High Poverty Areas and HUD Funding

Local Cleveland Shelters Ask HUD for Additional Help

A diverse group of advocates and Cleveland area service providers are proposing that communities with a history of acute poverty have access to additional funding in accordance with the implementation of the HEARTH law. Advocates and social service providers have a concern that traditionally high poverty areas will be harmed by the new regulations, and will not be able to access the high performing community designation and any funds that accompany this designation. We have expressed our concerns with Congressman Dennis Kucinich, and have included that letter.

As set forth in the law, communities must meet certain performance guidelines in order to qualify for additional or bonus funding from HUD. Over the last ten years, the City of Cleveland/Cuyahoga County has been the recipient of these additional funds to strategically assist the continuum in better serving those experiencing homelessness. The additional funding has enabled us to increase housing capacity and maintain a high quality of service to a growing homeless population, while also establishing one or two new strategic housing programs per year.

As you know, the soon-to-be-implemented HEARTH Law will mandate that additional bonus HUD dollars may be allocated to those communities that attain “High Performing Community” status. In order to qualify for this designation the community must: decrease the length of homelessness by 10%, reduce recidivism to 5% a year, implement the use of HMIS in every program, reduce the number who become homeless, and include programs that serve youth and families. We are asking that a similar fund be established for High Poverty Communities of equal value to assist those communities experiencing the highest rates of distress in the United States.

We maintain that severely impoverished communities nationwide, like Cleveland, could have substantial difficulty in decreasing the length of homelessness, reducing recidivism, and/or reducing the number of individuals and families who become homeless. In Cleveland, again as with many communities, there are mitigating factors that will significantly compromise endeavors to attain the “High Performing Community” status as set forth by the HEARTH Law.

While we will make every effort to be a High Performing Community, in the event we are not able to achieve those goals, we believe that the poorest cities in the United States need additional support from HUD to continue to address the issue of homelessness caused by the loss of jobs and a reduction in the ability to secure housing. Communities, such as Cleveland, need additional resources to continue to provide quality care to homeless people in an already stressed system. We believe that in a time of long waiting lists for mental health and alcohol and drug services as well as overcrowded shelters, quality programs specifically designed to serve and reduce the homeless population will be forced to close because of the huge demand and significant competition for limited resources.

We propose that if a community meets four (4) of the ten (10) factors that demonstrate a history of acute poverty, and is chosen by the HUD Secretary through a similar selection process as outlined in the HEARTH legislation for a “High Performing Community,” they have access to a pool of resources to reduce homelessness. The ten (10) factors are as follows:

1. The community experiences a natural disaster of national significance as declared by FEMA (flooding, earthquake, etc) in the previous year.
2. If according to the American Community Survey/US Census, the community is consistently listed among the top 20 poorest big cities in the nation.
3. In any of the last three years, the community experienced a decrease of 20% or more in State mental health funding.
4. In any of the last three years, the community experienced a decrease of 20% or more in State alcohol/drug addiction funding.
5. The community’s annual unemployment rate increases by more than 10% from one year to the next.
6. The community experiences a 10% increase in the number of evictions from one year to the next.
7. The community experiences a 10% increase in the number of households delinquent on their mortgage or there is a 20% increase in the number of foreclosure filings in any of the last five years.
8. The community experiences a 10% increase in the number of individuals receiving food stamps from one year to the next measured over the last three years.
9. The community experiences a 5% increase in the number of indigent care cases at local hospitals within the Continuum from one year to the next in any of the previous five years.
10. The community experiences a 5% increase in the number of offenders returning from the prison system from one year to the next any time over the last five years.

Again, in keeping with these ten (10) mitigating factors, we propose that if a community is quantifiably assessed to present with at least four (4) of the above-mentioned items, it receive access to a similar level of funding as those communities designated as a “High Performing Community.”. We are proposing that a community be measured over the last five years, and if at least four (4) extenuating factors are found in any of those five years, HUD designate the community as a “High Poverty Area,” and offer access to additional funding. The community should be allowed to maintain dispensation from “High Performing Community” status for a period of no less than three (3) years into the future while they work through their poverty issues. Additionally, the community should be re-evaluated every year, as part of the application process, to determine progress toward reducing poverty and meeting HUD guidelines.

