Performance Details

Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic Development - Community & Regional Affairs

• Return to Departments
• Community & Regional Affairs website

Mission

Promote strong communities and healthy economies.

Core Services

• Local Government Assistance - Training and technical assistance to develop and maintain local capacities for administering essential government services
• Rural Utility Business Advisor (RUBA) - Increase the managerial and financial capacities of rural water and wastewater utilities
• Land Management Assistance - Assist and train communities on regional and local basis to address and resolve land and planning issues
• Financial Assistance - Administer multiple grant and funding distribution programs
• Information Resources - Collect, analyze and publish local government and economic development information
• Local Boundary Commission staff - Prepare and distribute information and reports on incorporation, dissolution, annexation, or consolidation
• State Assessor - Technical assistance to municipal assessors on property value assessments to promote equity in the distribution of education funding and other shared revenue programs
• Serve Alaska - Provide National Service and volunteerism opportunities within Alaska

Mission Results	Core Services
A: Local governments provide essential services and operate in a sustainable manner.  Details > TARGET #1: Five percent increase per year in rural utilities which meet all essential management indicators. TARGET #2: Reduce the number of communities (public entities) that are noncompliant with management sustainability indicators by five percent each year. TARGET #3: 100 percent of municipal governments provide essential public services (i.e. elections, legal, health, financial/contracting, fuel).	A1: Local Government Assistance - Training and technical assistance to develop and maintain local capacities for administering essential government services  Details > TARGET #1: The number of interventions required by staff to prevent disruptions of essential public services is reduced each year. A2: Rural Utility Business Advisor (RUBA) - Increase the managerial and financial capacities of rural water and wastewater utilities  Details > TARGET #1: Increase the number of users trained on the Utility Management training courses. A3: Land Management Assistance - Assist and train communities on regional and local basis to address and resolve land and planning issues  Details > TARGET #1: Provide appropriate site control for all identified uses of Municipal Lands Trust land. TARGET #2: Negotiate one ANCSA 14(c) final settlement agreement each year. A4: Financial Assistance - Administer multiple grant and funding distribution programs  Details > TARGET #1: Percentage of grant appropriations fully expended within the award period. TARGET #2: All grantees are notified of funding appropriation within 30 days of capital bill being signed into law. A5: Information Resources - Collect, analyze and publish local government and economic development information  Details > TARGET #1: 75% of entities compliant with all managerial capacity indicators in communities with a population base of less than 2,500. A6: Local Boundary Commission staff - Prepare and distribute information and reports on incorporation, dissolution, annexation, or consolidation  Details > TARGET #1: All required reports are produced within regulatory deadlines. TARGET #2: Local Boundary Commission staff determines that all submitted petitions have met the statutory and regulatory requirements A7: State Assessor - Technical assistance to municipal assessors on property value assessments to promote equity in the distribution of education funding and other shared revenue programs  Details > TARGET #1: All statutorily required determinations completed. TARGET #2: 100 percent of taxing municipalities are audited once every five years.
Mission Results	Core Services
B: Services and volunteerism in Alaska exceeds the national average ranking (among the 50 States)  Details > TARGET #1: Alaska ranks within the top ten among states on service and volunteerism.	B1: Serve Alaska - Provide National Service and volunteerism opportunities within Alaska  Details > TARGET #1: The number of beneficiaries being served by AmeriCorps members and recruited volunteers will increase annually. TARGET #2: The number of volunteers recruited by AmeriCorps members in Alaska will increase annually.

