On January 7, 1999, NCDA distributed a survey to its members regarding HUD's FY 1998 "Continuum of Care" application process. NCDA would like to thank all of the members who responded to the survey. The survey was intended to gather feedback from members on a variety of issues, including the planning process, the types of assistance being applied for, and suggestions to HUD on improving the application process. NCDA received a total of 45 survey responses. Those responses have been compiled and the information provided below. The responses have been forwarded to HUD for consideration in future development of their "Continuum of Care" application and award processes.
HUD will hold broadcasts of its FY 1999 Continuum of Care application process on April 16. The broadcasts are intended to provide HUD the opportunity to discuss the FY 1999 application process, take suggestions from applicants, and answer questions on the process. Contact your local HUD office, if you would like to participate in the broadcast.
(1) Attach a brief 1-2 paragraph written description of your FY 1998 "continuum of care" planning process.
Since these descriptions are extensive, and add considerably to the survey, they have not been attached to this survey response. These descriptions are available from NCDA upon request. Contact Vicki Watson at 202-887-5532 to obtain copies. The descriptions will be forwarded to all 45 survey respondents.
(2) What type of application did your jurisdiction submit?
consolidated application: 30
associated application: 13
solo application: 2
TOTAL RESPONSES: 45
(3) Did you apply as a single jurisdiction or in conjunction with a consortium of jurisdictions?
single jurisdiction: 34
consortium of jurisdictions: 9
no response: 2
TOTAL RESPONSES: 45
(4) Is the time delay between the preparation and submission of the application and the actual notification of awards by HUD, and receipt of the contracts, a barrier to your jurisdiction submitting a request for funding under the continuum of care process?
Yes: 13
No: 32
TOTAL RESPONSES: 45
(5) If yes, what suggestions would you provide to HUD for streamlining the process
- (1) Notification generally occurs during the Christmas holiday. We'd
like the preparation and submission to occur earlier in the year so the
actual notification could be received in late Fall.
(2) Do adjusted pro rata need computations ASAP and concentrate on reviewing those projects that fall within the need threshold for each community. But don't overlook high-ranked renewal projects.
(3) It would be helpful to have HUD explain their internal process, then I could have information needed to suggest how to streamline it.
(4) Need to involve more communication between HUD and local governmental agencies each step of the way.
(5) Obtain a time line from HUD to the applicants.
(6) HUD needs to process paperwork quickly and get contracts out in a more timely fashion.
(7) Award contracts with property acquisition funding prior to the actual purchase of property, as there is a delay between initial site control until the point of purchase.
(8) Cut the time delay between submission of application, completion of the technical submission and the actual notification of the award.
(9) HUD should push its field offices to agree to grant agreements being completed at least six months after the announcement or receipt of the award for conditional awards. Expeditious finalization of the grant award is most necessary.
(10) If we are purchasing a site to be used by a program funded under this funding source, we have to know an accurate date for release of funds for planning purposes.
(11) The Continuum of Care requires a match prior to application, however, HUD takes about 1-1/2 years from application to contracting for funds and won't let you spend any funds from other sources until HUD funds are contracted. Other funders can't work on or wait on HUD's schedule.
(12) Limit HUD review to perhaps 90 days for applications and expedite contract processing.
(13) The process needs to begin and end earlier in the year. Announcing the grant during Christmas week forces short turnaround for agencies needing funds early in the next calendar year.
(14) Set a definite date, preferably before the end of the federal fiscal year.
|
|
|
| Transitional housing for families with children | 18 |
| Permanent supportive housing for individuals | 7 |
| Affordable permanent housing | 6 |
| Substance abuse treatment | 6 |
| All types of transitional and assisted living | 4 |
| Transitional housing for singles | 3 |
| Emergency shelter for families with children | 2 |
| Safe havens | 2 |
| Transitional housing for the mentally ill | 2 |
| Supportive services | 2 |
| Case management | 2 |
| Emergency shelter -- short term | 1 |
| Supportive housing for the disabled | 1 |
| Residential treatment facilities for women with children | 1 |
| Emergency shelter for persons with substance abuse problems | 1 |
| Emergency shelter for women | 1 |
| Job training | 1 |
| Supportive housing for teenagers, especially teen moms | 1 |
(7) Which programs did your jurisdiction apply for under HUD's FY
1998 "Continuum of Care" Homeless Assistance competition, and for what
amount?
| Supportive Housing Program | 44 out of the 45 survey respondents (98%) applied for SHP | $127,718,243 total applied for by all 44 survey respondents
average amount of award applied for: $2,902,687 |
| Shelter Plus Care | 10 out of the 45 survey respondents (22%) applied for S+C | $13,578,960 total applied for by the 10 survey respondents
$1,357,896 average amount applied for |
| Section 8 Moderate Rehab for SROs | 3 out of 45 the survey respondents (6%) applied for Section 8 Moderate Rehab for SROs | $2,320,230 total applied for by the 3 survey respondents
$773,410 average amount applied for |
(8) How many total projects did you seek funding for in your FY 1998 application, and how many of these projects received funding?