We are sending this ahead of the introduction of the HEARTH guidelines in hopes that these concepts are included in the draft. As those serving on the “front lines” to effectively meet the needs of the homeless population, we thank you for your time and consideration of this correspondence.

This letter sent to Congressman Dennis Kucinich and and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to the Assistant Secretary of Community Development. It was signed and written by the directors of the Salvation Army Harbor Light Complex, Y-Haven transitional shelter, LMM 2100 Lakeside shelter, Joseph's Home transitional shelter, New Life Community, and Transitional Housing Inc. along with NEOCH.

Posts reflect the opinions who sign the entry

No Foreclosure Help for Youngstown

Mahoning Valley Application was Rejected by HUD?

I got notice of a petition drive in Youngstown to protest the rejection of the Mahoning Valley Application for Neighborhood Stabilization 2 funding that was announced last week. The Youngstown paper has been aggressively reporting this story here and here. Evidently, Youngstown has one of the highest rates of foreclosure in the country, and was denied the joint proposal submitted by nine communities in the Mahoning Valley. The Youngstown Mayor and US Rep. Tim Ryan are crying foul and pledging to raise the issue with President Obama. In addition, the foreclosure funds given to the State of Ohio were distributed throughout the state and Mahoning and Trumbull counties received the smallest amount of all the large counties in Ohio. The Dayton area received the largest per capita amount of funding from Ohio even though they have a smaller 12.1% foreclosure rate in comparison to Youngstown and Cleveland with foreclosure rates at 14.7% and 12.7% respectively.

Brian
Posts reflect the opinion of those who sign the entry.

Continuum of Care Dollars Released

Behind the Headlines

Homeless people do read the paper. They visit the library and read the national news online as well as perusing the local Plain Dealer regularly. This is the time of year when the federal government releases its annual "Continuum of Care" funding, and I get a lot of questions from homeless people about all this money given to Cleveland for homelessness. Perhaps you saw the headline over the last day, "Obama Administration releases [some many millions or billions] to deal with homelessness." This dates back to the Clinton administration when they combined all the homeless money given to states and localities into one release of dollars to maximize news coverage. Clinton did it right by releasing the money right around a big, tug-on-the-heart-strings-holiday of either Christmas or Thanksgiving. It was difficult for the Bush administration to manage the release of the HUD grant around a good holiday, because the federal budget was not regularly passed by the October 1 deadline. Bush was often relegated to second tier-tug-at-your-heart holidays like MLK Day or President's Day for his homeless press release. Obama released the funds yesterday with a $1.6 billion headline provided to local and state jurisdictions.

We certainly appreciate the help with Cleveland/Cuyahoga County getting all that they asked for in $22 million, but what does that mean? In almost the entire United States, the money just renews existing programs. So, the headline should be "Obama renews shelter/housing grants so no one will be forced to close." It is not a huge new pool of money even though the headline makes it sound like that. In Cleveland, we had room for a few new housing vouchers and one new project, but otherwise all the money went to renew the budgets of the existing shelters/housing vouchers. The shelters do not get a cost of living increase or money to serve new populations (like foreclosure victims). They get the same amount of money that they asked for when they were originally funded. While utility prices, food prices, health benefits, and salaries have all gone up over the years, the shelters must figure out how to make up the shortfall because the federal government does not pay for any cost of living increases.

So, a big thank you has to go out to Ruth Gillett from the County Office of Homeless Services locally who fills out all the paperwork and checks all the boxes to make sure that we get our fair share. It is a huge job that takes months, and was complicated this year because everything had to be submitted electronically. As you may be aware, the federal government takes many years to figure out how to move away from paper, so it was a rough ride this year. She has to gather all this information from every facility and gather information about their clients and put it in one application that printed out is about 3 foot tall stack of paper. She has always secured the money set aside for Cleveland/Cuyahoga County with only a few minor problems. Other cities (Akron, Ohio, Columbus, Canton and Dayton) have all had major problems in the last five years costing their homeless populations millions of dollars.

