NY-606/Rockland County CoC Rank & Review - Attachments Checklist

Similar documents
2017 Saratoga-North Country CoC Project Rank & Review Application

HUD CoC Reviewing, Scoring and Ranking Procedure

COC RANKING For Grant Year 2017

Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Continuum of Care 2017 Renewal Project Performance Scorecard

TOOL OVERVIEW. FY2019 CoC Program Competition Renewal Project Scoring Tool

APR Data: # of Clients: # of Households # of Adults # of Leavers: # of Adult Leavers:

2018 Kentucky Balance of State CoC Expansion Project Scoresheet for RRH and PSH Projects (Approved by KY BoS CoC Advisory Board August 3, 2018)

Attachment C. Updated March 23 rd, 2018 by EveryOne Home

AGENDA. 1. Welcome and Introductions. 2. Review IRP Meeting Summary from Feb. 7, HUD CoC Program NOFA

FY 2017 TX BoS CoC Review, Score, and Ranking Procedures and Reallocation Process for HUD Continuum of Care Program Funds

FY2019 HCCSC SCORING CRITERIA AND SCORE SHEET

Continuum of Care Written Standards for NY- 508 Buffalo, Niagara Falls/Erie, Niagara, Orleans, Genesee, Wyoming Counties CoC

FY2017 CoC Program Competition Application Score Cards

FY16 HUD CoC Program Consolidated Application Scoring Criteria Summary June 2016

HUD 2016 System Performance Measures Submission Recap. NYC Coalition on the Continuum of Care October 20, 2017

2018 Performance Management Plan. Ohio Balance of State Continuum of Care Updated January 2018

2017 HUD CoC Program Rating and Review Procedure

[HUDX-225] HMIS Data Quality Report Reference Tool

PSH Renewal Review & Scoring Document

Summary of 3 County CoC SPM Report Data

SACRAMENTO HOMELESS MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM: DATA QUALITY PLAN

FY Performance Measurement Module (Sys PM)

The Role of HUD s Homeless and Mainstream Housing Programs in Ending Homelessness. Jennifer Ho Ann Marie Oliva Marcy Thompson

Performance Measurement Module (Sys PM)

Using Data to Make Funding and Reallocation Decisions

Metropolitan Denver Homeless Initiative 2016 CoC NOFA Evaluation Tool for Renewal Project Applications

HMIS 320 APR Training

Before Starting the CoC Application

FY Performance Measurement Module (Sys PM)

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY HOMELESS ACTION PARTNERSHIP

DESTINATION Which of the following most closely matches where the client will be staying right after leaving this project?

HMIS PROGRAMMING SPECIFICATIONS

HMIS REQUIRED UNIVERSAL DATA ELEMENTS

Before Starting the Exhibit 1 Continuum of Care (CoC) Application

1A. Continuum of Care (CoC) Identification

Santa Clara County Performance Measures - Updated July 1, June 30, 2019

Continuum of Care (CoC) and Emergency Solutions Grant Program (ESG) 2015 Policy Manual

Santa Clara County Performance Measures - finalized July 1, June 30, 2017

2019 Housing Inventory Count (HIC) Guidance Document

The Community Partnership How to Run the CoC-APR 2018 Report Version 1 Last Updated December 17, 2018

NC ESG Application Form: Regional Application (January 1, 2017 December 31, 2017)

1A. Continuum of Care (CoC) Identification

Updated 01/22/2019 ID 24, Page 1 of 5

Access Center Domestic Violence

Written Standards for Permanent Supportive Housing

GLOSSARY HMIS STANDARD REPORTING TERMINOLOGY. A reference guide for methods of selecting clients and data used commonly in HMIS-generated reports

Toledo Lucas County Continuum of Care: 2014 Key Performance Indicators

HUD-ESG CAPER User Guide

Standards for CoC- and ESG-Funded Rapid Re-Housing Programs in the Metropolitan Denver Continuum of Care

GLOSSARY HMIS STANDARD REPORTING TERMINOLOGY. A reference guide for methods of selecting clients and data used commonly in HMIS-generated reports

County of Riverside Continuum of Care (CoC)

FY 2013 NOFA Planning and Advocacy December 17, 2013

HMIS Programming Specifications PATH Annual Report. January 2018

Summary and Analysis of the Interim ESG Rule December 2011

Data Quality Plan Tampa / Hillsborough County Continuum of Care

HMIS Data Standards: HMIS Data. Dictionary. Released May, 2014 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Volume 2

Due Date. I have read and understand the changes to the 2010 PATH rept.

