2017 HUD CoC Program Rating and Review Procedure

Transcription

1 Introduction: In accordance with the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act, the CoC Board was reconstituted in March 2014 and its duties and responsibilities are set forth in the Chapter 12, Part XV of the Broward County Administrative Code. In Broward County, the responsibilities of the CoC roles are fulfilled by the Broward County Board of County Commissioners, Homeless Continuum of Care (CoC) Board, and the Community Partnership Division (CPD), Homeless Initiative Partnership (HIP) Section of Broward County. HIP is the HUD CoC Program Collaborative Applicant (CA) and is responsible for completing and submitting the Consolidated Application for funding on behalf of the Broward County CoC - FL 601. The Consolidated Application consists of CoC Application, Project Priority Listing, and Project Applications. Collaborative Applicant General HUD CoC Project Selection Process: The following is an overview of the grant selection process for the Broward CoC-FL-601 HUD Notice of Funding Proposal Request for Letter of Intent (RLI) process for 2017 HUD CoC NoFA projects: Prior to HUD CoC Program NoFA - CoC Board established priorities for HUD CoC Program Renewal/Reallocation/Bonus funding Distribute CoC priorities set by the CoC board to the community CPD/HIP issues RLI for HUD CoC Program funded projects Set calendar of deadlines (confer with CoC Board) Publically Publish/Post/Distribute the HUD CoC Program RLI funding announcement Publically Publish/Post/Distribute announce the calendar of deadlines Notify CoC Performance Outcome Needs Gaps (PONG) Review Committee members about schedule and confirm availability Host info call and/or meeting that is open to entire CoC Require receipt of RLI by a certain date and including outlined proposed services and target population(s) Require project applicant agencies to prepare separate applications for each proposed project. CA hosts mandatory briefing(s) with those who submitted RLI CA hosts information session(s) with those who submitted RLI CA prepares application material pertaining to Rating, Ranking, and Renewal/Reallocation/Bonus project based on the annual HUD NoFA guidelines Host info call and/or meeting to debrief those agencies who were selected from the RLI process about the Rating, Ranking and Renewal/Reallocation/Bonus. Share agency name, proposed services, and target population with all who submitted RLIs. Note: The CA and CoC Board use a Cone of Silence during open procurement(s) consistent with Broward County Administrative Code. Require agencies to submit applications via based on the announced calendar of deadlines 1

2 Select PONG Review Committee PONG Review Committee reviews, scores, and ranks project applications Grant Inventory Worksheet review prior to HUD NoFA Renewal Projects confirm intent to renew via GIW process Reallocation determination made by CA and PONG and confirmed by CoC Board Projects with poor performance and/or are not serving the intended population or with significant, unresolved findings are subject to re-allocation. Applicants may appeal the decision, and the appeal must be considered in accordance with the Broward County Administrative Code Section 23.10, available for download on the CPD website (click here). CA announce the Tier 1 and Tier 2 ranking at CoC Board meeting. Review Committee Qualifications: The CoC Board PONG Review Committee in collaboration with the CA, evaluates and scores project applications and makes recommendations to the CoC Board whether a project should be reallocated in whole or part and/or included in the CoC s funding application. The time commitment required for each grant is different with some requiring more time than others. PONG review Committee members serve on the committee for every grant. The minimum requirements for being on the PONG Review Committee are: 1. CoC Board Member; 2. No affiliation with any agency (or subcontractor of any agency) submitting a RLI to apply or a full application for funding; 3. Experience reviewing and scoring grant applications for local, state, or federal funding; and 4. Experience developing a grant application that was successfully funded by a Local, State, or Federal funder. NoFA Performance Scoring Policy: Applications for Renewal/Reallocation/Bonus Projects will undergo a threshold review to ensure compliance with the HEARTH Act and the Continuum of Care (CoC) Program NoFA and the local CoC Request for Applications. Any Renewal/Reallocation/Bonus project not meeting the threshold requirement will not be further reviewed and will not be considered for funding. Renewal projects have previously passed HUD threshold review and only in very exceptional cases of changed HUD policies or program changes will be at risk of not passing the threshold review. Scoring of renewal projects is tabulated by the Collaborative Applicant s staff and is mainly based on data obtained from the most recent, completed APR and HMIS and adhere to the HUD approved System Performance Measures. The ranking of all project applications is done only after the scoring of all Renewal/Reallocation/Bonus Projects within the CoC. This ranking is based on the Renewal/Reallocation/Bonus Project Scoring Criteria that is developed annually based on the HUD NoFA announcement. 2

