TRANSITION ISSUES AND BUILDING A FOUNDATION FOR SUCCESS

1
TRANSITION ISSUES AND BUILDING A FOUNDATION FOR
SUCCESS

• Bridget Kurtt DeJong
• Stacey Murphy

2
TOPICS

• Differences between current CoC and new CoC
  practices and roles
• New requirements for CoC oversight structure,
  oversight, and responsibilities under HEARTH Act
  (changeover to be completed by 2011)
• Possible Structures for CoCs Under HEARTH

3

• CoC Leaders Goals
• Realistically assess their current CoCs
  inter-organizational arrangements and current
  strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities
• Understand what they need to do to work towards
  designing an optimal alternative

4
Agenda

• I. HEARTH Changes to CoC Structure and Activities
• Discussion of Impact on CoC Stakeholders
• II. Restructuring Your CoC Governance/Management
• Discussion of Choosing an Entity to Lead
• III. A New Grant System

5
I. HEARTH Changes to CoC Structure and
Activities- Big Overview

• Continuum of Care (CoC) becomes Collaborative
  Applicant (CA)
• CA has a few more responsibilities
• CA receives funds to do work
• CA can become Unified Funding Agency (UFA)
• take on more responsibilities
• receive even more funding

6
The Pre-HEARTH System

• A Continuum of Care
• Engaged in community planning
• Filed the annual HUD application
• Oversaw HMIS implementation
• Project grantees
• Contracted with HUD
• Monitored fund use
• Maintained financial management procedures

7
Post-HEARTH System- Option 1

• A Continuum of Care
• Engages in community planning (including Con
  Plan)
• Files the annual HUD application and tracks
  outcome data
• Oversees HMIS implementation
• Oversees project requirements
• Project grantees
• Contract with HUD
• Monitor fund use
• Maintain financial management procedures

8
Post-HEARTH System- Option 2

• A Continuum of Care
• Engages in community planning (including Con
  Plan)
• Files the annual HUD application and tracks
  outcome data
• Oversees HMIS implementation
• Oversees project requirements
• Contracts with HUD
• Monitors fund use
• Oversees financial management procedures
• Project sponsors
• Run the projects and keep accurate files

9
Map of the Old to New System Two Options
Option 1
Option 2
10
CHANGES, CHANGES

• The changes in structure and responsibilities
  could change other parts of your CoC too
• Role of your CoC in the community
• Relationships among CoC members
• CoC power structure

11
Collaborative Applicant

• Collaborative Applicant
• Submits CoC application for all projects in its
  community
• Is not required to be a legal entity
• Can receive up to 3 of a communitys CoC grant
  to cover its costs
• Conflict of Interest No board member of a CA may
  participate in decisions concerning an award to
  her or her organization

12
Duties of a Collaborative Applicant

• Submits consolidated CoC grant application
• Designs collaborative process to apply for
  funding
• Evaluates outcomes
• Determines compliance with program requirements
  and selection criteria
• Establishes funding priorities
• Participates in the Consolidated Plan
• Ensures operation of and consistent participation
  in HMIS
• Summary
• Much of what CoCs currently do,
• with additional roles and responsibilities.

13
Becoming a Unified Funding Agency

• A CA can apply to serve as a UFA
• or
• HUD can designate a CA as a UFA if
• the CA has capacity
• the change would serve the purposes of HEARTH

14
Unified Funding Agency Duties

• In addition to the CA duties, a UFA
• Receives and distributes funds from HUD
• Requires each project to establish proper fiscal
  control and fund accounting procedures
• Arranges for an annual audit of the financial
  records of each project

15
Unified Funding Agency

• A UFA can receive up to 6 of a communitys CoC
  grant to cover the administrative costs of
  performing these duties
• Summary
• UFA takes on CA duties PLUS other key tasks
  related to grant management and oversight

16
Agent of Collaborative Applicant

• A CA may designate an agent to
• Apply for grant funding
• Receive and distribute grant funds
• Perform other administrative duties
• But CA retains all duties and responsibilities

