All right, good morning and welcome to our October 15th Health and Human Services Committee meeting. While we have just two topics, they're both pretty robust and I think we'll take quite a bit of conversation. The first one you will recall we did have a presentation on this probably a year ago for start of the conversation in 2021 and that's the economic mobility pilot. This is just an update that pilot is still ongoing but we are very fortunate to have our retiring Chief Equity Officer Carla Bruce with us because this has been ongoing for quite a while and she has worked with Michael Beckett's Director of Department Family Services and Lloyd Tucker as Director of Neighborhood and Community Services on this project. conversation, we will have the park authority here for 2024 FCPA equity outreach executive summary. So both pretty relevant topics and different parts of the county, different agencies as we work on our one-of-fair facts and equity work on the ground and really follow the impact and the data that we are collecting as we do this. So before we get started, just want to make sure and see if our deputy can executive Chris Lemmer wants to say any words and then I'll turn it over to Carla Bruce. Sure, thanks. Thanks, Chairman Powell-Chic. And thank you for your time today, as Sir Roger Powell-Chic just mentioned. This will be updates. We have been updating you both in person and via memo over the last couple of years on both initiatives. We felt like both initiatives are in a place where we could stop and provide a full-throated update to you and be good time to ask any questions while we're still in the process of both initiatives moving along. So excited for the discussion today. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Powell-Tech. Members of the Board of Supervisors, I'm glad to be back. Today in the context of sharing an update as Chris said on our guaranteed income pilot, the pilot itself launched in October of 2023, but as the chairman and Chris referred, this has been something that we have been planning and designing since 2021. And it was, if you recall, initiated as a part of our efforts to respond to the COVID-19 crisis and its impact on our community. It's been jointly led by me or in the one Fairfax Central team, but I'm also joined today by Michael Beckett from the Department of Family Services, Director of the Department of Family Services, and Lloyd Tucker Director of the Department of Neighborhood and Community Services, because there's elements of this pilot that relate to both parts of their of the work that they do. And it was really centrally important in terms of the work of advancing one fair facts because it really got at this notion of inclusive prosperity. So what we're going to do today is talk to you a little bit about where we are now. Again, this is an update and expect to be able to come back to you sometime next year with more information about the outcome of the pilot. So let's just talk a little bit about the guaranteed income approach. Our pilot is based on really a movement around guaranteed income that is not unique to Fairfax County. There have been jurisdictions across the country that have piloted this approach. What we did in Fairfax County, though, was launched in October of 2023, and it was funded through the county's allocation from ARPA, as well as through the Human Services Council's Innovation Fund. And as you know, the Human Services Council Innovation Fund was put in place to really spur innovations in human services. And this is a very unique approach. It's not something that we have tried before in Fairfax County and the use of the ARPA dollars in particular gave us some opportunity to be flexible in ways that we may not have been able to be utilizing general fund dollars. And because again it happened during the period of the pandemic, our response to the pandemic really allowed us to hone in on a population that we did not see being adequately supported and served, and that we were really, it was emerging in terms of them as a population in need in the county. So part of the reason why it was so important to me and my team to play a role in this is we don't see this as a traditional sort of human services offering, right? We see this as a way to really challenge how we deliver human services and how we understand who is in need of support in our community. So it's really challenging the status quo of our existing human services system and encouraging us and it was so important to have Lloyd and Michael B. partners in this because it allowed us to together look at how the systems were working but also look at some of the limitations in terms of how the system is designed to support the needs of our community. It's also very much aligned with some of the strategies in our strategic plan. And so in terms of our population that we're focusing on, United Way refers to a population called Alice, and that is asset-limited income constrained and employed. And the most recent data from the United Way indicates that there's 23% of Fairfax County households fall within that population. They earn more than the federal poverty level and therefore often don't qualify for benefits, but they don't make enough to cover their daily living expenses and the cost of living, that is the cost of living plus save for emergencies or even think about a future for themselves and their families. So on this slide, you can see that the budget identified for that Alice population and my ageing eyes are failing me right now. That's what retirement will do to you. Retiring. But I digress. Is shortly a sort of $9,000 a month. And I think what's so important about this is that it really represents all of the things that people need to be able to cover in order to meet their monthly costs. If you see the cost of childcare, housing, transportation, food, and again, this is a population that is employed and in a later slide we'll dig a little bit deeper into that population. So the folks in this population are really just one paycheck away from complete financial hardship. So I think that for a place like Fairfax County, we often talk about the percentage of people that live under the poverty line. And sometimes we even talk about percentages, like 100%, 200%, but when you think of them with this sort of representation, asset limited income constraint in employed, it really starts to put a face on who these folks are. And when you think about the percentage of people living in this status, it really helps you to understand the significant numbers of people that reside in our county. And so, in focusing on this population, we use an evidence-based guaranteed income intervention. And so one of the things that was important is that our pilot had an extensive design process. So we mentioned that the last time we spoke to you about the pilot, it was 2021. We worked very closely with a design team to better understand the sort of population and need and sort of how to structure this pilot. But we also have worked with on a research process to really understand sort of what's going on and how to best structure and what we can learn from this pilot. So the partners that we engage, the community members that participated in the development of how we went about doing it really, I think, gave us insight that allowed us to sort of take sort of what the sort of standard has been that we've seen across the country and really tailor it to the context of Fairfax County. So aligned to the principles of power and autonomy, again, believing that people are in a position to know what's best for their lives, the pilot provided 180 randomly selected participants with a monthly cash payment of $750 for 18 months. Again, the dollars were unrestricted and they're able to use those dollars as they see necessary to support their family's goals and to meet their day-to-day needs. In addition, our pilot also provides access to wraparound supports and resources. So the eligibility for the pilot were of course Fairfax County residents, given the amount of money that was allocated, we had about $2.1 million allocated to go into people's pockets. So we had to be very clear about the who in this population. So we decided to build upon the structure already in place around opportunity neighborhoods. So we chose families that lived within an opportunity neighborhood footprint that had at least one child under the age of 16 living within their household that they would be people who are employed and again earn between 150 and 250 percent of the federal property level. Our engagement was extensive. We worked with NCS or through NCS and their network of computer-based nonprofit partners in order to reach the population. We utilized data to go beyond and as you all know, knowing zip codes is one thing, but even within zip codes there can be extreme differences in how people are doing. So from a recruitment perspective, we did very targeted recruitment using census track level data. There were 2400 applications, 1800 were actually successful, right? So those were ones that had completed all the steps and met all of the qualifications. And then out of that 1800, 180 people were chosen. It was the Department of Family Services, given their role in the county that administered that part of the process. But again I think the point here is there was much more demand for for this program than we had slots for. I will say that for the people who weren't selected that we were able to provide information about what is available to them in the community. And so it was interesting that we were prepared for there to be a lot of sort of anxiety and pushback about not getting into the program, but I think going the extra step of providing information about resources that were available and being very clear about the limited number of slots that were available helped in terms of mitigating that challenge. So a bit more about the 180 pilot participants. Mostly women, so 58% of them are women. 