower average score. Excluding these two programs results in the percentages increasing between 7 and 9 percentage points.
I can usually be myself in this program.
I feel like I matter in this program.
I have a strong sense of belonging
to a community at this program.
Not At All True A Little True Somewhat True Mostly True Completely True 8% 15% 29% 44%
7% 17% 25% 46%
8% 19% 29% 41%
“I feel like I have a second family
at Project Avary. I always feel
welcomed, cared about and whole.”
—Project Avary participant, age 11
“My child connected well with staff
and looks forward to coming.”
—Contra Costa Family
Justice Center parent
23 529
24 Grantee Performance
Measures
Each of the program quality domains above is
measured through several survey items, offering
a fuller picture of participants’ experiences. To
complement this, the RDCY also tracks one representative item per domain as a performance measure, providing a consistent, streamlined indicator for monitoring grantee performance over time. Grantee-level results are shared with the
RDCY annually to identify strengths, opportunities
for growth, and areas where additional support or
technical assistance may be needed.
The following performance measures were
selected by the Fund Oversight Board in partnership with WestEd, the RDCY, and the Fund evaluation youth advisory group. For each performance measure, a benchmark was selected by the Fund Oversight Board to represent the minimum acceptable level of performance. The RDCY is currently developing its technical assistance
and capacity-building model that will use these
benchmarks to identify grantees in need of intensive, targeted, or universal support. z Program Participation (benchmark:
85%): Number of participants served as
a percentage of the program’s projected
number of participants
z Program Satisfaction (benchmark: 50%):
Percentage of surveyed youth who agreed or
strongly agreed with the statement “I would
recommend this program to a friend.”
z Program Environment (benchmark: 70%):
Percentage of surveyed youth who agreed
or strongly agreed with the statement “I feel
physically safe when I am at this program.”
z Caring Adults (benchmark: 70%): Percentage
of surveyed youth who agreed or strongly
agreed with the statement “There is an adult
at this program who cares about me.”
z Sense of Belonging (benchmark: 50%):
Percentage of surveyed youth who indicated
that the statement “I have a strong sense of
belonging to a community at this program”
was somewhat, mostly, or completely true
Photo courtesy of City of Richmond Department of Recreation - Camp Achieve. ©2026 530 25 The following findings are based on 1,323 youth
surveys collected from 35 programs, and on 341
parent surveys collected from 11 programs.
Findings: Grantee
Performance Benchmarks
Because this report reflects the 1st year of imple-
mentation for a new funding cycle, benchmark
results should be interpreted as an early indica-
tor of program quality rather than a definitive
assessment of program effectiveness. Overall,
86 percent of applicable RFCY-funded programs
met all established benchmarks for survey-derived
performance measures, and 76 percent met the
benchmark for program participation. The RDCY is
establishing a Growth and Improvement Planning
(GIP) process in partnership with these programs
to identify the root cause of poor performance
and to identify a path to improvement.
As depicted in Figure 16, findings suggest that
RFCY-funded programs generally provided positive
experiences for participants, while the findings
also point to opportunities to further strengthen
engagement, belonging, and supportive relation-
ships for some youth. A small but meaningful
number of youth participants indicated neg-
ative experiences in their programs. Although
these responses represent a minority, they pro-
vide important insight into areas where program
improvements may be necessary to ensure all
youth feel safe, supported, and engaged.
Figure 16. Percentage of RFCY Grantees Meeting
Performance Benchmarks, 2025
Note. Only programs with at least 10 survey responses
were included in benchmark calculations.
As programs continue to mature, strengthen
implementation, and receive ongoing support
from the RDCY, the 2026 and 2027 evaluation data
will be able to assess whether participant reports
of program quality increase over time.
Program Satisfaction
Program Environment
Caring Adults
Sense of Belonging
97%
83%
Program Participation 76%
92%
96%
Photo courtesy of Contra Costa Family Justice Alliance. ©2026 531 Participant
Outcomes and
Early Indicators
of Impact
RFCY-funded programs
are designed to support a
wide range of outcomes
for children and youth.
Because funded programs vary considerably in their goals, service models, and activities, each program was assigned one or
more participant survey module with questions
that measured program-aligned outcomes.
This section is organized by outcome module
(Table 1) to illustrate the impact of programs
based on their specific design and focus.
Findings should be interpreted as early indicators of impact during the 1st year of the 2025–2027 grant cycle.
Table 1. Survey Outcome Modules
Outcome
module
What it
measures Which programs administered this module Number of grantees Number of
responses
Academic
Success
Academic motivation and
school-related
skills
Programs whose primary goals included
academic support, educational enrichment,
tutoring, homework assistance, school
engagement, and/or college preparation
9 561
Physical, Mental,
and Emotional
Health
Wellbeing,
coping, and overall health
Programs focused on behavioral health,
mental health services, wellness, violence
prevention, social–emotional development,
and related supports
15 861
Career Readiness,
Employment, and
Postsecondary
Success
Workforce skills
and career development
Programs focused on workforce development, employment readiness, internships, and career exploration
5 85
College
Preparedness
Postsecondary
awareness and
readiness
Programs focused on college preparation
and postsecondary access 4 112
Building
Connections
Peer relationships
and social connectedness
Programs focused on mentoring, enrichment, youth development, after-school programming, recreation, and community-building activities designed to strengthen peer relationships and social
connection
10 450
Leadership
Development
Leadership skills,
voice, and civic
engagement
Programs focused on youth leadership,
advocacy, civic engagement, environmental justice, community participation, and youth voice
7 511
Life Skills
Goal-setting,
self-management, and future
orientation
Programs focused on positive youth development, mentoring, leadership, career exposure, and skill-building
4 287
Connective
Supportive
Services
Access to services, supports,
and resources
All programs, regardless of program type;
survey participants were asked a question
about what types of resources, if any, they
had been connected with by the programs
10 450
26 532
Academic Success
Academic engagement and confidence are
important predictors of educational success
(Archambault et al., 2009; Dogan, 2015). Effective
academic youth programming involves helping
young people build the skills, habits, and motivation needed to succeed in school and pursue future educational opportunities (Child Trends,
2009; Naftzger, 2025; Neild et al., 2019; Sandoval
& Bowers, 2025).
Key Findings
Eighty-five percent of surveyed youth indicated
that “What I learn at this program helps me be
more successful in school.” Similarly, 80 percent
reported that “Because of this program, I am more
motivated to learn in school,” and 87 percent
reported that the program makes learning fun.
Parent and caregiver perceptions were similarly
positive: 94 percent of surveyed parents reported
that their child would do better in school because
of the program, and 97 percent reported that the
program makes learning fun.
These findings suggest that programs may
strengthen both academic engagement and attitudes toward school. “My child has really enjoyed
her time in the Nevin Summer
Camp. The staff are supportive
and engaging, and the activities
offered have helped build both
academic skills and social
confidence.”
—Camp Achieve parent
Program Highlight
Growing Together facilitated biweekly in-school garden and nutrition classes and after-school activities and mentored youth apprenticeships across four schools, serving thousands of students and training youth educators. They delivered hands-on experiential learning throughout semesters and planned ongoing programming. Responses to organization-administered surveys showed strong alignment with school priorities—engagement, science achievement, attendance, health and wellness—and high teacher and parent approval. Ninety-five percent of parents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “My child is more engaged in school because of the garden and nutrition program.” In addition, teachers provided positive feedback about the program, and 97.5 percent agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “This program helped engage students in learning science concepts.” One teacher said, “This program helps me promote student wellbeing, integrate hands-on learning into the curriculum, and foster a positive school culture. It also supports my role in teaching healthy habits and providing opportunities for crosscurricular connections, enhancing both academic and social development.” As a result of the positive reception, several schools committed to fee-for-service contracts and district matching funds for after-school components, supporting program sustainability beyond the Fund grant. 27 533
Physical, Mental, and
Emotional Health
Positive physical, emotional, and mental health
supports young people’s overall wellbeing and
ability to thrive at home, in school, and in their
communities (Banati et al., 2025; Newby et al.,
2022). Youth-serving programs can play an important role in helping participants learn and develop coping skills, address mental health challenges,
and improve nutrition and physical activity
(Barfield et al., 2021; Bengtsson et al., 2025; Child
Trends, 2009; Sandoval & Bowers, 2025; Tuaf &
Orkibi, 2023). Programs offering physical, mental,
and emotional supports are increasingly important given mounting concerns nationwide regarding the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic
on youth mental health and wellbeing (McGorry
et al., 2025; Verlenden, 2024).
Key Findings
Participants generally reported positive outcomes
related to health and wellbeing. Eighty-three percent of surveyed youth who participated in an RFCY-funded program reported that the program taught them how to be healthy, 86 percent reported learning how to deal with problems in
positive ways, and 79 percent reported that the
program helped them cope with stress. Parent
and caregiver responses reflected similarly positive perceptions, with 92 percent reporting that the program taught their family how to make
healthy decisions.
“Having joined the Richmond
Steelers has been extremely
positive for my sons and our
family—their confidence and
happiness are blooming!”
—Richmond Steelers parent
Program Highlight
The Fund supported the Contra Costa
Family Justice Alliance to deliver the
Richmond Children’s Mental Health
Program, expanding access to no-cost,
trauma-informed clinical and wraparound
supports for youth impacted by interpersonal violence. Services are provided at the Contra Costa Family Justice Center
in Richmond. In addition to providing
individual and family counseling, the program also delivered the “Dating Matters:
Building Safe and Healthy Relationships”
interactive workshop for youth ages 10–16
(in collaboration with the East Bay Center
for the Performing Arts). This workshop
helps students recognize healthy versus
unhealthy relationship behaviors, identify safe adults, and reduce stigma around counseling. On the participant survey, one
parent reflected, “So far it’s been great to
have found support for my son that is free
and did not have to wait too long to get
the help he needed.”
28 534
Career Readiness,
Employment, and
Postsecondary Success
Career readiness and postsecondary preparation
programs help youth develop workforce skills,
explore career pathways, and build knowledge
about future educational and employment opportunities. These supports can strengthen long-term economic mobility and help young people successfully transition into adulthood (Child Trends, 2009; Larson & Bolton, 2019; Sandoval & Bowers,
2025; Xing et al., 2019; Yousef, 2024).
Key Findings
Participants reported strong outcomes related to
career readiness and postsecondary preparation.
Ninety percent of surveyed youth who participated in RFCY-funded programming reported that the program helped them learn how to work
independently with focus, 88 percent reported
learning what is expected in a work setting, and 91
percent reported learning about jobs they could
have in the future. Eighty-five percent reported
understanding how to get the kind of job they
want, and 91 percent reported understanding the
steps needed to get into college.
While not required to do so, RFCY-funded programs also connected some participants to tangible work-based learning opportunities.
Among respondents, 36 percent reported receiving volunteer opportunities or unpaid internships, 20 percent reported receiving paid jobs, and 17
percent reported receiving paid internships.
Together, these findings suggest that RFCY-funded
workforce and postsecondary programs are helping youth build practical employment-related skills while also increasing awareness of educational
and career pathways.
“This was such a rewarding
program. I learned so much and
enjoyed every part of it. I’m ready
for college.”
—The Black Neighborhood—Youth
Empowerment Program participant, age 17
Program Highlight
The Fund supported Richmond Promise to
deliver the First Year Experience Program
in partnership with Contra Costa College.
The program provides coaching, case
management, and community-building
supports such as “Study Jam” drop-in sessions with tutors to help Richmond youth who are 1st-year college students to persist and succeed in college. The Fund also supported high-engagement events such
as Summer Bridge, Fall Welcome, workshops, and an end-of-year celebration and field trip that aimed to strengthen
belonging and retention. Despite challenges related to financial aid and summer counseling appointment availability, the
program met its ambitious goals. This
included 94 percent of participants who
completed pre–Summer Bridge registration and 90 percent of participants who updated their education plans. They
also made measurable progress toward
1st-year English and math requirements,
reflecting the program’s success in
improving college retention rates.
29 535
Building Connections
Positive peer relationships and social connectedness are foundational components of healthy youth development. Programs that help youth
build friendships, strengthen interpersonal skills,
and develop a sense of belonging can support
emotional wellbeing, resilience, and positive
engagement in school and community settings
(Boat et al., 2024; Naftzger, 2025).
Key Findings
Participants in RFCY-funded programs generally reported strong outcomes related to peer relationships and social connectedness. Eightyeight percent of surveyed youth reported that the program helped them make new friends, and 90
percent reported that the program helped them
learn how to get along with others. Parent and
caregiver responses reflected similarly positive
perceptions, with 100 percent of surveyed parents reporting that their child made new friends because of the program.
The high percentage of participants reporting new
friendships and improved ability to get along with
others suggests that many programs are creating
environments where youth feel connected, supported, and engaged with their peers. “My son … loves the program [and
says] that he feels so good seeing
other kids with brown skin, he feels
welcome, celebrated and happy
here. … My son got to experience
what it feels like to be centered
and invested in. He now wants to
invest into youth—his dreams and
thoughts have been expanded
and given space for seeds to be
planted. This program is more than
a program—it is planting seeds that
are growing and impacting lives.”
—Richmond Freedom School parent
Program Highlight
Big Brothers Big Sisters, Bay Area (BBBSBA)
was supported by the Fund to expand
and strengthen one-on-one communitybased mentoring for Richmond youth, pairing young people with trained volunteer mentors and providing ongoing case management to support match success.
In 2025, the Fund supported 11 Richmond
pairs through direct mentoring, match
supports, and case management. RFCY
funding also supported outreach and
partnership development that generated
new referrals and expanded community
engagement through group events and
caregiver workshops. This helped participants build consistent, supportive relationships that can promote youth
wellbeing and positive academic and
social outcomes.
30 536
Leadership Development
Leadership and advocacy skills help young people
build confidence, strengthen their voice, understand community issues, and see themselves as capable of contributing to positive change.
Programs that support youth leadership can help
participants develop civic awareness, problemsolving skills, and a stronger sense of agency (Buzinde et al., 2019; Child Trends, 2009; Clement
et al., 2014; Kelsey & Fuhrman, 2020; Sandoval &
Bowers, 2025).
Key Findings
Participants in RFCY-funded programs reported
strong outcomes related to leadership and civic
engagement. Since coming to the program, 86
percent of youth said they were more aware of
what is going on in their community, 92 percent
said they better understood solutions to problems in their community, and 86 percent said they saw themselves as more of a leader. In addition, 82 percent reported that they had become better at saying no to things they know are wrong.
These strong findings related to understanding
community problems and solutions suggest that
these programs are supporting youth not only as
participants but as emerging leaders with the
capacity to reflect on community conditions and
to take action.
“YES helped strengthen my
empathy by putting me in
situations where I had to work
with people from different
backgrounds and perspectives.
Whether it was during a teambuilding hike or a group discussion, I learned to listen deeply, respect
others’ experiences, and lead in a
way that brings people together
rather than apart. The program
also taught me the value of
dependability. Being part of a
close team made us rely on each
other, showing me that leadership
isn’t about doing everything alone
but about showing up, being
prepared, and supporting others
consistently.”
—YES program participant, age unknown
Program Highlight
The Fund supported The Latina Center to
deliver the Young Latinas, Future Leaders
STEAM program. This program engages
youth in leadership development, mentorship, and hands-on robotics learning.
The program supported training and stipends for youth mentors aged 18–22.
Training included engaging youth in how
to facilitate robotics instruction and in
leadership-building exercises. Youth mentors were integral to the overall program implementation. Collectively, youth mentors accumulated more than 100 hours of paid mentorship. Using a specific curriculum, the program helped a largely beginner cohort (90% had no prior robotics experience) build foundational skills in robot design, construction, and programming while also strengthening teamwork, communication, persistence, and problemsolving through group challenges and competitions. Participants exhibited their
work at a culminating Robotics Showcase
and graduation.
31 537
32 Life Skills
Life skills such as goal-setting and future orien-
tation help drive long-term success in education,
employment, and personal wellbeing (Aronowitz,
2005; Scarborough et al., 2010; Sun & Shek, 2012).
Key Findings
Participants in RFCY-funded programs generally
reported positive outcomes related to future orien-
tation and personal skill development. Eighty-one
percent of surveyed youth reported learning how
to set goals and meet them, 78 percent reported
that the program helped them think about the
future, and 83 percent reported learning new skills
that would help them achieve their goals.
“Touch of New Life has helped
me grow as an individual. I’ve
learned discipline, job skills, and
communication skills.”
—Touch of New Life participant, age 17
Program Highlight
The Fund supported Touch of New Life to
deliver the Youth Public Safety Academy,
a career-exploration and youth develop-
ment program that prepares Richmond
teens through life skills training, pub-
lic-safety exposure, and other hands-on
training. In 2025, the program con-
ducted broad community recruitment
and pre-academy workshops, including
Department of Motor Vehicle identification
support and first aid and cardiopulmo-
nary resuscitation training. They then
implemented a 3-week summer academy
featuring classroom lectures on life skills
topics, physical training, and scenariobased learning with engagement from law enforcement, fire personnel, dispatch
staff, and district attorneys. Youth who
completed the program earned certifi-
cates of completion, training certificates,
and scholarships. One youth shared, “I like
the program because it’s helping me learn
about a lot of jobs I never thought I could
get. I like the different trainings because
I will be able to use it in any job.”
