agenda - integral care · 4/24/2017 · finance committee minutes . date: march 27, 2017 time:...

FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING Integral Care’s mission is to improve the lives of people affected by behavioral health and

developmental and/or intellectual challenges.

DATE: Monday, April 24, 2017 TIME: 12:00 p.m. PLACE: 1430 Collier St. – Board Room Austin, Texas 78704

AGENDA I. Citizens’ Comments (Presentations are limited to 3 minutes)

II. Approval of Finance Committee Minutes for March 27, 2017 – pages 1-8

III. Discuss and Take Appropriate Action on Cash & Investment Report – March,

2017 (Weden) – pages 9-11

IV. Discuss and Take Appropriate Action on Financial Statements and Amendments (if applicable) for the Period Ending March 31, 2017 (Subject to Audit) (Weden, Thompson) – pages 12-21

V. Update on Transformation 1115 Waiver (Weden, Macakiage) – pages 22-27

VI. Facilities Report (Spencer) – pages 28-100

VII. Announcements – page 101

VIII. New Business – page 102

• Identify Consent/Non-Consent Agenda Items IX. Citizens’ Comments (Presentations are limited to 3 minutes) – page 103

FINANCE COMMITTEE MINUTES

DATE: March 27, 2017 TIME: 12:00 p.m. PLACE: 1430 Collier St. – Board Room Austin, Texas 78704 MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom Young, Robert Chapa, Vince Torres (via phone) GUEST PRESENT: Melissa Rowan of Wertz & Rowan Center staff were in attendance. The meeting was called to order by Mr. Young at 12:00 p.m. I. CITIZENS’ COMMENTS None. II. APPROVAL OF FINANCE COMMITTEE MINUTES No changes were noted to the minutes of the February 20, 2017 meeting. They stand approved as submitted. III. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ON CASH & INVESTMENT REPORT FOR FEBRUARY, 2017 Mr. Chapa made a motion to recommend to the Board the acceptance of the Cash and Investment Report for February, 2017. Mr. Young seconded. Mr. Weden reviewed the Cash and Investment Report for February, 2017 stating the interest earned in 2/2017 was $8,730 and total market and book value at end of month was $30,401,332. He also stated there were no significant changes for the month. A comparison of FY 2016 vs. FY 2017 cash and investment amounts was reviewed. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried.

1 of 103

Finance Committee Minutes/Integral Care March 27, 2017 Page 2 IV. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ON FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND AMENDMENTS (IF APPLICABLE) FOR THE PERIOD ENDING FEBRUARY 28, 2017 (SUBJECT TO AUDIT) Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the acceptance of the Financial Statements and amendments (if applicable) for the period ending February 28, 2017 subject to audit. Mr. Chapa seconded. Mr. Weden and Ms. Thompson discussed the following information from the schedules found in the packet: Financial Summary, Balance Sheet General Operating Fund and Notes (Schedule N2), Combined (Schedule C1), Statement of Revenue and Expenditures and Notes (Schedule C2), Waiver (Schedule C3), and HCC. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. V. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION APPROVING RESOLUTIONS REGARDING APPROVAL OF TAX CREDIT DOCUMENTS Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval of Resolutions regarding approval of tax credit documents. Mr. Chapa seconded. Mr. Weden presented a brief introduction for agenda items V – XIII. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. VI. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND/OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP OF HOUSING FIRST OAK SPRINGS, LP Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval for the Chief Executive Officer and/or his designee to sign the agreement of limited partnership of Housing First Oak Springs, LP. Mr. Chapa seconded. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried.

2 of 103

Finance Committee Minutes/Integral Care March 27, 2017 Page 3 VII. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND/OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SIGN THE COMPANY AGREEMENT OF HOUSING FIRST OAK SPRINGS, GP, LLC Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval to authorize the Chief Executive Officer and/or his designee to sign the Company Agreement of Housing First Oak Springs, GP, LLC. Mr. Chapa seconded. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. VIII. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND/OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SIGN THE CONSENT OF SOLE MEMBER AND SOLE MANAGER IN LIEU OF ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING OF HOUSING FIRST OAK SPRINGS, GP, LLC Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval to authorize the Chief Executive Officer and/or his designee to sign the Consent of Sole Member and Sole Manager in Lieu of Organizational Meeting of Housing First Oak Springs, GP, LLC. Mr. Chapa seconded. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. IX. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND/OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SIGN THE CONSENT OF MEMBER AND MANAGERS IN LIEU OF SPECIAL MEETING OF HOUSING FIRST OAK SPRINGS, GP, LLC Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval to authorize the Chief Executive Officer and/or his designee to sign the Consent of Member and Managers in Lieu of Special Meeting of Housing First Oak Springs, GP, LLC. Mr. Chapa seconded. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. X. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AUTHORIZING LISA OTT LAKY TO SIGN THE CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION OF HOUSING FIRST, LLC AS ORGANIZER Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval to authorize Lisa Ott Laky to sign the Certificate of Formation of Housing First, LLC as Organizer.

3 of 103

Finance Committee Minutes/Integral Care March 27, 2017 Page 4 Mr. Chapa seconded. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. XI. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND/OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SIGN THE COMPANY AGREEMENT OF HOUSING FIRST, LLC Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval to authorize the Chief Executive Officer and/or his designee to sign the Company Agreement of Housing First, LLC. Mr. Chapa seconded. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. XII. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND/OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SIGN THE CONSENT OF SOLE MEMBER AND MANAGER IN LIEU OF ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING OF HOUSING FIRST, LLC Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval to authorize the Chief Executive Officer and/or his designee to sign the Consent of Sole Member and Manager in Lieu of Organizational Meeting of Housing First, LLC. Mr. Chapa seconded. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. XIII. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND/OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SIGN A PROMISSORY NOTE BETWEEN HOUSING FIRST OAK SPRINGS, LP AND AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH AND MENTAL RETARDATION CENTER (DBA INTEGRAL CARE) Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval to authorize the Chief Executive Officer and/or his designee to sign a Promissory note between Housing First Oak Springs, LP and Austin –Travis County Mental Health and Mental Retardation Center (dba Integral Care). Mr. Chapa seconded. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried.

4 of 103

Finance Committee Minutes/Integral Care March 27, 2017 Page 5 XIV. REQUEST TO ACCEPT FUNDING IF AWARDED FROM THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION FOR THE HCC DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING FIRST OAK SPRINGS Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board acceptance of funding, if awarded, from the Austin Housing Finance Corporation for the HCC Development of Housing First Oak Springs. Mr. Chapa seconded. Ms. Casey discussed background information on this funding. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. XV. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE GENERAL CONTRACTOR FOR RENOVATION SERVICES AT 1165 AIRPORT Mr. Chapa made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval of staff’s recommendation of the General Contractor for renovation services at 1165 Airport. Mr. Young seconded. Ms. Spencer reviewed the background and current status information found in the packet. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. XVI. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE FUNDING FOR ROOF REPLACEMENT AT 1430 COLLIER ST. Mr. Chapa made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval of funding for roof replacement at 1430 Collier St. Mr. Young seconded. Ms. Spencer reviewed the background and current status information found in the packet. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried.

5 of 103

Finance Committee Minutes/Integral Care March 27, 2017 Page 6 XVII. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND/OR HIS DESIGNEE TO ACCEPT, IF AWARDED, THE DRUG-FREE COMMUNITIES SUPPORT PROGRAM GRANT Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval authorizing the CEO and/or his designee to accept, if awarded, the Drug-Free Communities Support Program Grant. Mr. Chapa seconded. Mr. Weden reviewed the background and current status information found in the packet. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. XVIII. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER/CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND/OR DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTING TO OPEN A BROKERAGE ACCOUNT WITH EDWARD D. JONES AND COMPANY, LP (DBA EDWARD JONES) Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the authorization for the CAO/CFO and/or Director of Accounting to open a brokerage account with Edward D. Jones and Company, LP (dba Edward Jones). Mr. Chapa seconded. Mr. Weden discussed the background and current status information found in the packet. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. XIX. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AUTHORIZING APPROVAL FOR THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND/OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SIGN A CONTRACT WITH ALERTMEDIA FOR SAFESIGNAL AND ALERTMEDIA NOTIFICATION CENTER. Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board the approval for the CEO and/or his designee to sign a contract with AlertMedia for SafeSignal and AlertMedia Notification Center. Mr. Chapa seconded. Mr. Weden discussed the background and current status information found in the packet. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried.

6 of 103

Finance Committee Minutes/Integral Care March 27, 2017 Page 7 XX. RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE CONTRACT FOR MILITARY VETERANS PEER NETWORK (MVPN) SERVICES TO THE SAMARITAN CENTER (P&O AGENDA ITEM) Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board approval of a contract for Military Veterans Peer Network Services to the Samaritan Center. Mr. Chapa seconded. Ms. Lynch and Mr. Dominguez discussed the background, projected workload, RFP Review Committee evaluation, PNAC follow-up and discussion, and award information. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. XXI. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ON FY 2018 BUDGET DEVELOPMENT CALENDAR Mr. Young made a motion to recommend to the Board approval of the FY 2018 Budget Development Calendar. Mr. Chapa seconded. Mr. Weden discussed the proposed budget calendar and the primary challenges of implementing the FY 2018 budget. Discussion followed. All were in favor. Motion carried. XXII. DISCUSSION OF INVITATION FOR BID (IFB) FOR NEW AUDITING FIRM Mr. Weden stated that the IFB will be prepared by staff which will include a list of qualifications and experience, i.e. previous work with community centers, experience with 990’s, audit plans, price, etc. Discussion followed. XXIII. DISCUSSION OF FINANCIAL RATIOS Mr. Weden reviewed the information including Current Ratio, Acid Test Ratio, Days Cash on Hand, Days of Operation (Unrestricted fund balance w/o capital expenditures) and Days of Operation (Total fund balance). Discussion followed.

