SUMMARY MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
Indian River County Hospital District Conference Room/ Zoom
February 3, 2025
9:00 AM
TRUSTEES: Chuck Mackett William Cooney Michael Kint Paul Westcott
Allen Jones (via Zoom) Kerry Bartlett
ABSENT: Karen Deigl
STAFF: Dawn Carboni Jennifer Frederick
Kate Voss Frank Isele
Jennifer Peshke, Esq. Kaytlin Dickens
ZOOM: Anne Posey Kim Jeansonne
Lisa Zahner
Convene Meeting
Dr. Cooney convened the special meeting of the IRCHD Board of Trustees at 9:00 AM by welcoming those participating via Zoom and in person. He also welcomed Mr. Jones and Dr. Mackett as new board members.
He began by discussing the Districts intent to create special liaison roles for Trustees. Mr. Isele explained that Trustee would be assigned to oversee a particular matter which would help further assist the Districts mission and vision. Those roles for each Trustee included Dr. Mackett serving as a representative for the VCOM partnership; Mr. Westcott serving as a legislation-government affairs liaison; Ms. Bartlett serving as strategic planning, governance, and succession planning liaison; Mr. Kint serving as a representative for the taxpayer’s association and financial matters liaison; Mr. Jones serving as the appointed Trustee for the Partners program; and Ms. Diegl as the Cleveland Clinic, mental health court, outpatient mental health, county government liaison.
There was also discussion surrounding the District ability to provide financial sponsorship at community events and Ms. Peshke recommended that the District not engage in this practice. However, she clarified that Trustees as individuals may support community organizations separate from their role as District Trustees. There was also mention of potential conflicts a Trustee may have while serving on other community organization boards and Ms. Peshke stated that the Trustee are required to complete the District’s conflict of interest forms disclosing the conflict, at the beginning of each year. They must also recuse themselves from voting on matters where a potential conflict may arise.
FY 2025/2026 Goals and Objectives, Performance Measures and Standards for Special Districts
Mr. Isele led a discussion surrounding the Districts new application process for funding requests, emphasizing alignment with the District’s goals and objectives. He reviewed information from the Florida Commerce Special District Handbook which outlined these requirements and explained that this transition is related to 2024 legislation requiring Special Districts to establish goal, objectives and performance measures. He further discussed the District’s annual reporting process which is published to the website and must reflect which performance measures were achieved that year. Additionally, funded agencies will now be required to demonstrate how their programs align with the district’s goals and provide quantitative measures of impact.
Review of Letter of Intent, 25-26 Funding Application & Application for Funding Timeline
Ms. Frederick discussed the fiscal year 2025-2026 funding cycle and began by providing a review of the new letter of intent process. She explained that new agencies wishing to apply for funding must complete a letter of intent, which will ensure they meet specific criteria before being approved to complete a funding application on eC Impact. The Trustee reviewed the letter of intent document and recommended a few minor changes which would bring further clarification to the information being requested. There was also a discussion surrounding how each letter of intent would be reviewed and Ms. Frederick stated that District staff would complete the initial reviews and bring forth recommendations to the Trustees for new agencies they felt aligned with the Districts priorities. Next, there was Trustee review and discussion surrounding the FY 25-26 funding application which has been updated and requires agencies to demonstrate how their programs align with the district’s goals and provide quantitative measures of impact. Ms. Frederick also reviewed the proposed application for funding timeline which outlined dates of importance and deadlines for the completion of the letter of intent and funding application. She also has two meetings scheduled next week for the funded agencies to review this updated application process and answer any questions. Mr. Westcott requested that there be consideration into the adjustment of the funded agencies’ semi-annual reporting process, which has become lengthy and may not always provide pertinent information. Mr. Isele stated that staff is working to create a one-page summary report which the funded agencies will complete that includes specific and relevant information with regard to funding and outcome measures, that align with the Districts goals and objectives. Ms. Bartlett requested this document be vetted by Trustees before making any changes to the process.
Review Common Funding Request Policy Discussion
Next, there was discussion surrounding the potential need to develop a funding request policy to provide structure and consistency to the District process approving funding requests, specifically items that are not always directly related to patient care. It was discussed that as the District works to transition most funded agencies to a fee for service model, this policy may not be needed. It was further discussed that an all-inclusive rate should be developed for each funded agency, assuring that agencies would be responsible for controlling their costs. Ms. Carboni spoke to the transition and stated that some agencies voiced their concern as to how this would affect their monthly reimbursement if patient volumes were lower some months. It was decided that additional internal discussions should take place internally regarding this policy.
Evaluating Agency Funding
Mr. Isele provided the Trustees with a spreadsheet which outlined the current funded agencies’ District funding, as a percentage of their total budget. The purpose of this document is to bring awareness to these figures and to make sure these agencies are held accountable if the District is providing substantial funding. It was discussed that anything over 30% would be considered significant and may need to be investigated further. Next, there was discussion on the process of reviewing the funding applications and Ms. Bartlett suggested that the Trustees hold an additional special call meeting in March to discuss a scoring rubric and evaluation standards, so that they are aligned moving forward in this process. The Trustees agreed and Ms. Voss indicated she would circle available dates for the second week in March.
Public Comment & Adjourn
Dr. Cooney asked for public comment and there was none. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 AM.