One unfortunate note for those who embrace the rivalry with our downstate competitors in best city in Ohio starting with the letter "C". Both Columbus and Cincinnati as well as Dayton and the Ohio small cities collaboration received one of the 23 demonstration grants released yesterday by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. It is amazing that out of 23 grants nationwide Ohio scored 4 of them. HUD funded groups to set up pilot programs to rapidly re-house people in order to avoid homelessness. I tried to find what the other cities applied for, but I could only find the Columbus plan. They are setting up some intensive case management using the Salvation Army combined with rental assistance money. The question is why didn't the Cleveland project make it? Why couldn't we compete with Dayton or Cincy for the one million dollar "rapid-rehousing" demonstration programs?

Brian
Posts by Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless staff and Board.

United Way Winners and Losers

A New Direction for United Way?

This last week saw a great deal of media attention to the winners and losers in the struggle for United Way dollars. Frankly, I don't understand it. I mean I read in detail the list of winners and losers, and I cannot find any logic. I read every article in the Plain Dealer, and the spin does not seem to translate well for what priorities were actually funded. There were kids groups that lost out (Heights Youth Centers) and there were some that were winners (Voices of Ohio's Children). I have to wonder since there was no clear pattern if this was some comment on health and effectiveness of these organizations? A few quick takes:

• There were four new groups funded who are also funded by Community Shares. We shall see how this is going to work. Until now only the merged group of the Domestic Violence Agency was funded by both Shares and United Way.
• It was a strange comment in the PD from United Way officials discouraging designations to specific groups because they have all these experts on staff to direct donations. People don't like reading , "Hey, you are too stupid to know who to donate to. We are the experts; let us do it." That is why I like Shares so much. They do not think that donors are stupid.
  
• The Neighborhood groups were split with four winners and four losers. Again, no clear pattern.
• Homeless groups were by far winners with 13 homeless direct service providers and four losers.
  
• I thought Dan Joyce's comments in the Plain Dealer were especially poignant and honest.
  
• The United Way is claiming these decisions were made by 200 volunteers. Are there really 200 experts on non-profits in our community or are these individuals who were touched by one or two groups? I guess this is some kind of representative democracy?
  
• It does not seem that self-sufficiency was the over-riding strategy or United Labor Agency which retrains workers and Recovery Resources which helps people with treatment issues would not have come up with fewer resources. They are both teaching people to get back on their feet.
  
• It does not seem advocacy/solving community problems was a big focus since the Center for Community Solutions and the Long Term Care Ombudsman were among the groups that saw a reduction.
  
• I have no sympathy for Red Cross of Cleveland, and I am glad they got fewer resources. They have stepped away from assisting in ending homelessness, and do not seem to care much about poverty anymore.
  
• I was not happy to see the Girl Scouts get less money (85% decrease) while the Boy Scouts and their homophobic policies got more money (39% increase). But I am biased in that I have two girls in the Girl Scouts.
• I had no problem with the Ombudsman being dropped by United Way, because they long ago stepped away from assisting homeless people. I was sad that the Empowerment Center got dropped, and I am worried what this will mean for the first Welfare Rights group in the United States.
  
• It was good to see the Free Clinic was finally recognized by both Shares and United Way for the value they provide to the community. Then there were also a bunch of groups added to United Way's roster that I have never heard from before.
  

Anyway, I am sure that there are many emergency Board meetings taking place this week. I have to wonder if there were too many cooks in the United Way kitchen that resulted in no clear direction. Some of our close friends like West Side Catholic, Cleveland Tenants Organization and Lutheran Metro Ministry received more money, and that is a plus. So far, I have only seen the Red Cross respond formally and with anger. They are asking for help from the community to make up the difference. Get cut by United Way--respond with anger-- and turn that into a fund raising opportunity does not make sense to me. NEOCH was not asked to participate, and we do not have much direct service left so that is not surprising. Anything that shakes up the non-profit world is most likely a positive. Some of these groups may suddenly awaken to the new reality that they must think outside their small world and start addressing the needs of consumers. More of our partner agencies were winners than were losers in the United Way reshuffling, which is a good thing. Bottom line: I think that the United Way transition is probably a beneficial to the community, and will re-order the priorities in our community. We shall see.

Brian
Posts by Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless staff and Board.