3 Broward County Policy on Project Re-Allocation, Ranking and Tiering Policy Objectives: In developing our local policy governing project ranking, re-allocation, and tiering, Broward County s objectives are to: Comply with all HUD requirements; Preserve funding for high performing projects; Shift investments from lower performing projects to new projects that help advance our community s goal of reducing homelessness General Project Review and Ranking Policy: HUD requires Collaborative Applicants to rank all projects in two tiers. Tier 1 is defined by HUD in the NoFA as a percent of the CoC s Annual Renewal Demand (ARD) approved by HUD on the final HUD-approved Grant Inventory Worksheet (GIW). Tier 1 projects are traditionally protected from HUD cuts. Tier 2 is the difference between Tier 1 and the CoC s ARD plus any amount available for the permanent housing bonus as described in the HUD NOFA. Tier 2 projects have to compete nationally for funding. Renewal projects are scored and ranked according to the Renewal Project Scoring Criteria with the exception of first time renewals or projects funded as part of the NoFA competition that have not been in operation for at least one year. Projects funded as part of the NoFA competition that have not been in operation for at least one year will be ranked ahead of first time renewals. First time renewal projects will be ranked after the renewal projects, projects funded as part of a previous NoFA that have not been in operations for one year, and ahead of the new project applications. New projects will be scored based on the New Project Scoring Criteria and ranked after renewal projects. The Broward County CoC will invite submissions for new and renewal projects and will conduct a review and ranking following the procedures established in Section III and IV. The general approach to rating and ranking will be to organize projects into five groups, following the priority order established by HUD: 1. Renewal PH: 2. Renewal RRH; 3. Renewal transitional housing; 4. Renewal HMIS; and 5. New PH and/or RRH Within each type, projects will be scored using a scoring system specific to that program type and placed in their ranked order, with renewal PSH in the first group (ordered by score), RRH renewals in the second group, renewal transitional housing in the third, renewal HMIS in the fourth and new PSH and/or RRH in the fifth group (ordered by score). 3

4 Determination of any conditions to renewal will be made at least 45 days ahead of the NoFA due date. Any required Performance Improvement Plans or plan that demonstrates that the grant s expenditure will be improved as part of a reallocation appeal must be submitted for approval at least 30 days ahead of the NoFA due date, so that a final determination can be made as to whether the project goes forward for renewal. Tiering Policy: Once the rank order of projects has been determined the projects at the bottom of the list (up to an amount equal to 7% of ARD) will fall into Tier 2. Given policy articulated above, the Tier 2 projects will in general be the lowest performing projects, except for transitional housing projects that serve youth and/or families. The CoC reserves the option of re-ordering the project list to place projects into Tier 2 to best position Broward County to receive the maximum overall amount of funding. HMIS is one of HUD s top mandated priorities, therefore it lies in Tier 1 in order to ensure funding for this required activity. Re-Allocation Policy: The HUD CoC Project Reallocation Process establishes the CoC s policy governing grant reallocation for the 2017 HUD CoC funded projects and County Homeless General Fund funded projects. This document is the culmination of concerted CoC planning and evaluation work by the CoC Board, Committees, CA and Project Sponsors to identify low performing permanent and/or transitional housing projects that can be re-allocated in whole to create new PSH and RRH. The adopted policy is based on the results of the NAEH Recommendations and update to the CoC s A Way Home Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners in August As a result of HUD funded Transitional Housing Projects serving priority youth and family populations, the CoC did not reallocate funds from any project in the 2016 but will solicit to reallocate an existing HUD CoC PSH Project in the 2017 CoC Competition. If applicable, funds re-allocated as part of recapturing unspent funds, voluntary or involuntary will be made available for reallocation to create new projects during the local solicitation process. Unspent Funds: Projects that are not fully expending or underspending their grant awards are subject to the re-allocation process. Projects that have underspent their award by 10% may be reduced and those funds will go to reallocation for New Project(s). A one year grace period may be extended by HIP to providers who appeal proposed reallocation with a plan that demonstrates that the grant s expenditure will be improved in the current program year. Projects that have under-expended more than 10% of their award in two consecutive program years will have their funding reduced or eliminated through reallocation in the next CoC NoFA competition. Voluntary Re-Allocation: As part of the local solicitation for inclusion in the HUD CoC CA, programs are asked whether they wish to voluntarily re-allocate some or all of their funding. 4

5 Such re-allocated funds are pooled for re-allocation to New Projects. The competitive process for New Projects provides bonus points as an incentive to providers offering to reallocate their entire Transitional Housing existing project funds to a new PH project addressing CoC priorities. Involuntary Re-Allocation: Projects with poor performance and/or are not serving the intended population or with significant, unresolved findings are subject to re-allocation. Bonus Project (determined annually by HUD): Bonus funds, equaling up to 5% of the final pro-rata need amount can be used to apply for one more Permanent Supportive Housing projects serving 100% chronic household, or Rapid Rehousing serving households coming from the street or emergency shelter, domestic violence victims (stalking, human trafficking, etc.). Annual HUD CoC Project Application Rating and Review Procedure: Each year, post the HUD CoC NoFA announcement, this section is amended and developed based on the specific requirements of that year s application. This is attached in Appendix A. The Final Scoring Grid for each HUD NoFA is in Attachment A to Appendix A. In order to meet HUD s transparency requirement and further facilitate the involvement of the entire CoC an abbreviated version of the above mentioned document is posted on the HIP website: ip/pages/2016-continuum-of-care-competition.aspx 5

