Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Ann Oliva Tonya Proctor Brian Fitzmaurice
Michael Roanhouse Ann Oliva Anne oleavea Ann Oliva Tonya Proctor
Michael Roanhouse Brian Fitzmaurice.
>>> High and welcome to the broadcast for the notice of
availability for the fiscal years 2013 and 2014 continuum of
care competition. My name is Ann Oliva and I'm the
director of the office of special needs assistance
programs, otherwise known as snaps, and today I am joined by
my management team, Michael Roanhouse,
Brian Fitzmaurice and our newest member, Tonya Proctor.
We will be your presenters today.
The purpose of this broadcast is to provide an overview of this
year's NOFA and application process and provide you with the
information that you will need to complete each part of the
application. But before we get started, I
want to offer a few reminders about this year's competition.
This year represents the first time that we will be
implementing cuts to the continuum of care funded
programs. It will be hard for all of us,
and we at hud have taken extra steps to try and help continuums
of care make strategic choices so that we minimum the impact to
the extent we can on those who we serve.
Please use all of the tools and resources that we are providing
to you to make these strategic decisions.
Also, please make sure you read the NOFA and all the
supplemental materials before you ask a question on the AAQ.
This helps us manage the help desk volumes and get to your
questions much more quickly. If you haven't already, I would
encourage you to read our weekly focus series, which provides
information on the policy priorities that are included in
the NOFA and that we will describe briefly today.
And lastly, this webcast touches on a lot of information, and
provides examples to help illustrate our points.
You may need to review the slides again to get all of the
detailed information that we're providing today.
So let's get started. We have a lot to cover.
Today we're going to talk about the following: first, we'll talk
about hud's homeless policy priorities.
Next, we will talk about the budget limitations we have for
this year and the implications of those budget limitations.
We will also talk about the selection criteria or in other
words the order in which we will select projects for funding in
this year's competition. We'll review what's new, scoring
and the COC application, the project application, priority
listing, and we'll have a brief note for our three continuums of
care that received unified funding agency status.
We'll conclude with the helpful hints and reminders, and leave
you with some tools and resources to assist you as you
complete the application. Before we get into the policy
priorities, I want to briefly discuss how and why this NOFA
applies to both FY 2013 and FY 2014 COC program funding.
In an effort to get onto a schedule that has us announcing
awards much earlier in the year, we are combining the FY 2013 and
2014 COC competitions so that COCs will only submit one COC
application or formerly known as exhibit 1 for those of you who
are old timers, for both funding years.
Based on this new schedule, we think that we can have FY 2014
funds announced in the fall well before our renewal grants begin
expiring in January 2015. The chart lays out what we will
be requiring, so let's take a look.
To apply for FY 2013 COC program funds under this NOFA, COCs
and project applicants will have to submit all three parts of the
continuum of care consolidated application that is the FY 13-14
COC application, also called exhibit 1, the FY 2013 project
applications and the FY 2013 priority listings.
The deadline to submit applications for that round of
funding will be February 3rd, 2014.
Although that is later than we would like, we wanted to allow
some extra time for continuums to apply since this score will
actually affect two years of funding.
Because we don't yet know the amount of funding available for
2014, we will publish at a later date the requirements and
deadlines for FY 2014 funds. In other words, we don't yet
know if we will be in another cut scenario for 2014 or whether
we will have enough funds to cover our renewals.
Applicants will not be required to submit another continuum of
care application but will be required to submit the
following. A modified registration, that
will establish the continuum's preliminary pro rata need or
PPRN, and annual renewal demand amounts, and that will allow
continuums to be designated as unified funding agencies.
We will not allow through that process changes in claimed
geography. Continuums will also have to
submit project applications in E-snaps for renewal projects,
planning, USA costs, and any reallocated projects for 2014.
The priority listing that will go along with the 2014 projects
and any necessary consolidated plan certifications.
So while today in this broadcast we're applying the information
here to the 2013-2014 continuum of care application, and the
funding for the 2013 appropriated funds, we will do a
separate and hopefully much shorter broadcast for the FY
2014 funding once we know our budget and have developed a
schedule. Next we want to talk about our
policy priorities. This past summer, the snaps off
initiated a new communication series that we called the snaps
weekly focus so that we could communicate with our continuums
of care our stakeholders and our recipients our policy priorities
and expectations leading up to this year's competition.
Each message focused on a different policy area, and our
goal is to help continue continuums and project
applicants to think critically about the changes they would
need to make in the COC and within projects to be as
effective as they possibly can. These policy priorities are in
line with hud's strategic plan and with the administration's
goals as articulated in opening doors, the federal strategic
plan to prevent and end homelessness.
The FY 2013-2014 continuum of care program competition
includes seven policy priorities.
And continuums will be evaluated in part based on the extent to
which they are able to demonstrate efforts to implement
at a community level each of these policy priorities listed
in the NOFA. So let's run through our seven
policy priorities as they are outlined in the NOFA.
I'm not going to give a large amount of detail.
You can read the NOFA and the weekly focus series for that,
but I do want to make sure that you all understand what we're
getting at when we're talking about these policy priorities.
Lets. As I mentioned, this is the
first year we expect to be in a cut scenario for the continuum
of care program, and it is incredibly important for our
continuums to really be looking at their resources and
allocating them in a strategic way at the local level.
