Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS DESTINATION HOME A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF

VIEWS: 153 PAGES: 310

									DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Destination Home: A Strategic Guide to the Development of Homeless Housing in Riverside
County is a report prepared by Polis Consulting Group, Inc. on behalf of the Department of
Public Social Services of the County of Riverside. This report would not have been possible
without the help received from many public and private organizations throughout the
County, for which the author is very grateful.



                                  Principal Consultants
                               Polis Consulting Group, Inc.
                             Geoffrey Gilbert-Hamerling. Ph.D
                                     Dave Ryan, M.A.
                                      Mary Arutunian
                            Thelma Herrera, Graphics Specialist



         Should you have questions, comments or input, please feel free to contact:
                               geoffrey@polisgroup.com



                              Additionally, you can contact:
                  County of Riverside Department of Public Social Services
                                 Homeless Programs Unit
                                      (951) 358-5636
 T H E D EV E HOME: N T O F H O GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE G U I D E
DESTINATIONLO P M EA STRATEGICM E L E S S H O U S I N G I N R I V E R S I D E CO U N T Y: A ST R AT EG I C COUNTY
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




CONTENTS

  Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... i
  1) Typology of Housing for Homeless Persons .............................................................1
  2) Homelessness and Special-Needs Homeless Populations..........................................7
  3) The Development Process .......................................................................................15
      a) Site Identification Through First Year Operations
      b) Critical Path Analysis
      c) Design Considerations
      d) Program Development: Housing First Strategies and Systems Change
      e) Leverage & Development Capacity
      f) Rental Assistance and Operating Subsidies
                       Project-Based Rental Assistance
      g) Financial Analysis - Feasibility
                       Sample Budgets
                       Sample Pro Formas
  4) Model Programs .......................................................................................................67
                       OPCC Cloverfield Services Center
                       Martha’s Village and Kitchen, Dan Dunlap Center
                       SRO Housing Corporation
  5) Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities ..........................85
                       Coordination and Resource Allocation
                       Coordination and Land Use Entitlements
                       Coordination and Leadership
                       Coordination and the Continuum of Care Planning Process
                       Confronting the NIMBY Challenge
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




 6) Development Strategy for the County of Riverside ..............................................103
     a) Program Goals and Outcome Measurement
     b) Data Management and Client Tracking
     c) Development Goals by Supervisorial District: 5 year and 10 year goals
     d) Development Goals by Special-Needs Population: 5 year and 10 year goals
     e) Monitoring Performance
     f) Reporting

 APPENDICES:
 A) Resources for the Development and Operation of Homeless Housing and Programs
                • Instructions for the use of the Resource Grid
                • Resource Grid
     (1) Development Resources
     (2) Resources for Operations
     (3) Supportive Social Services Resources

 B) Inventory of Homeless Programs of Riverside County
                • Emergency Shelter
                • Transitional Housing
                • Supportive Housing
 C) Acronyms
 D) Bibliography
 E) Persons Interviewed
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




B   uilding housing to assist homeless persons and families depends upon a number of
    critical factors, each of which must be in place for development to ensue. Firstly, there
need to be capital resources available to assemble the land, obtain proper approvals, draft
plans, construct the housing, and cover the many other indirect or soft costs associated with
development (e.g., insurance, legal matters, appraisals, environmental studies, etc.). In short,
capital resources must be available. Secondly, development depends upon ongoing operating
support (or subsidy) as the incomes of the program participants are generally capable of
paying only minimal rent (if any). Thirdly, development requires an agency with both the
capacity and the will to undertake the project, see it through to completion, and to establish
management practices that will sustain the project’s feasibility and maintain its effectiveness
through time.

The Destination Home: A Strategic Guide to the Development of Homeless Housing in
Riverside County includes a discussion of the challenges and opportunities of creating new
residential resources for homeless populations. This report includes a typology of housing
resources to assist a variety of homeless populations (Section 1). The second section of the
report includes a discussion of the special needs of a number of homeless sub-populations.

Section 3 provides a comprehensive analysis of the development process, from securing a site,
to obtaining financing and completing construction. This section lays out the complexities
of developing and operating housing for homeless populations. Among the key factors
impacting development are: proper location (taking into account the availability of services,
transportation, and environmental concerns); securing land entitlements; resistance of local
residents; and financial feasibility. In addition, the report includes a discussion of program




                                                                                                   i
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




design as there is a substantive difference (both in terms of costs and service delivery) in
creating private accommodations with beds (that may help to preserve the dignity and
integrity of individuals and families) and serving more persons in cots at a congregate mass
shelter. Among the most critical factors that may challenge the development of shelters
and housing for homeless populations is the apparent lack of local capacity. Existing service
providers almost universally lack the experience needed in affordable housing development
and management to undertake this kind of work. Developers, including affordable housing
developers, generally shy away from the added challenges and problems associated with
creating units that are affordable and suitable to persons emerging from homelessness. The
general lack of local development capacity is a substantive barrier that seems to put the onus
on local governments to undertake the planning and development work.

Included in Section 3 are model budgets and cash flow projections used to assess the level
of financial assistance that may be required of federal, state and local sources to develop
and manage new residential resources. These budgets include relative costs per program
participant over the course of a year. Capital and operating budgets are included for
emergency shelters and transitional housing programs of different sizes. These programs
differ markedly relative to the scope of development, as well as the types and levels of
services they offer, so comparisons are problematical but costs have been detailed at the
per square foot level to assist in budget preparation. Permanent and permanent supportive
housing are looked at as development types that have received a good deal of attention
over the past decade. Budgets for the development and operation of permanent housing are
also included in the section. The budgets are sufficiently detailed so that the reader may
assess the level and range of services compared against their costs and expenses. This is
particularly important as resources to sustain program operations have been few and (with
the exception of the Mental Health Services Act) will likely continue to shrink over time.
To develop model programs in the current funding environment is increasingly challenging.
This section of the report also includes a discussion of recent changes in the primary
resource to assist homeless populations, the HUD McKinney-Vento Act. The analysis also
includes a thorough discussion of the critical need for operating assistance and how this
alone poses one of the most significant barriers to new development of homeless resources
in Riverside County.




ii
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Section 4 of the analysis singles out three model programs and uses them to reinforce issues
raised in the third section of this report. In particular, the report includes descriptions of a
new multi-service center in Santa Monica, Martha’s Kitchen and Village in Indio (to highlight
transitional housing services), and the work of the Single Room Occupancy housing
Corporation in downtown Los Angeles. Section 5 addresses the need for local government
coordination, particularly as related to providing leadership in light of adverse reactions to
proposed new development by local homeowners and others. This section of this report also
includes a summary of the various resources that may be available at the local level to develop
and operate new shelters and housing.

The sixth section draws upon matters raised in the previous sections of the report and
identifies the most critical gaps in residential resources by Supervisorial District. This analysis
shows that while a number of resources are currently available, they are not disbursed evenly
throughout the County. Rather, a concentration of homeless resources can be found in
Supervisorial District 4, while Supervisorial District 5 has hardly any residential programs.
The imbalance is considered both in real and relative terms, meaning that the analysis takes
into account the need to fill the actual gap and how the districts with each other in terms of
existing resources. In addition, Section 6 seeks to prioritize development options both within
each Supervisorial District and across districts. This section of the report further investigates
the need for local resources to develop new housing for homeless persons and families. The
report includes an estimate of the costs to construct 215 new units and to operate them over
time. Section 6 concludes with a set of recommended next steps that may help stimulate
development of new residential options for homeless persons. These recommendations
include practical steps to grow local development capacity, as well as general policies
that may help to alleviate the problem of homelessness in Riverside County. Because new
resources are scarce, the analysis includes a discussion of the critical need to prioritize where
new housing should be developed.

In addition to the analytical sections, this report includes a Resource Matrix grid and
program descriptions to assist others determine the suitability of various resources in their
development plans. The matrix includes the primary public sources available to fund the
development of a range of housing types and configurations that may be occupied by
homeless and formerly homeless persons and families. The Resource Matrix is organized




                                                                                                iii
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




in three main sections: development (i.e. capital funds available to fund components of the
continuum of care); operations (e.g., rental assistance subsidies and other forms of operating
support); and supportive social services (differentiated by eligible services). In addition, the
Resource Matrix includes information on the various populations that may be eligible to
receive assistance through each program; the match requirements of each program are also
included in this summary document. The Resource Matrix may be seen as an organizing
tool that shows the breadth of resources to draw upon to finance a particular project. It also
identifies whether a program is funded through federal or state block grants or competitively.
In short, the Resource Matrix summarizes the universe of resources available to assist
homeless populations. Each program included on the Resource Matrix is more fully described
in a separate narrative included as a substantive appendix.




iv
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                                                                 1
                                                                             SECTION




T    he following typology has been created to explicate the range of housing resources that
     may be developed to assist homeless persons and families. This range of housing for
homeless populations is frequently thought of as providing a “continuum of care.” It should
be noted that depending on management practices and the configuration of a building, a
specific development may be seen as constituting more than a single type. For example, an
emergency shelter with on-site supportive services that permits persons to stay for up to a
year may well be considered a transitional housing program according to the definitions that
follow. This typology should be regarded as a tool to help better understand a specific project,
rather than a rigid classification system into which a development must exclusively fall.



HUD allows localities to define what they regard as constituting an emergency shelter. In
general an emergency shelter may be seen as a public or private facility in which occupancy
is voluntary and no fee is charged for use. This definition would exclude jails and prisons
owing to the involuntary nature of occupancy. It would also exclude “flop houses” that charge
rent. Providers of emergency shelter permit “guests” to remain housed for variable periods,
largely dependent upon funding sources. Supportive social services (including meals, case
management, transportation assistance, etc.) may or may not be available to the “guests.”
In most cases, emergency shelters provide congregate settings in reconfigured commercial
properties (especially warehouses). A less frequent emergency shelter configuration is to
provide for private occupancy in single room occupancy units. Outside third parties pay
the operating costs so that a shelter may remain open; because no rent is paid, tenancy is
generally not established.


Section 1: Typology of Housing for Homeless Persons                                           1
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Transitional housing differs from emergency shelter in three fundamental respects:
1) the availability of supportive social services, 2) tenancy rights, and 3) a limitation on
the maximum term of occupancy. The kind of spaces and units used as transitional housing
is extremely varied. Some programs are operated out of reconfigured warehouses; others
use standard rental units in the community. What most distinguishes transitional housing
from other housing are the special-needs populations for which they are developed and the
corresponding management practices.

Among the supportive services that are frequently found at transitional housing programs
are: nutrition services, case management, transportation assistance, referrals for medical,
dental and psychiatric services, life-skills training, money management, and socialization.
The availability of on-site services depends in large part on the funding under management
control. Because most transitional housing programs charge rent (at 30 percent of adjusted
income), residents enjoy the protections of landlord/tenant law. These protections have
been somewhat limited in California which has in place a statute known as the Transitional
Housing Participant Misconduct Act (THPMA). THPMA allows for a less than full judicial
review in order to terminate tenancies in a transitional housing program, but it should be
noted that the act preserves certain rights of appeal (see California Health and Safety Code
§50580 et seq).

When transitional housing was first being developed in the 1980s, the expectation was that
occupancy should be limited to no more than 18 months. Over time this standard has been
extended so that tenancy is generally limited to no more than 24 months. Recognizing
that certain persons may require longer periods of supervision and support (and wanting to
alleviate staff time from reviewing and approving specific waiver requests for extensions),
HUD ultimately eliminated the maximum tenancy period under certain circumstances. At 24
CFR §583.300 (i) the regulations state:
       Limitation on stay in transitional housing. A homeless individual or family may
       remain in transitional housing for a period longer than 24 months, if
       permanent housing for the individual or family has not been located or if the




2                                                           Section 1: Typology of Housing for Homeless Persons
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




          individual or family requires additional time to prepare for independent living.
          However, HUD may discontinue assistance for a transitional housing project
          if more than half of the homeless individuals or families remain in that project
          longer than 24 months.

Inasmuch as tenancies occasionally extend beyond 24 months, the distinction between
transitional housing and supportive housing is not hard and fast.



Supportive housing differs from transitional housing with respect to two key factors: 1) the
limitation on tenancy (and the availability of the THPMA remedy for problem tenants), and
2) whether or not supportive social services may be mandated. Supportive housing allows
for permanent tenancy and as such the units are commonly built to standards consistent with
other affordable developments. Mass shelters and shared housing are the exceptions, but
some programs have been developed that create such configurations. Because the majority
of (formerly) homeless residents of supportive housing are disabled individuals, only a small
number of family-style supportive housing units have been developed.

It is quite common for supportive housing to include specialized space for the delivery of case
management services and group activities. While access to supportive services is encouraged,
a landlord may not mandate the receipt of services. The point of supportive housing is to
establish a stable residential environment for disabled (formerly homeless) persons; it is not
to make housing a goal to be achieved once having satisfied a prescribed service program.



Single room occupancy (SRO) is defined as a dwelling unit intended to be occupied by a
single person. SRO units have been used as emergency shelter, transitional housing, and
permanent housing. The units are typically small (between 160 SF and 500 SF) and they
generally do not contain either private bathrooms or kitchens. Bathrooms are usually
developed at a ratio of about 1:8 units and each development includes a common kitchen.
Efficiency (bachelor) units that include both a private bath and kitchenette may also be
considered single room occupancy.




Section 1: Typology of Housing for Homeless Persons                                              3
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




A Safe Haven is primarily defined in terms of its flexible management practices that allow
for intermittent occupancy by persons with serious mental health (and other) disorders. The
intent of a Safe Haven is to create a no-fail/high-tolerance environment where persons with
mental illnesses (and co-occurring substance abuse and other disorders) may have a safe and
secure place to stay on an around-the-clock basis. The expectation is that over time persons
residing in a Safe Haven may increasingly avail themselves of supportive social services as
they choose. Some Safe Havens allow for permanent occupancy so that in the event that
a resident becomes “nomadic” or otherwise decides not to stay in the shelter/housing, he
retains the right to return should he so desire. Occupancy rates in Safe Havens may vary
widely as persons come and go throughout the day, and each resident has a designated space
that is uniquely his own and to which he may return without sanction at any time.



Shared housing has been another mechanism to assist homeless persons become re-settled
in the community. Typically a shared housing arrangement takes the form of a group home
in a single-family residence, what is commonly known as the “Oxford House” model. These
group homes operate as follows: an organization, for example Oxford House Riverside, leases
a single family residence from a private landlord. The lessee then monitors the behavior of
the persons in recovery that it permits to take up residency. Oxford House-type programs
operate with the expectation that should a resident relapse, he may be expelled immediately.
Whether this legal theory holds merit or not is secondary to the fact that group homes have
sprung up in nearly every quarter of the country. A 1995 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court
(Edmonds v. Oxford House) affirmed that for the purposes of zoning, Oxford Houses are
to be considered single family residences. This had always been true in practice and in 1988
it was made a matter of law, codified in the Amendments to the Federal Fair Housing Act.
Those amendments make it unlawful for any jurisdiction to discriminate against congregate
living for the disabled. Recovering alcoholics and drug addicts are within the scope of the
term “disabled.” Therefore, Oxford Houses are not subject to zoning laws regulating the
number of unrelated individuals who may live in a single family dwelling. An Oxford House
is not a treatment facility; it is simply an alcohol and drug free living environment which
provides an opportunity for recovering individuals to live as a family unit focused on the need
to change their individual lifestyle to one completely free of alcohol and drug use.



4                                                        Section 1: Typology of Housing for Homeless Persons
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




While not housing per se, increasingly communities are developing access centers where
homeless persons may obtain basic services, including temporary use of a cot for respite
purposes. Access centers also go by the name of respite or drop-in centers. They differ from
Safe Havens in that the center itself is regarded as a safe place to return and the homeless
person does not possess any rights to a unique space. In fact, the Downtown Drop-in Center
in Los Angeles’ Skid Row area (managed by the Volunteers of America) allows clients access
to a cot for a maximum of eight hours at a time. Access Centers contain a broad range of
supportive social services to help homeless persons and families become stabilized and enter
the overall “continuum of care.”




Section 1: Typology of Housing for Homeless Persons                                            5
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




6                                                       Section 1: Typology of Housing for Homeless Persons
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                                                                2
                                                                              SECTION




T    he problem of homelessness is multifaceted, a result of escalating housing markets,
     limited incomes, and personal and social barriers to accessing housing. Recent research
in the County of Riverside indicates that a number of sub-populations are represented among
the ranks of the homeless. The 2004/2005 Homeless Assessment identified 765 homeless
women who had experienced domestic violence (nearly two out of three homeless women).
Mental health disabilities were also found to be prevalent among Riverside’s homeless, as well
as persons with substance abuse disorders. The percentage of homeless men who reported to
be Veterans was just about 25 percent. A number of resources are available to assist a number
of special-needs homeless populations, and this section identifies each sub-population and
makes note of such funding.



In general, a person is considered homeless if, without HUD assistance, he or she would have
to spend the night in a homeless shelter or in a place not meant for human habitation. More
specifically, an individual is considered homeless if he or she is:
• sleeping in an emergency shelter;
• sleeping in places not meant for human habitation, such as cars, parks, sidewalks, or
  abandoned or condemned buildings;
• spending a short time (30 consecutive days or less) in a hospital or other institution, but
  ordinarily sleeping in the types of places mentioned above;


142USC11302


Section 2: Homelessness and Special-Needs Homeless Populations                                  7
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• living in transitional/supportive housing but having come from streets or emergency
    shelters;
• being evicted within a week from a private dwelling unit and having no subsequent
    residence identified and lacking the resources and support networks needed to obtain
    access to housing; or
• being discharged from an institution and having no subsequent residence identified and
    lacking the resources and support networks needed to obtain access to housing.

This definition excludes persons who are incarcerated or who may otherwise be eligible for
housing as part of a State-mandated program in which discharge from a public institution
includes access to a housing resource.

In addition, the definition includes an income test limiting eligibility to persons and families
below 50 percent AMI. To encourage homeless persons to obtain the supports needed to re-
enter the workforce, the statues allow participation in Workforce Investment Act programs
regardless of income.



Victims of Domestic Violence are in need of emergency housing services in a safe and secure
environment. Beyond the need for immediate safety, persons in such circumstances (and their
families) are often in need of assistance to settle in a new community. As homelessness caused
by domestic violence has both a circumstantial component and a more long-term component
(such abuse is frequently associated with substance abuse disorders), each household needs
to be assessed according to its unique circumstances. In some instances a prolonged period
of “recovery” from abuse may be required to re-acclimate the individual or family to a more
normative domestic situation. This may be particularly true of youth who feel the need to flee
an abuser. In some cases, however, the individual or family may be sufficiently resilient to re-
enter the housing market with only limited services and financial support.

Among the resources available to assist households made homeless because of domestic
violence is the:

• Transitional Housing Assistance Grants Program: This discretionary grant program
  provides transitional housing, short-term housing assistance, and related support services
  for individuals who are homeless, or in need of transitional housing or other housing


8                                                 Section 2: Homelessness and Special-Needs Homeless Populations
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




   assistance, as a result of fleeing a situation of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual
   assault, or stalking, and for whom emergency shelter services or other crisis intervention
   services are unavailable or insufficient. Support services should be designed to enable an
   individual fleeing domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking to locate
   and secure permanent housing and to integrate into a community. Such services may
   include transportation, counseling, child care services, case management, employment
   counseling, and other services. Eligible applicants are states, units of local government,
   Indian tribal governments, and other organizations, including domestic violence and sexual
   assault victim services providers, domestic violence or sexual assault coalitions, other
   nonprofit, nongovernmental organizations, or community-based and culturally specific
   organizations that have a documented history of effective work concerning domestic
   violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking.

Other DOJ resources that may be combined with a program of outreach and assistance to
homeless persons who may be victims of domestic violence are:

• STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grant Program: STOP grants are awarded to
  states to develop and strengthen the criminal justice system’s response to violence against
  women and to support and enhance services for victims. Each state and territory must
  allocate 25 percent of the grant funds to law enforcement, 25 percent to prosecution,
  five percent to courts, and 30 percent to victim services. The remaining 15 percent is
   discretionary within the parameters of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). These
   grant funds may be used for victims with emergency services, but they are not primarily
   intended as a long-term resource for assistance.
• Safe Havens: This discretionary grant program assists units of local governments to create
  safe places for visitation with and exchange of children in cases of domestic violence, child
  abuse, sexual assault, or stalking. These funds may be used to fund the following activities:
   o Establishment or expansion of supervised visitation and exchange services;
   o Development of community-based advisory committees to plan and/or implement
     visitation and exchange of services;
   o Development and implementation of policies and procedures regarding security, intake,
     case referral, record keeping, and confidentiality;




Section 2: Homelessness and Special-Needs Homeless Populations                                   9
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




     o Enhancement of program services to address special needs of the target population (e.g.,
       therapeutic services, directed visitation services, parent education groups); and
     o Development and implementation of effective training for project staff and volunteers.



It has long been known that a large percentage of the homeless population suffers from
serious mental health disorders. In Riverside County, over 50 percent of all homeless
individuals reported symptoms of mental illness. The development of a range of housing
types to assist persons with mental illness has recently been furthered by the passage of the
Mental Health Services Act. This Act amended the State Constitution to provide a new
stable resource that may be used to provide direct services and even housing for persons
with serious mental health disorders, particularly those experiencing homelessness or who
may be at risk. A number of other resources are available to assist homeless persons with
mental illnesses, including federal grants from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Administration (SAMHSA), a Division within the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services. A summary of the various resources that may be used to assist this special-needs
population can be found in the Appendix to this report.



It is all too common that homeless persons with serious mental health disorders will
frequently “self-medicate” with illegal narcotics or alcohol. The population of homeless
persons with substance abuse disorders certainly extends beyond those with co-occurring
mental illnesses, but those with multiple diagnoses have been found to be particularly difficult
to serve and are thereby significantly over-represented among the chronically homeless
population. Chronic homelessness commonly means that a person has been living literally on
the streets, in emergency shelters, or in other places not meant for human habitation for over
a year, or has had three episodes of such homelessness in the past four years. The resources
available to assist persons with substance abuse disorders (with or without co-occurring
mental-illness or other disabilities) can be found in the Appendix to this report.

It should be noted that one reason that persons with co-occurring disorders remain on the
streets for prolonged periods is that most programs have been developed to exclude or
dismiss persons who may use drugs or alcohol. Such “zero-tolerance” programs necessarily



10                                                 Section 2: Homelessness and Special-Needs Homeless Populations
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




routinely result in poor outcomes as they expect a state of health and stability prior to a state
of recovery and convalescence. This is not to condone the use of contra-indicated substances
(especially illegal narcotics). Rather, the intent here is to point to a very real dilemma that is
not easily resolved among program operators.

Over the past decade a body of literature has been developed, written mostly by
psychiatrists, who have grappled with the many challenges of treating persons with co-
occurring mental illnesses and substance abuse disorders. As yet no consensus has been
established within the psychiatric community, but a number of key lessons have been learned.



Homeless persons living with HIV/AIDS (PWAs) present a unique challenge as they are in
need of ongoing medical attention or risk poor medical outcomes (including fatality) and
otherwise costly hospitalizations. There is a pressing need to see that PWAs access affordable
housing to minimize the further transmission of HIV and to see that proper medical attention
is made available.

The Riverside County Department of Public Health reported 541 PWAs in its 2005
Communicable Disease Report.2 Fortunately, since 1993, the AIDS rate in Riverside County
has gradually declined, but it is still marginally higher than California’s rate. Treatment
advances have resulted in dramatic reductions in fatalities and in more people living longer
with HIV. These improvements in healthcare both escalate the need to prevent transmission
with proper risk reduction methods, as well as to attend to the non-chronic needs of this
population (including that part that is homeless). A number of specialized resources are
available for the medical care and supportive social service needs of PWAs, including Ryan
White Care Act funds. HUD has a specialized program for PWAs known as the Housing
Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program. This is an important resource
to assist this special-needs population to gain access to housing and supportive services.
HOPWA funds may be used for the development of specialized shelters, transitional housing,
and permanent supportive housing. A complete summary of the program appears in the
Appendix.


2 Riverside County Department of Public Health, 2005 Communicable Disease Report, available online:
www.rivcohealthdata.org/downloads/reports/CommDisease/cdr_05.pdf




Section 2: Homelessness and Special-Needs Homeless Populations                                        11
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Unlike a mental illness or substance abuse addiction, being a veteran is not a barrier to
housing. Rather, military service represents a period of service in one’s life. Unfortunately,
such service is often a double-edged sword (sic). The vast majority of persons who serve in
the armed forces emerge from the experience with a life experience that helps to prepare
them for success in civilian occupations. A small number of veterans, however, fail to
become sufficiently re-socialized to the norms of everyday life. There was a time when it
was almost commonplace to consider homeless veterans to be Viet Nam era servicemen and
servicewomen, but today the population is increasingly composed of persons returning from
more recent active military duty. While it is unlikely that there may be something inherent
in the experience of military service that may result in homelessness, what is clear is that
a number of homeless assistance programs are specialized to address issues confronted by
veterans. Whether or not veterans-specific programs show better outcomes than general
programs to assist homeless populations is a matter that has not been resolved. However,
what is certain is that veterans with honorable discharges are able to access a range of
services that are otherwise unavailable to non-veterans or those with less than honorable
discharges



The State of California acknowledges Transitional Age Youth (TAY) to be those between
the ages of 14 and 24. This age-group is eligible for a broad range of mainstream supportive
social services and resources, but a number of programs have been developed specifically to
address the needs of youth, particularly those exiting Foster Care. The 2004/2005 Homeless
Assessment found that roughly one in 10 homeless adults stated that they had first become
homeless upon discharge from the Foster Care program, thus making it important to
attend to the needs of this population to mitigate the needs of addressing its (likely more
pronounced) needs in years to come. Unlike other special-needs populations, TAY may never
have known a stable home environment, thereby exacerbating the challenges of bringing this
population into a normative housing environment. As with any population, TAY requires the
following life goals:




12                                                Section 2: Homelessness and Special-Needs Homeless Populations
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• A stable housing environment (which is affordable and safe)
• Education
• Employment
• Social Skills and Life Skills
• Health Care

When complicated by mental health disorders or substance abuse addictions, or both, TAY
will frequently find the road to social stability to be particularly challenging.

Unique resources are available to assist TAY either avoid homelessness or become more stable
following homelessness. As this represents a generally small sub-population in Riverside
County (only 18 persons included in the Homeless Survey), no additional special attention
has been given to the resources available to assist this population.



Over the past five years, HUD has paid increasing attention to chronically homeless
populations. Chronic homelessness refers to those populations that remain unsheltered for
considerable periods of time, typically as a result of pathological behaviors. This contrasts
with episodic homelessness which may be caused by an emergent situation, like the loss of a
job, divorce, or domestic violence. While HUD homeless resources may be used to assist any
population that meets the basic definition above, some resources are targeted to chronically
homeless populations.

A chronically homeless person is essentially one that has been outside the traditional
homeless services delivery system as well as the mainstream system of care for long periods of
time. The official definition of a chronically homeless person is as follows:




3 The definition of chronic homelessness has not been issued as a formal Notice by HUD. Rather the
definition was first published in a Notice of Funding Availability for the Collaborative Initiative to
Help End Chronic Homelessness/Federal Register, Vol. 68, No. 17/Monday, January 27, 2003, 4019.
This definition is shared by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the U.S. De-
partment of Health and Human Services, and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.




Section 2: Homelessness and Special-Needs Homeless Populations                                     13
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




         An unaccompanied homeless individual with a disabling condition who has
         either been continuously homeless for a year or more OR has had at least
         four (4) episodes of homelessness in the past three (3) years. A disabling
         condition is defined as ‘a diagnosable substance use disorder, serious mental
         illness, developmental disability, or chronic physical illness or disability,
         including the co-occurrence of two or more of these conditions.’ In defining
         the chronically homeless, the term ‘homeless’ means ‘a person sleeping in a
         place not meant for human habitation (e.g., living on the streets) or in an
         emergency homeless shelter.’

There are a number of key elements to this definition that are important to note. First, a
chronically homeless person is a single (adult) person with a disability, not a family-member.
Second, to be considered “chronic,” the homeless person has been either on the streets or
in emergency shelters. This is a much narrower definition of homelessness than HUD typically uses as it
disqualifies any persons leaving either institutional settings or a transitional housing program. Homeless persons
graduating from a transitional housing program are eligible for services, but they are intentionally excluded
from projects targeted to chronically homeless persons. This restriction tacitly endorses a “housing first”
model.




14                                                         Section 2: Homelessness and Special-Needs Homeless Populations
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                                                              3
                                                                            SECTION




T    here are a number of fundamental steps required to develop affordable housing for
     low-income households, particularly homeless ones. In particular, an appropriate site
must be identified and acquired, then plans must be developed and financing obtained prior
to construction. This section describes many of the key critical elements of the development
process.



A survey of available properties will guide possible site selections, based on the size and
configuration of the lot and existing structures, community resources, and local need.
Family housing rightfully should be close to schools and generally lenders will require that
community amenities—schools, parks, recreation facilities, libraries—are available to make
the units more “marketable.” Access to transportation is another important consideration
(particularly for working residents), and the availability of hospitals and clinics is also a
significant factor that needs to be considered relative to site selection. Low-income working
families also need a range of alternatives for their shopping needs.

Identification of community plan areas and residential or mixed-use zones is an approach
to narrowing site options. Often nonprofit developers will consider parcels that are non-
conforming because suitably zoned sites have been used by for-profit developers. They look
to key decision-makers to assist them in obtaining zone changes, plan amendments, and
Conditional Use Permits so that a site may be used.

Preliminary meetings with community members will provide information about the need for
affordable housing, community perceptions, and potential issues in the zoning process.




Section 3: The Development Process                                                          15
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Once a suitable site has been identified, a developer will determine the general scale of the
project: the size, number, and type of units, number of parking spaces, provision of open
space and other on-site amenities. The developer will make a contingent offer based on
knowledge of the market for land, and a preliminary financial analysis based on the expected
densities and cost of construction. Generally nonprofit developers put very little money
down to secure a property during an investigative period. The Purchase and Sale Agreement
will specify a period for initial financing and feasibility studies, after which the deposit is
increased and becomes “hard” or irrevocable.

The first stage of the escrow process involves due diligence in reviewing documents provided
by the seller; review of title issues; obtaining an appraisal; a Phase 1 toxic study and follow-
up, if required; development of architectural concepts; application for predevelopment
financing; and verifying the availability of local funds from redevelopment, HOME, CDBG
or other sources. Operating subsidies through Section 8 and grants or other sources of funds
are also investigated.

Among the common contingencies included in purchase offers for sites to be used as
affordable housing are site contamination, finance, relocation cost contingency, structural
considerations, title, and appraisal. Once feasibility has been confirmed, the property may be
purchased or escrow extended until sufficient financing has been obtained.



Finance, planning approval and design proceed simultaneously through the predevelopment
period. The scope of the project is verified through design development and preliminary cost
analysis. Numbers are refined as the resources available to the project are identified: rental
subsidies, city or county monies from redevelopment, HOME, CDBG or general fund; state
bond funds; bank loans, federal Low Income Housing Tax credits, and funds available for
social services.

Design features are worked out so that the number of units and unit type (bedroom count,
handicap etc) is finalized, and the height, yards and setbacks are defined. The planning
process is initiated with the Initial Study of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and review of the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA).




16                                                                     Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The developer identifies a capable management agent and social service provider (unless
they provide these services with its own staff) and integrates their perspectives on the
development. The developer may also hold public meetings to solicit local opinion on the
design and the project. City agencies and other funding sources may also require a review
of the architectural plans at various stages, from concept and schematic plans to design
development and construction documents.

The developer is responsible for ensuring that the project meets all of the requirements of
various lenders and investors. In addition, the developer ensures that the nonprofit goals of
the project are consistent with IRS regulations, and that project accounting will meet the test
of tax credit compliance (in the case of developments utilizing this key resource).

As the scope of the project is solidified, cost estimates are commissioned to determine the
construction cost of the project. Alternatively, the project may be bid out to contractors, or
negotiated, so that a more exact price is obtained before applying for low income housing
tax credits.

The developer hires the architectural firm and the general contractor, and is also responsible
for a number of other contracts: the management company, social service provider, lawyer,
financial consultant, title company, surveyor, soils engineer, cost estimator, appraiser,
historic consultant, planning consultant, and other professionals. The developer is also
responsible for making certain that sufficient cash is available and that work is billed
properly and paid promptly.



Once the architectural plans are developed, the process of selection of a general contractor
can begin. This may be done through a competitive bid process, or through a negotiated bid.
The developer makes sure that the bid corresponds with the work shown on the architectural
plans, and that the contract is sound. Requirements of lenders and tax credit investors
often must be incorporated in the construction contract, in addition to prevailing wage
requirements.




Section 3: The Development Process                                                            17
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Because most low-income housing developments involve financing using the Low Income
Housing Tax Credit program (among other sources) it is important to consider its impact
on the development process. To utilize tax credits, the developer needs to successfully
negotiate with a tax credit investor/partner based on a number of factors: the amount the
investor will pay for tax credit equity, the schedule of the pay-in, fees for ongoing partnership
management, terms of repurchase at the end of the 15-year tax credit compliance, and other
factors. The developer needs to provide the investor with extensive information regarding
the project and the organization to meet their underwriting process.

The developer is responsible for obtaining financing from local sources and the state. These
agencies require review of the partnership documents, and the developer coordinates the
reconciliation of different lenders’ requirements with the tax credit investors’. In addition,
many projects require construction financing from a private bank to bridge tax credit equity
which is not available until units are occupied.



The developer works with the architect to ensure that the building is constructed in
accordance with the project documents. The developer monitors the contingency budget,
approves change orders and monitors the construction schedule. He/she tracks conditional
lien releases and makes sure that pay draws are correct and correspond with the prevailing
wage provisions of the contract. The developer maintains a construction specialist or works
closely with the architect to ensure proper construction and resolution of issues raised by
inspectors. The developer signs off on pay draws.



Management staff initiates advertising for new units and schedules interviews several
months before the building is ready for occupancy. The developer provides furnishings and
equipment for management and lobbies and other common areas. As the general contractor
goes through final building inspections, the developer must coordinate connection of gas,
electric, telephone and internet services.




18                                                                     Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




On granting of the building’s Certificate of Occupancy and the achievement of a stated
occupancy level (usually 85 or 90 percent), construction loans are bought out by tax credit
equity and/or permanent financing and the developer receives a portion of their developer
fee. In this period the management and social service plans are tested, evaluated and
modified. The final role for the developer is to file the 8609 tax form, certified by a CPA,
which confirms that the project has been built according to the terms proposed in the tax
credit application.



The chart that follows identifies most of the key activities associated with the development of
affordable housing for homeless populations. The chart is divided into four broad categories:
I.     Planning and Design
II.    Finance and Legal
III.   Construction
IV.    Management, Asset Management, and Social Services

Within each of these categories a number of critical activities are identified with subtasks
further identified. Each task has been assigned an Activity Code. For example parking
considerations are identified as follows: I-K-6 (Planning and Design—Architect/ Schematic
Design—Parking. To the extent that a major activity depends upon a prior activity it
is identified in the column on the right of the chart labeled: Permanent, Transitional
Housing, and Emergency Shelter. For example, obtaining financial commitments from local
government sources is dependent upon the following specific tasks pertaining to site control
(I-C-3) having been completed:
• Appraisal (a)
• Studies (b)
• Phase I Toxics Analysis (d)
• Title Report (j)
• Plus other tasks.