7 of 103

Finance Committee Minutes/Integral Care March 27, 2017 Page 8 XXIV. UPDATE ON FISCAL YEAR 2017 BUSINESS PLAN Mr. Weden discussed the information found in the Business Plan notebook given to the Board. He stated that this information is shared with the Executive Management Team at their weekly meeting. Discussion followed. XXV. UPDATE ON NEW MILESTONES FOUNDATION Ms. Irwin discussed the following information regarding NMF: 2017 Slate of Officers, Strategic Plan Update, 2017 Bridging the Gap Gala, 2017 Bridging the Gap Gala Committee, and the next Board meeting scheduled for April 4, 2017. Discussion followed. XXVI. DISCUSSION OF FY 2017 DASHBOARD FINANCIAL METRICS Dr. Baker and Melissa Rowan discussed the information found in the packet on pages 123-138. Dr. Baker stated that there are three levels of the Dashboard – information for Planning and Operations Committee, for Finance Committee, and for the full Board of Trustees. Discussion followed. XXVII. ANNOUNCEMENTS None. XXVIII. NEW BUSINESS • Non-Consent: Item IV, XIII, XV • Consent: Items: III, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII, XIV, XVI, XVII, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI XXIX . CITIZENS’ COMMENTS None. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 1:10 p.m. __________________________________ ___________________________ Tom Young, Chair Date Libby Worsham, Finance Committee Executive Assistant

Libby Worsham

8 of 103

9 of 103

Mar'15 Mar'16 Mar'17Interest Rate 0.29% 0.36% 0.41%Earnings 5,067 5,426 8,944

0.00%

0.05%

0.10%

0.15%

0.20%

0.25%

0.30%

0.35%

0.40%

0.45%

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

Mar

-15

Apr

-15

May

-15

Jun-

15

Jul-1

5

Aug

-15

Sep-

15

Oct

-15

Nov

-15

Dec

-15

Jan-

16

Feb-

16

Mar

-16

Apr

-16

May

-16

Jun-

16

Jul-1

6

Aug

-16

Sep-

16

Oct

-16

Nov

-16

Dec

-16

Jan-

17

Feb-

17

Mar

-17

Inte

rest

Rat

es

Dol

lars

Interest Rates and EarningsComparison

10 of 103

LIST OF SECURITIESFor the month ended March 31, 2017

Investments AverageCash and Purchase Book Interest Maturity Days to

Cash Equivalents Dates Values Rates Dates Maturity

Chase Bank of TexasChase Bank Depository Account 6/1/2007 16,037,989 0.30% 1

Frost BankFrost Bank Depository Account 2/1/2017 10,005,737 0.53% 1

Short-term Investments:TexPool Fund - Operating 6/1/2007 1,913,386 0.62% 1TexPool Fund - Midelburg Trust 6/1/2007 311,665 0.62% 1

Total 28,268,778$ 0.41% 1

11 of 103

Operations Waiver

Sub-Total Operations &

Waiver Capital Projects Total

Total Annual Budget - Current $ 75,327,424 $ 17,288,685 $ 92,616,109 $ 26,352,978 $ 118,969,087 Total Annual Budget - Original $ 74,299,518 $ 17,313,179 $ 91,612,697 $ 26,352,978 $ 117,965,675 Total Budget Amendments $ 1,027,906 $ (24,494) $ 1,003,412 $ - $ 1,003,412

Year-to-Date (YTD) Net $ 315,273 $ 818,968 $ 1,134,241 $ (938,369) $ 195,872 Year-to-Date Planned Fund Balance Exp $ (107,629) $ (107,629) (921,334)$ $ (1,028,963) Year-to-Date Net (without FB planned loss) $ 422,902 $ 818,968 $ 1,241,870 $ (17,036) $ 1,224,834 Note: Settlement on outstanding FFS claims, $76,180

Notes: 1) Reserve

$ 218,473

2) Fund Balance Fund Balance

Category 2016 Ending

Fund Balance FY2017 YTD

Net Operations FY2017 YTD Fund Balance

Fund Balance Days of

Operation Operations Unassigned 9,854,862$ $ (407,504) $ 9,447,358 $ 9,447,358 Midelberg Restricted 6,653 - $ 6,653 Waiver Assigned 6,673,245 818,968 $ 7,492,213 $ 7,492,213 Sale of NLJ/Purchase Renovation 1165 Airport Assigned 4,281,431 (215,593) $ 4,065,838

Total Fund Balance 20,816,191$ $ 195,872 $ 21,012,063 $ 16,939,571

Annual Budget Used to Date Budget Balance Total Unrestricted / Waiver FB $ 16,939,571 FY17 Fund Balance Budget (1,225,175)

(1,000,000)$ $ (118,887) $ (881,113) FY2017 YTD Adj Fund Balance $ 15,714,396 (600,000) - (600,000) YTD Average Operations Expense $ 226,131 (659,139) (586,854) (72,285) YTD Unrestricted Days of Operation 69(137,478) (57,616) (79,862)(150,000) (50,013) (99,987)

(2,546,617)$ (813,370)$ (1,733,247)$ 508,072 508,072

(2,038,545)$ (813,370)$ (1,225,175)$ (4,500,000) (215,593) (4,284,407)(6,538,545)$ (1,028,963)$ (5,509,582)$

21,851$ (6,516,694)$

3) Capital Projects Include: Budget YTD Revenue YTD Expense YTD Net IT Project Plan Future EMR 1,000,000$ -$ $ 118,887 $ (118,887)Collier Facility Roof Replacement 600,000 - - - The Herman Center Facility Construction 4,331,821 2,549,096 3,135,950 (586,854)HCC Oaksprings Facility 15,921,157 1,400,000 1,403,477 (3,477)Airport Facility Renovation 4,500,000 - 215,593 (215,593)S. Lamar New Lease Build-Out - - 13,559 (13,559)

Total Capital Projects $ 26,352,978 $ 3,949,096 $ 4,887,465 $ (938,369)

Integral CareFinancial Summary Period Ending March 31, 2017

Included in budget are reserves, DSHS Adult ($174,136) and Child ($44,337)

2017 Fund Balance BudgetUnrestricted:IT Project Plan Future EMR

Total FY2017 Original Fund Balance Budget

Collier Facility Roof ReplacementThe Herman Center Facility Construction Early Child Intervention (ECI) ProgramUnallowable Type Expenses (recurring type expenses)

Total Unrestricted Fund Balance BudgetWaiver Fund Balance Contribution Budget (Profit)

FY2017 Unrestricted & Waiver Fund Balance Budget Airport Facility Renovation (restricted sale of NLJ Property)

Total FY2017 Amended Fund Balance Budgette: Sept Budget Amendment reduce Waiver FB Contribution Budget (fr $529,923 to $508,072)

12 of 103

Balance Sheet - General Operating Fund - Schedule N2As of 03/31/2017

Schedule N2 Balance Sheet Gen. Op. Fund

BeginningBalance

9/01/2016

Prior PeriodBalance

2/28/2017

Current PeriodBalance

3/31/2017

Notes Current Period % Change

Year To Date % Change

AssetsCurrent Assets

Cash 17,689,459$ 30,410,219$ 28,274,704$ (7.02%) 59.84%Accounts Receivable 16,032,605 12,248,138 13,251,005 (1) 8.19% (17.35%)Deposits and Prepaids 599,366 559,020 486,412 (12.99%) (18.85%)Inventory 0 0 0

Total Current Assets 34,321,430$ 43,217,376$ 42,012,121$ (2.79%) 22.41%Noncurrent Assets

Investment in Tejas -$ -$ -$ Investment in NMF 128,649 128,649$ 128,649$ 0.00% 0.00%Investment in Housing First Oak Springs 0 0 0

Total Noncurrent Assets 128,649$ 128,649$ 128,649$ 0.00% 0.00%Total Assets 34,450,079$ 43,346,025$ 42,140,770$ (2.78%) 22.32%

LiabilitiesCurrent Liabilities

Interfund Payables 436,571$ 419,447$ 414,212$ (1.25%) (5.12%)Accounts Payable 4,480,801 1,749,222 1,478,427 (2) (15.48%) (67.01%)Deferred Revenue 4,631,854 14,982,001 16,291,415 (3) 8.74% 251.73%Fringe Payables 2,506,735 2,958,686 1,267,619 (57.16%) (49.43%)

Total Current Liabilities 12,055,961$ 20,109,356$ 19,451,672$ (3.27%) 61.34%Noncurrent Liabilities

Accrued Compensated Absences 1,577,927$ 1,740,232$ 1,677,035$ (3.63%) 6.28%Total Noncurrent Liabilities 1,577,927$ 1,740,232$ 1,677,035$ (3.63%) 6.28%

Total Liabilities 13,633,888$ 21,849,588$ 21,128,707$ (3.30%) 54.97%

Fund EquityFund Balance - Operations

Fund Balance - Operations 9,861,515$ 9,861,515$ 9,861,515$ 0.00% 0.00%Net Income - Operations 0 205,410 315,273 53.48%Net Income - Capital Projects (excluding Airport) 0 (123,074) (722,777) 487.27%

Total Fund Balance - Operations 9,861,515$ 9,943,851$ 9,454,011$ (4) (4.93%) (4.13%)Fund Balance - 1115 Waiver

Fund Balance - 1115 Waiver 6,673,245$ 6,673,245$ 6,673,245$ 0.00% 0.00%Net Income - 1115 Waiver 0 663,416 818,968 23.45%

Total Fund Balance - 1115 Waiver 6,673,245$ 7,336,661$ 7,492,213$ (5) 2.12% 12.27%Fund Balance - Airport Building Capital Project

Fund Balance - Airport Building Capital Project 4,281,431$ 4,281,431$ 4,281,431$ 0.00% 0.00%Net Income - Airport Building Capital Project 0 (65,506) (215,593) 229.12%

Total Fund Balance - Airport Building Capital Projec 4,281,431$ 4,215,925$ 4,065,839$ (6) (3.56%) (5.04%)Total Fund Equity 20,816,192$ 21,496,437$ 21,012,063$ (2.25%) 0.94%Total Liabilities and Fund Equity 34,450,079$ 43,346,025$ 42,140,770$ (2.78%) 22.32%

- - - - - 13 of 103

Note 1 Accounts Receivable, $13,251,0053rd Party FFS A/R 1,000,7373rd Party FFS A/R - Allowance (311,840)

Sub-Total 3rd Party FFS A/R 688,897Contracts Receivable 7,911,726Contracts Receivable - Accrued Revenue (Central Health, MAC, etc/) 3,826,023Employee Advances - Payroll Pay Period Conversion 492,061Payroll Accrued Exp - Match Revenue Cost Reimbursement Contracts 166,931Employee Insurance Receivable 155,883Rental Operations 9,485

Total Accounts Receivable 13,251,005

Note 2 Accounts Payable, $1,478,427:Accrued Accounts Payable (mainly Contract Provider Exp and DSHS/DADS 2016 unspent cost reimb advances) 1,246,923Other 231,504

Total Accounts Payable 1,478,427

Note 3Waiver Funds 6,800,136 DSHS 3,690,911 St. David's EOU 1,730,405 DADS 1,246,071 Central Health 636,623 City of Austin Interlocal 735,258 DSHS Match - Rehab/CM Match 322,012 HCC MATCH (NMF, DACC, Lola Wright) 366,382 All Other 763,616