Photo courtesy of Richmond Outdoors Coalition. ©2026 538 Connective Supportive
Services
The 2024 RFCY Community Needs Assessment
identified three overarching connective service
needs: transportation, navigation support, and a
two-generation approach to services. Many children, youth, and families face barriers related to reliable transportation that prevent their ability to
attend programs. In addition, navigation support
is needed to help families access social services,
housing, education, and healthcare. Finally, a
two-generation approach provides support for
the entire family, resulting in a holistic approach
to children’s wellbeing. Programs that connect
participants and their families with supportive
services and resources can help reduce barriers to
program participation and strengthen overall wellbeing (Aspen Institute, 2026; Kennedy et al., 2007).
Key Findings
RFCY grantees coupled direct service with supportive navigation—case management, resource referrals, bilingual outreach, scholarship offerings, and assistance with employment or school systems—to lower access barriers and strengthen family capacity. Family supports included multiweek parent education, caregiver support groups, and intergenerational events. In addition, onsite family engagement activities helped families build trust, reduce isolation, and equip caregivers with parenting skills.
RFCY-funded programs connected youth and families with a broad range of supportive services and resources (Figure 17). Sixty-five percent of surveyed youth and 70 percent of surveyed parents and caregivers reported that they were connected to at least one resource or support through their program. The most commonly reported resources included education-related services (34%), food assistance (31%), and counseling services (24%).
Figure 17. Types of Resources Received by Surveyed Participants Note. Participants could select all that apply, so percentages do not add up to 100 percent. Data are based on responses from 321 parents and 1,182 youth survey respondents.
Education-Related
Services
Childcare
Medical or
Dental Care
Housing
Assistance
Transportation
Tickets or Passes
Work-Appropriate
Clothing or
Work-Related
Equipment
Counseling or
Other Mental
Health Services
Food Assistance
34% 31% 24% 17%
17% 10% 7% 6%
Top Resources Received by Youth
33 539
34 Types of multigenerational services
and programming: z workshops for parents on topics such as nutrition, cooking, and parenting
z case management (entire family) z family counseling services These findings suggest that RFCY-funded pro-
grams serve as important connectors between
participants and broader systems of support.
Beyond providing direct programming, many orga-
nizations are helping youth and families navigate
services, reduce barriers to participation, and
access resources that can support overall family
stability and wellbeing.
“Many caregivers—grandparents,
relatives, or guardians—also
experience isolation and stigma.
Through our family engagement
efforts, they have found a supportive
community where they can share
resources, exchange encouragement,
and feel understood. Caregivers
report feeling less alone and more
equipped to support their children’s
emotional and leadership growth.”
—Project Avary report
Program Highlight
The Fund supported the Child Abuse
Prevention Council to strengthen child
safety and family wellbeing through
Speak Up Be Safe (SUBS) school-based
prevention education and the Nurturing
Parenting Program (NPP) at Verde and
Coronado Elementary Schools. SUBS pro-
vides age-appropriate child safety lessons
to elementary and middle school class-
rooms, providing students with practical
tools and repeated exposure to rein-
force safety skills. Lessons are adapted
to support bilingual learners by offer-
ing materials in English and Spanish. The
NPP provides information to caregivers
in a trusting and judgment-free space,
making a positive impact on caregivers’
mental health. For example, one partici-
pant reported, “This program is so fulfilling
it lifts my spirit and allows me to feel good
about myself.”
Photo courtesy of East Bay Center for the Performing Arts. ©2026 540 35 Overall Patterns in
Participant Outcomes
Across outcome modules, the majority of participants reported positive outcomes related to supportive relationships, peer connection, leadership, future orientation, and wellbeing. Findings were especially strong for social connectedness,
leadership, career readiness, and postsecondary
preparation. Many participants reported that
programs helped them make friends, build interpersonal skills, understand community issues, develop leadership skills, and feel more confident
about future educational and career opportunities. Participants also reported positive outcomes related to healthy decision-making, coping with
problems, and stress management, suggesting that RFCY-funded programs are supporting important protective factors linked to positive
youth development.
Although findings were generally positive across
outcome areas, some variability emerged among
specific measures. Academic-related items related
to motivation and school success, while still positive overall, were somewhat less strongly endorsed than measures focused on belonging, leadership,
peer relationships, and career readiness. This pattern may reflect differences in program intensity, variation in the degree to which programs directly
targeted academic outcomes, or the reality that
changes in school engagement and academic
confidence may develop more gradually over time
than outcomes related to connection, enjoyment,
or the development of life skills.
Similarly, although participants frequently
reported positive relationships and opportunities for connection, measures related to a broader sense of belonging and community connection showed somewhat greater variation across respondents. These findings may suggest
opportunities for some programs to continue
strengthening strategies that foster deeper
participant engagement, inclusion, and communitybuilding. Taken together, the findings provide encouraging early evidence that RFCY-funded
programs are supporting wellbeing, connection,
leadership, skill development, and future opportunities for Richmond youth and families. Variation across some outcome areas may point to areas
that may benefit from additional support or technical assistance.
Photo courtesy of East Bay Center for the Performing Arts. ©2026 541 36 Organizational,
Community, and
Systems-Level
Findings
In addition to the findings on
participant-level outcomes,
emerging findings suggest
that the Fund contributed
to broader organizational,
community, and early systemslevel changes during the 1st year of the 2025–2027 grant cycle. Findings in this section are based primar -
ily on grantee focus groups and quarterly
reports and reflect how the Fund reduced ser-
vice gaps; strengthened organizational capacity
and sustainability; and strengthened community
engagement, partnerships, and collective impact.
These findings align with the Fund’s broader goals
of strengthening community-based systems of
support; increasing equitable access to services;
and promoting the wellbeing of Richmond chil-
dren, youth, and families.
Photo courtesy of Bay Area Girls Club. ©2026
Photo courtesy of The Hidden Genius Project. ©2026 542
Reducing Service Gaps
Evidence suggests that the Fund increased the
availability and accessibility of affordable programs and services in Richmond and North Richmond. The Fund has reduced service gaps by
enabling partners to expand staff time, broaden
their geographic reach, and diversify the type
of services they can offer. Programs have built
staffing capacity, increased scholarship funding,
and broadened participation so that more youth
and families have had opportunities to participate. Many grantees have also used RFCY funding to reduce barriers to participation by offering
free or low-cost programming, transportation
assistance, participant stipends, and culturally
responsive supports.
Geographically Accessible
Programs
In 2025, RFCY-funded programs operated across
more than 100 sites, including schools, community centers, parks, libraries, recreation facilities, and neighborhood-based locations throughout
Richmond and North Richmond. Many of the
programs operated in neighborhoods with lower
levels of child opportunity, including areas with
higher concentrations of economic hardship and
7 The COI visualized on the map is a calculated measure of neighborhood resources and conditions across domains of education, health, environment, social, and economic resources. For more information about the COI, visit www.diversitydatakids.org. 8 See the 2024 Richmond Department of Children and Youth Community Needs Assessment Report for more information about Richmond’s high-need areas. reduced access to resources and services. Figure
18 shows the location of RFCY-funded program
sites in relation to child opportunity as defined by
the Childhood Opportunity Index (COI).7 The majority of program sites are centrally located and in areas with a higher proportion of families whose
income is less than 200 percent of the federal
poverty level. Several organizations also described
intentionally locating services within neighborhoods and schools where youth and families already spend time in order to reduce participation
barriers and strengthen long-term engagement.8
Figure 18. Map of RFCY-Funded Program Sites
Among Richmond’s six city council districts,
District 3 has the most RFCY-funded program
sites, followed by District 1. These districts are
also those with lowest COI, indicating areas of
highest need. These findings suggest that RFCY
funding is helping channel services and supports
toward communities where youth and families
may face greater structural barriers to services
and supports for children and youth.
0 100
Child Opportunity Index Score
City Council District Boundaries
Child Opportunity Index 3.0
2020 Census Tracts
2021 Data
37 543
38 “The unmet need for safe, free
youth programming is profound in
a community where 6,620 children
lack access to quality summer
programs and many are confined
indoors with nowhere safe to go—
the demand for enriching, free
activities is huge.”
—Pogo Park report
Consistent Programming to
Address Service Gaps
Grantees emphasized that multiyear, stable
funding is critical for building an ecosystem of
services and ensuring continuity of supports as
youth age. They reflected that community-based
care and resource-sharing are essential for youth
wellbeing and for creating opportunities that
reinforce each other to deepen impact beyond
individual programs.
Programming Designed to
Serve Diverse Participants
Grantees were also committed to offering programs
for participants from varied cultural and linguistic
backgrounds and for neurodivergent participants.
Many grantees offered resources and information
in English and Spanish for parents and participants.
One grantee specifically focused on neurodiver-
gent populations, and many grantees integrated
practices to ensure that neurodivergent partici-
pants were well-served. For example, Big Brothers
Big Sisters had a Match Support specialist offering
resources on neurodivergence for mentors to imple-
ment best practices for engaging their mentees.
“The community reinforced the
need for culturally responsive, lowbarrier care. Families responded strongly to services that were
flexible, multilingual, and delivered
with cultural humility—especially
when childcare, transportation, and
informal engagement opportunities
were built in. ... Access isn’t just
about availability; it’s about design
that respects lived reality.”
—Greater Richmond Interfaith
Program Report
Together, these findings suggest that RFCY
funding is helping to strengthen the avail-
ability, continuity, and accessibility of
youth-serving supports across Richmond
and North Richmond.
Photo courtesy of The Watershed Project. ©2026 544
39 Strengthening
Organizational Capacity
and Sustainability
Across focus groups, participants from differ-
ent organizations consistently described RFCY
funding as an important source of organizational
stability within an increasingly uncertain funding
environment. Many organizations emphasized that
multiyear funding allowed them to engage in longer
term planning, retain staff, strengthen infrastruc-
ture, and invest in program quality in ways that are
often difficult under short-term grants.
In addition, several grantees described RFCY
funding as uniquely flexible and relationship cen-
tered compared to other public funding streams.
Organizations noted that the structure of the Fund
allowed them to respond to evolving participant
and community needs while maintaining consis-
tency in staffing and service delivery.
“Multiyear funding from RFCY
is especially vital to preventing
service interruption, which can
undermine trust, disrupt student
progress, and weaken long-term
outcomes. In [our organization’s]
experience, schools that lose
access to programming—whether
due to funding gaps or instability—
rarely have the opportunity to reengage in future years, even when need and desire remains high.”
—Grantee focus group member
Grantees frequently connected funding and staff-
ing stability to program quality and participant
relationships. Grantees also repeatedly emphasized
that stable funding allowed them to maintain con-
sistent relationships with youth and families over
time, building trust with the Richmond community.
Several organizations described continuity itself as
a critical lever of change, particularly for youth who
have experienced instability, trauma, violence, or
inconsistent access to support systems.
Photo courtesy of The Practice Space. ©2026 545
“RFCY is the largest and most
stable source of funding for the
community. … It is the biggest
grant that is available to most of
our organizations and knowing
that it’s going to be there longterm really allows us to change our thinking about how we’re planning,
programming, thinking about the
future and what we can do for our
community.”
—Grantee focus group member
Although 2025 was the 1st year of the 3-year RFCY
grant cycle, many grantees are already planning
for sustainability. The grantee reports from many
of the organizations mention prioritizing sustainability by diversifying revenue (grants, individual and corporate donations, earned income/fee-forservice, matching funds, and reserves), strengthening partnership practices (memoranda of understanding, school and district commitments,
anchor funders), and creatively braiding new funding with existing funding streams. Several reports also emphasize building institutional capacity—prospect development, documentation, cross-training, and billing mechanisms (e.g., MediCal/CalAIM)—to ensure program sustainability. “[For] this grant, we really invested
in scaling up our core programming
so that we’re serving more youth
through one-to-one mentorship
through our community-based
model. And because of that, we
can direct other funding streams
towards other new innovative things
that we want to do that we think
can also compound and support.”
—Grantee focus group member
For smaller community-based organizations in
particular, RFCY funding was often described as
being critical to developing partnerships, building
capacity, and establishing operational systems to
support their programs.
Five grants (totaling $356,000) were awarded to
small and emerging programs, each with operating budgets less than $250,000:
z Bay Area Girls Club
z Black Neighborhood—Youth Empowerment
Program
z Richmond Steelers Youth Football and Cheer
z Things That Creep
z Touch of New Life
Many programs also reported that an essential
part of their sustainability strategy is grounded in
their partnership models. In grantee reports, partnership models allowed grantees to reduce costs, embed program capacity into community institutions, diversify revenue and referrals, and expand ownership so that programs can persist despite
funding or staffing changes.
Training and Capacity
Building
Throughout the year, grantees invested in staff
training to build organizational capacity through
lunch-and-learns and by bringing in outside contractors to facilitate workshops for program staff.
In quarterly reports, nine grantees described
professional development offerings in 2025,
with many of those focused on evidence-based
approaches to serving specific populations.
40 546
41 “By having consistent funding,
organizations can plan for
sustainability over time and focus on
continuously improving programs,
rather than using funds to address
short-term issues: [Long-term
funding from RFCY is] invaluable
because then you don’t have to
worry about the money piece
and you can look at making your
programs better year over year.”
—Grantee focus group member
Grantee Professional
Development Topics
z gender-responsive, trauma-informed,
population-specific, culturally
competent programming
z support for students who are
English Learners
z support for LGBTQ+ youth
z improvement of outcomes for systeminvolved and violence-impacted youth z creative techniques for managing anger
for system-involved youth
z trauma-focused therapy for families
z African American trauma and resilience
z transformative justice
z healing-centered engagement
z equitable youth and adult partnerships
z motivational interviewing
z public speaking
z bias reduction
z disability justice
Photo courtesy of Pogo Park. ©2026 547
Strengthening
Community Engagement,
Partnerships, and
Collective Impact
Another major theme across focus groups was
the importance of collaboration and relationshipbuilding with the community and across Richmond’s youth-serving ecosystem. Many
organizations described the Fund as helping to
create stronger connections between schools,
community-based organizations, families, and
youth-serving systems.
Youth and Family
Engagement
Strong youth, family, and community engagement
supported program participation, youth outcomes, and community-building. In the grantee reports, organizations describe sustained, intentional efforts to engage families and strengthen community ties. Programs prioritized parent
meetings, volunteer roles, and family-focused
events—such as weekly assemblies, tournaments,
and retreats—which had high turnout and active
participation. These activities helped cultivate
belonging, reduce feelings of isolation, and build
families’ confidence in supporting their children.
“Through our family engagement
efforts, [caregivers] have found
a supportive community where
they can share resources,
exchange encouragement, and
feel understood. Caregivers
report feeling less alone and more
equipped to support their children’s
emotional and leadership growth.”
—Project Avary report
In addition, several grantees described having
consistent, formal engagement with youth and
families to inform the programs’ continuous
improvements. Five organizations reported engaging with youth through an established board or council, and two organizations reported engaging
with the Richmond community through an advisory board.
Strengthened Partnerships
Through the Fund, community-based organizations
deepened and diversified their partnerships to sustain and expand youth programs. Organizations reported prioritizing partners who shared
youth-centered values and demonstrated
operational stability. They employed a range of collaboration strategies, including clarifying roles and responsibilities and increasing and formalizing communication channels. They collectively addressed operational and programming barriers and fostered
relational trust to improve coordination. They also
broadened referral pathways and community networks to increase reach and enrollment.
There were 10 grantees that formally applied
for a collaboration grant. However, many of the
other funded organizations partnered with at
least one other community-based organization
in Richmond to bring programming to another
site or to collaborate on the development and
implementation of a program. These findings
suggest that the Fund is contributing to a more
connected and collaborative youth-serving
ecosystem in Richmond and North Richmond.
“[The Fund provides] more
opportunity for synergy and
resource sharing with each other
and really building organizational
capacity to work with each other
and collaborate with each other in
this way. So, I think this is not only
just for this time period of the grant,
but goes beyond in … building this
practice of resource sharing with
each other.”
—Grantee focus group member
42 548
Ten grants (totaling $2,718,475) were awarded
to collaborative programs:
z City of Richmond Employment and Training and John Muir Charter School: Richmond YouthBUILD
z City of Richmond Office of Neighborhood Safety and RYSE: CARRY z East Bay Center for the Performing Arts and Contra Costa Family Justice Center: Young Artist Diploma Program
z Greater Richmond Interfaith Program and Early Childhood Mental Health Program: Early Childhood Mental Health Program at GRIP z The Latina Center and Global Foundation of Arts, Science, and Technology: The Young Latinas, Future Leaders STEAM Program z Richmond High School and East Bay Center for the Performing Arts (Fiscal Sponsor: West Contra Costa Public Education Fund):
Richmond High School Music Department
z Richmond Outdoors Coalition and YES Nature to Neighborhoods (Fiscal Sponsor: YES! Nature to Neighborhoods)
z Richmond Promise and Contra Costa College: First Year Experience Program
z Richmond Public Library and Bay Area Tutoring Association:
Homework Help and Tutoring Program
z West Contra Costa Unified School District and West Contra Costa Public Education Fund: Positive Behavioral Intervention System Summarizing Early Organization-,
Community-, and Systems-Level Impacts
Importantly, many of the strongest themes emerging from the focus groups reflected systems-level conditions rather than discrete program outputs.