The next policy priority is ending chronic homelessness.
You are all familiar with our policy priority on ending
chronic homelessness, but continues this year will be
score -- continuums this year will be scored on the extent to
which they are increasing the number of permanent supporting
housing beds for the chronically homeless population through
reallocation or they are reprioritizing the chronically
homeless in nonpermanent supportive housing units and
they are implementing a housing first strategy.
We are also working on ending family homelessness as all of
you know. We have a goal to end family
homelessness by 2020, and rapid rehousing is the mechanism by
which we're implementing ending family homelessness within this
NOFA. We want you all to look at
removing barriers to continuum of care resources.
This is incredibly important because we've learned through
our research efforts and through work, our technical assistance
work in the field that there are in some places many barriers to
people accessing transitional and permanent supportive housing
resources within the community. So we want to encourage our
continuums and provide incentives for continuums to
implement efforts to remove barriers to accessing services
and housing within the community.
This could be through a coordinated assessment system.
It also could be through review of all the practices that are in
your community in terms of how people access transitional and
permanent supportive housing. You all are familiar with the
maximizing the use of mainstream resources policy priority.
We've had that for a number of years, but this year, we're
specifically asking you to review how you are planning on
using the implementation of the affordable care act in your
state to help maximize the use and mainstream resources,
building partnerships should also be familiar to you.
Working with your public housing agencies and other organizations
that can serve people who are homeless within your community,
and then we have other priority populations that we want you to
be thinking about. Specifically, unaccompanied use
and homeless veterans. The next section of this
presentation is really about budget limitations and the
implications. For us here at hud, and likely
for you at the local level, this is the toughest part of the
discussion for 2013 funds. I want to be really clear that
we are in this broadcast providing options and ideas for
implementing the cuts required this year and trying to provide
you the most accurate and transparent information
possible. But it is realtiy up to each
continuum of care to make the decisions that suit their
particular needs and aversion to risk.
We cannot tell you exactly what to do.
But here is what I can tell you. At the end of the day, some of
this is based on projections. As I will describe in a moment.
We don't know exactly what will happen until the applications
come in. Because of this uncertainty, we
can only tell you that we feel confident that our projections
are conservative enough that we can safely fund all of the
projects that will be listed in tier 1 based on the cuts that we
are presenting. But that also means that what's
submitted in tier one and how much refunding we can apture
from old grants between now and the time we award grants we may
or may not have funds available for some tier 2 projects.
This is a very different message than what we sent you last year
where we were relatively sure we would be able to get into tier
two. This year we are not sure how
far we will be able to get into tier two but what we can tell
you is we are confident that we can fund everything that's in
tier one. We will likely be able to fund
as I mentioned some tear two projects but only those in the
highest scoring continuums of care.
We hope that our projections are accurate enough that we can fund
everything in tear one and some at least a new reallocated units
in tier two but we cannot know for sure at this point.
Please use the information we are providing here to make the
smartest choices for your continuum of care.
So let's talk a little bit about the national funding picture.
Based on the estimated annual renewal demand or ARD for each
continuum of care with a hud-approved registration, the
national ARD for the continuum of care program competition
exceeds the $1.7 billion we have available under this NOFA.
Therefore, continues will be required to rank projects in two
tiers as we did in 2012. This provides continuums with
the ability to indicate to hud in a very clear manner which
projects are of the highest priority for FY 2013 funding.
Unlike last year, however, the only new projects that are
eligible are ones created through reallocation, planning,
for planning dollars, and unified funding agencies and
that only applys to three continuums.
There is no bonees and no new projects created through PPRN.
Continuums should not attempt to submit those types of new
projects because they will one, not be reviewed by hud but two
and more importantly may actually place some renewals at
risk if you attempt to put new projects that are not allowed on
the priority list. The total amount that each
continuum of care can apply for this year is their ARD, or
annual renewal demand, plus their planning amount plus UFA
if applicable. The tiers themselves are
financial thresholds. Tier 1 is equal to the continuum
of cares ARD established on the final hud approved GIW less 5%.
Tier two is the amount remaining in ARD plus the approved amount
for continue of care planning and UFA costs.
A continuum of care's annual renewal demand is the sum of all
projects eligible for renewal in FY 2013 as established on the
grant inventory work sheet. In FY 2013, continuums were
provided a seven-day grace period, which ended on
December 4th, to make any final additions to the GIW that
could impact their total ARD. Hud will consider the final hud
approved GIW to be either the final version approved during
registration or if applicable, the GIW approved during the
seven-day grace period. Once the grace period is over,
we will publish a list of all the continuums of care in the
country. Unlike in the past, hud will not
make any adjustments to a continuum's ARD following the
grace period. Although eligible renewal
projects may still apply for funding in FY 2013 if they were
left off the GIW in error, the COC's ARD will not be adjusted
which means the project will likely impact the availability
of funds for other projects that were included in the GIW.
We're actually going to discuss this in a little bit more detail
later in the presentation. Finally, I want to note
something that's very important for our continuums to know as
they're planning and that is any project that falls only
partially in tier one is considered by hud as falling
entirely in tier two. I will walk you through some
examples in a minute about how this works.
I just want to compare for a moment last year's NOFA and this
year's NOFA in a summary table so you can very quickly see the
differences. In FY 2012, continuums were
required to rank projects within two tiers as they are in 13.