Implementing the HEARTH Act: The Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) program

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT:

City of Tucson Housing and Community Development Department Planning and Development Division

2017 Point in Time Count

The Community Partnership HMIS Data Collection Guide Version 3 - Last Updated October 10, 2018

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS TCP Issuance Date: August 25, Closing Date: September 26, 2014 Closing Time: 2:00 p.m.

Santa Barbara County HMIS Data Quality Plan

ESCAMBIA COUNTY EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT PROGRAM REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS RAPID REHOUSING AND HOMELESS PREVENTION ACTIVITIES REVISED 7/17/18

11/15/2011. The Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) Program: An Introductory Overview. Submitting Questions in the Webinar

Full DOB reported Approximate or Partial DOB reported

Full DOB reported Approximate or Partial DOB reported. Non Hispanic/Non Latino Hispanic/Latino

CITY OF OAKLAND EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT DRAFT PY 2011 SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT

ESG CAPER Helper Guide

Ending Homelessness in Alameda County Strategic Plan Update

FY2016 Detroit Continuum of Care (CoC) Funding Announcements Report to Detroit CoC Board January 9, 2017

a. Standard policies and procedures for evaluating individuals and families eligibility for assistance under Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG).

Office of Community Planning and Development

HMIS Data Collection Form for Project EXIT/Annual Review All Projects (Excluding RHY)

Toledo Lucas County Continuum of Care: 2016 Key Performance Indicators

Homeless Management Information System (HMIS)

The 2017 HUD CoC Annual Performance Report (CoC-APR) Training for the Ohio Balance of State and Mahoning CoCs

Counts! Bergen County s 2017 Point-In-Time Count of the Homeless

HMIS Data Standards DATA DICTIONARY

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding the BYC and SPP

New Hampshire Continua of Care APR Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA) Exit Form for HMIS

HMIS Data Standards DATA DICTIONARY

Wilder Foundation Family Supportive Housing Services: ROOF Project

Welcome From DCA. Recovery Act Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program. HPRP Purpose. HPRP Activities. HPRP Eligible Persons

THURSTON COUNTY AFFORDABLE & HOMELESS HOUSING PROGRAMS 2012 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL GUIDELINES

Chapter 3: Implementing the CPD Outcome Performance Measurement System

Joint Office of Homeless Services FY 2018 Proposed Budget

Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Street Outreach & Emergency Shelters. April 4, 2017

Gloucester County s 2017 Point-In-Time Count of the Homeless

CoC Annual Performance Report (APR) Guide

2009 Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR)

2017 Emergency Solutions Grant Training Workshop

Massachusetts Homelessness Data Warehouse Proposal

NAEH Conference. Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) Program. February 2014

DENVER S ROAD HOME PEAK PERFORMANCE MARCH 20, PERFORMANCE REVIEW 2015 INNOVATION PLANNING

EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT (ESG) FUNDING

DuPage County Continuum of Care Emergency Solutions Grant Program Plan Outreach, Shelter, Re-Housing & Homelessness Prevention April 2016

EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT (ESG) Program Manual

Exit Form: Print on Light-Blue Paper

Transcription:

NY-606/Rockland County CoC 2018 Rank & Review - Attachments Checklist Agency: Project: The following attachments must be included with the submission of the 2018 Rank and Review Application for it to be considered complete. Self-Monitoring Tool with all attachments Q4B Project Application Q5 Project Application Q5B Project Application (optional) Q6 APR Q7 APR Q8 APR Q19a3 APR Received: at : am/pm Interview Time: NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 1 of 19

2018 Rockland CoC Project Rank & Review Application Please generate a CoC CALENDAR YEAR 2017 (CY17: 1/1/17-12/31/17) APR (new format) from Foothold or comparable HMIS to complete this application. A. PROJECT INFORMATION Informational Only A1. Organization Name: A2. Project Name: A3. Application Contact Person: A4. Project Type: PSH RRH A5. FY18 Funding Request: $ Leasing $ Rental Assistance $ Supportive Services $ Operations $ A6. Is this project voluntarily reallocating funds to the CoC? Yes No A7.PROJECT DESCRIPTION Provide a short project overview that clearly describes the project s unique characteristics and achievements. Please include the target population(s) served, the number of participants served, the number of contracted beds, units or voucher, the cost per bed, how participants access the project, and project goals and achievements. Please be as descriptive as possible by using data stated in the project application and the project s CY17 APR. Response must be 250 words or less. 1 NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 2 of 19