Significant milestones are identified in bold red lettering.




Section 3: The Development Process                                                            19
20
                                                                   CRITICAL PATH ANALYSES BY HOUSING TYPE
                                                                                                                                              KEY DEPENDENCIES
                                     ACTIVITY CODE                                            TASK                                 PERM              TH        EMERG
                                     I   PLANNING & DESIGN
                                     I   A           IDENTIFICATION OF NEED
                                     I   A   1            Data Collection
                                     I   A   2            Market Analysis                                                                                         n/a
                                     I   A   3            Key-Informant Survey
                                     I   A   4            Other Data (Census, Surveys, etc.)
                                     I   B           SITE SELECTION
                                                           Brokers, Real Estate Agents, and/or Others
                                     I   B   1             Experienced in Sites Appropriate for Redevelopment
                                     I   B   2             Analysis of Zoning
                                     I   B   3             Field Research (Consideration of Scoring Relative to Funding Sources)                              less critical
                                     I   B                 Initial Feasibility Analysis
                                     I   B   4             Physical Needs Assessment (if Rehabilitation)
                                     I   B   5             Location and Transportation Analysis                                    critical        critical      critical
                                     I   C           SITE ACQUISITION
                                     I   C   1             Negotiation of Purchase and Sales Agreement
                                     I   C   2             Site Control - Open Escrow
                                     I   C   3             Satisfaction of Site-related Contingencies
                                     I   C   3   a             Appraisal
                                     I   C   3   b             Studies (Acoustics, Traffic, etc.)
                                     I   C   3   c             Utilities Will-Serve letter (if New Construction)
                                     I   C   3   d             Toxics Analysis-Phase 1
                                     I   C   3   e             Toxics Analysis-Phase 2 if Required
                                     I   C   3   f             Mitigation Plan if Required by Phase 2
                                     I   C   3   g             CEQA/NEPA Review
                                     I   C   3   h             Lead & Asbestos report
                                     I   C   3   i             Geotechnical Analysis
                                     I   C   3   j             Title Report
                                     I   C   3   k             Chain of Title
                                     I   C   3   l             Relocation Plan (if Occupied Property)
                                     I   C   3   m             ALTA Survey
                                     I   C   3   n             Market Study                                                                                       n/a




Section 3: The Development Process
                                                                                                                                                                              DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
                                                           CRITICAL PATH ANALYSES BY HOUSING TYPE (CONT’D)
                                                                                                                                                 KEY DEPENDENCIES
                                     ACTIVITY CODE                                         TASK                                        PERM                TH          EMERG
                                     I   PLANNING & DESIGN (Continued)
                                     I   D   4        ACQUISITION CLOSING                                                          I-C, II-A, II-B   I-C, II-A, II-B   I-C,II-B3
                                     I   E            SELECTION OF DEVELOPER AND SPONSOR
                                                           Development of RFP or RFQ
                                                           Criteria for Selection




Section 3: The Development Process
                                                           Evaluation of Proposals
                                     I   F            IDENTIFICATION OF COUNTY AND CITY STAFF RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTATION
                                     I   F   1             Coordination Meeting
                                     I   F   2             Identification of Resources and Tasks
                                     I   G            COMMUNITY SUPPORT
                                     I   H            SELECTION OF ARCHITECT AND ENGINEERS
                                     I   H   1             Interviews/Discussion of Concept, Process, Fee, Staffing and Capacity
                                     I   H   2             Negotiate Contract
                                     I   H   3             Establish Design Timeline
                                     I   I            SITE PLAN
                                     I   I   1              Design Concept
                                     I   I   2              Site Capacity Analysis
                                     I   J            PLANNING ENTITLEMENTS
                                     I   J   1             Zone Change if Necessary
                                     I   J   2             Plan Amendment if Necessary
                                     I   J   3             Density Bonus
                                     I   J   4             Conditional Use Permit if Necessary
                                     I   K            ARCHITECT-SCHEMATIC DESIGN
                                     I   K   1            General Design
                                     I   K   2            Building Envelope
                                     I   K   3            Number of Units
                                     I   K   4            Configuration of Units
                                     I   K   5            Other Amenities
                                     I   K   6            Parking
                                     I   K   7            Identification of Planning Issues
                                     I   K   8            Open Space, Height Restrictions, etc.




21
                                                                                                                                                                                   DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
22
                                                           CRITICAL PATH ANALYSES BY HOUSING TYPE (CONT’D)
                                                                                                                                                   KEY DEPENDENCIES
                                     ACTIVITY CODE                                        TASK                                       PERM                   TH            EMERG
                                     I   PLANNING & DESIGN (Continued)
                                     I   L            ARCHITECT-DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
                                     I   L   1            Unit Plans                                                                                                    Key issue is
                                                                                                                                                                       mass shelter v.
                                                                                                                                                                        private units
                                     I   L   2             Refine Concepts and Relationships of Building Features
                                     I   L   3             Input from City, Developer, Management Agency, Community, etc.
                                     I   M            ARCHITECT-CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
                                     I   M   1            Create Drawings Suitable for Bidding & Plan Check Approval
                                     I   M   2                Grading Plan
                                     I   M   3                Mechanical Plumbing
                                     I   M   4                Mechanical HVAC
                                     I   M   5                Structural
                                     I   M   6                Electrical
                                     I   M   7                Disabled Access Features Articulated
                                     I   M   8                Demolition Plan (if Necessary)
                                     I   M   9                Specifications (Finishes)
                                     I   N            ARCHITECT-BID SET/PLAN CHECK
                                     I   O            PLAN CHECK
                                     I   O   1             Submit to plan check
                                     I   O   2             Review period
                                     I   O   3             Plan corrections and response to plan-check comments
                                     I   O   4             Obtain Planning Approval                                               I-I, I-K, I-N,      I-I, I-K, I-N,    I-I, I-K, I-N,
                                                                                                                                     I-O, I-P            I-O, I-P          I-O, I-P
                                     I   P            PREVAILING WAGE DETERMINATION
                                     I   Q            SELECTION OF GENERAL CONTRACTOR THROUGH BID PROCESS OR NEGOTIATION OF BID
                                     I   Q   1             Identify Bidders
                                     I   Q   2             Prequalification’s
                                     I   Q   3             Bidders' Meeting
                                     I   Q   4             Issue Plans for Bidders
                                     I   Q   5             Respond to Questions Through Bid Process




Section 3: The Development Process
                                                                                                                                                                                         DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
                                                         CRITICAL PATH ANALYSES BY HOUSING TYPE (CONT’D)
                                                                                                                    KEY DEPENDENCIES
                                     ACTIVITY CODE                                      TASK                 PERM           TH          EMERG
                                     I   PLANNING & DESIGN (Continued)
                                     I   Q   6            Award of Contract
                                     I   Q   7            Compliance Review of Contracting Process and Bid
                                     I   Q   8            Negotiation of Terms of Contract
                                     I   Q   9            Sign Contract
                                     I   Q   10           Bonding Requirements




Section 3: The Development Process
                                     I   Q   11           Compliance
                                     I   Q   12            Section 3, Prevailing Wages
                                     I   Q   13            Bonding
                                     I   Q   14            Insurance
                                     I   Q   15           Pull Building Permit                                       I & II COMPLETED




23
                                                                                                                                                DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
24
                                                             CRITICAL PATH ANALYSES BY HOUSING TYPE (CONT’D)
                                                                                                                                                    KEY DEPENDENCIES
                                     ACTIVITY CODE                                           TASK                                       PERM                   TH             EMERG
                                     II   FINANCE & LEGAL
                                     II   A            PROJECT FINANCES NEEDED
                                     II   A   1             Pre-Development Financing
                                     II   A   2             Acquisition Financing
                                     II   A   3             Construction Financing
                                     II   A   4             Permanent Financing
                                     II   B            FINANCE-LOCAL JURISDICTION(S)
                                     II   B   1             Develop Finance Plan / Underwriting
                                     II   B   2             Submit Applications for Permanent Financing
                                     II   B   2   a            Local Government Resources
                                     II   B   2   b            Redevelopment Funds
                                     II   B   2   c            CDBG Funds
                                     II   B   2   d            HOME Funds
                                     II   B   2   e            Other Local Funds                                                                                                critical
                                     II   B   3             Obtain Local Government Finance Commitments                                 I-C-3                I-C-3               I-C-3
                                                                                                                                     (a-h, j,l,m)         (a-h, j,l,m)        (a-h, j,l,m)
                                     II   B   4              Obtain Commitments of Operating Subsidies
                                     II   B   5              Submit Applications for Construction Financing (private financing)                                                  n/a
                                     II   B   6              Obtain Commitments of Construction Financing & 1st Trust Deed                                                       n/a
                                     II   B   7              Submit Applications for Supportive Social Services
                                     II   B   8              Obtain Commitments of Supportive Social Services                         IV-G-1-2             IV-G-1-2
                                     II   C            FINANCE-NON-LOCAL SOURCES
                                     II   C                 Submit Applications for Non-Local Permanent Sources
                                     II   C   1                Federal Resources
                                     II   C   2                State Resources (LIHTC and/or MHP)                                                                             EHAP-CD
                                     II   C   3             Obtain Commitments of Non-Local Permanent Sources                        I-C,I-E,I-I,I-J,    I-C,I-E,I-I,I-J,
                                                                                                                                    I-K,K-L,I-M,I-Q, I-K,K-L,I-M,I-Q,
                                                                                                                                  I-R,II-B,II-B (4,8), I-R,II-B,II-B (4,8),
                                                                                                                                   IV-C3,IV-D(1-3), IV-C3,IV-D(1-3),
                                                                                                                                      IV-G2,IV-G4         IV-G2,IV-G4
                                     II   D            Organization
                                     II   D   1              Create Limited Partnership                                                                                          n/a
                                     II   D   2              Create CHDO                                                                                                         n/a




Section 3: The Development Process
                                                                                                                                                                                             DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                     II   D   3              Other Organizational Matters                                                                                        n/a
                                                         CRITICAL PATH ANALYSES BY HOUSING TYPE (CONT’D)
                                                                                                                                                        KEY DEPENDENCIES
                                     ACTIVITY CODE                                            TASK                                               PERM         TH       EMERG
                                     II   FINANCE & LEGAL (Continued)
                                     II   E            IDENTIFY TAX CREDIT INVESTORS
                                     II   E   1             Compare Rates                                                                                                  n/a
                                     II   E   2             Terms                                                                                                          n/a
                                     II   E   3             Exit Strategy at the End of Initial Compliance                                                                 n/a




Section 3: The Development Process
                                     II   F            NEGOTIATE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT WITH LIMITED PARTNERS
                                                       (TAX CREDIT INVESTORS)
                                     II   F   1              Pay-in for Tax Credit                                                                                         n/a
                                     II   F   2              Terms of Partnership Agreement                                                                                n/a
                                     II   F   3              Schedule for Construction and Delivery of Credits                                                             n/a
                                     II   F   4              Schedule of Pay-ins: Purchase, Construction, Developer Fees and Completion (8609)                             n/a
                                     II   F   5              Ongoing partnership management                                                                                n/a
                                     II   G            CLOSE CONSTRUCTION LOANS / TAX CREDIT EQUITY
                                     II   G   1             Negotiate Loan Agreements
                                     II   G   2             Negotiate Partnership Agreement                                                                                n/a
                                     II   G   3             Probable Maximum Loss Study                                                                                    n/a
                                     II   G   4             Update of Documentation




25
                                                                                                                                                                                 DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
26
                                                        CRITICAL PATH ANALYSES BY HOUSING TYPE (CONT’D)
                                                                                                                  KEY DEPENDENCIES
                                     ACTIVITY CODE                                        TASK             PERM         TH       EMERG
                                     III CONSTRUCTION
                                     III   A          RECORDED NOTICE TO PROCEED / GROUNDBREAKING
                                     III   A   1          Notice to Proceed
                                     III   A   2          Groundbreaking Ceremony (Optional)
                                     III   B          ARCHITECT-CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
                                     III   C          DEVELOPER-CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
                                     III   D          CONSTRUCTION
                                     III   D   1          Environmental Mitigation
                                     III   D   2          Demolition
                                     III   D   3          Grading and Excavation
                                     III   D   4-20       All Other Trades
                                     III   D   21         Final Inspections
                                     III   E          FIXTURES, FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT
                                     III   F          UTILITY INSTALLATION AND CONNECTION
                                     III   G          INSPECTIONS AND BUILDING PERMIT SIGNOFF
                                     III   H          CLOSE-OUT
                                     III   H   1           Temporary Certificate of Occupancy
                                     III   H   2           Building Permit Signoff
                                     III   H   3           Notice of Completion
                                     III   H   4           Final Inspection for Certificate of Occupancy
                                     III   H   5           Warrantees to Owner




Section 3: The Development Process
                                                                                                                                         DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
                                                         CRITICAL PATH ANALYSES BY HOUSING TYPE (CONT’D)
                                                                                                                           KEY DEPENDENCIES
                                     ACTIVITY CODE                                         TASK                     PERM         TH       EMERG
                                     IV MANAGEMENT, ASSET MANAGEMENT & SOCIAL SERVICES
                                     IV   A           ASSET MANAGEMENT
                                     IV   A   1            Accounting
                                     IV   A   2            Insurance
                                     IV   A       a           General Liability Insurance
                                     IV   A       b           Coverage During Course of Construction




Section 3: The Development Process
                                     IV   A   3            Real Estate Taxes
                                     IV   A       a            Tax Abatement
                                     IV   B           COMPLIANCE
                                     IV   B   1           Preparation and Submission of Annual Reports to Lenders
                                     IV   B   2           Tenant/Resident Verifications
                                     IV   C           CONTRACTING FOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES
                                     IV   C   1           Selection Criteria
                                     IV   C   2           Interview Firms & Make Selection
                                     IV   C   3           Negotiate Contract
                                     IV   D           MARKETING AND LEASING
                                     IV   D   1           Marketing Plan                                                                      n/a
                                     IV   D   2           Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan                                             n/a
                                     IV   D   3           Lease-Up Schedule                                                                   n/a
                                     IV   D   4           Advertising and Interviews for Tenants                                              n/a
                                     IV   D   5           Tenant Certifications                                                               n/a
                                     IV   D   6           Unit Inspections (PHA)                                                              n/a
                                     IV   D   7           Tenant Move-In                                                                      n/a
                                     IV   D   8           Rent up to 90% occupancy                                                            n/a
                                     IV   E           AUDIT AND ACCOUNTING
                                     IV   E   1            Project Accounting
                                     IV   E   2            Construction Cost Certifications
                                     IV   E   3            Annual Audit and Preparation of Partnership Tax Return                             n/a
                                     IV   E   4            Filing of 8609 Tax Forms                                                           n/a




27
                                                                                                                                                    DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
28
                                                        CRITICAL PATH ANALYSES BY HOUSING TYPE (CONT’D)
                                                                                                                         KEY DEPENDENCIES
                                     ACTIVITY CODE                                       TASK                     PERM         TH       EMERG
                                     IV MANAGEMENT, ASSET MANAGEMENT & SOCIAL SERVICES (Continued)
                                     IV   F           PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
                                     IV   F   1           Up-keep, Maintenance, and Tracking of Warranted Items
                                     IV   F   2           Rent Collection                                                                   n/a
                                     IV   F   3           Notices to Tenants
                                     IV   F   4           Local Government Coordination
                                     IV   G           SUPPORTIVE SOCIAL SERVICES
                                     IV   G   1           Needs Assessment Based on Resident Population
                                     IV   G   2           Program Development / Program Planning
                                     IV   G   2   a          Tenant Engagement Strategies
                                     IV   G   2   b          Intakes
                                     IV   G   2   c          Assessments
                                     IV   G   2   d          Service Planning
                                     IV   G   2   e          Information and Referral
                                     IV   G   2   f          Direct Services
                                     IV   G   2   g          Tracking & Follow-Up
                                     IV   G   3           Applications for Funding
                                     IV   G   4           Approval of Funding Request
                                     IV   G   5           Staffing
                                     IV   G   5   a          Recruitment, Hiring, and Background Checks
                                     IV   G   5   b          Staff Training and Development
                                     IV   G   5   c           Staff Evaluations and Monitoring
                                     IV   G   5   d          Program Evaluation
                                     IV   G   6           Coordination with Property Management Staff
                                     IV   G   7           Program Administration
                                     IV   G   7   a          Insurance
                                     IV   G   7   b          Accounting
                                     IV   G   7   c          Reporting




Section 3: The Development Process
                                                                                                                                                  DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The development of housing for homeless persons over the past few decades has tended to
follow a rather predicable set of configurations. With respect to unit configurations, the key
design consideration is whether to develop private units or group quarters. This is particularly
true of emergency shelters and transitional housing facilities as shared permanent housing
developments have not been especially common.

The majority of emergency shelters have been built as congregate, barracks-style housing.
A large number of such shelters have involved the reconfiguration of warehouses or the
adaptive reuse of commercial buildings. Only a handful of emergency shelters have been
built with private accommodations in Southern California the most notable is the single room
occupancy units used as emergency shelter by SRO Housing Corporation in the Skid Row
section of Los Angeles.

There is a substantive difference in providing truly private accommodations to persons
with separately keyed entries. To hand a key to a person who has previously been homeless
confers a measure of confidence and dignity to him that is rare among homeless service
providers. Placing homeless persons in open environments perpetuates the fundamentally
public life of being without normative housing. Such open, public spaces frequently work
against the therapeutic goal of recovery from homelessness in that they fail to re-establish a
normative balance between the public and private spheres. Having noted this, the primary
reasons that open mass shelters have been used are: 1) that they allow easy surveillance and
supervision, and 2) that they are inexpensive to design and develop in contrast with private
accommodations.

It may be advisable for any new emergency shelters to allow for a combination of public and
private spaces so that the unique needs of certain special-needs populations may be properly
accommodated while realizing some of the cost savings of mass shelters. Such a design would
mean that a certain number of private or semi-private units would be developed to be used by
persons with serious disabilities or medical conditions that may benefit from added privacy.
Among the populations with special needs that seem most appropriate for such private units
would be those with communicable diseases and those whose untreated mental health and/
or substance abuse disorders that may disrupt day-to-day shelter operations. Bathrooms in
emergency shelters have almost always been designed for shared-use. Dining facilities have
also been shared with meal services being incorporated in the program operations.


Section 3: The Development Process                                                           29
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The intent of transitional housing, whether for individuals or families, is to establish a safe
and secure therapeutic environment where stability may be attained and the process of
reintegration into the social mainstream may be achieved. Transitional housing has been
developed in a broad range of configurations, in part because such programs have been
developed to serve each homeless sub-population. As a general rule, transitional housing
facilities have been developed with greater attention to creating privacy than is found in
emergency shelters. Many transitional housing developments allow for private sleeping units
(either for individuals or shared by a single family) or have one-half or three-quarter walls
and/or partitions to create semi-private living areas in otherwise open spaces. Partitioned
accommodations are more frequently found among programs designed for special needs
populations, particularly those with serious mental health disorders.

Transitional housing programs for individuals typically include common bathroom and
dining facilities. This configuration has been less common for families as the configuration
can be problematical, compelling families to sacrifice their unique identities when placed
in institutional settings. Showing greater sensitivity to the need to preserve family identity
and integrity as a source of resiliency, over the past decade a number of family providers
have increasingly placed homeless families in standard apartment units. Apartment units for
homeless families have increasingly been leased in the open market with rental assistance
provided by a non-profit organization or a PHA. Families participating in such “housing
first” programs typically receive a range of supportive services (usually off-site) to stabilize
households over a set interval (generally capped at 24-months). Alternatively, families have
been housed in unique shelter environments where they reside for prescribed periods. In
such settings, supportive social services are generally made available on-site--with ancillary
services accessed on a referral basis off-site.

Permanent housing and permanent supportive housing for formerly homeless persons has
typically followed traditional arrangements found in rental housing developments. Supportive
housing is distinguished from standard housing in that it is developed to serve a special-needs
population and the management plan includes the availability and integration of supportive
social services. Not all persons leaving homelessness may need (or may be interested in
obtaining) social services, thus there is a need to develop permanent rental units that are
affordable to extremely low-income persons (whether disabled or not). The vast majority
of affordable rental housing developed over the past two decades (i.e. since the advent of


30                                                                      Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit) has been for households at 50 percent and 60 percent
AMI. These housing resources have assisted a large number of low-income households
achieve social and economic stability. They have not, however, been especially relevant to
the life-experiences of persons emerging from homelessness because their extreme poverty
keeps even these units out of reach. In order to be relevant to homeless persons, there needs
to be some form of rental assistance made available so that persons and households below 30
percent AMI may gain access. A discussion of the role of rental assistance in making housing
affordable to homeless persons can be found in a section of this report titled: Rental Assistance
and the Difference it Makes.

Permanent housing for homeless individuals (whether supportive housing for disabled
persons or units for a general population) has typically meant the development of modest
private units, either efficiency units or single room occupancy. “Single room occupancy”
means a small unit (usually between 160 and 500 S.F.) with or without either a private bath
or kitchen (but not both). An efficiency unit includes both a private bathroom (often ¾
bath) and kitchenette. Single room occupancy is generally inexpensive to develop because
of the simplicity of the units and the limited number of bathrooms and kitchens. These
accommodations are usually developed from late 19th or early 20th century masonry
hotels in most older urban downtowns (especially concentrated near old rail depots), or
they are reconfigured and modernized motels. Because they tend to use existing structures,
the redevelopment potential may be limited by the original building configuration. The
advantage of using motels is that they provide superior units with baths included and
the rehabilitation process often tends to remove an existing blight in a neighborhood. A
disadvantage of motels, however, has been that their original construction has often been
found to be sub-standard, thereby necessitating extensive rehabilitation (with limited
marginal benefit) compared with new construction.

Two overarching considerations that impact the development of any housing for homeless
populations are: a) locational amenities, and b) on-site amenities. Location matters in any
development endeavor, and this is no less true in homeless housing. One cannot presume that
merely because a new resource has been developed, homeless persons will necessarily avail
themselves of it. A resource needs to be delivered in a manner that is inviting, meaningful,
and accessible. In a dispersed county such as Riverside, transportation from one point
to another will remain an ongoing challenge, and this becomes a substantive barrier for


Section 3: The Development Process                                                              31
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




homeless populations. A strategy of disbursed housing and social services may ultimately
prove to be more effective in moving persons from homelessness to stable housing. This is
because a “one-stop” approach with a host of resources “co-located” that may either be remote
or otherwise be challenging to access (because of the costs of transportation). What may
matter the most to homeless persons (relative to locational amenities) may be access to jobs
and appropriate supportive social services, such as benefits, health, and mental health services.

The other critical factor that needs to be seriously considered in the development of
homeless housing is the amenities to be made available on site. On-site amenities may
include physical features, like a laundry, community room (with regular entertainment and
socialization activities), computers with internet access, case management offices, and other
design elements to improve the livability of the development. Other amenities may be more
therapeutically-based, like 12-Step recovery meetings, case management, socialization,
money management, and life-skills training programs. There is considerable debate among
homeless services practitioners as to the utility of on-site services. Some providers are of
the opinion that there is a therapeutic benefit to having services off-site so that homeless
persons more quickly learn how to re-acclimate into the social mainstream as they relearn
to negotiate the issues of everyday life, such as getting to appointments on time. Other
providers have held that a range of on-site services allows for a high level of supervision
that permits social work professionals to make adjustments in client action plans to achieve
positive results.




As Federal assistance to address homelessness increased in the late 1990s, advocates and
local officials were increasingly dismayed that the rapid expansion of transitional housing
programs and services did little (if anything) to reduce the prevalence of homelessness on the
streets of America’s cities. As these grants came up for renewal, it became ever more difficult
to convince existing transitional housing grantees of alternate strategies to help persons out
of homelessness. However, it became increasingly untenable to expect homeless persons to
“graduate” from transitional housing and access market-rate housing. The expansion of transitional
housing without a concomitant consideration of the permanent housing needs of persons leaving homelessness has
been the most glaring weakness in most community’s strategies to addressing homelessness.




32                                                                               Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Figure 3A depicts Riverside’s current inventory of homeless shelters and housing and contrasts
it with the model described within the 2006 Continuum of Care Plan submitted to HUD.
The figure shows the need for a modest increase in emergency shelter and an enormous
expansion of permanent housing resources. The Riverside continuum is not unlike most other
continua nationwide in terms of its constituent elements of housing resources. Most continua
have a modest supply of emergency shelter units, a large supply of transitional housing,
and hardly any permanent housing that is affordable, accessible, and managed so as to be a
relevant resource for chronically homeless persons.


                             Figure 3A: Riverside Continuum of Care Components
                                     Current Inventory vs. Future Model

                                                                                                1897
                           2000
         Number of Units




                           1500                                            1186                              Emergency
                                                                                         1120
                           1000                                                                              Transitional
                                         511                                                                 Permanent
                            500    237                      354                              354
                                               59     273         202   237       59
                              0
                                  Current Family        Current          Proposed         Proposed
                                                       Individual          Family         Individual


                                         Data for this chart was obtained from the 2006 Continuum of Care Plan


How much transitional housing does a community need? To answer this, one needs to
consider: 1) the availability of affordable permanent housing in a community in general and
2) the effectiveness of programs in preparing (formerly) homeless persons for independent
living. In a tight rental market with few affordable units, a program participant will be forced
to remain “transitionally” housed no matter how effective a program may be in preparing him
for permanent housing. Also not to be overlooked is that if a program graduates (say) 100
persons per year, then there need to be at least 50 or so units of permanent housing developed
each year just to keep pace with the demand for housing. This analysis assumes that there will
be turnover within the permanent units and that not all graduates of transitional housing will
seek independent living. This sketch is based on prior experience and is not an empirical study
of market demand for permanent and supportive housing, particularly for chronically homeless
populations.


Section 3: The Development Process                                                                                          33
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




To return to the question of how much transitional housing a community needs, the answer
may well be: as much as needed to fill the new units being developed to capacity and to not
keep a person in a transitional housing program any longer than is therapeutically necessary.
In practice, most communities have significantly over-developed transitional housing as the
planning work undertaken during the mid 1990s was suspect and (generally) communities did
not appreciate how critical it has been to develop a stock of affordable supportive housing to
address the problem of homelessness. Moreover, in most communities the goal has been to
“help” the homeless and ameliorate the problem, that is, to provide safe environments where
persons could obtain respite from the cold, hard streets. Today the mandate (at least from
HUD) seems to be far more ambitious, namely to end chronic homelessness. As this report
hopes to elucidate, the development of supportive housing is not for the faint of heart. It
involves addressing all of the regular challenges of affordable development, with the added
challenges of managing a property with at-risk tenants in need of rental assistance.

Whether or not one accepts as realistic the goal of ending chronic homelessness, this has
become the guiding principal by which future HUD funding for homeless assistance will
be allocated. To lose sight of HUD’s role in this means to risk funding and to become
irrelevant to the model of service-delivery that is under development nationwide. For
existing programs, this means that if they are not currently focused on chronically homeless
populations, they need to plan to do so in the future. The projects that will remain (with
some latitude given for other needs among homeless populations) will be those projects that
appropriately serve chronically homeless persons and that can demonstrate their efficacy
relative to the emerging service-delivery system. Some projects are categorically excluded
from this refocusing of HUD homeless assistance: programs for emancipating foster youth,
domestic violence shelters, etc. However, to the extent that a program already provides
assistance to homeless persons who are disabled by substance abuse or mental health
disorders, or that assists persons with developmental disabilities or with chronic health
conditions, these programs will need to begin to target more clearly their efforts upon
chronically homeless persons.

This effort towards systems change will create new opportunities, but seemingly in an
increasingly narrow arena: permanent housing (primarily for chronically homeless persons).
A number of social service agencies are increasingly becoming involved (either directly or




34                                                                   Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




indirectly) in permanent housing development or in the administration of rental assistance.
Some have created development departments and have hired staff to create new housing;
others have sought out Shelter Plus Care and other forms of rental assistance to assist
graduates in making the full transition from homelessness to stable housing. Perhaps the most
common route to involvement in permanent housing is by partnering with an experienced
housing developer who has been induced to serve chronically homeless persons by the
availability of supportive services (from the non-profit service provider) and rental assistance.

In the preceding discussion there are several references to “appropriate” services for
chronically homeless populations. Opinions among homeless providers differ on how best
to structure management and case management services, but increasingly it seems as though
the pendulum is swinging toward a “housing first” approach. Housing first tends to involve
providing high-tolerance, low-demand permanent housing resources for chronically homeless
persons, and to assist them with the social supports they may need to remain stably housed.
One housing first model that has been employed has been the development of Safe Havens.
This approach is contrary to most traditional transitional housing models in which a person
is placed in a therapeutic environment for a period of time until he is deemed “housing
ready.” Moreover, most transitional housing programs require sobriety as a condition of
occupancy. Sobriety is rarely a pre-requisite in “housing first” developments where the
management entity accepts that it may have to tolerate a certain degree of deviant and even
self-destructive behavior. In a “housing first” approach, sobriety is a goal to be achieved, not a
precondition to shelter.

The bottom line question that all providers of such housing have to answer is this: how
tolerant does a high-tolerance environment have to be? There is no single right answer to this.
So long as public policy is guided by the belief that chronic homelessness largely results from
poorly designed programs incapable of addressing the unique needs of long-term homeless
persons (rather than the other way around), HUD homeless funding will largely go to support
permanent housing in which harm-reduction is the prevailing ethos of service delivery. The
pendulum has begun to shift and traditional social service programs are no longer regarded as
capable of drawing in, reaching, and reforming chronically homeless persons.




Section 3: The Development Process                                                            35
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Most homeless service providers have long recognized the need to aim high with respect
to their management practices. Not all agencies have the experience or capacity to
implement highly professional management systems. This is unfortunate as housing homeless
populations is far more challenging than housing other populations. One additional
challenge is that a (formerly) homeless person may need a period of adjustment to become
reacquainted to the norms consistent with living in a residential apartment. Such tenants may
need assistance in working through landlord-tenant matters or in resolving conflicts with
neighbors. When one adds to the mix the fact that a large percentage of chronically homeless
persons have disabling conditions that hinder their capacity to live independently, it becomes
evident that the operation of homeless housing resources is perhaps an even more daunting
task than developing such housing in the first place.

In addition to the difficulties in serving a special-needs population, the financing of most
homeless housing developments (from emergency shelters to permanent supportive housing),
necessitates due consideration to the many compliance issues connected with using public
resources. The compliance issues are a particularly sensitive point for developments financed
with Low-income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC). The LIHTC program provides a private tax
benefit to investors who place considerable funds at risk. Over the first fifteen years from the
date a LIHTC-financed development is placed in service, the “initial compliance period,” the
investor risks the recapture of its tax benefits should the development not properly document
incomes or fail in other respects to maintain the property according to the IRS and TCAC
regulations. Public bodies are equally concerned that the developers manage their properties
in compliance with the rules, regulations, and the agreements ascribed to the project.



The most successful developers who work is intended to assist homeless populations have
been those that have followed one of two development strategies. One approach that has
proven effective has been to establish partnerships between a nonprofit service provider and
an experienced affordable housing developer. Some nonprofits have partnered with for-profit
housing developers, and in Riverside County there is an example of this in the partnership
between U.S. Veterans Initiative and the Cantwell-Anderson development corporation. More
often, nonprofits have joint ventured with nonprofit housing developers to create specialized




36                                                                   Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




new housing stock for homeless persons. Cultivating effective relationships between the
non-profit service provider and the developer (whether profit motivated or not) is challenging
at best because the expectations of each generally differ in substantive ways, particularly in
relationship to management issues. The other approach that has often been used to develop
housing resources for homeless populations has been for a nonprofit organization to undertake
the development work itself. Generally, this latter approach has meant that social service
agencies have had to create in-house development capacity. Less commonly, non-profit
developers have created social service divisions within their organizations. Whether the
development impetus is from a service provider or a housing developer, it is critical that the
functions of each are properly addressed so that the project may move forward expeditiously
and that attention is paid to the well-being of the residents, the property, and the community.

The reason that this section on leverage begins with a discussion of the relationship between
service providers and developers is that in general service commitments may be used to
leverage housing resources, and vice-versa. Organizations that control resources in each of
these domains are at a competitive advantage compared with those that need to work through
the time-consuming and uncertain process of negotiating with another entity for support.
Both the State and HUD assign critical rating points for applicants for housing dollars that
leverage services. The Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) which administers the Low-
income Housing Tax Credit has created a number of set-aside pools that are less competitive
than the general pool for special-needs projects and single room occupancy projects that
can demonstrate the availability of service commitments. The Supportive Housing Program
administered by the California Department of Housing and Community Development
similarly assigns points to applications capable of demonstrating leveraged commitments.

Commonly, a funding agency will require that its capital resources are matched (on a dollar-
for-dollar basis or better) by another form of capital. Match is not to be confused with
leveraged resources. The former are required commitments, the latter are resources that help
to make an application more competitive relative to others. A common source of match
(that may also leverage an application for competitive purposes) has been the Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG). While typically a federal source may not serve as a match
for other federal funds, HUD regards CDBG funds to be local dollars thereby permitting these
funds to be used flexibly for match commitments.




Section 3: The Development Process                                                               37
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Experience is another factor that provides a competitive edge in accessing State and federal
housing resources. Experience thereby serves as a non-material form of leverage. The
LIHTC application for nine percent credits, for example, assigns points on a sliding scale
for experience, reaching a maximum for those developers who can demonstrate having
completed seven or more projects that have been operational for over 3 years.

Another challenge to typical management practices with respect to homeless housing has
been to establish and maintain an effective working relationship with the social services
provider(s). Even when the management control is within a single organization, the inter-
relationship between the housing management and social services divisions may be strained
owing to disparate commitments and concerns. A housing division will typically orient itself
to those practices that will maintain a property as decent, safe, and sanitary and will provide
for the long-term well-being of the physical asset through vigorous maintenance and upkeep.
A social service division, in contrast, will focus its attention on the physical and moral well-
being of each resident. There are no easy answers as to how these orientations may work
through tough tenancy issues when a tenant relapses or otherwise becomes a nuisance to
others. Because there are no two days alike when it comes to providing housing and services
to homeless persons, no single set of rules and regulations will cover the many varied
challenges that a special-needs population may present. Thus it has generally been accepted
that flexibility within limits may be the only strategy to employ.

Development has been compared to planning for the wedding day; management is more like
the marriage itself.



“Build it and they will come” seems to have worked in A Field of Dreams. It is a prescription
for disaster in the field of affordable housing, particularly as related to housing for homeless
populations. Development of housing resources for homeless populations depends upon a
number of critical elements, each of which needs to be in place for a project to ensue. Firstly,
there need to be capital resources to construct the development. Secondly, there needs to be
ongoing financial support to provide for the myriad of services that homeless persons require
to become stabilized and progress in their lives. Thirdly, development requires ongoing
operating support as the costs of providing homeless housing resources far outstrip the ability
of the client populations to cover with rental payments. In the case of literally homeless



38                                                                     Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




persons with no reliable means of income, the subsidy needs are extreme; and for persons
without any income, the need grows to 100 percent. A somewhat more stabilized homeless
population requires marginally less in the way of operating support as this population may be
expected to pay rent.