But they could apply for renewal projects, new projects, through
PPRN, new reallocated projects, a bonus, and for COC planning
costs. Last year, although we thought
that there was a possibility that we would have to make cuts,
we were fortunate to be able to fund all of the renewals and
several new projects in tier one.
Beyond the safe tier one amount. But this year we know that the
shortfall between what we have in our appropriations versus the
renewal demand amount approved through registration is much
greater and that we don't actually have the funds to be
able to make up that gap as we did in 2012.
So this year, tier 1 is ARD less 5%, last year it was 3.5%, and
COKCs -- COCs can only request continuum of care
projects and renewal costs. As I mentioned earlier, no types
of new projects should be submitted by a continuum or they
are actually putting other projects at risk.
One of the most difficult decisions that this team has had
to make is where exactly to set the tier one threshold.
Because this is a competition and there's a lot of different
projects, we have over 8,000 projects nationally, some of it
is, is projections. And the other thing that's
important for folks to know is that that we are required to
update renewals each year based on changes in fair market rents
in a geographic area. Therefore, we had to project
this amount so that we could as accurately as possible determine
the cut amount. It's a delicate balance.
We don't want to overcut but we want to ensure we have enough
money in tier 1 to fund everything that you place as
highly as highly prioritized and then some projects in tier 2.
This is how it works. The national ARD is determined
before the statutory application to rental assistance based on
changes to the fair market rents as I mentioned a moment ago.
The chart on this slide is based on estimates, not actual numbers
from this year but is intended to show you how we landed at a
5% cut. We know that we have
approximately $1.7 billion available for FY 2013 projects
through this NOFA. However, based on the sum of all
of the ARDs that came in through registration, we
estimate the annual renewal demand from registration is
about $1.76 billion. But those projects still have to
be updated as required by the hearth act, so we had to project
the amount that it would cost us to actually award those projects
and that's the projected ARD after the statutory adjustments
is $1.78 billion. Therefore the national shortfall
in this example is $80 million or 5% cut.
Over the next few slides, I'm going to go over some options
that continuums have in terms of how to prioritize projects
within tier one using a fictional continuum of care that
we'll call the ABC continuum of care.
As you can see on the chart on this slide, ABC continuum of
care has four projects that make up its ARD.
Of $450,000. The tier amount would be ARD
less 5% or $427,500. So what does this mean?
Essentially, this means that whatever projects are ranked on
the priority listing up to $427,500 are considered safe.
The tier one amount is static. The continuum plan caring or UFA
cost for a renewal project not calculated into the COC's ARD in
tier one, it means that anything ranked below those projects are
at greater risk. Let's run through some examples
to show you what I'm talking about.
Under option 1, the continuum of care should choose to submit
each project at its full annual renewal amount or ARA.
However, because projects that fall only partially in tier 1
are pushed into tier 2, the fourth ranked project, project
4, as you can see the cumulative request for project 4 is
$450,000 which is above the tier 1 amount of $427,500 so project
4 is actually pushed into tier 2.
And it will only be awarded if the continuum of care scores
very well and the project type is high on hud's order of
selection priorities. We're going to get to selection
priorities specifically in a moment.
But what are the pros and cons here?
The pros of this approach are that all projects obviously are
submitted at their full annual renewal amount.
But the conhere is that the fourth ranked project will
likely not be funded unless some things happen, and that is that
the continuum of care scores very high and that there's
enough funding to get to that type of project in tier 2.
So this is a risky approach. Option two would be something
akin to across the board cuts. That is you want to spread the
5% cut across all projects and only include renewal projects or
new reallocated projects for the reduced amount in tier 1.
This allows all existing projects to be funded, however,
it cuts all projects equally, meaning high performers take the
same cut as low performers. The continuum of care could
choose to take the balance of fund cuts from those projects
and reallocate into a new project and we'll talk about
that focus series moment but this is a fairly simplified
option, example and the pros are all fit into tier 1 but the cons
are around the fact that your high performing project are
taking the same cut as your low performing projects.
Option 3 is a hybrid approach and it really is a combination
of the first two that we discussed.
All renewal projects still are able to fit within the tier 1
threshold instead of cutting all projects equally however the
cuts themselves are made on performance rather than impact.
So as you can see the highest priority project is taking no
cut and the lowest priority project is taking a 29% cut with
the ones in the middle taking various types of cuts based on
again some performance and impact in this particular
option. Please keep in mind these are
just examples of what a continuum could do.
There is no single cookie cutter approach to how to make these
decisions at the local level. With the proceeding examples
really only talk about how tier 1 works so I want to give you a
more comprehensive view of what a continue's total priority list
might look like. So let's review the same
continuum of care and include tier 2.
In this example, the annual renewal demand is the same as
before, which is $450,000, and the COC's eligible to receive
$10,000 in planning funds, and that comes from their
registration. For simplicity purposes we
assume none of the things listed are renewal funds and this is
not UFA. So the total amount the
continuum can apply for as I mentioned earlier in this
presentation is $460,000 or ARD plus their planning.
So let's take a look at what their total priority list could
look like. On the screen is what their
priority list might look like for tear 1 and tier 2 using the
hybrid approach we discussed a few moments ago.
As you can see in this example, the cut amount is used to create
a new permanent supportive housing project created through
reallocation, and planning funds are also included in tier 2.