2018 Rockland CoC Project Rank & Review Application B. PROJECT PERFORMANCE (Total 25 POINTS) B1. Performance Monitoring Results: Rockland County CoC monitors project performance throughout the year, as per HEARTH regulations, self-monitoring forms and site visits. Please attach your scorecard from your most recently submitted self-monitoring forms. C. SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE (TOTAL 95 POINTS) C1.A Utilization Rate -Using the project s most recent Project Application and CY17 APR, complete the following chart to calculate the project s utilization rate. Please print and attach the corresponding questions from the Project Application and APR. Projected persons served during an Actual number served during average PIT (Question 5 in Project PIT (Questions 7 & 8 in APR) Application) Persons Households January Persons April July October Households Average: Persons: Average Actual / Projected = Utilization Households: Average Actual / Projected = Utilization C1.B If the utilization rate is under 100%, please explain the reason why in 250 words or less. For example, were there barriers or specific challenges to achieving 100% capacity? 2 NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 3 of 19

2018 Rockland CoC Project Rank & Review Application C2. Funds Returned. The Continuum returned a total of $ (CARES will fill in this amount after application is submitted) from the total awarded funds from the 2016 NOFA. C2.A. What dollar amount did this project return in the most recently ended contract? C2. B. Percentage of funds in relation to the entire CoC funds returned: (to be filled in by CARES) C2.C If the project was unable to expend all of the grant funds, please explain why in 250 words or less C3. Chronic Homeless-Dedicated To show impact of this project on ending chronic homelessness (CH) in the CoC, refer to Attachment 1 and note below the percentage of CH beds this project contributes to the CoC: C4. Effect on Chronic Homeless: Permanent Supportive Housing Programs: During CY17, the CoC PSH projects served a total of 5 chronically homeless individuals. To show impact of this project on ending chronic homelessness, refer to Attachment 2 to note the following: C4.A The total number of chronically homeless persons this project served in CY17: C4.B The percentage of the CoC total served by this project: Rapid Rehousing Programs: During CY17, the CoC RRH projects served a total of 0 chronically homeless individuals. To show impact of this project on ending chronic homelessness, refer to Attachment 2 to note the following: C4.C The total number of chronically homeless persons this project served in CY17: C4.D The percentage of the CoC total served by this project: C5. Positive Outcomes Permanent Supportive Housing projects: During CY17, there were 18 persons with positive outcomes noted across all CoC PSH programs. (An exit is positive for PH if individual is a stayer or exited to a PSH destination.) To show the effect of this project on housing stability, refer to Attachment 3 and note the percentage this project had on the system: % NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 4 of 19

2018 Rockland CoC Project Rank & Review Application Rapid Rehousing projects: During CY17, there were 40 persons with positive outcomes noted across all CoC RRH programs. (An exit is positive for RRH if individual exited to a PH destination.) To show the effect of this project on housing stability, refer to Attachment 3 and note the percentage this project had on the system: % C6. Exits to Homelessness: To show impact of this project on ending homelessness, refer to Attachment 4 (showing all CoC project leavers) and note the percentage of project leavers who exited this program to a shelter or the street % C7.A Income growth. During CY17, there were 3 persons reported with an increase in total income between the two most recent assessments. Please refer to Attachment 5 and note the percentage this project had on the system: %. C7.B What percentage of adults gained or increased earned income from employment at entry to follow up/exit as noted in Question 19a3 of the APR? C7.C What percentage of adults gained or increased other income from entry to follow up/exit as noted in Question 19a3 of the APR? C8. Data Quality. On your CY17 APR Question 6: C8.A. Is there an error rate of more than 5% of your PII data? Yes No C8.B. Is there an error rate of more than 5% of your universal data elements? Yes No C8.C. Is there an error rate of more than 5% of your Income and Housing data? Yes No C8.D. Is there an error rate of more than 5% of your Chronic Homelessness data? Yes No C8E. For all (non CoC) agency programs participating in HMIS that contribute to System Performance Measurers (see Attachment??), please indicate if all Universal Data Elements have a Missing/Null rate of below??%: Yes No NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 5 of 19