Performance Detail

Target #1: Five percent increase per year in rural utilities which meet all essential management indicators. Methodology: Data from the Rural Utility Business Advisor (RUBA) Grant Annual Progress Report. Analysis of results and challenges: For many years, State-administered sanitation grants required that grantees meet all essential indicators prior to awarding construction funds. The essential indicators of a Rural Utility Business Advisor (RUBA) management assessment were required to be met during the life of the project for funding to continue. Beginning in FY2015, assessments were no longer required as a condition for grant funding administered by the state. Assessments were replaced with the scoring criteria called Best Practices that provide a numerical score of management capacity used to prioritize communities for construction funding. There are nine criteria, six of which are scored by RUBA staff for 195 communities. Those criteria include adoption of a realistic budget, financial reporting, timely reporting and payment of payroll taxes, and compliance with workers’ compensation insurance. In FY2017, 133 (68%) of the 195 communities scored improved their Best Practices score at some point during the year. In FY2018, that number decreased to 86 (44%) of the 195 communities scored. In FY2019 there were 102 communities that scored 60 or higher on Best Practices, making them eligible for infrastructure project funding. Challenges for utilities in receiving and maintaining a high Best Practices score include increasing operations costs with stagnant or declining revenues, high staff turnover, and increasing work demands from multiple agencies.

Target #2: Reduce the number of communities (public entities) that are noncompliant with management sustainability indicators by five percent each year. Methodology: Data from Community and Regional Affairs internal portal of Community Database On-line. Analysis of results and challenges: Public services are critical to the health and long-term viability of communities. A local government’s ability to provide adequate and sustainable public services can be accurately predicted by examining essential management indicators. DCRA gathers public entity data used by staff to conduct service assessments necessary to understand the existing level of governance and to provide any assistance necessary to them. In FY2009, the division began measuring compliance of a set number of entities using a standardized set of indicators. These indicators and compliance standards are: 1. Workers’ Compensation policy – If an entity has an active policy or not. 2. Municipal elections – If the required election was properly held and certified. 3. Financial Audits – If the required state or federal financial audits have been completed and filed. 4. Liens - If liens or judgments are filed against the entity. 5. PERS Debt - If an entity is current on their PERS payments. 6. Fuel Loans - If an entity borrowed loans for purchase of fuel and is current on its payment; and 7. Financial Documents (budgets, audits/certified financial statements) – if an entity has completed and filed these documents. The total number of non-compliant entities has decreased by 9% in FY2019. Though progress has been made in the total number of entities that are compliant, 46% of those that were non-compliant were not compliant in at least one or more of the following indicators: had active Liens or were not current with Fuel Loan or PERS Debt payments. Which could be an indicator of the entity unable to keep up with their financial obligations. The reduced resources to work with communities, accuracy of data, timeliness of information reported by agencies, community resources, and commitment to issue resolution will continue to be a challenge. Most indicators will require the entity to make changes in procedures, policies, and or staffing to rectify issues.

Target #3: 100 percent of municipal governments provide essential public services (i.e. elections, legal, health, financial/contracting, fuel). Methodology: Data from eGrants On-line Database. Analysis of results and challenges: DCRA attempts to identify and help all local governments requiring assistance to meet the minimum criteria for becoming a city, e.g. holding required public meetings and elections, providing adequate financial disclosure of public finances, and codifying municipal ordinances. Some municipalities struggle with providing these basic public services and lack the administrative capacity to manage the finances of the city. However, with DCRA’s assistance, most cities ultimately meet these minimum criteria. Despite the assistance available through DCRA, some municipalities are unable to meet the basic requirements to sustain a city. The challenge is a lack of standards by which to verify the accuracy of submitted reports and financial disclosure of public finances. No requirements exist for municipalities to report inadequate or poor delivery of public services. Municipalities are only obligated to submit reports required under AS 29.20.640 and to certify that they have met the minimum statutory requirements of a municipality as a prerequisite to receiving Community Assistance Program (CAP, formerly Community Revenue Sharing) funding. Information for this performance measure is collected as part of the Community Revenue Sharing application process, and is spot checked by Local Government Specialist staff during routine interactions with their assigned communities.

Target #1: The number of interventions required by staff to prevent disruptions of essential public services is reduced each year. Methodology: Data from the Rural Utility Advisor (RUBA) Grant Annual Progress Report and Staff Travel and Activity Report System (STARS). Analysis of results and challenges: Continuous monitoring and proactive interactions with Alaskan communities provides DCRA staff with an opportunity to intercede and avert a possible community crisis before it happens. There were 119 Interventions in FY2019, including providing 14 fuel loans to communities ineligible for bank loans and coordination of fuel deliveries to avoid critical shortages; assistance with delinquent Power Cost Equalization (PCE) reports to facilitate payments before they expire; assistance meeting minimum requirements to receive Community Assistance Program payments; assistance with QuickBooks accounting issues, resolving IRS matters; and assistance with utility management to avoid loss of essential public sanitation services.