6 The Broward County Continuum of Care (CoC) will use the following process to rank all project/program applications in the 2016 Continuum of Care Program Competition. Section I HUD Requirements On April 10, 2017, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published the Registration Notice for the 2017 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for the Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Assistance Program. Applications are estimated to be due to HUD by September 14, All Project Applications have to be into the CoC 30 days prior to the deadline: approximately August 14, As the 2017 HUD CoC NoFA has not been released, County reserves the right to adjust due dates, funding amounts, tiering policy and other factors as applicable based on the requirements and regulations in the 2017 HUD CoC Homeless Assistance Program NoFA. Ranking Requirements: The NoFA requires that each CoC conduct a transparent and objective process to review and rank all applications for renewal of existing projects and creation of new projects. Ranking of renewal projects m u s t incorporate regularly collected data on project performance and effectiveness. Re-Allocation: CoCs may use funds taken in whole or in part from existing grants to create new projects through re-allocation. Four types of projects may be created: Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) serving chronically homeless individuals and families; Rapid Re-Housing (RRH) serving homeless families or individuals coming from streets or shelters (not transitional housing), youth up to age 24; Supportive Services Only (SSO) project specifically for a centralized or coordinated assessment system; New dedicated Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) project for the costs at 24 CFR that must be carried out by the HMIS Lead. New Permanent Housing Bonus: CoCs may apply for a Permanent Housing Bonus in amount of up to 5% of Final Pro Rata Need (FPRN). There are two (2) types of new projects: These projects will be individually scored by HUD based on the scoring system set forth in the NOFA. New Permanent Supportive Housing projects that will serve 100 percent chronically 6

7 homeless families and individuals: and New Rapid Re-housing projects that will serve homeless individuals, youth, parenting youth, and families coming directly from the streets or emergency shelters, including persons fleeing domestic violence situations. Although the available amount of funding is expected to be sufficient to fund anticipated eligible renewal projects in the 2017 NoFA, HUD continues to require CoCs to rank all projects, except the CoC Planning Project in two tiers. Tier 1 is equal to 93% of the CoC s Annual Renewal Demand ($10,438,621) or $9,707,918. Tier 2 is the difference between Tier 1 and the CoC s ARD or $730,703 plus the amount available for the permanent housing bonus which is estimated to be $500,000 for Broward. Tier 1 projects will be funded by HUD provided they meet all threshold and project quality requirements. Tier 2 project will be funded only if they meet HUD requirements and there are sufficient funds available nationally. Additionally, The CoC Application score and the project application score(s) will determine which projects in Tier 2 will be conditionally selected for award. As stated earlier, HUD continues to utilize the Tier 1 and Tier 2 funding process; and the 2017 CoC Program Competition continues HUD s emphasis on performance. Therefore, CoCs and applicants should ensure there is thorough understanding of the information provided in this NoFA. HUD established each CoC s Tier 1 and Tier 2 amounts based on the final HUD-approved GIW. A report that lists each CoC s ARD Tier 1 amount, Tier 2 amount, and permanent housing bonus amount available will be posted to the HUD Exchange website no earlier than August 5, Section VIII of the 2016 NOFA provides additional information regarding project selection ( As the 2017 HUD CoC NoFA has not been released, County reserves the right to adjust due dates, funding amounts, tiering policy and other factors as applicable based on the requirements and regulations in the 2017 HUD CoC Homeless Assistance Program NoFA. Tier Process Overview: Tier 1 is equal to 93 percent the CoC s ARD amount approved on the final HUD-approved GIW and projects in this tier will be conditionally selected from the highest scoring CoC to the lowest scoring CoC, provided the project applications pass both eligibility and threshold review. Any type of new or renewal project application can be placed in Tier 1. However, in the event HUD is required to drastically reduce the total amount of funds available under this NOFA, the Tier 1 amount per CoC will be reduced proportionately among all CoCs which could result in some Tier 1 projects falling into Tier 2. Therefore, CoCs should carefully determine the priority and ranking for all project applications in Tier 1 as well as Tier 2, which is described below. Tier 2 is the difference between Tier 1 and the CoC s ARD plus any amount available for the permanent housing bonus (before adjustments are made to permanent housing leasing, operating, and rental assistance line items based on changes to FMR) as described in Section II.B.4. of the 2017 NOFA. This does not include the amounts available for CoC planning and UFA 7

8 Costs. Project applications that are in Tier 2 will be selected for 2017 CoC Program funding using the process described in Section II.B.16 of this NOFA. Projects placed in Tier 2 will be assessed for eligibility and threshold requirements, and funding will be determined using the CoC Application score as well as the factors listed in Section II.B.16 of the 2016 NOFA. If a project application straddles the Tier 1 and Tier 2 funding line, HUD will conditionally select the project up to the amount of funding that falls within Tier 1 as stated above; and then, using CoC score and other factors described in Section II.B.16 of the 2016 NOFA, HUD may fund the Tier 2 portion of the project. If HUD does not fund the Tier 2 portion of the project, HUD may award project funds at the reduced amount provided the project is still feasible with the reduced funding (e.g., is able to continue serving homeless program participants effectively). As previously stated, CoC planning and UFA Costs are not ranked; therefore, will not be included in Tier 1 or Tier 2. CoC planning and UFA Costs projects that pass eligibility and review threshold will be conditionally selected using CoC scores from the highest scoring CoC to the lowest scoring CoC. Tier 2 Specifics: HUD will award a point value to each new and renewal project application that are in Tier 2 using a 100 point scale: CoC Score. Up to 50 points in direct proportion to the score received on the CoC Application rounded to the nearest whole point. CoCs must receive at least 198 points out of the 200 CoC Application points available to receive the full 60 points for the CoC Application score. For example, if a CoC received 100 out of 200 points on the CoC application, the project application would receive 25 out of 50 points for this criterion. CoC Project Ranking. Up to 35 points for the CoC s ranking of the project application(s). In order to more evenly distribute funding across CoCs and take into account the CoC s ranking of projects, point values will be assigned directly related to the CoCs ranking of projects. The calculation of point values will be 30 times the quantity (1-x) where x is the ratio of the cumulative funding requests for all projects or portions of projects ranked higher by the CoC in Tier 2 plus one half of the funding of the project of interest to the total amount of funding available in Tier 2. For example, if a CoC is eligible to apply for projects totaling $500,000 in Tier 2 and applies for 5 projects ranked in Tier 2 of $100,000 each: the highest ranked project would receive 31.5 points and then the subsequently ranked projects would receive 24.5, 17.5, 10.5, and 3.5 points. Project Type: Up to 5 points will be based on the type of project application submitted and the population that will be served with the following points available for the following project types: Five (5) points for renewal and new permanent housing (permanent supportive 8