If this continuum of care scores very well and there is enough
funding available to get to this type of project in tier 2, they
might actually be able to win back their cuts with the new
reallocated project. Again, the highest priority
project is taking no cut, the lowest priority project in tier
1 is taking a 29% cut, and the funds that were cut from all of
the projects to fit them into tier 1 created project number 5
for $22,500, which is a new permanent supportive housing
project for the chronically homeless.
Again, these are really just examples of what a continuum
could do, and we really want to make sure that we're not
endorsing any specific approach but what we are endorsing is
that our continuums be strategic with their decision making.
And with that, I'm going to turn it over to mikeroanhouse to
discuss our priorities. >> Thank you, Ann.
Now that Ann's discusses the priorities, let's discuss how
the selection criteria fits into all of this.
You may not believe it, but we tried to streamline and simplify
the process this year, which is either remarkable exhibition of
self-restraint or self-denial of -- proportions on our part,
but I digress from this broadcasting Odyssey.
The selection priorities in the NOFA are the same for projects
in tier 1 and tier 2. The selection criteria
prioritize those projects that hud deems the most important are
in line with the policy priorities discussed earlier by
Ann. Unlike years past, when hud
awarded all renewals, then all new projects regardless of
project type in fiscal year 2013 selection priorities will be
based entirely on project type. That is, whether it is a
permanent supportive housing rapid rehousing, transitional
shelter, supportive services only project, and whether it is
a renewal, new reallocation, or other eligible new project.
This will allow hud to ensure that to the extent that funds
are available beyond tier 1, that permanent housing is
preserved above all else: it will also allow hud to fund more
projects of a particular type and more COCs rather than
funding one COC in total before moving to the next highest
scoring COC. This means that it is unlikely
that even the highest scoring COC will receive all of its
projects placed in tier 2 given our shortfall in funds available
in the 2013 competition. Knowing the selection priorities
is critically important to COCs' strategic project
placement. Now, let's move onto the
operation of the priorities themselves.
Next slide. Within the rank order
established by the COC on the COC priority listing, hud will
select projects from each tier in the following order by COC
score. So the first selection priority
is renewal permanent housing projects, either rapid rehousing
or permanent supportive housing. The second tier is new permanent
supportive housing projects created to reallocation for 100%
chronically homeless. Third is new rapid rehousing
projects created through reallocation for homeless
household with children. Four is the renewal transitional
housing, five is COC planning cost, six is UFA cost, seven is
SSO project for specialized system.
Eight is renewal, nine is all other renewal supportive
services only projects, and lastly, ten is any other project
application submitted by the COC that was not included in the hud
approved GIW. We will come back to this
situation later. Now, let's look a little closer
at this selection process. Next slide.
The selection priorities in effect can be seen as setting up
rounds of funding by project type, thus, there are ten
distinct funding rounds matching each of the selection
priorities. Projects of the same project
type from all COCs are combined, and they are ranked by
COC score in the priority selection funding round for that
particular project type. If the COC has more than one
project in the selection round, they will be ranked by their COC
ranking from the COC priority list.
Once all ten selection priority funding rounds are completed in
tier 1, the same sequential priority selection funding
process is run for tier 2 to the extent funds are available.
Looking at the tier 2 funding, it should be clear once again
that this selection process does not result in every project
being selected in a COC with the highest score in the
competition. Thus, in the tier 2 selection
process, it is possible for a permanent housing renewal from a
COC with a score of 122 to be funded ahead of a planning
project from a COC with a score of 128.
Now Ann is going to bring this all together in a slide that
contains more vibrant colors than the great Walt Disney film
fantasia. Now over to our tiering
sorceress. >> The team wanted to come up
with an easy way to show how selection works so we decided we
would do this through the use of color, and I hope that folks
take a look at this in color and can understand the process by
using this chart that is up on the screen.
As mike described this year we will fund projects in rounds in
the order described in the NOFA. The rounds in this example are
represented by different colors. Rounds again allow us to fund
more projects of a certain type like permanent supportive
housing across the country rather than funding one
continuum of care in its entirety before moving to the
next highest scoring continuum of care.
In this example, we have three continuums with various types of
new and renewal projects submitted as part of tier 1 and
tier 2. Only one of these continuums,
that is continuum of care A, has a high enough score that it will
get tier 2 projects funded. Let me walk through the example.
The first selection priority is red, permanent supportive
housing renewals or permanent housing renewal.
We would first fund projects 1 and 6 in continuum of care A.
Then projects 1 and 2 in continuum of care B, then
project 1 in continuum of care C.
All of those are red. So you can see that we're going
across rather than deep, which is an important difference in
what we've done in the past. The next round of funding is in
blue, and that is new permanent supportive housing projects for
the chronically homeless created through reallocation.
Continuum of care A has none of those projects, so we move to
the next highest scoring continuum of care, which is B,
and fund project number 3. The third selection priority is
green, new rapid rehousing projects for families created
through reallocation. As you can see, first we fund
project 3 in continuum of care A, but there are none of those
type in continuum of care B. We also fund continuum of care
project 3 in that round. This process continues for all
of the selection priorities throughout tier 1 or until we
exhaust our funding. And as you can see, we've laid
out the ten selection priorities in the bottom of the chart, and
the last one in this example is pink, which is project number 4
in continuum of care B. We think we will be able to fund
a small number of projects in tier 2 and in this example, the
first round of funding, obviously in tier 2, is for
renewal permanent supportive housing or rapid rehousing
projects. As you can see, continual --
continuum of care A is the highest.