To better understand the need for rental assistance, it may be useful to contextualize the
current state of housing in the County of Riverside by comparing it with that of the State of
California in general. Of the roughly 11 million households in California, nearly 5 million
(representing 43 percent) are renters; at 31 percent (approximately 160,000 households),
the percentage of renter households in Riverside County is significantly lower than the state
average largely because the cost of housing has generally been lower than in other parts of
the state. As like any other market, income determines both the size and quality of the units
that a household can afford. One way to assess the ability of a household to access rental
housing is to determine the maximum rent that it can afford. HUD defines rental housing to
be affordable if the household pays no more than 30 percent of its monthly income for rent
and utilities. Based upon current income data, the maximum monthly housing costs that a
median income household in Riverside County can afford is as follows:




                                                          12       California   Riverside
                    100% AMI Annual1                               $66,153      $57,500
                    100% AMI Monthly                                $5,513       $4,792
                    30% of AMI2 (housing affordability standard)   $19,846      $17,250
                    AFFORDABLE RENT FOR HH @ 100% AMI               $1,654       $1,438


In other words, the average household should be able to afford rents (including utilities) of
$1,438 per month. Lower income households can afford significantly lower rents as made
clear in Table 3A.




1The HUD AMIs are conveniently located at: http://www.efanniemae.com/sf/refmaterials/hudmedinc/
2 HUD defines “affordable” rents as a household spending not more than 30 percent of its income on housing
costs (rent plus utilities).



Section 3: The Development Process                                                                          39
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                   California                      Riverside
              Area Median      Monthly           Rent    Monthly          Rent
                Income         Income                    Income
                 20%            1,103            $331     $958            $287
                 30%           $1,654           $496     $1,438          $431
                 40%           $2,205            $662    $1,917          $575
                 50%           $2,757            $827    $2,396         $719
                 60%           $3,308            $992    $2,875          $863
                 80%           $4,410           $1,323   $3,834        $1,150
                 100%          $5,513           $1,654   $4,792        $1,438



Table 3B shows that households at 20 percent AMI in Riverside County can “afford” housing
costs of $287 per month. To the extent that this household’s rent is greater than $287, it
becomes rent burdened thereby putting the tenancy at risk. In other words, as households
pay more than 30 percent of their incomes as rent, or sacrifice quality by leasing smaller
units, to that extent the household becomes at risk of homelessness.

Income is only one of two elements that determine affordability. The other consideration is
market rent. Rent levels are variable throughout the County of Riverside, but a benchmark
is established annually by HUD which establishes “Fair Market Rent” based on field surveys
of actual rents charged by landlords. In truth the Fair Market Rent (FMR) is something of a
hypothetical construct as the standard reduces the multiple markets throughout a jurisdiction
to a single “market.” The FMR, however, provides a convenient shortcut by which to assess
the overall rent levels by unit-type. Moreover, it nicely summarizes how much money a
household would have to come up with on a monthly basis to access a market-rate rental
unit. The current FMRs established by HUD for California and Riverside County appear in
Table 3C.




40                                                                         Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                          TABLE 3C: 2007 HUD Fair Market Rents (FMR)
                                                              California    Riverside
                                     Zero-Bedroom               $832          $765
                                     One-Bedroom                $972          $835
                                     Two-Bedroom              $1,189          $974
                                     Three-Bedroom            $1,648        $1,383
                                     Four-Bedroom             $1,924         $1,617


The differential between the Fair Market Rents charged by landlords and the maximum rents
that a household can afford (based on 30 percent of household income) are summarized
in Table 3D for Riverside County. Table 3D demonstrates that even a household at 100
percent AMI (earning a monthly income of $4,792) would be rent-burdened by $179 per
month if it sought to lease a 4-bedroom apartment. As incomes decrease, rental units become
increasingly unaffordable. What is perhaps most telling is that a household at 60 percent AMI
(the HUD definition of low-income), could reasonably expect to afford only a 0-bedroom
or 1-bedroom apartment given market rents. This helps to explain how low-income families
often end up in overcrowded conditions. All income levels below 60 percent AMI are rent burdened
regardless of the size of the apartment. The rent differentials in Table 3D represent the actual net
subsidy amount that the Riverside County Housing Authority must pay to private landlords
for units occupied by persons on its rental assistance programs. The differentials show the
amount of rental subsidy required at each income level to achieve affordability.




                                                          HUD FAIR MARKET RENTS
              Household                 Maximum    0-      1-       2-      3-                     4-
              Income as Monthly         Housing bedroom bedroom bedroom bedroom                 bedroom
               % of AMI Income           Costs   $765    $835     $974    $1,383                $1,617
                                                              AFFORDABILITY DIFFERENTIALS
                20%          $958        $287        ($478)      ($548)    ($687)    ($1,096)   ($1,330)
                30%         $1,438       $431        ($334)      ($404)    ($543)     ($952)    ($1,186)
                40%         $1,917       $575        ($190)      ($260)    ($399)     ($808)    ($1,042)
                50%         $2,396       $719         ($46)      ($116)    ($255)     ($664)     ($898)
                60%         $2,875       $863          $98         $28     ($111)     ($520)     ($754)
                80%         $3,834      $1,150        $385        $315      $176      ($233)     ($467)
                100%        $4,792      $1,438        $673        $603      $464       $55       ($179)



Section 3: The Development Process                                                                         41
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




How is an extremely low-income household lacking rental assistance able to get by? The
options are few, but all too common. Some households double-up or triple-up creating
an overcrowded condition.3 Other households find “housing” in non-standard units like
bootleg units, garages, storage facilities, etc. Others, particularly those with substance abuse
and/or mental health disabilities often forsake housing altogether and live on the streets,
or in shelters. For low-income households, the economic reality is that rents are simply
unaffordable. The National Low Income Housing Coalition 2006 Out of Reach report
emphasizes that an employee earning minimum wages in Riverside County would have to
work 59 hours a week simply to afford the rent of a zero-bedroom unit.4 A minimum wage earner making
$6.75 per hour generates monthly income of approximately $1,170. Using the HUD guideline
that a renter should pay no more than 30 percent of household income as rent, this means that
the affordable rent for a single minimum wage earner is $351 ($1,170 x 30% = $351).

To remedy the problem of homelessness it is essential that one appreciates that the common underlying barrier to
achieving housing stability is economic instability. From an exclusively economic standpoint, there
are only two strategies to improve housing stability for households below 60 percent AMI:
1) increase incomes (through wages, benefits or a combination of the two); or 2) lower
housing costs by providing rental assistance subsidies and/or develop new affordable housing
with rent-restricted units. A consideration of strategies to increase incomes is beyond the
scope of work of this report. The focus here is on solutions to the affordability problem faced
by homeless households from the perspective of housing development and rental assistance.

The County of Riverside 2004/2005 Homeless Assessment identified over 2,300 homeless
persons without an identifiable income source. This means that if headway is to be made in
moving this chronically homeless population off of the streets and into normative housing,
the resources will have to be identified to deeply subsidize rents. If in fact no progress
could be made in growing incomes (a dire and unlikely but “worst-case” assumption), the
annual costs to subsidize all 2,300 persons in 0-bedroom units in the open market would be
$21,114,000 ($765 monthly rent x 12 months = $9,180 annual rent x 2,300 homeless persons
= $21,114,000). These costs are reduced considerably if a percentage of this population were



3HUD regards overcrowding as more than 1.2 persons per room.
4 National Low Income Housing Coalition, Out of Reach (2006). http://www.nhilc.org/oor/index.cfm




42                                                                                 Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




permanently disabled and therefore eligible for and enrolled in the Supplemental Security
Income (SSI) Program.5

SSI is a Federal program with State cost-sharing provisions to assist persons who are
permanently disabled and ineligible for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) owing
generally to erratic and poor work histories. SSI payments in Southern California are
currently $836 per month, which means that a recipient should be capable of affording rent
of $251 ($836 x 30% - $251). An SSI recipient with a rental assistance voucher will thus
make a tenant payment equivalent to 35 percent of the Fair Market Rent for a 0-bedroom
(studio) apartment thereby reducing the net assistance necessary to cover the total rent as per
the following analysis:
          A. Fair Market Rent:                                $765          100%
          B. Tenant Income:                                   $836
          C. Tenant Rental Payment (B x 30%):                 $251          33% of rent
          D. Rental Assistance Payment (A-C):                 $514          67% of rent

In practice this means that as chronically homeless persons become enrolled in the SSI
program, they reduce the overall demand and costs of rental assistance. In the unlikely
limiting case of 100 percent of the 2,300 chronically homeless persons becoming enrolled
in SSI, the cost savings could amount to nearly $7 million annually, reducing the maximum
potential subsidy from $21 million to $14 million.

HUD regulations permit Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) to establish priorities on their
waiting list for a select number of special-needs and other populations, including homeless
individuals and households. In fact, HUD Notice PIH 2003-25 (HA) issued October 3,
2003 encourages PHAs to utilize its public housing units and Housing Choice Vouchers for
homeless populations.6 The priority may be limited in terms of the number of vouchers and
housing units made available through this preference, as well as by establishing conditions

5 The most recent county-level data on the number of SSI recipients shows Riverside with 49,630 eligible
persons of whom 26,093 are between the ages of 18 and 64 (the most likely population to be homeless). The
total amount of SSI assistance provided to recipients in Riverside County amounted to more than $27 million in
FY 2005. (See: U.S. Social Security Administration, Office of Policy, SSI Recipients by State and County, 2005
found at http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statecomps/ssi_sc/2005/ca.html.
6 U.S. Department of HUD, Public and Indian Housing, Notice PIH 2003-25 (Homeless Initiative in Public
Housing and Housing Choice Voucher Programs), October 3, 2003.




Section 3: The Development Process                                                                         43
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




like disability status. Given the extremely low-incomes of homeless persons, it is inevitable
that some amount of rental assistance will be required to bridge the affordability gap.



Following the HUD scandals of the 1980s, Congress prohibited project-basing rental
assistance vouchers. As a direct result of this action, the production of “affordable” rental
units for households below 50 percent AMI declined. Recognizing that a subsidy source is
required to assist very-low and extremely-low income households to remain stable in rental
housing, in 2000 Congress reauthorized attaching rental assistance vouchers to specific
projects (as opposed to being used exclusively as tenant-based assistance). In January 2001,
HUD provided guidance on how vouchers may be used as project-based assistance, but the
regulations were so cumbersome that hardly any Public Housing Authority (PHA) undertook
such developments.

In October 2005 HUD issued new far more flexible and locally determined procedures for
the use of vouchers as project-based assistance (24 CFR Part 983). HUD anticipates that
owing to these new regulations roughly 400,000 units may receive voucher assistance. The
key provisions of the new regulations are as follows:
• A PHA may project-base up to 20 percent of its voucher budget authority
• “Existing” housing may be assisted as well as new construction and rehabilitated units
• Supportive Housing and other housing for persons with disabilities may be assisted, but
  transitional housing is prohibited
• PHA must use the vouchers in a way consistent with the goal of de-concentrating poverty
  and expanding opportunity, and the development must allow for a range of incomes
     o Achieved by limiting project-basing to no more than 25 percent of the units in a
       building (with certain exceptions)
• No limit on the number of tenant-based vouchers or other project-based assistance that
  may be used in remaining units
• Housing must be accessible (under Section 504) for disabled persons
• To promote market discipline and provide for individual choice, tenants must be allowed to
  move after one year (as vouchers become available)



44                                                                     Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




   o The project-based unit retains the original voucher assistance
• The initial contract term may be from 1 to 10 years (subject to Section 8 Appropriations)
   o The contract may be renewed in 5 year increments
   o Contract may require owner to accept any extensions offered
• Owners generally prefer longer-term contracts to allay feasibility concerns that may be
  raised by investors in developments financed with Low-Income Housing Tax Credits.
• Rents may be set at 110 percent of Fair Market Rent (or higher with HUD-approval)
   o Certain technical problems in establishing rents in LIHTC units
   o Rent in HOME-assisted units may exceed FMR
   o Rents adjusted annually by PHA based on reasonableness
• PHA may target disabled persons with special needs when appropriate services are offered
  on-site

In order to issue project-based vouchers, a PHA must express its intent in its planning
documents. Existing plans that may have been submitted to HUD may be amended to
include such references following a public hearing (when required). Once a PHA has formally
registered its intent to issue project-based vouchers, it needs to allocate such vouchers based
in a fair and impartial manner. The PHA is then responsible to ensure compliance in the areas
of environment, relocation, workmanship, and finance.

There are many reasons why a PHA may want project-based vouchers. First and foremost,
project-basing voucher assistance improves access to housing for certain sub-populations,
including (formerly) homeless and disabled persons. Project-basing allows for improved
voucher utilization in tight rental markets where existing units may be scarce or landlords are
hesitant to lease to persons with voucher assistance. Project-basing allows for development
in “opportunity-rich” neighborhoods, thereby allowing for the dispersion of assisted units in
higher-income areas. In addition, project-basing encourages new production of affordable
units, particularly to the lowest-income households. Another incentive to PHAs to project-
based assistance is that it reduces its on-going administrative costs as the program allows for
unit inspections based on samples, instead of complete reviews.




Section 3: The Development Process                                                           45
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Project-basing vouchers does not provide for a deeper subsidy thereby costing the PHA or
HUD additional monies. In fact, it may help to save funds in the long run. The PHA would
have to pay a private landlord in the rental market the same level of subsidy with his tenant-
based voucher as it would pay for a project-based voucher. Because HUD provides each
PHA with a fixed budget, housing authorities are motivated to use their funds in the most
cost-effective manner to assist additional households. By working with specific landlords
over time, a PHA is able to better manage cost increases and to anticipate how to absorb
adjustments. In the tenant-based program, the PHA is entirely dependent upon market forces,
not management capacity.

This is not to minimize the administrative burdens of establishing a project-based program.
Because PHAs have been outside of production for nearly 20 years, it is likely that existing
staff will need to be trained on the program and its implementation. Additionally, project-
basing voucher assistance only makes sense if the PHA has confidence that the Section 8
Program will continue to enjoy reauthorization into the future. This is a real matter as over
the past few years HUD has altered its policies relative to the number of vouchers each
PHA may be entitled to administer. The result of these changes has been to force many
PHAs to scale-back their implementation plans (if only marginally). Finally, despite the new
regulations that cleared the path for using voucher as project-based assistance, there remain
a number of administrative barriers to making the program “user-friendly,” particularly from a
development perspective.



The HACR has established preferences (consistent with the HUD regulations) targeting
assistance to extremely low-income homeless persons and families. The Housing Authority
has established the following preferences so that 75 percent of the assistance it delivers goes
to households below 30 percent AMI:
1. County of Riverside residency
2. Families who are rent burdened or homeless,
3. Working families with minor or dependent children or elderly families or disabled families

Within each preference category, HACR has further prescribed a preference for veterans
and/or active duty servicemen and their spouse or survivor.



46                                                                     Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The Housing Authority has established what appears to be an accessible set of procedures to
place persons on its waiting list. Among the registration methods it employs are: telephone
enrollment (as a reasonable accommodation for disabled persons), mail, fax, and in-person
delivery. The waiting list was last opened on June 1, 2006 and remains open. Through
December 31, 2006, the enrollment process resulted in 9,513 requests of which 7,829 were
new applicants (the balance being prior registrants whose applications were withdrawn
for one reason or another). The waiting list now numbers over 25,000 households. The
registration form itself is available as a download from its website (http://www.harivco.
org). In addition, the website provides generally clear information to prospective registrants
as to the eligibility criteria and the administration of the waiting list (especially as regards
preferences). In any given year, the Housing Authority assists roughly 1,000 new households,
meaning that over 20 potentially eligible households will have to wait many years in order to
obtain rental assistance.7

The Housing Authority allows for the use of project-based assistance in those parts of the
county where there are low voucher utilization rates. The intent of project-basing vouchers is
to alleviate the concentration of poverty. Because the actual utilization of voucher assistance
exceeds the Housing Authority’s annual allotment, project-basing assistance has not been
possible in practice.



All development requires a feasible finance plan that takes into account available sources
and their eligible uses. Some sources, the Low-income Housing Tax Credit, for example,
are extremely flexible with respect to the timing and uses for which (equity) funds may be
used. Other sources are far more restrictive, like the Multifamily Housing Program that may
only be used as permanent financing. There is no such thing as a single finance model that
may be applied to all developments. That is because the availability of funds is variable and
a large number of key sources are allocated on a competitive basis that takes into account
matters such as the experience of the developer, the location of the project, and the resident
population. Financial planning involves the development of a number of budgets and
projections:

7Information on the management of the waiting list was provided by Ms. Heidi Marshall of the Riverside
County EDA.




Section 3: The Development Process                                                                       47
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• Development Budget: Showing the total costs to complete construction and support the
     project through stabilization (generally at 95 percent occupancy).
• Sources and Uses: Being a summary of the available public and private resources and costs
     at different stages of development:
     o Acquisition
     o Pre-development
     o Construction
     o Permanent financing
• Allocation Plan: Being a summary of how the permanent sources will be allocated taking
  into consideration the restrictions on eligible uses.
• Income Schedule: In order to comply with various funding sources and to be competitive
  for funding, rents are restricted to be affordable at different income levels. In order to
  determine how much cash will be available to cover operations and incur debt (if any),
  it is essential to understand the various restrictions on tenancy (including income, status
  relative to homelessness, and disability status). To the extent that rental assistance is
     proposed to be attached to the development, it must also be identified and budgeted. The
     gross potential income is then reduced by a percentage to account for vacancies caused
     by unit turnover. The majority of underwriters require developments serving homeless
     populations to include a vacancy factor of 10 percent. The vacancy factor for most other
     affordable housing is five percent (or an actual rate fixed by an independent third party
     market analyst).
• Operating Expense Schedules: A budget based on developments of comparable size,
  age, and tenant population must also be created. In general, this budget would be
  independent of the supportive social services budget, but some capital sources permit a
  modest level of service coordination to be included among the eligible expenses. Sample
  operating budgets with staffing plans for emergency shelter, transitional housing and
  supportive housing follow.
• Reserve Balance Schedule: A budget must also be prepared showing the projected
  balances of the following reserves:
     o Capital Replacement Reserve: For acquisition / rehabilitation projects, a Physical Needs
       Assessment will have to be conducted that takes into account the existing condition of


48                                                                        Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




       the building, its age, the proposed scope of improvements, and the remaining useful life
       of the building systems. The replacement costs must then be adjusted to account for
       inflation so that it can be determined how much cash must be deposited annually into
       the replacement reserve.
   o Operating Reserve: Standards vary on this, but in general public agencies require a reserve
     to be capitalized and included in the development budget. The initial reserve is typically
     equal to 3 to 4 months of expenses, including debt service. In addition, an annual
       contribution to the operating reserve must also be included in the development budget.
   o Rental Assistance Reserve: Over the past several years as concerns have been raised as to
     whether the Section 8 (and other HUD rental assistance programs) will be sustained,
     it has become increasingly important for projects with rental assistance to include a
     reserve budget to be drawn upon in the event that the Housing Assistance Payments
     contract is not renewed.
   o Supportive Social Services Reserve: To the extent that there may be a need to guarantee a
     commitment of social services, it may be necessary to include a reserve account in the
     overall capital development budget.
• Supportive Social Services: It has often been the case that grants and/or contracts to
  cover the costs of social services have been among the most difficult resources to obtain for
  developers of housing for homeless persons. One reason for this has been that most service
  agreements are appropriated annually, but (recognizing the need for a range of appropriate
  services) public bodies allocating funds for housing development require long-term service
  commitments before investing in homeless housing. In general only a modest level of
  services may be included in a project’s operating budget. There is tremendous variation
  across the landscape regarding how much to budget for social services as it is hard to
  assess both the range and quality of services from one program site to another. Moreover,
  even if benchmarks are established by a program, there is no way to prejudge the level
  of acuity and capacity of disabled homeless persons to live independently. For example,
  a transitional housing program for persons with mental health disorders may operate
  relatively smoothly if it has a high percentage of residents with schizophrenia taking their
  psychotropic medications. To introduce to this community a number of persons with
  Type II personality disorders may create a number of challenges that could occupy a large
  percentage of the staff’s time to monitor and regulate thereby impacting the overall level


Section 3: The Development Process                                                               49
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




     of service. The following case management ratios have been used as a guide for budget
     purposes:




                                                             Case Loads
            Program Type                                        High      Medium              Low
            Emergency Shelter for Individuals                    60        40                 25
            Emergency Shelter for Families (per family)          40        30                 20
            Transitional Housing for Families (per family)       30        20                  15
            Transitional Housing for Disabled Persons            40        25                 20
            Safe Haven                                           40        30                 20
            Permanent Supportive Housing                         50        40                 30
            Permanent Housing                                    80        60                 40

The chart above references case management services (which may be assumed to include
ancillary services such as money management, medication monitoring, and the like), but it
does not include other services that may be available to homeless clients. Among the other
services that may be offered on-site and would thereby have to be considered for budgetary
purposes are:
• Childcare
• Compensated work therapy (i.e., stipends to clients for on-site labor like food handling)
• Dental care
• Educational services
• Employment assistance (assessment, job training, and job search assistance)
• Food services
• Legal assistance (including benefits advocacy, especially for SSI eligibility)
• Life-skills training
• Medical care (including psychiatry)
• Medication management
• Money Management
• Outreach and intake services




50                                                                                 Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• Socialization services
• Substance abuse counseling
• Transportation

To the extent that these services are to be offered off-site by community partners, agreements
would have to be negotiated between the developer and the service providers confirming
the availability of such resources for the proposed tenant populations. These agreements
are required by the predominant state and federal agencies allocating capital for housing
production. The preparation of specific budgets for these services is outside of the scope
of this report, but for analytical purposes, the study assumes a moderate level of services as
follows:

                    Assumed Case Management Caseloads for Budget Purposes
                                   (for Sample Budgets)
                                     Emergency   Transitional Housing   Permanent Supportive
                Service               Shelter          Housing           Supportive Housing
                1 FTE per               40                20                    30


The operating budgets that appear on the following tables show a range of costs depending
on the size of the shelter, its design, and whether or not it is used for emergency or
transitional housing purposes. The budgets were developed using locally available
information, but clearly some variation is to be expected as no two programs operate
identically. The budgets presented here assume the following: that case management and
food services are available, as well as a range of other services (like transportation). Housing
and social expenses have been segregated so that better comparisons may be made across
programs. Case management services have been assumed on a ratio of one case manager
for every 40 program participants for emergency shelter and one case manager for every 20
participants or families for transitional housing. The lower caseload for transitional housing
programs has been assumed based on the fact that most programs are targeted to homeless
families or severely disabled persons—each population requiring a substantial amount of
attention. The caseload for permanent supportive housing has been assumed as being on
a 30:1 ratio. In addition to case management services, each budget assumes a number of
additional costs for the delivery of supportive social services (e.g., telephone, office).




Section 3: The Development Process                                                               51
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                               Sample Operating Budget Emergency Shelter
                                                         BEDS / COTS                                      SRO Units
                                                 20            40                          80               40
                                            % FTE Salary % FTE    Salary           % FTE    Salary     % FTE Salary
PERSONNEL
                                   Base
Operations                         Salary
Shelter Manager                   $34,000   100% $34,000       100%     $34,000    100%     $34,000    100% $34,000
Assistant Manager                 $28,000                       50%     $14,000    100%     $28,000     50% $14,000
Night Shift / Desk Clerks         $19,000   120%     $22,800    20%     $22,800    220%     $41,800    300% $57,000
Maintenance                       $24,000    25%      $6,000    50%     $12,000     50%     $12,000     50% $12,000
Janitorial                        $18,000    50%      $9,000   100%     $18,000    125%     $22,500    100% $18,000
Security                          $18,500   100%     $18,500   150%     $27,750    200%     $37,000    100% $18,500
Food Services                     $16,000   100%     $16,000   150%     $24,000    200%     $32,000    150% $24,000
Total Operations Personnel                   4.95   $106,300    7.20   $152,550     9.95   $207,300     8.50 $177,500
Social Services
Program Assistance                $24,000   25% $6,000          50%  $12,000       100% $24,000         50%   $12,000
Case Management                   $34,000   50% $17,000        100%  $34,000       200% $68,000        100%   $34,000
Program Management                $40,000   25% $10,000         50%  $20,000       100% $40,000         50%   $20,000
Total Soc. Service Personnel                1.00 $33,000        2.00 $66,000        4.00 $132,000       2.00  $66,000
Total Salary/Wages                               $139,300           $218,550             $339,300            $243,500
Benefits/Fringe/PR Taxes             25%          $34,825            $54,638              $84,825             $60,875
TOTAL PERSONNEL                             5.95 $174,125      9.20 $218,550       13.95 $424,125      10.50 $304,375
Other                             Per Bed
1. Maintenance/Repair               $300          $6,000                $12,000             $24,000             $12,000
2. Utilities                        $300          $6,000                $12,000             $24,000             $12,000
3. Equipment                          $60         $1,200                 $2,400              $4,800              $2,400
4. Supplies                         $125          $2,500                 $5,000             $10,000              $5,000
5. Insurance                        $200          $4,000                 $8,000             $16,000              $8,000
6. Furnishings (quantity)           $300          $6,000                $12,000             $24,000             $12,000
7. Food                            $1,600        $32,000                $64,000            $128,000             $64,000
8. Pest Control                       $75         $1,500                 $3,000              $6,000              $3,000
9. Linens, Uniforms                 $125          $2,500                 $5,000             $10,000              $5,000
10. Other Soc. Services             $600         $12,000                $24,000             $48,000             $24,000
Total Other                                      $73,700               $147,400            $294,800            $147,400
Total Direct Expenses                           $247,825               $365,950            $718,925            $451,775
Administration / Overhead                    15% $37,174                $54,893            $107,839             $67,766
Total Program Expenses                          $284,999               $420,843            $826,764            $519,541
Cost per Bed/Unit/Annual                         $14,250                $10,521             $10,335             $12,989
Cost per Bed/Unit/Daily                           $39.04                 $28.82              $28.31              $35.59
Staff to Participant Ratio                            3.4                    4.3                 5.7                 3.8




52                                                                                     Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                 Sample Operating Budget Transitional Housing
                                                                     BEDS / COTS                                   SRO Units
                                                      20                    40                  60                   40
                                                 % FTE Salary         % FTE    Salary      % FTE Salary         % FTE Salary
PERSONNEL
                                        Base
Operations                              Salary
Shelter Manager                      $ 34,000    100% $ 34,000        100%     $ 34,000    100%    $ 34,000     100%     $ 34,000
Assistant Manager                    $ 28,000                          50%     $ 14,000     50%    $ 14,000      50%     $ 14,000
Night Shift / Desk Clerks            $ 19,000    120%     $ 22,800    120%     $ 22,800    120%    $ 22,800     120%     $ 22,800
Maintenance                          $ 24,000     25%      $ 6,000     50%     $ 12,000     50%    $ 12,000      50%     $ 12,000
Janitorial                           $ 18,000     50%      $ 9,000    100%     $ 18,000    125%    $ 22,500     100%     $ 18,000
Security                             $ 18,500    100%     $ 18,500    150%     $ 27,750    200%    $ 37,000     100%     $ 18,500
Food Services                        $ 16,000    100%     $ 16,000    150%     $ 24,000    200%    $ 32,000     150%     $ 24,000
Total Operations Personnel                        4.95   $106,300      7.20   $152,550      8.45   $174,300      6.70   $143,300
Social Services
Program Assistance                   $ 24,000     50%  $ 12,000       100%   $ 24,000      125% $ 30,000        100%   $ 24,000
Case Management                      $ 34,000    100%  $ 34,000       200%   $ 68,000      300% $102,000        200%   $ 68,000
Program Management                   $ 40,000     50%  $ 20,000       100%   $ 40,000      100% $ 40,000        100%   $ 40,000
Total Social Service Personnel                    2.00 $66,000         4.00 $132,000        5.25 $172,000        4.00 $132,000
Total Salary/Wages                                    $172,300              $284,550             $346,300             $275,300
Benefits/Fringe/PR Taxes                  25%          $ 43,075              $ 71,138             $ 86,575             $ 68,825
TOTAL PERSONNEL                                  6.95 $215,375        11.20 $284,550       13.70 $432,875       10.70 $344,125
Other                                 Per Bed
1. Maintenance/Repair                   $300           $ 6,000                 $ 12,000             $ 18,000             $ 12,000
2. Utilities                            $300           $ 6,000                 $ 12,000             $ 18,000             $ 12,000
3. Equipment                              $60          $ 1,200                  $ 2,400              $ 3,600              $ 2,400
4. Supplies                             $125           $ 2,500                  $ 5,000              $ 7,500              $ 5,000
5. Insurance                            $200           $ 4,000                  $ 8,000             $ 12,000              $ 8,000
6. Furnishings (quantity)               $300           $ 6,000                 $ 12,000             $ 18,000             $ 12,000
7. Food                               $ 1,600         $ 32,000                 $ 64,000             $ 96,000             $ 64,000
8. Pest Control                           $75          $ 1,500                  $ 3,000              $ 4,500              $ 3,000
9. Linens, Uniforms                     $125           $ 2,500                  $ 5,000              $ 7,500              $ 5,000
10. Other Social Services               $600          $ 12,000                 $ 24,000             $ 36,000             $ 24,000
Total Other                                           $ 73,700                $147,400             $221,100             $147,400
Total Direct Expenses                                $289,075                 $431,950             $653,975             $491,525
Administration / Overhead                         15% $ 43,361                 $ 64,793             $ 98,096             $ 73,729
TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENSES                               $332,436                 $496,743             $752,071             $565,254
Cost per Bed/Unit/Annual                              $ 16,622                 $ 12,419             $ 12,535             $ 14,131
Cost per Bed/Unit/Month                                $ 1,385                  $ 1,035              $ 1,045               $ 1,178
Staff to Participant Ratio                                  2.9                      3.6                  4.4                  3.7




Section 3: The Development Process                                                                                             53
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




           Sample Operating Budgets Supportive Housing (excludes food services)

                                               SRO UNITS      SRO UNITS            SRO UNITS        Efficiency Units
                                                  20              40                  60                   50
                                            % FTE Salary    % FTE    Salary     % FTE Salary        % FTE Salary
PERSONNEL
Operations                     Base Salary
Resident Manager                $34,000 100% $34,000        100%     $34,000    100% $34,000        100%     $34,000
Assistant Manager               $28,000                      50%      $14,00     50% $14,000         50%     $14,000
Maintenance                     $24,000    25% $6,000        50%     $12,000     75% $18,000         50%     $12,000
Janitorial                      $18,000    50% $9,000       100%     $18,000    100% $18,000         50%      $9,000
Security                        $18,500    50% $9,250       100%     $18,500    100% $18,500        100%     $18,500
Total Operations Personnel                 2.25 $58,250      4.00    $96,500     4.25 $102,500       3.50    $87,500
Social Services
Program Assistance              $24,000     25% $6,000       50%   $12,000       75%   $18,000       50%   $12,000
Case Management                 $34,000     50% $17,000     100%   $34,000      150%   $51,000      100%   $34,000
Program Management              $40,000     25% $10,000      50%   $20,000       75%   $30,000       50%   $20,000
Total Soc. Service Personnel                1.00 $33,000     2.00  $66,000       3.00  $99,000       2.00  $66,000
Total Salary/Wages                                $91,250         $162,500            $201,500            $153,500
Benefits/Fringe/PR Taxes            25%           $22,813          $40,625             $50,375             $38,375
TOTAL PERSONNEL                             3.25 $114,063    6.00 $203,125       7.25 $251,875       5.50 $191,875
Other                            Per Unit
1. Maintenance/Repair             $ 300           $6,000             $12,000             $18,000             $15,000
2. Utilities                      $ 300           $6,000             $12,000             $18,000             $15,000
3. Equipment                       $ 60           $1,200              $2,400              $3,600              $3,000
4. Supplies                       $ 125           $2,500              $5,000              $7,500              $6,250
5. Insurance                      $ 200           $4,000              $8,000             $12,000             $10,000
6. Furnishings (quantity)         $ 300           $6,000             $12,000             $18,000             $15,000
7. Food
8. Pest Control                    $ 75          $1,500               $3,000              $4,500              $3,750
9. Linens, Uniforms               $ 125          $2,500               $5,000              $7,500              $6,250
10. Other Social Services         $ 200          $4,000               $8,000             $12,000             $10,000
Total Other                                     $33,700              $67,400            $101,100             $84,250
TOTAL DIRECT EXPENSES                          $147,763             $270,525            $352,975            $276,125
Administration / Overhead                   15% $22,164              $40,579             $52,946             $41,419
TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENSES                         $169,927             $311,104            $405,921            $317,544
Cost per Bed/Unit/Annual                         $8,496               $7,778              $6,765              $6,351
Cost per Bed/Unit/Month                           $ 708                $ 648               $ 564               $ 529
Staff to Participant Ratio                           6.2                  6.7                 8.3                 9.1




54                                                                                  Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• Cash-flow Projection: Public and private investors are not only interested in whether
   the funds can be assembled to construct a new development but also they need to feel
   confident that such investment will be protected through time. Accordingly, every
   development budget includes a cash-flow projection (generally of 15 years) that takes
   into account the project’s income and expenses when adjusted for inflation. Because it is
   generally assumed that there will be a bank-financed first trust deed on a development, it is
   important to demonstrate to a private lender that the project will generate sufficient cash
   to amortize the proposed debt. It should be noted that most homeless housing does not
   include private debt as a permanent source owing to the modest incomes generated by the
   tenants. The level of private debt that may be placed on a development is a factor of the
   Net Operating Income (income less expenses and reserve contributions). Private lenders
   will typically finance a loan up to 85 percent of the first year Net Operating Income (a
   debt service ratio of 1.15). Larger loans may be possible with mortgage insurance (e.g.
   FHA or CalFHA). The sample cash flow projections that follow assume that there is no
   permanent serviceable debt on the development owing to the diminishing net operating
   income. It is highly unusual in any event for an emergency shelter or transitional housing
   program to incur debt, as there is no certainty from one year to the next as to the sources
   available to cover operations. In a permanent housing development with a dedicated source
   of rental assistance, it may be possible to incur a small (residual) amount of debt. The cash
   flow projection for the permanent supportive housing model that follows assumes the
   availability of 40 Shelter Plus Care rental assistance certificates. It should be noted that
   even with this subsidy, the project trends downward and begins to run at a negative cash
   flow in year 10 despite the fact that the model does not assume any serviceable debt.