Of the responses submitted, the highest number of projects requested by an applicant was 22 (17 of the projects were funded). At least seven of the respondents requested funding for 10 or more projects. All other project requests were less than 10. At least eight applicants requested funding for one or two projects.
Two of the applicants did not receive funding for any of their project
requests (one requested funding for two projects and the other requested
funding for five projects). The highest number of projects funded for one
application was 17 (out of a request of 22). The following table shows
the number of projects requested, and the number of projects funded, by
each survey respondent.
|
|
|
| 2 | 2 |
| 11 | no response |
| 13 | 3 |
| 11 | 3 |
| 2 | 1 |
| 4 | 2 |
| 2 | 1 |
| 4 | 4 |
| 1 | 1 |
| 6 | 2 |
| 14 | 10 |
| 13 | 9 |
| 7 | 6 |
| 4 | 3 |
| 9 | 9 |
| 6 | 5 |
| 7 | 1 |
| 4 | 4 |
| 3 | 1 |
| 3 | 2 |
| 12 | 3 |
| 2 | 0 |
| 9 | 6 |
| 6 | 4 |
| 8 | 8 |
| 22 | 17 |
| 5 | 5 |
| 8 | no response |
| 6 | 4 |
|
|
|
| 6 | 4 |
| 6 | 1 |
| 1 | 1 |
| 8 | 7 |
| 5 | 0 |
| 6 | 6 |
| 4 | 3 |
| 6 | 2 |
| 8 | 8 |
| 2 | 1 |
| 2 | 1 |
| 3 | 1 |
| 5 | 1 |
| 10 | 5 |
| 9 | 4 |
| 6 | 2 |
(9) Did you apply for funding to renew existing projects?
Yes: 25
No: 17
No response: 3
TOTAL RESPONSES: 45
(10) If yes, please complete the following chart.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Supportive Housing Program | 3
1 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 4 3 1 3 5 21 2 |
3
0 1 3 0 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 5 17 2 |
$1.1 million
$146,244 $506,940 $354,510 $881,376 $344,619 $1.6 million $592,852 $869,198 $376,223 $491,851 $2.6 million $650,260 $839,916 $763,482 $1.5 million $485,176 $238,250 $1.22 million $9.8 million $833,107 |
$1.1 million
0 $506,940 $346,500 0 $344,125 0 $592,852 $869,198 $376,223 $486,000 $244,605 $650,200 $839,916 $241,850 $778,776 $485,176 $238,250 $1.22 million $8.8 million $833,107 |
| Shelter Plus Care | 1
1 1 |
1
1 1 |
$1.7 million
$11.1 million $847,080 |
$1.7 million
$11.1 million $847,080 |
| Section 8 Mod. Rehab for SROs | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
(11) Did you apply for funding for new projects?
Yes: 41
No: 2
No response: 2
TOTAL RESPONSES: 45
(12) If yes, please complete the following chart.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Supportive Housing Program | 12
1 4 1 2 3 1 1 2 12 6 5 8 10 2 2 2 5 6 3 8 1 4 3 2 2 8 1 1 5 4 1 6 3 5 8 7 6 |
2
1 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 8 2 4 5 2 1 0 2 4 0 0 3 0 0 1 1 1 8 0 1 5 0 1 1 3 3 8 0 6 |
$3.1 million
$275,076 $3.5 million $658,767 $504,358 $1.3 million $575,400 $407,013 $495,000 $7,124,274 $3.2 million $1.7 million $1.5 million $2.09 million $466,145 $569,721 $757,272 $1.045 million $2.6 million $2.033 million $3.192 million $467,097 $1.8 million $1.975 million $280,903 $3.15 million $1.572 million $225,000 $60,000 $1.4 million $3.076 million $769,619 $871,782 $1.3 million $1.263 million $2.271 million $2.379 million $2.623 million |
$770,871
$275,076 $3.5 million $249,666 $262,500 $1.3 million $575,400 $407,013 $95,000 $3,984,200 $718,524 $1.5 million $1.1 million $405,955 $194,700 0 $504,848 $884,924 0 0 $2.173 million 0 0 $899,449 $270,155 $1.250 million $1.572 million 0 $60,000 $1.4 million 0 $769,619 $142,635 $1.3 million $724,706 $2.271 million 0 $2.623 million |
| Shelter Plus Care | 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 |
1
1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 |
$327,600
$536,160 $111,300 $399,300 $3.4 million $951,600 $687,600 $166,560 $3.579 million |
$327,600
$536,160 $111,400 $373,080 0 $961,200 0 $170,880 0 |
| Section 8 Moderate Rehab for SROs | 1
1 1 |
0
1 0 |
$387,840
$727,200 $1.205 million |
0
$864,000 0 |
(13) If you did not receive the funding you requested (for both renewal and new projects) in your application, how does your jurisdiction plan to fund these projects, if at all.
