The merger shouldn't have anything to do with Dr. Kim's clinic. I must say, though, he is truly a remarkable man and one of the most genuinely compassionate and caring humans I have ever met. He never stops trying to help others.

Dr. Kim performs a great and valuable community service.

In my experience there is frequently some type of reason given when a grant is denied. Perhaps that would give some insight.

Also, those citizen reviews were divided, who was on the group that reviewed this grant. If they didn't give a reason, let's ask them for one.

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

In my experience there is frequently some type of reason given when a grant is denied. Perhaps that would give some insight.

I was wondering the same thing. The WBIR report doesn't have much detail on it.

Does anyone know when the list of those groups that were approved, and those that weren't, will be available to the public?

It is much easier to get a "brick and mortar" grant than a salary grant.

I just spent some valuable time trying to find something about this on the county's website. Nothing. Just the schedule of when the committee's were meeting and what the original requests were. Nothing that gave who sits on the committee or that decisions had been made. It's clearly too late today to get any info, but I'm going to make a note to see what I can find out Monday or Tuesday. I'm very busy w/ a project that's growing like topsy, so it may be later rather than sooner if someone else has more time.

I will note that the request from Dr. Kim was $20,000, which isn't much for a nurse. Was the position fulltime? Was it a CNA or an RN or what?

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

While I felt the process used to determine who got the grants needed some refinements,(a numerical value for each application's criteria fulfillment and another numerical value for the interview process) I felt, as a whole, the citizens themselves tried their best to follow the directions given them and to divide the monies in a way that made the most sense. There was only so much money to be given, and there was much discussion about whether or not partial funding would be in the best interest of the organizations applying. Obviously, a project requiring $80,000 would not be able to fulfill their project goal if only $3,000 was given to them, no matter how worthy.

I am still working on the request to provide feedback about the process to the County, but one thing that seemed obvious to me was the lack of minority representation. On our review board, there was only one African American, and she dropped out early. I believe almost every person on our board was a professional person. Granted the comprehension of the grant information and the criteria would be challenging for some people, but I believe a better recruitment process could have increased more racial and economic diversity.

I also felt there should be more direction from the review board directors. A definition of what kinds of things for instance the county/city thought were most needed and should given the highest priority would have been beneficial. I felt at least some rubrics designed to rate the interviews better was also needed.

This was a very difficult job given the short amount of time the board got to discuss process before having to allocate the monies. It was also the first time the citizens review boards met, so there was little historical information to go on.

In spite of the fact that being a volunteer on the review board had already consumed a considerable amount of my time and energy, I would have appreciated a follow-up meeting to discuss our feelings in person about the whole process.

Granted it wasn't perfect, but I do feel the board members I was involved with did sincerely try to give the money to the organizations who best fit the criteria. I should say the review board was pretty much in agreement about which organizations got the highest numerical scores.

I am a little wary of speaking for other people involved in this process, and I'm still working on my feedback response to the review board directors, but I think all citizens should feel free to ask questions and to give their own feedback. Just be aware that the review board process is still being developed and refined and that things can get very complicated when you're actually involved in deciding who gets the grant monies.

It was disturbing to hear that someone posting here felt the interview process was hostile to them. Most people appearing before us were well prepared to answer any and all questions about their organization.

Erik Hoglund and Judy Parker from community development were the people in charge of the whole review board process. They would be the best people to contact if you have any questions.

A definition of what kinds of things for instance the county/city thought were most needed and should given the highest priority would have been beneficial.

Carole,

Did you have any criteria on which to judge whether the groups had effectively met any of their own objectives or goals? It sounds like you all had to make a lot of hard decisions based on mostly anecdotal evidence. That's not necessarily always a bad thing, but one would hope that those types of decisions are also made based on some type of statistical data.

It sounds like you all did what you could with what you had.

It was disturbing to hear that someone posting here felt the interview process was hostile to them.

Missed that. Who said the interview process was hostile?

of why we're allocating public money to non-profits to start with. And if we decide to do it, why not write a check to United Way? They've already got evaluation tools in place and a history. -- s.

Dr. Kim could work like any other doctor and 'volunteer' his time at Interfaith Health Clinic but he wants to be a maverick on his own and the citizens have realized this. That is why he wasn't funded. Can't blame this one on Ragsdale...a panel of volunteer citizens made this decision. He doesn't want to comply with reporting requirements so being 'free' is his way around it. If he's free, then why does he want TAXPAYER $? Other doctors who want to be "free" work together at the IF Health Clinic.

Taxes going to Dr. Kim seems much more appropriate than taxes going the the Red Cross...after all, Dr. Kim practices medicine to treat people truly in need...the Red Cross hands out coffee and doughnuts and pleads for more and more $$$$........

Just got off the phone w/ Ms. Parker. She was very polite and readily answered all my questions.

First, the grant approval/denial forms are being reviewed to make sure no calculation mistakes were made during the meetings. The final recommendations will be posted on knoxcounty.org this week. She emphasized that these are recommendations only and must be approved by the full commission as part of the budget process. She said only three commissioners had made any comments. Mike Hammond had written a letter saying his vote would be to support the recommendations as is. R. Larry Smith attending the hearings but made no comments. Lumpy Lambert attended to lobby on behalf of some applications. She didn't know what they were off-hand.

In addition, she said she would send me a list of all the committee members. She thought it was on the website, but I couldn't find it. She emphasized that anyone who wanted to be on a committee was accepted. She said that some people had to drop off the committee b/c they could not attend the meetings for one reason or another. She suggested that if any one was dissatisfied w/ the make-up of the review panels that they should make sure that next year there are people who volunteer for the committees.

The panel member list has already arrived in my mailbox. I need to do some paying work now, but I'll figure out how to post the membership or whatever I'm going to do with it, later today.

Thanks,
Pam

Mike Hammond -- recommendation would vote

Lambert -- lobbyiest

R. Larry Smith -- observed

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

as provided by Judy Parker of County Community Development....

Health Panel: Timothy Dale, Edward Eckenrod, Kashi Farmer, Beverly Hammond and Cynthia Mancebo

Social Services: Chip Barry, Evelyn Blau, Carole Borges, Melody Carnes, Betsey Creekmore, Dona McEvers, Rick Ross, Daniel Smith, John Stancil and Traci Tassey

Seniors & Veterans: LaVance Davis, Robert Faulkner, Sherrie Raymond, William Schall and Eula Tassey

Tourism & Cultural: Martha Arnold-Charnay, Brian Brooks, Mark Hancock, Antonio Hinton, Charles McKeown, Kay Newton, Eric Ogle and Carl Wheeler

Youth: Jim Byrge, Michael Combs, Robert Davis, Duane Gregg, George Johnson, Carroll Logan, Carol Norris

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

I haven't read all of the postings... but am I to believe that his office is closed?

Not that I am aware of. Is there some news I missed?