Grantees frequently emphasized that stable relationships, trusted community spaces, culturally responsive programming, and continuity of care are foundational to long-term positive outcomes for youth and families. Grantees described a clear orientation toward strategic growth and diversification of delivery models in the coming years. At the same time, findings also suggest that many RFCY-funded organizations continue to operate within a broader environment of funding instability, workforce strain, and increasing community need. While RFCY funding appears to have strengthened organizational capacity and service continuity, grantees consistently described the need for additional investment, coordination, and infrastructure support to sustain and expand these efforts over time.
While grantees highlighted implementation facilitators and positive impact, they also surfaced a set of practical obstacles that they navigated throughout the year. The following section outlines the most common implementation challenges from 2025 that inform the recommendations for the next year of grant implementation and that are summarized at the end of this report.
Photo courtesy of Nurturing Independence through Artistic Development (NIAD) Art Center. ©2026 43
549
Implementation
Challenges
Several recurring challenges emerged across
grantees’ 2025 reports:
z School and District Partnerships: Delays in
establishing school and district partnerships
were commonly reported. Grantees cited late
site confirmations, slow badge and contract
approvals, and difficulty identifying decisionmakers within schools. Partnerships often depended heavily on school staff capacity,
which varied widely. As a result, some
grantees experienced delays or reductions
in programming due to staffing changes or
limited coordination capacity within schools.
z Partnership Coordination Challenges: Some
grantees also faced broader partnershiprelated barriers associated with the importance of having each site’s point of
contact collaborate on program planning
and implementation. Staff turnover and
transitions among key personnel at host
sites led to communication disruptions and
logistical delays. In addition, when partners
required changes to program logistics or
schedules, it complicated programming
planning for grantees. Grantees reported
that these issues with site coordination and
site capacity affected program momentum
and attendance. Grantees reported
dedicating more time to program planning
and alignment with partners and pivoting
to different partners or program formats to
support more collaborative partnerships.
z Administrative and Compliance Barriers:
Delays in contracting and payments—
along with complex compliance and
insurance requirements—slowed program
implementation and constrained available
resources in some cases.
z Recruitment, Retention, and Attendance: A
few grantees reported difficulty maintaining consistent enrollment due to last-minute cancellations, competing extracurricular commitments, transportation challenges, and limited parent availability. To address these
challenges, grantees engaged in proactive outreach and prioritized waitlist management. z Staffing Constraints: A minority of grantees
experienced staffing-related challenges,
including vacancies, onboarding delays, staff
transitions, and burnout, which reduced
program capacity and continuity.
z Space and Infrastructure Limitations: Limited
access to facilities, delayed park construction,
and reliance on temporary venues reduced
cohort sizes and restricted opportunities for
hands-on activities in some cases.
z Community Stressors and Resource
Limitations: External factors affecting
families also impacted participation in some
programs. Work schedules, food and housing
insecurity, and immigration-related concerns
were frequently cited.
z Safety Concerns Related to Immigration
Enforcement: Some participants were
hesitant to leave home, access services,
or engage in programming due to fears of
detention. In certain cases, participants
withdrew from programs altogether.
Grantees reported that immigration-related
stress had significant emotional, mental,
and physical impacts on youth and families.
In response to safety concerns, grantees
implemented mitigation strategies such
as developing internal protocols, creating
safety procedures specific to Immigration
and Customs Enforcement activities,
posting reassuring signage, and providing
individualized support to help participants
feel safe accessing programming.
z Funding Landscape: Some grantees noted
instability in funding sources, including
SNAP-Ed, AmeriCorps, federal and
state grants, and district funding. Some
organizations reliant on AmeriCorps faced
staffing uncertainty or sudden loss of
personnel. One grantee used short-term
loans to maintain staff during a government
shutdown, while others experienced staffing
gaps that affected recruitment efforts. In
anticipation of future funding reductions, at
least one organization proactively reduced its
budget to protect core programming.
z WCCUSD Strike: Grantees partnering with
WCCUSD schools had fewer programming
days due to a WCCUSD strike. Some grantees
paused programming, others transitioned
to virtual delivery, and some expanded
offerings to provide safe, supervised
spaces for youth during the disruption.
44 550
45 Fund
Administration
An important component
of the Fund implementation
is how the funding is
administered by the RDCY. T he RDCY is responsible for administering the grants, which includes establishing the grant
requirements and administrative processes. The
RDCY is also responsible for grant monitoring,
year-round data quality review, invoice review-
ing, payment processing, and implementation of
the GIP process.
Administrative Capacity
The 1st year of the 2025–2027 funding cycle coin-
cided with a period of significant organizational
growth and transition within the RDCY. During
2025, the RDCY was simultaneously responsible
for administering and monitoring RFCY grants,
closing out the previous funding cycle, onboard-
ing new staff, implementing new internal systems,
and supporting a range of responsibilities beyond
RFCY implementation. These activities placed sub-
stantial demands on the RDCY’s capacity during
a critical implementation period.
Despite these challenges, grantee feedback sug-
gests that RDCY staff continue to be viewed as
trusted and supportive partners. Most grantees
reported receiving helpful guidance and feedback
from RDCY staff (74%) and indicated that they
felt comfortable reaching out when challenges
arose (86%). These findings reflect the strength
of the RDCY’s relationships with grantees and
the department’s continued commitment to
supporting funded organizations (Figure 19). At
the same time, findings identified opportunities
to strengthen fund administration processes.
Grantees were asked how the RDCY compares
to other funders “on processing grant agree-
ments and invoices,” and 46 percent said worse
or much worse.
Photo courtesy of The Practice Space. ©2026 551
Figure 19. Responses Regarding RDCY Staff, Expectations, and Support Delays in contracting and payment processing were among the most common challenges identified throughout the grantees’ quarterly reports during the 1st year of implementation. These delays stemmed from a combination of factors on both the grantee and department sides, and in some cases from both simultaneously. As noted earlier, the RDCY’s own internal capacity was still growing during this 1st year, which affected the speed of contract and invoice processing. For some organizations, delayed contracts and reimbursement timelines created uncertainty around staffing, program planning, and service delivery.
At the same time, variation in grantee administrative capacity also contributed to processing delays. At times, resolving invoices required multiple rounds of follow-up between RDCY and grantee staff, a process that could extend over a month of communication per invoice. This represented a substantial and recurring demand on RDCY staff capacity.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree 14% 34% 43% 6%
6% 11% 26% 34% 23%
6% 26% 20% 31% 17%
9% 43% 43%
9% 17% 57% 17% RDCY staff provide helpful
guidance and feedback.
Expectations for reporting
and invoicing are clear.
RDCY staff respond to
questions or concerns
within a few business days.
RDCY provides valuable resources
and supports to my organization
that go beyond grant funding.
I feel comfortable approaching RDCY
staff when a problem or issue arises.
“Delays in fund disbursements can
create operational challenges for
our organization, as timely funding is important for covering program expenses and planning staffing and services. When funds are delayed, it can introduce some uncertainty and make advance planning more difficult.” —RFCY grantee report
Although these challenges are not uncommon
during periods of organizational transition and
systems implementation, they underscore the
importance of continuing to streamline administrative processes and build internal capacity to support timely grant administration.
46 552
Data and Reporting
Infrastructure
In 2025, the RDCY implemented a new grant
management system using a Grant Management
Software (GMS) platform. Starting in 2025, RFCY
grantees were required to submit their reports
and other documentation to the Fund through the
GMS. The investment in a GMS provides a streamlined platform for the RDCY to monitor grants, but there is a continued need to build the department’s capacity to use the system and review the documentation required for grantees to receive
their payments. There is also a need for continued or improved technical assistance for grantees because the system is new for many.
Grantees noted that the transition to the GMS has
been helpful, but not without challenges. Related
to reporting and invoicing, slightly more than
half of grantees (57%) agreed or strongly agreed
that expectations for reporting and invoicing are
clear. About two thirds of grantees (66%) agreed
or strongly agreed that the GMS is easy to navigate, with one grantee sharing that “the use of [the GMS] is a big improvement. However, the amount
of reporting for any given year is challenging.” As
in previous years, some grantees suggested that
reporting and invoicing are time-consuming and
more extensive than for other similar grants.
Evaluation and
Continuous Learning
Evaluation is an important component of the
Fund’s accountability and continuous improvement efforts. In addition to documenting participant outcomes and program implementation, the evaluation is intended to provide information that can support program improvement, inform decision-making, and strengthen understanding of how RFCY investments contribute to outcomes for children, youth, and families.
Overall, grantees had a positive experience with
WestEd, with 100 percent of respondents agreeing or strongly agreeing that the WestEd team was responsive to questions.
Results indicate that some grantees may need
more support for the evaluation. The majority of grantees (91%) agreed or strongly agreed that expectations of the evaluation were clear.
While the majority of grantees indicated that
they were well-supported to complete evaluation activities (97%), some grantees suggested areas of improvement. Survey results indicated
a need for additional technical assistance related
to required data collection and reporting, with 76
percent saying that it is easy to collect service
provision data, 71 percent saying that it is easy to
collect the demographic data for the evaluation,
and 85 percent saying that the reporting templates that WestEd provided were helpful.
The survey findings also highlight an interest in evaluation-specific technical assistance and capacity building. Nearly half of grantees
expressed interest in additional support related
to program evaluation (46%), survey development (40%), and qualitative data collection (37%), while slightly more than half expressed interest
in data analysis for program improvement (51%).
These findings suggest that many organizations
view evaluation not only as a reporting requirement but also as a tool for learning, continuous improvement, and demonstrating impact beyond
the Fund evaluation.
In response to grantee feedback, WestEd will offer a
robust series of quarterly evaluation-specific technical assistance supports for 2026.
Photo courtesy of City of Richmond Office of Neighborhood Safety. ©2026 47 553
Recommendations
for Strengthening
RFCY
Implementation
and Impact
The findings presented
throughout this report suggest
several opportunities to
strengthen implementation
and maximize the long-term
impact of RFCY investments.
Improve Access and
Engagement
While programs are reaching youth and families
across Richmond and North Richmond, findings
suggest that barriers to participation remain for
some populations.
Recommendations:
z Explore transportation supports and other
strategies that can reduce barriers to
participation.
z Engage with community partners through
the Community Needs Assessment to
identify communities with continued need.
z Continue to support flexible program models
that meet the needs of diverse participants
and families.
z Continue investing in culturally responsive,
multilingual, and community-based
approaches to service delivery.
Strengthen Program
Quality Through
Targeted Technical
Assistance
Findings from participant surveys provide opportunities to identify areas where grantees may benefit from additional support. Targeted technical assistance and capacity building (TA/CB) can help organizations strengthen program quality,
improve participant experiences, and build capacity in areas that support positive outcomes for youth and families.
Recommendations:
z Clearly define and communicate a Growth
and Improvement Plan (GIP) process,
including when it applies.
z Implement GIPs as a collaborative process
with grantees that do not meet established
performance benchmarks to identify root causes
and build a shared action plan for growth.
z Pair GIPs with a tiered TA/CB model matched
to grantee need: intensive support for
grantees facing significant or persistent
challenges, targeted support for grantees
with specific areas for growth, and universal
support available to all grantees.
z Develop and implement a TA/CB model in
alignment with best practices, calibrated
to what is feasible within the department’s
current capacity constraints.
Photo courtesy of Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bay Area. ©2026 48 554
Strengthen
Organizational Capacity
and Sustainability
Findings suggest that RFCY funding plays an
important role in supporting organizational
stability, staffing continuity, and long-term
planning. At the same time, many organizations
continue to operate within an increasingly challenging funding environment characterized by workforce shortages, rising costs, and growing
demand for services.
Recommendations:
z Support organizational sustainability
planning, including strategies for
diversifying funding and strengthening
administrative infrastructure.
z Provide more intensive and individualized
support for small and emerging
organizations that may face unique
operational and implementation challenges.
z Continue investing in evaluation capacity
building, data literacy, and continuous
improvement efforts.
Strengthen School
and Community
Partnerships
Strong partnerships between schools and
community-based organizations can support
participant recruitment, program implementation, and continuity of services. Findings suggest opportunities to strengthen coordination structures that can support effective collaboration and reduce disruptions caused by staff turnover
and competing organizational priorities.
Recommendations:
z Develop coordination processes and
expectations for partnerships between
grantees and schools to support scheduling,
recruitment, and service delivery.
z Explore opportunities to establish datasharing agreements with partners like WCCUSD to support accurate data reporting
while protecting student privacy.
Strengthen Data
Infrastructure and
Build Capacity for Grant
Monitoring
The 1st year of implementation highlighted opportunities to build grantee fluency with a newly implemented data infrastructure and with data
collection and reporting requirements. As grantees become more comfortable with the GMS, data collection, and data reporting, the RDCY can
improve accountability while reducing administrative burden on grantees.
Recommendations:
z Continue refining the grants management
system and reporting processes to improve
usability and consistency.
z Develop and communicate clearer reporting
guidance and standardized definitions for
key metrics.
z Implement routine data quality monitoring
and reconciliation processes throughout the
reporting cycle.
z Continue providing technical assistance
related to data collection, reporting, and
evaluation requirements to improve the
quality of evaluation data and to support
grantees’ use of data for continuous
improvement.
49 555
Conclusion
Year 1 of the Fund’s 2025–2027
funding cycle demonstrates
that the Fund is reaching the
communities it was designed to
serve and delivering measurable
value to Richmond’s children,
youth, and families.
I
n 2025, 37 grants to 36 organizations delivered
more than 28,500 hours of direct programming and 15,774 encounters with children, youth, and adults, concentrated in the Richmond neighborhoods with the greatest need. Participants reported strong outcomes across nearly every
domain measured, including academic engagement, wellbeing, leadership, peer relationships, and career and postsecondary readiness. Parents
and caregivers echoed these results, reporting
positive changes in their children’s health, learning,
and social connectedness. Grantees themselves
described RFCY funding as a stabilizing force, one
that allowed them to retain staff, expand reach,
and plan beyond a single budget cycle—addressing
service gaps left by cuts elsewhere in the system.
At the same time, the evaluation identified opportunities to strengthen Fund administration, data infrastructure, organizational capacity, and school–
community partnerships. Addressing these areas
may help improve implementation, strengthen
accountability, and maximize the impact of RFCY
investments over time.
These findings should be read as early indicators of
implementation and impact from the 1st year of a
new 3-year cycle. Continued investment in program
quality, grantee capacity, strong partnerships, and
continuous improvement will be critical in ensuring
that Richmond children, youth, and families have
access to the opportunities and supports they
need to thrive.
Photo courtesy of Fresh Lifelines for Youth. ©2026 50
556
References
Agans, J. P., Champine, R. B., Johnson, S. K., Erickson, K., & Yalin, C. (2015).
Promoting healthy lifestyles through youth activity participation: Lessons from research. In E. P. Bowers, G. J. Geldhof, S. K. Johnson, L. J.
Hilliard, R. M. Hershberg, J. V. Lerner, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Promoting positive youth development: Lessons from the 4-H Study (pp. 137–153).
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17166-1_8
Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Morizot, J., & Pagani, L. (2009). Adolescent behavioral, affective, and cognitive engagement in school: Relationship to dropout. Journal of School Health, 79(9), 408–415.
Aronowitz, T. (2005). The role of “envisioning the future” in the development of resilience among at-risk youth. Public Health Nursing, 22(3), 200–208.
Aspen Institute. (2026). The 5 guiding principles of 2Gen. https://ascend. aspeninstitute.org/2gen-approach/guiding-principles/
Banati, P., Vedechkina, M., De Rubeis, V., Kalai, S., Massaquoi, L., Sadana, R., Baltag, V., & Baird, S. (2025). Adolescent experiences and exposures: A systematic review of life course outcomes. EClinicalMedicine, 88.
Barber, B. K., & Olsen, J. A. (1997). Socialization in context: Connection, regulation, and autonomy in the family, school, and neighborhood, and with peers. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12(2), 287–315.
Barfield, P. A., Ridder, K., Hughes, J., & Rice-McNeil, K. (2021). Get outside! Promoting adolescent health through outdoor after-school activity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(14), 7223. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147223
Bengtsson, D., Svensson, J., Wiman, V., Stenling, A., Lundkvist, E., & Ivarsson, A. (2025). Health-related outcomes of youth sport participation:
A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 22(1), 89.
Boat, A. A., Hsieh, T. Y., & Wu, C. Y. (2024). Bidirectional pathways between relationships and sense of belonging in a program for youth living in low-income households. Children and Youth Services Review, 163, 107797.
Buzinde, C., Foroughi, B., & Godwyll, J. (2019). Youth leadership programs for community development and social action: A pedagogical approach.