|
|
# of responses |
| Re-apply for HUD's next Super NOFA application | 9 |
| Not fund the project | 4 |
| Reduce the project | 2 |
| Look to the state | 2 |
| Seek other funding sources
Funding sources mentioned in the survey responses include: Fannie Mae Foundation, Emergency Shelter Grants Program, HOME Program, Dept. of Health and Human Services, local foundations, local corporations, local government general funds, state funds |
9 |
| Push HUD to fund the project | 2 |
(14) Did your jurisdiction submit a "Continuum of Care" application in previous years?
Yes: 40
No: 4
No response: 1
TOTAL RESPONSES: 45
(15) Do you plan to apply for HUD's FY 1999 Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance competition?
Yes: 43
No: 1
No Response: 1
TOTAL RESPONSES: 45
(16) How would you suggest that HUD change its "Continuum of Care" Homeless Assistance process in FY 1999, if at all.
- Reconfigure pro rata amounts for communities showing capacity.
- HUD should set a date that they will release funds to the community. This will allow communities to plan their project in a timely fashion and not incur additional expenses.
- Reduce the complexity of the application procedure. Require less information in Exhibit I and minimize redundant information requests.
- It was fine. The materials helped us do a very comprehensive approach and technical assistance was available.
- They could issue ground rules earlier in the game -- prior to NOFA -- or else give longer time before the application is due.
- Emphasize a quick turn around from award notice to the beginning of the program set-up.
- I would suggest HUD change its "Continuum of Care" Homeless Assistance Process from being a "competitive" to an "entitlement" funding application. Factors that could be considered in the amount of funds received by each participating jurisdiction may be: (1) population (50,000 or more); (2) poverty level; (3) number of homeless persons (information compiled using a HUD approved counting method).
- Improve the Electronic Application Software -- still glitches. Provide more technical assistance on process.
- Give more direct guidelines in criteria for the application. Provide examples of applications who received the majority of their request.
- Publish the Super NOFA earlier in the year. Also, clarify the use of the "prorata need" score in the competition.
- Existing programs serving people must get higher priority and not be subject to sudden cut-off due to a weak application.
- We had problems with the application disc we received from HUD and we eventually did the entire application on a word processor. The project applicants also had this problem.
- Stop having applicants prioritize each activity.
- (1) Be consistent with annual dates for process; (2) Shorten the time between award announcement and contract; (3) HUD should hold discussions with local "Continuum of Care" during decision-making process; (4) Send copies of award letters to local "Continuum of Care" contact.
- Stop changing how the application asks for information. Every year has been somewhat different, so there isn't consistency from year to year.
- Eliminate pro rata share and base awards on application merit. Also, make the award announcements quicker.
- Fast track decision making, announcement of awards, and grant documents.
- We are in favor of "block granting" these funds to cities and States.
- HUD should base their allocation on a formula similar to the Emergency Shelter Grants Program. This would give jurisdictions an amount they can plan for and then the allocation process should be based on this dollar amount. I'm not saying it would turn into a full blown entitlement program, but at least there would be some assurance that part of your priority list would be funded.
- Put Shelter Plus Care in a separate NOFA, with a separate appropriation. Give communities their whole pro rata amount by funding partial projects and/or leap frogging projects that are too large to fit.
- Be more willing to share scoring information with Field. Three years running I've had to pull teeth to get HUD to release actual pro rata need levels for my surrounding jurisdiction. Problem is with HUD D.C., not regional offices.
- Streamline the application process by reducing the redundancy. Either make the application software more user friendly or eliminate it.
- Entitlement funding will help to end the uncertainty of the whole process. We have been successful up until now by submitting all projects as one priority.
- (1) Fund renewals separately from new requests; (2) Adopt a more realistic/fairer "needs" formula; (3) Seek additional funds to ensure adequate dollars for renewals.
- Lower the percentage of money a renewal can request. Currently, it is 100% of operating and supportive services in third year. Recommend something like 50% of operating and supportive services in third year.
Return to Washington Report