Total Deferred Revenue 16,291,415

Note 4 Fund Balance Operations, $9,454,011(includes Midelberg):Fund Balance Ending 8/31/2016 (includes operations & Midelberg) 9,861,515FY2017 YTD Net Operations 315,273FY2017 Capital Projects Net (excluding Airport Facility) (722,777)

Fund Balance Ending (Operations & Midelberg) 9,454,011

Note 5 Fund Balance Waiver, $7,492,213:Fund Balance Ending 8/31/2016 6,673,245FY2017 YTD Net Waiver 818,968

Total Waiver Fund Balance 7,492,213

Note 6 Fund Balance Airport Building Sale/Purchase/Renovation, $4,065,838:Fund Balance Ending 8/31/2016 4,281,4312017 Renovation Airport Building (215,592)

Total Building Sale/Purchase Fund Balance 4,065,839

BALANCE SHEET NOTES Period Ending 3/31/2017

Deferred Revenue, $16,291,415:

14 of 103

Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Schedule C1 - CombinedFrom 3/01/2017 Through 3/31/2017

Schedule C1 - Combined Original Budget Budget

Revisions Revised Budget Current Month

Actual YTD Actual YTD Budget YTD Variance Percent

VarianceREVENUES Local Funds City of Austin 8,101,521$ -$ 8,101,521$ 397,997$ 2,262,173$ 4,725,903$ (2,463,730)$ (52.13%) Travis County 5,454,161 476,008 5,930,169 425,400 2,913,115 3,459,274 (546,159) (15.79%) Central Health 10,085,269 - 10,085,269 968,883 5,685,640 5,883,073 (197,433) (3.36%) Other Local 19,522,655 267,920 19,790,575 (66,710) 4,302,539 11,544,533 (7,241,994) (62.73%)Total Local Funds 43,163,606$ 743,928$ 43,907,534$ 1,725,570$ 15,163,467$ 25,612,783$ (10,449,316)$ (40.80%) State Funds DSHS Mental Health 27,473,901$ 190,877$ 27,664,778$ 3,215,538$ 15,596,720$ 16,137,828$ (541,108)$ (3.35%) DSHS Substance Abuse 2,420,402 (209,350) 2,211,052 219,440 1,317,132 1,289,792 27,340 2.12% DADS 4,226,581 6,053 4,232,634 306,714 2,288,077 2,469,054 (180,977) (7.33%) TCOOMMI 1,821,958 - 1,821,958 205,740 1,029,478 1,062,803 (33,325) (3.14%) DARS (Early Childhood Intervention) 636,610 - 636,610 52,058 376,364 371,357 5,007 1.35% Other State 351,286 120,214 471,500 16,037 151,681 275,037 (123,356) (44.85%)Total State Funds 36,930,738$ 107,794$ 37,038,532$ 4,015,527$ 20,759,451$ 21,605,871$ (846,420)$ (3.92%) Federal Funds Medicare/Medicaid/HMO 10,738,243$ 129,839$ 10,868,082$ 972,437$ 5,799,727$ 6,339,704$ (539,977)$ (8.52%) HCS/Tx Hm Lvg Waiver 297,273 - 297,273 24,193 137,444 173,411 (35,967) (20.74%) Other Federal 3,747,123 - 3,747,123 320,705 1,951,175 2,185,820 (234,645) (10.73%)Total Federal Funds 14,782,639$ 129,839$ 14,912,478$ 1,317,335$ 7,888,346$ 8,698,935$ (810,589)$ (9.32%) Waiver Funds 1115 Waiver 16,571,998$ -$ 16,571,998$ 1,317,429$ 9,211,490$ 9,666,993$ (455,503)$ (4.71%)Total Waiver Funds 16,571,998$ -$ 16,571,998$ 1,317,429$ 9,211,490$ 9,666,993$ (455,503)$ (4.71%)

Total REVENUES 111,448,981$ 981,561$ 112,430,542$ 8,375,861$ 53,022,754$ 65,584,582$ (12,561,828)$ (19.15%)

EXPENDITURES Operating expenditures Salaries 46,222,643$ 559,001$ 46,781,644$ 3,574,012$ 24,867,524$ 27,289,388$ 2,421,864$ 8.87% Fringe benefits 12,844,427 48,038 12,892,465 812,329 6,268,526 7,520,863 1,252,337 16.65% Travel/Workshop 892,265 48,862 941,127 51,671 494,171 549,101 54,930 10.00% Prescription Drugs & Medicine 1,857,310 - 1,857,310 32,868 290,041 1,083,460 793,419 73.23% Consumable Supplies 282,159 16,500 298,659 32,466 168,410 174,314 5,904 3.39% Contracts & Consultants 21,586,868 139,771 21,726,639 2,842,098 11,569,909 12,673,878 1,103,969 8.71% Capital Outlay 23,259,798 100 23,259,898 566,425 3,233,326 13,568,275 10,334,949 76.17% Furniture & Equipment 1,063,383 59,157 1,122,540 100,961 674,459 654,948 (19,511) (2.98%) Facility/Telephone/Utility 5,199,584 27,897 5,227,481 611,240 3,122,565 3,049,662 (72,903) (2.39%) Insurance Costs 310,529 1,246 311,775 24,420 173,556 181,888 8,332 4.58% Transportation Costs 120,270 - 120,270 5,683 48,156 70,161 22,005 31.36% Professional Fees 651,427 - 651,427 251,573 620,948 379,981 (240,967) (63.42%) Other Operating Costs 2,442,398 39,917 2,482,315 53,744 425,283 1,448,027 1,022,744 70.63% Client Support Costs 1,232,614 62,923 1,295,537 107,692 870,438 755,790 (114,648) (15.17%)Total Operating expenditures 117,965,675$ 1,003,412$ 118,969,087$ 9,067,183$ 52,827,312$ 69,399,736$ 16,572,424$ 23.88%Total EXPENDITURES 117,965,675$ 1,003,412$ 118,969,087$ 9,067,183$ 52,827,312$ 69,399,736$ 16,572,424$ 23.88%

Total Gain/Loss Operating before FB (6,516,694)$ (21,851)$ (6,538,545)$ (691,322)$ 195,442$ (3,815,154)$ 4,010,596$ (105.12%)

Fund Balance Fund Balance 6,516,694$ 21,851$ 6,538,545$ 3$ 429$ 3,814,153$ (3,813,724)$ (99.99%)Total Fund Balance 6,516,694$ 21,851$ 6,538,545$ 3$ 429$ 3,814,153$ (3,813,724)$ (99.99%)

Total Gain/Loss Operating With FB -$ -$ -$ (691,318)$ 195,871$ (1,001)$ 196,872$ 15 of 103

Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Schedule C2 - OperationsFrom 3/01/2017 Through 3/31/2017

Schedule C2 - Operations Original Budget

Budget Revisions Revised Budget

Current Month Actual YTD Actual YTD Budget YTD Variance Notes

Percent Variance

REVENUES Local Funds City of Austin 5,101,521$ -$ 5,101,521$ 397,997$ 2,262,173$ 2,975,903$ (713,730)$ (1) (23.98%) Travis County 5,454,161 476,008 5,930,169 425,400 2,913,115 3,459,274 (546,159) (2) (15.79%) Central Health 10,085,269 - 10,085,269 968,883 5,685,640 5,883,073 (197,433) (3) (3.36%) Other Local 3,061,625 396,417 3,458,042 (72,605) 1,726,384 2,017,211 (290,827) (4) (14.42%)Total Local Funds 23,702,576$ 872,425$ 24,575,001$ 1,719,675$ 12,587,312$ 14,335,461$ (1,748,149)$ (12.19%) State Funds DSHS Mental Health 25,394,036$ 190,877$ 25,584,913$ 2,081,067$ 14,196,720$ 14,924,574$ (727,854)$ (5) (4.88%) DSHS Substance Abuse 2,420,402 (209,350) 2,211,052 219,440 1,317,132 1,289,792 27,340 2.12% DADS 4,226,581 6,053 4,232,634 306,714 2,288,077 2,469,054 (180,977) (6) (7.33%) TCOOMMI 1,821,958 - 1,821,958 205,740 1,029,478 1,062,803 (33,325) (3.14%) DARS (Early Childhood Intervention) 636,610 - 636,610 52,058 376,364 371,357 5,007 1.35% Other State 351,286 120,214 471,500 16,037 151,681 275,037 (123,356) (7) (44.85%)Total State Funds 34,850,873$ 107,794$ 34,958,667$ 2,881,056$ 19,359,451$ 20,392,617$ (1,033,166)$ (5.07%) Federal Funds Medicare/Medicaid/HMO 9,373,702$ 1,342$ 9,375,044$ 823,550$ 4,995,686$ 5,468,764$ (473,078)$ (8) (8.65%) HCS/Tx Hm Lvg Waiver 297,273 - 297,273 24,193 137,444 173,411 (35,967) (20.74%) Other Federal 3,747,123 - 3,747,123 320,705 1,951,175 2,185,820 (234,645) (9) (10.73%)Total Federal Funds 13,418,098$ 1,342$ 13,419,440$ 1,168,447$ 7,084,305$ 7,827,995$ (743,690)$ (9.50%) Waiver Funds 1115 Waiver 2,040,493$ 46,345$ 2,086,838$ 164,593$ 1,156,812$ 1,217,321$ (60,509)$ (10) (4.97%)Total Waiver Funds 2,040,493$ 46,345$ 2,086,838$ 164,593$ 1,156,812$ 1,217,321$ (60,509)$ 4.97%

Total REVENUES 74,012,040$ 1,027,906$ 75,039,946$ 5,933,771$ 40,187,880$ 43,773,394$ (3,585,514)$ (8.19%)