Community Development Journal, 54(4), 677–694.
Child Trends. (2009). Effective and promising summer learning programs and approaches for economically-disadvantaged children and youth.
Clement, R., Deering, M., Mikhael, R., & Villa-Garcia, C. (2014). Youth civic engagement and leadership. Elliot School of International Affairs, George Washington University. https://youthtoday.org/wp-content/ uploads/sites/13/2017/11/Youth-CEL_FINAL.pdf
Dogan, U. (2015). Student engagement, academic self-efficacy, and academic motivation as predictors of academic performance. The Anthropologist, 20(3), 553–561.
The Forum for Youth Investment. (2023). The Youth Program Quality Improvement (YPQI) approach: Implications for policy and practice. https://forumfyi.org/knowledge-center/ypqi_approach/
Gootman, J. A., & Eccles, J. (Eds.). (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. National Academies Press.
51 557
Greene, K. M., Lee, B., Constance, N., & Hynes, K. (2013). Examining youth and program predictors of engagement in out-of-school time programs. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(10), 1557–1572.
Henderson, K. A., Powell, G. M., & Scanlin, M. M. (2005). Observing outcomes in youth development: An analysis of mixed methods. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 23(4), 58.
Kelsey, K. D., & Fuhrman, N. E. (2020). Leadership and life skills development among 4-H state-level youth leaders. Journal of Human Sciences and Extension, 8(2), 15–27.
Kennedy, E., Wilson, B., Valladares, S., & Bronte-Tinkew, J. (2007). Improving attendance and retention in out-of-school time programs. Researchto-Results Practitioner Insights. Publication #2007-17. Child Trends.
Kramer, K., McDonnell, S., Fraix, M., Murillo, L., & Motely-Lewis, D. (2026).
Oakland Fund for Children and Youth, FY 2024–2025 final evaluation report. The Bridging Group.
Larson, M., & Bolton, A. (2019). Guideposts for success 2.0: A framework for successful youth transition to adulthood. National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability for Youth.
Leonard, K., & Moore, C. E. (2017, Spring). K–12 student success: Out-of-school time initiative: Program quality (Learning Brief). The Oregon Community Foundation.
Mathematica. (2019, April 18). Investing in communities can create meaningful and measurable change: Place-based initiatives help children reach their full potential. https://www.mathematica.org/news/ investing-in-communities-can-create-meaningful-andmeasurable-change McGorry, P., Gunasiri, H., Mei, C., Rice, S., & Gao, C. X. (2025). The youth mental health crisis: Analysis and solutions. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 15, 1517533.
Moore, D., Grant, S., McLaughlin, C., Walker, K., & Shaffer, B. (2010). Preliminary findings from the Minnesota 4-H Quality Improvement Study.
Naftzger, N. (2025, August 20). The positive changes youth experience when we invest in afterschool and summer learning programs. American Institutes for Research. https://air.org/resource/blog-post/ positive-changes-youth-experience-when-we-invest-afterschool-and-summer-learning Neild, R. C., Wilson, S. J., & McClanahan, W. (2019). Afterschool programs: A review of evidence under the Every Student Succeeds Act. Research for Action.
Newby, H., Hagell, A., Marsh, A. D., & Guthold, R. (2022). Opportunities to advance measurement of adolescent wellbeing: Building on a new conceptual framework. BMJ, 379.
Ratner, K., Zhu, G., Li, Q., Estevez, M., & Burrow, A. L. (2023). Interacting with supportive adults predicts greater same-day psychosocial functioning among adolescents in a self-driven learning program. Journal of Adolescence, 95(4), 729–739.
Roth, J. L., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2016). Evaluating youth development programs: Progress and promise. Applied Developmental Science, 20(3), 188–202.
Sabatelli, R. M., Anderson, S. A., & LaMotte, V. (2005). Assessing outcomes in child and youth programs: A practical handbook (Rev. ed.). University of Connecticut and State of Connecticut.
Sandoval, A., & Bowers, E. P. (2025). Positive outcomes of out-of-school time activity participation for youth: A pattern-centered approach.
Journal of Youth Development, 20(1), 1–23.
San Francisco Department of Children, Youth, and Their Families. (2026).
DCYF grantee year end reports. https://apps.dcyf.org/
granteereports2429/
52 558
Scarborough, M. K., Lewis, C. M., & Kulkarni, S. (2010). Enhancing adolescent brain development through goal-setting activities. Social Work, 55(3), 276–278.
Serido, J., Borden, L. M., & Perkins, D. F. (2011). Moving beyond youth voice.
Youth & Society, 43(1), 44–63.
Simmons, M. B., Parker, A. G., Hetrick, S. E., Telford, N., Bailey, A., & Rickwood, D. (2014). Development of a satisfaction scale for young people attending youth mental health services. Early Intervention in Psychiatry, 8(4), 382–386.
Sun, R. C., & Shek, D. T. (2012). Beliefs in the future as a positive youth development construct: A conceptual review. The Scientific World Journal, 2012(1), 527038.
Tuaf, H., & Orkibi, H. (2023). Community-based programs for youth with mental health conditions: A scoping review and practical implications.
Frontiers in Public Health, 11, 1241469.
Verlenden, J. V. (2024). Mental health and suicide risk among high school students and protective factors—Youth Risk Behavior Survey, United States, 2023. MMWR Supplements, 73.
Watts, C. E., Witt, P. A., & King, T. (2008). Predictors of outcomes for after-school program participants. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 26(2), 134.
Xing, X., Huerta, M., & Garza, T. (2019). College and career preparation activities and their influence on post-high school education and work attainment. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 34(1), 8.
Yohalem, N., & Wilson-Ahlstrom, A. (2010). Inside the black box: Assessing and improving quality in youth programs. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45(3), 350–357.
Yousef, W. (2024). Shaping career development through college readiness at the high school level. Education Sciences, 14(11), 1190. 53 559
Appendix A. Funded Programs by Priority Area
Funded program
Annual
award
amount
Grant type
Number
of youth
surveys
Number
of parent
surveys
Total
number of
surveys
2025 total
number
served
2025 total
service
hours
Core need 1: Mental and behavioral health
Bay Area Community Resources—Promoting Youth and Family Resilience $200,000 Single organization 18 2 20 330 269
Bay Area Girls Club—Take Care of You (TCY) $50,000 Small & emerging 9 8 17 84 45
The Black Neighborhood—Youth Empowerment Program $60,000 Small & emerging 18 N/A 18 32 39
Child Abuse Prevention Council—Speak Up Be Safe (SUBS) and Nurturing Parenting Program (NPP) $51,200 Single organization 21 N/A 21 591 118 City of Richmond, Office of Neighborhood Safety and RYSE—CARRY $300,000 Collaborative 73* N/A 73* 33 161 Contra Costa Family Justice Alliance—The Richmond Children’s Mental Health Program $200,000 Single organization 1 4 5 331 203 Desarrollo Familiar, Inc. (Familias Unidas)—Trauma-Informed Care in Schools $200,000 Single organization 30 N/A 30 91 815 Greater Richmond Interfaith Program and Early Childhood Mental Health Program (ECMHP)—ECMHP at GRIP $300,000 Collaborative 2 18 20 52 1,005 The Latina Center and the Global Foundation of Arts, Science, and Technology—Young Latinas, Future Leaders $200,000 Collaborative 51 N/A 51 66 499 Mindful Life Project—SEL Services $150,000 Single
organization 154 5 159 3,386 2,503
West Contra Costa Unified School District and West Contra Costa Public Education Fund—Positive Behavioral Intervention System $300,000 Collaborative N/A N/A N/A 51 50 SUBTOTAL $2,011,200 5,047 5,707
Core need 2: Physical health and access
18 Reasons—Cooking Matters and Food as Medicine $200,000 Single organization 9 N/A 9 935 427
Growing Together Bay Area—Garden and Nutrition Education $190,840 Single organization N/A N/A N/A 1,723 2,102
54 560
Funded program
Annual
award
amount
Grant type
Number
of youth
surveys
Number
of parent
surveys
Total
number of
surveys
2025 total
number
served
2025 total
service
hours
Pogo Park—Enrichment Programs at Elm Playlot $200,000 Single organization 80 66 146 2,052 2,571
Project Avary—Leadership Program for Children of Incarcerated Parents $200,000 Single organization 26 N/A 26 60 949
Richmond Outdoors Coalition and YES Nature to Neighborhoods— Outdoor Programming $300,000 Collaborative 162 N/A 162 909 147 Richmond Steelers—Youth Football and Cheer $80,000 Small & emerging 20 52 72 200 136
Summer Search—Summer Outdoor Program $50,000 Single
organization 11 N/A 11 41 1,873
YES Nature to Neighborhoods—Youth Leadership Pathway Program $199,974 Single organization 122 1 123 147 3,618
SUBTOTAL $1,420,814 6,067 11,821
Core need 3: Learning needs
City of Richmond, Community Services Dept. (Recreation Division)— Camp Achieve $300,000 Single organization 73 149 222 300 912 City of Richmond, Employment and Training Dept.—YouthBUILD $300,000 Collaborative 15 N/A 15 33 990 Fresh Approach—Youth Community Ambassadors $200,000 Single organization 5 N/A 5 64 444
The Hidden Genius Project—The Intensive Immersion Program $200,000 Single organization 25 N/A 25 299 587
The Practice Space—Mentorship and Leadership Program $200,000 Single organization 49 N/A 49 954 546
Richmond Promise and Contra Costa College—Contra Costa College First Year Experience Program $218,475 Collaborative 30 N/A 30 120 127 Richmond Public Library and Bay Area Tutoring Association—Homework Help and Tutoring Program $200,000 Collaborative 7 3 10 85 580 RYSE—Leadership Pathways Program $200,000 Single
organization 73* N/A 73* 213 1,306
Things That Creep—Neighborhood Snakes and Neighborhood Reptiles $100,000 Small & emerging N/A N/A N/A 1,415 210
55 561
Funded program
Annual
award
amount
Grant type
Number
of youth
surveys
Number
of parent
surveys
Total
number of
surveys
2025 total
number
served
2025 total
service
hours
The Watershed Project—Educational Programs $125,000 Single organization 72 N/A 72 695 77
West Contra Costa Public Education Fund—Richmond Freedom School $200,000 Single organization 35 40 75 117 196
Subtotal $2,243,475 4,295 5,975
Core need 4: Safety, community, and belonging
Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bay Area—Mentorship Program $60,000 Single organization 3 N/A 3 21 332
East Bay Center for the Performing Arts and Contra Costa Family Justice Center—The Young Artist Diploma Program (YADP) $300,000 Collaborative 73 N/A 73 50 4,100 Fresh Lifelines for Youth, Inc.—Law Education and Mentoring Program $101,790 Single organization 21 N/A 21 95 84
Nurturing Independence through Artistic Development (NIAD Art Center)—Young Artist Leaders Program $58,556 Single organization 1 N/A 1 4 22 Richmond High School and East Bay Center for the Performing Arts— Richmond High School Music Department $300,000 Collaborative 96 N/A 96 101 329 Summer Search—Mentoring Program $173,000 Single
organization 19 N/A 19 12 953
Touch of New Life—Youth Public Safety Academy $66,000 Small & emerging 13 N/A 13 82 213
Subtotal $1,059,346 365 6,032
Total $6,734,835 37 Grants 1,344 348 1,692 15,774 29,534 Note. RYSE administered surveys to both their Leadership Pathways Program participants and CARRY participants and are not distinguished in the data set. For a description of participant surveys and data collection procedures, see FY21–24 RFCY Evaluation Report. *Service hours are rounded up to the nearest whole hour. Subtotals and totals are calculated using unrounded values and therefore may not equal the sum of the displayed line items.
56 562
Appendix B. List of Program Sites by Organization
Grantee Sites
18 Reasons—Cooking Matters and Food as Medicine Urban Tilth, 515 Silver Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 Verde Elementary, 2000 Giaramita St., Richmond, CA 94801 Bay Area Community Resources—Promoting Youth and
Family Resilience
King Elementary, 4022 Florida Ave., Richmond, CA 94804
Lincoln Elementary School, 29 6th St., Richmond, CA 94801 Coronado Elementary, 2100 Maine Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Ford Elementary, 2711 Maricopa Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Bay Area Girls Club—Take Care of You (TCY) Bay Area Girls Club, 260 Broadway, Richmond, CA 94804 Chabot and Space Center, 10000 Skyline Blvd., Oakland, CA 94619 Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bay Area—Mentorship Program Richmond Greenway, Richmond Greenway Trail, Richmond, CA 94804 The Black Neighborhood—Youth Empowerment Program
Burg Park, 2910 Clinton Ave., Richmond, CA 94804
Grizzly Peak, 3092–3148 Grizzly Peak Blvd., Berkeley, CA 94705 Kennedy High School, 4300 Cutting Blvd., Richmond, CA 94804 Chabot and Space Center, 10000 Skyline Blvd., Oakland, CA 94619 Richmond City Recreation Complex, 3230 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Child Abuse Prevention Council—Speak Up Be Safe (SUBS) and Nurturing Parenting Program (NPP)
Cesar E. Chavez Elementary School, 960 17th St., Richmond, CA 94801 Lincoln Elementary School, 29 6th St., Richmond, CA 94801 Verde Elementary, 2000 Giaramita St., Richmond, CA 94801 Coronado Elementary, 2100 Maine Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 City of Richmond, Community Services Dept. (Recreation
Division)—Camp Achieve
Booker T. Anderson Community Center, 960 S 47th St., Richmond, CA 94804 Parchester Community Center, 3833 Collins Ave., Richmond, CA 94806 Nevin Community Center, 598 Nevin Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 Shields Reid Community Center, 1410 Kelsey St., Richmond, CA 94801 City of Richmond, Employment and Training Dept.—YouthBUILD RichmondBUILD/YouthBUILD Office, 360 S. 27th St., Richmond, CA 94804 City of Richmond, Office of Neighborhood Safety and RYSE— CARRY RYSE Youth Center, 3939 Bissell Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 Contra Costa Family Justice Alliance—The Richmond Children’s Mental Health Program West Contra Costa Family Justice Center Office, 256 24th St., Richmond, CA 94804 Desarrollo Familiar, Inc. (Familias Unidas)—Trauma-Informed Care in Schools
Lovonya DeJean Middle School, 3400 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 Richmond High School, 1250 23rd St., Richmond, CA 94804 East Bay Center for the Performing Arts—The Young Artist Diploma Program (YADP) East Bay Center for the Performing Arts, 339 11th St., Richmond, CA 94801 Fresh Approach—Youth Community Ambassadors Fresh Approach, 5060 Commercial Circle, Concord, CA 94520 57 563
Grantee Sites
Fresh Lifelines for Youth, Inc.—Law Education and Mentoring Program
Mt. McKinley, 202 Glacier Dr., Martinez, CA 94553
Golden Gate Community School Richmond, 2200 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 FLY Office, 3260 Blume Dr., Richmond, CA 94806
De Anza High School, 5000 Valley View Rd., Richmond, CA 94803 RYSE Youth Center, 3939 Bissell Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 Greater Richmond Interfaith Program and Early Childhood Mental Health Program (ECMHP)—ECMHP at GRIP GRIP, 165 22nd St., Richmond, CA 94801 Growing Together Bay Area—Garden and Nutrition Education Mira Vista K–8, 6397 Hazel Ave., Richmond, CA 94805
Peres K–8, 719 5th St., Richmond, CA 94801
King Elementary, 4022 Florida Ave., Richmond, CA 94804
Washington Elementary, 565 Wine St., Richmond, CA 94801 The Hidden Genius Project—The Intensive Immersion Program Making Waves Academy, 4123 Lakeside Dr., Richmond, CA 94806 Invictus Academy, 7150 Portola Dr., El Cerrito, CA 94530 Betty Reid Soskin Middle School, 1121 Allview Ave., El Sobrante, CA 94803 Helms Middle School, 2500 Rd. 20, San Pablo, CA 94806
Salesian High School, 2851 Salesian Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Lovonya DeJean Middle School, 3400 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 RYSE Youth Center, 3939 Bissell Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 Richmond High School, 1250 23rd St., Richmond, CA 94804 Nystrom Elementary, 230 Harbour Way S, Richmond, CA 94804 The Latina Center and the Global Foundation of Arts, Science, and Technology—Young Latinas, Future Leaders
The Latina Center, 3701 Barrett Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 Chabot and Space Center, 10000 Skyline Blvd., Oakland, CA 94619 Mindful Life Project—SEL Services
Richmond College Preparatory, 214 South 11th St., Richmond, CA 94804 Highland Elementary, 2829 Moyers Rd., San Pablo, CA 94806 Grant Elementary, 2400 Downer Ave., Richmond, CA 94804
Aspire Richmond Technology Academy, 3170 Hilltop Mall Rd., Richmond, CA 94806 Cesar E. Chavez Elementary School, 960 17th St., Richmond, CA 94801 King Elementary, 4022 Florida Ave., Richmond, CA 94804
Ford Elementary, 2711 Maricopa Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Nurturing Independence through Artistic Development (NIAD Art Center)—Young Artist Leaders Program
Vista Hills Education Center, 2625 Barnard St., Richmond, CA 94806 Richmond Art Center, 2450 Barrett Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 NIAD Art Center, 551 23rd St., Richmond, CA 94804
Walnut Creek Library, 644 N. Broadway, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Pogo Park—Enrichment Programs at Elm Playlot Elm Playlot, 720 Elm Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 58 564
Grantee Sites
The Practice Space—Mentorship and Leadership Program
CoBiz Richmond, 1503 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 Voices Charter School, 201 28th St., Richmond, CA 94804 Sheldon Elementary School, 2601 May Rd., Richmond, CA 94803 FIERCE Advocates, 312 9th St., Richmond, CA 94801