40% of the population served are Hispanic Latino. 25% are black. And just to mention, I mean, they're definitely other, these might not add up to 100% because there's other populations represented here. About 38% between the ages of 30 and 39, 34% between 40 and 49. So again, working age people likely to have families. And then 7% identified as having a disability. In terms of their preferred languages, 73% spoke English and it was interesting. We put a lot of effort into making sure that we were responsive to the diverse language needs of the county, but in terms of how people presented, how people said they would be communicated to. There was a preference toward English with also 22% requesting communications in Spanish, but we did have the capacity through our language access services to meet other language needs. Households sizes are interesting. We had small households in very large households. So this one that says 5 plus that really represents, you know, 5, six people household. And again, when you think about the income qualifications in order to be able to participate in the program, you can start to see how just knowing a person's income really does not paint the picture in terms of their needs. And then in terms of educational attainment, a fairly educated group, right? So high school graduation rates, a lot of them have college, some have college degrees. So, right, these are people who are working in our community who are vital to our economy, who are the people that we rely on. Some of the folks that participated in this program are teachers, some of the folks that participated in this program, we did You know, some of the prox that participated in this program, you know, we did not sort of know what their jobs were, but as we've done the research, we've gotten to know that these are people that are in jobs that we consider to be vital to our community. And then again, this, the map really just represents where the percentages of the people came from. And so I will note that what's listed here are the names of the opportunity neighborhoods and not the actual districts. But you can see that there were the highest representation in the pilot is from Mount Vernon, but that really represents Mount Vernon and Franconia districts. And so as I mentioned, we initiated the pilot with the understanding that there would be a thorough, comprehensive research component. And we were working, we worked with, or are working with George Mason University's Center for Social Science Research in the pilot. What I will say about our research is the goal here was not to say whether or not guaranteed income works. So if you've been following the guaranteed income literature, we know that guaranteed income works. What we wanted to know is how does it fit within the array of supports in Fairfax County and how might we design it? How does our design work? And so the researchers through the Center for Social Science research are really important to note who they are because these are the same researchers that worked with us in the design and development of our opportunity neighborhood structure and a lot of our neighborhood structure. So these are folks that understand the county and understand the communities and who are our long time partners. And this is just they're working with us again on another facet of our attempt to design a system of supports tailored to the unique characteristics of our community. In terms of their research approach, again, this community input is important, and so they have convened a community research advisory council that they're working closely with and who helped in their research design and who they are also consulting with throughout the process. So the three areas that we are focusing on in terms of the research are family mobility trajectory, growth in social capital and role in the community, and changes in policy and approach. And so I think that one's important. So yes, we want to know how this is working for the people that we're serving. But our researchers are also looking at what does this mean for us as an organization to our systems. And so I'm particularly looking forward to that component because I think that the significance of this pilot is yes yes we have been able to help 180 people but the lessons learned are going to be so much more valuable to our broader system. And just to give you a little more depth on the research questions that we're asking so our first research question is, what impact does direct monthly cash payments during the pilot have on a family's mobility trajectory? And you can see here the types of indicators that we're looking at. So we're looking at economic security. We're looking at people's day-to-day vulnerability, entrepreneurial investments, credentialing. So we're seeing basically, this is where we're getting a sense of how people are utilizing the resources. Question two is really important because what we find is that people are successful, one, based on sort of their economic status, but too, also on their connectivity to the community. So the second one is really focused on how are they connecting in the community, as well as their ability to contribute to the community. So community involvement, but social networks exist, their trust of the community, and how people are really, you know, just agents of our system in the community and how they share and support their neighbors is a huge part of how people are able to climb the economic ladder. And then our final research question, as I mentioned, is it really talks about how does the program fit into the spectrum of other county-based programs and supports. And so, you know, having the United Way as a partner has been helpful in terms of this focus on the Alice population, the other thing that's been helpful is to put this pilot in the context of the idea of upward mobility. You know, this is, again, this is less about just the money in the pocket. This is an investment in individuals and families that then will enable them to climb the economic ladder. And that requires more than just money, right? So I think that this last research question is really going to be useful in terms of informing our work in the system. And so again, this was really intended to be an overview of the approach in what we're seeing thus far. One of the things I really do want to sort of make clear about this pilot is what we're learning from it, right? Even, we don't have to wait for the research to end to learn. And one of the things that's been most notable about what we've learned is sort of these groups that the pilot participants are fitting in. So we're finding folks are participants are falling within three general categories. We, they're first sort of in this stability group. So these are folks where that $750 is helping them to make ends meet. If they didn't have it, they wouldn't be able to pay for housing. They wouldn't be able to pay for child care, or some other sort of necessity of life. Then we have the mobility group. And the mobility group is that group that having this money is they're able to pay their bills. mobility group is that group that having this money is, they're able to pay their bills, but maybe this is helping them attain a higher level of education or helping them to not have to work two jobs or three jobs and spend more time with their children to participate in their children's education. So it's really enabling them to begin investing in themselves. And then the prosperity group is the group that is really sort of focused on the future, right? They're able to use this money to invest in their future. And all of those folks are fall in this category, this category of asset limited income constrained and employed. And when we think about our system, who are we most supporting? Right? I think we do an amazing job, you know, Fairfax is, you know, the system that exists to support the folks at the stability side, both within County government and in our very generous community focuses on that population. But when you think about the folks in the middle and the folks on that prosperity end, really that's what's required to get you up the economic ladder. And our question should be our investments targeted there, right? With 23% of our population estimated to fall within these categories. And knowing, I mean, it's not a linear progression, but you can expect it makes sense. You start here, you move to this level, you go to that level. So you know, you're moving up, right? And so that gives us a picture. And I think we should be able to sort of look at what our services are. Look at what partners are operating in our communities. And so I think that has to be an important part of the learning from this pilot, right? So yes, does it guarantee income work? That's a question. But what