Advertiser reporter Rob Perez's recent series on the Hawai'i State Legislature's process for reviewing and awarding grants-in-aid painted an incomplete picture of how the Senate handles requests from community groups. I am afraid that the unfortunate overriding effect of these articles will be to erode public confidence in the grants process and the important function it performs in our community.

The Hawai'i grants-in-aid program is in some ways a victim of its own success. Because it provides critical funding to organizations providing needed community services, the number of applications continues to grow. As the Advertiser series recognized, we received over 300 applications last session, requesting over $300 million in funding; we can expect similar numbers for 2008. In my experience, a large majority of those applications come from organizations that are sincerely in need of support, and which truly help their constituencies and our community. Our task as legislators is to quickly and efficiently review the applications, prioritize them, and make as many awards as possible within budgetary constraints.

The grant applications represent a broad spectrum of programs covering a vast array of needs, with the profile of the pool of applications varying from year to year. Starting the process with a preconceived set of criteria would present both significant challenges and a substantial chance that those criteria will not match the changing needs of our applicants. For example, even if we intended to focus on educational programs, a review of the applications may show a growing need for community health programs. We can provide better and more flexible support to the entire pool of applicants by allowing our focus to reflect the realities of our community's true needs.

Grant requests are handled similarly to other budget requests and were included in last session's Senate drafts of the general appropriations or executive budget bill, and the Judiciary budget bill. While I can only speak about the Senate's approach to reviewing grant applications, it is wrong to think that our final decisions reflect the opinions and priorities of only one or two senators. Senators receive a list of applicants and their requests, and we solicit input from our colleagues on their priorities and the needs of their respective districts. We also ask the Senate's various subject-matter committees for their advice.

In addition, we provide completed applications to the Executive-branch departments that would have oversight over the individual grants once they are awarded. These departments provide their opinions regarding the appropriateness of the proposed grants, whether the grants would be duplicative of existing programs, and the status or suitability of the applicant organizations. This distribution of applications allows for a more thorough review than would be possible if the Senate tried to deal with the large mass of information on its own.

Given the large number of grant applications and the limited funds available for awards, in most cases the organizations seeking funding will receive less than the full amount requested. This adds another wrinkle to the review process. Working with the appropriate departments, we need to determine whether providing a lower level of funding will render individual requests moot. Grant funds are limited to the purpose for which the grant was sought. Sometimes a lesser award will allow the organization to begin raising additional money to accomplish its goal. In other instances, however, the lower funding amount will not help the organization and, generally speaking, that will prevent the supervising state agency from disbursing grant funds; that determination is again made in consultation with the appropriate department. Under those conditions, unfortunately, we are forced to decide whether the limited available funds might better serve another applicant.

All of these factors, taken together, present an extremely complicated set of conditions that call for a delicate balancing of funding requests, priority reviews, factual considerations, and grant awards. Keeping in mind that the entire process must take place within the confines of our relatively short legislative session, one can begin to appreciate the challenges the Legislature faces in fulfilling its grant-in-aid function. But I believe that it is equally apparent that the process is hardly the picture of secret backroom dealings that the article tries to paint.

Sen. Roz Baker represents District 5 (South and West Maui — Kapalua, Ka'anapali, Lahaina, Ma'alaea, Kihei, Wailea, Makena) and is chairwoman of the Hawai'i Senate Ways and Means Committee. She wrote this commentary for The Advertiser.

Make a difference. Donate to The Advertiser Christmas Fund.