They have two projects, project 7 and project 8.
This selection criteria is represented in the color brown.
And they are funded in this round.
However, in this example, it assumes that we exhausted all of
our funding after continuum of care A, and we do not have
sufficient funding to reach the renewal permanent housing
project in continuum of care B. The next highest scoring
continuum of care, or the lowest scoring continuum of care in
this specific example. So as you can see, our effort
here is really about trying to ensure that we're getting across
as many continuums as we can rather than throughout very
deeply into one continuum before moving to the next.
I hope that our color scheme worked for you.
If you have any questions about the -- how selection works, you
can obviously take a look at the NOFA, review this slide again,
or ask a question to the AAQ. I'm going to turn it back to
mike for our next slide. >> As we discussed earlier,
COCs were given a one-time seven-day grace period following
the NOFA to allow for adjustments to the GIW that
allow for impact to the ARD. After that grace period, no
additional changes will be considered that add to the ARD.
Like to restate that. After the grace period, no
additional changes will be considered at that adD to an
ARD. If a COC fails to approve on the
hud approved GIW within the seven-day grace period, the
project may still apply for renewal.
However these projects are picked last in each tier
regardless of project type. If the COC puts that project in
tier 1 to be awarded, it must still fit within the final tier
funding line. This practically would require
further cuts across the board or knocking another renewal project
into tier 2. Now I turn myself over to Tonya
for the next discussion of scoring.
>> Thank you, mike. I'm going to cover what's new
for FY 2013. Due to funding limitations, hud
would not -- will not consider requests for new funding outside
of reallocation, continuum of care planning, and UFA costs.
New projects created through reallocation may be for
permanent supportive housing projects that serves chronically
homeless or rapid rehousing projects for homeless households
with children. Continuum of cares will be
required to state goals in the continuum of care application
and identify the projects that will help meet these goals.
Reallocation is a when a continuum of care shift funds in
whole or part from an existing eligible renewal project to
create one or more new projects within the continuum's ARD.
New projects created through reallocation must meet the
requirements set forth in the NOFA, and the eligibility and
project quality thresholds established by hud in the NOFA.
In the FY 2013 NOFA continuing of care competition,
reallocation can only be used to create new permanent supportive
housing for the chronically homeless or rapid rehousing to
serve homeless households with children.
Eligible rental renewal projects will now be requested to provide
a permanent renewal amount less than fair market rent based on
the actual rent cost per unit. This change will help to reduce
the number of projects receiving rental assistance that have
large balances of unspent funds remaining at the end of the
operating year. Project applicants must ensure
that the amount requested will be sufficient to cover all
eligible costs as hud cannot provide funds beyond what is
awarded through the competition. Project applications for rental
assistance cannot request more than 100% of the published fair
market rent new project applications must adhere to 24
CFR 578.51 F and must request the full fair market rent amount
per unit. See the NOFA for additional
information. Next.
Scoring in the continuum of care application, now before I get
started on the continuum of care application and scoring, I want
to mention a few important items and suggestions.
In order for each continuum of care to be most competitive, it
is important that you carefully review the questions in the
continuum of care application in conjunction with the continuum
of care scoring criteria in the NOFA.
The NOFA will tell you how to maximize points and each
criteria is tied to a question or questions in the application.
Hud has also provided detailed instructions that provide
further guidance on the questions in the continuum of
care application; including examples.
We strongly recommend these documents are used together as
you develop your application. Also, this year, there is no
minimum continuum of care funding score.
First, it is important to note that the consolidated
application must be submitted by the collaborative applicant.
Not a consultant, or another third party.
If you have questions about your collaborative applicant, or need
to change the collaborative applicant, contact the 1 CPD
resource exchange, ask a question, AAQ, for assistance.
Continuum of care applications will be assessed based on
150-point scale plus a possible 6 bonus points.
Continuum of cares with a higher score have a better chance of
awarding projects ranked in tier 2.
Now, all this is depending on the availability of carryover
and recapture funds to be used in the FY 2013 continuum of care
program competition. The continuum of care
application score from FY 2013 will also apply to the FY 2014
competition. The continuum of care
application score consists of scores from the following.
Strategic planning and performance.
This is the continuum of care's plan for and progress to
reducing homelessness in its geographic area and decreasing
the number of reoccurrence of homelessness.
The continuum of care coordinated, coordination of
housing and services. Now the coordination of housing
and services resources with other systems of care that
serves the homeless and coordination of housing and
services within the continuum of care.
The recipients' performance. Now, this is the steps taken to
ensure that continuum of care programs funded projects meet
performance measures as outlined in the NOFA.
The continuum of care housing services and structure.
Now, this is the existence of a coordinated inclusive outcome
ordinated community process including an organizational
structure, a decision making process for developing and
implementing a continuum of care strategy that is inclusive of
representatives from both the private and public sectors.
Leveraging. Continuum of cares that have
100% participation in leveraging from all project applications
and that have a minimum of 150% leveraging will receive the
maximum points. HMIS.
HMIS is an existence of a functioning system that
facilitates the collection of information on the homeless
using residential and other homeless services and stores
that data in an electronic format.