EXPENDITURES Operating expenditures Salaries 36,708,192$ 442,370$ 37,150,562$ 2,873,397$ 19,810,166$ 21,671,237$ 1,861,071$ 8.59% Fringe benefits 10,273,827 52,731 10,326,558 655,390 5,023,287 6,024,088 1,000,801 16.61% Travel/Workshop 716,647 48,862 765,509 44,321 428,076 446,649 18,573 4.16% Prescription Drugs & Medicine 446,567 - 446,567 30,552 256,752 260,519 3,767 1.45% Consumable Supplies 237,512 16,500 254,012 27,450 140,977 148,246 7,269 4.90% Contracts & Consultants 18,152,171 276,203 18,428,374 1,594,074 9,645,538 10,749,886 1,104,348 (13) 10.27% Capital Outlay 111,362 100 111,462 1,127 22,672 65,023 42,351 65.13% Furniture & Equipment 838,310 59,157 897,467 84,965 533,593 523,642 (9,951) (1.90%) Facility/Telephone/Utility 4,232,434 27,897 4,260,331 477,542 2,500,814 2,485,413 (15,401) (0.62%) Insurance Costs 244,544 1,246 245,790 19,808 140,616 143,388 2,772 1.93% Transportation Costs 100,150 - 100,150 3,906 37,759 58,415 20,656 35.36% Professional Fees 182,480 - 182,480 14,576 95,182 106,428 11,246 10.57% Other Operating Costs 888,598 39,917 928,515 52,471 380,282 541,646 161,364 (14) 29.79% Client Support Costs 1,166,724 62,923 1,229,647 106,600 857,323 717,346 (139,977) (15) (19.51%)Total Operating expenditures 74,299,518$ 1,027,906$ 75,327,424$ 5,986,179$ 39,873,037$ 43,941,926$ 4,068,889$ 9.26%Total EXPENDITURES 74,299,518$ 1,027,906$ 75,327,424$ 5,986,179$ 39,873,037$ 43,941,926$ 4,068,889$ 9.26%

Total Gain/Loss Operating before FB (287,478)$ -$ (287,478)$ (52,408)$ 314,843$ (168,532)$ 483,375$ (286.82%)

Fund Balance Fund Balance 287,478$ -$ 287,478$ 3$ 429$ 167,699$ (167,270)$ (11) (99.74%)Total Fund Balance 287,478$ -$ 287,478$ 3$ 429$ 167,699$ (167,270)$ (99.74%)

Total Gain/Loss Operating With FB -$ -$ -$ (52,404)$ 315,273$ (833)$ 316,106$

(12)

16 of 103

Note 1: City of Austin - YTD Budget Variance ($713,730):City HCC Bond Operations ($350,000) City of Austin ACT (City's 1115 project) (343,323) Cost ReimbursementOther (5 cost reimbursement type contracts) (20,407)

Total City of Austin Budget Variance ($713,730)

Note 2: Travis County - YTD Budget Variance ($546,159):SAMSO contract $221,705Child System of Care (124,927)Travis County - Families With Voice (FWV) (197,447)Travis County Correctional Complex (286,325)All Other (6 contracts) (159,165)

Total Travis County Budget Variance ($546,159)

Note 3: Central Health - YTD Budget Variance ($197,433):In-Patient ($243,147) Cost Reimbursement, contract end 9/30 spend DSHS 1stCommUnity Care- EMERGE Program 45,714 Anticipate contract increase

Total Central Health Budget Variance ($197,433)

Note 4: Other Local -YTD Budget Variance ($290,827):St. David's Herman Center (EOU) ($692,502) Anticipate opening JuneSt. David's Mental Health First Aid ($206,293) Contract recently executed, variance based on 1/2 half fiscal yearSeton In-School ($89,658)Cost Reimbursement - Contra Budget on Est Unearned Contract 464,765 Cost Reimbursement contracts that may not spend total contract Payroll Accrued Exp - Match Revenue Cost Reimbursement Contracts 166,931 No BudgetAll Other (20 line items) 65,930

Total Other Local Budget Variance ($290,827)

Note 5: DSHS MH - YTD Budget Variance ($727,854):DSHS - General Revenue Reserve ($145,914) DSHS - In-Patient (704,953) DSHS - Rental Assistance 107,620DSHS - RA1SE (1st psychotic episode) (49,559)DSHS - HCC (billing HCS 1st then COA $600K end of year) 193,684DSHS - All Other, 8 programs (128,732)

Total DSHS MH Budget Variance ($727,854)

REVENUE BUDGET VARIANCE NOTES - OPERATIONSPeriod Ending 3/31/2017

17 of 103

Note 6: DADS - YTD Budget Variance ($180,977):Crisis Respite 63,946Transitional Support (HUB) (77,662)Crisis Intervention Specialist (60,507)PASRR (75,348)CLOIP / Enhanced Community Coordination (31,406)

Total DADS Budget Variance ($180,977)

Note 7: Other State - YTD Budget Variance ($123,356):CPRIT (unallowed billing prior years $21K) (123,356)

Total TCOOMMI Budget Variance ($123,356)

Note 8: Medicare/Medicaid/HMO - YTD Budget Variance ($473,078):MH - HMO & Medicaid $10,841SUD - HMO & Medicaid 12,324Case Management - HMO & Medicaid (62,062)Rehab - HMO & Medicaid (527,404)Medicare (51,425)IDD Service Coordination (10,941)Reserve - Unearned FFS contra budget 155,589

Total Medicare/Medicaid/HMO Budget Variance ($473,078)

Note 9: Other Federal - ($234,645):VA Safehaven ($86,936)HUD Supported Housing (36,022)MAC (47,797) EOU ytd bud (70,658) All Other, 5 programs (63,890)

Total Other Federal Budget Variance ($234,645)

Note 10: Waiver - ($60,509): Waiver in Program Indirect-reserve match expenses Program Indirect ($60,509) UT medical school collaboration

Total Waiver Budget Variance ($60,509)

Note 11: Fund Balance - ($167,270):Total Annual Fund Balance Budget Unallowable $150,000, no rev, ytd budget is variance ($87,500)Total Annual Fund Balance Budget ECI $137,478, no rev, ytd budget is variance (80,199)Midelberg Interest Income 429

Total Fund Balance Budget Variance ($167,270)

18 of 103

EXPENSE BUDGET VARIANCE NOTES - OPERATIONSPeriod Ending 3/31/2017

Note 12: Note 13: Note 14: Note 15: Total

Major Funding Types:

Salaries & Fringe

BenefitsContracts & Consultants

Other Operating

Client Support

Cost

Expense Categories

with Budget Variances > or < $50k

1.) Capital Projects $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ 2.) Cost Reimbursement 1,705,650 1,066,983 14,971 (102,901) 2,684,703$ 3.) FFS Contract Max 216,865 (107,435) 4,234 (24,546) 89,118$ 4.) DSHS Adult & Child / Housing 350,429 39,945 16,927 (5,767) 401,534$ 5.) DADS 160,809 16,845 5,300 (54) 182,900$ 6.) TxHmLvg 16,371 19,753 (56) 3,538 39,606$ 7.) Program Support & Community Collaboratives 30,328 45,547 81,588 (10,823) 146,640$ 8.) Admin / Authority 381,420 22,710 38,400 576 443,106$

Total Expense (over)/under YTD Budget 2,861,872$ 1,104,348$ 161,364$ (139,977)$ 3,987,607$

Major Funding Category Notes YTD Budget Variances $50,000 & >:Contracts & Consultants - Cost Reimbursement 1,066,983$

Contracts & Consultants - FFS Contract Max (107,435)$

Note 14Other Operating - Program Support & Comm Collaboratives

81,588$

Note 15 Client Support Cost - Cost Reimbursement (102,901)$ DSHS Rental Assit ($75K); HUD $44K; SAMSO ($48K); Travis County System of Care ($49K); All Other 25 programs $25K under budget

General Note: All contracts are budgeted at contract amount. In some instances we will budget a contra budget if we believe that we do not have the capacity to earn all funds, ie some DSHS SUD contracts.

Note 13

DSHS In-Patient $705K; DSHS HCC $113K; Travis County Family with Voices $140K; Travis County System of Care $197K; Extended Observation Program $120K; SAMSO ($136K); Community Care ($109K); All Other 17 programs $37K under budget

YES Waiver ($127K); 5 Other programs $20K under budget

Unallowable Exp Unit $27K; CTAAFC $38; All Other 7 Programs $17K

19 of 103

Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Schedule C3 - WaiverFrom 3/01/2017 Through 3/31/2017

Schedule C3 - Waiver Original Budget


Current Month Actual YTD Actual YTD Budget YTD Variance

Percent Variance

REVENUES Local Funds Other Local 1,947,056$ (128,497)$ 1,818,559$ 5,895$ 27,059$ 1,060,836$ (1,033,777)$ (97.45%) Total Local Funds 1,947,056$ (128,497)$ 1,818,559$ 5,895$ 27,059$ 1,060,836$ (1,033,777)$ (97.45%) Federal Funds Medicare/Medicaid/HMO 1,364,541 128,497 1,493,038 148,888 804,041 870,940 (66,899) (7.68%)Total Federal Funds 1,364,541$ 128,497$ 1,493,038$ 148,888$ 804,041$ 870,940$ (66,899)$ (7.68%) Waiver Funds 1115 Waiver 14,531,505 (46,345) 14,485,160 1,152,836 8,054,678 8,449,672 (394,994) (4.67%)Total Waiver Funds 14,531,505$ (46,345)$ 14,485,160$ 1,152,836$ 8,054,678$ 8,449,672$ (394,994)$ (4.67%)Total REVENUES 17,843,102$ (46,345)$ 17,796,757$ 1,307,619$ 8,885,778$ 10,381,448$ (1,495,670)$ (14.41%)

EXPENDITURES Operating expenditures Salaries 9,514,451$ 116,631$ 9,631,082$ 700,615$ 5,057,357$ 5,618,151$ 560,794$ 9.98% Fringe benefits 2,570,600 (4,693) 2,565,907 156,939 1,245,239 1,496,775 251,536 16.81% Travel/Workshop 175,618 - 175,618 7,350 66,095 102,452 36,357 35.49% Prescription Drugs & Medicine 1,410,743 - 1,410,743 2,316 33,290 822,941 789,651 95.95% Consumable Supplies 44,647 - 44,647 5,016 27,433 26,068 (1,365) (5.24%) Contracts & Consultants 2,161,170 (136,432) 2,024,738 218,845 856,133 1,181,103 324,970 27.51% Furniture & Equipment 225,073 - 225,073 15,996 140,865 131,306 (9,559) (7.28%) Facility/Telephone/Utility 967,150 - 967,150 80,717 539,508 564,249 24,741 4.38% Insurance Costs 65,985 - 65,985 4,612 32,940 38,500 5,560 14.44% Transportation Costs 20,120 - 20,120 1,777 10,397 11,746 1,349 11.48% Professional Fees 237 - 237 196 621 140 (481) (343.57%) Other Operating Costs 91,495 - 91,495 1,272 43,816 53,368 9,552 17.90% Client Support Costs 65,890 - 65,890 1,091 13,116 38,444 25,328 65.88%Total Operating expenditures 17,313,179$ (24,494)$ 17,288,685$ 1,196,743$ 8,066,810$ 10,085,243$ 2,018,433$ 20.01%Total EXPENDITURES 17,313,179$ (24,494)$ 17,288,685$ 1,196,743$ 8,066,810$ 10,085,243$ 2,018,433$ 20.01%