2018 Rockland County CoC Project Rank & Review Application D. CONTINUUM PRIORITIES AND SYSTEM IMPACT (TOTAL 80 POINTS) D1. Coordinated Entry. Does your project participate in the Coordinated Entry process by making or receiving referrals? If your project is a DV or Legal Service provider, explain barriers to participation (250 words or less). This will be verified by the CE lead. D2. Cultural Barriers. Please describe your agency's resources and experience in meeting the needs of clients facing various cultural barriers (e.g., language, LGBTQ, gender identity, mental health) in 250 words or less. D3.A. Coordination of Services and Leverage. Please describe how your project coordinates with other funded and non-funded providers in order to leverage services in no more than 250 words. D3.B. Housing Stability. How has increased coordination affected your housing stability? D3.C. Income. How has increased coordination affected participant income growth, including non-cash benefits? NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 6 of 19

2018 Rockland County CoC Project Rank & Review Application D4. Opening Doors. Please explain how the project works to meet the goals (below) stated in the USICH's "Opening Doors: Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness" (250 words or less). 1) Prevent/end homelessness among Veterans in 2015; 2) End chronic homelessness in 2017; 3) Prevent and end homelessness for families, youth and children in 2020; 4) Set path to end all homelessness D5. Priority Populations. Is the project dedicated to one of the following priority populations: Chronically homeless Youth Veteran D5.B If the project is not dedicated, what percentage of beds are dedicated to a priority population? % Please attach Project Application Q4B. and/or 5B. D6. Street Outreach. Does the project conduct street outreach that addresses specific needs of homeless individuals/families? Yes No If yes, please note what services specifically meet the needs of homeless individuals/families and how outreach is conducted. NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 7 of 19

2018 Rockland County CoC Project Rank & Review Application D7. Housing First. Housing First is a recovery-oriented approach to ending homelessness that allows for rapidly housing individuals without screening out or terminating based on any of the below criteria. Does the project screen out or terminate based on any the following? YES NO Having too little or no income Active or history of substance abuse Criminal record with exceptions for state-mandated restrictions History of domestic violence Failure to participate in supportive services Failure to make progress on a service plan Loss of income or failure to improve income Being a victim of domestic violence Any other activity not covered in a lease agreement typically found in the project's geographic area. D8. CoC Participation. Does the project or agency staff regularly participate in any of the following CoC standing or ad hoc committees of the Rockland County CoC: Board Meetings Systems Committee HMIS Advisory Committee Point in Time Committee Rank and Review Committee Membership Meeting Performance Evaluation Committee Coordinated Assessment Committee D9. Self Sufficiency: Include information about the services available to participants and how the program will help households work towards and achieve self-sufficiency. (250 word limit) D10. Number of Homeless Persons: Was your project included in the final submission of the 2018 Point in Time? This will be verified by the Collaborative Applicant. Yes No NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 8 of 19

2018 Rockland County CoC Project Rank & Review Application Points Scale: The 2018 Rockland County CoC Project Rank and Review Application is scored on a 200-point scale with the following breakdown: A. PROJECT INFORMATION: No points B. PROJECT PERFORMANCE: Maximum 25 Points C. SYSTEM PERFORMANCE: Maximum 95 Points C1.A. Utilization Rate Maximum 20 points Utilization Rate 100% 19 99-90% 15 89-80% 11 79-70% 7 51-60% 3 Under 50% 0 C1.B Narrative 0-10 points C2. Funds Returned Maximum 16 points C2.B. Funds Returned Points 0% 16 1%-9% 12 10%-19% 10 20%-29% 8 30%-59% 4 60%-100% 0 C2.C. Narrative 0-8 points Points C3. Chronic Homeless Dedicated Maximum 7 points C3. Dedicated CH beds Points 50-100% 7 35-49% 5 20-34% 3 10-19% 1 0-9% 0 NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 9 of 19