17
Reminder Duties of a Collaborative Applicant

• Submits consolidated CoC grant application
• Designs collaborative process to apply for
  funding
• Evaluates outcomes
• Determines compliance with program requirements
  and selection criteria
• Establishes funding priorities
• Participates in the Consolidated Plan
• Ensures operation of and consistent participation
  in HMIS

18
CA RESPONSIBILITY 1A APPLICATIONWHATS THE
APPLICATION PROCESS GOING TO BE LIKE?

• Still a competition
• Some selection criteria for CoCs described in
  legislation
• Funding directly awarded to projects or to UFAs

19
CA RESPONSIBILITY 1A AND B APPLICATIONCOC
SELECTION CRITERIA IN THE LEGISLATION

• CAs Plan for reducing homelessness and length of
  homelessness, which should include
• Needs of subpopulations
• Comprehensive strategies
• Quantifiable performance measures
• Timelines
• Funding sources
• Responsible parties
• And more

20
CA Responsibility 1a and b ApplicationMore CoC
Selection Criteria

• Prior performance of ESG and CoC grants and
  including at least
• Length of time people remain homeless
• Extent of repeated homelessness
• Thoroughness in reaching homeless people
• Reduction in number of people who are homeless
• Jobs and income growth for homeless people
• Reduction in number of people who become homeless

21
CA Responsibility 1a and b ApplicationEven
More CoC Selection Criteria

• Review and Rank Process
• Uses outcome data
• Involves a range of stakeholders
• Based on objective criteria that are publicly
  announced
• Open to proposals from previously unfunded
  entities
• Leverage for CoC grants
• Coordination with other Federal, State, local,
  private and other entities ending homelessness

22
CA Responsibility 1a and b ApplicationEven
MORE CoC Selection Criteria

• Outcomes of projects serving DOE-defined homeless
  families with children and youth (e.g. doubled
  up), such as
• Preventing literal homelessness for those at
  highest risk
• Achieving independent living in permanent housing
  among highest risk households
• Other criteria HUD creates
• The need within the geographic area for homeless
  services

23
CA Responsibility 1c Program Requirements

• By submitting application, CA agrees to
• Ensure operation of project
• Monitor and report progress of project
• Ensure consumer involvement in management and
  execution of project

24
CA Responsibility 1c Program Requirements

• By submitting application, CA agrees to
• Require certification from project sponsors to
• maintain DV confidentiality
• establish policies/staff to protect educational
  rights
• provide data/reports
• Monitor and report provision of matching funds
• Consider educational needs when placing families
• Other activities

25
CA Responsibility 1c Matching Funds

• CAs demonstrate match
• Match required At least 25 of funds provided to
  the area (except admin, leasing)
• Match may be
• Funding for eligible activities
• In-kind services
• By an entity other than sponsor
• Need an MOU in place

26
CA Responsibility 1d Funding Priorities

• Determining how to use CoC funds
• Including scoring of project applications,
  perhaps using CoC Selection Criteria as guidance
  (esp about Project Performance and Review and
  Rank process)
• HEARTH CA may use up to 10 of funds to serve
  families w/ children and youth defined as
  homeless under other Federal statutes, IF the CA
  shows use of such funds is
• Of an equal or greater priority OR
• Equally or more cost effective in meeting the
  goals of the CAs plan

27
Reminder Duties of a Collaborative Applicant

• Submits consolidated CoC grant application
• Designs collaborative process to apply for
  funding
• Evaluates outcomes
• Determines compliance with program requirements
  and selection criteria
• Establishes funding priorities
• Participates in the Consolidated Plan
• Ensures operation of and consistent participation
  in HMIS

28
CA Responsibility 2 Con Plan Participation

• CA must participate in the Con Plan
• CA must consult with the body allocating ESG
  funds (prevention and shelter)

29
CA Responsibility 3 Operate and Ensure
Participation in HMIS

• HMIS must
• Collect unduplicated counts
• Analyze patterns of use
• Provide information to projects for needs
  analyses and funding priorities
• Meet all technical and privacy standards
• encryption
• documentation
• rights protected
• criminal/civil penalties for unlawful disclosure
• etc.