Total Gain/Loss Operating 529,923 (21,851) 508,072 110,875 818,968 296,205 522,763

Fund Balance Fund Balance (529,923)$ 21,851$ (508,072)$ -$ -$ (296,373)$ 296,373$ (100.00%)Total Fund Balance (529,923)$ 21,851$ (508,072)$ -$ -$ (296,373)$ 296,373$ (100.00%)

Total Gain/Loss Operating With FB -$ -$ -$ 110,875$ 818,968$ (168)$ 819,136$

20 of 103

Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Schedule C4 - Capital ProjectsFrom 3/01/2017 Through 3/31/2017

Schedule C4 - Capital Projects Original Budget


Current Month Actual YTD Actual YTD Budget YTD Variance

Percent Variance

REVENUES Local Funds City of Austin 3,000,000$ -$ 3,000,000$ -$ -$ 1,750,000$ (1,750,000)$ (100.00%) Other Local 14,513,974 - 14,513,974 - 2,549,096 8,466,486 (5,917,390) (69.89%) Total Local Funds 17,513,974$ -$ 17,513,974$ -$ 2,549,096$ 10,216,486$ (7,667,390)$ (75.05%) State Funds DSHS Mental Health 2,079,865 - 2,079,865 1,134,472 1,400,000 1,213,254 186,746 15.39%Total State Funds 2,079,865$ -$ 2,079,865$ 1,134,472$ 1,400,000$ 1,213,254$ 186,746$ 15.39%Total REVENUES 19,593,839$ -$ 19,593,839$ 1,134,472$ 3,949,096$ 11,429,740$ (7,480,644)$ (65.45%)

EXPENDITURES Operating expenditures Contracts & Consultants 1,273,527$ -$ 1,273,527$ 1,029,180$ 1,068,239$ 742,889$ (325,350)$ (43.80%) Capital Outlay 23,148,436 - 23,148,436 565,298 3,210,654 13,503,252 10,292,598 76.22% Facility/Telephone/Utility - - - 52,981 82,243 - (82,243) 0.00% Professional Fees 468,710 - 468,710 236,801 525,145 273,413 (251,732) (92.07%) Other Operating Costs 1,462,305 - 1,462,305 - 1,185 853,013 851,828 99.86%Total Operating expenditures 26,352,978$ -$ 26,352,978$ 1,884,261$ 4,887,465$ 15,372,567$ 10,485,102$ 68.21%Total EXPENDITURES 26,352,978$ -$ 26,352,978$ 1,884,261$ 4,887,465$ 15,372,567$ 10,485,102$ 68.21%

Total Gain/Loss Operating (6,759,139) - (6,759,139) (749,789) (938,369) (3,942,827) 3,004,458

Fund Balance Fund Balance 6,759,139$ -$ 6,759,139$ -$ -$ 3,942,827$ (3,942,827)$ (100.00%)Total Fund Balance 6,759,139$ -$ 6,759,139$ -$ -$ 3,942,827$ (3,942,827)$ (100.00%)

Total Gain/Loss Operating With FB -$ -$ -$ (749,789)$ (938,369)$ -$ (938,369)$

FUND BALANCE NOTE Prior Period

Balance Current Month

Actual YTD Actual to Balance Sheet

FY2017 Renovation Airport Blvd Building (65,506) (150,086) (215,593) - Fund Balance Airport Building Sale/Purchase/Renovation

FY2017 Capital Projects (excluding Airport Facility) (123,074) (599,703) (722,777) - Fund Balance Operations

Capital Projects Total (188,580) (749,789) (938,369)

21 of 103

V. Update on Transformation 1115 Waiver

David WedenKim Macakiage

Handout Pg. 110-115

22 of 103

ljworsham

Text Box

Update on Transformation 1115 Waiver

April 24, 2017

Kim MacakiageDirector of Practice Management – 1115 Medicaid Waiver Projects

23 of 103

DY6 Achievements

April DY 6 ReportingValuation reported as achieved $5,259,649.91Associated IGT (43.82%) $2,304,778.60

Federal Funds (56.18%) $2,954,871.31

Completed DY5 Carry Forward MetricsEarly DY6

Achievement for 3 ProjectsReporting of MLIU

P4R metrics

24 of 103

1115 Waiver Transition ScheduleSchedule Estimated End Date

Submits Request for 21 Month Extension to CMS January 26, 2016

Gather stakeholder feedback on PFM Protocol February 28, 2017

Submit PFM Protocol to CMS for approval March 31, 2017 [Delayed]

Gather stakeholder feedback on the measure bundles led by Texas

Council

February – May 2017

DY7-8 proposed rules posted for public comment June/July 2017

HHSC Submits Measure Menus to CMS June 30, 2017

Targeted CMS Approval August 2017

25 of 103

Change Management Plan

• February 2017Financial Impacts

• February 2017Technical Feasibility

• May 2017Operational Impacts

• June 20171115 Waiver Impacts

• OngoingStakeholder Communications

Financial ImplicationsTechnical ImplicationsData AnalyticsOperational Impacts1115 Waiver Impacts

26 of 103

Change Management in Action!

On track to meet DY6 Targets Closely monitoring metrics while also focusing on transition plans

Program Managers are engaged in transition and sustainability planning EMCOT proposal to Travis County First Steps grant opportunities Evaluation grant for Integrated Care in Schools Integration of Cultural Competency, Peer Support and Chronic Disease Management

Staff Planning meeting on May 12

Streamlining the reporting process Completed test reports for BMI metric

Ongoing discussions with partners Tour of Manor Mustang Clinic with County, City and Central Health Crisis Planning Workgroup hosted by Central Health Involved in Seton, Dell Medical School, Central Health Planning Meeting Data Evaluation Workgroup, Texas Council

27 of 103

VI. Facilities Report (Additional Information at meeting)

Donna Spencer

Handout Pg. 110-115

28 of 103

ljworsham

Text Box

2017 Energy Conservation Audit

and Disclosure (ECAD) Report

For:

Austin Travis County Integral Care

1430 Collier

Conducted by:

Blue Ocean Energy Management

April 2017

29 of 103

1 4 3 0 C o l l i e r P a g e | 2 E C A D R e p o r t

Executive Summary

Blue Ocean Energy Management (Blue Ocean) is an energy consulting firm. We develop and

implement energy management strategies for clients who have significant exposure to energy

costs. The main objective of an energy management strategy is to manage energy-related costs and

other risks associated with energy consumption.

The objective of this Energy Conservation Audit and Disclosure (ECAD) report is to benchmark

energy usage, as well as look at specific energy consumption patterns. The assessment for this

report was completed using utility information for 2016 supplied by Austin Travis County Integral

Care, as well as information supplied by Austin Energy and Texas Gas Service. The information

has been analyzed using Blue Ocean Energy’s analytical tools and the Department of Energy’s

ENERGY STAR® Portfolio Manager.

Austin Travis County Integral Care is now in compliance with the City of Austin’s Energy

Conservation Audit and Disclosure Ordinance for 1430 Collier, Austin, TX.

As a result of ECAD compliance, 1430 Collier is eligible for the following benefits:

• Austin Energy rebates for qualifying energy efficiency improvement. Without ECAD

compliance, commercial properties are not eligible to receive rebates.

• Avoid Class C misdemeanor for non-compliance of ECAD ordinance.

• Current ECAD rating required for sales/transfers of commercial properties.

Findings:

• The ENERGY STAR rating improved to “66” for 2016

• Total energy costs in 2016 equaled $41,235: a 7% decrease from 2015

• Total electricity charges equaled $39,855 in 2016: a 6% increase versus 2015

• Total natural gas charges equaled $1,380 in 2016: a 34% decrease versus 2015

• Electricity unit cost ($/kWh) decreased 5% compared to 2015 (to $.099)

• Demand costs (kW) increased 12% from 2015 to 2016

• Peak Demand constitutes 41% of electric charges 2013-2016

Blue Ocean confirmed that the 2016 Austin Energy charges were calculated correctly and that the

appropriate rate plan was used.

Recommendations and Comments:

This facility obtained an ENERGY STAR score of “66” in 2016 which is an improvement versus

the past year. 1430 Collier is considered “above average” from an energy efficiency point of view.

Peak Demand Cost increased 12% in 2016 and should be monitored as demand constitutes 41%

of electric charges.

30 of 103


Blue Ocean recommends that ATCIC consider adopting an energy management strategy to

continue to energy efficiency improvements to the building and to mitigate the risks of future

increases in energy prices.

31 of 103


Benchmarking:

Utility Invoice Audit:

As part of Blue Ocean’s ECAD compliance work, all electrical invoices are verified for billing

and rate accuracy. The 2016 Austin Energy invoices are calculated correctly and this account is

now on the new rate plan >10kW <300kW.

32 of 103


Table of Contents

1. Introduction .......................................................................................... 7

1.1 Authorization ............................................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Scope of Services ......................................................................................................................................... 7 1.3 Limitations ................................................................................................................................................... 7

2. ECAD Energy Rating and Filing with City of Austin ........................ 8

2.1 Portfolio Manager Statement of Energy Performance: ........................................................................................ 9 2.2 Portfolio Manager Energy Performance Explanation: ....................................................................................... 10

3. Historical Energy Consumption Analysis ......................................... 11

3.1 Onsite Energy Sources ............................................................................................................................... 11 3.2 Austin Energy Electricity Charges ............................................................................................................. 11 3.2 Texas Gas Service Charges ........................................................................................................................ 13

4. Electricity “Demand” (kW) Analysis ................................................. 14

4.1 Austin Energy Demand Charges ................................................................................................................ 14 4.2 Demand Charges ........................................................................................................................................ 15

5. Load Factor .......................................................................................... 16

6. Power Factor ........................................................................................ 17

7. Climatic Variation ............................................................................... 18

8. Electricity Price Forecasting ............................................................... 19

9. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................. 21

33 of 103


Glossary of Commonly Used Abbreviations and Terms

1. AE – Austin Energy

2. ASHRAE – American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers

3. BOE – Blue Ocean Energy

4. Btu – British Thermal Unit

5. CCF – 100 Cubic Feet

6. CDD – Cooling Degree Day

7. COA – City of Austin

8. Demand Charge – Proportion of monthly AE invoice that is demand charges

9. DOE – U.S. Department of Energy

10. ECAD – Energy Conservation Audit and Disclosure

11. Electricity Cost – Proportion of monthly AE invoice that is electricity charges

12. ERCOT – Electric Reliability Council of Texas

13. EUI – Energy Use Intensity

14. GHG – Greenhouse Gas

15. HDD – Heating Degree Day

16. HVAC – Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning

17. KATT– NOAA designation for the weather station at Camp Mabry

18. kW – Thousand Watts (measure of electrical load)

19. kWh - Thousand Watt Hours

20. LF – Load Factor

21. Monthly AE Invoiced – Total $ of electricity including taxes on AE monthly invoice

22. MW - Megawatt

23. NOAA – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

24. PF – Power Factor

25. PM – Department of Energy’s Energy Star Portfolio Manager

26. PUC – Public Utility Commission of Texas

27. REP – Retail Electric Provider

28. RSF – Rented Square Foot

29. SF – Square Foot

30. TDP – Transmission/Distribution Provider

31. TGS – Texas Gas Service

34 of 103


1. Introduction

1.1 Authorization

Blue Ocean Energy Management conducted the Energy Conservation Audit and Disclosure

(ECAD) report on behalf of Austin Travis County Integral Care for the facility located at 1430 Collier,

Austin, Texas 78704, in accordance with the contract BOE2017-0112 that was authorized by Ms.