9 housing and rapid re-housing), renewal Safe Haven, Homeless Management Information System, Supportive Services Only (SSO) for Centralized or Coordinated Assessment System, or transitional housing that exclusively serve homeless youth projects; Three (3) points for renewal transitional housing, except those transitional housing projects that exclusively serve homeless youth which will be scored as discussed in paragraph (1); and One (1) point for renewal SSO project applications. Commitment to Policy Priorities: Up to 10 points for how the permanent housing project application commits to applying the Housing First model. Transitional housing projects and SSO projects that are not for centralized or coordinated assessment can receive up to 10 points for how the project demonstrates that it is low-barrier, prioritizes rapid placement and stabilization in permanent housing and does not have service participation requirements or preconditions to entry (such as sobriety or a minimum income threshold). HMIS projects and SSO projects for a centralized or coordinated assessment system will automatically receive 10 points. HUD Priority Order: CoCs have the flexibility to rank projects in any order; however, HUD has established a priority order in which they will fund projects by project type, and within each Tier. This order is: 1. Renewal permanent housing projects, RRH and PSH; 2. New PSH projects created through reallocation for 100 percent chronically homeless; 3. New rapid re-housing projects created through reallocation for homeless households with children; 4. Renewal safe havens; 5. Renewal transitional housing; 6. CoC planning costs; 7. UFA costs; 8. SSO projects for centralized or coordinated assessment system; 9. Renewal HMIS; 10. All other renewal supportive services only projects, and 11. Any project application submitted by the CoC that was not included in the HUD-approved GIW. Within the rank order established by the CoC on the Priority Listings, HUD will then select projects from Tier 2 with any remaining available funds in the same order as above order by CoC score. 9

10 Section II Broward County Policy on Project Re-Allocation, Ranking and Tiering Policy Objectives: In developing our local policy governing project ranking, re-allocation, and tiering, Broward County s objectives are to: Comply with all HUD requirements; Preserve funding for high performing projects; Shift investments from lower performing projects to new projects that help advance our community s goal of reducing homelessness Re-Allocation Policy: In March 2015 the Broward CoC Board approved the HUD CoC Project Reallocation Process, and in January 2016, April 2016 and September 2016, reaffirmed the process and established the CoC s policy governing grant re-allocation for the 2017 HUD CoC funded projects and County Homeless General Fund funded projects. This document is the culmination of concerted CoC planning and evaluation work by the CoC Board, Committees, CA and Project Sponsors to identify low performing permanent and/or transitional housing projects that can be reallocated in whole to create new PSH and RRH. The adopted policy is based on the results of the NAEH Recommendations and update to the CoC s A Way Home Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners in August As a result of HUD funded Transitional Housing Projects serving priority youth and family populations, the CoC did not reallocate funds from any project in the 2016 CoC Competition. General Project Review and Ranking Policy: The Broward County CoC will invite submissions for new and renewal projects and will conduct a review and ranking following the procedures established in Section III and IV. The general approach to rating and ranking will be to organize projects into five groups, following the priority order established by HUD: 6. Renewal PH: 7. Renewal RRH; 8. Renewal transitional housing; 9. Renewal HMIS; and 10. New PH and/or RRH Within each type, projects will be scored using a scoring system specific to that program type and placed in their ranked order, with renewal PSH in the first group (ordered by score), RRH renewals in the second group, renewal transitional housing in the third, renewal HMIS in the fourth and new PSH and/or RRH in the fifth group (ordered by score). 10