does it tell us about our systems and our structures and how we're investing in them and how they're positioned? And so, you know, my challenge to my colleagues as I depart is to not lose sight of that part of it and to make sure that we really are sort of putting those rungs in the ladder to economic success. There'll be another Health and Human Services Committee where the team will come back and give you an update. By that time, we'll have more from the preliminary research in evaluation findings. We'll be able to talk about, or you all be able to talk more about the funding of the potential funding of the pilot into the future. I think it's important, and when we let take lessons learned from other jurisdictions, a government private arrangement is really important. So we've been having conversations that would enable us to design a philanthropic strategy to complement this. But again, I think to the sort of my statement earlier, what are we investing in and what are we getting out of those investments is a question that I think we need to be thinking about, not just for county government, but for our philanthropic partners and business community as well. In particular to the business community, who is this population? You need them to be successful. They are people that work for you. And so I think it's amazing that Fairfax County would make an investment like this for us to learn from it. But in terms of looking onward to sustainability, it's very much something that I think should be a whole community commitment. And so that I see a whole lot of opportunity to work with our nonprofit partners and others in the community to realize this. So the final report, we're expecting fall 2025, spring 2026, and again, there'll be another update at that point, but excited to be able to come in and represent this was really something that Chris and I have talked about for years in that ARPA gave us the opportunity to test it out in Fairfax, was again, a still- relining of the pandemic. And when you look at the stories, which there's a couple on the next slide, when you hear from people, we know it's making an impact. We know it's been useful for individuals. So again, let it be useful for individuals, but hopefully allow it to be useful for our insights as we think about our system. Well, Carla, first of all, I want to thank you. I assume we have our entire board. Well, I know we are all a little anxious to have you finish that retiring phase and be fully retired. I know that the work you have done, including this pilot and the coordination, especially talking about the people served from NCS, from DFS and different, the whole spectrum, right continuum of county services. I know that Tony's definitely up to the task. We are so grateful for where you left us here. I have a couple of comments and then want to see if Lloyd or Michael wanted to add anything else before we turn it over. Number one, I mean, what really stood out to me though, it's not surprising is on page four, right, that graph. I was telling you, Chris, I was like, oh, I appreciate the way we have it because we're used to seeing our county budget, right? And where the expenses go. And to really see that for a family of four, the level of expenses that go into childcare and housing. We know housing in Fairfax is just continues to rise. And childcare, as I mentioned in our last committee meeting I know the state is looking at how to help better meet the needs of these families as well and where we are now especially knowing as we said right 23% of our families on this bucket and economic inequality has only grown since the 1980s right so it I think it makes sense and I appreciate that we used the innovation fund to try to be innovative, to learn from our own practices. Is there a different way? Is there maybe a better way to do what we've been doing really well for a long time? Right? No, you know, criticism of what we've been doing or what our private partners and nonprofits have been doing. But how do we look at where we are today and where our families are today and help meet the needs knowing that so many cannot live and work here. And so what are the best ways, the most effective ways, inefficient ways to do that? And finally, I just wanna say that clearly the engagement was very targeted. The fact that only 10% of the applications that were successful were able to be met. I'm very much look forward to the final report and having continued to have that conversation of what is next after that. So let me pause there, see if Water Michael want to add anything and then I'll turn it over to the chairman. Sure, I just wanted to, you know, Carla highlighted quite a few times the structures and the systems that we have to definitely work on to bring something like this to fruition. But also being a partner with one Fairfax, with DFS, and the community. This gave us an opportunity within NCS, and while our partners were helping to build the plane, and while we were flying it, it gave us an opportunity to really pause and look at how we're delivering our work, how we're providing opportunity structures, whether it's CSP, the tutu-tool line, whether it's how we do our community engagement, we really got a chance to really kind of dissect what we already had going on, which from some instances, where deficit-based approaches that we've been using historically. But this gave us an opportunity to really look at strength-based, from a strength-based lens at how we can help folks, as Carla mentioned, reach the power and autonomy that they need to have the agency over those resources that they were given. But I just wanted to mention that this was definitely a great opportunity for us to be able to also have an internal look at how we were structured in an ongoing manner. I cannot add one tiny thing to that. Just this week I've heard from a constituent. And even I, after all these years of working with all of our agencies, have to check in three-member. Okay, is this program under this agency? Is it here? Where are they? Where do they go? And if it's that complicated for us to know how every program is administered, right? Can't only imagine for people who are reaching out to get the support. So that coordination, I think, improvement our own processes. The house is so critical. So I'm glad you said that, Lloyd. Michael? Good morning, Michael Beckett, Department of Family Services. I just wanted to say how much I appreciate being part of this opportunity. It really has keyed me into how limiting the resources and services of the department really are for people who do not qualify for public assistance benefits, while we have a broad sort of stretch really are for people who do not qualify for public assistance benefits. While we have a broad sort of stretch and opportunity to help, you know, more than a couple hundred thousand people through Medicaid, SNAP, TANF, Child Care, that there's a population of people who are left out. A population of people that slide number four really reflects as being on the cusp of neediness. And so being able to sort of work with Carla, work with Lloyd, our partners at the United Way, the Financial Empowerment Center, and the community that helped us sort of develop this pilot, it's really phenomenal and I would think sort of helped me as a leader critically reflect on the role of a local department of social services, the department of family services, while significant is still limited. Thank you. I'm gonna turn over to the chairman. Please let me know if you'd like to speak, and then we'll come back for the next conversation. Yeah, just very briefly, a great presentation. And I think we all need a refresher of the qualifiers for this program because there's been a lot of things set out there that are just so far off from the truth and what this does is shows us demographically what we're talking about and obviously the chart stands out but also what really stands out to me was a reminder of the eligibility of the folks we're talking about. I mean these are people who have at least one child under the age of 16 living in their household. So the downstream benefits of this program for our young people, but also really sticks out as earned between 150 and 250 percent of the federal poverty level. I mean, we know that federal poverty level is nonsense when it comes to real costs of living here, but this is 150 to 250 over that, still struggling. And I think it's a growing percentage of people that are caught in between qualifying for some existing programs and qualifying for nothing. And I think one of the things we need to be thinking about, and I know you to be thinking about, and I know you will be through recommendations, is this was a disruption, so to speak, to our traditional human service programs. So how does this disrupt them moving forward? Because one thing we know out of this is there's a lot of people that aren't eligible for conventional supports, whose lives can be changed if we can rethink the way we do our human services programming throughout the county and the other reminder that this was of course funding we got related to ARPA but also this came out of the innovation fund and I think we need to stress that fact because this was to innovate, to think better about how we deliver services to improve people's lives and improve our economy. And so there's been a lot of naysayers about this program. And