The Practice Space, 317 11th St., Richmond, CA 94801
First 5 Contra Costa, 4005 Port Chicago Hwy #120, Concord, CA 94520 El Cerrito High School, 540 Ashbury Ave., El Cerrito, CA 94530 Nystrom Elementary, 230 Harbour Way S, Richmond, CA 94804 Booker T. Anderson Community Center, 960 S 47th St., Richmond, CA 94804 Parchester Community Center, 3833 Collins Ave., Richmond, CA 94806 Salesian High School, 2851 Salesian Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Lincoln Elementary School, 29 6th St., Richmond, CA 94801 Nevin Community Center, 598 Nevin Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 Shields Reid Community Center, 1410 Kelsey St., Richmond, CA 94801 Washington Elementary, 565 Wine St., Richmond, CA 94801 Project Avary—Leadership Program for Children of Incarcerated Parents
Clem Miller Environmental Education Center, 1 Bear Valley Rd., Point Reyes Station, CA 94956 Martin Griffin Preserve, 4900 Shoreline Hwy., Stinson Beach, CA 94970 California Academy of Science, 55 Music Concourse Dr., San Francisco CA 94118 El Cerrito Community Center, 7007 Moeser Ln., El Cerrito, CA 94530 Rafting, 7330 River Park Dr., Lotus, CA 95651
Stinson Beach, Highway 1, Stinson Beach, CA 94970
Challenge Sonoma Adventure Ropes Course, Orchard Rd, Eldridge, CA 95431 St. Dorothy’s Rest, 168 St. Dorothy Ave., Camp Meeker, CA 95419 Miller Knox Regional Shoreline, 900 Dornan Dr., Richmond, CA 94801 Richmond High School and the East Bay Center for the
Performing Arts—Richmond High School Music Department
Richmond High School, 1250 23rd St., Richmond, CA 94804 Downer Elementary School, 1231 18th St., San Pablo, CA 94806 Helms Middle School, 2500 Rd. 20, San Pablo, CA 94806
Ford Elementary, 2711 Maricopa Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Richmond Outdoors Coalition and YES Nature to
Neighborhoods—Outdoor Programming
Rob Hill Campground, 1475 Central Magazine Rd., San Francisco, CA 94129 Muir Beach, Pacific Way, Muir Beach, CA 94965
Point Pinole, 551 Giant Highway, Richmond, CA 94806
Wildcat Canyon Regional Park, 5755 McBryde Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 Nystrom Elementary, 230 Harbour Way S, Richmond, CA 94804 Richmond Promise—Contra Costa College First Year
Experience Program
Contra Costa College, 2600 Mission Bell Dr., San Pablo, CA 94806 Six Flags, 1001 Fairgrounds Dr., Vallejo, CA 94589
UC Berkeley, 110 Sproul Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720
Santa Clara University, 500 El Camino Real, Santa Clara, CA 95053 UC Davis, 1 Shields Ave., Davis, CA 95616
59 565
Grantee Sites
Richmond Public Library—Homework Help and Tutoring
Program and Bay Area Tutoring Association
Richmond West Side Branch Library, 135 Washington Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 May Valley Community Center, 3530 Morningside Dr., Richmond, CA 94803 Richmond Library, 325 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804 Richmond Public Library Bayview Branch, 5100 Hartnett Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Nevin Community Center, 598 Nevin Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 Shields Reid Community Center, 1410 Kelsey St., Richmond, CA 94801 Richmond City Recreation Complex, 3230 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Richmond Steelers Youth Football and Cheer Richmond City Recreation Complex, 3230 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Paradise Coast Sports Complex, 3940 City Gate Blvd. N, Naples, FL 34117 RYSE—Leadership Pathways Program RYSE Youth Center, 3939 Bissell Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 UC Davis, 1 Shields Ave., Davis, CA 95616
Summer Search—Mentoring Program
Alvarado Park, 755 McBryde Ave., Richmond, CA 94806
Summer Search Office, 304 12th St., Oakland, CA 94607
Environmental Traveling Companions, 6700 CA-49, Lotus, CA 95651 Leadership Public Schools, Richmond, 880 Bissell Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 Adventure Risk Challenge, PO Box 3208, Truckee, CA 96160 De Anza High School, 5000 Valley View Rd., Richmond, CA 94803 Deer Hill Expeditions, 7850 Rd. 41, Mancos, CO 81328
Sierra Nevada Journeys, 5900 Grizzly Rd., Portola, CA 96122 Summer Search Office, 2201 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94612
Summer Search—Summer Outdoor Program
GirlVentures, 119 Filbert St., Oakland, CA 94607
Adventure Risk Challenge, PO Box 3208, Truckee, CA 96160 Deer Hill Expeditions, 7850 Rd. 41, Mancos, CO 81328
Sierra Nevada Journeys, 5900 Grizzly Rd., Portola, CA 96122 Summer Search Office, 2201 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94612
Things That Creep—Neighborhood Snakes and
Neighborhood Reptiles
Michelle Obama Elementary School, 629 42nd St., Richmond, CA 94805 Olinda Elementary School, 5855 Olinda Rd., El Sobrante, CA 94803 Washington Elementary, 565 Wine St., Richmond, CA 94801 Coronado Elementary, 2100 Maine Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Ford Elementary, 2711 Maricopa Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Nystrom Elementary, 230 Harbour Way S, Richmond, CA 94804 Touch of New Life—Youth Public Safety Academy
Phila Burger Richmond CA, 1100 23rd St., Richmond, CA 94804 City of San Pablo Library, 13751 San Pablo Ave., San Pablo, CA 94806 San Pablo Police Training Center, 2300 El Portal Dr., Unit C, San Pablo, CA 94806 Wanlass Park, 2999 21st St., San Pablo, CA 94806
RFD Training Facility, 3506 Cutting Blvd., Richmond, CA 94804 Target, 4500 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94801
Lovonya DeJean Middle School, 3400 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 Richmond High School, 1250 23rd St., Richmond, CA 94804 60 566
Grantee Sites
The Watershed Project—Educational Programs
Tilden Regional Park, 1500 Central Park Dr., Berkeley, CA 94708 Brookside San Pablo Health Center, 2023 Vale Rd., San Pablo, CA 94806 Montalvin Manor Elementary School, 300 Christine Dr., San Pablo, CA 94806 Point Pinole, 551 Giant Highway, Richmond, CA 94806
Wildcat Canyon Regional Park, 5755 McBryde Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 Miller Knox Regional Shoreline, 900 Dornan Dr., Richmond, CA 94801 Verde Elementary, 2000 Giaramita St., Richmond, CA 94801 Nystrom Elementary, 230 Harbour Way S, Richmond, CA 94804 Richmond High School, 1250 23rd St., Richmond, CA 94804 West Contra Costa Public Education Fund—Richmond
Freedom School Nystrom Elementary, 230 Harbour Way S, Richmond, CA 94804 West Contra Costa Unified School District and West Contra Costa Public Education Fund—Positive Behavioral Intervention System
Pinole Valley High School, 2900 Pinole Valley Rd., Pinole, CA 94564 Coronado Elementary, 2100 Maine Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Lovonya DeJean Middle School, 3400 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 YES Nature to Neighborhoods—Youth Leadership Pathway
YES Nature to Neighborhoods/Gateway Mountain Center, 10038 Meadow Way, Unit D, Truckee, CA 96161 Richmond City Recreation Complex, 3230 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 CYO Camp, 2136 Bohemian Hwy., Occidental, CA 95465
Hidden Villa, 26870 Moody Rd., Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 YES Nature to Neighborhoods, 3029 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 YMCA Camp Loma Mar, 9900 Pesadero Creek Rd, Loma Mar, CA 94021 Camp Mendocino, PO Box 1790, Fort Bragg, CA 95437
St. Dorothy’s Rest, 168 St. Dorothy Ave., Camp Meeker, CA 95419 Miller Knox Regional Shoreline, 900 Dornan Dr., Richmond, CA 94801 61 567
Appendix C. List of Program Sites by City Council District In the following tables, the parenthetical number next to each organization name indicates the corresponding core need being addressed by the organization.
Core Need 1: Mental and Behavioral Health Needs
Core Need 2: Physical Health and Access
Core Need 3: Learning Needs
Core Need 4: Safety, Community, and Belonging Needs
District 1
Neighborhood Councils: Iron Triangle, Belding Woods, North & East Program site Funded organizations
Cesar E. Chavez Elementary School, 960 17th St., Richmond, CA 94801 Child Abuse Prevention Council (1) Mindful Life Project (1)
Cobiz Richmond, 1503 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 The Practice Space (3) East Bay Center for the Performing Arts, 339 11th St., Richmond, CA 94801 East Bay Center for the Performing Arts (4) Elm Playlot, 720 Elm Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 Pogo Park (2) FIERCE Advocates, 312 9th St., Richmond, CA 94801 The Practice Space (3) Ford Elementary, 2711 Maricopa Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Bay Area Community Resources (1)
Things That Creep (3)
Mindful Life Project (1)
Richmond High School Music Department (4)
Nevin Community Center, 598 Nevin Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 The Practice Space (3)
City of Richmond, Recreation Division (3)
Richmond Library (3)
NIAD Art Center, 551 23rd St., Richmond, CA 94804 Nurturing Independence through Artistic Development (NIAD) (4) Peres K–8, 719 5th St., Richmond, CA 94801 Growing Together, Bay Area (2) Phila Burger Richmond CA, 1100 23rd St., Richmond, CA 94804 Touch of New Life (4) The Practice Space, 317 11th St., Richmond, CA 94801 The Practice Space (3) Richmond High School, 1250 23rd St., Richmond, CA 94804 Desarrollo Familiar (1)
The Watershed Project (3)
Richmond High School Music Department (4)
Touch of New Life (4)
The Hidden Genius Project (3)
62 568
District 2
Neighborhood Councils: Shields-Reid, Point Richmond, Santa Fe, Hilltop District, Parchester Village, Marina Bay Program site Funded organizations
Aspire Richmond Technology Academy, 3170 Hilltop Mall Rd., Richmond, CA 94806 Mindful Life Project (1) FLY Office, 3260 Blume Dr., Richmond, CA 94806 Fresh Lifelines for Youth (4) Making Waves Academy, 4123 Lakeside Dr., Richmond, CA 94806 The Hidden Genius Project (3) Miller Knox Regional Shoreline, 900 Dornan Dr., Richmond, CA 94801 Project Avary (2)
The Watershed Project (3)
YES Nature to Neighborhoods (2)
Parchester Community Center, 3833 Collins Ave., Richmond, CA 94806 The Practice Space (3) City of Richmond, Recreation Division (3)
Point Pinole, 551 Giant Highway, Richmond, CA 94806 Richmond Outdoors Coalition (2) The Watershed Project (3)
Richmond West Side Branch Library, 135 Washington Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 Richmond Library (3) Shields Reid Community Center, 1410 Kelsey St., Richmond, CA 94801 City of Richmond, Recreation Division (3)
The Practice Space (3)
Richmond Library (3)
Washington Elementary, 565 Wine St., Richmond, CA 94801 The Practice Space (3)
Things That Creep (3)
Growing Together, Bay Area (2)
63 569
District 3
Neighborhood Councils: Atchison Village, Iron Triangle, Coronado, Richmond Village/Metro Square, Cortez/Stege, Pullman, Park Plaza Program site Funded organizations
Bay Area Girls Club, 260 Broadway, Richmond, CA 94804 Bay Area Girls Club (1) Coronado Elementary, 2100 Maine Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Bay Area Community Resources (1)
West Contra Costa Unified School District (1)
Things That Creep (3)
Child Abuse Prevention Council (1)
Golden Gate Community School Richmond, 2200 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 Fresh Lifelines for Youth (4) GRIP, 165 22nd St, Richmond, CA 94801 Greater Richmond Interfaith Program (1) King Elementary, 4022 Florida Ave., Richmond, CA 94804
Growing Together, Bay Area (2)
Bay Area Community Resources (1)
Mindful Life Project (1)
Leadership Public Schools, Richmond, 880 Bissell Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 Summer Search Mentoring (4) Lincoln Elementary School, 29 6th St., Richmond, CA 94801 Bay Area Community Resources (1)
Child Abuse Prevention Council (1)
The Practice Space (3)
Lovonya DeJean Middle School, 3400 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 West Contra Costa Unified School District (1)
Touch of New Life (4)
The Hidden Genius Project (3)
Desarrollo Familiar (1)
Nystrom Elementary, 230 Harbour Way S, Richmond, CA 94804 The Hidden Genius Project (3)
The Watershed Project (3)
Richmond Outdoors Coalition (2)
The Practice Space (3)
West Contra Costa Public Education Fund (3)
Things That Creep (3)
RichmondBUILD/YouthBUILD Office, 360 S. 27th St., Richmond, CA 94804 City of Richmond, Employment and Training (3) Richmond City Recreation Complex, 3230 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 The Black Neighborhood (1)
Richmond Library (3)
YES Nature to Neighborhoods (2)
Richmond Steelers (2)
Richmond College Preparatory, 214 South 11th St., Richmond, CA 94804 Mindful Life Project (1) Richmond Greenway, Richmond Greenway Trail, Richmond, CA 94804 Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bay Area 64 570
Program site Funded organizations
RYSE Youth Center, 3939 Bissell Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 RYSE (3)
The Hidden Genius Project (3)
Fresh Lifelines for Youth (4)
City of Richmond, Office of Neighborhood Safety (1)
Target, 4500 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 Touch of New Life (4) Voices Charter School, 201 28th St., Richmond, CA 94804 The Practice Space (3) West Contra Costa Family Justice Center, 256 24th St., Richmond, CA 94804 Contra Costa Family Justice Alliance (1) District 4
Neighborhood Councils: Hilltop Village, Fairmede/Hilltop, Hilltop Green, Quail Hill, Greenridge Heights, May Valley, El Sobrante Hills, Greenbriar, Carriage Hills North, Castro Heights, Carriage Hills South
Program site Funded organizations
De Anza High School, 5000 Valley View Rd., Richmond, CA 94803 Fresh Lifelines for Youth (4) Summer Search Mentoring (4)
Highland Elementary, 2829 Moyers Rd., San Pablo, CA 94806 Mindful Life Project (1) May Valley Community Center, 3530 Morningside Dr., Richmond, CA 94803 Richmond Library (3) Olinda Elementary School, 5855 Olinda Rd., El Sobrante, CA 94803 Things That Creep (3) Sheldon Elementary School, 2601 May Rd., Richmond, CA 94803 The Practice Space (3) Vista Hills Education Center, 2625 Barnard St., Richmond, CA 94806 Nurturing Independence through Artistic Development (NIAD) (4) Wildcat Canyon Regional Park, 5755 McBryde Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 The Watershed Project (3) Richmond Outdoors Coalition (2)
65 571
District 5
Neighborhood Councils: Southwest Annex, Richmond Annex, Panhandle Annex, Parkview, Marina Bay, Eastshore, Laurel Park, Cortez/Stege Program site Funded organizations
Booker T. Anderson Community Center, 960 S 47th St., Richmond, CA 94804 The Practice Space (3) City of Richmond, Recreation Division (3)
Kennedy High School, 4300 Cutting Blvd., Richmond, CA 94804 The Black Neighborhood (1) RFD Training Facility, 3506 Cutting Blvd., Richmond, CA 94804 Touch of New Life (4) Richmond Public Library Bayview Branch, 5100 Hartnett Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Richmond Library (3) District 6
Neighborhood Councils: North & East, East Richmond, Park Plaza Program site Funded organizations
Alvarado Park, 755 McBryde Ave., Richmond, CA 94806 Summer Search Mentoring (4) Burg Park, 2910 Clinton Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 The Black Neighborhood (1) Grant Elementary, 2400 Downer Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Mindful Life Project (1) The Latina Center, 3701 Barrett Ave., Richmond CA 94805 The Latina Center (1) Michelle Obama Elementary School, 629 42nd St., Richmond, CA 94805 Things That Creep (3) Richmond Art Center, 2450 Barrett Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 Nurturing Independence through Artistic Development (NIAD) (4) Richmond Library, 325 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804 Richmond Library (3) Salesian High School, 2851 Salesian Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 The Practice Space (3) The Hidden Genius Project (3)
YES Nature to Neighborhoods, 3029 Macdonald Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 YES Nature to Neighborhoods (2) 66 572
North Richmond
Program sites Funded organizations
Urban Tilth, 515 Silver Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 18 Reasons (2) Verde Elementary, 2000 Giaramita St., Richmond, CA 94801 18 Reasons (2)
The Watershed Project (3)
Child Abuse Prevention Council (1)
Outside of Richmond
Program sites Funded organizations
Adventure Risk Challenge, PO Box 3208, Truckee, CA 96160 Summer Search Mentoring (4) Summer Search Summer (2)
Betty Reid Soskin Middle School, 1121 Allview Ave., El Sobrante, CA 94803 The Hidden Genius Project (3) Brookside San Pablo Health Center, 2023 Vale Rd., San Pablo, CA 94806 The Watershed Project (3) California Academy of Science, 55 Music Concourse Dr., San Francisco, CA 94118 Project Avary (2) Camp Mendocino, PO Box 1790, Fort Bragg, CA 95437 YES Nature to Neighborhoods (2) El Cerrito Community Center, 7007 Moeser Ln., El Cerrito, CA 94530 Project Avary (2) El Cerrito High School, 540 Ashbury Ave., El Cerrito, CA 94530 The Practice Space (3) Chabot and Space Center, 10000 Skyline Blvd., Oakland, CA 94619 Bay Area Girls Club (1)
The Black Neighborhood (1)
The Latina Center (1)
Challenge Sonoma Adventure Ropes Course, Orchard Rd., Eldridge, CA 95431 Project Avary (2) City of San Pablo Library, 13751 San Pablo Ave., San Pablo, CA 94806 Touch of New Life (4) Clem Miller Environmental Education Center, 1 Bear Valley Rd., Point Reyes Station, CA 94956 Project Avary (2)