Section 3: The Development Process                                                               55
56
                                      Sample Cash Flow Projections: Emergency                                                                    Annual Rate of Increase
                                      40-bed Program                                                                                             Rental Income: 102.5%
                                                                                                                                                 Expenses: 103.5%

                                                                                                                              YEAR
                                                                         1          2          3          4          5           6       7          8          9           10
                                     Expenses
                                     Total Operations Personnel       $152,550   $157,889   $163,415   $169,135   $175,055   $181,182 $187,523   $194,086   $200,879   $207,910
                                     Total Social Service Personnel   $66,000     $68,310    $70,701    $73,175    $75,737    $78,387 $81,131     $83,970   $86,909     $89,951
                                     Total Salary/Wages               $218,550   $226,199   $234,116   $242,310   $250,791   $259,569 $268,654   $278,057   $287,789   $297,861
                                     Benefits/Fringe/PR Taxes         $54,638     $56,550    $58,529    $60,578    $62,698   $64,892 $67,163      $69,514    $71,947    $74,465
                                     Total Personnel                  $273,188   $282,749   $292,645   $302,888   $313,489   $324,461 $335,817   $347,571   $359,736   $372,327
                                     Total Other                      $147,400   $152,559   $157,899   $163,425   $169,145   $175,065 $181,192   $187,534   $194,098   $200,891
                                     Total Direct Expenses            $420,588   $435,308   $450,544   $466,313   $482,634   $499,526 $517,009   $535,105   $553,833   $573,218
                                     Administration / Overhead         $63,088    $63,088    $63,088   $63,088     $63,088    $63,088 $63,088     $63,088    $63,088    $63,088
                                     TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENSES           $483,676   $498,396   $513,632   $529,401   $545,722   $562,614 $580,098   $598,193   $616,922   $636,306
                                     Required Operating Subsidy       $483,676   $498,396   $513,632   $529,401   $545,722   $562,614 $580,098   $598,193   $616,922   $636,306
                                     Cost per Bed/Unit/Annual          $12,092    $12,460    $12,841    $13,235    $13,643    $14,065 $14,502     $14,955    $15,423    $15,908
                                     Cost per Bed/Unit/Day              $33.13     $34.14     $35.18     $36.26     $37.38     $38.54 $39.73       $40.97     $42.25     $43.58

                                     Five Year Subsidy Need:          $2,570,827
                                     Ten Year Subsidy Need:           $5,564,959




Section 3: The Development Process
                                                                                                                                                                                  DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
                                      Sample Cash Flow Projections: Transitional Housing                                                             Annual Rate of Increase
                                      40-bed Program                                                                                                 Rental Income: 102.5%
                                                                                                                                                     Expenses: 103.5%




Section 3: The Development Process
                                                                                                                                YEAR
                                                                          1           2          3          4          5           6         7          8          9           1
                                     Total Rental Revenue             $105,600 $108,240 $110,946 $113,720 $116,563 $119,477 $122,464 $125,525 $128,663 $131,880
                                     Vacancy Loss                     -$10,560 -$10,824 -$11,095 -$11,372 -$11,656 -$11,948 -$12,246 -$12,553 -$12,866 -$13,188
                                     Effective Gross Income           $95,040 $97,416 $99,851 $102,348 $104,906 $107,529 $110,217 $112,973 $115,797 $118,692
                                     Expenses
                                     Total Operations Personnel       $152,550     $157,889   $163,415   $169,135   $175,055   $181,182   $187,523   $194,086   $200,879   $207,910
                                     Total Social Service Personnel   $132,000     $136,620   $141,402   $146,351   $151,473   $156,775   $162,262   $167,941   $173,819   $179,902
                                     Total Salary/Wages               $284,550     $294,509   $304,817   $315,486   $326,528   $337,956   $349,785   $362,027   $374,698   $387,812
                                     Benefits/Fringe/PR Taxes          $71,138      $73,627    $76,204    $78,871    $81,632    $84,489    $87,446    $90,507    $93,675    $96,953
                                     Total Personnel                  $355,688     $368,137   $381,021   $394,357   $408,160   $422,445   $437,231   $452,534   $468,373   $484,766
                                     Total Other                      $147,400     $152,559   $157,899   $163,425   $169,145   $175,065   $181,192   $187,534   $194,098   $200,891
                                     Total Direct Expenses            $503,088     $520,696   $538,920   $557,782   $577,304   $597,510   $618,423   $640,068   $662,470   $685,657
                                     Administration / Overhead         $75,463     $75,463    $75,463     $75,463   $75,463     $75,463    $75,463    $75,463   $75,463     $75,463
                                     TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENSES           $578,551     $596,159   $614,383   $633,245   $652,768   $672,973   $693,886   $715,531   $737,933   $761,120
                                     Required Operating Subsidy       $483,511     $498,743   $514,532   $530,898   $547,861   $565,444   $583,669   $602,558   $622,136   $642,428
                                     Cost per Bed/Unit/Annual          $14,464      $14,904    $15,360    $15,831    $16,319    $16,824    $17,347    $17,888   $18,448     $19,028
                                     Cost per Bed/Unit/Month            $1,205       $1,242     $1,280     $1,319    $1,360      $1,402     $1,446     $1,491     $1,537     $1,586
                                     Five Year Subsidy Need:          $2,575,544
                                     Ten Year Subsidy Need:           $5,591,779




57
                                                                                                                                                                                      DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
58
                                      Permanent Supportive Housing Cash Flow Analysis                                                           Annual Rate of Increase
                                      Participants: 50 @ 30% AMI                                                                                Rental Income: 102.5%
                                                    40 Residents with S+C Subsidy                                                               Expenses 103.0%

                                                                                                                            YEAR
                                                                         1          2          3         4           5             6        7          8          9          10
                                     Revenues
                                     Tenant Rent                      181,200   185,730    190,373    195,133    200,011     205,011    210,136    215,390    220,775     226,294
                                     Rental Assistance           40   112,320   115,128    118,006    120,956    123,980     127,080    130,257    133,513    136,851     140,272
                                     (Shelter + Care)
                                     Laundry/Other                   1,800       1,845      1,891      1,938      1,987       2,037      2,087      2,140      2,193       2,248
                                     Gross Potential Income         295,320     302,703    310,271    318,027    325,978     334,127    342,481    351,043    359,819     368,814
                                     Vacancy Loss               10% (29,532)    (30,270)   (31,027)   (31,803)   (32,598)    (33,413)   (34,248)   (35,104)   (35,982)    (36,881)
                                     Net Income                     265,788     272,433    279,244    286,225    293,380     300,715    308,233    315,938    323,837     331,933
                                     Expenses
                                     Total Direct Expenses–Housing    183,625   189,134    194,808    200,652    206,672     212,872    219,258    225,836    232,611     239,589
                                     Total Reserves                    45,000   46,350      47,741     49,173    50,648       52,167    53,732     55,344     57,005       58,715
                                     TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES         228,625   235,484    242,548    249,825    257,319     265,039    272,990    281,180    289,615     298,304
                                     NET OPERATING INCOME              37,163   36,949      36,695     36,400     36,061      35,676     35,242    34,758     34,222      33,629
                                     Social Services
                                     SOCIAL SERVICES EXP.              92,500    94,813    97,183    99,612    102,103   104,655 107,272 109,953 112,702 115,520
                                     NET SOCIAL SERVICE GAP*          ($55,337) ($57,864) ($60,488) ($63,212) ($66,042) ($68,980) ($72,029) ($75,195) ($78,481) ($81,891)


                                                  * Social service costs not covered by operating revenues and requiring additional subsidy from an external source.




Section 3: The Development Process
                                                                                                                                                                                     DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Development costs vary widely because no two projects are identical. A general range of
average costs can be created to help in the creation of long-term budgets. Among the key
variables that tend to introduce variability in development budgets are: acquisition costs,
design standards, scale of development, reserve requirements, and impact fees. Land costs
in urban centers are far higher than in outlying areas (in general). In addition to the costs
of acquiring a parcel or building, an acquisition budget may also need to include relocation
and holding costs. The scale of a development also has a direct bearing on per unit costs as
larger projects are able to allocate fixed costs over a larger denominator thereby lowering
per unit costs. Depending on whether private units or a congregate shelter is being proposed
also impacts a development budget. A general range of development costs can be prepared,
but each proposed new project has to be looked at in terms of the reasonableness of the
development budget in light of local design standards, land costs, etc.

For the purposes of the analysis included in this report, four development budgets have been
prepared. The first budget is for a congregate shelter with 40 cots in an open space with half-
wall built-in partitions. The assumption is that the shelter would be developed by converting
an existing commercial property. The second budget is for a new construction transitional
housing development for individuals, also configured as a congregate shelter. The third budget
is for transitional housing for families comprised of private one-bedroom units. The final
capital budget is for a proposed new construction of 50 efficiency units for disabled homeless
persons. Efforts have been made to confirm the cost estimates, but in the end these budgets are
merely models and a specific budget will need to be created for any project to be proposed.




Section 3: The Development Process                                                              59
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




              Emergency Shelter                    Units 40
              Acquisition / Rehabilitation         Shelter Size 20,000
                                                   Lot Size 16,000
                                                                       TOTAL
                                                                    PROJECT COST    PER UNIT
              LAND COST/ACQUISITION                       Per S/F
                  Land Cost or Value                                  $300,000       $7,500
                  Demolition                                          $120,000       $1,500
                  Legal                                                 $12,000       $300
                  Total Land Cost or Value                            $432,000       $9,300
                  Existing Improvements Value                         $550,000      $13,750
                  Off-Site Improvements                                 $40,000      $1,000
                  Total Acquisition Cost                  $51.10     $1,022,000     $24,050
              REHABILITATION
                  Site Work                                $7.81      $125,000       $3,125
                  Structures                              $87.50     $1,750,000     $43,750
                  General Requirements                     $6.14      $122,850       $3,071
                  Contractor Overhead                      $2.17        $43,407      $1,085
                  Contractor Profit                        $6.64      $132,825       $3,321
                  Prevailing Wages                        $14.88       $297,500      $7,438
                  General Liability Insurance              $2.10        $42,000      $1,050
                  Total Construction Costs               $127.24     $2,513,582     $62,840
              ARCHITECTURAL FEES
                  Design                                   $9.00      $180,000       $4,500
                  Supervision                              $2.10       $42,000       $1,050
                  Total Architectural Costs               $11.10      $222,000       $5,550
                  Total Survey and Engineering             $5.50      $110,000       $2,750
              CONST. INTEREST & FEES
                  Taxes                                    $0.35          $7,000      $175
                  Insurance & Bond                         $1.95         $39,000      $975
                  Total Const. Interest & Fees             $2.30         $46,000     $1,150
              PERMANENT FINANCING
                  Title and Recording                      $0.63         $12,500      $313
                  Total Perm. Financing Costs              $0.63         $12,500      $313
              LEGAL FEES
                  Lender Legal Pd. By Applicant            $1.60         $32,000      $800
                  Total Attorney Costs                     $1.60         $32,000      $800
              RESERVES
                  Replacement Reserve                      $5.00      $100,000       $2,500
                  3 Month Operating Reserve                $3.84       $76,840       $1,921
                  Total Reserve Costs                      $8.84      $176,840       $4,421
                  APPRAISAL COSTS                         $0.35         $7,000         $175
              OTHER
                  Environmental Audit                      $0.60        $12,000        $300
                  Local Dev. Impact Fees                   $4.00        $80,000      $2,000
                  Permit Processing Fees                   $1.00        $20,000        $500
                  Furnishings                             $13.00       $260,000      $6,500
                  Total Other Costs                       $18.60       $372,000      $9,300
                  Subtotals                              $227.26     $4,513,922    $111,348
              DEVELOPER COSTS
                  Consultant/Processing Agent              $3.75       $75,000       $1,875
                  Project Administration                   $1.30       $26,000        $650
                  Construction Management by Developer     $1.80       $36,000        $900
                  Other: security                          $3.00       $60,000       $1,500
                  Total Developer Costs                    $9.85      $197,000       $4,925
              TOTAL PROJECT COST                         $237.11    $4,710,922     $116,273




60                                                                                  Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                   Transitional Housing                  Units 40
                   New Construction for Individuals      Shelter Size 20,000
                                                         Lot Size 16,000
                                                                           TOTAL
                                                                        PROJECT COST      PER UNIT
                   LAND COST/ACQUISITION                      Per S/F
                        Land Cost or Value                                 $300,000        $7,500
                        Demolition                                         $120,000        $1,500
                        Legal                                               $12,000         $300
                        Total Land Cost or Value                           $432,000        $9,300
                        Existing Improvements Value                        $450,000       $11,250
                        Off-Site Improvements                               $40,000        $1,000
                        Total Acquisition Cost                $46.10       $922,000       $21,550
                   NEW CONSTRUCTION
                        Site Work                             $7.81       $125,000         $3,125
                        Structures                          $140.00      $2,800,000       $60,000
                        General Requirements                  $8.42        $168,480        $4,212
                        Contractor Overhead                   $2.98         $59,530        $1,488
                        Contractor Profit                     $9.11        $182,161        $4,554
                        Prevailing Wages                     $20.40       $408,000        $10,200
                        General Liability Insurance           $2.10         $42,000        $1,050
                        Total Construction Costs            $170.82      $3,785,170       $84,629
                   ARCHITECTURAL FEES
                        Design                                 $9.00       $180,000        $4,500
                        Supervision                            $2.10        $42,000        $1,050
                        Total Architectural Costs             $11.10       $222,000        $5,550
                        Total Survey and Engineering           $5.50       $110,000        $2,750
                   CONST. INTEREST & FEES
                        Taxes                                  $0.35            $7,000      $175
                        Insurance & Bond                       $1.95           $39,000      $975
                        Total Const. Interest & Fees           $2.30           $46,000     $1,150
                   PERMANENT FINANCING
                        Title and Recording                    $0.63           $12,500      $313
                        Total Perm. Financing Costs            $0.63           $12,500      $313
                   LEGAL FEES
                        Lender Legal Pd. By Applicant          $1.60           $32,000      $800
                        Total Attorney Costs                   $1.60           $32,000      $800
                   RESERVES
                        Replacement Reserve                    $5.00       $100,000        $2,500
                        3 Month Operating Reserve              $3.84        $76,840        $1,921
                        Total Reserve Costs                    $8.84       $176,840        $4,421
                       APPRAISAL COSTS                        $0.35          $7,000          $175
                   OTHER
                        Environmental Audit                   $0.60         $12,000          $300
                        Local Dev. Impact Fees               $24.00       $480,000        $12,000
                        Permit Processing Fees                $1.00         $20,000          $500
                        Furnishings                          $13.00       $260,000         $6,500
                        Total Other Costs                    $38.60        $772,000       $19,300
                        Subtotals                           $305.84      $6,085,510      $140,638
                   DEVELOPER COSTS
                        Consultant/Processing Agent            $3.75        $75,000        $1,875
                        Project Administration                 $1.30        $26,000         $650
                        Const. Management by Developer         $1.80        $36,000         $900
                        Other: security                        $3.00        $60,000        $1,500
                        Total Developer Costs                  $9.85       $197,000        $4,925
                   TOTAL PROJECT COST                      $315.69      $6,222,510       $155,563




Section 3: The Development Process                                                                   61
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                Transitional Housing                  Units 40
                New Construction for Families         Shelter Size 30,000
                                                      Lot Size 20,000
                                                                        TOTAL
                                                                     PROJECT COST      PER UNIT
                LAND COST/ACQUISITION                      Per S/F
                    Land Cost or Value                                  $300,000        $7,500
                    Demolition                                          $120,000        $3,000
                    Legal                                                $12,000         $300
                    Total Land Cost or Value                            $432,000        $9,300
                    Existing Improvements Value                         $450,000       $11,250
                    Off-Site Improvements                                $40,000        $1,000
                    Total Acquisition Cost                $30.73        $922,000       $23,050
                NEW CONSTRUCTION
                    Site Work                              $6.25        $125,000        $3,125
                    Structures                           $160.00       $4,800,000     $120,000
                    General Requirements                  $11.23        $336,960        $8,424
                    Contractor Overhead                    $3.97         $119,059       $2,976
                    Contractor Profit                     $12.14         $364,321       $9,108
                    Prevailing Wages                      $27.20         $816,000      $20,400
                    General Liability Insurance            $1.40          $42,000       $1,050
                    Total Construction Costs             $222.19       $6,603,340     $165,084
                ARCHITECTURAL FEES
                    Design                                  $6.00       $180,000        $4,500
                    Supervision                             $1.40        $42,000        $1,050
                    Total Architectural Costs               $7.40       $222,000        $5,550
                    Total Survey and Engineering            $3.67       $110,000        $2,750
                CONST. INTEREST & FEES
                    Const. Loan Interest                    $8.67       $260,000        $6,500
                    Origination Fee                         $0.80        $24,000         $600
                    Taxes                                   $0.23         $7,000          $175
                    Insurance & Bond                        $1.30        $39,000          $975
                    Title and Recording                     $0.53        $16,000         $400
                    Total Const. Interest & Fees            $2.87       $346,000        $8,650
                PERMANENT FINANCING
                    Title and Recording                     $0.42           $12,500       $313
                    Total Perm. Financing Costs             $0.42           $12,500       $313
                LEGAL FEES
                    Lender Legal Pd. By Applicant           $1.07           $32,000      $800
                    Other: Partnership                      $0.80           $24,000      $600
                    Total Attorney Costs                    $1.87           $56,000     $1,400
                RESERVES
                    Replacement Reserve                     $3.33       $100,000        $2,500
                    3 Month Operating Reserve               $2.56        $76,840        $1,921
                    Total Reserve Costs                     $5.89       $176,840        $4,421
                    TOTAL APPRAISAL COSTS                   $0.23         $7,000          $175
                OTHER
                    TCAC App/Alloc/Monitor Fees            $0.90          $27,000        $675
                    Environmental Audit                    $0.40          $12,000        $300
                    Local Dev. Impact Fees                $16.00         $480,000      $12,000
                    Permit Processing Fees                 $0.67          $20,000        $500
                    Capital Fees                           $0.40          $12,000        $300
                    Marketing                              $0.27           $8,000        $200
                    Furnishings                            $8.67         $260,000       $6,500
                    Market Study                           $0.40          $12,000        $300
                    Total Other Costs                     $26.80         $831,000      $20,775
                    Subtotals                            $302.07       $9,286,680     $232,167
                DEVELOPER COSTS
                    Developer Overhead/Profit             $28.33        $850,000       $21,250
                    Consultant/Processing Agent            $2.50          $75,000       $1,875
                    Project Administration                 $0.87          $26,000        $650
                    Const. Mngmt. Oversight by Dev.        $1.20          $36,000        $900
                    Other: security                        $2.00          $60,000       $1,500
                    Total Developer Costs                 $34.90       $1,047,000      $26,175
                TOTAL PROJECT COST                      $336.97      $10,333,680      $258,342


62                                                                                     Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                      Permanent Supportive Housing
                      New Construction: 50 Efficiency Units      Building Size 32,000
                                                                 Lot Size 36,000
                                                                               TOTAL
                                                                          PROJECT COST   PER UNIT
                      LAND COST/ACQUISITION
                           Land Cost or Value                                300,000       6,000
                           Demolition                                        120,000       1,200
                           Legal                                              12,000         240
                           Total Land Cost or Value                          432,000       7,440
                           Existing Improvements Value                       750,000      15,000
                           Off-Site Improvements                              40,000         800
                           Total Acquisition Cost              $33.94      1,222,000      23,240
                      NEW CONSTRUCTION
                           Site Work                             $8.59       275,000       5,500
                           Structures                         $ 148.44     4,750,000      95,000
                           General Requirements                 $10.51       336,300       6,726
                           Contractor Overhead                   $3.71       118,826       2,377
                           Contractor Profit                    $11.36       363,608       7,272
                           Prevailing Wages                     $26.72       855,000      17,100
                           General Liability Insurance           $1.31        42,000         840
                           Total Rehab. Costs                 $ 210.65     6,740,734     134,815
                           Relocation Expenses                  $14.38       460,000       9,200
                      ARCHITECTURAL FEES
                           Design                               $6.81       218,000        4,360
                           Supervision                          $1.31        42,000          840
                           Total Architectural Costs            $8.13       260,000        5,200
                           Total Survey and Engineering         $1.25        40,000          800
                      CONST. INTEREST & FEES
                           Const. Loan Interest                 $7.81       250,000        5,000
                           Origination Fee                      $0.28         9,000          180
                           Taxes                                $0.22         7,000          140
                           Insurance & Bond                     $1.22        39,000          780
                           Title and Recording                  $0.63        20,000          400
                           Total Const. Interest & Fees        $10.16       325,000        6,500
                      PERMANENT FINANCING
                           Loan Origination Fee                 $0.16         5,000          100
                           Title and Recording                  $0.25         8,000          160
                           Total Perm. Financing Costs          $0.41        13,000          260
                      LEGAL FEES
                           Lender Legal Pd. By Applicant        $0.75        24,000          480
                           Other: Partnership                   $1.00        32,000          640
                           Total Attorney Costs                 $1.75        56,000        1,120
                      RESERVES
                           Rent Reserves                       $15.00       480,000        9,600
                           Replacement Reserve                  $3.13       100,000        2,000
                           3 Month Operating Reserve            $2.40        76,840        1,537
                           Total Reserve Costs                 $20.53       656,840       13,137
                      APPRAISAL                                 $0.22         7,000          140
                      OTHER
                           TCAC App/Alloc/Monitor Fees          $0.68         21,780         436
                           Environmental Audit                  $0.38         12,000         240
                           Local Dev. Impact Fees              $13.13        420,000       8,400
                           Permit Processing Fees               $0.63         20,000         400
                           Marketing                            $0.17          5,500         110
                           Furnishings                          $6.88        220,000       4,400
                           Market Study                         $0.25          8,000         160
                           Total Other Costs                   $22.10        707,280      14,146
                           Subtotals                           323.50     10,487,854     208,557
                      DEVELOPER COSTS
                           Developer Overhead/Profit           $30.00        960,000      19,200
                           Consultant/Processing Agent          $2.34         75,000       1,500
                           Project Administration               $0.81         26,000         520
                           Const. Mngmt. Oversight by Dev.      $1.13         36,000         720
                           Other: security                      $1.88         60,000       1,200
                           Total Developer Costs               $36.16      1,157,000      23,140
                      TOTAL PROJECT COST                     $ 359.66    11,644,854      231,697



Section 3: The Development Process                                                                  63
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                Emergency         Transitional       Transitional           Permanent
                                                    Housing            Housing           Supportive Housing



                                Acquisition                                                      New
     Type                                       New Construction   New Construction
                               Rehabilitation                                                Construction
     Scale                          40                40                 40                       50
     Total Development Costs    $4,710,922        $5,882,510        $10,333,680              $11,584,854
     Hard Costs Per S/F           $95.31            $147.81           $166.25                  $157.03
     Total Cost Per Unit         $116,273          $155,563          $258,342                 $231,697
     Per Unit Range             $80,000 to        $140,000 to       $250,000 to              $200,000 to
                                 $169,000          $210,000          $340,000                 $280,000



It is unsurprising that the per square foot “hard” construction costs differ depending in
whether a congregate shelter or private units are being proposed as the finishes and design
characteristics for an emergency shelter are inferior when compared with transitional or
permanent housing.

The figures that appear in the table above were used to develop the consolidated budgets
associated with this plan.



In addition to questions about the availability of resources to develop and operate homeless
housing, there are a number of matters that pose serious challenges to any development,
whether related to market-rate housing or low-income housing. Such potential barriers may
range from the need to mitigate environmental contamination to zoning restrictions, or
the lack of public resources for development. One area that has increasingly burdened new
development has been the levying of local impact fees. With the passage of Proposition
13, local governments have had to seek out mechanism besides the property tax that could
generate revenues for essential services, one place that where they have been especially
creative has been impact fees. Impact fees vary by jurisdiction, and some localities in
Riverside County waive such fees for affordable low-income housing developments. For
example, the County of Riverside waives its Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee for low-
income housing developments.




64                                                                                  Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Impact fees are collected for a variety of infrastructure purposes. Some of these fees are
particular to each jurisdiction; others are collected by the local jurisdiction on behalf
of the County. Developers of residential projects will find that they have to pay fees to
several agencies, e.g., Building Department, Public Works, and School District. Some fees
are for presumed impacts on the local infrastructure and service delivery system: like law
enforcement, fire fighting, and library and school development fees. Fees are assessed both
on a per-unit and per-square foot basis. A unique fee is assessed in the western portion
of Riverside County (unincorporated) and 14 cities for the Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan. Residential developments above 14 units per acre are required to pay
a fee of $900 per unit. Parkland fees tend to be the highest levied through the Building
Departments, with fees ranging from $1,490 per unit in Hemet to $8,924 per unit in Corona.
Infrastructure costs are passed differently, for instance Corona assesses $2,716 per unit for
Sewer Capacity, while Hemet charges $2,030 for bridges, signals and thoroughfares. School
district fees tend to be among the highest, ranging from $2.93 per square foot in Palm
Springs and Palm Desert to $4.27 per square foot in Riverside. Because there is no way to
know for certain the scale of any proposed development and its configuration, one can only
get the most general sense as to how much impact fees may add to the development costs of
a project. In lieu development fees add from $7,000 to $19,000 per unit in Riverside County
and its constituent jurisdictions. For a 25-unit project, this could amount to $425,000, a
significant amount that must be added to the development budget. As a percentage of costs,
such fees generally add from three to six percent to the total development costs.

Perhaps the greatest barrier in developing housing resources for homeless persons is the likely
unpopular response to such plans by local residents. A discussion of the need for leadership in
overcoming local resistance is included in the next section of this report.




Section 3: The Development Process                                                           65
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




66                                                                  Section 3: The Development Process
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                                                                       4
                                                                                     SECTION




E   very development for homeless populations must take into account the many issues
    addressed in the preceding sections. This section singles out a handful of developments
that have resolved the many matters, demonstrating unusual or notable success of one sort or
another.



                                                           Ocean Park Community Center (OPCC), an
                                                           innovative and nationally-recognized
                                                           homeless services agency operating in Santa
                                                           Monica, California recently opened the
                                                           Cloverfield Services Center located in a
                                                           largely industrial and commercial area
                                                   (Figure 4A). This 21,900 square foot multi-
Figure 4A.                                         purpose center was developed with $11.4
million in public and private sources. It should be noted that of the total development costs,
over $5.1 million was used to acquire the 30,000 square foot parcel. In other words, excluding
the cost of land, the shelter cost $6.9 million to develop, a cost of $315 per square foot.

                County of Los Angeles                    General Funds           $200,000
                California Department of Mental Health   Unspecified             $200,000
                California HCD                           EHAP-CD                $1,000,000
                LAHSA                                    HUD: SHP                $400,000
                City of Santa Monica                     HOME, Redevelopment    $7,397,112
                OPCC                                     Private fundraising    $2,802,888
                TOTAL                                                          $12,000,000




Section 4: Model Programs                                                                           67
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The center has sections devoted to a number of specific uses. Its Daybreak Shelter has
developed 30 partitioned cubicles for homeless women with serious mental health disorders.
These beds are managed as Safe Haven units meaning that OPCC has a high tolerance for
behaviors that in most traditional models of service-delivery would force a woman back onto
the streets. The shelter also includes space dedicated to service delivery, including space
for mental health services, medical services, substance abuse treatment services, and on-site
recreational and socialization activities. Funds to operate the Cloverfield Services Center come
from a federal grant from SAMHSA, local government sources, and private funds from donors.

What was particularly noteworthy about the development of this new shelter was the level
of local opposition to the shelter from what is generally considered a liberal and tolerant
community. Opposition to the location of the shelter came from three main sources.
Firstly, although the typical land uses in the general vicinity of the shelter are commercial
and light-industrial, the handful of residents within roughly a mile of the site organized
in opposition to the City’s investment of funds to acquire the site. A second group of
opponents were local businesses although, with the exception of some gas stations and a
supermarket, hardly any retail uses are in the vicinity. Rather, the business interests that
organized in opposition included body shops, printing shops, and a well-connected private
waste disposal firm. The third group that organized in opposition to the development of this
shelter was an internationally-known arts community located adjacent to the site. The local
residents were the most strident in their opposition, and that stridency ultimately proved to
be its undoing. Carrying signs reading: “No Skid Row in Santa Monica,” and incapable of
suggesting specific design or management changes that would help to mitigate their concerns
about neighborhood impact, the City Council was pressed to make a decision that it knew
would be unpopular with a section of the local populace. The City’s considerable investment
in this shelter (representing over 60 percent of the total funds) goes to show the level of
commitment the City was willing to make to support this otherwise unpopular cause.




68                                                                           Section 4: Model Programs
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Figure 4B.


Martha’s Village and Kitchen opened the Dan Dunlap Center in 2001, a “one stop” center
where a range of homeless populations could come to have a large number of their needs
addressed (Figure 4B). This 44,000 square foot facility includes a transitional housing program
on the top floor with 34 private rooms (with 120 beds) accommodating homeless families and
individuals. The ground floor includes a variety of uses to assist homeless persons address
many of their day-to-day needs. The ground floor space is used as a secure, outdoor reception/
assembly area with easy access to public showers and laundry facilities (see below). The
outdoor reception area also provides access to
the dining room, the central feature of the
ground floor service amenities. With a full-
production kitchen on-site (Figure 4C),
Martha’s Village and Kitchen provides
285,000 meals each year to its residents and
other homeless persons in the community.
This center also has an on-site




Section 4: Model Programs                                                                   69
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Figure 4C.


licensed childcare center for infants, toddlers, and young children (Figure 4D). Programming
includes after-school activities for the children who reside at the shelter. To assist homeless
persons re-enter the labor force, Martha’s Village includes a Career and Education Center
accessed by 6,000 persons a year (Figure 4E). A particularly unique feature of the Dunlap
Center is the presence of an on-site medical clinic serving both residents and low-income,
uninsured persons in the community (Figure 4F).




Figure 4D.




70                                                                          Section 4: Model Programs
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Figure 4E.

The Dan Dunlap Center was designed as both a transitional housing facility and emergency
shelter. Each evening, the dining room is cleaned and the furnishings moved so that mats may
be place on the hard-tile floors. These mats are allocated on a first-come/first-served basis to
persons needing access to emergency shelter (Figure 4G).




Figure 4F.                                             Figure 4G.




Section 4: Model Programs                                                                  71
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The Dan Dunlap Center requires $3.9 million to operate. An active and extensive volunteer
program provides 35,000 hours of community service each year that helps to reduce the
overall operating costs. The functional divisions comprising the 2005/06 operating (cash)
budget are as follows:

                            Case Management                     $225,108
                            Emergency Services                   $75,081
                            Children’s Services                 $376,448
                            Chaplaincy Services                  $51,936
                            Maintenance                         $400,194
                            Food Services                       $715,998
                            Security Services                   $318,757
                            Medical Services                    $654,675
                            Career & Education Services         $267,166
                            Resident Services                   $491,356
                            Volunteer Services                   $52,886
                            Administration                      $353,483
                            TOTAL                             $3,983,089

In terms of the transitional housing component, exclusive of any on-site services that the
residents may utilize, the cost per bed per year is approximately $4,100. If half of the security
costs are allocated to this, the annual bed cost increases to $5,700.

The development of the Dan Dunlap Center was financed with the following sources:
         SOURCE                                 PROGRAM                         AMOUNT
         CA Tax Credit Allocation Committee     LIHTC (9% credits)           $2,615,387
         U.S. Dept. of HUD                      Supportive Housing Program    $400,000
         Federal Home Loan Bank                 Affordable Housing Program    $500,000
         Martha’s Kitchen & Village             Private Donations            $5,638,807
         TOTAL                                                               $9,154,194

Of the $9.1 million in total development costs, the amount required to acquire the parcel
was a modest $280,000. Excluding land, the total development costs came to $201 per
square foot in 2001 and the quality of construction is at least on par with (if not superior
to) the Cloverfield Services Center noted above. This shows the significant escalation in
construction costs over the first half of this decade.

It should be noted that the development of a comprehensive program such as this may make
sense in a handful of population centers where homeless persons may be congregated. In a
dispersed county such as Riverside, a more comprehensive planning approach may be to site



72                                                                                   Section 4: Model Programs
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




small to modest housing resources in several areas to facilitate the integration of the programs
and the resident populations into the community.




The largest homeless services agency in the Western United States, the Single Room
Occupancy (SRO) Housing Corporation, has developed a comprehensive system of care that
is capable of addressing the broad range of needs presented by various homeless populations.
Operating in the Skid Row section of downtown Los Angeles, SRO Housing has been at
the forefront of agencies nationwide creating opportunities to move homeless persons out
of poverty and despair and into a more normative set of life-experiences. Over its 22 year
history, SRO Housing has developed nearly 1,700 units of single room occupancy housing
for homeless (and formerly homeless) persons.

SRO Housing uses its inventory in a variety of ways. Two hotels, the Russ and Panama,
are used as emergency shelters with a combined occupancy of 369 units. Two other hotels,
the Golden West and the Marshal House are used as transitional housing for special-needs
populations. An additional 1,100 units developed at 20 different sites by SRO Housing are
used as permanent housing. As a community development organization focusing its efforts
on the lowest-income population in the United States, SRO Housing has sought to transform
both the lives of the unfortunate persons in the downtown area as well as the blighted
neighborhood of Skid Row.

This neighborhood has received much attention over the past two years owing in large
measure to the passionate writing of Steve Lopez of the Los Angeles Times. Lopez has chronicled
the journey of a homeless person whom he met on the streets of downtown Los Angeles.
His journey has taught him to look at the human suffering in the Skid Row area, but what
he has not always fully appreciated is how much progress has been made by the concerted
efforts of the City of Los Angeles and nonprofit organizations to revitalize this area. As bad
as things may appear on the surface, the neighborhood known as Skid Row is far better
than in years past because of the redevelopment activity. SRO Housing has been the most
active agent of change in Skid Row, having acquired and rehabilitated a large portion of the
decaying housing stock and re-marketing it as quality affordable housing for extremely low-
income persons. The work of SRO Housing is included here as a model depicting: 1) how



Section 4: Model Programs                                                                    73
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




a commitment to design and management excellence helps to reduce recidivism or relapse;
2) how supportive housing has helped to stabilize large numbers of persons, and 3) how a
comprehensive development plan for homeless housing is achievable.




Unlike traditional providers that use mass shelters as emergency shelter, SRO Housing
places literally homeless persons in secure, private accommodations at the Russ and Panama
Hotels. Each unit in these hotels is separately keyed, and keys are controlled by a front-desk
that is staffed around the clock. Each new guest signs a copy of the house rules that include
prohibitions on bringing weapons into the facility, using illegal narcotics on-site, or allowing
a key to be taken from the premises. A security system through which all residents must pass
to enter or leave the buildings prevents the keys from being removed from the premises.
Entrusting a formerly homeless person with a key to his own fully-furnished, self-contained
residential unit bestows dignity, respect, and a modicum of trustworthiness to him. Private
accommodations provide necessary therapeutic spaces that are an antidote to the intensely
public experience of living on the streets. Moreover, while ensuring a measure of much-
needed privacy, the configuration of single room occupancy units with common bathroom
facilities makes it nearly impossible for a person to become isolated and be at risk of engaging
in self-destructive behaviors.

Each unit is furnished with a bed (not a cot), dresser, chair, and either a wardrobe or closet.
Linens are changed by maids upon unit-turnover and weekly for guests staying over. In
addition, each of these private units has a sink, medicine cabinet, and window to the outside. SRO Housing
recognizes that these unit features distinguish its emergency shelters from those of other
providers, yet it accepts these as “necessary luxuries.” Through its model of providing
superior emergency shelter accommodations, SRO Housing hopes to reacquaint homeless
persons to a more normative life-style, one in which there are reciprocal expectations of
behavior and respect. SRO Housing made a conscious decision to reject the model of
placing human beings on mats or cots to initiate the process by which persons “recover” from
homelessness. Thus, the installation of a private sink and mirror are both potent symbols and
the very mechanism by which SRO Housing hopes a person to stop, (literally) take a good
hard look and take stock: “is this really the person I have become?” SRO Housing provides
personal hygiene kits for each guest as they enter the emergency shelter. These kits include


74                                                                                   Section 4: Model Programs
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




soap, a toothbrush, toothpaste, shaving cream, a disposable razor, deodorant, shampoo,
laundry soap, and tokens to use the washers and dryers. In other words, SRO Housing
provides the basic tools by which a person may begin to clean up and shape up and begin to
reintegrate into the social mainstream.