Donna Spencer on January 20, 2017. The facility will from this point forward be referred to as

“1430 Collier.”

1.2 Scope of Services

The ECAD report is a proprietary procedure developed by Blue Ocean Energy for commercial

buildings and facilities. The ECAD report is an assessment of 1430 Collier in terms of an energy

consumption, cost, and Greenhouse Gas emissions point of view. This assessment can be used to

further develop a strategy to manage energy-related risks facing 1430 Collier.

This ECAD report also ensures compliance for 1430 Collier with the City of Austin’s ECAD

ordinance for the year 2017 (using 2016 utility data). The ECAD ordinance requires this type of

energy rating to be supplied to the City of Austin on a yearly basis.

1.3 Limitations

This ECAD report was conducted in accordance with industry standards; its conclusions are based

on information collected and a review of records and data that were reasonably assessable and

practically reviewable in consideration of constraints of the project schedule and budget.

This report is prepared for the sole use of the Austin Travis County Integral Care and should not

be distributed to or relied upon by third parties without written authorization from Blue Ocean

Energy Management.

35 of 103


2. ECAD Energy Rating and Filing with City of Austin

In order to comply with the City of Austin’s ECAD ordinance, Blue Ocean utilized the EPA’s

Portfolio Manager to generate the energy rating. The energy rating for 1430 Collier has been

communicated to the City of Austin and is in compliance with the City of Austin’s ECAD

ordinance for the 2017 reporting period, as can be seen below. The ECAD rating was submitted

on April 1, 2017, well in advance of the June 1st, 2017 deadline.

Figure 1: Proof of ECAD Compliance for 2017 Reporting Year

36 of 103


2.1 Portfolio Manager Statement of Energy Performance:

In Figure 2, below, the ENERGY STAR rating for 2016 can be observed. The building achieved

an ENERGY STAR score of “66,” which indicates that the building performs above average in

terms of energy efficiency.

Figure 2: Portfolio Manager's 2016 Energy Rating

37 of 103


2.2 Portfolio Manager Energy Performance Explanation:

The City of Austin requires that the ECAD rating be calculated utilizing a 12-month range from

January – December of a given year. The rating has to be calculated yearly and communicated to

the City of Austin. The yearly energy ratings were calculated using the Department of Energy’s

ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager.

The ENERGY STAR score is a measure of how well a property is performing from an energy

efficiency perspective relative to similar properties, when normalized for climate and operational

parameters.

The ENERGY STAR scores are based on data from national building energy consumption surveys.

This allows Portfolio Manager to control for key variables affecting a building’s energy

performance, including climate, hours of operation, and building size. What this means is that

buildings from around the country, with different operating parameters and subject to different

weather patterns, can be compared side-by-side in order to see how they stack up in terms of energy

performance.

The 1-100 scale is set so that 1 represents the worst performing buildings and 100 represents the

best performing buildings. A score of 50 indicates that a building is performing at the national

median, taking into account its size, location, and operating parameters. A score of 75 indicates

that at a property is performing in the 75th percentile and may be eligible to earn ENERGY STAR

certification.

PM measures the Energy Use Intensity (EUI) per square foot. Intuitively, this can be thought of

as the aggregated energy used per square foot converted to British Thermal Units (Btu)i PM uses

kBtu, which is 1,000 Btu. In addition, PM distinguishes between “Site” and “Source” energy. A

simplified explanation is that “Site” energy is the energy consumed at the “Site” and “Source”

energy represents the total amount of raw fuel that is required to operate the building. It

incorporates all transmission, delivery, and production losses, thereby enabling a complete

assessment of energy efficiency in a building.

Austin Energy states the following regarding the ECAD rating on their website:

The energy evaluation online tool will give you a rating number, a single number between 1 and 100

which indicates the overall energy use of your building compared to similar buildings. Factors such

as weather and operating hours are part of the calculation.

The Austin City Council has set the following voluntary goals to help you interpret your rating:

38 of 103

https://portfoliomanager.energystar.gov/pm/glossary#EnergyStarCertification



3. Historical Energy Consumption Analysis

In most commercial buildings, the second largest operational expense after property taxes is energy

cost. Unlike property taxes, building management can effectively mitigate this operational expense

by running a building as efficiently as possible.

The City of Austin’s ECAD ordinance does not require a detailed analysis of historical energy

usage or cost developments. Blue Ocean includes this analysis as part of our compliance work, as

we deem that the understanding of the energy profile of a building is the first step in operating the

building efficiently and thereby mitigating energy costs.

Blue Ocean believes that you cannot manage what you do not measure.

3.1 Onsite Energy Sources

1430 Collier has one Austin Energy (AE) electricity meter and one Texas Gas Service meter

serving the facility, located on-site.

3.2 Austin Energy Electricity Charges

The analysis done in this section is completed utilizing gross energy as invoiced by Austin Energy.

For this report, Blue Ocean Energy utilized electricity data from 2013 - 2016. These 48 months

make up the base period.

As can be observed in Figure 3, below, the trendline for electricity consumption for the base period

is rather flat over time. During the 48 months of data used for this report, 1430 Collier used

1,644,720 kWh of electricity at a cost of $166,732.

Figure 3: kWh Consumed in 2013 – 2016

In Table 1, below, the base period’s electricity consumption (kWh), costs, demand usage (kW),

and demand cost are summarized.

39 of 103


Table 1: Energy Consumption (kWh), Demand (kW) Usage and Costs 2013 - 2016

More important, perhaps, than consumption, is the actual cost of the electricity and the breakdown

in cost between kWh and demand charges. 1430 Collier has incurred a total of $166,732 in Austin

Energy charges during the base period. As shown in Figure 4, below, the monthly electricity costs

for 1430 Collier are rather flat over the base period.

Figure 4: Monthly Cost of Electricity 2013– 2016

During the base period, the average monthly electricity cost was $3,474.

During 2016, Austin Energy had three different rate changes. The table below shows the current

rates and not the rates that were in effect in 2016.

1430 Collier is currently on the Austin Energy fixed rate called “SECONDARY VOLTAGE

>10kW <300 kW.” This rate structure has five major components. The five components, as well

as the current rate, can be observed in Table 2, below.

40 of 103


Table 2: Current Electric Utility rates

The unit cost ($/kWh) for electricity is a function of the relationship between peak demand (Load

Factor) and energy prices for a particular billing period.

One variable that will change the unit cost is the peak demand (kW) in a particular billing period.

If a particular billing period has an increase in the peak demand but a reduction in kWh

consumption, the kWh unit cost will increase, as there would be fewer kWh to “absorb” the

demand charges.

Figure 5: Unit Cost ($/kWh) in 2013 – 2016

The unit cost (see Figure 5, above) is the total invoice divided by kilowatt hours. The average unit

price for the 48-month base period is $.101 /kWh.

3.2 Texas Gas Service Charges

As mentioned previously, there is one natural gas (NG) meter located 1430 Collier. Blue Ocean

Energy obtained 48 months of natural gas consumption from January 2013 to December 2016.

41 of 103


Figure 6: Natural Gas Consumption/cost and electricity consumption 2013–2016

Figure 6, above, shows natural gas usage by month compared to electricity consumption. As

expected natural gas use is primary used for space heating which peaks in the winter months and

declines to almost nothing in the summer.

Natural gas represents about 5% of the total energy costs for 1430 Collier as can be seen in Figure

7, below.

Figure 7: Natural Gas Cost in 2013 – 2016

4. Electricity “Demand” (kW) Analysis

4.1 Austin Energy Demand Charges

Austin Energy, like all other utilities in the U.S., charges peak demand (kW) fees. In fact, Austin Energy

has some of the highest peak demand rates in the state of Texas. The reason why Austin Energy has

implemented this rate strategy is to financially incentivize commercial customers to manage their peak

demand.

42 of 103


Demand charges are billed by Austin Energy to its customers based on the numerically largest average

power demand in 1000 Watts (kW) during any 15-minute period within a given billing period. The

following hypothetical example explains the demand charge pricing structure:

• Case 1: Given a 10kW motor and a 15kW motor, if both units were operated for 1 hour at the

same time, the demand meter will record 25 kW for the purposes of calculating the demand

charge. If the two motors were the only two electricity-consuming operations measured by the

account meter, then the demand charge portion of the monthly invoice would be based on 25

kW.

• Case 2: Given the same 10kW motor and 15kW motor, if the units could be operated

alternately, operating each for 1 hour, but the 15kW only when the 10kW unit is off, then the

kW demand would only be 15kW.

Austin Energy implemented its last rate change in January 2017 and no longer has seasonal charges for

peak demand. Currently Austin Energy is charging $12.44/kW for the rate plan >10kW<300kW.

Calculating cost of the two cases utilizing AE’s rate for peak demand ($12.44/kW) and $0.02421/kWh,

the cost would be as seen in Table 3:

kWh kW Cost

Simultaneously (Case 1) 25 25 $311.00

Alternately (Case 2) 25 15 $186.60 Table 3: Demand Cost Example

This is sometimes referred to as “load shifting.” The key point is that in the example above, the same

amount of kWh was used but a 60% savings was achieved ($311.00/186.60) by simply “shifting”

operations of the units.

4.2 Demand Charges

Over the base period, 1430 Collier had an aggregated total of 4,597 kW in peak demand equaling

charges of $68,210, representing 41% of total electric costs.

Over the 48-month base period, the monthly demand average for 1430 Collier has been 96 kW,

with a corresponding average monthly demand charge of $1,421. The trendline for demand charges

for the base period is increasing, as can be seen in Figure 8, below.