Target #1: Increase the number of users trained on the Utility Management training courses. Methodology: Data from Rural Utility Business Advisor (RUBA) Grant Annual Progress Report. Analysis of results and challenges: Eight 32-hour utility management courses were developed to build local capacity for operations and maintenance of local infrastructure. These courses are approved for CEUs and are often presented in conjunction with regional health corporations and other regional entities. In FY2019, Rural Utility Business Advisor (RUBA) staff presented additional classes in QuickBooks and Bulk Fuel Financial Management. Fourteen classes were taught in four different regional hubs training 215 utility management managers, elected officials and staff. Partnerships with Denali Commission and the US EPA RUBA grant helped expand the frequency and reach of instruction.

Target #1: Provide appropriate site control for all identified uses of Municipal Lands Trust land. Methodology: Data from Municipal Land Trust (MLT) database. Analysis of results and challenges: The Municipal Lands Trustee (MLT) Program was created in 1975 to carry out Section 14(c)(3) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, which requires every village corporation to reconvey title to "the remaining improved land on which the Native village is located, and as much additional land as is necessary for community expansion, and appropriate rights-of-way for public use, and land for other foreseeable community needs." These lands are transferred to the appropriate municipal corporation (a first- or second-class city) where one exists, or otherwise to the "State in trust for any municipal corporation established in the Native village in the future." Land settlements have been completed for 38 of the 93 communities served by the program, with approximately 11,500 acres currently held in trust by the state. Lands held in trust are used for airports, landfills, schools, other community development, and future community expansion. Following a major transition of staff in 2013, the MLT program resumed the practice of making site visits to communities for which land is held in trust by the State of Alaska. The site visits are an opportunity for to build critical relationships with local leaders and to inspect land held in trust. Site visits frequently result in the identification of land uses in need of site control. Much work remains to be updated or completed. Staff have completed 21 site visits since FY2014 resulting in an increase of identified land uses not yet under site control.

Target #2: Negotiate one ANCSA 14(c) final settlement agreement each year. Methodology: Data from Community and Regional Affairs Staff Travel and Activity Report System (STARS). Analysis of results and challenges: DCRA assists municipalities with land management issues and provides community mapping. One of the most significant land issues involves the process of identifying and negotiating lands entitled to city governments under section 14(c) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA). The settlement of a city’s ANCSA 14(c)(3) claim is an essential step in clearing land title in the community and providing land for public and private development. The settlement of a city’s claim typically involves a final, signed agreement, submittal of a “map of boundaries” to the Bureau of Land Management who surveys the land selections, and a deed which transfers the property based on survey descriptions. Two communities filed their agreements and land selection maps to BLM for survey – Shishmaref and Shageluk. Of 113 communities with potential ANCSA 14(c)(3) lands, 73 communities have completed their 14(c) negotiations, or roughly 65 percent of municipalities with ANCSA entitlements. Of those 73 communities, 8 are still waiting for a final approved plat to be completed by BLM and 5 municipalities are waiting for deeds to be issued which transfers the entitlement. Significant ANCSA 14(c)(3) assistance was provided to 9 communities. DCRA provided other land management assistance to 23 communities related to settling equitable interest lot and other residential disposals, enforcement of reverter clauses, resolving trespass cases, vacating rights of way, addressing encroachments, or obtaining site control so publicly funded community projects funds can be developed. Two communities updated land status maps and corrected or updated title situations which provides for the orderly development of their community. DCRA also completed community profile maps for Tok and Northway and assisted two communities with land planning as they manage a retreat from the immediate impacts of aggressive erosion.