30
Key Differences between CA and UFA

• A CA does the things CoC currently does plus some
  oversight of program requirements and outcomes
• A UFA does everything a CA does plus grants
  management it receives the grant funds,
  distributes them, audits programs, etc.

31
Things to Think About Current Stakeholders

• Changing roles
• Changing relationships among sister agencies
• Data driven
• Best practices
• Evaluation
• Monitoring
• Centralization (esp. UFA)
• Current authority or decision-making within the
  CoC

32
Things to Think About Geography

• Improving partnerships with Con Plan bodies and
  Education Coordinator
• Meeting additional data collection and outcome
  tracking requirements
• Merging may increase competitiveness
• Administrative capacity
• UFA duties may require an economy of scale
• Consider current grant administrators in
  community
• Consider CoC mergers to achieve greater efficiency

33
Things to Think About So much more!

• Big decisions!
• Merging
• Choosing one entity to serve as CA
• Structure
• Aligning funding streams
• Each CoC will need to determine their existing
  players, structures, processes, funding, and
  decide how to best allocate resources and design
  its system

34
A Case Study Community X

• X has a young CoC, led by local providers
• City and county staff have been involved, but
  peripherally
• X has been moderately successful in the
  competition, but mostly focuses on coordinating
  services and advocacy
• Each provider is its own grantee

35
A Case Study Community X

• How will HEARTH changes affect CoCs current role
  in the community and its stakeholders?
• Will the CoC be able to collect data and report
  out on the Selection Criteria under HEARTH? How
  will that affect projects?
• Would the CoC want to become a legal entity and
  centralize grants? How would that affect members?

36
A Case Study Community X

• Would the CoC benefit from increasing economy of
  scale by merging with a staffed CoC nearby?
• How will the CoC structure and membership need to
  change? How will that affect the current CoCs
  activities and success?
• What is the effect of changes on sister agency
  relationships?
• What else?

37
Activity Impact on YOUR Geography and
Stakeholders
38
II. Restructuring Your CoC Governance/Management

• The big question.

39
Possible Models

• Disclaimer The following models may not work in
  precisely the way presented below for your CoC.
  They are only for discussion.
• Other Disclaimer We do not know if additional
  CA/UFA administrative funds will be available.
  You may not receive more funding.
• Final Disclaimer These slides should not be
  used on their own. Discussing Pros and Cons and
  resources is key to fully understanding these
  models.

40
Collaborative Applicant Option 1COC Governing
Body becomes C.A.
All CA Responsibilities HMIS, application,
planning, monitoring

• Current CoC takes on all CA responsibilities
• May assume 3 of grant

41
COLLABORATIVE APPLICANT OPTION 2CA
RESPONSIBILITIES DIVIDED BETWEEN COC GOVERNING
BODY AND AGENT
3 admin

• CA responsibilities AND 3 admin divided between
  CA (planning, HMIS participation) and Agent
  (monitoring, application)
• Similar to current CoC structure, but allows
  agent to take on new CA responsibilities

42
Unified Funding Agency Option 1CoC Governing
Body Becomes UFA
6 Admin

• Existing CoC becomes legal entity and contracts
  with HUD as UFA
• UFA contracts with agent for grants management
• Grant recipients contract with UFA, not HUD
• UFA and Agent divide UFA responsibilities and up
  to 6 of grant
• May make sense where there is a very strong CoC
  body

43
Unified Funding Agency Option 2UFA and CoC Body
in Government Agency
CoC Commission with CoC Members

• Government Agency becomes UFA and contracts
  directly with HUD
• UFA contracts directly with grant recipients
• Government Agency assumes up to 6 of grant and
  most UFA responsibilities
• CoC Advisory Commission created for planning
• May make sense in CoC where a government agency
  is involved now