11 Tiering Policy Once the rank order of projects has been determined the projects at the bottom of the list (up to an amount equal to 7% of ARD) will fall into Tier 2. Given policy articulated above, the Tier 2 projects will in general be the lowest performing projects, except for transitional housing projects that serve youth and/or families. The CoC reserves the option of re-ordering the project list to place projects into Tier 2 to best position Broward County to receive the maximum overall amount of funding. HMIS is one of HUD s top mandated priorities, it lies in Tier 1 in order to ensure funding for this required activity. Section III Process for Rating and Ranking of Renewal Project Rating and Ranking Process: Through the HUD Grant Inventory Worksheet (GIW) process, all HUD CoC Program renewal project recipients and sub recipients submitted their intent to renew via the 2017 HUD NoFA. This notice was issued by the CoC on April 10, 2017 to gather relevant performance and threshold documentation from each renewal project. The renewal project s GIW information is due to HUD on May 4, All renewal projects are ranked using an objective scoring system approved by the CoC Board and Collaborative Applicant as recommended through the CoC PONG Committee. Staff from the Collaborative Applicant will use data provided through the GIW process (for both TH, RRH and PSH renewals) as well as the results of the APRs to calculate a score for each renewal and use the results to develop the Project Priority Listing for review and final approval by the CoC Board as recommended through the CoC PONG Committee (see Section V). (Note that consistent with previous CoC applications, HMIS Renewal is exempt from formally requesting renewal. As noted in Section II, the HMIS renewal is the top ranked renewal project in Tier 1.) Scoring Criteria for Renewal Permanent Housing and Rapid Re-housing for priority subpopulations: Scoring is based on a point system with up to 80 points for project performance, up to 20 points for threshold factors, and potential bonus points. Data to assess both performance and threshold criteria will be obtained from Annual Performance Reports, Project Applications, fidelity to Housing First Principles, and/or most recent Monitoring Report(s) during the ranking review period. The performance measures evaluated for Permanent Supportive Housing include the following: 1. Housing Stability Results: The percentage of Households (HH) who remained in the permanent housing program as of the end of the operating year or exited to permanent housing (subsidized or unsubsidized). (HUD Standard = 80%) (Maximum Points 15) 11

12 2. Total Income Results: The percentage of persons age 18 and older who maintained or increased their total income (from all sources) as of the end of the operating year or program exit. (HUD Standard = 54%) (Maximum Points 10) 3. Earned Income Results: The percentage of persons age 18 through 61 who maintained or increased their earned income as of the end of the operating year or program exit. (HUD Standard = 20%) (Maximum Points 10) 4. Non-Cash Income Results: The percentage of households receiving non-cash income as of the end of the operating year or at program exit. (HUD Standard = 56%) (Maximum Points 10) 5. HH Returns to Homelessness Result: The percentage of HHs who exit to non-positive destinations as of the end of the operating year. (HUD Standard = 5%) (Maximum Points 15) 6. Chronic Homelessness: The percentage of new intakes who were categorized as chronically homeless at intake or turnover of bed or unit. (Maximum Points 10) 7. Utilization: The percentage of award funds expended during the project year. (Maximum Points 15) 8. Cost per Household: The percentage of expenditure for each HH permanently housed (Average Total Cost to maintain and to permanently house one HH/total expenditure & match). (Maximum Points 10) 9. High-Barrier Need: The percentage of clients served in the program with 2 or more highbarrier needs (i.e. no income, substance abuse, mental health diagnosis, HIV/AIDS, Domestic Violence) at entry. (Maximum Points = 10) Total Maximum Points = 100 The performance measures evaluated for Rapid Re-housing include the following: 1. Housing Stability Results: The percentage of HHs who remained in the permanent housing program as of the end of the operating year or exited to permanent housing (subsidized or unsubsidized). (HUD Standard = 80%) (Maximum Points = 15) 2. Total Income Results: The percentage of persons age 18 and older who maintained or increased their total income (from all sources) as of the end of the operating year or program exit. (HUD Standard = 54%) (Maximum Points = 15) 3. Earned Income Results: The percentage of persons age 18 through 61 who maintained or increased their earned income as of the end of the operating year or program exit. (HUD Standard = 20%) (Maximum Points = 15) 4. Non-Cash Income Results: The percentage of households receiving non-cash income as of the end of the operating year or at program exit. (Maximum Points = 10) 5. HH Returns to Homelessness: The Percentage of HHs who exit to non-positive destinations as of the end of the operating year. (HUD Standard = 15%) (Maximum Points = 15) 6. Utilization: The percentage of award funds expended during the project year. (Maximum Points = 15) 12

13 7. Cost to exit per HH: The percentage of expenditures for each household exiting to permanent housing (Average Total Cost to permanently house one household / total expenditures & match). (Maximum Points = 10) 8. High Barrier Need: The percentage of clients served in the program with 2 or more highbarrier needs (i.e. no income, substance abuse, mental health diagnosis, HIV/AIDs Domestic Violence) at entry. (Maximum Points = 10) Total Maximum Points = 100 The performance measures evaluated for Transitional Housing include the following: 1. Housing Stability Results Relative to Goal: The percentage of persons who exited to permanent housing (subsidized or unsubsidized. (HUD Standard =80%) (Maximum Points 15) 2. Total Income Results: The percentage of persons age 18 and older who increased their total income (from all sources) as of the end of the operating year or program exit. (HUD Standard= 54%) (Maximum Points = 15) 3. Earned Income Results: The percentage of persons age 18 through 61 with earned income as of the end of the operating year or program exit. (HUD Standard =30%) (Maximum Points = 15) 4. Non-Cash Income Results: The percentage of households receiving non-cash incomes as of the end of the operating year or at program exit. (HUD Standard =56%) (Maximum Points = 15) 5. HH Return to Homelessness: Percentage of households who exit to non-positive destinations as of the end of the operating year. (HUD Standard = 15%) (Maximum Points = 15) 6. Utilization: Percentage of award funds expended during the project year. (Maximum Points = 15) 7. Cost to exit per client: The percentage of expenditures for each HH exiting to permanently housing (Average Total Cost to maintain and to permanently house one HH/total expenditures & match). (Maximum Points = 5) 8. High Barrier Need: The percentage of clients served in the program with 2 or more highbarrier needs (i.e. no income, substance abuse, mental health diagnosis, HIV/AIDs Domestic Violence) at entry. (Maximum Points = 10) Total Maximum Points = 100 The scoring system for will have a maximum of 100 points, with 80 points for project performance and 20 points for threshold factors. The project performance score will be based on the factors developed by the CoC Collaborative Applicant, Providers and CoC Board, with the highest performing project receiving 80 points, the next highest 75 points, and so on. The 20 points for threshold factors will be assessed using information provided in the RLI process and will match the scoring system for renewal PSH. 13