Target #1: Percentage of grant appropriations fully expended within the award period. Methodology: Data from eGrants On-line database. Analysis of results and challenges: Grant administrators have a primary responsibility to assure grant agreements are prepared within statutory deadlines. Once a grantee is under agreement, the grant administrators have a responsibility to work closely with each of them to provide technical assistance and training so they are able to successfully complete their project within the award period. A review of the grants awarded for the five year grant period ending in 2019 indicated 77% of grants awarded were successfully completed in that period.

Target #2: All grantees are notified of funding appropriation within 30 days of capital bill being signed into law. Methodology: Data from eGrants On-line Database. Analysis of results and challenges: Statutes authorizing the majority of the funding awarded by the Division require notification of the grantee within a 45- or 60-day period. It is the goal of the Division to notify all recipients within 30 days of the effective date of the funding. This goal applies to grants as well as allocations made through the Community Assistance Program (CAP, formerly Community Revenue Sharing), Payment In Lieu of Taxes, or shared fisheries business tax allocations. For FY2019, 100% of notifications were made within the 30-day period.

Target #1: 75% of entities compliant with all managerial capacity indicators in communities with a population base of less than 2,500. Methodology: Data from Community and Regional Affairs internal portal of Community Database On-line. Analysis of results and challenges: The Community Status Report (CSR) identifies possible managerial problems and provides selected information about a community’s managerial capacity. The indicators measured address public performance issues and reveal a community’s financial management results as displayed in the respective fiscal years’ operating revenues and operating expenditures. Data collected and analyzed include: financial records; elections (required by statute); liens; workers compensation; delinquent Audits; fuel loans per entity; and PERS debt. The overall performance of entities in 238 communities have improved between FY2018 and FY2019 from 66 percent to 74 percent. The reduction in available staff resources to work with communities, delays in the timely reporting of information, the availability of community resources, and commitment to issue resolution will continue to be an ongoing challenge.

Target #1: All required reports are produced within regulatory deadlines. Methodology: Data from Local Boundary Commission (LBC) internal database. Analysis of results and challenges: Statutory requirements are met on every petition. The number of required reports produced by the Local Boundary Commission (LBC) or its staff can vary from year to year, depending on how many petitions are submitted. The LBC staff has many obligations such as assisting the public and communities with questions, administrative functions, coordinating and scheduling LBC meetings, public records requests, quarterly ethics reports, and traveling to communities. In FY2019 no new petitions were accepted for filing and no reports were required.

Target #2: Local Boundary Commission staff determines that all submitted petitions have met the statutory and regulatory requirements Methodology: Data from Local Boundary Commission (LBC) internal database. Analysis of results and challenges: The Local Boundary Commission (LBC) was created by the Constitution of the State of Alaska to ensure that arguments for and against proposals to create or alter municipal governments are analyzed objectively, and take area-wide and state-wide needs into consideration. LBC staff must respond to petitions when and as submitted. While several petitions may arrive in a year’s time, not all will meet the statutory and regulatory requirements to move forward to consideration by the LBC. In FY2019 no new petitions were filed.

Target #1: All statutorily required determinations completed. Methodology: Annual Alaska Taxable Report – Municipal Taxation Full Value Determination. Analysis of results and challenges: Full value equalization must occur for each city or borough that is a school district or that levies real property taxes. There are currently 25 municipalities that levy a property tax. The Office of the State Assessor also visits these communities to provide training to staff, Boards of Equalization, or when other technical needs arise. The details of each city and borough’s tax policies and assessment procedure vary widely making the on-site audits and assistance unique to each municipality. The remoteness of some jurisdictions also requires substantial travel time and expense. Data for prior fiscal years was corrected to represent the valid statutory requirement. These determinations require on-site visits to make adequate, defendable determinations. If these values are not correct, inequities in funding distribution will occur. The Office of the State Assessor also defends Full Value Determinations when and if appeals of the Full Value Determination occur.