2018 Rockland County CoC Project Rank & Review Application C4. Effect on Chronic Homeless Maximum 8 points C4.B&D Total CH served 40-100% 8 20-39% 4 6-19% 2 0-5% 0 Points C5. Positive Outcomes Maximum 10 points C5. Positive Outcomes Points More than 25% 10 20-25% 8 15-19% 6 10-14% 3 Less than 10% 0 C6. Exits to Homelessness Maximum 10 points C6 Exits to Homelessness 0% 10 1-25% 6 26-50% 3 Greater than 50% 0 Points C7. Income Growth Maximum 20 points (for all of C7) C7.A C7.A Income Growth Between Last 2 Assessments 20% or higher 10 10%-19% 6 3%-9% 3 Below 3% 0 Points C7.B C7.B Income from Employment 50-100% 5 30-49% 4 20-29% 2 Under 20% 0 Points NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 10 of 19

2018 Rockland County CoC Project Rank & Review Application C7.C C7.C Income From Other than Employment Points 100-90% 5 70-89% 4 55-69% 2 Under 54% 0 C8. Data Quality Maximum 9 points C8.A 0 or 1 point C8.B - 0 or 1 point C8.C - 0 or 1 point C8.D - 0 or 1 point C8.E 0 or 5 points D. CONTINUUM PRIORITIES AND SYSTEM IMPACT: TOTAL 80 POINTS D1. Coordinated Entry 0-10 points maximum D2. Cultural Barriers 0 5 points D3.A. Coordination of Services and Leverage 0-5 points D3.B. Housing Stability 0 5 points D3.C. Income 0 5 points D4. Opening Doors 0 5 points D5. Priority Populations 0 10 points D5.B 0 5 points D6. Street Outreach 0 5 points D7. Housing First 0 or 10 points D8. CoC Participation 0 or 5 points D9. Self-Sufficiency 0 10 points D10. Number of Homeless Persons - 0 5 points NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 11 of 19

Proj. Type Attachment 1 - CH Beds Project Name CH Dedicated Beds Percent of System Impact PSH CSC DV Rapid Re-Housing (2017) 0 0% PSH Helping Hands Rapid Re-Housing (2017) 0 0% PSH Helping Hands Rapid Rehousing 2 0 0% PSH Rapid Rehousing DSS Program 2 (2017) 0 0% PSH Rapid Rehousing DSS Program I (2017) 0 0% PSH Rockland County DSS PSH Program (2017) 2 100% 6 2 100% NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 15 of 19

Proj. Type Attachment 2 - CH Served Project Name CH Dedicated Beds Percent of System Impact PSH CSC DV Rapid Re-Housing (2017) 0 0% PSH Helping Hands Rapid Re-Housing (2017) 0 0% PSH Helping Hands Rapid Rehousing 2 0 0% PSH Rapid Rehousing DSS Program 2 (2017) 0 0% PSH Rapid Rehousing DSS Program I (2017) 0 0% PSH Rockland County DSS PSH Program (2017) 5 100% 6 5 100% NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 16 of 19

Attachment 3 - Positive Outcomes -PSH Proj. Type Project Name Positive Outcomes Percent of System Impact PSH CSC DV Rapid Re-Housing (2017) 12 21% PSH Helping Hands Rapid Re-Housing (2017) 11 19% PSH Helping Hands Rapid Rehousing 2 0 0% PSH Rapid Rehousing DSS Program 2 (2017) 0 0% PSH Rapid Rehousing DSS Program I (2017) 17 29% PSH Rockland County DSS PSH Program (2017) 18 31% 6 58 100% NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 17 of 19

Attachment 4 - Returns to Homelessness Proj. Type Project Name Total Leavers Returning to Homelessness Percent of System Impact PSH CSC DV Rapid Re-Housing (2017) 0 0 0% PSH Helping Hands Rapid Re-Housing (2017) 8 0 0% PSH Helping Hands Rapid Rehousing 2 0 0 0% PSH Rapid Rehousing DSS Program 2 (2017) 0 0 0% PSH Rapid Rehousing DSS Program I (2017) 11 0 0% PSH Rockland County DSS PSH Program (2017) 0 0 0% 6 19 0 0% NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 18 of 19

Proj. Type Attachment 5 - Total Income Growth Project Name Adults with Income Growth Percent of System Impact PSH CSC DV Rapid Re-Housing (2017) 0 0% PSH Helping Hands Rapid Re-Housing (2017) 2 67% PSH Helping Hands Rapid Rehousing 2 0 0% PSH Rapid Rehousing DSS Program 2 (2017) 0 0% PSH Rapid Rehousing DSS Program I (2017) 0 0% PSH Rockland County DSS PSH Program (2017) 1 33% 6 3 100% NY-606 2018 Rank & Review Tool 19 of 19