I think it's important for us to restate what the facts were in it. And then also, we look across the country and I know we're not making conclusions today about what worked and didn't work. We're going to get to that. I do know there are places like Georgia where this program has made a measurable difference. They started earlier. They now have statistics that show it. And I mean, Georgia is not a leader in human services delivery or innovation by any means. And so this is not just something that's being done in select areas, but is being done across the country. And I think one of the things we need to look at, obviously, is how we shake up our system if we do that. But then also, what ingredients of this have worked in other places? Because I think one thing that might be clear to a lot is that to sustain a program like this in perpetuity would be very difficult. So then where do you land? Where do you take what we've learned here? Where have other jurisdictions taken what they've learned through this program and transform their system to make sure that this population of people doesn't stay caught in a system that's not meeting their needs today. And I think that to me is the most important takeaway from this entire thing and certainly look forward to having that conversation, not just here, but also with our partners who do this work, including our nonprofit partners and others who I think can be major contributors perhaps to a rethinking of some of the things that we do. And so great presentation and looking forward to the next step. Thank you, Scott. I have said it better myself. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And clearly, I think as you mentioned, having those, finding the time to have those conversations with our nonprofit and the philanthropy partners. Well, I think I saw a surprise restored and then all the hands down that way. So Ed. Well, thank you for the presentation. Excuse me. And I think Alice is crucial, I think, for all that we want to do in society which is to increase mobility, I think that's the core. In my mind, the core measure of the healthy society is that folks in the bottom quartile can aspire and actually achieve the top quartile, or frankly wherever they may want to go, but they have the opportunity to do that. Two key questions. One is, was there a control group in any way with this process? Yeah, we did not design the research to have a control group. Again, because our focus was not on the effectiveness of guaranteed income, but specifically, how are people using it and how would we, how would it inform our system? When you look at the research though, broadly, many of the projects have included a control group. And when you look at it with the control group, you often see, yes, there has been a significant difference with the families that have received funding versus those of you. Thank you. I think there's still to have been value to it. There may have still been some comparison and with George Mason. I mean, I would think that would be part of how they might approach something like this. But just because there may be some differentiation in how people chose to do certain things. And I realize we're probably trying to do a broad measure here, but I would have liked to at least understood if there are any significant differences between control groups and the foreshort. For the next round, that's a good recommendation. Then I wasn't clear about, so I didn't look at the original memo that you sound up, which probably had this in it, but just look at the presentation take. The specific dates that the dollars were provided and our being provided and what the end date of that is and is the same for everybody in the group. Yeah, so the initial money went to people in October of 2023, right? So we're just now hitting the one year mark. The initial design called for it to end in December of this year. Part of that was because of our interpretation of the ARPA rules that we had to have all the money spent by December. When the community members initially designed the program, it was intended to be for 18 months. So with the ability, we had a little bit more flexibility with our, our than we anticipated. So we were recently able to extend the program. And so it will end in March of 2025. That'll make it the full 18 months. And that's basically why three to six months to assess and then report back and forth. Yes, yeah. I'm very much looking forward to this. I mean, I'm one of these people, and for my young days, and I know many people here who don't have no idea what I'm talking about, and maybe even will roll their eyes when I mention the word, the economist melt the freedman But the negative income tax this is not unlike that and I know we have Programs now that are related to this and I think they are very efficient ways of trying to get additional funds to folks who may need it without Kind of society and all of us trying to tell people how to spend those money because I know everybody's situation is a little different so I'm I think guaranteed income approaches to have great value in society and getting to Alice. So thank you. And I would just note that this is you know that's an important point because we're piloting this at the local level. I think looking at this at terms of what's the role of the federal government and again maybe not as a guaranteed income program, but as a child tax credit or otherwise. And so where might our local government advocate in other ways that would sort of have the result of what we would see with the guaranteed income? It doesn't have to be liberal or conservative. It's just what's the most efficient mechanism and how do we help people get dialos if you will. Absolutely. And if nothing else as the federal government looks at the results positive, the earned income tax credit increases and how they want to maybe target those even more going forward. Hopefully they will look at studies like these to help inform us. I think it's a supervisor's lust and then a minutes. And then we'll move on. Thank you very much. Madam Chairman, I'll start by saying I very much appreciated the presentation in Carla. It's great to see you as you are continuing your transition. I just wanted to start on the chart again on the income that's required to live in Fairfax County. And when I multiplied that out by 12, it comes to $107,712 per year. That is a fairly substantial amount of money and to think that we have so many in our community that are not making anywhere near that number and certainly have difficulty, you know, surviving in our community. So I appreciate the effort that's been placed and giving them the opportunity to look for ways to kind of ladder up. I appreciate your laddering. You've used it in so many different ways. And that's exactly what will be shown at the end of this is how people have been able to move from one place on the ladder up to the next and hopefully even higher. I appreciate also the discussion about the partnerships and really looking at how corporate citizens can help us in this effort. And I think their role is really more specific than just even the funding. Because as we think about the opportunity to have them get engaged and helping us maybe even transition some of these individuals into employment in their corporations and then also thinking about ways to help them move up as they see the investment. They're invested in this program, they're invested in these individuals and they're invested in this community. So I'm looking forward to seeing how that plays out private, nonprofit, county. And then when I think about the best practices and I appreciate the chairman's point about Georgia and I'm also thinking even locally in Arlington, I'm sure there's a number of others that we can take a look at and see whether there might be opportunities for us to, you know, gleam some, gleam some lessons. And I'm just really excited about seeing on that mobility group as you were describing in earlier in that prosperity group. Really what are the outcomes from this effort and how does it really improve the quality of life for the residents who are in these communities. And I think about my own service here on the board and one of the things that drove me to even come into public office is to try to make a difference in the lives of the folks who are here and to look for ways to help them. And this program is doing that. There's so many other programs that we do, but then to the point that was made earlier, you know, qualification, you don't qualify for certain programs, but you still need help. And I'm just personally excited about what this might demonstrate and show, and then to look at the impacts. And it goes back to the point I made at the board, Carla, about you is at the generational impacts. What we are doing here is going to make a difference in future generations. And we should all be proud of that. So thank you very much. Thank you, Supervisor Las. The Reser Humaniz. Thank you so much. This is so, You supervise your loss, the reiser he men is. Thank you so much. This is so, first of all, it's so interesting. And looking at the demographics, looking at all of the information as it comes out is, I think it's really helpful for our snout, but it's also helpful for us to take a snapshot of where the community is moving forward. I think Carly said one of the something that was so right