Contra Costa College, 2600 Mission Bell Dr., San Pablo, CA 94806 Richmond Promise (3) CYO Camp, 2136 Bohemian Hwy, Occidental, CA 95465 YES Nature to Neighborhoods (2) 67 573
Program sites Funded organizations
Deer Hill Expeditions, 7850 Rd 41, Mancos, CO 81328 Summer Search Mentoring (4) Summer Search Summer (2)
Downer Elementary School, 1231 18th St., San Pablo, CA 94806 Richmond High School Music Department (4) Environmental Traveling Companions, 6700 CA-49, Lotus, CA 95651 Summer Search Mentoring (4) First 5 Contra Costa, 4005 Port Chicago Hwy. #120, Concord, CA 94520 The Practice Space (3) Fresh Approach, 5060 Commercial Circle, Concord, CA 94520 Fresh Approach (3) GirlVentures, 119 Filbert Street, Oakland, CA 94607 Summer Search Summer (2) Grizzly Peak, 3092–3148 Grizzly Peak Blvd., Berkeley, CA 94705 The Black Neighborhood (1) Helms Middle School, 2500 Rd 20, San Pablo, CA 94806 The Hidden Genius Project (3) Richmond High School Music Department (4)
Hidden Villa, 26870 Moody Rd., Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 YES Nature to Neighborhoods (2) Invictus Academy, 7150 Portola Dr., El Cerrito, CA 94530 The Hidden Genius Project (3) Martin Griffin Preserve, 4900 Shoreline Hwy., Stinson Beach, CA 94970 Project Avary (2) Mira Vista K–8, 6397 Hazel Ave., Richmond, CA 94805 Growing Together, Bay Area (2) Montalvin Manor Elementary School, 300 Christine Dr., San Pablo, CA 94806 The Watershed Project (3) Mt. McKinley, 202 Glacier Dr., Martinez, CA 94553 Fresh Lifelines for Youth (4) Muir Beach, Pacific Way, Muir Beach, CA 94965 Richmond Outdoors Coalition (2) Paradise Coast Sports Complex, 3940 City Gate Blvd. N, Naples, FL 34117 Richmond Steelers (2) Pinole Valley High School, 2900 Pinole Valley Rd., Pinole, CA 94564 West Contra Costa Unified School District (1) Rafting, 7330 River Park Dr., Lotus, CA 95651 Project Avary (2) Rob Hill Campground, 1475 Central Magazine Rd., San Francisco, CA 94129 Richmond Outdoors Coalition (2) San Pablo Police Training Center, 2300 El Portal Dr., Unit C, San Pablo, CA 94806 Touch of New Life (4) 68 574
Program sites Funded organizations
Santa Clara University, 500 El Camino Real, Santa Clara, CA 95053 Richmond Promise (3) Sierra Nevada Journeys, 5900 Grizzly Rd., Portola, CA 96122 Summer Search Mentoring (4) Summer Search Summer (2)
Six Flags, 1001 Fairgrounds Drive, Vallejo, CA 94589 Richmond Promise (3) St. Dorothy’s Rest, 168 St. Dorothy Ave., Camp Meeker, CA 95419 YES Nature to Neighborhoods (2) Project Avary (2)
Stinson Beach, Highway 1, Stinson Beach, CA 94970 Project Avary (2) Summer Search Office, 2201 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94612 Summer Search Mentoring (4) Summer Search Summer (2)
Summer Search Office, 304 12th St., Oakland, CA 94607 Summer Search Mentoring (4) Tilden Regional Park, 1500 Central Park Dr., Berkeley, CA 94708 The Watershed Project (3) UC Berkeley, 110 Sproul Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720 Richmond Promise (3) UC Davis, 1 Shields Ave., Davis, CA 95616 RYSE (3)
Richmond Promise (3)
Walnut Creek Library, 644 N. Broadway, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Nurturing Independence through Artistic Development (NIAD) (4) Wanlass Park, 2999 21st St., San Pablo, CA 94806 Touch of New Life (4) YES Nature to Neighborhoods/ Gateway Mountain Center, 10038 Meadow Way, Unit D, Truckee, CA 96161 YES Nature to Neighborhoods (2) YMCA Camp Loma Mar, 9900 Pesadero Creek Rd., Loma Mar, CA 94021 YES Nature to Neighborhoods (2) 69 575
Richmond Fund for
Children and Youth
Grantee
Program Profiles
2025
576
2 This document was prepared under Contract 6896 from the City of Richmond, CA, Department of Children and Youth. The content does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the City of Richmond or the Department of Children and Youth.
© 2026 WestEd. All rights reserved.
WestEd is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that aims to improve the lives of children and adults at all ages of learning and development. We do this by addressing challenges in education and human development, increasing opportunity, and helping build communities where all can thrive. WestEd staff conduct and apply research, provide technical assistance, and support professional learning.
We work with early learning educators, classroom teachers, local and state leaders, and policymakers at all levels of government.
577
i
Table of Contents
Mental and Behavioral Health and Wellness 1
Bay Area Community Resources—
Promoting Youth and Family Resilience 2
Bay Area Girls Club—Take Care of You 3
The Black Neighborhood—Youth
Empowerment Program 4
Child Abuse Prevention Council—Speak
Up Be Safe and Nurturing Parent Program 5
City of Richmond, Office of Neighborhood
Safety and RYSE—CARRY 6
Contra Costa and Solano Family Justice
Alliance—The Richmond Children’s Mental
Health Program 7
Desarrollo Familiar, Inc. (Familias Unidas)—
Trauma-Informed Care in Schools 8
Greater Richmond Interfaith Program and
Early Childhood Mental Health—Early
Childhood Mental Health Program 9
The Latina Center—Young Latinas,
Future Leaders 10
Mindful Life Project—SEL Services 11
West Contra Costa Unified School
District and West Contra Costa Public
Education Fund—Positive Behavioral
Intervention System 12
Physical Health and Wellness 13
18 Reasons—Cooking Matters and
Food as Medicine 14
Growing Together Bay Area—Garden
and Nutrition Education 15
Pogo Park—Enrichment Programs
at Elm Playlot 16
Richmond Outdoors Coalition and YES
Nature to Neighborhoods—Outdoor
Programming 17
Richmond Steelers—Youth Football
and Cheer 18
Summer Search—Summer
Outdoor Program 19
YES Nature to Neighborhoods—
Youth Leadership Pathway Program 20
578
ii
Learning Needs 21
City of Richmond, Community Services
Department (Recreation Division)—
Camp Achieve 22
City of Richmond, Employment and
Training Department—YouthBUILD 23
Fresh Approach—Youth Community
Ambassadors 24
The Hidden Genius Project—The Intensive
Immersive Program 25
The Practice Space— Speech and Debate
Mentorship and Leadership Program 26
Richmond Promise and Contra Costa
College—Contra Costa College First Year
Experience Program 27
Richmond Public Library and Bay Area
Tutoring Association—Homework Help
and Tutoring Program 28
RYSE—Leadership Pathways Program 29
Things That Creep—Neighborhood Snakes
and Neighborhood Reptiles Program 30
The Watershed Project—Educational
Programs 31
West Contra Costa Public Education
Fund—Richmond Freedom School 32
Safety, Community, and Belonging 33
Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bay Area—
Mentorship Program 34
East Bay Center for the Performing Arts
and Contra Costa Family Justice Center—
The Young Artist Diploma Program 35
Fresh Lifelines for Youth, Inc.—Law
Education and Mentoring Program 36
Nurturing Independence Through Artistic
Development (NIAD Art Center)—Young
Artist Leaders Program 37
Richmond High School and East Bay
Center for the Performing Arts—
Richmond High School Music Department 38
Summer Search—Mentoring Program 39
Touch of New Life—Youth Public
Safety Academy 40
579
Mental and
Behavioral Health
and Wellness
580
2 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Bay Area Community
Resources—Promoting Youth
and Family Resilience
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
330 unique individuals served (proposed: 240 per year)
269 hours of service delivery
Bay Area Community Resources (BACR) partners with West Contra Costa Unified School District to implement a school-based community support program that works to improve student success by engaging families, developing youth leadership, and connecting households with essential resources at Coronado Elementary School. A key focus of BACR’s RFCY grant is providing direct support to families through case management, including one-on-one consultations, needs assessments, and referrals to school and community resources, such as housing assistance, behavioral support, employment services, and healthcare. The organization also collaborates closely with school staff and multidisciplinary teams to address students’ academic, social, and behavioral needs. In addition, the organization promotes youth development by facilitating leadership groups in which students build skills, mentor peers, and contribute to school activities and events. Workshops and community events that center on health, wellness, and cultural connection aim to further strengthen family engagement and a sense of belonging. By promoting family and child mental and behavioral health through school-based, trauma-responsive outreach, prevention, and intervention strategies, BACR aims to help Richmond families thrive. For more information, visit the BACR website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z Ongoing Care Team Meetings
z Ongoing Case Management
z Ongoing Family Engagement
z Ongoing Career Support Opportunities
z 6 Parent Workshops
z Ongoing Youth Leadership Team Engagements
581
3 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Bay Area Girls Club—
Take Care of You
Annual Award Amount: $50,000
84 unique individuals served (proposed: 90 per year)
45 hours of service delivery
The Take Care of You (TCY) Program is a 10-week initiative focused on promoting wellness and social–emotional learning for students in grades 1–6. Through structured workshops, peer support groups, and community-based healing activities, the program is designed to help participants build skills in self-care, emotional awareness, and resilience. Each session integrates mindfulness practices, guided reflection, interactive activities, and ageappropriate discussions to support students in navigating school, relationships, and personal challenges. The program emphasizes creating safe, supportive spaces where participants can build confidence, strengthen coping skills, and develop positive peer connections. In 2025, three program cohorts were implemented, including two at Bay Area Girls Club (BAGC) sites and one in partnership with Richmond Freedom School. These efforts expanded access to consistent social–emotional support and wellness-focused programming. Through these supports, the TCY Program aims to equip youth with foundational skills and resources that promote emotional resilience and support long-term well-being. For more information, visit the BAGC website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 30 TCY Social–Emotional Health and Wellness Sessions
582
4 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles The Black Neighborhood—
Youth Empowerment Program
Annual Award Amount: $60,000
32 unique individuals served (proposed: 150 over 3 years) 39 hours of service delivery
The Black Neighborhood (TBN) Youth Empowerment Program provides Richmond youth ages 12–24 with communitybased supports focused on mental wellness, leadership development, and life skills. Through mentorship, workshops, and partnership-driven activities, the program aims to help participants build resilience, confidence, and real-world skills. In 2025, TBN partnered with Kennedy High School to implement college and career workshops and healthy habits workshops. In addition, TBN promotes mental and behavioral health through structured experiences such as guided “Mental Health Hikes,” which integrate mindfulness, reflection, and physical activity to strengthen emotional regulation and self-awareness. The program also creates opportunities for youth leadership and community engagement through service initiatives, such as large-scale community events, in which participants can develop communication, teamwork, and problem-solving skills. Through this programming, youth are provided with tools, support, and experiences for fostering resilience, making informed decisions, and contributing positively to their communities. For more information, visit the TBN Program website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 7 Mental Health Hikes
z 9 College and Career Workshops
z 4 Healthy Habits Workshops
z 1 Thanksgiving Turkey Drive
583
5 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Child Abuse Prevention Council—
Speak Up Be Safe and Nurturing
Parent Program
Annual Award Amount: $51,200
591 unique individuals served (proposed: 593 per year)
118 hours of service delivery
The Child Abuse Prevention Council (CAPC) partners with the RFCY to implement two programs that provide mental health, behavioral support, and prevention education to students and families. The Nurturing Parent Program (NPP) is an 18-week, trauma-informed curriculum that aims to strengthen parenting skills and promote healthy family relationships. Offered in culturally responsive formats, including Spanish-language sessions, NPP incorporates group discussions, skill-building activities, and mental health support to address trauma and reduce risk factors associated with child abuse and neglect. Parents who complete the program are provided a stipend. CAPC also delivers Speak Up Be Safe, a school-based prevention program that educates students on personal safety, bullying, and healthy boundaries. Classroom lessons aim to help students build awareness and develop skills to recognize and respond to unsafe situations. In 2025, CAPC implemented programming across multiple Richmond elementary schools. These efforts are designed to support safer environments and strengthen family and student well-being.
For more information on these programs, visit the CAPC website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 36 Nurturing Parent Program Sessions
z 30 Speak Up Be Safe Sessions
584
6 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles City of Richmond, Office
of Neighborhood Safety
and RYSE—CARRY
Annual Award Amount: $300,000
33 unique individuals served (proposed: 150 per year)
161 hours of service delivery
The Care, Affirmation, Recovery for Richmond Youth (CARRY) Program supports youth ages 12–24 who have been impacted by gun and community violence. It provides trauma-informed mental health and support services. Through a partnership between the Office of Neighborhood Safety (ONS) and RYSE, the program offers individual therapy, group-based support, and care coordination to help youth and families navigate trauma and promote healing. A core component of the program is timely crisis response, including psychosocial assessments, safety planning, and coordination with emergency and clinical services following incidents of violence or for acute mental health needs.
Services are delivered in both community-based settings and at RYSE, with frequency tailored to each participant’s needs. The program also incorporates a family-centered approach, providing ongoing support to caregivers to strengthen family dynamics and reduce stressors. By combining clinical services, crisis intervention, and life skills development, the CARRY Program aims to promote mental health recovery, resilience, and long-term stability for youth and their families. For more information about the partner organizations, visit the City of Richmond ONS website and the RYSE website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 127 Individual Therapeutic and Clinical Support Sessions z Group Life Skills Session
z 3 Mental Health Consultations for ONS Staff
585
7 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Contra Costa and Solano
Family Justice Center—
The Richmond Children’s
Mental Health Program
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
331 unique individuals served (proposed: 70 per year)
203 hours of service delivery
The Contra Costa and Solano Family Justice Center serves children, youth, and families impacted by interpersonal violence by providing coordinated, trauma-informed support services. The program identifies youth ages 0–24 who have been exposed to violence and connects them with care through dedicated navigators who assess needs and link families to appropriate services. A core component of the program is individualized care coordination.
Navigators work closely with clients to connect them to mental health, legal, and community-based resources that can support healing and long-term stability. In addition, clinicians provide ongoing mental health services at the Richmond site at no cost to families. Therapeutic services include weekly sessions that incorporate creative and evidence-based approaches such as art, music, storytelling, and skill-building activities to help youth process trauma and build resilience. Through integrated navigation and clinical support, the program aims to promote healing, strengthen coping skills, and improve overall well-being for youth and their families. For more information, visit the Contra Costa and Solano Family Justice Center website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z Individual Therapy
z Resource Navigation
586
8 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Desarrollo Familiar, Inc.
(Familias Unidas)—Trauma-Informed
Care in Schools
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
91 unique individuals served (proposed: 90 per year)
815 hours of service delivery
The Desarrollo Familiar Youth Matters program provides bilingual (English/Spanish), school-based mental health services to students and families at Lovonya DeJean Middle School and Richmond High School. The program delivers trauma-informed support through individual and family counseling, crisis intervention, and case management to help students address mental health needs and access essential resources. A core component of the program is flexible service delivery, including both drop-in crisis support and ongoing counseling based on student needs.