43 of 103


Figure 8: Peak Demand (kW) Cost for 2013 – 2016

The split between the demand charge (kW) and electricity charges (the “fuel” and “energy” charges

discussed above) can be seen in Figure 9, below.

Figure 9: Demand and Electricity Charges from 2013 -2016

1430 Collier incurred a total of $98,522 in electricity costs (non-demand charges) from 2013

through 2016. As can be observed in Figure 9, above, $68,210 or 41% of total electricity cost is

attributable to the demand charges over the last two years.

To think of the demand charge another way, a series of 15-minute peaks of electricity each month

over the period have determined 41% of the total electricity cost.

5. Load Factor

Load Factor (LF) is a parameter which compares average consumption of electricity against peak

demand. Load Factor is indexed on a scale from “0 to 1,” with a Load Factor of “1” being the

maximum, as it implies that the consumer’s demand is constanti. The lower the Load Factor the

greater the difference is between average consumption and peak demand. Utilities prefer even or

44 of 103


constant demand as it is easier to plan for power production and supply. This is why utilities place

a premium on demand charges (kW).

LF = [(Total kWh) / (# Days in Bill Cycle x 24 hrs/day)] x [Peak kW Demand]

A simpler, more intuitive way of looking at Load Factor is to think of it as the relationship between

the average load and the peak load.

If the LF is low, one should look for ways to level the electrical usage (i.e., shift energy intensive

processes to periods of otherwise low usage). By increasing LF, the impact of monthly demand

(kW) charges will be reduced. Peak demand (kW) in a billing period is what Austin Energy

utilizes in its demand charge calculations discussed earlier in this section.

If a Load Factor of “1” is achieved, it does not mean that demand charges will not be incurred or

that a building is operating efficiently from an energy point of view. For example, if all lights and

HVAC systems in a building were left running all the time, a very high LF would be observed.

The theoretical ideal Load Factor is a LF close to “1” with the fewest kWh possible consumed.

Load Factor for the base period can be observed in Figure 10, below.

Figure 10: Load Factor for 1430 Collier 2013 – 2016

Over the 48-month base period, 1430 Collier averaged a Load Factor of 0.49.

6. Power Factor

Power Factor (PF) is another measurement of how efficiently electricity is used in a building.

Austin Energy, along with many other utilities, are applying additional utility charges if the PF is

below a certain threshold.

In general, utilities are moving to a pricing structure that intends to financially “punish” clients

with poor or below average Power Factor and Load Factor (demand) measurements. Austin

Energy currently imposes additional charges when the Power Factor is below “.9.”

45 of 103


If any such power factor charges are incurred, they will appear as a separate line item on the AE

bill (Power Factor Adjustment Below 90%).

Figure 11: Power Factor 2013 – 2016

In Figure 11, above, the PF readings as reported by Austin Energy for 1430 Collier are shown.

During the 48-month base period this property did not incur any PF charges. Therefore, we can

conclude that PF issues are not a problem for this location. However, PF charges should be

monitored moving forward to ensure that total electricity costs are minimized.

7. Climatic Variation

The climate plays a significant role in the consumption of electricity in buildings, especially

heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC). The weather-related impacts on energy

consumption make it difficult to evaluate energy efficiencies. However, one method for

normalizing for temperature variations is the use of published degree days.

Degree days are either Heating Degree Days [HDD] or Cooling Degree Days [CDD]ii. When

rationing kWh of energy used by the number of degree days for a period, the impact of temperature

variation on energy consumption is normalized so that a truer picture of energy efficiency can be

visualized.

As can be seen in Figure 12, below, the proportions of HDDs to CDDs vary significantly from

year to year. In general, during the past 16 years, there has been an upward trend in CDDs, whereas

HDDs have remained flat.

46 of 103

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heating

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ventilation_(architecture)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Conditioning


Figure 12: Degree days, 2001 - 2016

Specifically, for 2016, it can be stated that it was a fairly typical climatic year from a CDD point

of view, whereas the very mild winter of 2016 meant fewer HDDs. The implication of the 2016

degree days is that all commercial buildings using strip heat should have seen reductions in energy

consumed (kWh) and cost.

In the benchmarking table, we offer a simplified climatic normalization by converting kWh/degree

day.

8. Electricity Price Forecasting

In a regulated market like Austin, customers do not have the option to contract with competitive

energy suppliers or use different types of priced energy contracts. Austin Energy is the only choice

for electricity.

Based on criticism from commercial and industrial customers, Austin Energy has initiated a new

rate structure. In the fall of 2016, Austin Energy announced new rate structures for residential,

commercial and industrial customers. The various rate and rate class changes were implemented

in Q4 of 2016, resulting in most commercial customers in Austin experiencing a slight decrease in

energy costs.

Historically, Austin Energy has imposed high demand (kW) charges, which often make up 40%

to 50% of commercial customers’ bills. Paradoxically, some of our customers have reduced

electricity consumption (kWh) significantly, only to see their electricity “all-in unit” ($/kWh)

increase due to peak demand (kW) remaining the same. We anticipate similar confounding factors

to be part of future rate plans, leading to increasing energy costs for customers who do not

strategically manage the components of their electricity bills such as peak demand, power factor

and load factor.

In 2016, natural gas prices have increased slightly from historic lows. As the percent of electricity

generation that comes from natural gas is increasing, natural gas impact on fuel charges are also

increasing. In spite of the slightly increasing natural gas prices in 2016, AE twice reduced the fuel

47 of 103


charges. It is our anticipation that later in 2017, AE will be forced to increase the fuel charges

again.

As a result of these multiple factors, each affecting future electricity costs in different ways, Blue

Ocean assumes a modest 2% per year increase in electricity costs, as well as a less likely aggressive

3.5% annual increase in electricity costs for our price forecasting exercise.

If we model current electricity costs for this facility over the next decade, assuming a constant

occupancy rate and no energy efficiency improvements, the following forecast can be observed:

Figure 13: 1430 Collier Yearly Projected Cost of Electricity Only

If we assume this price increase to occur evenly over the next 10 years, we can calculate the

additional cost for 1430 Collier over the period using 2016 as the reference year and the $166,732

paid for electricity in 2016 as the base cost. The cost for electricity would reach $48,583 /year by

2026 in the best-case scenario and $56,219 /year in the worst scenario.

This corresponds to an additional $46,579 to $85,369 in cumulative projected electricity costs over

the 10-year period attributable to the price increase as can been seen in Figure 14, below.

Figure 14: Projected Cumulative Increase in Energy Costs

48 of 103


9. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Portfolio Manager produces a defensible Greenhouse Gas (GHG) number. The methodology

employed is used by all GHG registers and is a standard that is sanctioned by the federal

government. The GHG calculated in the table below is considering the actual energy consumption

of this particular building and the electricity generation fuel mix of Austin Energy.

GHG can be viewed as a measurement of waste. If GHG emissions are reduced, holding all other

parameters constant, it will mean a more efficient utilization of energy and lower energy cost.

Table 4: GHG Emission Table from Portfolio Manager

As can be seen in Table 4, above, the total Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions for 2016 was 214.9

Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e).

49 of 103


Footnotes

i A Btu is defined as amount of heat required to raise the temperature of one 1 pound (0.454 kg) of liquid water by 1 °F (0.556 °C)

at a constant pressure of one atmosphere. As is the case with the calorie, several different definitions of the Btu exist, which are

based on different water temperatures and therefore vary by up to 0.5%: A Btu can be approximated as the heat produced by burning

a single wooden match[2] or as the amount of energy it would take to lift a one-pound weight to a height of 778 feet (237 m)

ii Heating degree days,” or “HDD,” are a measure of how much (in degrees), and for how long (in days), outside air temperature

was lower than a specific “base temperature” (or “balance point”). They are used for calculations relating to the energy consumption

required to heat buildings.

“Cooling degree days,” or “CDD,” are a measure of how much (in degrees), and for how long (in days), outside air temperature

was higher than a specific base temperature. They are used for calculations relating to the energy consumption required to cool

buildings.

50 of 103

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_%28unit%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_thermal_unit#cite_note-1



For:


5225 N. Lamar

Conducted by:


April 2017

51 of 103

5 2 2 5 N . L a m a r P a g e | 2 E C A D R e p o r t

Executive Summary








Care, as well as information supplied by Austin Energy. The information has been analyzed using

Blue Ocean Energy’s analytical tools and the Department of Energy’s ENERGY STAR® Portfolio

Manager.


Conservation Audit and Disclosure ordinance for 5225 N. Lamar, Austin, TX.

As a result of ECAD compliance, 5225 N. Lamar is eligible for the following benefits:





Findings:

• The ENERGY STAR rating improved from “88” in 2013 to “91” in 2016

• Total electricity charges equaled $19,306 in 2016; this is a 10% decrease from 2015

• Electricity unit cost ($/kWh) decreased 6% compared to 2015

• Electricity consumption decreased 3% in 2016 versus 2015

• Demand costs (kW) decreased 2% in 2016 versus 2015

• Peak Demand constitutes 49% of electric charges 2013-2016

• The property incurred $931 in total power factor charges 2013-2016




The ENERGY STAR rating increased over the last year, continuing to demonstrate that 5225 N.

Lamar is one of the top-performing buildings from an energy efficiency point of view. This

building may be eligible for the ENERGY STAR certification which requires buildings to obtain

a “75” or higher.

52 of 103


Demand costs (kW) represent 49% of the building’s electricity costs. ATCIC should monitor

demand from the building’s larger loads to identify potential modifications to operating procedures

that will likely reduce these charges.

Blue Ocean recommends that ATCIC implement an energy management strategy to continue to

improve the energy efficiency metrics of the building.

53 of 103


Benchmarking:





54 of 103


Table of Contents

1. Introduction .......................................................................................... 7



2.1 Portfolio Manager Statement of Energy Performance: .................................................................................. 9 2.2 Portfolio Manager Energy Performance Explanation: ................................................................................. 10


3.1 Onsite Energy Sources ............................................................................................................................... 11 3.2 Austin Energy Electricity Charges ............................................................................................................. 11



5. Load Factor .......................................................................................... 15

6. Power Factor ........................................................................................ 16




55 of 103
























22. MW - Megawatt










56 of 103


1. Introduction

1.1 Authorization


(ECAD) report on behalf of Austin Travis County Integral Care for the facility located at 5225 N.

Lamar, Austin, Texas 78704, in accordance with the contract BOE2017-0112 that was authorized

by Ms. Donna Spencer on January 20, 2017. The facility will from this point forward be referred

to as “5225 N. Lamar.”



buildings and facilities. The ECAD report is an assessment of 5225 N. Lamar in terms of an energy


further develop a strategy to manage energy-related risks facing 5225 N. Lamar.