on point, and he said, we are investing in people. And that's what we do here in Fairfax County. We invest in communities and we invest in people, even pilot programs like this really help showcase that. And one quick question, when you were going through the numbers of those who applied and those who made it and those who didn't, do you think or can we, or do their way of knowing, maybe not, if a language barrier hurt people filling out paperwork because they didn't know how to, how to do it properly or they needed someone to help them, just moving forward in different pilot programs. I wonder if that's kind of a thing where there's a barrier at some point where folks either give up or don't really know how to fill out the proper paperwork. And are there ways in which we might be able to assist them or offer assistance in filling out that paperwork? Well, I'll start, but I also want to give Lloyd and Michael an opportunity to step in because their agencies were tremendously helpful in this. So as a part of our design process, that was one of the things that we wanted to make sure was not a barrier. To the point of streamlining the types of questions that would be asked in the application itself, right? So really making sure that the questions themselves weren't barriers. But beyond that, then there was a question of language access. So we were able to tap into the resources within both of their agencies from a technology perspective as well as sort of on the ground outreach. And so they can speak more to that. But I do not believe that that was a barrier. Other than I would say people's trust of the process because it can be pretty hard to believe that this is a real opportunity, right? And so you did have to share some information in order to be able to so-called put your name in the hat but let me hand it over. The Department of Family Services was largely responsible for the application and eligibility component. And the vendor that we selected actually, their online platform was able to be translated into a number of languages. They were actually able to do it themselves for Spanish, but then through tools like Google, Google Translate, then the application would have been available to them in the language of their choice. And then, Naveen. And like Carlos said, it was so important to make sure things were in plain language for everyone to understand. But NCS was able to mobilize staff to meet folks where they are in their communities in Annandale, throughout the different districts and locations in the opportunity neighborhood footprints that we've listed in here and we were able to sit down and go through page by page question by question with folks who needed that kind of support and assistance with filling out the application. So it was a really intimate process if you chose to come in person to gain assistance. I'll just say that finding those leaders in communities where the trust is already there is super helpful. So like faith-based communities or teachers, those are places where we can help push that trust even forward. But thank you. Thank you very much. Absolutely. And I'm just going to close it out and thank you. And clearly, just even the process of how this was done, as we continue to improve our targeted engagement and the framework through NCS with all of our agencies. And that's an area that we know. Carla has brought a lot and will continue to improve. And as was mentioned, I think this is probably the most robust I've heard so far of how it's been done and there's only always room to continue to grow. But very much appreciate that. Before we close out, I had to look up our average median income for a family of four right now is $154,700 a year and so even this as Rodney mentioned $107,000 is not even up to the county's average median income so that really shows you just how critical and why I think we have such interest in the supports and an opportunity to just relook at what we're doing and how we do it and do it better. So thank you so much Carla I believe you're still available by email if anyone has any additional follow-up questions maybe for a day. As I promised last week I'm never too far. Thank you so much Lloyd and Michael and I know Tony will continue to support this work. With that, we will move on to our park authority. We do, I think Chris wants us to say something. As we transition and we absorb what has to be the first Milton Friedman reference in the history of health and human services, we'll play some resource work. Carla talked about the fact that we've been wanting to do this past presentation for the last two, three, four years. We wanted to do this. What you're about to hear from the park authority, Carly and I have been talking about this for at least a decade. We both grew up in NCS, so we partner very closely with the park authority, so I'm really appreciative of what you're going to hear today and what you're going to continue to hear from Jay because this is a long time coming with regards to having this conversation, making our park authority more accessible to all of our community. So I just wanted to highlight that as a segue and give Jay time to walk up here. I was going to say my generation, I'm obsessed with the economics, the book and the podcast and so I think as we look at how we do social science and the research, and especially, I appreciate that George Mason is using the community research group and counsel to really give people a voice who are being studied and to be able to give that input. But to that, I think before I present Jay, I appreciate it that Supervisor Lust mentioned, his personal experiences and desire to run for office. And I think both of the presentations today, to me, reflect my and my family's personal experiences growing up here under the poverty line and as immigrants and as more and more of our families are in this situation I very much appreciate that while it's taken a decade or longer for us to continue to address them that are bored and that are directors in our county executive across the county are so invested in doing better as Carla does for her grandmother grace as well. So what I do wanna say, we've been talking about this for a decade but we didn't have, we weren't in the seats to really do anything about it. So we both said when we both got over here on the fifth floor that if we didn't do something about it, shame on us. So that's why we're really excited about this next presentation. I thought you were going to say you had a little more hair, but sorry. All right, well thank you. I have Jay leading this. OK, so we have Jay Kohler, Executive Director, and I'll let her go ahead and introduce her team and the work. And we have about half an hour for discussion and the presentation. Thank you. The presentation's not that long, so we wanted to leave a lot of time for conversations. I invited because of all of the work that she did for Carla to stay because she's here anyway. So why don't we get a little bit of more free mileage out of her? I also wanted to thank the genius. I also want to thank the genius of Chris to put us and the previous presentations together because they really do link up quite beautifully. With me, say genius, is that genius? I say it in public. Not hairless, genius. Yes, the genius of Chris Liner and Dissol. It's for people. You could be a genius in losing your hair. Just throw that out there. Yes, genius. Genius, I think. So for the record, Jay Cole, executive director of the Fairfax County Park Authority, and with me is Sarah Baldwin, deputy director of the the Park Authority and some of you may have met her. If not this is a new introduction to DeGio Grayson who is a division director for our marketing and communications division. So we're going to go through this fairly quick presentation about our equity outreach. The first thing I wanted to do was sort of remind you of where we come and how this sort of all started and it started really back in 2020 when we created our first equity action plan and then at the time the acting executive director Sarah Baldwin came to a joint park authority and board of supervisor meeting May of 2021 to really start to discuss the equity issues that are surrounding our revenue fund. That kind of got followed up in July with when we really first started to intensely look at what we're talking about and follow it up with some data. So we're funded in FY23 for to bring in a consultant HRNA to really start to study our equity model and make some recommendations. This is what should be fairly recognizable to you. It's kind of the first really intense data exercise that we did. These numbers have been updated with summer 2024. And so the side looks a little different, but this is 2024 data. So as you might remember, FCPA's reliance on fees means that some of our agencies, especially recreational programming, charge more than other local jurisdictions. And more than the county, a lot of our county residents can afford. And as a result of that, our recreation participation skews wealthier and whiter than both the population of Fairfax County and when you compare it to general fund programs like RecPack. So following that, we hired an HRNA and we came back and gave your presentation about that. I did want to point out that we're not just, um, folks, we're focused on all of the equity things. We also were funded in FY 23 to hold our summer camp