Target #2: 100 percent of taxing municipalities are audited once every five years. Methodology: Data from Office of State Assessor (OSA) Scheduler. FY2016 data was a generalized statewide audit of property tax systems. Analysis of results and challenges: Currently 25 municipalities levy a property tax. State statutes require that each municipality have an audit of practices completed every five years. The Office of the State Assessor (OSA) also visits these communities to provide training to staff, Boards of Equalization or when other technical needs arise. The details of each city and borough’s tax policy and assessment procedure varies widely, making on-site audits and assistance unique to each municipality. The remoteness of some jurisdictions also requires substantial travel time and expense. We have completed two detailed audits: the Ketchikan Gateway Borough and the North Slope Borough. In FY2018, the OSA has conducted a statewide audit of property tax systems and technology that includes reporting and reviewing all property taxing jurisdictions’ systems and technology to ensure adequate systems exist and that tax rolls are equitable. This is a generalized audit of all jurisdictions rather than a detailed audit of a single jurisdiction. Future audits will return to audits of individual jurisdictions.

Target #1: Alaska ranks within the top ten among states on service and volunteerism. Methodology: The source is collected by the OnCorps reporting system and sub-grantee performance measures. The program cycle varies but is generally adjacent to the Calendar Year. Analysis of results and challenges: Prior to 2011, data collected and represented were based from the number of volunteers recruited not necessarily the number of hours volunteered. Currently, program data is represented by the number of hours and the number of volunteers. In 2014, two new programs participated in the AmeriCorps program, which resulted in an increase in hours served. Over the 2014-2016 timeframe, fewer organizations used AmeriCorps volunteers, resulting in lower hours served. 2017 numbers only include two programs. 2018 numbers will include the new programs in the Serve Alaska portfolio as the reporting period does not occur until October.

Target #1: The number of beneficiaries being served by AmeriCorps members and recruited volunteers will increase annually. Methodology: Data prior to 2011 was based on a spreadsheet format that was not consistent between programs but in 2012 programs began using a consistent measurement entry system of OnCorps. The program cycle varies but is generally adjacent to the Calendar Year. Analysis of results and challenges: Serve Alaska is responsible for recruitment and placement of volunteers in programs that receive assistance under the national service laws and ensure outreach to diverse community-based agencies that serve underrepresented populations. Starting in 2012, Serve Alaska contracted with a web-based reporting system called OnCorps that counted overall attendees instead of individual beneficiaries. This system was specifically designed to comply with Federal AmeriCorps programmatic and fiscal management. The system tracks and calculates required Federal and Alaskan demographics including the number Alaskan beneficiaries served. The significant decrease in beneficiaries served in 2016 is due to a loss of three programs. Over the 2014-2016 timeframe, Serve Alaska’s funded portfolio decreased by over half. 2018 numbers stayed fairly steady as new programs came onboard throughout the year.

Target #2: The number of volunteers recruited by AmeriCorps members in Alaska will increase annually. Methodology: The data from 2012 is collected from OnCorps Reports. Prior years from program self reporting. The program cycle varies and generally a year behind. There were fewer programs in 2012-2013 year that previously reported. Analysis of results and challenges: Through outreach efforts and coordination with the Corporation for National and Service, Serve Alaska helps Alaskan secure valuable work skills and experience while reaping the benefits of responsible citizenship and community service. The commission has helped to recruit, train, and deploy 2,500 volunteers across Alaska to address needs in education, homeland security, the environmental arena and public safety. Starting in 2013, Serve Alaska required all Alaska AmeriCorps programs to report on a federal performance measure. The performance measure has three outputs: number of Volunteer Opportunities created, number of Volunteers recruited (for these opportunities) and number of hours those volunteers served. All reporting is now completed in a web based reporting system called OnCorps. Now all of the Alaska AmeriCorps programs are reporting on the same effort, and within the same system, Serve Alaska’s numbers are higher and more accurate in comparison to the national level. In 2014 and 2015, two AmeriCorps programs chose not to reapply for funding, resulting in the significant reduction of the number of members serving the state. In 2016-2017, Serve Alaska brought on four new programs which has increased the number of AmeriCorps members serving. 2018 numbers stayed fairly steady as new programs came onboard and began programming.

Current as of December 9, 2019