This ECAD report also ensures compliance for 5225 N. Lamar with the City of Austin’s ECAD

Ordinance for the year 2017 (using 2016 utility data). The ECAD ordinance requires this type of


1.3 Limitations






Energy Management.

57 of 103




Portfolio Manager to generate the energy rating. The energy rating for 5225 N. Lamar has been





58 of 103







59 of 103









parameters.






performance.





certification.













60 of 103














5225 N. Lamar has one Austin Energy (AE) electricity meter serving the facility, located on-site.





As can be observed in Figure 3, below, the trendline for electricity consumption has decreased

slightly over time. During the 48 months of data used for this report, 5225 N. Lamar used 654,720

kWh of electricity at a cost of $81,770.




61 of 103




in cost between kWh and demand charges. 5225 N. Lamar has incurred a total of $81,770 in Austin


for 5225 N. Lamar are rather flat.





5225 N. Lamar is currently on the Austin Energy fixed rate called “SECONDARY VOLTAGE




62 of 103







demand charges.

Case in point is the December 2015 Peak Demand, which for reasons we do not know, increased

almost 150% (From 43 kW to 107 kW) from one month to the next. As the kWh stayed fairly

consistent that means the all-in unit cost ($/kWh) increased as the additional peak demand charges

were “absorbed” by the kWh’s consumed. Hence the $0.22/kWh unit cost for December 2015 as

can be observed in Figure 5, below.









demand.






63 of 103




kW.








kWh kW Cost






4.2 Demand Charges

Over the base period, 5225 N. Lamar had an aggregated total of 2,693 kW in peak demand equaling


Over the 48-month base period, the monthly demand average for 5225 N. Lamar has been 56 kW,

with a corresponding average monthly demand charge of $828. The trendline for demand charges


64 of 103






5225 N. Lamar incurred a total of $42,045 in electricity costs (non-demand charges) from 2013



To think of the demand charge another way, a series of 15 minute peaks of electricity each month


5. Load Factor





65 of 103
















Figure 8: Load Factor for 5225 N. Lamar 2013 – 2016

Over the 48-month base period, 5225 N. Lamar averaged a Load Factor of 0.39. The Load Factor

for this property is rather low indicating Peak Demand is high.

6. Power Factor







66 of 103





In Figure 9, above, the PF readings as reported by Austin Energy for 5225 N. Lamar are shown.

This property obtained PF charges in 39 months out of the 48-month base period. Although the

cost was only $931 during this time period, PF charges should be monitored moving forward to

ensure that total electricity costs are minimized.









visualized.




67 of 103











day.




for electricity.





energy costs.







and load factor.




68 of 103



again.






Figure 11: 5225 N. Lamar Yearly Projected Cost of Electricity Only


additional cost for 5225 N. Lamar over the period using 2016 as the reference year and the $19,306






69 of 103












70 of 103


Footnotes










buildings.

71 of 103






For:


6222 N. Lamar

Conducted by:


April 2017

72 of 103


Executive Summary








Care, as well as information supplied by Austin Energy. The information has been analyzed using

Blue Ocean Energy’s analytical tools and the Department of Energy’s ENERGY STAR® Portfolio

Manager.


Conservation Audit and Disclosure ordinance for 6222 N. Lamar, Austin, TX.

As a result of ECAD compliance, 6222 N. Lamar is eligible for the following benefits:





Findings:

• The ENERGY STAR remained “100” for 2016.

• Total electricity charges equaled $20,859 in 2016, a 3% decrease versus 2015.

• Electricity unit cost ($/kWh) decreased 4% compared to 2015.

• Demand costs (kW) increased 15% in 2016 versus 2015.

• Peak Demand now represents 38% of electric charges 2013-2016.

• Power Factor charges increased in 2016 totaling $452.




The facility scores a perfect “100” again in 2016. This is due to the solar panels installed at the

facility. The rating nonetheless reflects that 6222 N. Lamar is a top-performing building from an

energy efficiency point of view.

The building actually increased energy consumption in 2016 by 1% versus 2015 and Peak Demand

cost increased 15% over the same time period.

73 of 103


This building may be eligible for the ENERGY STAR distinction based on consecutive years of

ENERGY STAR ratings above “75.” Blue Ocean recommends validation of parameters if this

certification is desired.

74 of 103


Benchmarking:





75 of 103


Table of Contents

1. Introduction .......................................................................................... 7



2.1 Portfolio Manager Statement of Energy Performance: .................................................................................. 9 2.2 Portfolio Manager Energy Performance Explanation: ................................................................................. 10


3.1 Onsite Energy Sources ............................................................................................................................... 11 3.2 Austin Energy Electricity Charges ............................................................................................................. 11



5. Load Factor .......................................................................................... 15

6. Power Factor ........................................................................................ 16




76 of 103
























22. MW - Megawatt










77 of 103


1. Introduction

1.1 Authorization


(ECAD) report on behalf of Austin Travis County Integral Care for the facility located at 6222 N.

Lamar, Austin, Texas 78704, in accordance with the contract BOE2017-0112 that was authorized

by Ms. Donna Spencer on January 20, 2017. The facility will from this point forward be referred

to as “6222 N. Lamar.”



buildings and facilities. The ECAD report is an assessment of 6222 N. Lamar in terms of an energy


further develop a strategy to manage energy-related risks facing 6222 N. Lamar.

This ECAD report also ensures compliance for 6222 N. Lamar with the City of Austin’s ECAD

Ordinance for the year 2017 (using 2016 utility data). The ECAD ordinance requires this type of


1.3 Limitations






Energy Management.

78 of 103




Portfolio Manager to generate the energy rating. The energy rating for 6222 N. Lamar has been





79 of 103







80 of 103









parameters.






performance.





certification.













81 of 103














6222 N. Lamar has one Austin Energy (AE) electricity meter serving the facility, located on-site.





As can be observed in Figure 3, below, the trendline for electricity consumption has increased

slightly over time. During the 48 months of data used for this report, 6222 N. Lamar used 707,760

kWh of electricity at a cost of $83,251.




82 of 103




in cost between kWh and demand charges. 6222 N. Lamar has incurred a total of $83,251 in Austin


for 6222 N. Lamar are increasing.





6222 N. Lamar is currently on the Austin Energy fixed rate called “SECONDARY VOLTAGE




83 of 103







demand charges.









demand.








kW.

84 of 103









kWh kW Cost






4.2 Demand Charges

Over the base period, 6222 N. Lamar had an aggregated total of 2,109 kW in peak demand equaling


Over the 48-month base period, the monthly demand average for 6222 N. Lamar has been 44 kW,

with a corresponding average monthly demand charge of $652. The trendline for demand charges


85 of 103






6222 N. Lamar incurred a total of $51,939 in electricity costs (non-demand charges) from 2013



To think of the demand charge another way, a series of 15 minute peaks of electricity each month


5. Load Factor





86 of 103
















Figure 8: Load Factor for 6222 N. Lamar 2013 – 2016

Over the 48-month base period, 6222 N. Lamar averaged a Load Factor of 0.45. The Load Factor

for this property is rather low indicating Peak Demand is high.

6. Power Factor







87 of 103





In Figure 9, above, the PF readings as reported by Austin Energy for 6222 N. Lamar are shown.

This property obtained PF charges in 41 months out of the 48-month base period. Although the

cost was only $1,351 during this time period, PF charges should be monitored moving forward to

ensure that total electricity costs are minimized.









visualized.




88 of 103











day.




for electricity.





energy costs.







and load factor.




89 of 103



again.






Figure 11: 6222 N. Lamar Yearly Projected Cost of Electricity Only


additional cost for 6222 N. Lamar over the period using 2016 as the reference year and the $20,859






90 of 103












91 of 103


Footnotes










buildings.

92 of 103




of 2

DATA REQUEST RESPONSE RECEIPT

Data Request Name: Data Request:Austin ECAD Commercial Report 2017

Response sent: 04/01/2017 03:45 PM EDT

Response includes: 1 property

Response sent to: ECAD Commercial Report 2017City of Austin811 Barton Springs RoadSuite 300Austin, TX 78704

Response sent by: Bo PetersenBlue Ocean Energy2313 Lake Austin Blvd.Suite 108Austin, TX 78703

I __________________ (print name) verify that the properties enumerated below were submitted on the abovedate to this data request.

Signature: ___________________________________________ Date: _________________________

93 of 103

Allison

Typewritten Text

Allison

Typewritten Text

Bo Petersen

Allison

Typewritten Text

Allison

Typewritten Text

Allison

Typewritten Text

4/1/2017

Allison

Stamp

of 2

Properties included in this Response (1)*

PortfolioManagerProperty ID

Property Name & Address Other Property IDs

5835175 1165 Airport1165 Airport Blvd.Austin Texas 78702

TCAD: 198924_001Austin Property ID: 198924

*Note: ECAD Commercial Report 2017 will only receive a single record for each property. If a property listedon this receipt was also included in another response, then ECAD Commercial Report 2017 will only see the dataassociated with the last (i.e. most current) response sent. That is, if another person submits data on these propertiesat a later data, your record will be over-written.

94 of 103

of 2








Signature: ___________________________________________ Date: _________________________

95 of 103

Allison

Typewritten Text

Allison

Typewritten Text

Bo Petersen

Allison

Typewritten Text

4/1/2017

Allison

Stamp

of 2




4096868 1430 Collier1430 CollierAustin Texas 78704



96 of 103

of 2








Signature: ___________________________________________ Date: _________________________

97 of 103

Allison

Typewritten Text

Allison

Typewritten Text

Bo Petersen

Allison

Typewritten Text

Allison

Typewritten Text

4/1/2017

Allison

Stamp

of 2




4094890 5225 N. Lamar5225 N. LamarAustin Texas 78734



98 of 103

of 2








Signature: ___________________________________________ Date: _________________________

99 of 103

Allison

Typewritten Text

Allison

Typewritten Text

Bo Petersen

Allison

Typewritten Text

4/13/2017

Allison

Stamp

of 2




4097234 6222 N. Lamar6222 N. LamarAustin Texas 78752



100 of 103

VII. Announcements

Handout Pg. 139

101 of 103

ljworsham

Text Box

VIII. New Business

• Identify Consent/Non-Consent Agenda Items

Consent: Item III

Non-Consent: Item IV

Handout Pg. 140

102 of 103

ljworsham

Text Box

IX. Citizens’ Comments

Handout Pg. 141

103 of 103

ljworsham

Text Box

agenda - integral care · 4/24/2017 · finance committee minutes . date: march 27, 2017 time:...

Documents