fees and not raise them. So we did, we were able to hold our fees for one summer and not increase that. The Wonder Wagon that was funded has done, has been wonders that was not on purpose. Has done wonders of bringing environmental education and nature into communities that lack such has been very popular. It's booked completely booked right now. And then really, and Lloyd is still here also is when we combined RecPack with Camp Fairfax. It was a really great equity initiative because it makes it a one-stop shop. And we're not sort of, want to say competing. We're not really competing for schools and locations. And so that's kind of where we came back, but we really did wanna go out into the public and test a lot of our hypothesis. And so our hypothesis began that our recreational services are too expensive for some residents in Fairfax County, which ultimately impacts their ability to participate in programs and services. We don't want to just throw that out there, but that actually going in and asking people and really trying to figure out what are their barriers to access. So what we went about doing, the way we went about this is our three-legged stool, and you're going to hear about two of them today. And so one of them, well, three of them today. So one of them is one fair back. And that's why we asked Carlitos to stay. Really is a framework that we use for addressing a lot of the inequities that we're seeing. The second one, which I'm very, very proud of, is the Sully Community Center Pilots. With our first tranche of funding, we hired the consultal, but we also set some money aside, because we really wanted to test out our theory. So we did a pilot at Sully that Sarah is going to talk about in a second that, like I said, I'm very proud of. And the third stool is really leaning heavily on, as Chris and Carla both said, they had this thoughts and feelings when they worked at NCS. Since I started working here, Lloyd has been a phenomenal partner in absolutely everything that we're doing as a means of really rising tide floats all boats and they've been phenomenal as a key partner in our inclusive engagement for the survey and outreach and for the Sully pilot. So the first thing we're gonna go over is what the Sully Community Center pilot is and where it began and some of the results from there and then we'll move a little bit into our equitable outreach results. Good morning Sarah Baldwin Deputy Director for Good morning Sarah Baldwin Deputy Director for the Park Authority. As Jane mentioned during the summer of 2023 we tested a pilot at Sully Community Center to see how we would implement a sliding fee scale. A little bit of background on Sully as some of you may be aware. The park authority partnered with NCS in the development of Sully Community Center. We funded the second gym. In return, we have access to the gym for programming as well as rentals. And we knew that if we run programs at Sully, we're going to need a different model than we have at most of our other facilities, which borne the Sully pilot. We partnered with NCS to implement this pilot, and we use different strategies during the implementation process. We implemented a sliding fee scale. We reduced access to barriers by providing transportation for the children enrolled in the summer program. And we ensure that the community was aware that the pilot existed and how to access it. And then we developed a approach to address the capacity issues as many of you are aware. Camps are very popular. They feel very quickly. And so we wanted to make sure that our target audience had access to that camp. Ultimately, the goal of the program was to ensure that the camps at Sully reflected the community that we served in that area. As mentioned during the previous presentation, outreach and engagement was a very key part of our work here. We knew that this was not just a situation where we build it, they will come. We knew that we had to identify the opportunity areas around Sully Community Center, and we needed to assist them with building awareness about the pilot, as well as assistance with the registration process. We partnered with NCS staff. They were boots on the ground. They've reached out to the local communities, identified families that could benefit from the pilot program, actually met with the families one-on-one and assisted them with the registration process and the documentation that was required for the sliding fee scale. As a result, through the surveys that were done, you can see that families identified the staff support that they received from NCS staff is critical to their enrollment in the program. Additionally, in identifying the opportunity areas surrounding Sully Community Center, we also identified another barrier in that was proximity or transportation. So we worked with NCS staff to identify those communities that could most benefit from the program and we provided transportation to those campers to and from camp each day. So eliminating costs and proximity are two barriers that we identified and really based on the survey results, 70% of the families that participated in the program said that if they did not have access to our program, their children would have stayed at home and not participated in enriching safe summer camp program. And then finally, we assessed how the strategies used in the pilot impacted the racial makeup of participants. If you look at participation in FCPA camps in general, 34% of the individuals enrolled in those camps are non-white. When you look at the Sully pilot, 92% of the individuals that were enrolled in the pilot were non-white. at the Sully pilot, 92% of the individuals that were enrolled in the pilot were not white. The next phase of our work centered around serving, the broader community and barriers that may impact their participation in all of FCPA programs and services. I'm gonna turn the presentation over to Dageria for information about that engagement effort. Awesome. Dageria Grayson, again, Division Director of Marketing and Communications Division for Fairfax County Park Authority. Hello. We heard about the foundation that was laid to support this initiative. We also heard about Sully as a solid case study to affirm that the hypothesis that classes in the barrier, it probably the first barrier of engagement for our programs. So we come to 2024, where we launch an intensive and inclusive outreach effort to identify those barriers that may prevent our neighbors or our community from taking full advantages of our programs and services. Our engaged audience is definitely representative of our existing audience very affluent, also white. So we if it wasn't for NTS we end the inclusive inclusive excuse me community engagement. We would not have been able to achieve some goals in being able to reach the underserved. We were able to participate in 19 public meetings. We were able to host collateral within a lot of our centers to promote the survey itself, whether it be the posters or any other outreach brochures. We also engaged our digital communications and press so that we manage or garner a level of impression so that we can build awareness about the surveys availability. We had the web surveys available as well to engage the online audience and they were also available in several languages with opportunities in the future to expand to include more. 2400 seems to be the magic number today. So we had 2400 total respondents over a very brief survey period of February to April of this year. But we were able to extract some directional learnings that will lead us into the next phase of this initiative. So cost, cost, cost, cost is really the top barrier that we saw coming out of the first wave of this survey. And of course, this match exactly with Sarah was talking about earlier with Sully. Once you remove cost distance and awareness, also becoming an opportunity based on the landscape of our centers. But we really have the opportunity to hone in. And in the next phase, we really need to understand why. Willingness to pay is important. We heard earlier about the span of disposable income and what any one of any income level would need to cover. So we really need to kind of understand those nuances in order to be able to convey value and availability to all members of our community. So a few key findings when we look into this, again, first preliminary wave cost remains the top participation barrier for households with an income of 75K or under. When we look at specifically race and ethnicity for Hispanic, Latino, and black households, distance and lack of familiarity also are key barriers that we should work to overcome. And some of the learnings, even from Sully about how we were able to leverage transportation to bring members of our community to our sites could definitely be something that we probe in the future. Right center memberships are perceived as expensive, but we also know there's a key value because they are still under market to all our competitors within Fairfax County, so we have an opportunity to promote the value proposition there. There's still opportunity to grow overall awareness. We service a lot of people, but there's still a community that we may not reach, and we have an opportunity to explore exactly how much we have available to reach beyond our current audience. When you look at current enrollment, Black and Hispanic Latino households remain