Point and time count. The collection used in
submission of the 2013 point in time count, and bonus points.
The bonus points are based on three subcategories which up to
two points each may be awarded. Okay,ium -- I'm going to turn it
back over to mike who's going to go over the continuum of care
strategic planning and performance scoring.
>> There is nothing funny about scoring.
It along with the selection priorities will determine which
projects are funded in tier 2 given the shortfall in 2013
funding. Hud will allocate up to 69
points for COC's strategic planning and performance for the
following categories. Ending chronic homelessness, hud
will award up to 16 points to COCs that further the
achievement of hud's goal of ending chronic homelessness by
2015. Housing stability.
The ability to maintain and sustain critical supportive --
permanent supportive housing is critical to homelessness.
Hud will award points to the extent to which they demonstrate
performance and further planning for this projective.
Jobs and income growth. Hud will award points to COCs
based on the extent to which COC program funded projects assist
project participants to increase income, which is one way to
ensure housing stability and decrease the possibility of
returning to homelessness. Mainstream benefits.
Hud will award points to COCs based on the extent to which
their COC program-funded projects assist project
participants to obtain mainstream benefits, which is
one way to ensure housing stability and decrease the
possibility of returning to homelessness.
Rapid rehousing for homeless families.
Rapid rehousing allows all homeless to be provided
permanent housing quickly without spending long periods in
shelter or transitioning housing.
Hud will award points to COCs based on the extent to which
they are implementing a rapid rehousing model to reduce the
number of homeless households with children.
The strategic and planning performance scoring are drawn
from the federal strategic plan and focus on the COC's
descriptions and its efforts to address opening door, doors
goal, ending family homelessness, addressing the
needs of domestic violence victims, ending youth
homelessness, reaching persons and families living on the
streets, and ending veterans' homelessness.
Hud will award a total of 28 points based on the extent to
which the COC demonstrates that it coordinates its housing and
services resources with other systems of care that serve the
homeless in that housing and services within the COC are
coordinated. COC must coordinate efforts to
there exiting health care, foster care, and corrections
systems are not discharged onto the street, shelters or
assistance programs. Participate in consolidateed
jurisdiction processes. Work on performance evaluation.
Coordinate with other funding sources and work with public
housing agencies to house homeless persons and prevent
homelessness. I'm going to turn this over to
Brian who will continue on this particular aspect of scoring.
>> Thank you, mike. I will highlight the remaining
sections in this. To receive maximum points at
least 75% of the COC's permanent supportive housing project
applications submitted for the 2013 funds must report that they
follow a housing first approach. And the COC must describe
specific steps it has taken to implement this approach in
permanent supportive housing COC-wide.
Centralized or coordinated assessment center.
COC should have a centralized or coordinated assessment system
covering the COC's geographic area.
Educational assurances. Hud will award maximum points to
the COCs that demonstrate that the COC actively collaborates
with local school districts and early childhood education
providers to identify homeless households with children to
ensure they understand their eligibility for educational
services. Resources for services.
COC will specifically describe the steps it is taking to work
with recipients to identify other sources of mainstream
resources fundings for supportive services in order to
reduce the amount of COC program funds being used to pay for
supportive service costs. Hud will award up to 15 points
to COCs that clearly and specifically demonstrate steps
taken to ensure that COC program funded projects meet performance
measures as outlined by hud. Again, some highlights of these
items. Performance monitoring.
COC should demonstrate that the COC monitors the performance of
recipients on hud established performance goals that are
reported in the 2013-2014 COC application and are included in
the strategic planning process. Increasing capacity.
COCs should demonstrate how the COC assists underperforming
recipients to increase their capacity to implement program
requirements. For example, submission of
timely reports, timely withdrawals for funds,
et cetera. In order to successfully carry
out the requirements of the act, COC program interim rule and the
local COC priorities. Reducing homeless episodes.
To get full points, COC must have a narrative that describes
specific efforts currently in place by the COC to determine
length of time homeless fam realz are in the -- families and
to reduce the amount of time individuals and families are in
homeless. Tracking and returns to
homeless. In order to receive full points
in this area, the COC must demonstrate the use of HMIS or a
comparable database within the COC to monitor and record
returns to homelessness by participants who exit rapid
rehousing, transitional housing, and permanent supportive
housing. Hud will award points to COCs
based to the extent to which a COC demonstrates the extent to
which a coordinated inclusive or outwardly coordinated process
including an organizational structure and decision making
process for developing and implementing a COC strategy that
is inclusive of representatives from both the private and public
sectors. As a fair and impartial project
review and selection process, and has created, maintained, and
built upon a community-wide inventory of housing for the
homeless. A few highlights from this
section. Complaints.
The collaborative applicant must indicate whether the COC
received any written complaints from any entity related to the
project review and selection process within the 12 months
before the 2013, 2014 COC program competition submission
dead line. If the collaborative applicant
selects a no on this question indicating no complaints were
received by the COC as described above, but the local hud CPD
field office or hud headquarters is aware of complaints that the
COC received but failed to report, hud will not award the
COC any points for this section. Accuracy of the GIW.
The collaborative applicant must attach the -- to the 2013-2014
application the final hud approved GIW, which was either
approved during the COC registration or if applicable,
during the seven-day grace period following the publication
of the 2013-2014 COC competition NOFA.