It is at root the proto-typical “housing first” model with the exception that tenancy rights
are not established as the units are paid for by an outside source. This is not an insignificant
difference from certain other housing first models, but it is one that SRO Housing has felt
it necessary to enforce as a necessary commitment to the safety and security of its residents.
SRO Housing refers to this as its “try before you buy” strategy, essentially giving its
management an opportunity to assess prospective tenants for permanent housing.

Recognizing the futility of expecting a homeless person (especially one with a disabling
condition) to seek to access normative housing, SRO Housing created the Enhanced
Emergency Housing Program (EEHP). EEHP is a case management program providing
outreach, engagement, assessment, and information and referral services for persons in
emergency shelters. The intent of EEHP is to move homeless persons to more stable housing
in as short a period as possible, ideally not exceeding 180 days. Services are aimed at assisting
this population in achieving three primary goals: addressing the primary cause of their
homelessness (typically an untreated mental health disorder or addiction to drugs or alcohol);
increasing the participant’s income (primarily through earnings, but through public benefits as
necessary); and achieving residential stability. Clients’ Individual Action Plans include specific
steps to be taken to achieve these overriding goals. Each IAP is developed in conjunction
with the program participant to address a wide range of matters including source of income,
savings for permanent housing, substance addiction, mental health concerns, lingering legal
issues, etc. Each IAP is different based upon the unique resources and needs of the individual;
therefore each step varies from individual to individual.

EEHP program participants are provided housing referrals as a regular part of their
participation in the development of their Individual Action Plans. With over 1,100 units of
permanent affordable housing, many EEHP participants leave the Russ or Panama emergency
shelters to enter one of SRO Housing’s 20 permanent residences. SRO Housing has obtained
261 Sponsor-based Shelter Plus Care housing rental certificates through the Continuum of
Care process, and it has project-based Section 8 rental assistance attached to an additional



Section 4: Model Programs                                                                     75
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




497 units at ten of its properties. Some of the rental assistance is restricted to special-needs
populations. As a testament of this program’s effectiveness, roughly a third of all of SRO
Housing’s permanent residents were once on the caseload of an EEHP Service Coordinator.
Many persons are referred by EEHP for drug treatment and return to SRO Housing for
permanent housing or to reside at the Marshal House, SRO’s transitional housing program
for persons in recovery. A large contingent of EEHP graduates participate in SRO Housing’s
Shelter Plus Care program.

To some extent, the evaluation of prospective residents while in emergency shelter results
from an inefficiency that is built into the administration of rental assistance for homeless
persons. From the time a prospective resident has been identified and an application for rental
assistance has been submitted, it may take two or even three months for the local housing
authority to approve the application and inspect the unit prior to occupancy. During this
time, the prospective tenant needs to remain sheltered in either an emergency shelter setting
or a transitional housing program. SRO Housing’s management model permits a person to
remain stable in housing while awaiting a determination on a rental assistance application.

Funding to operate SRO Housing’s emergency shelters comes from a variety of sources and
the regulations pertaining to each source does in fact pose a barrier to success from time to
time. Among the public agencies that have bought into SRO Housing’s model (and have
thereby entered into contractual relationships with it) are the following:



                                                     Russ Hotel   Panama Hotel   COMBINED
          Total Units                                   168           201          369
          Units by Funding Allocation
            Adult Protective Services                    15            0              15
            Department of Mental Health                  10             0             10
            Department of Mental Health–AB2034           12            0              12
            Department of Public Health–TB Control       15            0              15
            Department of Public Social Services         24            91            115
            HOPWA                                       20              0             20
            LAHSA Year-Round Shelter Program              0           100            100
            LAHSA-CDBG                                    0            10             10
            Homeless Housing Fund                       35              0             35
            Veterans Administration (per diem)          36             0             36
            Winter Shelter Program                        0            0               0
          Unallocated Units                               1             0              1
          Total                                         168           201            369


76                                                                               Section 4: Model Programs
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




A review of the sources funding emergency shelter services at SRO Housing evinces that
some of the units are set-aside for special-needs populations, and a few words are in order
to single out how some of these sources have been used. The Department of Public Social
Services reimburses SRO Housing on a per-diem basis for applicants for General Relief
benefits who are either awaiting an initial eligibility determination, or who declare themselves
homeless. DPSS provides such persons with vouchers that may be redeemed for emergency
housing at the Russ or Panama Hotel. On average, about 2/3 of the vouchers are redeemed,
meaning that roughly one out of three homeless persons do not avail themselves of this
benefit. The greatest barrier to utilization has been that persons must walk about a mile
from the eligibility offices to the shelters, and for some that is a “long mile.” Utilization has
not been a problem for persons receiving shelter through the Department of Public Health,
TB Control Unit. These guests are homeless persons in a medically supervised treatment
program to combat tuberculosis. Once a course of treatment is begun, it is important
that the patient continue until the illness is under control. To stop treatment mid-course
means to invite new treatment-resistant bacterial strains into the environment and unleash
an outbreak that could seriously threaten the public health. Other sources are limited to
specific populations, like the funding from the Veterans Administration or the Department of
Mental Health. In general, the LAHSA-funded units are for a general population of homeless
persons, but this source has seemed more intent than others in establishing fixed time limits
for which assistance may be offered.



In addition to emergency shelter and transitional housing, SRO Housing also provides
permanent housing in 20 hotels, with a combined occupancy of over 1,000 units. These are
among the few decent, safe, and sanitary permanent housing units that are affordable to the
lowest income persons in Los Angeles County, namely persons collecting General Relief
benefits of $221 per month. Three of these hotels, the Leo, Southern and Angelus Inn are
sober residences that enforce a zero-tolerance policy; one, the Ellis Hotel, is a senior citizen
hotel where SRO provides supportive social services and a congregate meal site funded by
the City of Los Angeles Department of Aging. The Eugene Hotel and Brownstone Hotel
receive Shelter Plus Care project assistance to house disabled persons (respectively, persons
living with HIV/AIDS and chronic mental illnesses). The remaining units serve a general
population, and SRO has been awarded two allotments of rental assistance certificates



Section 4: Model Programs                                                                      77
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




(combined 218 certificates) through the Shelter Plus Care Sponsor-based Program to serve
homeless persons with disabilities.

In addition to managing this stock of housing, SRO Housing has also developed a
comprehensive system of supportive services to assist its permanent residents remain stable in
housing. Funding for social services comes from the County of Los Angeles Adult Protective
Services division and HUD’s Supportive Housing Program. These resources provide case
management services for disabled persons and those at risk of relapse to homelessness.
Moreover, SRO Housing assists its residents through a program of tenant amenities provided
at no cost to the residents. Among the free services that SRO offers its residents are: tickets to
athletic events, cultural activities, and civic functions; quarterly potluck meals; and monthly
birthday (and sobriety birthday) celebrations. SRO also accepts as a part of its regular housing
management responsibilities the provision of food in its hotels without charge. With resources from the LA
Regional Foodbank and World International, SRO delivers over three tons of groceries each
month throughout its hotels. Finally, of particular note, SRO Housing hosts AA, CA, and NA
recovery meetings at most of its hotels as well as at a new Community Center it developed in
the heart of Skid Row (see Figure 4H).




Eugene                                              Yankee Site
After Renovation                                    After Renovation




78                                                                                    Section 4: Model Programs
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




   Harold Hotel



                                               Figure 4H. James Wood Center




As an organization dedicated to creating the resources and opportunities for persons to
overcome homelessness, SRO Housing has developed a number of unique management
practices that help it to achieve its mission. Previously noted was SRO Housing’s capacity to
assess prospective residents prior to entering permanent housing. Its 400 units of emergency
shelter give SRO Housing an advantage compared to those agencies that do not have the
ability to observe homeless residents prior to occupancy.

The emergency shelters also provide an important safety valve that supports the operation
of the permanent housing. When a person relapses he becomes disruptive to the entire
community, engaging in behavior that can be dangerous, like inviting strangers into a building.
SRO Housing uses the traditional means at its disposal to resolve problem tenancies, including
notices and eviction proceedings. But rather than seek to remedy each problem using the
courts (which are slow and uncertain), SRO Housing managers generally look to negotiate
with such tenants. In general, the option offered to such residents is free accommodations
(for a period) at the Russ Hotel emergency shelter in exchange for an executed voluntary
quit notice. In addition, SRO Housing makes clear that if a tenant takes this offer, he will




Section 4: Model Programs                                                                   79
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




be permitted to re-enter the permanent housing once he has overcome the challenges that
have caused the disruptive behavior in the first place. A number of persons have in fact
returned to the housing community having completed a period of rehabilitation and recovery,
thereby confirming to all tenants that SRO Housing stands by its word that it will stand by
its residents. This mechanism allows SRO Housing to quickly resolve problem tenancies.
Moreover, it provides its case managers an extended opportunity to make contact with the
former resident and encourage acceptance of a referral to a residential treatment program.

In short, the fact that SRO Housing has a range of housing types at its management disposal
means that frequently it is able to prevent homelessness by intervening in such a manner that
ensures that a person remains housed. This does not mean that SRO Housing will knowingly
permit a person to use illegal narcotics on site on any of its properties. It extends a measure
of understanding and tolerance that accepts that recovery may not be a lifetime achievement
for all persons. In instances when a party rejects the offer to voluntarily vacate and forces
SRO Housing to go through the entire eviction process, SRO Housing places the name of
this party on a Watch List and prohibits him from re-entering the permanent housing until
reparation has been made. Reparation includes paying any past-due rent and legal fees for
having forced SRO Housing into court.

Another management practice implemented by SRO Housing also deserves note, namely
how it deals with issues of relapse and substance abuse in general. To prohibit occupancy to
persons who have used illegal drugs in the past would destine a large percentage of the Skid
Row community to life in the streets and thereby further blight the neighborhood. In having
developed a range of housing, SRO has sought to create a number of options that might
address the range of needs and market demands of the resident community. Among the most
challenging populations served by SRO Housing are persons with substance abuse disorders:
alcoholics, persons addicted to “Crack,” heroin, or other illegal substances. Recognizing that
no single approach to confronting addiction will effectively meet the needs of each person,
the following policies and procedures have been established to address the range of issues and
problems raised by the use of alcohol and drugs among residents at SRO Housing’s properties.




80                                                                          Section 4: Model Programs
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




On-site Possession
The possession and sale of illegal substances is a crime, and as landlords SRO Housing has an
obligation to protect its residents and its assets. To allow a criminal activity to occur on the
premises of a property owned and managed by SRO Housing compromises the Corporation
and exposes it (and its employees) to a range of civil and criminal penalties. For this
reason, any resident found in possession of drugs or illegal drug paraphernalia are reported
immediately to the Los Angeles Police Department. This policy is binding on all properties
owned and operated by SRO Housing Corporation.

On-site Use of Alcohol vAmendment XXI of the Constitution (ratified in 1933) repealed
Amendment XVIII which prohibited the sale and transportation of alcoholic beverages within
the United States. The repeal of prohibition means that the private consumption of alcoholic
beverages is a legal activity of any adult. Regardless of one’s personal feelings about alcohol,
SRO Housing has not felt that it should seek to control the use of alcohol, except in certain
very limited ways. The use of alcohol in pubic settings is regulated by State law, and SRO
Housing reserves the right to ask any person in a public setting to refrain from drinking.
Places where persons may not drink include: the streets in front of SRO Housing Hotels, the
lobbies, halls, and common kitchen and restroom facilities. SRO Housing does permit resi-
dents to drink alcoholic beverages in the private units that they lease, but no one is permitted
to appear in public with an open container of alcohol. Persons who violate this policy are
reminded of the restriction, and if they persist in drinking in public they are served a writ-
ten notice of violation of the terms of their lease. SRO Housing Security staff enforces this
policy.



SRO Housing is not in the business of monitoring every behavior of its residents, and
it recognizes that a number of residents may use drugs and/or alcohol off-site. Public
intoxication or being clearly under the influence of an illegal substance in a public area is not
tolerated in any of SRO’s properties. Persons found to be under the influence are instructed
that they must retire to their private unit or risk receiving a notice of violation of the house
rules of the hotel.




Section 4: Model Programs                                                                      81
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




SRO Housing has developed three hotels as sober residences for persons who prefer to live that
lifestyle. Residents of these hotels sign a special addendum to their leases indicating their voluntary
agreement to remain drug- and alcohol-free both on-site and off-site. It has been the experience of SRO
Housing that persons who violate this provision of the lease typically reveal the fact to the
Housing Manager or the recovery community itself. Should a Housing Manager be informed
by a resident of his/her use at a sober residence, the Manager contacts the Director of Social
Services and the Director of Housing Management who make alternative arrangements for
the resident, such as moving the person to one of SRO’s emergency shelters. In exchange for
emergency housing, the Director of Housing Management has the discretion to negotiate a
termination of the lease agreement by securing a Voluntary Quit Notice. If a resident refuses
to sign a Voluntary Quit Notice, the Housing Manager will be instructed to initiate eviction
proceedings and take all legal remedies to secure the unit. At any time during the eviction
process, up until a judgment is rendered by the Court, the resident may sign the Voluntary Quit
Notice and take advantage of the offer to relocate to one of SRO’s emergency shelters for
a limited period until alternative housing can be located. Persons who accept this offer are
permitted an uncontested right to lease from SRO Housing again, either at a sober residence,
or at a general population hotel, after participating in a recovery program of at a least three-
month duration. Persons who force SRO Housing to proceed to a judgment are placed on
the Resident Alert List and prohibited from residing in a property managed by SRO Housing
for at least three years. At the end of three years, the Director of Housing Management may
extend this sanction for cause.



SRO Housing endeavors to meet its residents on their own terms. Recognizing that not all
persons in recovery prefer to live a sober lifestyle at a sober residence, SRO has adopted a
policy toward drug and alcohol use that provides a range of options. Consistent with the
goal of providing realistic options that persons will choose to pursue on their terms, SRO
has established a pro-active stand toward recovery. What this means in practice is that SRO does
not seek to enforce a Zero Tolerance policy in its general population hotels. Rather, a Zero
Tolerance policy is enforced only at the Angelus Inn, Leo Hotel, and Marshal House, SRO’s
designated sober residences. Persons with mental health and/or substance abuse disorders
who reside in one of SRO Housing’s general population hotels are strongly encouraged to



82                                                                                  Section 4: Model Programs
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




involve themselves in the many recovery options available downtown, and to a great extent
this population is monitored by SRO Housing social services staff. However, rather than
establish a long period of sobriety as a pre-condition to entering permanent housing, SRO regards sobriety as
a goal to be achieved through a process of accepting a greater level of personal commitment to recovery. SRO
supports recovery through on-site recovery meetings (AA, CA, NA) at 16 of its hotels, plus
the Drifters AA meeting at Gladys Park. The Corporation maintains an up-to-date list of the
many recovery meetings that convene in downtown Los Angeles, and makes this available to
assist persons identify a meeting for his/her specific needs. In addition to hosting meetings,
SRO supports recovery through education, and (as necessary) referrals to either a residential
treatment program or outpatient program. Additionally, Housing Managers within its various
permanent housing hotels, make referrals to the Social Services Division when the need arises.



SRO Housing encourages its 304 Shelter Plus Care Program participants residing outside
of sober residences to minimize their exposure to high-risk behavior, including alcohol
and drugs. The case management staff assigned to these residents provides education,
information, guidance, and counseling to encourage this population to increase levels of
self-control and to minimize self-destructive behaviors. Weighing the competing goals of
maintaining a safe and clean residence, as well as meeting the specific needs of each resident,
SRO Housing has adopted the following specific policies for its Shelter Plus Care (S+C)
Program participants who reside outside of sober-living environments:

1. S+C participants who enter with a history of substance addiction must have 180 days
   of sobriety as a condition of seeking tenancy and must sign an addendum to the lease
   indicating their willingness to remain drug- and alcohol-free, both on and off site.
2. These participants (and any others who abuse substances while in the program), are
   required to attend recovery meetings as part of their Individual Action Plans.
3. Relapse is a violation of the agreed upon conditions for S+C housing and is addressed on
   an individual basis in conjunction with the assigned Case Manager and Licensed Clinician.
4. Persistent use of drugs and alcohol is considered a serious lease violation and may
   ultimately result in eviction proceedings, depending upon the frequency and intensity of
   the abuse.




Section 4: Model Programs                                                                                       83
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




84                                                                        Section 4: Model Programs
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                                                                 5
                                                                               SECTION




T     he coordination of local government entities is essential to develop and operate
      affordable housing, and this is particularly true when the units are intended to be used
by persons who are (or have recently been) homeless. Coordination is important for three
primary reasons. Firstly, various levels of government control the resources that may be
used to assist homeless persons and families. Secondly, municipalities generally establish
entitlements for land uses (within state guidelines) and local impact fees, so County-driven
development activities require local input, approval, and occasionally concessions relative to
fees. Thirdly, leadership that can only be achieved through compromise and coordination is
needed to address the considerable obstacles to the development of residential resources to
address the problem of homelessness.



Appendix I of this report includes a funding matrix and program descriptions of the various
key resources that may be utilized to address the problem of homelessness. These resources
are generated at all levels of government, and, in fact, nearly all development involves
accessing a broad range of funding from different sources. It seems to be axiomatic that a
governmental entity will tend to seek to minimize its particular investment to maximum its
leverage potential. Put simply, everyone wants the biggest “bang for its buck.” In addition,
it has generally been true that leverage works up, much like a weight on a fulcrum, meaning
that typically the first dollar invested in a project is from a local source as State and Federal
commitments nearly always demand demonstrable local support before committing their
investment. Thus, as with construction, so too with finance: a developer works from the
ground up, applying for financial support at increasingly remote levels of government. The
seeming exception to this rule has been that a considerable amount of Federal support for



Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities                           85
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




affordable housing and homeless assistance is allocated to local governments in the form of
block grants. For the most part, these funds become redefined as local, despite their inception
from the U.S. Treasury. An advantage to this has been that local governments have found it
far easier to commit what from their perspective are “other people’s,” (i.e., federal funds from
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) dollars rather than to seek to
invest using their own limited tax resources.

In general, the (HUD-originated) resources that localities have used to support the
development and ongoing operation of housing for homeless households have come from
the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership
(HOME) programs. The allocations of these (and other HUD formula-based) assistance
to entitlement jurisdictions in Riverside County for Fiscal Year 2006 appears on the page
following. By-and-large, HUD’s block grant assistance has remained relatively stable over the
past decade, so for planning purposes it makes sense to assume the availability of such funds
over time. Table 5A shows that the total block grant assistance from HUD to jurisdictions
within Riverside amounts to $27.3 million, the majority of which being allocated to the
County of Riverside (nearly $14.6 million). HUD block grant assistance is a largely flexible
funding source relative to development and operations, although as with any Federal
program, there are a number of limitations like an annual cap of 15% for supportive services
for CDBG funds. Table 5B shows how the County’s CDBG allotment has been reallocated
to various participating cities in the jurisdiction as well as to the Supervisorial Districts
themselves. Clearly the need for federal block grant assistance for community development
activities extends well beyond the problem of homelessness, but it should not go unnoticed
that the current practice of reallocating CDBG on a “fair share” basis throughout the County

  TABLE 5A: HUD Entitlement Allocations For The Cities And County of Riverside-FY 2006
Supervisorial                                         CDBG
  District       Jurisdiction            CDBG      Reallocation      HOME            ESG         HOPWA           TOTAL
       2         Corona               $1,233,892                    $477,523                                   $1,711,415
       3         Hemet                  $717,858                                                                 $717,858
       5         Moreno Valley        $1,802,216     $7,782        $623,440                                    $2,433,438
       4         Palm Desert            $356,983                                                                $356,983
       4         Palm Springs           $518,598                                                                 $518,598
     1, 2        Riverside City       $3,461,498    $24,851       $1,599,230     $147,650      $1,684,000      $6,917,229
 1, 2, 3, 4, 5   Riverside County    $10,488,729    $51,155       $3,594,993     $443,329                     $14,578,206
                 TOTAL              $ 18,579,774    $83,788       $6,295,186     $590,979      $1,684,000     $27,233,727




86                                                    Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




           TABLE 5B: County of Riverside CDBG Reallocation, 2006-2007
 PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION                                                                                  2,097,760
 ALLOCATED TO
 PARTICIPATING CITIES                                               DISTRICT
                                          1             2                3           4           5
         Banning                                                                              180,433      180,433
         Beaumont                                                                             124,394      124,394
         Blythe                                                                   142,775                  142,775
         Cathedral City                                                           301,881                  301,881
         Canyon Lake1                                                        0                                   0
         Desert Hot Springs                                                                   139,461      139,461
         Indio                                                                     427,161                 427,161
         Lake Elsinore                 236,011                                                             236,011
         La Quinta                                                                 190,911                 190,911
         Murrieta                                                    418,887                               418,887
         Norco                                       134,202                                               134,202
         Perris                                                                               294,688      294,688
         San Jacinto                                                 185,184                               185,184
         Temecula                                                    422,307                               422,307
 TOTAL MUNICIPAL                       236,011       134,202       1,026,378     1,062,728    738,976     3,198,294
 ALLOCATIONS
 ALLOCATED TO
 SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICTS
       1st District                    594,473                                                             594,473
         2nd District                                838,833                                               838,833
         3rd District                                                901,272                               901,272
         4th District                                                             606,560                  606,560
         5th District                                                                         526,551      526,551
 TOTAL ALLOCATED TO DISTRICTS                                                                             3,467,689
 TOTAL CDBG BY DISTRICT               830,484        973,035       1,927,650     1,669,288   1,265,527
 ALLOCATED TO HOUSING                                                                                      600,000
 PROGRAMS2
 ALLOCATED TO Econ. Dev.                                                                                  1,125,056
 PROGRAMS
 TOTAL CDBG ALLOCATION                                                                                   10,488,799




1 The City of Canyon Lake’s CDBG allocation is included in the 3rd District Supervisorial allocation.
2 The Housing Programs include Home Repair, Senior Home Repair, and IDA Down-payment Assistance.




Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities                                           87
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




seriously limits the availability of these funds as potential resource that might be available
to make a significant contribution to impacting the problem of homelessness. In fact the
allocations in Supervisorial Districts 3, 4, and 5 are significant (over $1 million in each) and,
when aggregated within each district CDBG, they could be an important resource for the
development of homeless programs and housing. The current reallocation methodology takes
what could be significant sums and reduces them to what are (at best) modest allocations to
the participating cities. These funds are then further re-distributed in even smaller allocations
to address a variety of local needs. Thus, given the reallocation methodology implemented
by the County of Riverside, in the final analysis it is hard to imagine that CDBG could ever
be a relevant resource in the development and operation of homeless housing programs. A
more strategic approach to the utilization of CDBG would be needed to use these funds to
address the problem of homelessness in Riverside County.

Most communities throughout California depend upon their CDBG allocations to develop
new programs and facilities to assist homeless populations. Section 108 of the CDBG
regulations contain a provision for entitlement jurisdictions to borrow from the U.S.
Treasury using future allocations for repayment of the debt. The intent of Section 108 is to
assist localities in assembling larger sums than they would otherwise be able to aggregate
through the CDBG program because the regulations include requirements that localities
have uncommitted no more than 150% of their annual allocation. If it proved politically
unacceptable to alter the local convention of reallocating CDBG in Riverside County, the
only possible recourse to utilize CDBG would be to pursue a strategy of using a Section 108
loan to finance the development of new homeless housing.

In addition to the CDBG committed to the County of Riverside, six other jurisdictions
receive direct commitments from HUD (see Table 5A). Given that it may be possible to
assemble funds from the other entitlements with a portion of the County’s CDBG, larger
allocations may be available that could prove to be useful in the development of housing
for homeless populations. Were there political will to dedicate 20% of each jurisdiction’s
CDBG allocation to the development of resources to impact the problem of homelessness
(an admittedly ambitious goal); nearly $3 million would be made available on an annual basis.
On a Supervisorial District basis, funding would be variable, but would amount to at least
$500,000 per year as shown in Table 5C.




88                                          Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                     District       20% Entitlement            County Allocations   Combined CDBG
                        1               346,150                    166,097              512,247
                        2               592,928                    194,607              787,535
                        3               143,572                    385,530              529,102
                        4               175,116                    333,858              508,974
                        5               360,443                    253,105              613,549
                     TOTAL            1,618,209                  1,333,197            2,951,406



This analysis is intended to help policy analysts better understand the consequences of
current funding strategies and to consider alternative approaches to the allocation of CDBG
funds that may produce better results to develop housing for homeless populations. The
intent here is not to suggest that it would be possible to achieve a consensus that 20%
should in fact be set aside for the production of housing for homeless and near-homeless
populations. Rather, the goal here has been to encourage thought about ways that resources
may be aggregated to achieve substantive results.



Municipal governments have considerable other resources available for development
purposes, particularly funds controlled by local redevelopment agencies. A summary of
redevelopment funds that may be available to develop and operate homeless programs
appears in Table 5D. As over against the limited number of federal entitlement jurisdictions,
the creation of redevelopment agencies and project areas has been a popular strategy for all
but one municipality in Riverside County (the exception being Canyon Lake). The gross tax
increment generated by the redevelopment project areas amounts to nearly $360 million,
with just under $72 million required to be set-aside for affordable housing development.
Housing set-aside funds may be used to develop and operate homeless assistance programs.
It should be noted that the housing set-aside is a statutory minimum and many jurisdictions
throughout California have invested considerably more than the mandatory minimum
to create and sustain affordable housing for low-income populations, including homeless
populations. Other than the totality of federal assistance for housing (meaning not only the
block grant funds referenced above) redevelopment has been the largest source of funds for
affordable housing development.




Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities                              89
90
                                                                                                             TABLE 5D: California Redevelopment Agencies -
                                                                                         Fiscal Year 2004/2005 Project Area Contributions to Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund
                                                                         Data as of: 5/1/2006
                                                                                                 100% of Gross        20% Required      Tax Increment     Tax Increment        Repayment of         Additional    Total Project Area
                                                                                                Project Area Tax       Set Aside to      Allocated to      Deposited to    Prior Years’ Deferrals    Income      Receipts Deposited
                                                                         PROJECT AREA              Increment          Housing Fund      Housing Fund      Housing Fund       of Tax Increment                     to Housing Fund
                                                                         BANNING                $2,512,556              $502,511           $502,511          $502,511                0             $57,333      $559,844
                                                                         BEAUMONT               $2,273,410              $454,682           $454,682          $454,682                0              $9,125       $463,807
                                                                         BLYTHE                 $4,414,375              $882,875           $882,875          $882,875                0          $3,095,511     $3,978,386
                                                                         CALIMESA                 $421,272               $84,254            $84,254           $84,254                0              $5,591        $89,845
                                                                         CATHEDRAL CITY        $17,586,301            $3,517,260         $3,517,261        $3,517,261                0          $2,483,322     $6,000,583
                                                                         COACHELLA RDA          $4,237,819              $847,564           $847,563          $847,563                0          $1,033,028     $1,880,591
                                                                         CORONA                $15,643,754            $3,128,751         $3,128,751        $3,128,751          $53,718          $2,200,488     $5,382,957
                                                                         DESERT HOT SPRINGS     $3,693,280              $738,656          $738,535           $738,535          $71,638            $810,173              0
                                                                         HEMET                  $7,600,065            $1,520,013         $1,520,013        $1,520,013       $1,019,951          $2,539,964              0
                                                                         INDIAN WELLS          $27,593,501            $5,518,700         $5,518,700        $5,518,700         $476,002          $5,994,702              0
                                                                         INDIO RDA              $6,298,605            $1,259,721         $1,259,721        $1,259,721         $184,006          $1,443,727              0
                                                                         LA QUINTA             $51,323,319           $10,264,664        $10,282,664       $10,282,664       $4,326,581         $14,609,245              0
                                                                         LAKE ELSINORE         $13,136,082            $2,627,216         $2,627,216        $2,627,216         $100,999          $2,728,215              0
                                                                         MORENO VALLEY          $9,718,925            $1,943,785         $1,943,785        $1,943,785         $294,773          $2,238,558              0
                                                                         MURRIETA               $3,431,025              $686,205           $686,205          $686,205          $32,009            $718,214              0
                                                                         PALM DESERT           $62,013,998           $12,402,800        $12,402,801       $12,402,801       $6,748,558         $19,151,359              0
                                                                         PALM SPRINGS           $7,728,670            $1,545,734         $1,545,734        $1,545,734                0          $1,545,734              0
                                                                         PERRIS                 $5,006,849            $1,001,370         $1,001,370        $1,001,370                0             $45,732     $1,047,102
                                                                         RANCHO MIRAGE         $26,210,427            $5,242,085         $5,242,085        $5,242,085                0                   0     $5,242,085
                                                                         RIVERSIDE COUNTY      $41,311,826            $8,262,365         $8,291,740        $8,291,740                0         $95,325,779   $103,617,519
                                                                         RIVERSIDE RDA         $21,243,066            $4,248,613         $4,248,613        $4,248,613                0         $13,622,384    $17,870,997
                                                                         SAN JACINTO            $3,075,648              $615,130           $615,130          $615,130                0          $4,046,106     $4,661,236
                                                                         TEMECULA              $12,663,849            $2,532,770         $2,532,770        $2,532,770                0            $461,477     $2,994,247
                                                                         COUNTY TOTAL       $ 359,977,834          $ 71,995,566       $ 72,042,821      $ 72,042,821      $13,607,626        $176,633,000 $ 153,789,199




Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Redevelopment is a complex area of law that is ever-changing. A few salient points need to
be addressed at this point to elucidate how redevelopment funds may or may not be used to
develop homeless housing. There is no question that resources generated in a redevelopment
project area may be used for affordable housing within that project area. Housing set-aside
funds may also be used outside of the project area in which they were generated. In fact,
redevelopment agencies may transfer funds from one project area to another in order to satisfy
the 20% requirement. An agency may use its 20% housing set-aside funds either within or
outside of a project area, but use outside of a project area may only occur after a finding of fact
by the agency and the legislative body that the housing will benefit the project area.

In practice this means that the 20% requirement is essentially agency-based, not project-
based. Moving housing resources outside of the jurisdiction in which they were generated,
however, is problematical (at best). There is a very narrow window of opportunity to transfer
housing set-aside funds from one jurisdiction to another and it should be noted that this is
a highly contentious area that could easily lead to litigation. A number of redevelopment
agencies would rather not invest in affordable housing for low- and moderate-income
households, particularly as regards developments that are actively seeking to assist homeless
or recently homeless individuals or families. Because other agencies might welcome
additional financial assistance in the form of resources for affordable housing development, it
has been suggested from time-to-time that agencies should be permitted to transfer monies
from their housing funds to nearby communities. Opponents of this concept regard this
as an attempt by local governments to evade their responsibilities to develop affordable
housing. A provision was added to redevelopment law in 1992 that authorized the transfer of
housing resources where adjoining cities had contiguous agencies willing to develop a joint
powers agency to pool housing funds. This provision expired on January 1, 2001. Until 2001,
however, redevelopment agencies were permitted to transfer funds to a joint powers authority
under the following circumstances:
1. The jurisdiction must have met at least 50% of its need as included in the Regional
   Housing Need Allocation plan;
2. Reallocated funds had to be encumbered within two years;
3. The funds had to provide a direct assistance to the proposed development; and
4. Each project had to be certified by HDC to be in compliance with the statute.



Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities                         91
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




These limitations made it nearly impossible for housing funds to be reallocated across
jurisdictional lines.

In addition to the mandatory 20% housing set-aside, each redevelopment agency is
responsible for implementing an inclusionary housing plan. This requirement (§33413(b))
requires that at least 15% of all new and substantially rehabilitated dwelling units within
a project area shall be affordable to low or moderate income households. Where it is
impractical for a jurisdiction to provide for the affordable units within a project area, the
redevelopment agency may transfer the responsibility outside of the area at the rate of two
units for every one that would otherwise have been required within the project area.

Additional information about federal block grant assistance and redevelopment housing set-
aside funds may be found in Appendix A of this report.



Another critical reason why it is important to have close coordination between municipalities
and the County relative to the development of homeless programs is that cities establish the
eligible uses for parcels within its jurisdiction. Land use is highly regulated by State law which
has increasingly imposed standards on local governments that facilitate the development
of affordable housing. This does not mean, however, that either a private organization or a
governmental entity has entitled rights to develop as it sees fit in a municipality. Rather, in
many instances, a jurisdiction may require homeless shelters to be located only on certain
types of parcels and in limited areas. This does not mean that a city would reject out of hand
a proposal to site a shelter or affordable housing development for homeless persons in on
parcels not meeting the specific Code. The process either to re-zone a parcel or to secure
Conditional Use Permits to operate homeless housing may well take many months which
may even extend to years. Moreover, to place a program on a non-conforming parcel means
to invite much public scrutiny which will likely result in an adverse reaction by local interests.
At the very least, a protracted approval process relative to land-use entitlements could delay
a development significantly, thereby undermining the will of the development entity which
may seek alternate (and seemingly less controversial) sites.

This report does not include a discussion of how each local jurisdiction has zoned its land
relative to the development of housing and other facilities intended to assist homeless persons.
Nor does the analysis include a discussion of the potential sites that may be available in
redevelopment project areas.

92                                          Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Perhaps no better example of the critical need for local government coordination can be
found than by considering the example of the City and County of Los Angeles. For nearly a
decade in the 1980s and 1990s, these jurisdictions were entangled in a legal dispute in which
each attempted to place responsibility on the other for the problem of homelessness. The
County alleged that the City’s land-use policies (including the demolition of single room
occupancy hotels in the downtown area) and limited investment in new affordable housing
production was forcing persons into the streets. The City countered that the County failed in
its responsibilities to provide appropriate supportive social services and benefits to destitute
homeless persons and families. The result of this stand-off was the creation of a joint-powers
agency to address homelessness, the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA).

The underlying conflict that created LAHSA has resurfaced from time to time, as neither
the City nor the County has invested significant resources to be administered through this
“independent” agency. In fact, both the City and the County have each invested considerable
sums over the past few years in initiatives independent of LAHSA. The problem, however, is
that these approaches have not been coordinated, and in their implementation, occasionally
they have been at cross purposes.

The creation of a joint powers authority is only one approach that has been used to
coordinate local government efforts relative to homelessness. A number of mechanisms
currently exist that may be utilized to coordinate municipal and County efforts and develop
comprehensive, consensus-driven plans. In particular, it may be advantageous to involve the
Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) and the Western Riverside Council
of Governments (WRCOG) in planning efforts. Another mechanism already in existence
is the annual Continuum of Care planning process undertaken by the Department of Social
Services, Homeless Assistance Division. While primarily intended to plan for the use of
HUD funding for homelessness, the process could be expanded to incorporate a broader
range of policy considerations and resources.

Given the need for local governments and not-for-profit organizations to work in unison
to secure HUD homeless assistance through the Continuum of Care planning process, it
is worth considering the current status of these funds and their likely future course. This
discussion of HUD McKinney-Vento funding appears in this section on local government



Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities                        93
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




coordination because securing these funds depends almost entirely upon coordination. Over
the past decade (both directly and indirectly) HUD has allocated several billions of dollars of
assistance to local and state homeless services agencies. In turn, these agencies have provided
a number of homeless populations throughout the country with a vast array of programs,
services and housing. HUD awards homeless assistance via two primary mechanisms
authorized by the McKinney-Vento Act: a) formula allocations to larger jurisdictions through
the Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) Program (a total of $591,000 divided between the City
and County of Riverside), and b) the Continuum of Care planning process.