the most underrepresented. But in the survey, we were able to lightly ask, you know, what is your point of entry to our services and swim actually seems to be the biggest opportunity or equalizer if you will for households, even though it's perceived as expensive. So life skills is a priority. That seems to be something that we can leverage going forward. And then last but certainly not least, we know that there's a familiarity gap or at least it's something to explore. There is also potentially a cultural gap in offerings and communication as well. So we don't want to limit the findings or learnings to income but also to relevant and residents. So in the next few, in the next wave, we'll come to you in January to share a holistic plan including efforts to better understand barriers and ways to overcome them in our communications and outreach. In January. Okay. So this is sort of the first phase we wanted to split it up because we wanted to give this presentation it's due and we're still in very deep and meaningful conversations with the county and DMB is how to structure this moving forward. So this was the first phase of surveys completed. We'll be coming back in January to really talk about a potential implementation plan. Thank you. That's why I have her. Implementation plan that really has the four- to get people, I think it's really telling, especially when you talk about the Alice communities that you heard about earlier in the previous presentation, that 69% of kids would have stayed home and as enriching as our summer camps are and as important as for the kids, they are also a child at age day care and it does allow for double parents to be able to go to work as having them in there so that really removed, it would have removed that entire population from being able to get employment throughout the summer. And so it's really telling that's not something that we thought we would see, we thought they would be going someplace else, we maybe thought maybe are they competing with NCS but really it showed that if we put the leg work in and the time you really can you know bring these kids into these programs and allow them. So we'll be coming back in January to talk about implementation plan outreach and all of those things. But we wanted to bring the outreach survey study and Sally to you today. And with that, any questions? All right, well, thank you so much to the team and welcome, Diedra. Excellent. Again, presentation. I appreciate the continued work to be strategic and targeted before we jump into any decisions or implementing the plan. I had one question as I was looking through this, and not surprised that cost and transportation were such big factors knowing the cost and the distances in our county. Do we happen to have of your current membership the numbers and we can get back to people using discount programs? Like I know I just signed up now because of the employee discount program. It is helpful to understand whether it's the senior program, the 15% discount. Do you have that data? Yeah. Okay, because I've been curious about that. I think that probably shows you what people are looking at as well and where opportunities are there. And for the pools, I know as we talk about just the cost of being able to access pools in our community. Not only do we talk about the fees and the lack of access in our summer pools, but I know I was shocked when I lived in DC and it was free to go swimming compared to how much it caused here for residents. So yeah, absolutely. I think you're definitely in the right direction. Go ahead. compared to how much it caused here for residents. So yeah, absolutely. I think you're definitely in the right direction. Go ahead. Yes, and I will say there was some data that we were able to extract specifically for our swim programs. We're almost a quarter, I think 23%, honestly was the number where part of our scholarship in discount program. So that's directional, but we can certainly get back to you on that exact data. Excellent. Well, thank you. I will pause there to make sure everyone has a chance that let me turn over to the chairman. And then I'll start at that end this time. Yeah, I just have two questions. I mean, I think I'm guessing here in thinking that none of us are surprised. And necessarily with the data, we're still challenged with obviously how do you address it? How do you come up with an implementation plan? And obviously the distance and accessibility piece jumps out and there's two ways to address that. One is through a better transportation network. One is we need a lot more facilities. And I think that's something that, as we've talked before around this board table, fixing a problem that has existed for a long time is not going to be a one or two or three year fixed to this. And so, I think one of the things that comes out of this is what is the low hanging fruit in the implementation plan that can immediately be addressed and what are the things that have to go into a longer range plan are going to be obvious. But I guess one thing that jumped out of me that seemed to be a disconnect and maybe you can help me explain it a little bit because I heard costs cost cost and I think we all know that and are concerned about that. Yet on slide 11, when you asked people who were in the pilot program at Sully, why did you choose to enroll your child here instead of FCPA camps that only 12% of people said the financial assistance component? And so I'm trying to reconcile that in my mind a little bit when close to home is the biggest driver because at some point we're going to have to be thinking about fee structure obviously versus investment in accessibility improvements and I'm trying to just take slide 11 and look at slide 16 as a comparison and try to understand that a little bit. That 12% seems really low to me. I think when we're looking through it, I think that when you have a bus that's right there picking them up, I think that's the first thing that jumps out at them. I mean, we could, when we're going forward and looking at it, it could be two buses to say we can take you to the camps as well. But I think it's almost like a Mazda's hierarchy of needs where it's the first one that's the most like we pick them up from their neighborhood. And so that you can't beat that in any, you know, situation. So I think that's one of the things that when Dave just talking about, we're going to have to delve a lot deeper. And I think it's, you'll see when we come back in January, one of the things we're working on is it is a huge balance because something that might be the biggest, what's the biggest bang for our buck? What's the first thing that we can do? What's the thing? What's the first thing that we can do that is, when I say easy, I don't mean that in a big e-way, but it's the easiest way, because we don't wanna fail the first time. So it's gotta be manageable, but still give us some sort of a return for our investment and then be replicable and moving up. So that's one of the things that we're really looking at doing. It's not everything in the kitchen, it's like we really do need the celly pilot was proof of how much time and effort goes into a very small data point, but it's such a large and important data point for those who live in that community that it's such a win of replicating that even in baby steps around and then sort of connecting the dots later is really important. It's really, you know, Carla and I talked about it. It's so important to take two steps forward in the right direction, then take 17 steps left. Left. Chris, go ahead. Yeah, I think that's a great question, Mr. Chairman, and I would just ask, let's drill down a little bit on the question. How was the question asked as well? Because I do know from my own experiences in NCS that when you a sliding fee scale exists, a lot of times people ask about financial assistance and they're like, no, no, I paid, I paid what you told me. So they don't equate the sliding fee scale with the financial assistance, but that goes directly to how the question was asked. But that's a great point. Yeah, because I mean, ultimately we're going to have to grapple with that. I mean, I think of having been to the Sully Community Center and where it's located and the distance from the neighborhoods that are being served. I mean, we have the challenge today of the facilities aren't necessarily in the communities that need them the most. And you can't fix that overnight. Unfortunately, a lot of us have our own reasons to believe why that happened, which is why one Fairfax is important. But I do think we're going to have to, when we look at implementing some, you know, a path forward, we're going to have to be thinking about distance versus cost, as those are the two biggest drivers. And then also, obviously, capacity. Because I look at awareness and awareness, you would think, is a quasi-easy thing to fix. How do we improve awareness of these programs in their existence? But on the other hand, if they're not going to serve the community that you're making aware, you're not making any headway. And if you don't have the facilities to be able to handle that increased number of people coming in, you're also just frustrating people more. And so I think how all these things work together is going to be an important thing for us to think about as we think about implementation, both short-term implementation