Clinicians also engage caregivers, when appropriate, to strengthen family support systems and improve student outcomes. In addition, the program aims to promote healing and conflict resolution through restorative justice practices, including restorative circles and mediation. Group-based services, such as Grupo de Mujeres, provide targeted therapeutic support for students experiencing depression, anxiety, and trauma. Through comprehensive, culturally responsive care, the program is designed to support student well-being, strengthen coping skills, and promote safer, more supportive school environments. For more information, visit the Familias Unidas website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 20 Grupo de Mujeres Group Therapy Sessions
z 941 Sessions of Individualized Mental Health Services (clinical assessments, counseling, crisis intervention, and case management)
587
9 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Greater Richmond
Interfaith Program and
Early Childhood Mental
Health—Early Childhood
Mental Health Program
Annual Award Amount: $300,000
52 unique individuals served (proposed: 100 families per year) 1,005 hours of service delivery
The Early Childhood Mental Health Program (ECMHP), in partnership with the Greater Richmond Interfaith Program (GRIP), provides trauma-informed mental health services to young children and their caregivers experiencing housing instability. The program serves children from infancy to early childhood and focuses on promoting social–emotional development and family well-being within a supportive shelter environment. A core component of the program is onsite therapeutic preschool services whereby a therapeutic teacher provides structured, developmentally appropriate activities for children during weekday morning sessions. These services aim to support emotional regulation, early learning, and school readiness. In addition, ECMHP offers mental health assessments, therapy, and two-generation case management to address the needs of both children and caregivers. Weekly parent groups provide psychoeducation, emotional support, and parenting guidance, while family engagement activities are intended to strengthen caregiver–child relationships. Through integrated, family-centered services, the program is designed to support early childhood development, promote healing from trauma, and strengthen family stability.
For more information, visit the GRIP website and the ECMHP website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z Clinical Assessments
z Family Therapy
z Weekly 90-minute Parent Support Groups
z Monday–Friday Therapeutic Preschool
z Ongoing Case Management
588
10 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles The Latina Center—Young
Latinas, Future Leaders
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
66 unique individuals served (proposed: 54 per year)
499 hours of service delivery
The Latina Center provides culturally responsive programming designed to increase access to STEAM education and leadership development for young Latinas. Through an integrated approach, the program combines robotics and technology training with emotional coaching and mental health support to promote both academic and personal growth. A core component of the program is hands-on robotics instruction using the VEX IQ platform to teach participants foundational concepts in engineering, programming, and problem-solving through interactive projects and team-based challenges. These activities can help build technical skills while fostering collaboration, persistence, and creative thinking. In addition, the program incorporates workshops and activities to support self-esteem, cultural identity, and emotional well-being. Enrichment experiences, including field trips and interdisciplinary learning opportunities, further connect STEM education with creativity and real-world exploration. Through this programming, participants can develop both technical competencies and essential life skills for strengthening confidence, resilience, and pathways to future educational and career opportunities. For more information, visit the Latina Center website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 3 Field Trips
z 10 Future Latinas in Tech Program Sessions
z 97 Robotics Workshops
589
11 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Mindful Life Project—
SEL Services
Annual Award Amount: $150,000
3,386 unique individuals served (proposed: 7,425 over 3 years) 2,503 hours of service delivery
The Mindful Life Project (MLP) provides school-based social–emotional learning rooted in mindfulness for students across five schools in Richmond. Through partnerships with local schools, the MLP delivers universal and targeted supports that aim to build students’ self-awareness, emotional regulation, empathy, and decision-making skills.
A core component of the program is Mindful Community, a Tier 1 model in which trained coaches deliver weekly classroom-based mindfulness sessions to all students and teachers. These lessons establish a shared language and set of practices to promote emotional well-being and a positive school climate. For students needing additional support, the MLP offers Rise Up, a Tier 2 small-group program that provides more intensive, trauma-informed services through creative expression, mindfulness, and skill-building activities. The MLP also engages educators through mindfulness training and professional development to support whole-school well-being. Through this multitiered approach, the program aims to strengthen students’ social–emotional skills and foster healthier, more supportive school environments. For more information, visit the MLP website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z Adult Mindfulness Programming for Educators at 7 schools z Mindful Community (push-in sessions) at 4 schools
z Rise Up (pull-out sessions) at 5 schools
590
12 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles West Contra Costa Unified
School District and West
Contra Costa Public Education
Fund—Positive Behavioral
Intervention System
Annual Award Amount: $300,000
51 unique individuals served (proposed: 120 per year)
50 hours of service delivery
West Contra Costa Unified School District, in partnership with the West Contra Costa Public Education Fund, provides school-based therapeutic and restorative support through two full-time clinicians serving high-need students at Coronado Elementary School and Pinole Valley High School. The program supports students facing challenges such as absenteeism, behavioral concerns, and social–emotional needs. A core component of the program is direct mental health support, including individual therapy, crisis intervention, risk assessments, and safety planning. Clinicians also facilitate small-group sessions designed to create safe spaces for students to share experiences, build coping skills, and strengthen peer connections. In addition, the program promotes trauma-informed school environments by providing coaching and psychoeducation to teachers and administrators. These efforts support staff in responding to student behavior with empathy and implementing social–emotional practices that can foster positive classroom climates. Through integrated mental health services and schoolwide support, the program works to reduce disciplinary incidents, improve attendance, and strengthen student well-being and success. For more information, visit the West Contra Costa Unified School District website and the Ed Fund West website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 42 Individual Therapy Sessions
z Professional Development Training for School Staff
z 22 Social Skills Group Sessions
591
Physical Health
and Wellness
592
14 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles 18 Reasons—Cooking Matters
and Food as Medicine
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
935 unique individuals served (proposed: 800 per year)
427 hours of service delivery
Cooking Matters for Teens and Food as Medicine for Kids provide nutrition education and cooking skill development to low-income youth and families in Richmond, with the goal of improving food security and healthy eating habits.
Hands-on and virtual programming aim to help participants build confidence in preparing nutritious meals while increasing access to healthy foods. Cooking Matters classes offer hands-on learning experiences, and Food as Medicine delivers virtual sessions paired with home-delivered food boxes, allowing families to practice recipes with provided ingredients. Lessons cover key topics such as MyPlate guidelines, reading nutrition labels, hydration, physical activity, and incorporating a variety of fruits and vegetables. In 2025, programs were implemented virtually and in person with partnerships with Verde Elementary School, Urban Tilth, Fierce Advocates, and Hacienda Heights Mercy Housing. Through this combined approach, participants can gain practical skills, nutritional knowledge, and resources that support healthier lifestyles and long-term well-being. For more information, visit the 18 Reasons Cooking Matters website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 25 In-Person Cooking Workshops (with provided groceries) z 156 Virtual Cooking Workshops (with provided groceries) 593
15 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Growing Together Bay Area—
Garden and Nutrition Education
Annual Award Amount: $190,840
1,723 unique individuals served (proposed: 1,483 per year) 2,102 hours of service delivery
Growing Together Bay Area provides garden-based education, nutrition programming, and wellness activities across four participating schools in Richmond. Serving students from kindergarten through 12th grade, the program promotes healthy eating, school engagement, and science learning through hands-on, outdoor experiences. A core component of the program is experiential garden education integrated into the school day whereby students engage in growing, harvesting, preparing, and tasting fresh foods while participating in science-based observation and inquiry projects. After-school programming aims to further support skill-building through garden stewardship, teamwork, and hands-on activities that encourage responsibility and community contribution. In addition, the program supports workforce and leadership development through youth apprenticeship opportunities. Young participants work alongside experienced educators to gain practical experience in teaching, gardening, and program facilitation. Through this integrated approach, Growing Together aims to strengthen students’ connection to healthy food, build social–emotional skills, and enhance science knowledge while fostering a sense of ownership and pride in their school environments. For more information, visit the Growing Together website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 1,121 During-School Garden/Nutrition Lessons
z 260 After-School Garden/Nutrition Lessons
z 8 Teaching Apprenticeships
594
16 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Pogo Park—Enrichment
Programs at Elm Playlot
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
2,052 unique individuals served (proposed: 1,500 per year) 2,571 hours of service delivery
Pogo Park provides free, drop-in enrichment programming at Elm Playlot, a community park in Richmond’s Iron Triangle neighborhood. Operating Monday through Friday, the program offers a safe, welcoming space where children and families can engage in play-based learning, creative expression, and outdoor activities. A core component of the program is diverse, hands-on enrichment, including daily art activities, chess instruction, nature exploration, gardening, and unstructured play. These activities aim to build creativity, critical thinking, and social skills while supporting healthy child development. Community partnerships expand programming to include movement-based activities such as Zumba, animal-assisted learning experiences, and access to free, healthy meals for participating children and youth. In addition, Pogo Park hosts seasonal events and community celebrations to strengthen neighborhood connection and engagement. The program is staffed by local residents and emphasizes reclaiming and transforming public spaces into vibrant community hubs. Through this approach, Pogo Park supports youth development, promotes well-being, and fosters stronger, more connected communities. For more information, visit the Pogo Park website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 52 Sessions of Enrichment Activities at the Park
z 245 Free Lunch Program Sessions
595
17 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Richmond Outdoors
Coalition and YES Nature to
Neighborhoods—Outdoor
Programming
Annual Award Amount: $300,000
909 unique individuals served (proposed: 1,100 per year) 147 hours of service delivery
Richmond Outdoors Coalition (ROC) provides year-round outdoor programming for youth and families during school days, recesses, and weekends. Their collaborative RFCY grant supports a formal partnership with YES Nature to Neighborhoods. The program promotes physical, mental, and social well-being while increasing access to naturebased experiences for underserved communities. A core component of the program is experiential outdoor learning, including field trips, environmental education, and nature-based activities such as hiking, birding, and exploration of local ecosystems. During the school day at Nystrom and Verde Elementary Schools, students participate in structured outdoor play, team-building games, and environmental learning that support both physical activity and social–emotional development. In addition, ROC offers family engagement opportunities, including overnight camping experiences, that aim to deepen connections to nature and strengthen family relationships. The program also provides leadership development through training for educators and partners to deliver safe, inclusive, and culturally responsive outdoor experiences. Through this comprehensive approach, ROC is designed to foster environmental awareness, build leadership skills, and strengthen community connection. For more information, visit the ROC website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 2 Bay Area Wilderness Training Sessions
z 39 Camp Days Recess Enrichment Sessions
z 17 Field Trips
z 1 Family Camp Session
596
18 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Richmond Steelers—
Youth Football and Cheer
Annual Award Amount: $80,000
200 unique individuals served (proposed: 170 per year)
136 hours of service delivery
The Richmond Steelers Youth Football and Cheer program provides community-based athletics combined with mentorship, leadership development, and health education for Richmond youth. The program promotes discipline, teamwork, and confidence while ensuring inclusive access to organized sports. A core component of the program is structured athletic training, including regular practices, games, tournaments, and cheer competitions. Participants can develop physical skills, sportsmanship, and teamwork through consistent engagement in football and cheer activities. The program also aims to reduce barriers to participation by providing uniforms and equipment to youth across multiple age levels. In addition, the program integrates wellness supports such as nutrition education and mental health discussions to promote overall well-being. Opportunities to travel and participate in regional and national competitions further expand youth experiences and exposure. Through this combined approach, the program is designed to support youth development, foster leadership skills, and create a positive, supportive environment for participants and their families. For more information, visit the Richmond Steelers social media page.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 40 Sessions of Football and Cheer Practice, Games,
and Tournaments
z Travel to National Championships
597
19 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Summer Search—
Summer Outdoor Program
Annual Award Amount: $50,000
41 unique individuals served (proposed: 11 per year)
1,873 hours of service delivery
Summer Search provides intensive outdoor experiential learning opportunities for high school students from underresourced communities in Richmond. Through a 2-week summer program, youth participate in adventure-based experiences that promote self-discovery, teamwork, leadership, and personal growth. A core component of the program is immersive outdoor learning in which participants engage in physically and mentally challenging activities that can build confidence, resilience, and social–emotional skills. These experiences are designed to improve mental health, strengthen peer connections, and encourage students to expand their sense of possibility for their future. In addition, Summer Search provides ongoing mentorship, including one-on-one support to help students reflect on their experiences, set goals, and apply lessons learned to their academic and personal lives. This continued guidance aims to help youth stay engaged and focused on long-term success. Through this combination of experiential learning and mentorship, the program supports youth in building the skills and confidence needed for postsecondary success and lifelong growth. For more information, visit the Summer Search website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 2 Sessions of the Adventure Risk Challenge:
Yosemite Stepping Stone Course
z 1 Deer Hill Wilderness Leadership Trip
z 2 Environmental Traveling Companions Expeditions
z 1 GirlVentures Fierce and Fabulous Series
z Post-Summer Program Mentoring Sessions
z 1 Sierra Nevada Journeys Backcountry Leadership Trip
598
20 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles YES Nature to
Neighborhoods—Youth
Leadership Pathway Program
Annual Award Amount: $199,974
147 unique individuals served (proposed: 175 per year)
3,618 hours of service delivery
The Youth Leadership Pathway program (YLP) provides health, wellness, leadership, and environmental education programming for Richmond youth ages 8–18. The program aims to promote physical, emotional, and social well-being while expanding access to safe outdoor spaces, healthy lifestyles, and environmental learning opportunities. A core component of the program is leadership development through biweekly workshops, youth-led projects, and paid leadership roles that build communication, teamwork, and problem-solving skills. Participants also engage in hands-on activities to promote nutrition education, community improvement, and environmental stewardship. In addition, YLP offers outdoor enrichment experiences, including day-trips, retreats, and weeklong summer camps that combine recreation, physical activity, and social–emotional learning. These experiences are designed to help youth build confidence, strengthen peer relationships, and deepen youth connection to nature. Through this comprehensive approach, YLP aims to support positive youth development, foster leadership skills, and promote long-term health and well-being. For more information, visit the YES Nature to Neighborhoods website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 2 Camp Days
z 85 Leadership Cohort Workshops
z 20 Summer Camp Sessions
z 1 Winter Camp Session
599
Learning
Needs
600
22 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles City of Richmond,
Community Services
Department (Recreation
Division)—Camp Achieve
Annual Award Amount: $300,000
300 unique individuals served (proposed: 360 per year)
912 hours of service delivery
The City of Richmond Community Services Department, in partnership with the West Contra Costa Public Education Fund (Ed Fund West), provides free, high-quality summer programming for Richmond youth in grades K–8 through Camp Achieve. The program operates at four community center sites—Nevin, Parchester, Shields Reid, and Booker T. Anderson—and is designed to combat summer learning loss while providing engaging and enriching experiences. A core component of the program is academic enrichment through project-based learning aligned with weekly themes to help students maintain and strengthen key skills during the summer months. These activities are complemented by daily enrichment programming delivered by partner organizations. In addition, youth participate in recreational activities and educational field trips that promote social development, creativity, and exploration.
Through a combination of academic support and enrichment activities, Camp Achieve provides a structured and engaging environment in support of continued learning, personal growth, and positive youth development. For more information, visit the City of Richmond, Community Services Recreation webpage.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 152 Enrichment Activities at Camps
601
23 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles City of Richmond,
Employment and Training
Department—YouthBUILD
Annual Award Amount: $300,000
33 unique individuals served (proposed: 67 over 3 years) 990 hours of service delivery
YouthBUILD provides workforce development and pre-apprenticeship training for low-income Richmond youth ages 16–24, with a focus on opportunity youth who face barriers to education and employment. The program prepares participants for careers, apprenticeships, or postsecondary education through an integrated academic and vocational pathway. A core component of the program is its partnership with John Muir Charter School through which participants work toward earning a high school diploma or general equivalency diploma (GED) while receiving daily academic instruction. At the same time, youth engage in hands-on construction trade training to build technical skills and prepare them for entry into the workforce. In addition, YouthBUILD offers supportive services such as stipends, transportation assistance, and case management to address barriers to participation and promote consistent engagement. This comprehensive approach is designed to equip youth with credentials, practical skills, and support to achieve long-term employment and economic stability. For more information, visit the YouthBUILD webpage.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 33 Construction Training/Pre-Apprenticeships
z Case Management and Supportive Services
z Post-Program Support (e.g., job placement assistance) 602
24 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Fresh Approach—Youth
Community Ambassadors
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
64 unique individuals served (proposed: 20 per year)
444 hours of service delivery
Fresh Approach partners with community organizations and local agencies to provide nutrition education, food access resources, and workforce development opportunities for Richmond youth and families. The program aims to improve nutrition knowledge, increase fruit and vegetable consumption, and support long-term health outcomes.
A core component of the program is the VeggieRx initiative, which offers virtual nutrition and cooking classes alongside vouchers for locally grown produce. Participants can build skills in healthy eating, budgeting, and meal preparation while having increased access to fresh foods through local farmers’ markets. In addition, the Youth Community Ambassadors program engages young adults ages 18–24 in paid training and mentorship. Participants earn certifications in nutrition, health, and safety while gaining hands-on experience through job shadowing, supporting farmers’ markets, and cofacilitating community workshops. Through this combined approach, Fresh Approach aims to strengthen food access, build workforce skills, and promote healthier communities. For more information, visit the Fresh Approach website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 12 Youth Ambassadors Training and Certification Classes z 27 Job Shadowing Sessions
z 34 VeggieRx Nutrition and Cooking Classes
603
25 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles The Hidden Genius Project—The
Intensive Immersive Program
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
299 unique individuals served (proposed: 30 per year)
587 hours of service delivery
The Intensive Immersive Program provides Black male high school students with a 15-month, holistic program focused on mentorship, technology education, and leadership development. The program aims to equip participants with coding, entrepreneurship, and problem-solving skills while fostering confidence, responsibility, and community leadership. A core component of the program is hands-on, project-based learning designed to develop students’ technical skills through website development, robotics, artificial intelligence, and social entrepreneurship projects.