The Continuum of Care process allocates funding for three programs: the Supportive
Housing Program (SHP), Shelter Plus Care (S+C) Program, and the Section 8 Moderate
Rehabilitation for Single Room Occupancy Housing (SRO) Program. SHP allows a
grantee to undertake a range of eligible activities including: acquisition, rehabilitation, new
construction, leasing, operational assistance, supportive social services, and developing
and maintaining an Information Technology system known as the Homeless Management
Information System (HMIS). SHP is also the most flexible program relative to the homeless
populations it assists, including: families, disabled adults, runaways, emancipating foster
youth, victims of domestic violence, veterans, and many other populations. It is primarily
because of its flexibility that this has been the most popular of HUD’s homeless programs.
The latter two programs, S+C and SRO, are rental assistance programs (i.e. what is
commonly known as Section 8) that are primarily used to assist homeless individuals
(although there are a handful of S+C programs for family households).

The Continuum of Care is a competitive local process undertaken by a planning body that
is established by either custom or statute. Localities compete for a pre-defined allocation of
HUD assistance that tracks the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) formula.
HUD defines this allocation as “pro-rata need.” When it first began to allocate assistance
via the continuum of care process, HUD did not inform localities of their pro-rata need, so
communities essentially loaded the boat and included a staggering number of projects in
their plans. Since 1996 HUD has published the pro-rata need so that planners could make
more informed decisions regarding how ambitious their efforts can be relative to available
resources.




94                                          Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The entity that takes on the planning for homeless assistance differs from one community to
the next based largely upon politics. In general this is not an area in which local governments
prefer to have a role unless they feel that they can best administer the assistance in a
responsible manner. Thus, in many communities, homeless coalitions assume the authority
to plan for HUD assistance. In others, the planning is under jurisdictional control, either
by a municipal or county department or other government body. In Riverside, the planning
work is conducted by the Department of Public Social Services. HUD allows localities
to determine the authorized planning body, but it does not permit “renegade” planning
processes as only a single plan may be submitted from each locality. One reason that HUD
allows for flexibility is that it seeks to engage the widest number of jurisdictions in the
planning process.

Prior to implementing the Continuum of Care planning process in 1993, HUD awarded
grants through a direct funding process. The sheer volume of grant applications and the
fact that HUD headquarters was not in a position to make good local decisions led the
Department to initiate a locally-driven planning process. Moreover, toward the end of
the 1990s Congress began to put pressure on HUD to demonstrate that its investment in
homeless programs was making a substantive difference. To its credit, HUD recognized
that funding programs was secondary to encouraging systems change as a way to attack
the problem of homelessness. HUD recognized that much homelessness results from poor
systems integration. For example, the medical system might restore a person’s health and
then seek to discharge him from its care. HUD’s focus on local planning has sought to bring
communities to examine how their “mainstream” programs failed to attend to the many
factors that might result in homelessness. In short, HUD has hoped that improved planning
would encourage communities to take stock of policies and procedures that either directly
create homelessness or maintain barriers to overcoming it.

Such is the official policy goal. In practice, many locally developed continuum of care plans
are only thinly disguised justifications for sustaining the funding of particular agencies
whether or not their projects substantively address the problem of homelessness. This is
partly due to the fact that HUD homeless funding now supports over 4,000 projects nation-
wide, each one of which creates a new particular interest to be protected. Many veterans
groups have argued that their interests have not been represented through the funding




Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities                        95
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




mechanism established by HUD, and this may or may not be the case. What is clear is that
70% of all HUD McKinney-Vento funds now go to renew existing projects, including a
growing allocation of rental assistance. In 2004, for example, HUD funded 4,406 projects
of which 715 (or 17%) were entirely new. Competition from renewal grants makes it
challenging for a potential new grantee to get into the process, but there are methods by
which this can still happen. In order to understand how an agency might be awarded a grant
to inaugurate a new program, or to expand an existing one, it is essential to know how to: 1)
propose a project that will be perceived as addressing a priority need, and 2) put an agency in
an advantageous position in the planning process. Put simply, one needs how the system so as
to influence the system.

While many persons are familiar with the HUD Supportive Housing Program, few grantees
have taken the time to fully understand how the HUD Continuum of Care process actually
works. So long as their projects get funded—that is, so long as their particular interests are
addressed—they are satisfied. In as much as the entire process is geared to systems-change,
however, it is unwise to take a short-sighted and narrow view of these resources, even if one
receives an award. Rather, it makes sense to plan to align one’s agency with the long-term
trends and to become part of the emerging new system of care, rather than to be intransigent
and trapped into old ways of thinking about serving homeless populations.

The Continuum of Care planning process begins at the local level. Local planning bodies
review applications that are placed in priority order for HUD. In general, as long as there
is a sufficient justification for the inclusion of a project, and as long as the proposed project
is eligible, HUD will provide funds if the local plan makes the grade. The plan itself appears
as Exhibit 1 of the application to HUD and the specific projects (SHP, S+C, and SRO
applications) are placed behind it. HUD evaluates continua plans on a 60 point scale, to
which are added 40 points for “first tier” projects (that is, those falling within the pro-rata
need established by HUD). In previous years HUD assigned points to 2nd and 3rd tiers, and
a number of these projects were funded, but because the minimum threshold for funding has
been steadily rising it is no longer possible to award a 2nd tier project. Put in practical terms,
if HUD were to assign a score of 40 to a continuum, each “first tier” project would receive
a score of 80 (40 for the plan and 40 for being in the first tier of pro-rata need). After all
projects have been scored this way, they are put in rank order and HUD then allocates funds




96                                           Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




until they are exhausted. In the 2004 competition HUD funded projects that received at least
82 points; those scoring less were dropped from consideration. There is one exception to
this, in the case where a first tier renewal project received less than the threshold but more
then 60 points, HUD would provide the funding necessary to sustain that program for one
year. This is a concession that HUD provides so as not to force a community to completely
dismantle its system of care. The critical thing to note in this is that as worthwhile as one
may consider a project to be, it is impossible to be awarded funding through the continuum
of care process unless the local plan scores well. And, because the funding it competitive, it is
critical that a community’s plan fare well relative to others.

In short, the Continuum of Care process is a national planning competition. So, even as they focus on
how their projects rank relative to others in a local continuum of care plan, applicants for
HUD McKinney-Vento assistance need to also consider how the local planning process will be
evaluated by HUD. Because everything depends upon the quality of local planning, this creates
an advocacy and evaluation opportunity for parties interested in this process as they seek to
hold local planning bodies accountable. HUD initiated this process of awarding homeless
assistance based upon a nation-wide competition in 1993 and since then it has tinkered with
the system but kept it largely intact. The rudiments have remained constant: localities are
allocated “pro-rata need” based on the CDBG model, and then HUD adjusts this figure to
account for local renewal demand and to encourage communities to undertake permanent
housing activities.

The 2005 and 2006 Continuum of Care planning process differs from prior year processes
relative to both assisting communities with high renewal demand, and providing bonus
funding for permanent housing projects. In years past, a continuum community with a heavy
renewal demand could expect all of its projects to be awarded at least one year of funding so
that they could sustain the system of care. In many communities the annual application to
HUD was largely static because the localities had expanded services to the point that their
pro-rata need was roughly equal to the annual costs of renewing all applications. In order
to allow for greater flexibility, and to further encourage communities to increasingly direct
resources to establish permanent housing options for chronically homeless persons (and not
simply accept the status quo), HUD now allows continua that have maximized their pro-
rata need with renewals to decrease or eliminate funding for existing projects and to receive




Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities                                  97
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




the equivalent value of any savings. In other words, some continua will now be permitted
to create new projects at the expense of existing ones, with one critical proviso: the funds
released through this process must be used to develop new permanent housing for chronically
homeless persons. HUD refers to this provision as “hold harmless.” One would expect the
hold harmless mechanism to drive continua to evaluate more rigorously the relevance of a
particular project or service to resolving the problem of chronic homelessness.

As it alters the scoring criteria of the Continuum of Care process, HUD has increasingly
pressed continua to confirm that the components of each system are justifiable relative to the
most critical local needs. Having noted this, it bears noting that the impetus for this is an
effort initiated by HUD to see that McKinney-Vento Homeless Act funds are increasingly
steered to projects that are intended to help localities end chronic homelessness. This is
not the place to discuss 10-year plans to end chronic homelessness, except to note that a
considerable number of points in the Continuum of Care plan competition are awarded based
on the quality of planning surrounding the problem of chronic homelessness.

What matters most to HUD? How does HUD evaluate a Continuum of Care Plan? In
truth, goaded by Congressional critics who question whether HUD’s investment in homeless
services and housing has made much of an impact on the problem, HUD has changed its
evaluative criteria over time. Table 5E shows the shift in HUD evaluative criteria over the
past three years. The table makes clear the increased emphasis through time on housing and
a community’s evaluation processes. HUD is pressured to demonstrate that its resources are
well-spent and achieve substantive results, but it recognizes that local communities have
generally been unequal to the task at hand. For this reason HUD has steadily been trying to
encourage communities to narrow their use of these funds on chronic homeless populations
and housing activities.

The final score awarded to a continuum of care plan is then assigned to each project in the
application. Projects falling within a continuum’s first tier allocation of pro-rata need then are
assigned 40 points for need to arrive at a final score. All projects from throughout the country
are then placed in rank order and are allocated an award until the money is exhausted. There
are a handful of exceptions to this rule. Congress has mandated a number of funding goals for
these funds: 1) that no less than 30% of all funds are awarded to permanent housing projects,
and 2) that at least 10% of the funds serve chronic homeless persons. If insufficient funds



98                                          Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




are available to fund all projects receiving identical scores, HUD will first fund proposals
for permanent housing, then other housing for chronically homeless populations. To break
any remaining ties, HUD looks at continuum of care scores for select criteria. So while
particular projects end up being funded, it is critical to understand that HUD evaluates plans
not projects. Thus to the extent that one can participate in and improve the local planning
process so that it is relatively consistent with HUD’s expectations, the projects included in
the plan have a better chance of being funded. Also, despite the fact that HUD publishes
pro rata need figures ought not to lead one to conclude that the community will be awarded
these funds. Every year a number of continua are not funded because their plans were not
competitive when stacked up against the work being undertaken in other jurisdictions. There
are numerous instances in which communities are simply not funded.

Table 5E also makes clear what has been a consistent pronouncement from HUD over
the past several years, namely, that planners must attend to the permanent housing needs of homeless
populations, particularly chronically homeless persons.3



                                                                                          YEAR
                 CRITERION                                                   2003         2004   2005
                 1. Process & Strategy                                        20           17     17
                    a) coordinated & inclusive process
                    b) comprehensive strategy
                    c) strategy to end chronic homelessness
                    d) local plan to remove regulatory barriers
                    e) participation in Energy Star
                 2. HMIS Implementation                                  included above     5      5
                 3. Gaps & Priorities                                          15          10     10
                    a) description of analysis undertaken
                    b) proposed projects consistent with analysis
                 4. Leveraging & Supplemental Resources                       15           13      8
                 5. Emphasis on Housing Activities                            10           10     12
                 6. Performance Measurement
                    (progress toward reducing chronic homelessness)            0            5      8
                 TOTAL SCORE AVAILABLE                                        60           60     60




3The HUD definition of homelessness and chronic homelessness appears in the section of this report on home-
less sub-populations.




Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities                                  99
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




In-as-much as the primary resource used to assist homeless populations in Riverside County
has been Continuum of Care funds from HUD, it is important that future planning efforts take
into account these trends and that programs are developed to not only secure these funds but
also to show results in moving homeless populations into stable living environments.



Homelessness is hardly a new phenomenon, but our understanding of it, and approaches to
resolving this social problem have received increased attention over the past few decades.
A survey of American history would find that newspapers in communities throughout the
country have reported on problems created by vagrancy, transients, and rootless men and
women whose presence in an otherwise settled area occasions alarm and calls for social
action. The various waves of social action that began in the 1840s and culminated with the
passage of the 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1920 was largely a reaction
to the demonstrable impact of alcohol on the social fabric of communities, including
creating large numbers of persons whom we would today classify as “homeless.” The
21st Amendment repealed Prohibition in 1933 just prior to the unleashing of the New
Deal which created a broad array of social experiments intended to stimulate the national
economy and lift households out of poverty, ignorance, and social isolation. When one out
three breadwinners was unemployed, a national consensus emerged in support of poverty
programs. As America became an “affluent society” in the years following the Second World
War, fewer households fell into or remained in poverty, and public support largely waned
for programs, services, and benefits for what was increasingly perceived as the “undeserving
poor.” As a social issue, the problem of homelessness has waxed and waned in the public
conscience as a matter deserving and requiring investment of time, energy, and political will
to address. Moreover, few communities have evolved policies around which a concerted set
of actions can be organized to address the many problems related to homelessness. In such an
environment, proposals to create resources to address homelessness generally have been met
with a common local response: not in my backyard (NIMBY)!

An initial negative response to a specific project proposal should hardly be surprising. People
generally care about the quality of life in their communities, and they want to see things
improved. They fear that a development serving homeless populations will necessarily blight
the neighborhood. Decision officials should not reject local concerns as knee-jerk NIMBY




100                                        Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




reactions. Rather, it is important to air concerns in public so that planning officials may seek
to mitigate the most serious matters and work to achieve a consensus on what can and should
be done at a specific site. In general, this vetting process tends to help educate the public on
the problem of homelessness and how local government and non-profit organizations have
partnered to create solutions. The challenge, however, is that the process of raising public
awareness and understanding and achieving consensus is extremely time-consuming, stressful,
and risks considerable political capital. In short, it is precisely the kind of issue that requires
leadership, particularly as the interests of the various actors will likely be at odds with one
another.

Among the approaches to moving beyond NIMBY reactions has been to confront the
problem in community forums where proponents and opponents may air their concerns
with each other. An effective program of community outreach should be organized that
emphasizes the quality of the proposed design, the rigorous management practices that will
be employed, and addresses the fears that neighbors have of homeless populations. Good
design helps to enhance the neighborhood and may bring much needed new resources into
an area. Whenever possible, the design should comport with community standards and
incorporate quality and enhancements whenever possible (taking into account budgetary
constraints). Research conducted by the Corporation for Supportive Housing has found
that the creation of supportive housing in a community has no adverse impact on property
values.4 One reason for this has been the attention paid to quality design so that the end
result is a development that adds character to the neighborhood. Another factor to consider
in addressing NIMBY responses to a proposed development is the management plan.
Because most affordable housing is financed with a variety of public sources, they much
comply with a broad range of regulations, including maintaining the property as descent,
safe, and sanitary. Moreover, normative management practices necessitate the screening of
all potential residents. In the end, perhaps no matter how well-reasoned may be a planned
development for homeless populations, there will likely be local opposition as there will
always be a number of fears and concerns that are not capable of being resolved through


4University of Pennsylvania Health System, Department of Psychiatry, Center for Mental Health Policy and
Services Research Kay E. Sherwood, TWR Consulting, Connecticut Supportive Housing Demonstration Pro-
gram Evaluation Report (1999).




Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities                                101
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




rational discourse. It is precisely at moments such as these that solid leadership is required to
advance a development proposal. To assist developers and local governments address NIMBY
concerns, the State of California has created a web-site that assembles a variety of tools and
resources that may be used to move debate on such matters.5




5http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/nimby.htm




102                                         Section 5: Local Government Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                                                                           6
                                                                                         SECTION




T     he goal of any plan to address the problem of homelessness is to alleviate human
      suffering and end the phenomenon altogether. To some extent, homelessness has been
a part of the American experience since the earliest days of settlement. Local communities
provided some manner of support for families stricken by calamity even if it meant having
to live in a “poor house.” A transient may receive a bowl of soup and religious instruction,
but such “vagabonds” were generally not regarded as the responsibility of a local community.
Rather, the community generally regarded transients as the “undeserving poor.”1

A complex modern, industrial society with numerous opportunities for physical and social
mobility (both upward and downward) necessarily creates a number of rootless persons who
live betwixt and between otherwise settled populations. One reason for this is that resiliency
is variable and not all persons have the psychological or material resources to adapt to the
demands of everyday life. Some persons may have significant barriers to full social integration
like a physical or mental health disorder. Another reason is that the systems of care that have
been developed are generally not well-coordinated, making it challenging for extremely low-
income persons to navigate a steady course to greater self-sufficiency and residential stability.

Homelessness is a complex social phenomenon that is indicative of the poor coordination
of systems of care and the inability of certain subpopulations to integrate into the social
mainstream. Inadequate social integration is particularly true of chronically homeless persons:
i.e., disabled persons that have lived a year or more without normative housing. What

1 Herbert J. Gans, The War Against the Poor, (New York: Harper Collins, 1995), p. 89 et seq.


Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside                                        103
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




are reasonable expectations that should be placed upon social service programs to move
homeless populations back into the social mainstream? Given that homelessness often
results from inadequate discharges from institutional settings, is it realistic to expect homeless
persons to achieve social stability when placed in community settings? Clearly, public
investment in programs to assist homeless persons should be able to meet a basic level of
performance relative to accountability and compliance: shelters should be clean and orderly,
and financial records should be above reproach.

While poor social integration is clearly positively correlated with homelessness, no factor
is as determinative as is income. Homelessness is fundamentally an economic problem:
extremely low-income persons lack the means to afford market-place rents. The economic
challenges confronting homeless persons are especially pronounced for persons on limited,
fixed incomes. In Riverside County, an entry-level job is insufficient to afford market-rate
housing, even sub-standard housing. As market conditions press housing expenses higher,
persons on fixed incomes experience increased stress and possible social dislocation. A “rising
tide” does not lift all ships; extremely low wage earners and those on low fixed-incomes risk
“drowning” as real estate markets become heated.

The intent of social service programs to assist homeless persons is methodically to assist
persons stay on track and access benefits and services and (for those capable of employment)
finding and keeping a job. The process of case management is the fundamental form of
assistance that has been used to reintegrate homeless persons back into the social mainstream.
Homeless programs vary in many fundamental respects. Capacity and capability are unequal
across programs. There is the general expectation that agencies able to pay higher salaries
will be in a position to attract and retain a talented and professional staff when compared
with agencies with lower paid staff. How program staff interacts and communicates with
clients also differs markedly across agencies; some agencies have charismatic leadership able
to reach persons in a manner that is both therapeutic and transformative. Such types are rare,
and their skills are not always replicable or transferable to others. Programs also differ in
terms of their physical configuration, staffing level, staff to client ratios, access to resources,
and the populations they serve.

Evaluating “success” across the varied landscape of diverse programs and services requires
sensitive tools capable of taking into account the multiple variables that may impact



104                                                   Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




outcomes. Some effort to create a standard methodology to account for success and track
client outcomes was implemented by the State Department of Mental Health with the advent
of AB2034 program funds. AB2034 funding requires a significantly higher level of client
tracking and evaluation than has been seen in most other programs. The system developed
over the past decade of funding may soon be scrapped in favor of an even more rigorous
system to be implemented to track clients receiving Mental Health Services Act (Proposition
63) services. A State working group has been convening to design the new system.

HUD has pressed continuum of care communities to implement more rudimentary
client tracking systems through its Homeless Management Information System (HMIS)
requirements. All continua are to have implemented a baseline system to track homeless
persons by 2007, and increasingly these modalities have been brought online over the past
two years. HMIS does not include meaningful acuity measures so it is not an effective tool
to help determine a person’s level of functioning. Also, these systems generally only track
literally homeless persons; they do not include information on at-risk populations, nor
are they particularly effective after a person reestablishes himself in an independent living
situation. These systems do, however, record a homeless person’s frequency of contact with
agencies operating within a continuum, and in this regard they can be useful in identifying
“high utilizers.” Is a person accessing many services because they are in great need, or are
they “program shopping” and receiving redundant services. Congress mandated that continua
establish HMIS so that homeless persons could be viewed from a systems-level perspective.
Yet because HMIS is a rudimentary system when compared with other tracking systems used
by other systems of care, it is not at all clear that this redundant system will be useful at the
client-level so much as at the systems level where planners may utilize the information to
recommend program and/or policy changes in light of empirical data.

With respect to client or resident outcomes, however, it may be difficult to establish a single
fixed set of outcomes that all programs should meet. One reason for this is that in order
to establish expectations regarding outcomes, it is essential that there first be set criteria
regarding intake and admission. A second reason why it may be difficult to establish fixed
expectations with respect to outcomes is that not all agencies have equal access to certain
resources to help persons achieve greater stability in their lives. A transitional housing
program for persons in recovery may be able to point to a high rate of success in helping




Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside                                  105
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




homeless persons access permanent housing, but its success may have less to do with its
programs and services, than with the rental assistance certificates that it may offer “graduates.”
An outreach program for homeless persons with mental illnesses may focus its efforts on the
most seriously disabled populations of which only a handful may regularly access mental
health services in a year. Access and acuity are two factors that challenge any outcome
measurement system.

                          TABLE 6A: Matrix of Probable Outcomes

                                         High Acuity                  Low Acuity
                                        (Gravely Disabled)       (Limited Special Needs)



                                        LOW PROBABILITY                 OUTCOME
                    Limited Access        OF SUCCESS                   UNCERTAIN
                      to Services           Prolonged              Client motivational
                                          homelessness                consideration




                                            OUTCOME
                                                                   HIGH PROBABILITY
                                           UNCERTAIN
                                                                      OF SUCCESS
                    High Access to           Program
                                                                       Residential
                       Services            effectiveness
                                                                        stability
                                          considerations




As the County of Riverside grows its HMIS and MHSA tracking systems, it will be useful to
analyze reports on client outcomes to help operators modify existing programs and services,
and to recommend new services as necessary. In this regard, it may be useful to bear in mind
the interplay of the availability of services (that increase the likelihood that a homeless
person may achieve housing stability) compared against acuity and level of functioning
(factors that decrease the long-term prognosis for achieving and maintaining housing
stability). Other things being equal, like program performances, the impact of these two
critical variables may look something like the depiction in the matrix of probable outcomes
(Table 6A).




106                                                        Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The intent of this report has been to provide information on the basic materials and
methodology of creating new housing for homeless populations. An assessment of
countywide (or baseline) need is outside of the scope of this research, but the analysis does
include an allocation and an implementation plan broken out both by Supervisorial District
and special-needs population. For the purposes of this report, baseline need has been derived
from the County of Riverside: County of Riverside 2004/2005 Homeless Assessment.2 In
addition, this research has relied upon the inventory of homeless housing contained in
the 2006 Continuum of Care (CoC) plan submitted by Riverside County Department of
Public Social Services to HUD on behalf of Housing and Homeless Coalition Steering Committee.
The inventory included in the 2006 CoC Plan was broken out by Supervisorial District (see
Appendix B). Countywide programs, and those operating in certain regions were allocated
to each Supervisorial District based upon an equal share basis. With respect to the inventory
or emergency shelter beds, this meant that each District was allocated a single family unit
and two family beds along with nine year-round beds for individuals and 15 occasional
voucher beds. Countywide transitional housing units were similarly reallocated with 8 beds
for homeless individuals ascribed to each District. The allocation process for permanent
supportive housing units was more complex because some programs operate in only certain
portions of the County. Supportive housing units were therefore not reallocated on an equal
basis. Rather these units were allocated to the Supervisorial Districts in close proximity to
where each program operates. The results of this reallocation process appear in summary
fashion in Table 6B. The District allocations resulted in a rounding problem evident in the
totals, but the figures are sufficiently accurate for planning purposes.

Table 6B summarizes the inventory of existing homeless housing resources by type and
Supervisorial District. This table makes evident the highly variable distribution of residential
programs for homeless persons in Riverside County. With the exception of the First
District, which has a balanced inventory of homeless housing resources, none of the other
Supervisorial Districts has a stock of housing consistent with an expectation of an even
distribution of resources. The First District has between 24 percent and 28 percent of the


2Institute for Urban Research and Development, County of Riverside: County of Riverside 2004/2005
Homeless Assessment (2005).




Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside                                         107
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




total inventory for each housing type in the grid. The Second District has between seven
percent and 23 percent of the resources by type, being particularly under-represented with
respect to permanent supportive housing. The Third District ranges are even more extreme
with only one percent of the transitional housing and an only slightly higher percentage
of supportive housing. The Fourth District is the most anomalous with the highest overall
percentage of housing resources as well as having the largest inventory per housing type.
Development of housing programs for homeless persons has clearly proceeded faster in the
Fourth District than elsewhere. The Fifth District has the fewest resources to assist homeless
persons, with only five percent of the overall inventory and less than eight percent of any
single housing type.


          TABLE 6B: Summary of Homeless Housing Inventory by District
                                  Seasonal &
                     Year Round     Voucher    Transitional      Supportive           TOTAL
         DISTRICT    Emergency    Emergency      Housing          Housing           INVENTORY
                        Shelter      Shelter
                      #       %     #      %    #      %          #        %          #     %
           1st      143 28%        95 24%      178   25%         95     30%         512  26%
           2nd      62 12%         55 14%      167   23%         22       7%        306   16%
           3rd       87 17%        27     7%    8     1%         65      21%        187   10%
           4th      210 41%       215 53%      310   43%        113     36%         849  43%
           5th       12      2%    12     3%    58    8%         17       5%         99    5%
          TOTAL     514 100%      404 100%     721   100%       312     100%       1,954 100%



The inventory summarized in Table 6B was compared against the population of homeless
persons in Riverside County to arrive at projections of need at the district-level. The County
of Riverside commissioned a census of the homeless population that was conducted on
January 1, 2005, so the data relied upon to assess need is relatively current. A total of 4,785
persons were found in Riverside County, of whom 3,131 were unsheltered and 1,854 were
in shelters (or transitional housing programs). A District-level estimate of the homeless
population was not included in the census, but an effort was made to summarize the numbers
found in certain general regions. These regional counts have been reallocated by the
author of this study to each of the Supervisorial Districts to better understand the relative
distribution of homeless persons throughout the County. No attempt has been made to adjust
allocations. Rather, each regional count was divided equally among the proximate districts.


108                                                    Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




          TABLE 6C: Allocation of Regional Census of Homeless Persons to Supervisorial Districts

                                                                                   SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT
 Region                          #        %    Allocated          1st            2nd         3rd        4th                 5th
                                                   to:        #         %      #     %     #     %    #     %           #         %
 Western Metropolitan          2,110    44%       1,2      1,055        22%   1,055   22%
 I-15 Corridor                  492     10%    1,2,3,5     123          3%    123         3%   123    3%               123        3%
 Mid County                     717     15%     2,3,5                         239         5%   239    5%               239        5%
 Desert & Coachella Valley     1,362    28%      4,5                                                       681   14%   681    14%
 Blyth                          104      2%       4                                                        104   2%
 TOTAL                         4,785    100%               1,178        25%   1,417   30%      362    8%   785   16% 1,043 22%
 GAP ANALYSIS BY SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT
 Inventory                     1,954    100%               512          26%   306     16%      187   10% 849     43%   99         5%
 Need Gap                      2,869    100%               694          24%   1,114   39%      181    6% (66)    -2%   947    33%
 Hosing Coverage Percentage                                       43%               22%         52%          108%            9%


The reallocated census appears as Table 6C which indicates that over 50 percent of the
homeless population can be found in the First and Second Supervisorial Districts. This
should not be surprising as homelessness is largely an urban phenomenon resulting from
inadequate social integration. Table 6C further indicates that the Third District has less than
10 percent of the total homeless population while the Fourth District has roughly 16 percent
of the population. The Fifth Supervisorial District has just over 22 percent of the homeless
population, which is consistent with the expectation that each district contains roughly 20
percent of the County’s population. Because the homeless census included both sheltered
and unsheltered homeless persons, it is essential to take into account the extent to which
the sheltered homeless population skews the results of the allocation matrix. In other words,
each new shelter or program in a district would thereby increase the number of homeless
persons in a particular district, so it is necessary to adjust for this by considering the role that
the existing inventory plays in boosting the homeless count in a particular district. Table
6C includes a tabulation of the relative “demand” for homeless services against the available
inventory of resources by district. The difference between the homeless population in a
particular district and the available inventory describes a need gap that has been calculated
both a numeric and percentage basis. The benefit of considering the numeric difference
between the number of homeless persons and the current inventory is that it begins to point
to how much additional inventory should be developed in that district.




Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside                                                                        109
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Table 6C indicates a need for 2,869 total new beds to accommodate the existing homeless
population in Riverside County. The District percentages help to depict where program
operators have been the most successful in beginning to address the problem of homelessness
and which additional inventory is necessary to keep pace with the homeless population
in a district. On a purely numeric basis, the First, Second, and Fifth Supervisorial Districts
clearly have the greatest need for new residential resources for homeless persons. Combined,
these districts would require 2,755 beds/units of housing to address the current need. The
Fourth District, in contrast, has an inventory that exceeds its homeless population by
8%.3 In contrast, the Second, and Firth Supervisorial Districts are currently capable of
accommodating 22 percent and nine percent, respectively, of their homeless populations. The
Fifth Supervisorial District stands out owing to its very limited supply of residential options
for homeless persons, with only 99 beds for over 1,000 persons. It should be noted that of
the 99 beds in the Fifth District, 40 beds have been attributed to the District as a result of
the reallocation methodology. The actual capacity to assist homeless persons in the Fifth
Supervisorial District is probably even lower than is reflected in Table 6C. In summary, while
there is a significant gap in residential resources for homeless persons across the County of
Riverside, the need is not distributed equally.

The housing coverage percentage shown on the last row of Table 6C helps elucidate relative
need. The lower the percentage, the greater the need, and conversely, the higher the
percentage, the less the evident need for additional new services and resources. Of the five
Supervisorial Districts, only one shows a modest excess inventory.

A prudent development strategy would seek to moderate the extreme variability of resources
across the County of Riverside so that residential services are accessible and relatively
proximate to where the homeless populations are to be found. If this planning principal is
adopted, it will mean stimulating growth of certain housing types in some districts, while
capping or limiting growth in others. Given the dearth of permanent supportive housing

3 This does not mean that additional development may not be needed in the Fourth District, but that consider-
able attention should be paid to the type of housing proposed for future development there and in all districts. The
anomaly of an excess inventory may result from the fact that the census was conducted on January 26 at a time
when weather-activated shelters were in operation, temporarily swelling the available resources beyond need
(on that particular evening). It may also be the case, however, that the excess inventory is not an aberration at
all, but is an accurate depiction of the empirical facts. The chart further indicates that the Third District has an
inventory that is capable of accommodating half of the homeless population found there on any given night.




110                                                             Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




in contrast to the overwhelming need throughout the County, and the fact that a modest
infrastructure of emergency and transitional housing resources already exists (except in
Supervisorial District 5), the most reasonable strategy would be to focus considerable
attention and resources on the development of permanent supportive housing irrespective
of the district in which it is proposed. To rectify the apparent great need for emergency and
transitional services in Supervisorial District 5, new development of these housing types
should be focused there. Tables 6D.1 and 6D.2 summarize the relative need by housing
type and Supervisorial District for the County of Riverside. Using the data in Table 6B,
need was assessed as being either high, moderate or low depending on the following
percentages: a) low need being attributed to inventories higher than 40%; b) moderate need
being inventories above 10 percent but less than 40%; and c) high need being assigned to
inventories capable of addressing less than 10 percent of the current need.

While these priorities should be weighed against specific proposals to develop new housing
resources, it would be unwise for the County to lock itself into a development strategy that
limits growth only to where current housing resources are scarce. Rather, Tables 6D.1 and
6D.2 should be regarded as general guides to influence development decisions. Table 6D.2
depicts the summary information in ordinal fashion, which may be particularly useful to
help determine the order and overall priority of projects. Table 6D.2 reemphasizes that both
Supervisorial Districts 2 and 5 are relatively under-developed in terms of residential resources
for homeless populations. Supervisorial District 4 has the most residential resources, both
on a numeric and percentage basis. The residential resources of the Fourth Supervisorial District
are more highly developed both in the aggregate, as well as for each residential type. The
existing inventory in District 4 results in its being assigned the lowest overall rank in terms of
future development to address need.




Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside                                   111
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




               TABLE 6D.1: Relative Need for Homeless Housing Resources,
                         by Type and by Supervisorial District
                         Year Round        Voucher
        DISTRICT         Emergency        Emergency        Transitional        Supportive         District
                           Shelter         Shelter           Housing            Housing          Overview
           1             MODERATE         MODERATE         MODERATE          MODERATE            MODERATE
           2             MODERATE         MODERATE         MODERATE              HIGH              HIGH
           3             MODERATE           HIGH              HIGH           MODERATE            MODERATE
           4               LOW              LOW               LOW            MODERATE              LOW
           5               HIGH             HIGH              HIGH             HIGH                HIGH
       Countywide          LOW              LOW               LOW              HIGH




               TABLE 6D.2: Supervisorial District Ranked by Relative Need
                           for Types of Housing Resources
                                  Emergency        Transitional       Supportive          District
                                   Shelter           Housing           Housing           Overview
            Greatest Need             5                3                   5                 5
            2nd Greatest Need         2                5                   2                 2
            Mid-Range Need            3                2                   3                 3
            Next to Lowest Need       1                1                   1                 1
            Lowest Need               4                4                   4                 4


The considerable gap between the current inventory and existing need makes planning a
critical undertaking because resources to both develop and to operate homeless housing are
extremely limited. There is no question but that a strategy to provide shelter for all homeless
persons—to create over 2,800 beds and/or units of housing—would be overly ambitious.
The costs alone would greatly exceed available resources, requiring in excess of $1.1 billion
over the next decade, even assuming per unit costs below $200,000. In addition to the capital
needed to build facilities and permanent housing units, the annual operating support needed
for 2,800 new beds would exceed the budget capacity of local governments, costing upwards
of $30 million annually.




112                                                           Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




However, even a strategy of less than full implementation will require local financial resources
for development and ongoing operations. The analyst has assumed that 25 percent of all
development costs will have to be borne locally.4 State and federal resources do not currently
exist to pick up the balance of costs required to develop a full implementation model.
Moreover, the HUD Continuum of Care (CoC) and the Mental Health Services Act are the
only significant operating support for homeless services from non-County sources.

The County of Riverside has been successful over the past few years in competing for
allocations from HUD of approximately $6 million, so this resource should be assumed to
be available into the future. HUD CoC funds are currently used for a variety of purposes
including grants to supportive housing programs for operations and supportive social services,
rental assistance, and (rarely) for capital development. The majority of HUD CoC funds are
used to renew existing programs for one year terms, so any expectation to access these funds
for a new project would likely mean a commensurate reduction in services by an existing
provider. Table 6F assumes that all funds for new operations and social services will be from
local sources because so little room exists to expand programs within the CoC funding
scheme. The one main exception to this is in the area of rental assistance where HUD has
made new funds available for permanent housing developments for chronically homeless
persons. The modest annual “bonus” to Riverside County that could be included in the plan
as an available resource is approximately $1,100,000. The 2006 CoC funding cycle absorbed
almost all of the remaining available allocation with an award of $913,000 to the County
DPSS to develop 142 beds of transitional housing for homeless families (the MARB King
Hall Transitional Housing Program).

The limited availability of future development and operating resources from HUD has been
taken into account in the production plan that follows. If used exclusively as rental assistance,
the roughly $1.1 million in annual “bonus” funding would result in either 32 single room
occupancy units or 24 efficiency units at the current Fair Market Rents.5 If production of
permanent supportive housing were limited by the availability of rental assistance from HUD

4Most developments financed with Low Income Housing Tax Credits require close to 30%local government
support to be feasible.
5HUD Fair Market Rents can be found at www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/fmrs/2007. The current FMR for an
efficiency unit in Riverside County is $765. An SRO is calculated at 75 percent of an efficiency unit, or $574 at
current rates.




Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside                                                 113
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




through the Continuum of Care process, it would take nearly 80 years to develop the 1,825
units needed to close the gap so that all homeless persons in need could access housing. The
development strategy included here looks to the horizon in spans of 5-years and 10-years.
For planning purposes, the strategy proceeds with the assumption that local funds will be
made available at 58 percent of the level of funding that HUD provides to programs within
the County. With a commitment of funds at this level, there would be approximately $10
million available each year to develop new resources and support the operations of programs
to be developed as per the following:

       2006 Continuum of Care Plan Award to Riverside                    $ 6,311,803
       Rounded                                                           $ 6,300,000
       58% Local Government Commitment                                   $ 3,700,000
       TOTAL Proposed                                                    $10,000,000

The discussion that follows shows how $10 million a year could be leveraged to develop
new housing programs to assist homeless persons. The plan employs a methodology that
seeks to maximize the leverage capacity of local government funds, thereby minimizing the
demands placed on local resources and maximizing the impact of these funds. To this end,
the following strategy has been employed:
• The highest priority for HUD CoC funds shall be as rental assistance or operating
  subsidies
  o Rationale: a) a number of local and state resources are available to acquire sites and
    construct facilities or housing, so limited CoC funds should not be treated as a potential
    development resource; and b) the most difficult local resource to obtain is rental
    assistance and/or operating support which is needed to bridge the gap between the
    limited rent generated by the extremely low-income (homeless) residents and annual
    operating costs.
• Developers shall seek to maximize the leverage potential of capital contributions from local
  government sources shall with State and/or federal funds (including low-income housing
  tax credits).
  o Rationale: the affordable housing needs of the County of Riverside extend well beyond
    the problem of homelessness (which is merely its most visible dimension); affordable
    housing needs to be developed to assist other low-income populations work their way
    out of poverty.

114                                                 Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Section 3 of this report includes a number of capital and operating budgets for a range of
homeless housing developments. The development of new emergency housing has been
excluded from the analysis for two reasons. Firstly, the need itself has been determined to
be less than that of transitional and permanent supportive housing. Secondly, there are
hardly any resources at the state and federal levels to develop and operate new emergency
shelters; thus the costs must be borne almost exclusively by local sources. This means that the
development principal of leveraging local resources is violated, and the development of new
emergency shelters would pose a considerable challenge in Riverside County. Consequently,
the development focus in Riverside County over the upcoming several years will likely
be upon supportive housing and family transitional housing. Table 6E shows in five-year
increments the probable demand upon local capital resources to develop supportive housing
for disabled individuals and transitional housing for families. The plan shows that 40 units
of family transitional housing and 175 units of supportive housing would require over $60
million over the next decade. Of this sum roughly $21 million (representing 35 percent of
costs) would likely have to come from local sources. These sources could be a combination
of city, county, and redevelopment sources. Local sources would thus leverage roughly $40
million, a nearly 3:1 ratio, resulting in 215 new units of housing to address the problem of
homelessness in Riverside County.

To operate these units will require additional local support, although some new State
funding will be available through the Mental Health Services Act. HUD Continuum of
Care funds have been almost entirely allocated, with the exception of annual “bonus”
funding used as rental assistance for chronically homeless persons (see Section 3 for a
discussion of the Continuum of Care). The budget in Table 6F assumes that some new rental
assistance vouchers will be made available through the CoC process. If this assumption
does not materialize, the rental revenues will be insufficient to operate the housing, and
demands will be placed upon local funding sources to sustain operations. Taking inflation
and the rate of growth into account, by year ten the annual operating assistance required
to maintain the proposed 215 units of housing will be in excess of $870,000. Given that
the HUD Continuum of Care has already been allocated and existing grantees receive only
one year renewal funding, the assumption is that these expenses will be covered by local
sources. Among the likely sources would be a combination of the following: Section 8
rental assistance (from the Housing Authority); CDBG (from local government entitlement
jurisdictions); Mental Health Services Act; or general revenues.


Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside                                   115
116
                                                                                  TABLE 6E: Proposed Capital Investment Plan: Local Sources for Homeless Housing, by Type
                                                                                                                                                   Total Development Costs         Local Share of Costs
                                                                                Family                  SRO               Cost Per      Years
                                                              Project Type    Location       TH Units   Units Inflator      Unit       to Dev.   2007 - 2011     2012 - 2016     2007 - 2011 2012 - 2016         Total
                                                              SRO             Sup. Dist. 5              50        4%     $232,000        3       $11,600,000                     $4,060,000                    $4,060,000
                                                              SRO             Sup. Dist. 2              75        4%     $269,120        6       $10,092,000    $10,092,000      $3,532,200 $3,532,200         $7,064,400
                                                              SRO             Sup. Dist. 3              50        4%     $312,179        9                      $15,608,960                 $5,463,136         $5,463,136
                                                              Family TH       Sup. Dist. 2     40                 4%     $336,000        10                     $13,440,000                 $4,704,000         $4,704,000
                                                              Capital Contributions                                                                                              $7,592,200 $13,699,336       $21,291,536
                                                              TOTAL                            40       175                                      $21,692,000    $39,140,960                                   $60,832,960
                                                                                                                                                                                              Leverage Ratio:        2.86




                                                                                   TABLE 6F: Local Operating Assistance (in addition to HUD CoC Operating Assistance)
                                                                                                                                                                                                             COLA: 103.5%
                                                                                                                                                               Year
                                                              Project                         Units        3              4             5            6             7             8          9           10        Total
                                                              SRO                              50       $60,000        $62,100       $64,274      $66,523       $68,851       $71,261    $73,755      $76,337   $543,101
                                                              SRO                              75                                                 $66,523       $68,851       $71,261    $73,755      $76,337 $356,728
                                                              SRO                              50                                                                                        $73,755      $76,337 $150,092
                                                              Family TH                        40                                                                                                    $642,000 $642,000
                                                              Local Operating Support                   $60,000        $62,100       $64,274     $133,046      $137,703      $142,522   $221,266     $871,010 $1,691,921




Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside
                                                                                                                                                                                                                            DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The development goals included in this report are modest in that the new units will
accommodate only 7.5 percent of the existing need, defined as 2,869 units (see above in
Table 6C). There are two primary reasons why less than 10 percent of the existing need
is proposed for development in this planning guide. Firstly, as noted previously, new
development of housing for homeless persons and families is limited by the availability of
operating subsidies. This report assumes that it would be extremely challenging to obtain
local rental assistance subsidies for permanent housing, and more general grant support for
any proposed transitional housing or emergency shelter. New development is thus largely
limited to availability of new resources from the annual HUD Continuum of Care process.
These resources are modest (roughly 25 certificates a year) and are accessible only once a
year thereby prolonging development timeframes.

A second reason that this analysis assumes modest development goals is that Riverside
County currently lacks the requisite capacity to undertake the development (and
management) of complex projects. Only a handful of not-for-profit developers possess the
interest and experience to develop homeless housing, particularly supportive housing. Thus,
until additional capacity is developed or supported, it is unlikely that projects will move far
beyond the conceptual stage to become actual resources. In order to grow capacity, it may be
useful to allocate resources for technical assistance, training, and organizational development
so that agencies may plan for new housing resources. It should be noted that while there
is general development capacity for affordable housing development throughout Riverside
County, hardly any developer has created new units that are affordable to persons leaving
homelessness.

Recognizing that new development will likely be limited by available rental assistance in the
near future, a number of other strategies may be employed to create new affordable units
for persons emerging from homelessness. The following policy recommendations have been
proposed to stimulate the growth of housing for homeless persons and families.




Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside                                  117
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Policies shall be developed to build the capacity (including facilitating the creation of joint
   ventures) and to minimize the risk to nonprofit agencies to undertake the development of
  affordable housing for homeless populations.
  Rationale: there is a dearth of development experience among non-profit social service
  agencies, yet such agencies generally provide the impetus for new housing programs for
  homeless populations. These agencies lack the capacity and the resources to undertake
  the considerable risks associated with the development of affordable housing. A forgivable
  pre-development loan fund would shift the early risk of projects from the nonprofit sponsor
  to the local government, thereby serving as a spur to development. In addition to creating
  incentives to develop homeless housing, an effort will need to be made to increase the
  skills of providers so that they may undertake development expeditiously.

2. Policies should be developed that will encourage development of new resources in service-
   poor areas and to limit future development in areas rich in residential resources.
  Rationale: homeless resources have been developed unevenly throughout the County. An
  effort should be made to establish greater equilibrium so that programs and services are
  available to reach all at-risk populations.

3. Policies should be developed to integrate homeless populations into the social mainstream,
   including in residential developments.
  Rationale: the burden to develop and manage housing for homeless populations should
  not fall exclusively upon the small number of developers who have created units for
  homeless populations. Rather, an effort should be made to create incentives for all housing
  developers to integrate a limited number of (formerly) homeless persons into their
  projects. This may be accomplished by using fee-waivers and providing other incentives
  to developers who not only set-aside units for low-income households but make the extra
  effort to market units to persons leaving homelessness.



The approach to planning incorporated in the Destination Home guide incorporates the
basic principals of public health planning, namely, to assure, to the extent possible, that all
populations have access to appropriate and cost-effective care and housing, and that the



118                                                   Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




basic system of care is organized so that no one is forced to become homeless in order to
receive care. This approach tacitly promotes the idea that prevention services need to be
developed alongside resources that provide emergency and long-term care. The approach
also assumes that evaluation mechanisms will be built into the service-delivery system and
that ongoing assessments may be made of the plan’s implementation. Any system of care so
designed will seek to have baseline level services available throughout the County so that a
person or family may access them expeditiously. This is also critical in order to reduce the
amount of time that a person or family experiences homelessness. Thus, it is important that
new residential services be sited in areas now lacking sufficient resources to assist the current
and anticipated future homeless population. To the extent that a community’s services lag as
compared to other areas, special attention should be paid to that locality.

The implementation of a strategy to develop housing for homeless populations should
include an expectation that units will be created within a set timeframe. Resources to build
new shelter and programs seem plentiful enough, but the funding needed to operate the
housing is limited, thereby constraining new development. Without allocation of new
local resources as operating subsidies and rental assistance, development will continue to
lag behind need. The short supply of resources places added emphasis on the question of
where new homeless resources should be located. Prior development of homeless programs
and services has been uneven across Riverside County, leaving significant gaps in certain
Supervisorial Districts. Thus, the performance goal should be to see that a baseline set of
services is made available in each community, and that enhanced services are created as
opportunities arise. It therefore seems prudent to monitor performance less in terms of total
units to be developed (which is largely limited by the availability of external resources)
and more upon a variable over which there exists a measure of local control—the location
of new housing for homeless persons. In part, location may be driven by opportunity, but
establishing performance goals that prioritize where new housing and resources are most
needed will serve the County’s needs better in the long-run. Tables 6D.1 and 6D.2 provide
direction to local planners on the question of where to site new residential opportunities.
Maintaining consistency with the priorities identified in these tables will strengthen and
enhance the continuum of care as new resources are brought online in Riverside County.




Section 6: Development Strategy for the County of Riverside                                  119
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                                                            A
                                                                           APPENDIX




T    he Resource Grid that follows was created to provide an overview of the predominant
     resources used to develop and operate housing for homeless populations. The Resource
Grid also includes a summary of the primary sources used to provide supportive social
services to homeless persons. The Resource Grid is divided into three parts: Development,
Operations, and Social Services. Each section contains information on the name of each
program or resource, its funding source and the administrative agencies involved in its
allocation and compliance. Program due dates and the most recent information on the level
of funding available are also included in each section, except due dates are excluded for most
programs allocated through block grants. Each section also includes a description of the
eligible uses of the funds, the eligible populations to be served, match requirements (if any)
and the source of the regulations governing the resource.

A key appears on the bottom of each page of the grid to help identify the eligible population.
Explanatory notes also appear on each page.

The pages that follow the Resource Grid in Appendix A provide detailed summaries of each
source and how it may be used. These resources appear in alphabetical order and are indexed.




                                                                                           A-1
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The Resource Grid may be used as a starting place to understand the range of funding
available to address the needs of a specific population or to develop a type of housing. It is
intended as tool to guide understanding and direct attention to parties interested in a specific
facet of development related to homelessness.




A-2
RESOURCES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF HOMELESS HOUSING AND PROGRAMS
Eligible Uses                                                                                                Current Funding
                                                                                      Typical Due Date(s)         Level                                                           Eligible Use of Funds
 Development                                                                                                   (in millions)                          DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES                                      HOUSE TYPES
                                                                                                                                                                                New       Permanent Emergency Transitional Permanent Supportive                   Required
Program                                           Source          Administration                                                  Acquisition Pre-development Rehabilitation Construction Financing  Shelter    Housing     Housing   Housing     Population(s)    Match           Regulations

Affordable Housing Program (AHP)                  Federal Home    Federal Home          April & October     $20 - $30 per round                                         x               x             x   x         x         x          x              all                  12 CFR Part 951
                                                  Loan Bank       Loan Bank
Community Development                             HUD             EDA                 local determination      See Table X.X          x               x                 x               x             x   x         x         x          x              all                  24 CFR Part 570
Block Grant (CDBG)
Emergency Housing and                             State bond      Cal. HCD/DPSS        January/February            $31                x               x                 x               x             x   x         x                                   all                  Title 25, §7950
Assistance Program– (EHAP-CD)                     measure         Priority-setting
Federal Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG)             HUD             HUD/EDA             local determination          $0.6                                                 x                             x   x         x                                   all        100%      24 CFR Part 576
Governor’s Homeless Initiative (GHI)              State bond      Cal. HCD              open enrollment            $42                                                                                x                                  x          see Note 1               Title 25, §7300
                                                  measure                                                                                                                                                                                                                    & §8300
HOME Investments Partnership                      HUD             EDA                 local determination          $6.3               x               x                 x               x             x             x         x          x              all         25%      24 CFR Part 92
Program (HOME)
Housing Enabled by Local Partnerships             CalHFA          CalHFA                   October             revolving loan         x               x                                                   x         x         x          x              all                  State Chartered
Program (HELP)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Bank
Housing Opportunities for Persons with            HUD             City of Riverside   local determination          $1.7               x               x                 x               x             x   x         x                    x             HIV                   24 CFR Part 574
AIDS (HOPWA)
Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC)             Federal/State   CTCAC                  March & July        $700 9% Federal          x                                 x               x             x             x         x          x              all                  Title 4, §10300
                                                                                                               $320 State
Multifamily Housing Program (MHP)                 State bond      Cal. HCD             February/August          $30 - $40                                                                             x             x         x                         all                  Title 25, §7300
                                                  measure                                                       pre round                                                                                                                                                    & §8300
Residential Development Loan                      CalHFA          CalHFA                   October             revolving loan         x               x                 x               x             x             x         x          x              all                  State Chartered
Program (RDLP)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Bank
Redevelopment Housing Set-aside                   Redevelopment   Redevelopment            October             revolving loan         x               x                 x               x             x   x         x         x          x              all                  CA H & S Code
                                                  Agencies        Agencies                                                                                                                                                                                                   §33000
Special Needs Housing Finance Program             CalHFA          CalHFA                open enrollment        revolving loan         x               x                 x               x             x             x         x          x              all                  State Chartered
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Bank
Supportive Housing Program –                      HUD             HUD / DPSS                 June            $0.4 per project         x                                 x               x             x             x                    x          see Note 2     100%      24 CFR Part 583
McKinney Vento (SHP)
Supportive Housing Program (SHP)                  State bond      Cal. HCD              open enrollment            $37                                                                                x                                  x             see                   Title 25, §7300
                                                  measure                                                                                                                                                                                             Note 3                 & §8300
Supportive Housing Program for Persons            HUD             HUD                     May/June             $5 in So. Cal.         x               x                 x               x             x                                  x        special needs              24 CFR Part 891
with Disabilities (811)
Tax Exempt Bonds–(Bonds for 501c3                 Federal/State   CDLAC                 open enrollment      open enrollment          x                                 x               x             x   x         x         x          x              all                  26 U.S.C. Section
Charitable Organizations)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    145

Rental Projects                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              147
Title V Program                                   HUD & HHS       HUD & HHS                variable          open enrollment                   excess federal property deeded or leased to eligible       x         x         x          x              all                  24 CFR 581

VA Grant Program                                  DVA             DVA                        June                  varies             x               x                 x               x             x   x         x                                 VETS          35%      38 CFR Part 61


CODE TO SUB-POPULATIONS                                           NOTES
SMI = Serious Mental Illness                                      1 Chronic Homeless = disabled with income below 30% AMI & eligible for MHSA services.
SA = Substance Abuse                                              2 All populations may be served, permanent supportive housing may only be occupied by disabled homeless persons.
HIV = HIV & AIDS
DD = Developmental Disability                                     3 HCD defines special needs as: homeless or at-risk of homelessness (incomes below 20% St. Median Income or AMI
CH = Other Chronic Health Condition (eg. Hep-C)                     w/o rental subsidy. Eligible disabled populations include: CMI, HIV, SA, DD, CH.
VETS = Veterans
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          A-3
RESOURCES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF HOMELESS HOUSING AND PROGRAMS
Eligible Uses                                                                                                         Current Funding
                                                                                                Typical Due Date(s)        Level                                                       Eligible Use of Funds
 Operations                                                                                                              (rounded)                                                 OPERATING SUBSIDIES
                                                                                                                                            Homeless      Operating       Rental         Property   Emergency   Transitional   Permanent   Supportive                   Required
Rental Assistance and Subsidy Programs                                                                                                      Prevention    Assistance     Assistance       Leasing    Shelter     Housing        Housing     Housing     Population(s)    Match         Regulations

Emergency Food and Shelter Program            FEMA                 DPSS                                                   $873,000                             x                                         x           x

Emergency Housing and Assistance              Cal HCD              DPSS                                                   $151,000                             x                            x            x           x                                                             Title 25, §7950
Program–Operations

Federal Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG)         HUD–McKinney-Vento   EDA                                                    $591,000             x               x                            x                                                                            100%      24 CFR Part 576

Housing Opportunities for Persons with        HUD                  HUD/City of Riverside                                 $1,684,000            x               x               x            x                                                               HIV                    24 CFR Part 574
AIDS (HOPWA)

HUD-VA Supported Housing (VASH) Program       HUD/DVA              HUD/DVA                                              no new funding                                         x                                                   x          x          VETS /SMI                 24 CFR Part 982

Public Housing                                HUD                  EDA                                                       n/a                   affordable rental housing                                                       x          x                                    24 CFR Part 902
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   et seq.

Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program      HUD/EDA              Public Housing Authorities                                                                                  x                                                   x          x                                    24 CFR Part 982

Section 8 Moderate Rehabiltiation for SROs    HUD–McKinney-Vento   Public Housing Authorities                         part of Continuum-                                       x                                                   x          x                                    24 CFR Part 882
                                                                                                                       of-Care process

Shelter Plus Care Program                     HUD–McKinney-Vento   Public Housing Authorities           June          part of Continuum-                                       x                                                   x          x           SMI/SA/        100%      24 CFR Part 882
                                                                                                                       of-Care process                                                                                                                                  HIV/CH

Supportive Housing Program –                  HUD–McKinney-Vento   HUD/DPSS                             June          part of Continuum-                       x                            x                        x                        x                          25%       24 CFR Part 583
McKinney Vento (SHP)                                                                                                   of-Care process

Transitional Living Program for               HHS                  HHS                                unknown         not funded in 2006                       x                            x            x           x                                  Youth (16-21)     10%      Transitional Living
Older Homeless Youth (TLP)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Program through
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   the Runaway,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Homeless, and
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Missing Children
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Protection Act of
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   2003, as amended
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   by P.L. 108-96

VA Homeless Providers Per Diem Program        DVA                  DVA                                  June          $29.31 per unit/day                      x                                         x           x                                      VETS          50%      38 CFR Part 61

CODE TO SUB-POPULATIONS
SMI = Serious Mental Illness
SA = Substance Abuse
HIV = HIV & AIDS
DD = Developmental Disability
CH = Other Chronic Health Condition (eg. Hep-C)
VETS = Veterans




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               A-5
RESOURCES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF HOMELESS HOUSING AND PROGRAMS
Eligible Uses                                                                                      Typical     Current Funding
                                                                                                 Due Date(s)        Level                                       Eligible Use of Funds
 Supportive Social Services                                                                                                                             FUNDING FOR SOCIAL SERVICES
                                                                                                                                 Mental   Substance   Employment                    Case     Medical      Life                                        Required
Social Services Funding                                                                                                          Health     Abuse      Assistance Transportation Management Serv./AIDS   Skills   Childcare   Other   Population(s)    Match           Regulations

FORMULA / BLOCK, GRANTS
AB2034                                                           Cal. DMH     RBHD                               $1.7 million      x         x                                                                                            SMI
Child Care & Development Block Grant (CCDB)                      HHS          Cal DSS, DOE                                                                                                                           x                  families                 45 CFR Parts 98 & 99
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)                         HUD          EDA                               $18.5 million      x         x            x            x            x           x          x                               all                   24 CFR Part 570
Community Mental Health Services Block Grant (CMHS)              HHS          Cal. Dept. of MH                                     x         x            x            x            x                      x                              SMI                    45 CFR Part 96
Community Services Block Grant (CSBG)                            HHS          Cal HCD                            $378,000                    x            x            x            x                      x         x                     all                   45 CFR Part 96
Education for Homeless Children and Youth                        DoE          Cal. DoE                           $250,000                                                                                            x          x                                34 CFR Part 74
Federal Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG)                            HUD          EDA                                $591,000                                              x            x                                                      all         100%      24 CFR Part 576
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)              HUD          HUD                                $1.7 million      x         x            x            x            x            x         x         x                    HIV          20%       24 CFR Part 574
Medicaid (MediCal)                                               SSA          SSA                                                  x         x                                      x            x                                      SMI, HIV       50%       42 CFR Subchapter C
Mental Health Services Act (Prop. 63 or MHSA)                    Cal. DMH     RBHD                               $23 million       x         x            x            x            x            x         x         x                    SMI
Projects for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness (PATH)   HHS/SAMHSA Cal Dept. of MH                      $226,000          x         x            x            x            x                      x                    x       SMI, SA        25%       42 CFR Subchapter C
Ryan White                                                       Cal. DH      RHD                                $6.3 million      x         x                         x            x            x         x         x          x         HIV                    PHS Grants Policy
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Statement, DHHS
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 (OASH) Publication No.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 94-50,000, (Rev.)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 April 1, 1994.

Social Services Block Grant (SSBG)                               HHS          Cal DSS                                                        x            x            x            x                      x                               all                   45 CFR Part 96
Substance Abuse Prevention & Treatment Block Grant (SAPT)        HHS          Cal. Dept. of MH                   $3.5 million      x         x            x            x            x                      x                               SA                    45 CFR Part 96
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF/CalWORKS)          SSA          DPSS                              $17.3 million      x         x            x            x            x                      x         x          x                      50%

CATEGORIAL FUNDING
Emergency Housing and Assistance Program – (EHAP)                State bond   Cal. HCD / DPSS      November      $150,884                                              x            x                                                      all                   Title 25, §7950
                                                                 measure
Health Care for the Homeless                                     HHS                               unknown         variable        x         x                         x            x           x                                                                52 CFR Part 32347
Minority SAP & HIV Prevention Services Program                   HHS          HHS                    Fall          variable        x         x                                      x            x                                        HIV                    45 CFR Parts 74 & 92
Supportive Housing Program – McKinney Vento (SHP)                HUD          HUD / DPSS             June         $6 million       x         x            x            x            x            x         x         x                     all                   24 CFR Part 583
Targeted Capacity Expansion (TCE)                                HHS          HHS                    Fall          variable                  x                                                                                             SA                    45 CFR Parts 74 & 92
Transitional Living Program for Older Homeless Youth (TLP)       HHS          HHS                  unknown       not funded        x         x            x            x            x            x         x         x          x     Youth (16-21)    10%       Transitional Living
                                                                                                                  in 2006                                                                                                                                        Program through the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Runaway, Homeless,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 and Missing Children
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Protection Act of 2003,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 as amended by P.L.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 108-96
Treatment for Homeless Persons                                   HHS          Cal. Dept.             May           variable        x         x            x            x            x                      x                               SA                    45 CFR Parts 74,
                                                                              of Health                                                                                                                                                                          45 & 92
VA Homeless Providers Per Diem Program                           DVA          DVA                    June          variable        x         x            x            x            x            x         x         x          x         VETS         50%       38 CFR Part 61


CODE TO SUB-POPULATIONS
SMI = Serious Mental Illness
SA = Substance Abuse
HIV = HIV & AIDS
DD = Developmental Disability
CH = Other Chronic Health Condition (eg. Hep-C)
VETS = Veterans                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     A-7
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act .......................................................A-11
Development
Affordable Housing Program (AHP) .........................................................................A-19
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) ......................................................A-21
Emergency Housing and Assistance Program–(EHAP-CD)......................................A-29
Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG)................................................................................A-33
Governor’s Homeless Initiative (GHI) .......................................................................A-40
HOME Investments Partnership Program (HOME) .................................................A-49
Housing Enabled by Local Partnerships Program (HELP) ........................................A-52
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA).......................................A-55
Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) ...............................................................A-63
Multifamily Housing Program (MHP).......................................................................A-93
Redevelopment Housing Set-aside ............................................................................A-102
Special Needs Housing Finance Program ..................................................................A-120
Supportive Housing Program – McKinney Vento (SHP)..........................................A-122
Supportive Housing Program/Multifamily Housing Program (SHP/MHP) ..............A-128
Supportive Housing Program for Persons with Disabilities (811) .............................A-133
Tax Exempt Bonds – Qualified Residential Rental Projects .......................................A-142
Tax Exempt Bonds – (Bonds for 501c3 Charitable Organizations) ...........................A-140
Title V Program .........................................................................................................A-151
VA Grant Program......................................................................................................A-160
Operations/Rental Assistance and Subsidy Programs
Emergency Food and Shelter Program.......................................................................A-26
Emergency Housing and Assistance Program–Operations........................................A-31
Federal Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) ...................................................................A-33
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA).......................................A-55
HUD-VA Supported Housing (VASH) Program .......................................................A-59
Public Housing...........................................................................................................A-100
Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program............................................................A-115


                                                                                                                                 A-9
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Section 8 Moderate Rehabiltiation for SROs.............................................................A-117
Shelter Plus Care Program ........................................................................................A-119
Supportive Housing Program – McKinney Vento (SHP)..........................................A-123
VA Homeless Providers Per Diem Program ...............................................................A-160
Supportive Social Services—Formula/Block Grants
AB2034.......................................................................................................................A-17
Child Care & Development Block Grant (CCDB) ....................................................A-34
   (See Federal Block Grant Assistance)
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) ........................................................A-21
  (See Federal Block Grant Assistance)
Community Mental Health Services Block Grant (CMHS)......................................A-35
  (See Federal Block Grant Assistance)
Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) (See Federal Block Grant Assistance) ........A-36
Education for Homeless Children and Youth ............................................................A-23
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA).......................................A-56
Medicaid (MediCal)...................................................................................................A-73
Mental Health Services Act (Prop. 63 or MHSA) .....................................................A-84
Minority Substance Abuse Prevention and HIV Prevention Program.......................A-89
Projects for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness (PATH).............................A-97
Ryan White ................................................................................................................A-106
Social Services Block Grant (SSBG)...........................................................................A-37
Substance Abuse Prevention & Treatment Block Grant (SAPT) ...............................A-38
   (See Federal Block Grant Assistance)
Targeted Capacity Expansion or TCE........................................................................A-136
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF/CalWorks)...................................A-145
Supportive Social Services–Categorical Funding
Emergency Housing and Assistance Program – (EHAP) ...........................................A-31
Federal Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) ...................................................................A-33
Health Care for the Homeless ...................................................................................A-45
Supportive Housing Program – McKinney Vento (SHP)..........................................A-123
Treatment for Homeless Persons................................................................................A-155
VA Homeless Providers Per Diem Program ...............................................................A-160

A-10
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




At the beginning of the Reagan Presidency, most programs to address problems associated
with homelessness were created, funded and administered at the grass-roots level. In the
view of the administration, states and local jurisdictions were best equipped to handle the
problem of homelessness. In 1983, in response to growing concerns from the US Conference
of Mayors (and other advocacy groups), the Federal government creates the first task force
on homelessness. The initial federal response was to make available surplus federal property
to localities through the Title V program. In 1986 Congress took up the Homeless Persons’
Survival Act and the Urgent Relief for the Homeless Act (URHA), each providing emergency
relief provisions for shelter, food, mobile health care, and transitional housing. These acts
passed Congress with large bipartisan majorities in both houses of Congress in 1987. After
the death of the chief Republican sponsor of the URHA, Representative Stewart B. McKinney
of Connecticut, the act was renamed the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act. It was
signed into law by President Reagan on July 22, 1987.

The McKinney Act originally consisted of 15 programs providing a range of services to
homeless people, including the Continuum of Care Programs: the Supportive Housing
Program, the Shelter Plus Care Program, and the Single Room Occupancy Program, as well
as the Emergency Shelter Grant Program. These programs are all contained within Title IV.
• Title I of the McKinney Act includes a statement of six findings by Congress and provides a
  definition of homelessness.
• Title II establishes and describes the functions of the Interagency Council on the Homeless,
  an independent entity within the Executive Branch composed of the heads of 15 federal
  agencies.
• Title III of the McKinney Act authorizes the Emergency Food and Shelter Program, which
  is administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
• Title IV authorizes the emergency shelter and transitional housing programs administered
  by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, including the Emergency
  Shelter Grant program (expanded from the program created by the Homeless Housing



                                                                                          A-11
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




  Act in 1986), the Supportive Housing Demonstration Program, Supplemental Assistance
  for Facilities to Assist the Homeless, and Section 8 Single Room Occupancy Moderate
  Rehabilitation.
• Title V of the McKinney Act imposes requirements on federal agencies to identify and
  make available surplus federal property, such as buildings and land, for use by states, local
  governments, and nonprofit agencies to assist homeless people.
• Title VI authorizes several programs administered by the Department of Health and
  Human Services.
• Title VII authorizes several programs administered by the Department of Education, the
  Department of Labor and the Department of Health and Human Services.
• Title VIII amends the Food Stamp program to facilitate participation in the program by
  persons who are homeless, administered by the Department of Agriculture.
• Title IX of the McKinney Act extends the Veterans Job Training Act.



Though amended several times since its passage, the McKinney Act has stood the test of
time, and provides the best first step to address the needs of a population that is, by and large
unknown and underrepresented.




TITLE 42, CHAPTER 119, SUBCHAPTER I, § 11302: General definition of homeless
individual

(a) In general

For purposes of this chapter, the term “homeless” or “homeless individual or homeless person”
[1] includes—

       (1) an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence; and
       (2) an individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is—
            (A) a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide
                temporary living accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate
                shelters, and transitional housing for the mentally ill);

A-12
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                 (B) an institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended
                 to be institutionalized; or
                 (C) a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular
                 sleeping accommodation for human beings.

(b) Income eligibility

             (1) In general A homeless individual shall be eligible for assistance under any
             program provided by this chapter, only if the individual complies with the income
             eligibility requirements otherwise applicable to such program.

             (2) Exception: Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a homeless individual shall be
             eligible for assistance under Title I of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 [29
             U.S.C. 2801 et seq.].

(b) Exclusion

For purposes of this chapter, the term “homeless” or “homeless individual” does not include
any individual imprisoned or otherwise detained pursuant to an Act of the Congress or a
State law.



Over the past few years, HUD has narrowed the eligibility of different homeless sub-
populations, arriving at the following more limited definition in Fiscal Year 2006:

A person is considered homeless only when he/she resides in one of the three places
described below. For new and renewal projects, persons assisted with permanent housing
must be homeless and come from:
1. places not meant for human habitation, such as cars, parks, sidewalks, and abandoned
   buildings;
2. an emergency shelter; or
3. transitional housing for homeless persons and who originally came from the streets or
   emergency shelter.

If a person is in one of the three categories listed above, but most recently spent less than 30
days in a jail or institution, he/she qualifies as coming from one of these three categories.


                                                                                              A-13
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




In addition to the above three categories, projects providing Transitional Housing, Safe
Havens (non-PH), or Supportive Services Only may also serve populations meeting the
following:
4. eviction within a week from a private dwelling unit and no subsequent residence has
   been identified and the person lacks the resources and support networks needed to obtain
  housing; or
5. discharge within a week from an institution in which the person has been a resident for 30
   or more consecutive days and no subsequent residence has been identified and he/she lacks
  the resources and support networks needed to obtain housing.



By law, only those persons who are homeless may be served by the programs under the
Continuum of Care NOFA. Persons at risk of homelessness (persons who are “doubled up,”
or persons who are “near homelessness”) are eligible for assistance through the Emergency
Shelter Grants (ESG) program that can fund homelessness prevention activities. A variety
of other programs, such as Section 8, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and
HOME, also serve low-income persons who may be at risk of becoming homeless due to
poor housing conditions, overcrowding or other reasons.

Owing to the high demand for federal assistance to homelessness and Congress’ reluctance
to authorize funding beyond $1.3 billion annually, HUD has felt forced to increasingly
target its funds. Recent regulatory changes have focused HUD McKinney-Vento funds
in three significant ways: (1) HUD has prioritized the use of its funds to assist “chronic
homeless persons,” (2) HUD has encouraged localities to use McKinney-Vento funding to
develop permanent housing, and as a corollary (3) HUD has begun to downplay the role of
transitional housing programs as necessary steps in the process by which persons “recover”
from homelessness.

HUD defines a “chronic homeless” individual as:
       an unaccompanied homeless individual with a disabling condition who has
       either been continuously homeless for a year or more OR has had at least
       four (4) episodes of homelessness in the past three (3) years. In order to




A-14
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




       be considered chronically homeless, a person must have been sleeping in
       a place not meant for human habitation (e.g., living on the streets) and/or
       in an emergency homeless shelter.” A disabling condition is defined as “a
       diagnosable substance use disorder, serious mental illness, developmental
       disability, or chronic physical illness or disability, including the co-occurrence
       of two or more of these conditions.” A disabling condition limits an
       individual’s ability to work or perform one or more activities of daily living. An
       episode of homelessness is a separate, distinct, and sustained stay on the streets
       and/or in an emergency homeless shelter. A chronically homeless person
       must be unaccompanied and disabled during each episode. To be defined as
       chronically homeless, a person must be living on the street or in emergency
       shelter at the time of the count or eligibility determination. The definition
       does not include those currently in transitional housing.

There are a number of key elements to this definition that are important to note. First, a
chronic homeless person is a single (adult) person with a disability. Second, to be considered
“chronic,” the homeless person has been either on the streets or in emergency shelters. This
is a much narrower definition of homelessness than HUD typically uses, as it disqualifies any
persons leaving either institutional settings, or a transitional housing program. Homeless
persons graduating from a transitional housing program may still be eligible for other
programs and purposes, but they are excluded from projects targeted to chronic homeless
persons. There is one other dimension to this definition that bears noting: that the definition
itself tacitly endorses a “housing first” model. If one may not move a chronic homeless person
from transitional housing into permanent housing, then a program necessarily is forced to
identify prospective tenants from emergency shelters or the streets. Finally, it is important to
recognize that the definition of chronic homelessness excludes families.