14 Some renewing PH projects (PSH or RRH) will not have an APR because they have not been operational for a full year. For Project(s) that have operated for a minimum of 6 months, an interim APR will be used; and for projects that have not started prior to the NoFA, they will receive 0 points for performance. Their overall score will therefore place them in the bottom of the group of PSH and RRH renewals, but they may still be in Tier 1 because PH renewals as a group may be first on the Project Priority List. As necessary, ranking and prioritization may also take into account review of Project Applications, performance measurement, audits, fidelity to Housing First principles and monitoring and how the agency s Mission Statement, policies and procedures confirming to best practices towards ending homelessness and devotion to special priority populations in Broward County. The point scoring system for Renewal TH is in Attachment A. Consistent with previous CoC applications, HMIS Renewal is exempt from formally requesting renewal. As noted in Section II, the HMIS renewal is the top ranked renewal project in Tier 1. Section IV New Projects: As approved by the CoC Board Homeless Budget Prioritization (March 2017) and to further the goal of reaching functional zero for Chronic Homelessness and/or Family Homelessness the Broward County CoC, there may be reallocation to create new PSH and/or RRH from the lowest performing projects. Additionally, the Broward County CoC will be applying for approximately $500,000 to fund a new bonus permanent supportive housing project. Reallocated funds (if applicable) and new bonus funds will be awarded through a Request for Letter of Intent (RLI) process for open competition for projects that provide permanent supportive housing to chronically homeless and or RRH for youth, parenting youth and households with children experiencing homelessness HUD CoC Program NEW Bonus Project Request for Letter of Intent (RLI) Selection Process: The 2017 HUD CoC New Bonus Project RLI Selection Process for the 2017 HUD CoC NOFA will close on Wednesday, July 5, Consistent with the CoC Board s prioritization of Permanent Supportive Housing for Chronically Homeless as the only eligible 2017 HUD CoC NoFA bonus project, a competitive RLI process will be conducted by the Community Partnerships Division/Homeless Initiative Partnership (HIP) and applicants will be scored. Subsequently, the CoC Board approved the CoC Board Performance, Outcomes, Needs and Gaps Committee will make a recommendation for approval of the highest ranked New Bonus project submission in the 2017 HUD CoC NOFA. The 2017 HUD Continuum of Care Program New Project Request for Letter of Intent (RLI) process will be Publicly Noticed on Saturday, May 13, 2017 and Sunday, May 14,

15 Please contact Linda Krepel, RFP Coordinator at should you desire a copy of the Sunshine Public Notice. Please contact Susan Batchelder at , if you wish to discuss the outcome of your renewal project. The RLI and submission of Renewal Project Applications is structured to award funds to projects that: (1) meet the CoC s A Way Home Plan to End Homelessness priorities; and (2) are most competitive and likely to receive HUD funding. In addition, projects must meet HUD s threshold and quality requirements. The RLI/Renewal/Reallocation Application process requires applicants to submit project narrative, applicant capacity, and financial information sufficient to assess all of these factors. To evaluate whether projects meet HUD threshold and quality standards, the projects will be reviewed by the Collaborative Applicant and Office of Evaluation and Planning staff. Any correctable deficiencies will be identified and applicants will have the opportunity to submit corrected documents. Applications that are substantially deficient will not be advanced to the rating and ranking stage (see below). To evaluate project quality and fit with Broward County system objectives and develop a ranked order, the CoC will convene an unbiased project review panel to review each new project. Projects will be scored based on a 100 point system. The panel will receive the applications and scoring instructions in advance of the meeting. The panel will then hold one meeting to review and average their scores and arrive at a proposed final ranking for new projects, including a recommendation about which project should be submitted as the permanent housing bonus. The panel may also recommend that projects either increase or decrease their funding request to maximize the use of available re-allocated or bonus funds. The final ranking of new projects as determined by the Panel will be used to determine their order on the Project Priority Listing. Section V Final Project Priority List and Notification to Applicants: Once the rating and ranking processes for new and renewal projects are complete, staff from the Collaborative Applicant will integrate results of the three scoring/ranking processes (renewal PSH, Rapid Re-housing, renewal TH and new projects) and create the final proposed Project Priority list. This proposed list can include recommendations to adjust the placement of projects in Tier 2 in order to maximize the total funding award for Broward County. Agencies will be informed of their ranking before August 19, The CoC Ad Hoc Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday August 17, 2107 to review the Ranking Prioritization List. The proposed final list will be approved by the CoC Board at on August 23,