The COC's ARD, annual renewal demand will be based upon the
final GIW. However, please note as we, you
know, made clear in our November 27th listSERV, it is
not hud's intent to penalize COCs if new 2012 projects are
listed on the GIW are not executed on time by hud.
If hud rimoves the 2012 project because it was not executed by
hud by December 31st, 2013, this will not impact the COC's
score in this area. The COC's score is impacted if
the COC adds an eligible project after the seven-day grace
period. That's important and many
questions have come in on that already.
On housing inventory count submissions, COCs were
required to conduct a housing inventory count on a day during
the last ten days of January and submit that data into the
homeless data exchange. The HDX, by April 30th, 2013,
submission deadline. Hud will award up to five points
to COCs that demonstrate the extent to which the amount of
the systems of the COC will be supplemented by resources from
other private sources including main stream programs.
COCs that have 100% participation in leveraging from
all project applications, including only those projects
that have commitment letters on file that are dated within 60
days of the COC application deadline, and that have a
minimum 150% leveraging will receive the maximum points.
Hud will award up to 11 points to COCs that clearly
demonstrate the existence of a functioning HMIS that
facilitates the collection of information on the homeless
using residential and other homeless services and stores
that data in an electronic format.
Again some highlights from this area.
HMIS governance. The collaborative applicant must
indicate whether there is currently a governance charter
in place that is developed in consultation with the HMIS lead
and that incorporates all policies and procedures
necessary for compliance with the HMIS requirements in the COC
program interim role. The 2010 HMIS data standards and
any local HMIS requirements. HMIS plans.
COCs are expected to review, revise, and approve the
following plans that should be developed by the HMIS lead.
A privacy plan, a security plan, and a data quality plan.
Beds coverage. The COC will be assessed on the
bed coverage rate for each of the following housing types.
Emergency shelter, safe haven, transitional housing, rapid
rehousing, and permanent and supportive housing.
Hud will score COCs to the extent that records reflect 86%
or higher for the bed coverage rate.
The bed coverage rate is the number of HMIS participating
beds divided by the total number of year-round beds dedicated to
homeless individuals and families in the geographic area
covered by the COC. Beds funded by victims service
providers must not be included in this calculation.
Required reports. There are various reports that
hud requires COCs and recipients of COC programs and
ESG funding to prepare and submit.
Including but not limited to the annual performance report, the
APR, and the consolidated annual performance and evaluation
report, the CAPR. The collaborative applicant must
describe the extent to which the HMIS is able to generate such
reports and indicate the specific reporting requirements
that are fulfilled using HMIS generated data.
Hud will reward nine points to the collection, use, and
submission of the 2013 point in time count data.
The collaborative applicant must indicate the date of the COC's
most recent point in time count. If the sheltered point in time
count was not conducted during the last ten days of January,
the COC must have received an exception from hud.
COCs are required to collect and produce data on six
subpopulations. Data produced from the point in
time counts must be based on reliable methods, not on
guesstimates. COCs must use one or more
methods to count sheltered homeless persons.
A method must be described such as public place count with
interviews on the night of the count of the interview or at a
later date. Service-based count HMIS or
other methods. Hud will award up to six bonus
points to COCs as follows. Hud will award up to two points
for COCs where 100% of the project application's requested
7% or less in project administration costs.
Supportive service project only. Hud will award up to two bonus
points to COCs where no SSO projects excluding those that
were awarded in the 2012 competition for coordinated
assessment are prioritized in tier 1.
Accuracy of submission. Hud will award up to two bonus
points to COCs that accurately include all applications on hud
29911 which is a comp plan certification.
As a reminder as we finish this scoring section for the COC
application as Tonya stated in the beginning, please carefully
read the NOFA scoring section and the detailed instructions.
This presentation was taken from those sections, so please read
that over. We didn't hit that point in the
NOFA or detailed instructions but if you read it, you will get
those points. The COC consolidated application
for funds under this NOFA includes a COC application which
describes a COC's plan for ending homelessness, its system
level performance and addresses the selection criteria specified
in section 7 of this NOFA. Project applications or the
projects that the COC listed on the priority listings and the
priority listings which contain all project applications
submitted to the COC for funding consideration that are either
ranked or rejected. This section will provide an
overview of the project application.
The project application will only be available in E-snaps
when the applicant has successfully completed SF 424.
Project applicants must ensure they are working in the correct
applicant account. E-snaps users with access to
only one organization's account will see only one item in the
dropdown menu. Others with access to multiple
organizational accounts will have a list this latter group
will include staff members who work on multiple applications.
For example, a staff person at an agency that services as the
collaborative applicant as well as a project applicant
submitting one or more project applications.
This year E-snaps will not be importing data from the 2012
project applications. All project information must be
reentered, except for some information that prepopulates
from the applicant profile. Fill out each question
thoroughly and completely, even if projects have renewed
multiple times, please thoroughly read the NOFA, the
hide show instructions, the training guides and the
frequently asked questions database.
Hide show are in each. The training guides, the FAQs
and other instructions are located on the competition
resource page on the one CPD web site.
Please note that there are no separate detailed instructions
for project applications this year.
The less ambiguity in responding to the project application
requirements, the fewer issues and conditions are placed on the
project and also lower the likelihood that a project will
be rejected or delayed in execution.
Remember most if not all of these attachments on this slide
are required to be uploaded in your project applicant profile.