44
Unified Funding Agency Option 3Nonprofit or
Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Becomes UFA

• Nonprofit or Joint Powers Authority becomes UFA
  and contracts with HUD
• UFA assumes all UFA responsibilities and up to
  6 of grant, and contracts with grant recipients
• UFA establishes mechanism for ensuring CoC
  member participation/representation
• May make sense in a CoC that contains multiple
  jurisdictions or a large geographic area

45
Barriers

• Each CA/UFA will be required to collect and
  report on complex data and do project oversight
• Additionally, each UFA will need to have
  excellent financial oversight and management
  procedures and capacity

46
Barriers

• HUD usually looks to past performance to
  establish capacity will possible entities in
  your area have experience?
• Your community is likely comfortable with the
  current set-up getting buy-in may be difficult
  especially if stakeholder roles will be
  diminished.

47
Preparing for the Application Process

• Each CA/UFA will need to be collecting more
  information than it does now
• Each CA/UFA will need to be engaging in
  restructuring activities in order to be ready for
  the application process in 2011

48
Implications for HMIS

• HMIS will
• Need to be more robust to meet HEARTH data
  requirements
• Need to collect additional information
• Be supported by the oversight structure

49
Choosing an Entity to be the CA or UFA

• Consider current structure
• What works or doesnt work
• Consider entities in community
• Their capacity to be CA/UFA
• Their interest in being the CA/UFA
• Consider bringing other funding streams under
  central oversight
• May present the opportunity to improve alignment
  among various funding streams/application
  processes, creating efficiencies at many levels

50
Case Study Community Y

• Community Y is a successful, established CoC that
  would like to centralize homeless system
  oversight (e.g. Ten Year Plan, CoC, shelter
  system, etc.) and improve its adequate HMIS
  system.
• CoC membership wants what is best for the
  community.
• With budget cuts, the PHA, the County, the
  Cities, local United Way and foundations are
  nervous about taking on the responsibilities of
  the CoC.
• Y has a strong faith-based community and provider
  network.

51
Case Study Community Y

• What is the next step for Community Y?
• What models could Community Y consider? What
  resources would it need for each?
• What challenges should Y expect, and how could
  it overcome them?

52
Activity Capacity Assessment for CA/UFA
53
III. A New Grant System

• Pre-HEARTH grants were subdivided into different
  programs
• different match requirements, activities, and
  structures
• HEARTH SHP, SC, and Section 8 SRO Mod Rehab are
  combined into one CoC program
• one set of eligible activities
• a single match requirement
• a unified set of operating rules

54
Eligible Activities

• Included
• acquisition, rehabilitation, construction
• rental assistance (short and long term)
• operating costs
• supportive services
• re-housing services
• HMIS
• Key points
• No cap on acquisition/ rehabilitation/
  construction
• PH Rental Assistance must be administered by unit
  of government or public housing agency
• Addition of Re-housing services
• Staff training now allowable

55
Administrative Costs

• Project sponsors can receive 10 of total project
  funds for admin (up from 5)
• Reminder Continuums must demonstrate 25 match
  for all activities except leasing and
  administration (which have no match requirement)

56
Grant Terms

• Permanent housing leasing/ rental
  assistance/operations
• New may have a 15-year initial term
• first 5 years funded through CoC
• next 10 years funded through CoC or through
  Section 8 Project-based Rental Assistance
• Renewals
• Can be funded either through CoC or through
  Section 8 Project-based Rental Assistance
• Tenant-based assistance 1-year terms
• Project-based assistance up to 15 years subject
  to applicants discretion and annual
  appropriations

57
Contract Renewal

• Renewal amounts for Permanent Housing leasing,
  operations, or rental assistance
• HUD will adjust proportional to increases in fair
  market rents in the geographic area
• This expands the SC FMR increases to all
  permanent housing activities
• HUD may impose minimum grant terms (up to 5
  years) for new permanent housing projects

58
Funding Recapture

• Acquisition, Rehabilitation, or Construction
• If project ceases to operate within 15 years
  (used to be 20 years) of award, it must repay
  funds according to a new schedule
• Except under certain circumstances

59
Questions?

• Bridget Kurtt Dejong
• 415-788-7961 ext. 314
• Bridget_at_homebaseccc.org