16 Section VI Appeal Process: Eligible grievants must use the HSD appeals process described in Section of the Broward County Administrative Code, available for download on the CPD Solicitation website (click here) Continuum of Care (CoC) Ranking and Reallocation Process Background: In line with A Way Home Plan to End Homelessness goal of implementing robust rapid rehousing programs with a focus on families and youth experiencing homelessness, the Broward County Board Of County Commissioners has established homelessness as a County Priority and approved the CoC Board s recommendation to match the 2016 Bonus Project $457,094 (125%) with by County General Funds to more than doubling the capacity of the project. In December 2016, the Board of County Commissioners approved the CoC Board s FY 2017 recommendation to fund an additional $300k in RRH funding targeted for low and high-barrier families. Beginning in April 2017 the CoC PONG and Permanent Housing Committees and Collaborative Applicant met with the County and HUD CoC providers to discuss the draft recommendation for reallocating 2016 CoC grant funding to create new permanent projects in the 2017 HUD CoC NoFA. Based on feedback and further review by the CoC Ad Hoc Committee, the 2016 CoC policy recommendations were updated and presented at the April 26, 2017 CoC Board meeting. Performance criteria were outlined in those recommendations consistent with the Performance Reports, HUD guidance and HEARTH Act regulations. Performance Measures and rationale: CoC policy recommendations, HUD guidance and HEARTH Act regulations guide performance evaluation. Primary Performance Measure Considerations include: Housing Results: This measure evaluates the degree to which a project assists clients to move to a housed situation, and is a critical aspect of project performance. Income, Employment and Mainstream Benefits Results (Cash and Non-cash income): These measures were selected to reflect federal policy priorities of increasing self-sufficiency and economic stability of project participants. Cost per Client: In order to move to a highly efficient system, it is essential that investments are aligned with the objective of ending homelessness. Scarce system resources must be spent in a way that achieves the maximum possible results. Cost per permanent housing retention/exit was selected as a performance measure because it assesses not only whether a program is 16

17 helping clients to stay in or move to permanent housing but also whether they do so in a cost effective manner. As funders shift funds from programs that are very expensive to those that are more cost effective per person served, system capacity will increase and the numbers of homeless people will be reduced. High Barrier Clients: This measure evaluates the type and level of barriers project participants have when entering CoC Program funded projects. It also assists in measuring adoption of housing first. The percentage of clients served in the program with 2 or more high-barrier needs (i.e. no income, substance abuse, mental health diagnosis, HIV/AIDS, Domestic Violence) at entry. Recommended Ranking/Reallocation Process: Ranking: Based on the selection of the performance measures, the CoC Board and PONG Committee is recommending a formula that will rank each of the renewing CoC programs across each measure and average those ranks for a total average rank. Reallocation: After applying the total average rank, it is recommended that the three CoC Transitional Housing programs not be reallocated because two serve youths and the third serves families; all priority sub- populations. New PSH projects (if applicable) that are included in Tier 1 will be ranked according to HUD priority order in Tier 1. Given the anticipated continued aggressive schedule from HUD, the following is the proposed timeline (subject to change): July-August 2017 August 12, 2017 August 8, 2017 August 24, 2017 September 1, 2017 September 1, 2017 September 8, 2017 September 14, 2017 Review Period and Announcement to Agencies of Ranking Project Applications Due to CoC Reduction, Reallocation rejection of Renewal Appeals Deadline PONG Committee Meeting to Review Final Ranking criteria PONG Committee Meeting to Approve Final Ranking Appeals due in writing to the Collaborative Applicant Final Approval of Ranking by CoC Board NoFA application Due to HUD Using the CoC Ranking Tool: This ranking tool was designed to make the ranking process easier for Collaborative Applicants as they will have to project listings in the CoC Project Priority Listings in e-snaps. Once the rows have been populated by the Collaborative Applicant, the Ranking Spreadsheet can be sorted by Project Name, Expiring Grant Number, Project Type, Component Type, Amount Requested, or Amount Ranked. 17

18 The only protected part of the Ranking Spreadsheet is Column J "Running Total." The purpose of the running total Applicants determine when they reach the end of Tier 1 in the ranking process. Step 1: Enter the information for each project application the Collaborative Applicants intends to approve and rank in e-snaps. Step 2: Once all of the projects have been entered with the amounts, the Collaborative Applicant will be able to determine funding request that will be submitted to HUD. Sort the spreadsheet by any of the columns, A - I, that will allow for ease of ranking the projects. As noted above, protected and cannot be sorted. This will not affect the spreadsheet as the running total is based on the amount. Once sorted, rank the projects in numerical order, Column B, as determined by the CoC ranking process. Step 3: Once the Collaborative Applicant is ready to begin the review, approval and rank, or rejection process in e-snaps, spreadsheet available. Sort the spreadsheet by project type: New, Renewal, or Planning - depending on the project listing that is being p the project types together to make the ranking process in e-snaps easier. For Example: 1. Sort by Project Type - places all of the project types together (new, renewal, planning); 2. Sort by Applicant Name (places the applicant names in alphabetical order); 3. Sort by Rank Number (sorts by the rank number); 4. This will place the spreadsheet in the following order: Project Type, Applicant Name, and Rank Number; and 5. Finally, remember that you can sort the projects in each of the project listings by Applicant Name, Project Name, etc. Any knowledge of outstanding issues (programmatic) will be documented as deficiencies and used in ranking. Note: Tie breakers will be actual percentage of chronic beds Step 4: It is recommended that the Collaborative Applicant retain this spreadsheet as part of the application process. The Collaborative Applicant can also attach this to the CoC Application if it chooses, but this is not required. 18