This is reviewed side by side with your project application,
so please upload the most recent versions of these documents,
particularly for the hud 2880. While we know that uploading
these documents may feel like a perfunctory act they are very
important and can hold up an applicant from award if not done
so completely and accurately. Please make sure to upload the
most accurate and current forms. Back to Tonya for the next
slide. >> Thank you, Brian.
We are going to go over the continuum care priority listing.
Each applicant should prioritize projects according to the
continuum's need in the community's gaps analysis.
Ranking numbers should not be duplicated, should be one number
per project. All project applications
submitted to the continuum of care will appear on the
continuum of care priority listing.
There are four project listing forms that make up the continuum
of care priority listing. One is new projects.
This is where the new projects are listed, which are created
through the reallocation, renewal projects, continuum of
care planning. Only one only one planning
project can be ranked in this listing, and and the last one is
UFA calls. Now, this one is only used by
collaborative applicants who were approved by hud for UFA
designation. Hud has developed the ranking
tool which is available on the one CPD resource exchange NOFA
page. The ranking tool is to assist
continuum of cares with the ranking process in order to help
the continuum to determine which project falls within tier 1 and
within tier 2. And I'll turn it to you.
>> Thank you so much, Tonya, and thank you so much to the
management team here. I'm going to go ahead and close
this out with the next few slides.
First I want to talk about unified funding agencies.
During the annual registration process, continuumshood ability
to apply to hud for designation as a unified funding agency or
UFA. In 2013, three collaborative
applicants met the requirements for UFA designations, and we
expect that we will continue to see more of these in the future.
Hud has notified all of the collaborative applicants that
applied for UFA status whether they were approved for this
designation or not. Those who did not meet the
threshold in 2013 can apply again in 2014 and anyone who
believes they meet the threshold at a later date can apply in
2014 and beyond. It is important to note for
those of you in UFA status that UFA's receive one grant renewal
from all projects and one grant agreement for all projects
funded within the continuum. Being a UFA provides the
continuum through its UFA through flexibility to
administer its programs but these organizations are required
to have significant financial and programatic capacity.
The capacity necessary to really ensure that it and all its
subrecipients are in compliance with program requirements.
It's important to note for these continuums that are designated
UFA that all project applications must list the UFA
as had applicant. Hud will merge these grant
agreements into one after announced and if there are any
project applications within those continuums that are ranked
on the priority list with any other organization listed as the
applicant, hud will cancel UFA status for those continuums of
care, so that's something that is incredibly important for
those continuums to be aware of. As we close out today's
presentation, I want to talk a little bit about some helpful
hints and reminders. I started our presentation today
with some items to think about and some reminders, and I
suppose I'll end in the same way.
Now that you all have had the opportunity to hear about this
year's NOFA in more detail. Continuum of care applicants are
expected to read the COC program interim rule and the NOFA
thoroughly prior to completing the continuum of care
application for homeless assistance.
We want you to utilize the the detailed instructions and
training materials when completing each part of the
continuum of care consolidated applications.
We developed these materials to help you put forth the best
application that you can at the local level.
Please ensure that data entered into the continuum of care
matches the data that's reported in the HDX for the point in time
count and the housing inventory count.
Surprisingly enough, this is something that we see almost
every year that, and community lose points by not actually
matching the data that is reported to hud through the
point in time count and inventory count with the data in
the application so please be sure you are double checking
those numbers. Make sure that all your projects
that are listed on the priority list as Tonya mentioned a moment
ago have unique ranking numbers. This is important because if nay
don't have unique ranking numbers we actually have to hold
up the competition and do a callback on that.
What that means is that even if they are in the separate, the
four separate lists, each one has to have a unique number so
that when, when we look at the list in total, we can see which
one is number one, and which one is last on your priority list.
We suggest that you use a separate spread sheet or the
ranking tool to actually rank your projects so you can keep
track of the projects and your tier 1 amount.
This is something I know when I was an applicant developing our
application locally, that I did on my own, so I could keep a
cumulative tab of all the different projects and what they
were coming in for, so I always knew where the funding line
would be. So to wrap up today's
presentation, I just want to provide you, again, with some of
the tools and resources and where you can find them.
Obviously, visit the 1 CPD web site to access the tools and
resources we have posted, the E-snaps ask a question or AAQ is
open, and we are responding to questions, I would remind you
again to please take a look at the materials we have developed
before you ask a question because it is likely that many
of the questions that you have are actually answered within our
materials. It helps us to control the
volume and be more responsive to the folks who are asking
important questions. Our application training modules
and guidance will be up on the 1 CPD resource exchange.
This broadcast will be up there, and the slides will be archived.
And of course, I remind everybody, especially when I go
out and do public speaking that the listSERVs are important.
We know that you get a lot of them.
We want you to please pay attention to listSERVs have
something, especially those that have something to do with the
competition or that say a note from Ann Oliva.
Usually I am trying to tell you something if it says a note from
Ann Oliva. I want to thank my team again
for putting together this presentation as well as the
snaps team upstairs for all the work that they've been doing to
get this competition and NOFA out the door, but most
importantly, I want to thank all of you who are out there who are
our recipients, who are stakeholders, who are doing the
work on the ground of serving people who are homeless.
We appreciate all of your efforts, and hopefully we've
made this process a little bit easier for the 2013 and 2014
rounds. Thank you so much.