Candice Gobble, Director of Social Services, explained the statute required social services to react to reports of abuse, neglect, or exploitation of elderly, disabled, or incompetent adults. She said this contract stemmed from those situations. She reported that in-home aide was used when no one else could provide those protective services. Ms.Gobble mentioned that the in-home aide was utilized as a last resort, and they had to have a contract in place.
Commissioner Priola asked whether that contract was a renewal. Ms.Gobble said it was an addendum to an established contract that was in place at the beginning of the fiscal year. She continued with the six individuals that her agency already has they have met and exceeded that amount or will potentially exceed that amount. Ms.Gobble explained that her request was over the allotted amount she could sign off on. Commissioner Priola asked for the increased payment amount. Ms.Gobble said it was $200,000, just in case they had to use that amount; it may not be necessary.
Chairman Paisley confirmed with County Attorney Stevens that this was required by law and the county did not have a choice. County Attorney Stevens confirmed the county did not have a choice and clarified this was a not-to-exceed contract. He said that just because the contract was for $200,000, it did not mean the county would spend $200,000. He noted that was the cap space amount.
Ms.Gobble explained that they expected to receive some return dollars for the payments paid out for three of the six individuals they had placed into in-home aide care.
Commissioner Thompson invited Ms. Gobble to present information at one of the Senior Services Committee meetings.
Commissioner Allen commented that it was a mandate and they had to look after the elderly.