National Conference on Ending Homelessness July 2013

Why reallocate? When to reallocate? How Delaware has used reallocation How this has helped Delaware’s CoC Next Steps

CoC is in Hold Harmless and has little PH Bonus dollars to create new programs

Renewals are not able to fill obligations of grant (i.e. matching requirements)

Renewals are under-performing Renewals are not aligned with community

goals New program models need to be funded

We typically aggregate the outcomes of all projects while looking at the APR’s to help answer questions during the Competition ◦ But then what happens to the program-level outcomes?

Create an intentional process to look at outcomes at least annually – during competition can be used as part of the scoring process

After competition – create action plans with projects under performing

Set a timeframe parameter for how long they have to increase their performance (before NOFA is released)

Then you will know whether you are reallocating during the competition or not

Policy: A grantee seeking the ability to reallocate funding through the non-competitive grantee-self-nominating process must do so in the 2012 or 2013 application process. ◦ If the new project meets priorities, the applicant will be

given the opportunity to receive the funding for the new project without going through the competitive reallocation process.

Starting in 2014, if a project is deemed as low performing by the CoC Lead Agency and has not made any significant changes to increase its performance since HEARTH was enacted or the project no longer meets priorities for funding, we reserve the right to reallocate funding from the existing project without the ability for the applicant to submit a proposal for a new project.

Process: Existing Grantees can complete and submit a Reallocation Request Form ◦ Existing Grant Name, Number, Award, Operating Dates ◦ New Project Name and Type of Project to be created ◦ Number of beds, Target Population, Location ◦ Grant Amount Requested ◦ Narrative description of project ◦ Anticipated Performance Measures ◦ Reasons for reallocating funding from existing project to

new project CoC Board reviews Request Form – approves or

denies

What are the policies/priorities for your CoC? ◦ Example: Prioritize all programs with beds first,

planning grants second, other grants third ◦ Example: Prioritize planning grants first, programs

performing above 80% on all outcomes How will you rank projects within the priority

areas? ◦ Ranking Process (Scores of 1-100; Ranked Highest

to Lowest) ◦ Based on HUD’s Ranking Process (Renewals,

Reallocation Projects, Planning, New Projects) – not normally announced until NOFA is released – then ranking by points within categories

Require all projects (renewal and new) to go through a competitive application process

If project scores below threshold or you run out of money based on rankings, projects get reallocated

Outcomes Review In this process now Created Action Plans with low performing

projects One has decided to merge two projects into

one to help with performance and financial management issues

Non-Competitive Grantee Self-Nominating Process

In the middle of this process now We have 5 TH projects and 1 SSO project that

we are working with on this process This is the last year they can voluntary

reallocate, so we will see…

2012 Competition Policies/Priorities ◦ Tier 1 and 2 Amounts – ensuring Delaware is as close to

Tier 1 Amount as possible ◦ Don’t want to lose beds – renewal projects with beds will

be prioritized in Tier 1 ◦ Planning Grants (including HMIS Renewal) will be

prioritized in Tier 1 ◦ New PH Bonus Project will be prioritized in Tier 1 after

planning grants (based on HUD’s ranking) ◦ Centralized Intake ◦ SSO project was ranked in Tier 2

Partial reallocation of SSO to create a Centralized Intake/Assessment Program with funds still available in Tier 1

2010 Competition ◦ One SSO Project Reallocated due to under

performance and unresolved audit findings ◦ One TH Project Reallocated due to grantee inability

to meet requirements for match ◦ CoC knew these decisions in advance of the

competition starting ◦ RFP Process for New Projects (PH Bonus) including

funding for new PSH Projects (using reallocated funds) Must describe how going to ensure continued service

for those currently served

Intent of the CoC to reallocate Supportive Services Only (SSO) and Transitional Housing (TH) projects to create new Permanent Housing (PH) projects.

2012 Competition had to tell HUD our intention to reallocate in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015

Each Year, we will need to report on our progress

Use this as the kick-start to your thinking/process

Opens up community dialogue ◦ What are our priorities? ◦ How are we going to use our resources effectively

to serve the hardest to serve? (Adjusted Risk Factors and Program Model Guide) ◦ What is going on with our projects? What is good

that we can’t tell with the HUD outcomes? Effective and Efficient Use of Resources ◦ Increases performance of funded projects ◦ Allows for new project models to be funded

Changes in Homelessness ◦ PIT Changes ◦ Length of Stay Changes

If you want to begin the conversation of reallocation… Create a Reallocation Policy for your CoC ◦ Policy Statement ◦ Process Description ◦ Associated Forms

Set CoC-wide Priorities/Ranking Policies in advance of competition, tweak if needed once NOFA is released

Create Scoring Criteria for Competition Set goals and create a plan around Objective

7

Create a Program Models Guide ◦ What are the programs we need in our community ◦ Who do they serve? ◦ What are the parameters (time frame, services, etc.) ◦ What are the expected outcomes? What are our Adjusted Risk Factors for hard-to-serve

populations? Open Communication ◦ Project Sponsors ◦ Other Funders ◦ HUD

Susan Starrett Homeless Planning Council of Delaware (302) 654-0126 sstarrett@hpcdelaware.org