elements and why, and then mid and long-term implementation. Absolutely. Okay, I have Spirizer Smith and then supervisor Biermann. Thank you. Just on that, I appreciate Chris mentioning the sliding scale, because that would be my assumption that financial systems didn't come that high. If they answered this, after they knew what fee they had to pay. Right? So capturing that, thank you. Thank you. Supervisor Bearmann? Yeah, so just a quick question about sort of broader implementation. Well, one thing that struck that just jumped out to me though, it's not your facility is that the Coats Elementary School is actually closer to the Herndon Community Center that is to the Sully Community Center, the Herndon Community Center, of course, being a town facility. But this by question with the pilot and it goes to that question of cost only on the other end, our costs. What were the biggest drivers of our costs in providing this system? Was it the sliding ski, sliding ski schedule? Was it the cost of buses? What kind of buses did we use? Was it the cost of added staff? Like what, when we're looking to sort of replicate the results, what are the inputs we need to under better understand? The biggest cost was a sliding fee scale. So transportation existed. The Celi Community Center has a busing service they use during the summer for their camps, so we utilize that. But really there was no additional staff that was needed. We used existing staff resources for us in terms of the delivery of the summer camp program. But we did depend heavily on NCS staff to do the outreach and to engage with the community. So it was an impact on their resources to be able to provide that service for us. But if you look at the financial impact, it was really the implementation of the scale. And when we scaled that up, I just wanted, when we scaled that, this was a, I don't wanna call it a labor of love, this was something that everybody was very, very excited about being able to do. And so fitting it into that, when we scaled it up, it would have some, but when you, some staff time, but when you compare it to the cost of the sliding fee scale, it will still be negligible. But yes, a point is that it's the fees that are primarily the added cost. Got it, understood. Thank you. And I would just add as one example, and we can share it with you in the Kingsley community when RecPack was moved farther away as you are well aware that owner worked with the schools and paid for bussing through the schools finance the majority so families were only paying a small fraction and had someone helping enroll all of the students one by one and so I think there are some examples that we can look at both at this pilot and other of our community partners that have been working to provide support for their communities as well. Not seeing any other, oh, I do, I apologize. Supervisor Jimenez, and then I saw last come walking, Sean. Well, I think, and thank you for this. I think this fits really well with the previous presentation. It's all about investing in people, investing in our community, investing in our youth, the numbers showing, you know, that kids would be at home doing not activities and not being, you know, getting their energy out. So I think that that, and this pilot really shows that this is needed, that it helps, that it's great, that it's putting our kids in a good spot. I would just encourage if this starts to expand the ways that we communicate with different communities and making sure that we're educating and that we're doing the proper outreach, just to try to reach as many people, as many youth as we can. And I think that that's gonna take going to, again, like it was said earlier, whether or not. So whether that's finding them on a Sunday afternoon after church, whether that's in a daycare, whether that's, you know, it's going to the communities making sure that they know about the programs, that they know about the financial assistance, because I think that that's how we can expand the type of young people that are going to this. So thank you very much. Absolutely, Supervisor Les. I'll go quickly. I'll just say I appreciate from the HRNA presentation that was done so many months ago, just how detailed and just the high quality of the presentation, but then also the implementation portion. So looking at what you've been able to do and acknowledging that it's making a difference in addressing some of the disparities that we have. But I look again at chart 16 and under the REC center one in particular and you see cost all the way down as it relates to income and race. So it definitely does establish that we have kind of an issue here, right, in terms of how do we adjust the structure, the fee structure to allow this to be more accessible. So look forward to seeing kind of the next steps and just appreciate the work that you're doing and acknowledging that we're trying to make this better for the residents easier, more convenient and more cost effective. So thank you. Thank you. Is there a walk-ins for you to get the last word before? Okay. Thank you. Just on slide three, if you could pull that up. I think for at least when you're comparing to classes, well, maybe classes, but certainly for summer camps, the appropriate comparison would not be county population, but would be county population of households with childrens which would be different percentages of income levels. I don't know if the top of my head what it would be but I'd be interested to see that because obviously the general population in most households in the county don't have kids are not potential customers of summer camps. Classes a little bit different. I suspect a majority of class participants are kids but obviously not 100%. So I'd be interested to see that. I was kind of struck by the fact that Rec Center membership and maybe it's explained by what I just described but Rec Center membership is much less still disparate, but much less disparate relative to the camps and classes. And maybe that's because if you're earning over $200,000 a year, you're going to join the lifetime gym or something like that. But I would say wealthy parents have other options too. So I'd be interested in understanding that a little bit better, but definitely want to see that data for households with kids and how it breaks down. I'm very insight in you all know. I've from the very first time we started talking about this issue. I was saying sliding, scale, sliding, scale, sliding scale, so I really appreciate the work that's been done on this. The way that I think about it, a cross-bratic road from Audrey Moore is the big blue swims, one of those swim schools that is in every strip mall now. And, you know, a family who makes over $200,000 a year should be paying at Audrey Moore probably less but comparable to what the big blue swim school or whatever the swim school charges. And today they're not. I mean, it's a great deal if you can get in, you know, if you log on at at 11.59 and can get into that class. So the sliding fee scale has to work both ways. I think that could be implemented over time as your normal schedule of fee increases may be applied only to those wealthier families and others stay at a lower rate. But I would also like to see for the Sully, I'd like to see the actual fee scale for the Sully program and have an understanding of what it took, how far did the fee need to slide to accomplish the results that you accomplish? So none of that, I don't think has to be answered now, but I just wanted to answer one of your questions quickly, is the, we thought about the breakdown for families, for camps to make that change. One of the reasons why we didn't put it in here is because it takes a lot of explaining that the families with children in the county are actually much more diverse than the county population. So it would go the other way as opposed to being so we could do that in a longer time presentation to break down sort of that data but just putting it out there would I think would would have caused a little bit of confusion but yes I agree we really the same thing with the distance from we're really talking about people who can drive to, I'm not trying to pull somebody who lives in Supervisor Lusks district to up camp at Lake Fairfax. So there's a lot of factors that we... Thank you. And one final question from Supervisor Stark. And then we will break. Does the park authority have any programs that don't include a sliding fee scale? That don't include a slide? Is there any program that park... That's you. Yeah. the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . doesn't have options for people who make okay. None of those bars across have any options except for that cell that was the first pilot for park authority for a sliding fee scale. Thank you. And seeing how cozy work with Lloyd, I assumed you're looking at how sack updated their sliding ski field. We are working directly with the Queen of the sack sliding fee scale who I have a commandeered to come over. Katie Horseman who is going to be deciphering all of this at Chris's request specifically. Very happy to hear it. Well, thank you so much, and thank you to your team, to Dejra for coming on board, and to Carla for joining us for hopefully your final requirement or time in front of us. I don't have the date for the next committee, but we will 28th, January 28th. Thank you and we are at Jernd.