Participants build portfolios of work that demonstrate their growth and ability to apply technology to real-world challenges. In addition, the program offers mentorship, college and career exposure, and opportunities for youth to present their work and lead workshops in schools and community settings. Family engagement and support services are designed to further strengthen student success. The program also exposes younger children and youth to technology through partnering with other community programs such as the Richmond Freedom School. This comprehensive approach aims to prepare participants for pursuing higher education, careers in technology, and leadership roles within their communities. For more information, visit the Hidden Genius Project website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 1 Rich City Codes Workshop in Gaming and Robotics
z 15-Month Immersion Program
z 6-Week Summer Workshop Series
604
26 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles The Practice Space—Speech
and Debate Mentorship and
Leadership Program
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
954 unique individuals served (proposed: 500 per year)
546 hours of service delivery
The Practice Space Speech and Debate Mentorship and Leadership Program provides year-round communication and literacy programming for Richmond youth in grades K–12. The program focuses on developing public speaking, advocacy, and social–emotional skills through mentorship, leadership opportunities, and community engagement.
A core component of the program is after-school and summer programming in which students participate in regular speech, debate, and storytelling sessions to build confidence, critical thinking, and communication skills. Youth also engage in scrimmages, showcases, and tournaments that provide opportunities to practice public speaking in supportive, community-based settings. In addition, the program offers workforce development through paid coaching roles for high school students and young adults, along with mentorship and professional skill-building.
Family workshops and community storytelling events further expand access to opportunities for developing public speaking skills across generations. Through this comprehensive approach, the program aims to amplify youth voice, strengthen communication skills, and foster leadership development. For more information, visit the Practice Space website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 15 Young Actors Club Sessions
z In-School Public Speaking Programs
z Community Events
z 7 Public Speaking Workshops for Families and Caregivers z 109 Youth Coach Training and Professional Development Sessions 605
27 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Richmond Promise and
Contra Costa College—Contra
Costa College First Year
Experience Program
Annual Award Amount: $218,475
120 unique individuals served (proposed: 75 per year)
127 hours of service delivery
Richmond Promise, in partnership with Contra Costa College, provides academic support, mentorship, and college readiness services to first-year community college students from Richmond. The program focuses on supporting first-generation college students, students of color, and Pell Grant–eligible students to succeed in their first years of college and persist toward degree completion. A core component of the program is structured academic and career support, including workshops on financial aid, education planning, and internship preparation, as well as tutoring and study sessions to strengthen academic skills and help students stay on track. In addition, the program is designed to foster community and belonging through peer mentorship, cohort-based activities, and events such as Summer Bridge and college visits to help students navigate campus resources and explore transfer opportunities. Through this comprehensive approach, the program aims to strengthen student retention, increase academic success, and improve long-term college and career pathways. For more information, visit the Richmond Promise website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 8 Academic Study Jams
z 1 Field Trip
z 12 Workshops (e.g., financial literacy, internships and resumes, financial aid) z 5 Social Events
z 2 Campus Visits
z Summer Bridge Session
606
28 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Richmond Public Library
and Bay Area Tutoring
Association—Homework Help
and Tutoring Program
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
85 unique individuals served (proposed: 1,013 over 3 years) 580 hours of service delivery
Richmond Public Library provides free academic support to children and youth through its Homework Help Program, offering drop-in tutoring services at six library and community center locations across Richmond daily from 3 to 5 p.m. Designed to address learning loss and support literacy development, the program serves students in grades K–8. A core component of the program is personalized academic support, with trained tutors providing one-on-one and small-group assistance with homework, as well as support in subjects such as math and reading.
Students without assigned homework are offered additional educational activities to continue building their skills. In addition, the program fosters accessibility by offering consistent after-school hours and maintaining a welcoming, supportive learning environment. Tutors are trained and supported through a partnership with the Bay Area Tutoring Association. Through this approach, the program aims to strengthen academic achievement, support literacy development, and help students build confidence in their learning. For more information, visit the Richmond Public Library website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 317 Homework Help and Tutoring Sessions
607
29 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles RYSE—Leadership
Pathways Program
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
213 unique individuals served (proposed: 400 over 3 years) 1,306 hours of service delivery
RYSE’s Leadership Pathways Program provides year-round, youth-centered programming for Richmond youth ages 13–24. The program focuses on education, career readiness, and leadership development by offering free and stipend-based opportunities designed to support academic success, skill-building, and personal growth for youth navigating systemic barriers. Youth participate in multiple cohort-based groups that meet regularly and focus on areas such as arts and media, health, social justice, and life skills development. A core component of the program is comprehensive academic and career support, including tutoring, college guidance, internships, and individualized case management. In addition, the program creates opportunities for leadership and community engagement through youth-led events, field trips, and immersive experiences such as college tours and leadership institutes. These activities aim to help participants build confidence, strengthen peer connections, and explore future pathways. Through this integrated approach, the program is designed to equip youth with the skills, support, and opportunities needed to achieve educational and career success. For more information, visit the RYSE website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 10 Career and Skills-Building Cohorts
z Case Management
z 1 College Field Trip
z Weeklong RYSE Youth Leadership Institute
z 1 Life Skills Workshop
z 136 Zymbolic College and Career Supports and Tutoring Sessions 608
30 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Things That Creep—
Neighborhood Snakes and
Neighborhood Reptiles Program
Annual Award Amount: $100,000
1,415 unique individuals served (proposed: 1,600 over 3 years) 210 hours of service delivery
The Things That Creep Neighborhood Snakes program provides hands-on science education to West Contra Costa Unified School District students in grades TK–5, reaching more than 1,400 youth. The program supports science learning by introducing students to local ecosystems and wildlife through engaging, standards-aligned curriculum and interactive classroom experiences. A core component of the program is a combination of classroom instruction and live presentations. Students participate in lessons supported by multimedia materials, including worksheets, videos, and activities, followed by in-person visits during which educators present live animal ambassadors and guide interactive discussions about local snake species and habitats. These experiences aim to help students build knowledge of ecology, develop scientific inquiry skills, and increase comfort and safety around local wildlife. The curriculum aligns with Next Generation Science Standards and Common Core, reinforcing classroom learning. Through this approach, the program is designed to enhance science engagement, promote environmental awareness, and foster a deeper understanding of local ecosystems. For more information, visit the Things That Creep website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 16 In-Class Live Animal Presentations
609
31 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles The Watershed Project—
Educational Programs
Annual Award Amount: $125,000
695 unique individuals served (proposed: 600 per year)
77 hours of service delivery
The Watershed Project partners with multiple schools in West Contra Costa Unified School District to provide hands-on environmental education for Richmond K–12 students. The program promotes environmental awareness, outdoor learning, and stewardship by helping students understand local ecosystems and their role in protecting natural resources. A core component of the program is experiential learning through classroom lessons and guided field trips led by trained naturalists. Students engage in activities such as exploring local creeks and shorelines, identifying plants and wildlife, testing water quality, and participating in nature journaling and inquiry-based projects. These experiences are designed to build scientific knowledge while encouraging curiosity and outdoor exploration. In addition, the program connects environmental science concepts to real-world issues, including watershed health, biodiversity, and climate change. It also aims to develop students’ problem-solving skills and engage them in activities that can promote environmental responsibility and community action. Through this approach, the program is designed to strengthen science learning, foster environmental stewardship, and deepen students’ connection to the natural world. For more information, visit the Watershed Project website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 9 Field Trips
z 37 In-Class Lessons
610
32 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles West Contra Costa Public
Education Fund—Richmond
Freedom School
Annual Award Amount: $200,000
117 unique individuals served (proposed: 150 per year)
196 hours of service delivery
Richmond Freedom School is a free, 6-week summer literacy program serving students in grades TK–8 in West Contra Costa Unified School District, with a focus on supporting African American youth and students from low-income households. The program aims to combat summer learning loss, improve reading achievement, and strengthen positive youth development. A core component of the program is academic enrichment through a research-based, multicultural Integrated Reading Curriculum that promotes literacy while incorporating themes of civic engagement, social action, and leadership. Students participate in structured classroom instruction designed to build reading skills and critical thinking. In addition, the program offers daily enrichment activities, including arts, STEM, music, gardening, and mindfulness-based programming, delivered by local community partners. Family engagement and leadership development are also emphasized to strengthen connections between students, families, and the broader community. Through this comprehensive approach, the program is designed to support academic growth, foster leadership skills, and promote a strong sense of identity and community among participants. For more information, visit the Richmond Freedom School webpage.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 30 days of Enrichment at Richmond Freedom School
611
Safety,
Community, and
Belonging
612
34 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Big Brothers Big Sisters
of the Bay Area—
Mentorship Program
Annual Award Amount: $60,000
21 unique individuals served (proposed: 20 per year)
332 hours of service delivery
Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bay Area (BBBSBA) provides evidence-based, one-on-one mentorship for Richmond youth ages 8–21, focused on promoting social–emotional well-being, academic success, and positive youth development. Through consistent mentoring relationships, the program aims to help youth build confidence, strengthen relationships, and reduce engagement in high-risk behaviors. A core component of the program is individualized mentorship whereby youth meet regularly with trained adult mentors for community-based activities to support relationship-building and personal growth. These experiences expose youth to new opportunities and are designed to help foster a strong sense of belonging. In addition, BBBSBA provides ongoing case management and match support, including regular check-ins with youth, caregivers, and mentors to ensure safety, track progress toward goals, and connect families to resources. Group activities and community events aim to further enhance engagement and connection. Through this comprehensive approach, the program is designed to support youth in developing the skills, relationships, and confidence needed for long-term success. For more information, visit the Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bay Area website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 11 Community-Based Mentorship Matches
z Case Management
z 13 Mentor Support Activities Sessions
613
35 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles East Bay Center for the
Performing Arts and
Contra Costa Family
Justice Center—The Young
Artist Diploma Program
Annual Award Amount: $300,000
50 unique individuals served (proposed: 120 over 3 years) 4,100 hours of service delivery
The Young Artist Diploma Program (YADP) provides free, comprehensive performing arts and college readiness programming for Richmond youth in grades 7–12. The program supports students from Central and South Richmond through intensive arts training, academic support, and wraparound services designed to promote personal growth and long-term success. A core component of the program is high-quality performing arts education, including classes, rehearsals, and private lessons in disciplines such as music, dance, and theater. Students begin with a summer intensive to explore multiple art forms before selecting a focused pathway for continued study. In addition, YADP offers academic support and college-readiness services, including homework help, assistance with applications and auditions, and guidance on postsecondary pathways. Wraparound supports, including case management and connections to health and social services, aim to ensure that students’ holistic needs are met.
Through this integrated approach, the program is designed to foster artistic development, academic achievement, and leadership while promoting safe and supportive environments for youth. For more information, visit the East Bay Center for the Performing Arts website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 4,976 Sessions of Arts Education: Classes and Lessons z 12 Student Leadership Council Sessions
z 144 Academic Support Sessions (e.g., tutoring,
college preparation)
z 48 Wraparound Support and Navigation Services Sessions 614
36 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Fresh Lifelines for Youth, Inc.—
Law Education and Mentoring
Program
Annual Award Amount: $101,790
95 unique individuals served (proposed: 40 per year)
84 hours of service delivery
Fresh Lifelines for Youth (FLY) provides high school and transition-aged youth in Richmond with education, mentorship, and skill-building focused on promoting positive decision-making and reducing justice system involvement.
The program aims to equip youth with knowledge of their legal rights and responsibilities while strengthening life skills that support long-term success. A core component of the program is interactive workshops delivered in schools and community settings for participants to build social–emotional skills, learn conflict resolution and communication strategies, and develop a deeper understanding of the justice system. Programming is tailored to both high school students and young adults with content that supports leadership, self-advocacy, and navigating real-world challenges. In addition, the program fosters supportive relationships through mentorship and consistent engagement with trained staff and facilitators. Through this approach, the program is designed to empower youth with knowledge, skills, and support for making informed choices, reducing system involvement, and contributing positively to their communities. For more information, visit the FLY Law-Related Education website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 47 Law-Related Education and Life Skills Workshops
615
37 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Nurturing Independence
Through Artistic Development
(NIAD Art Center)—Young Artist
Leaders Program
Annual Award Amount: $58,556
4 unique individuals served (proposed: 2 per year)
22 hours of service delivery
The NIAD Art Center’s Young Artist Leaders Program provides artistic and leadership development for young adults ages 18–24 with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The program aims to support participants in building creative skills, confidence, and pathways to meaningful opportunities in the arts. A core component of the program is studio-based arts learning, including workshops, collaborative projects, and exhibitions for developing technical skills and fostering self-expression. Young Artist Leaders also participate in community-based activities, including leading workshops and hosting tours to build communication and leadership skills. The program includes ongoing mentorship and an advisory group in which participants contribute to program planning and provide feedback to shape services. Outreach activities, such as resource fairs and community events, connect participants and families to additional opportunities and supports. Through this approach, the program is designed to promote artistic development, leadership, and greater inclusion for young adults with disabilities. For more information, visit the NIAD website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 3 Community Events (fairs, family day, public workshop) z Activites Led by 4 Young Artist Leaders
z 5 YAL-NIAD Advisory Group Sessions
616
38 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Richmond High School and East
Bay Center for the Performing
Arts—Richmond High School
Music Department
Annual Award Amount: $300,000
101 unique individuals served (proposed: 105 per year)
329 hours of service delivery
The Richmond High School Music Department provides music education and youth development opportunities to students. Through classroom instruction, after-school programs, and performances, the program aims to foster artistic growth, leadership, and a strong sense of belonging among participants. A core component of the program is instrumental and ensemble instruction whereby students develop technical skills, collaborate as a group, and build musicianship through regular practice and performance. Student leadership plays an important role, with experienced members supporting and mentoring younger participants. In addition, the program offers performance opportunities at community events, including parades, festivals, competitions, and the annual Performance Day in partnership with the East Bay Center for the Performing Arts. These experiences are designed to help students build confidence, represent their community, and strengthen connections across schools. Through this comprehensive approach, the program aims to expand access to high-quality music education and support students’ personal and artistic development. For more information, visit the Richmond High School website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 4 Band Reviews
z Community Events
z 150 In-School Classes
z 20 After-School Marching Band Rehearsals
617
39 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Summer Search—
Mentoring Program
Annual Award Amount: $173,000
12 unique individuals served (proposed: 26 per year)
953 hours of service delivery
Summer Search provides year-round mentoring and support services to DeAnza and Leadership Public Schools high school students (grades 9–12), with a focus on first-generation students of color. The program’s services aim to support students to build social–emotional skills, strengthen identity, and prepare for postsecondary success.
A core component of the program is individualized mentorship whereby each student is paired with a dedicated mentor and participates in regular one-on-one check-ins and group sessions held at partner schools. These sessions are designed to provide safe spaces for reflection, goal setting, and skill development in areas such as resilience, self-awareness, and navigating academic and personal challenges. In addition, the program offers activities that aim to build community and readiness, including orientation events, pre-summer trip preparation, and experiential outdoor learning opportunities to promote confidence and teamwork. Through this comprehensive approach, the program is designed to support students in developing a strong sense of belonging, building critical life skills, and successfully navigating high school and future pathways. For more information, visit the Summer Search website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 31 Group Mentoring Sessions
z 42 Individual Mentoring Sessions
z 5 Field Trips
618
40 Richmond Fund for Children and Youth 2025 Grantee Program Profiles Touch of New Life—
Youth Public Safety Academy
Annual Award Amount: $66,000
82 unique individuals served (proposed: 30 per year)
213 hours of service delivery
Touch of New Life provides workforce development and career readiness programming for Richmond youth, connecting participants to opportunities in public safety and other career pathways. Through life skills training, mentorship, and hands-on learning experiences, the program aims to prepare youth for higher education and future employment. A core component of the program is the Youth Public Safety Academy in which participants from Richmond High School engage in structured training that includes physical fitness, classroom instruction, and scenario-based learning led by local public safety professionals. Youth gain exposure to careers in law enforcement, fire services, and related fields while building discipline, teamwork, and communication skills. In addition, the program offers workshops focused on resume building, interview preparation, and career exploration, along with opportunities to earn certifications. Community service activities further support leadership development and civic engagement. Touch of New Life’s comprehensive approach is designed to equip youth with practical skills, career awareness, and confidence to pursue meaningful educational and professional pathways. For more information, visit the Touch of New Life website.
Reported Activities in 2025
z 8 Community Events (e.g., Turkey Giveaway, Christmas at the Park, Toy Giveaway) z 16 Summer Youth Public Safety Academy Sessions
z 38 Youth Public Safety Training Sessions
619