19 Attachment A Permanent Housing: Permanent Supportive Housing Elements 1, 5, 7 updated per recommendation Performance, Outcomes, Needs and Gaps Sub- Committee (PONG) Scoring Element Points Comments 1. Housing Stability Results relative to goal 100% = 15 Point 95%-99.99% = 12 Points 90%-94.99% = 9 Points 85%-89.99% = 6 Points 80%-84.99% = 3 points 79.99% = 0 Points 15 The percentage of Households (HHs) who remained in the permanent housing program as of the end of the operating year or exited to permanent housing (subsidized or unsubsidized). 2. Total Income Results 75% = 10 points 70% % = 8 points 65% % = 5 points 64.99% = 0 point 3. Earned Income Results 35% = 10 points 20% % = 8 points 10% % = 5 points 9.99% = 0 point 4. Non-Cash Income Results 60% = 10 points 50% % = 5 points 49.99% = 0 point HUD Standard = 80% 10 The percentage of persons age 18 and older who maintained or increased their total income (from all sources) as of the end of the operating year or program exit. HUD Standard = 54% 10 The percentage of persons age 18 through 61 who maintained or increased their earned income as of end of the operating year or program exit. HUD Standard = 20% 10 The percentage of persons receiving non-cash income as of the end of the operating year or at program exit. HUD Standard = 56% 19

20 5. HH Return to Homelessness Result 1% = 15 points 1.01% - 3%= 10 points 3.01% - 5% = 5 points 5.01% = 0 point 6. Chronic Homelessness 95% = 10 points 85% % = 6 points 75% % = 4 points 74.99% = 0 points 7. Utilization 95% = 15 points 85% % = 12 points 75% % = 9 points 65% % = 6 points 55% % = 3 point 54.99% = 0 points 8. Cost per Household (HH) 1.5% = 5 points 1.51% - 2.0% = 4 points 2.1% - 2.5% = 3 points 2.51% - 3%= 2 points 3.1% - 4% = 1 point 4.1%= 0 points 9. High-Barrier Need 60% = 10 Points 30% % = 5 Points 29.99% = 0 Points 15 The percentage of HHs who exit to non-positive destinations as of the end of the operating year. HUD Standard = 5% 10 The percentage of new intakes who were categorized as chronically homeless at intake. 15 The percentage of award funds expended during the project year. 5 The percentage of expenditures for each HH permanently housed (Average Total Cost to maintain and to permanently house one HH/total expenditures & match). 10 The percentage of clients served in the program with 2 or more high-barrier needs (i.e. no income, substance abuse, mental health diagnosis, HIV/AIDS, Domestic Violence) at entry. Households = HH 20

21 Permanent Housing: Rapid Re-Housing Elements 1, 5, 7 updated per recommendation Performance, Outcomes, Needs and Gaps Sub- Committee (PONG) Scoring Element Points Comments 1. Housing Stability Results relative to goal 100% = 15 Point 95%-99.99% = 12 Points 90%-94.99% = 9 Points 85%-89.99% = 6 Points 80%-84.99% = 3 points 79.99% = 0 Points 15 The percentage of Households (HHs) who remained in the permanent housing program as of the end of the operating year or exited to permanent housing (subsidized or unsubsidized). 2. Total Income Results 75% = 15 points 70% % = 8 points 65% % = 5 points 64.99% = 0 point 3. Earned Income Results 35% = 15 points 20% % = 8 points 10% % = 5 points 9.99% = 0 point 4. Non-Cash Income Results 60% = 10 points 50% % = 5 points 49.99% = 0 point HUD Standard = 80% 15 The percentage of persons age 18 and older who maintained or increased their total income (from all sources) as of the end of the operating year or program exit. HUD Standard = 54% 15 The percentage of persons age 18 through 61 who maintained or increased their earned income as of end of the operating year or program exit. HUD Standard = 20% 10 The percentage of households receiving noncash income as of the end of the operating year or at program exit. 21

22 5. HH Return to Homelessness Result 1% = 15 points 1.01% - 3%= 10 points 3.01% - 5% = 5 points 5.01% = 0 point 6. Utilization 95% = 15 points 85% % = 12 points 75% % = 9 points 65% % = 6 points 55% % = 3 point 54.99% = 0 points 7. Cost per HH 1.5% = 5 points 1.51% - 2.0% = 4 points 2.1% - 2.5% = 3 points 2.51% - 3%= 2 points 3.1% - 4% = 1 point 4.1%= 0 points 8. High-Barrier Need 60% = 10 Points 30% % = 5 Points 29.99% = 0 Points 15 The percentage of HHs who exit to non-positive destinations as of the end of the operating year. HUD Standard = 15% 15 The percentage of award funds expended during the project year. 5 The percentage of expenditures for each HH exiting to permanently housing (Average Total Cost to maintain and to permanently house one HH/total expenditures & match). 10 The percentage of clients served in the program with 2 or more high-barrier needs (i.e. no income, substance abuse, mental health diagnosis, HIV/AIDS, Domestic Violence) at entry. Households = HH 22