                                                                                            A-15
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Agency Name: Riverside County Department of Mental Health, 3600 Lime Street, Building
5, Suite 500, Riverside, CA 92501, (909) 341-6620. Program Coordinator: Maria Marquez
(909) 358-4523, mimarquez@co.riverside.ca.us

Recent estimates indicate that there are approximately 300,000 homeless persons in
California including 50,000 with serious mental illness. Approximately 5,000 of these persons
are served throughout the state in 34 local programs established initially under Assembly Bill
34, and expanded under Assembly Bill 2034. (Steinberg, Chapter 617 and 518, Statutes of
1999 and 2000).

In 1999 the Governor provided $10 million for three pilot programs to provide
comprehensive, integrated services to homeless adults with serious mental illness with
the condition that no future funding would be provided unless the three projects could
demonstrate positive client and system outcomes, including cost effectiveness, within that
first year. As documented in the May 2000 report to the Legislature on the effectiveness of
these programs, these three pilot projects located in Sacramento, Stanislaus and Los Angeles,
were very successful in reducing the number of homeless days, jail days and psychiatric
hospital days experienced by individuals enrolled in the programs. As a result of those early
outcomes funding was increased to $54.9 million to support 34 local programs.

State funding provided for these programs enables staff to directly or indirectly provide a
comprehensive array of services including outreach, supportive housing and other housing
assistance, employment, substance abuse, and mental and physical healthcare including
medications. The flexibility of the funding provided has made it possible for programs to
provide and subsidize housing and deliver the comprehensive services necessary to support
individuals living and working in the community. What has become apparent to providers and
stakeholders is the therapeutic significance of having a stable place to live, and the foundation
this provides for individuals’ ability and desire to make progress in other aspects of their lives.



A-16
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The individuals served in these programs are nearly always persons with multiple challenges
including mental illness, substance abuse issues, criminal justice issues, HIV/AIDS, and other
physical disabilities. Additionally many have been homeless a long time, sometimes more than
a decade. They often have no ties to family and rarely have any resources. Many will not utilize
programs that require sobriety at admission. In short, these are individuals for whom traditional
programs have not produced long-term solutions to homelessness. With almost five years since
initial program funding was provided, the success of AB 2034 programs over time continues to
exceed expectations. Recent data on individuals who have been in the program three years or
more demonstrate that their positive outcomes have been sustained and improved over time.
The outcomes described in each annual legislative report on the effectiveness of these programs
document not only the personal success of individuals dealing with multiple challenges, but also
the ongoing cost effectiveness of AB 2034 programs statewide.

Program Overview
The County of Riverside receives an allocation of approximately $1.6 million annually from
the State of California, Department of Mental Health through the AB2034 program. The
AB 2034 Homeless Assistance Program is designed to meet the long-term service needs of
homeless adults suffering from mental illness in Riverside County. Riverside County covers
a wide geographic area, bordering on Orange County in the west and stretching eastward
all the way to the state line. The Homeless Assistance Program offers services in all regions
of the county, with specialized teams out-stationed to remote areas. The teams are made
of a combination of skilled professional and paraprofessional members who work together
to meet the needs of our consumers. While recognizing that each consumer has their own
unique strengths and needs, the program endeavors to assist all consumers in achieving three
primary goals:
• Safe, secure, and stable housing.
• Appropriate mental health treatment, including medications.
• Participation in meaningful activity, such as employment, education, or volunteering.

The program relies heavily on community and inter-agency support. For that reason we
maintain ongoing relationships with local public, private, and nonprofit agencies in order
to provide a wide spectrum of services for our consumers. Program enrollees have become
involved in consumer advocacy groups such as the Alliance for the Mentally Ill, and 51



                                                                                            A-17
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




percent have successfully re-entered the workforce either part time or full time. This includes
those that have become employees of the agencies who once offered them vocational or
housing assistance. Since the program’s inception more than 400 individuals have been
assisted. Based on program outcome data, 65.5 percent of consumers have decreased
hospitalization and/or incarceration rates. As a result the county has avoided significant
costs that it has historically incurred serving AB2034 consumers. Equally important AB2034
consumers have avoided these highly restrictive settings and a 74 percent reduction in
homelessness indicates an improved overall quality of life.




A-18
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The affordable housing and economic development programs of the twelve FHLBanks consist
of grants and low-interest loans to member financial institutions to use to provide financing
for economic development and housing activities.

FHLBank grants and low-interest loans are catalysts for the construction and revitalization
of housing targeted to people with low- and moderate-incomes. AHP- funded projects serve
a wide range of neighborhood needs; many are designed for seniors, the disabled, homeless
families, first-time homeowners and others with limited resources.



The AHP is a competitive program that provides grants twice a year through financial
institutions for investment in low- or moderate-income housing initiatives. Member banks
partner with developers and community organizations to finance the purchase, construction,
or rehabilitation of owner-occupied or rental housing. Grants can also be used to lower the
interest rate on loans or cover down payment and closing costs. The program is flexible
so that AHP funds can be used in combination with other programs and funding sources,
ensuring a project’s feasibility. To make certain that AHP-funded projects reflect local housing
needs, each FHLBank is advised by a 15-member Affordable Housing Advisory Council for
guidance on regional housing and community development issues

System Highlights
• The AHP is funded with 10 percent of the FHLBank System’s net income each year.
• The AHP is one of the largest private sources of grant funds for affordable housing in the
  country.
• In 2005, a combined total of $280 million was made available for regional housing projects.
• Since the program’s inception in 1991, over $2 billion dollars in AHP funds have been
  awarded.
• $40 billion in CIP-funded loans have financed nearly 600,000 housing units and thousands
  of economic development projects.




                                                                                          A-19
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• The FHLBank System is the largest corporate contributor to Habitat for Humanity
  International; one in four Habitat homes in the U.S has received AHP funds.

HP Eligibility
• AHP grants can be used to fund housing for families or individuals with incomes at or
  below 80 percent of the area median.
• For AHP funded rental housing, 20 percent of the units must serve households with
  incomes at or below 50 percent of the area median.

Funding is awarded only to financial institution members of the FHLBank System working in
partnership with a community sponsor organization.




A-20
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Introduction
The program provides annual grants on a formula-basis to entitled cities, counties and states
to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living
environment, and by expanding economic opportunities, principally for low-and moderate-
income persons. The program is authorized under Title 1 of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1974, Public Law 93-383, as amended; 42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.

Nature of Program
HUD awards grants to entitlement community grantees to carry out a wide range of
community development activities directed toward revitalizing neighborhoods, economic
development, and providing improved community facilities and services. Entitlement
communities develop their own programs and funding priorities. However, grantees must give
maximum feasible priority to activities which benefit low- and moderate-income persons. A
grantee may also carry out activities which aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or
blight. Additionally, grantees may fund activities when the grantee certifies that the activities
meet other community development needs having a particular urgency because existing
conditions pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community
where other financial resources are not available to meet such needs. CDBG funds may not be
used for activities which do not meet these broad national objectives.

Eligible Grantees
Eligible grantees are as follows:
• Principal cities of Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs);
• Other metropolitan cities with populations of at least 50,000; and
• Qualified urban counties with populations of at least 200,000 (excluding the population of
  entitled cities) are entitled to receive annual grants.




                                                                                           A-21
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




HUD determines the amount of each entitlement grant by a statutory dual formula which
uses several objective measures of community needs, including the extent of poverty,
population, housing overcrowding, age of housing and population growth lag in relationship
to other metropolitan areas.




A-22
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Administrative Agencies

Federal:
• Department of Education (ED):
  Office of Elementary and Secondary Education
  (OESE) (202) 260-4412
  www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oese/index.html or
  www.ed.gov/programs/homeless/index.html

California:
• Department of Education
  (916) 319-0791
  www.cde.ca.gov/

Type Of Assistance: Formula

Program Description
This formula grant program is designed to:
(1) Ensure that homeless children and youth have equal access to the same free, appropriate
    public education as other children;
(2) Provide activities for and services to ensure that these children enroll in, attend, and
    achieve success in school;
(3) Establish or designate an office in each State educational agency (SEA) for the
    coordination of education for homeless children and youth and responsible for gathering
    comprehensive information about homeless children and youths and the impediments to
    their regular attendance at school;
(4) Develop and implement programs for school personnel to heighten awareness of specific
    problems of homeless children and youth; and




                                                                                               A-23
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




(5) Provide grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) for the purpose of facilitating the
    enrollment, attendance, and success of homeless children and youth in school.

Eligibility Information

Eligible Target Populations:
Homeless children and youth in elementary and secondary schools (and homeless preschool
children and the parents of homeless children)

Eligible Projects/Programs:
Educational activities to facilitate enrollment, attendance and success in school of homeless
children and youths.

Eligible Use of Funds & Use Restrictions:
Activities that will facilitate the educational success of homeless children and youth,
including: tutoring, summer enrichment programs, the provision of school supplies, and
professional development designed to heighten educators’ understanding of and sensitivity to
the needs of homeless children and youth. Services provided with these funds cannot replace
the regular academic program and must expand upon or improve services provided as part of
the regular academic program.

Eligible Applicants/Sponsors:
Departments of Education and schools serving Indian students that are funded by the Secretary
of the Interior. Only Local Education Agencies (LEAs) are eligible for state sub-grants.

Grant Terms

Awards:
The proposed Fiscal Year 2006/07 allocation to California is anticipated to be $8,085,000 of
which $140,000 is to be awarded to the Riverside County Office of Education and $110,000
to the Riverside Unified School District.

Term of Awards: One fiscal year.

Matching Requirements: N/A




A-24
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Formula:
States (and D.C and Puerto Rico) receive formula grant funds proportionate to the
distribution of funds under Section 1122 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965, as amended (ESEA).

Application Process
States (and the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) receive their allocation annually. The
state educational agency (SEA) must distribute not less than 75 percent of their allocation
in competitive sub-grants to local educational agencies. States may reserve their remaining
funds for State-level activities. States are required to have an approved plan for addressing
problems associated with the enrollment, attendance, and success of homeless children in
school. Biennial updates of State plans are required for ongoing renewals.

CFDA Code: 84.196

Authorizing Legislation
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1987, Title VII, Subtitle B, as amended, 42
U.S.C. 11431-11435

Regulations
Title 34 CFR Part 74; FY 2003 Draft Guidance for the Education for Homeless Chidren and
Youth Program (March 2003)




                                                                                           A-25
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program was created in 1983 to supplement
the work of local agencies and non-profit social service organizations help people in need of
emergency assistance. This collaborative effort between the private and public sectors has
disbursed more than $2.3 billion in Federal funds through FEMA during its 21-year history.
These funds have assisted over 11,000 local provider agencies in more than 2,500 counties
and cities. In Riverside County, the program is administered by DPSS.

The program was absorbed into the McKinney-Vento Act in 1987 and redefined the
program’s purpose: “To supplement and expand ongoing efforts to provide shelter, food
and supportive services” for homeless and hungry individuals nationwide. The program is
centered on quick response, public-private sector cooperation, local decision making and
funds allocations to the neediest areas.

The program is governed by a national board composed of representatives of the American
Red Cross; Catholic Charities, USA; United Jewish Communities; The National Council of
the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A.; The Salvation Army; and United Way of America. The
Board is chaired by a representative of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

The program’s objectives are:
• to allocate funds to the neediest areas,
• to ensure fast response,
• to foster public/private sector cooperation,
• to ensure local decision making, and
• to maintain minimal, but accountable, reporting.

Local Governance
Locally, the program is a model of public-private cooperation. Each civil jurisdiction (a
county or city) funded by the program must constitute a local board. The board must be
composed of representatives of the same organizations as those on the National Board, with



A-26
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




a local government official replacing the FEMA representative. The Local Board members
elect their chair. Local boards may also have additional members, and, since 1993, local
boards have been required to include a homeless or formerly homeless person as a member.
If a jurisdiction is located within or encompasses a federally recognized Indian reservation, a
Native American representative must also be invited to serve on the local board.

The National Board awards funds to jurisdictions based upon a formula; in addition, a small
portion of the overall award is allocated by formula to state set-aside committees, who then
allocate funds to jurisdictions based upon the criteria they feel is most appropriate. Once
an award is made by either the National Board or a state set-aside committee, local boards
decide which agencies are to receive funds, and then those agencies are paid directly by the
National Board. Within a jurisdiction, no more than two percent (2%) of the entire award
may be used for administrative costs by the local board and agencies combined.

In 1985, the National Board created a state set-aside process to identify and fund areas
of need not reflected in the national criteria. State set-aside committees, with members
mirroring local boards, receive funds based upon the number of unemployed people in
counties within their state that do not qualify under the National Board’s criteria. State
committees may use any criteria they wish to develop a needs-based formula to determine
which jurisdictions receive funding. The committees must give priority to jurisdictions which
have not qualified under the National Board formula, but they may also select, with National
Board approval, jurisdictions that were funded by the National Board.

State Set-Aside Committees may use up.five percent (5%) for administrative purposes. In a few
states, the state set-aside committee acts as a local board and funds agencies directly state-wide.



Program funds are an important component of homeless prevention programs and can be
used to provide the following (as prioritized by the Local Board in funded jurisdictions):
• Food, in the form of served meals or groceries.
• Lodging in a mass shelter or hotel.
• One month’s rent or mortgage payment.
• One month’s utility bill.




                                                                                              A-27
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• Minimal repairs to allow a mass feeding or sheltering facility to function during the
  program year.
• Equipment necessary to feed or shelter people, up to a $300 limit per item.

Application
Applications for EFSP funds are submitted to the Local Board which is responsible for making
funding decisions and setting overall priorities for the use of FEMA funds.




A-28
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Purpose
The Emergency Housing and Assistance Program/Capital Development (EHAPCD) funds
capital development activities for emergency shelters, transitional housing, and safe havens
that provide shelter and supportive services for homeless individuals and families.

Assistance Type
Deferred payment loans at three percent (3%) simple interest, forgiven when loan term is
complete. Term ranges from five to 10 years based on the development activity.

Terms
Competitive application process announced annually via a Notice of Funding Availability
(NOFA). 80 percent of the total allocation is available to urban counties, and 20 percent to
non-urban counties.

Eligible Activities
Acquiring, constructing, converting, expanding and/or rehabilitating emergency shelter,
transitional housing, and/or safe haven housing and administration of the award (limited to
five percent [5%]).

Eligible Applicants
Local government agencies and nonprofit corporations that shelter the homeless on an
emergency or transitional basis, and provide support services.

Application Procedure
When funds are available, applications are invited through issuance of Notices of Funding
Availability (NOFAs). In some counties, including Riverside, Designated Local Boards (DLBs)
develop local capital development priorities and advise HCD on the relative merits of
applications in their counties. Applications are rated and ranked competitively when the demand



                                                                                          A-29
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




for funds is greater than the annual allocation. HCD enters into Standard Agreements with
the sponsors of successful applications. The availability of funds was announced by HCD on
November 9, 2006 with applications due by February 8, 2007. The current funding round has
$24,800,000 available for urban counters with the maximum award per project being $1 million.




A-30
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Purpose
The State Emergency Housing and Assistance Program (EHAP) Operating Facility grants
are component funds for emergency shelter, transitional housing, safe havens, and temporary
rental assistance and winter shelter programs. The funds are to assist housing programs with
their operational costs, as well as for the expansion of bed capacity and/or supportive services
offered to clients. Funds are allocated (by formula) to counties that either establish a local
planning council, known as a Designated Local Board (DLB), or defer such local planning and
priority-setting, and allow the State Department of Housing and Community Development
to review requests for funding and administer grant assistance. In Riverside County, EHAP is
administered by the Department of Public Social Services.

Assistance Type and Term
EHAP operating funding is allocated annually as grant assistance. Funds must be expended
within fourteen months of contract execution.

Eligible Activities
EHAP operating funds may be used to establish new emergency shelters, transitional housing,
or safe havens, or to expand existing facilities in order to increase the number of homeless
persons served, expand existing eligible supportive services, or bring existing facilities up to
a level that meets State health and safety standards. These funds may also be used to operate
weather-activated shelters, provide short-term rental and/or utility assistance and deposits,
and for other forms of assistance that may prevent eviction. A limited amount of EHAP funds
may be used to upgrade or repair a shelter.

Eligible Applicants
EHAP funds may be allocated to not-for-profit organizations or to local government
agencies. Applicants must have provided client housing continuously each day for at least a
year prior to application submission. EHAP funds may not be used to supplant (substitute)
existing emergency shelter or transitional housing funding.

                                                                                           A-31
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Application Procedure
Designated Local Boards (DLBs) develop local strategies to allocate EHAP funding, and rate and
recommend applications. The Round 13 (2006) awards in Riverside County were as follows:
Alternatives to Domestic Violence                $30,000
Martha’s Village and Kitchen, Inc.                  $30,000
Path of Life Ministries                             $21,910
Riverside County Department of Mental Health        $32,896
The Homeless Task Force of Corona                   $30,000

Authorizing Legislation/Statute
Health and Safety Code (H&SC) Sections 50800 through 50806.5, and Chapter 47, Statutes
of 2006 (Budget Act of 2006), establish the Emergency Housing and Assistance Program
(EHAP) and specify the eligible uses of funding for this allocation. The EHAP is administered
by the California Department of Housing and Community Development.

Regulations/Guidelines
Title 25, Division 1, Chapter 7, Subchapter 12

Additional Resources
http://www.hcd.ca.gov/fa/ehap/ehapfunding.html




A-32
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The Emergency Shelter Grants program is a HUD formula-based program assisting eligible
localities with funds to provide homeless persons with basic shelter and essential supportive
services. It can assist with the operational costs of the shelter facility, and for the administration
of the grant. ESG also provides short-term homeless prevention assistance to persons at
imminent risk of losing their own housing due to eviction, foreclosure, or utility shutoffs.

Grantees are state governments, large cities, urban counties, and U.S. territories. Funds may
be granted to eligible recipients which can be either local government agencies or private
nonprofit organizations that provide assistance to homeless persons. Recipient agencies and
organizations apply to the EDA or the City of Riverside Development Department. The City
of Riverside received a Fiscal Year 2006 allocation from HUD of approximately $150,000 and
the County of Riverside was allotted just over $440,000 in Fiscal Year 2006.

Eligible Activities
ESG funds are available for the rehabilitation or remodeling of a building used as a new
shelter, operations and maintenance of the facility, essential supportive services (i.e., case
management, physical and mental health treatment, substance abuse counseling, childcare,
etc.), homeless prevention, and grant administration. Renovated buildings must be
maintained as shelters for the homeless for at least three years (10 years in the case of major
renovations).

Ineligible Activities
ESG funds may not be used to acquire a shelter or engage in new construction activities, but
rehabilitation and conversion are permissible activities.

Match Requirement
Local government grantees must match ESG grant funds dollar for dollar with other
resources. Matching funds may come from either the grantee or the recipient agency or
organization and may be federal funds, state or local grants, or “in-kind” contributions (such
as the value of a donated building), supplies and equipment, new staff services, and volunteer
time. The only federal funds that do not count toward the match are other McKinney-Vento
(homeless) funds.



                                                                                                 A-33
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The Federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has primary responsibility for
allocating funds related to health and human services, including substance abuse prevention
and treatment, mental health treatment, community-based social services and child care.
In most cases, the bulk of Federal services funding is distributed in block grants/ formula-
based allocation grant programs usually going to the state department that is responsible
for the service in question for a particular population. Funding for services in supportive
housing and other homeless services are rarely funded with Federal pass-through funding,
but such services are eligible for this assistance. These block grant programs are occasionally
combined with other local sources to fund the service needs of particular special-needs
populations. HUD is increasingly encouraging localities to plan for the use of “mainstream”
HHS sources in their comprehensive approaches to address homelessness.

The following are brief summaries of the mainstream HHS block grant programs which may
be used at the local level to fund supportive services for homeless populations.




CCDF funds states, territories and tribes to assist low-income families, families receiving
temporary public assistance, and those transitioning from public assistance in obtaining
childcare so they can work or attend training/education. Beneficiaries of CCDF funds must be
children under age 13 (or, at the option of the grantee, up to age 19 if physically or mentally
incapable of self-care or under court supervision)
• who reside with a family whose income does not exceed 85 percent of the State median
  income adjusted for family size, and who reside with a parent (or parents) who is either
  working, attending job training or an educational program; or
• who are in need of, or are receiving protective services.

Except for approved construction of childcare facilities by tribal grantees, no CCDF funds



A-34
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




may be used for the purchase or improvement of land, or for the purchase, construction, or
permanent improvement of any building or facility (other than remodeling or upgrading
facilities to meet State and local child care standards.)

Under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA)
of 1996 (“welfare reform”), the Child Care and Development Fund has changed Federally
subsidized child care programs in states by allowing them to serve families through a single,
integrated child care system as all child care funding is now combined under the Child Care
and Development Block Grant Act. Subsidized childcare services are available to eligible
families through certificates or contracts with providers; parents may select any legally
operating childcare provider that meets basic health and safety requirements set by states
and tribes. All states, territories and tribes must submit comprehensive plans every two years,
which require public hearings regarding the plan; public comment is invited through this
process. In Fiscal Year 2006 HHS allocated nearly $536 million to California through this
block grant program.



The CMHS Block Grant funds states and territories to provide comprehensive, community-
based systems of care for adults with serious mental illnesses (SMI) and children with
serious emotional disorders (SED) through outreach, mental health treatment, and other
health care. Among the other eligible uses of the funds are individualized support services,
rehabilitation, employment assistance, housing assistance, and education. These funds are
used flexibly by the State of California, but they may not be used for the following activities:
inpatient services, cash payment to recipients, capital development, and purchase of medical
equipment. This is the major Federal source to plan and implement community-based
mental health services. Funding is dependent upon approval of an annual plan submitted
to HHS that includes specific program goals and outcomes to be measured. The plan itself
is developed at the State level with input from the State Planning Council. In Fiscal Year
2005/06 the State of California received an allocation of over $55 million through the
CMHS program, and most of which is allocated to county mental health departments. In
Fiscal Year 2005/06, the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside received an award
of $400,000 to provide three-years of enhanced treatment and supportive services through its
Family Preservation Court program. These funds are expected to assist 360 drug-dependent
clients over its three-year grant period.


                                                                                           A-35
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Mission Statement: The Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) program provides States,
the District of Columbia, the Common Wealth of Puerto Rico, U.S. Territories, and federal
and state-recognized Indian Tribes and tribal organizations, Community Action Agencies,
migrant and seasonal farm-workers or other organizations designated by the States, funds to
alleviate the causes and conditions of poverty in communities.

Major Goal: The CSBG program provides states and Indian Tribes with funds to lessen
poverty in communities. The funds provide a range of services and activities to assist the
needs of low-income individuals including the homeless, migrants and the elderly.
Grant amounts are determined by a formula based on each States’ and Indian Tribes’ poverty
population. Grantees receiving funds under the CSBG program are required to provide
services and activities addressing the following: employment, education, better use of
available income, housing, nutrition, emergency services, and health.
• In 2004 $642 million was available for CSBG
• In 2005 $636.8 million was available for CSBG
• In 2006, $630.4 million was available for CSBG
• In 2007, the President has requested no funds for CSBG

The Community Services Block Grant program is designed to provide a range of services
to assist low-income people in attaining the skills, knowledge, and motivation necessary to
achieve self-sufficiency. The program also provides low-income people with immediate life
necessities such as food, shelter, and health care needs, etc. In addition, services are provided
to local communities for the revitalization of low-income communities, the reduction of
poverty and to help provider agencies to build capacity and develop linkages. Services
provided with CSBG must contribute to the achievement of one or more of the six goals
developed by the National CSBG Monitoring and Assessment Task Force.
• Low-income people become more self-sufficient;
• The conditions in which low-income people live are improved;
• Low-income people own a stake in their community;
• Partnerships among supporters and providers of services to low-income people are
  achieved;


A-36
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• Agencies increase their capacity to achieve results;
• Low-income people achieve their potential by strengthening family and other supportive
  systems.

The Community Services Block Grant program funds are allocated to the state’s existing
network of community action agencies and other eligible entities. This is a formula based
grant and is not competitive.



Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) is authorized by Title XX of the Social Security Act.
Funds enable each state to furnish social services best suited to meet the needs of the individuals
residing within the state. Such services may be, but are not limited to: daycare for children
or adults, protective services for children or adults, special services to persons with
disabilities, adoption, counseling, case management, family planning, health-related services,
transportation, foster care for children or adults, substance abuse, legal, housing, home-
delivered meals, congregate meals, independent/transitional living, special services for youth,
employment services or any other social services found necessary by the state for its population.

Funds are allocated to the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, and the Territories of Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the Northern
Mariana Islands in proportion to each State’s population. Services funded by the SSBG as far as
practicable under the conditions of that State are directed at one or more of these five goals:
• Achieving or maintaining economic self-support to prevent, reduce or eliminate
  dependency
• Achieving or maintaining self-sufficiency, including reduction or prevention of dependency
• Preventing or remedying neglect, abuse or exploitation of children and adults unable to
  protect their own interest, or preserving, rehabilitating or reuniting families
• Preventing or reducing inappropriate institutional care by providing for community-based
  care, home-based care or other forms of less intensive care
• Securing referral or admission for institutional care when other forms of care are not
  appropriate or providing services to individuals in institutions.




                                                                                              A-37
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




State and/or local Title XX agencies (i.e., county, city, regional offices) may provide these
services directly or purchase them from qualified agencies and individuals. In Fiscal Year
2007 the State of California is expected to receive over $145 million in SSBG funding. No
information could be obtained on how much of this funding was allocated to the County of
Riverside.



The SAPT Block Grant funds states, tribes and territories to support substance abuse
prevention and treatment programs for people at risk of or abusing drugs and alcohol. (20
percent of funds allocated to states must be spent on substance abuse primary prevention
services.) While the program enables states and localities to provide substance abuse
prevention and treatment services through a variety of means, both statute and regulations
place special emphasis on provision of treatment and primary prevention services to
injecting drug users, and to women who use substances and are pregnant or with dependent
children. States have flexibility in how to use these funds, but some activities are ineligible,
including: inpatient hospital substance abuse programs, cash payments to recipients, capital
development, and needle-exchange and provision programs. In California, the block grant
accounts for approximately 70 percent of public funds expended on substance prevention
and treatment services. In Fiscal Year 2006/07 SAMHSA is schedule to allocate over $227
million in SAPT funds to California of which nearly $10 million is slated to be allocated to
the County of Riverside for a full range of program activities.



Child Care and Development Fund
CFDA Code: 93.575
Legislation: Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990, as amended, Public
             Law 101-508, 42 U.S.C. 9858 et seq.; Personal Responsibility and Work
             Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Public Law 104-193; Balanced
             Budget Act of 1997, Public Law 105-33; Departments of Labor, Health and
             Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of
             2006, Public Law 109-149.
Regulations: 45 CFR Parts 98 and 99




A-38
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




CFDA Code: 93.958
Legislation: Public Health Services Act, Title XIX, Part B, Subpart I as amended, Public
             Law 106-310; 42 U.S.C. 300X
Regulations: 45 CFR Part 96



CFDA Code: 93.569
Legislation: Community Opportunities, Accountability, Training, and Educational Services
             Act of 1998, Title II, Section 201 and Sections 671-thru 679, Public Laws 97-
             35, 103-252, Public Laws 106-554 and 98-502
Regulations: 45 CFR 16, 45 CFR 74, 45 CFR 96



CFDA Code: 93.667
Legislation: Social Security Act, Title XX, as amended (see CFDA for full citation)
Regulations: 45 CFR 96

(For example, Chafee Foster Care Independent Living formula grant program targeting aging
out foster youth, CFDA code 93.674; Promoting Safe and Stable Families formula grant
program targeting preserving at-risk families, CFDA code 93.556.)



CFDA Code: 93.959
Legislation: Public Health Services Act, Title XIX, Part B, Subpart II as amended, Public
             Law 106-310; 42 U.S.C. 300X
Regulations: 45 CFR Part 96




                                                                                         A-39
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




On August 31, 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger announced an initiative to address long-
term homelessness in California. As part of this initiative, he directed the Department of
Housing and Community Development (HCD), the California Housing Finance Agency
(CalHFA) and the Department of Mental Health (DMH) to provide an integrated package of
funding for the development of permanent supportive housing for persons with severe mental
illness who are chronically homeless. These housing development funds are intended to be
complemented by Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funds from counties, as described
in Section D. This NOFA announces the funds available under the Governor’s Homeless
Initiative, as follows:
1. Approximately $40 million in permanent development financing under HCD’s Multifamily
  Housing Program (MHP) for units set aside for persons with severe mental illness who
  are chronically homeless. These funds were appropriated by the Housing and Emergency
  Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2002 (Proposition 46).
2. Additional MHP funds for other units, in projects serving mixed populations that do not
  use nine percent (9%) credits.
3. Construction, bridge and permanent financing from CalHFA, based on CalHFA’s loan
   underwriting criteria for supportive housing projects.
4. Approximately $2 million in State share Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funds for
   rent subsidies.
  Applications are accepted on an “over-the-counter” basis.

Authority
MHP was established by SB 1121, Statutes of 1999 (Alarcón), which created Chapter
6.7, commencing with Section 50675, of the Health and Safety Code. In addition to the
requirements of this NOFA, applications shall be subject to two sets of regulations, the


A-40
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




MHP-specific Regulations (including Article 6. Supportive Housing Loans) and the Uniform
Multifamily Regulations (UMR), both of which are available on the HCD’s website at
www.hcd.ca.gov/ca/mhp. Applications submitted under this NOFA are also subject to the
applicable statutory requirements (including those of Proposition 46 and SB 1227 of 2002).
All section references in this NOFA refer to the MHP regulation text unless otherwise noted.
UMR section references refer to the Uniform Multifamily Regulations.

Target Population
GHI targets chronic homeless households, defined as:
1. Households whose income does not exceed 30 percent of Area Median Income (or 30
  percent of State Median Income, if this is a greater amount); and
2. Households that include an adult or older adult member eligible for services under the
   Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) who is Chronically Homeless.

Welfare and Institutions Code Section 5813.5 specifies who is eligible for services under the
MHSA, by reference to Welfare and Institutions Code Section 5600.3(b) and (c).
       “Chronically Homeless” means individuals (including accompanied individuals)
       who have been continuously “Homeless” for a year or more during the
       past three years or have experienced four or more episodes of sustained
       homelessness during the past three years. “Homeless” means the same as that
       term is defined in Section 7341(b), except that it does not include individuals
       moving directly from transitional housing who have occupied such housing for
       more than a year. With advance State approval, project sponsors may elect to abide by more
       restrictive definitions of these terms, such as those used by HUD.

The MHP set-aside funds may only be used to cover development costs for permanent
housing linked to services where occupancy is restricted to the Target Population (“Target
Population Units”). These units are a subset of the units defined as Supportive Housing Units
under the MHP regulations.

County Mental Health Department Role
Typically, projects serving the Target Population will require three types of subsidies: (1)
development (capital) subsidies; (2) operating or rental subsides to cover the difference each
year between the cost of operating the housing and tenant-paid rents; and (3) subsidies for


                                                                                                    A-41
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




mental health and other supportive services. The GHI offers development subsidies, plus a
sharply limited amount of funds for rental subsidies. In some areas, federal funds are available
for more substantial rental subsidies and some supportive services.

To be eligible for GHI funds, projects must have commitments from the local County Mental Health Department
for ongoing Mental Health Services Act funding. At a minimum, Counties must commit funding for
services, and, operating subsidies (where federal funding is inadequate for this purpose).
Since the State is making a major capital investment in housing intended to serve the Target
Population for many years, County funding commitments shall be formalized through
Memorandums of Understanding, or similar agreements, and shall be for the longest legally
permissible term. County commitments must also be consistent with the Community Services
and Supports plan submitted to (and ultimately approved by) the State.

Eligible Project Sponsors
Sponsors and borrowing entities may be organized on a for-profit or not-for-profit basis.
Any individual, public agency or private entity capable of entering into a contract is eligible
to apply, provided that they or their principals have successfully developed at least one
affordable housing project. Sponsors of projects where at least 70 percent of the units
consist of Target Population Units or Special Needs Population units are exempt from the
requirement for previous development experience under limited conditions. See Section 7303
(d). Sponsors must also demonstrate a minimum of 24 months experience in the ownership
or operation of at least one Supportive Housing or Special Needs Population project with
five or more units, and provide the commitment of County Mental Health Department
funds described in Section D. See Section 7343. Sponsors must have site control in the name
of the Sponsor or an entity controlled by the sponsor as defined in Uniform Multifamily
Regulations (UMR) Section 8303.

Eligible Uses of Funds
MHP funds will be provided as permanent financing only, and may be used to take out
construction loans used to cover normal project development (capital) costs. MHP funds may
also be used to capitalize a project operating reserve account for up to four months. MHP
funds may not be used for the cost of supportive services, although the cost of on-site supportive
services coordination may be treated as a project operating cost, payable from operating income. MHP funds




A-42
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




must be attributable to the costs of “restricted” units (MHP units and units subject to a long-
term regulatory agreement with occupancy and rent restrictions similar to those of MHP)
or to the costs of facilities used for childcare, after-school care, and social service provision
integrally linked to the restricted units.

CalHFA funds are available as construction, bridge and permanent financing. They may be
used to cover normal project development (capital) costs.

Eligible Projects
Projects must qualify as rental housing developments, as defined in UMR Section 8301, and
meet the requirements of Sections 7302 and 7342. For example, projects must contain five or
more dwelling units. Projects must contain Target Population units, as defined in Section C
above, in an amount equal to the greater of five units or 35 percent of the total project units.
The income limit for Target Population Units shall not exceed 30 percent of Area Median
Income (or 30 percent of State median income, if this is a greater amount). Projects are
ineligible if construction has commenced prior to the date funds offered under this NOFA are
awarded, or if the project is already fully funded.

Maximum MHP Loan Amounts
The maximum MHP loan amount is a function of the number of restricted units in a project,
their size, location, affordability level, whether the project is receiving nine percent (9%) tax
low income housing tax credits (LIHTC), and the number and type of units restricted to the
Target Population. For projects not receiving nine percent (9%) LIHTC, the per unit limits
are the same as for other MHP NOFAs, except that the base amount for Target Population
units is $60,000 instead of $30,000. HCD updates the subsidy amount periodically (roughly
every 12 to 18 months). For projects receiving nine percent (9%) LIHTC credits, the per-unit
limits are as the same for other MHP NOFAs (with a $30,000 base amount), but the total
maximum loan amount will be calculated by applying these limits to Target Population Units
only. The maximum loan per project is $7,000,000.

Loan Terms and Security
MHP Loans have a 55-year term, and bear simple interest at the rate of three percent (3%)
per year. For the first 30 years, annual payments will be required in the amount of 0.42
percent (0.42%) of the outstanding principal loan balance. The annual payment amount


                                                                                               A-43
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




for the next 25 years will be set by the HCD in year 30, and will be the minimum amount
necessary to cover the HCD’s monitoring costs. Unpaid principal and accrued and deferred
interest will be due at the end of the loan term.

CalHFA construction loans have a 12- to 36-month loan term, with a variable interest rate.
Monthly interest-only payments (capitalized) will be required through the term of the
construction loan. In addition, permanent loans and bridge loans will be available under
CalHFA’s Special Needs Financing Program. Tax-exempt bridge loans for projects receiving
four percent (4%) tax credits will have a one- to three-year term, while permanent loans will
have a term of five to 30 years.

Application Process
The Application form is available on the HCD website. Applications are considered on an
“over-the-counter” basis until available funds are exhausted.




A-44
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Federal:
• Department of Health and Human Services (HHS):
  Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)
  Bureau of Primary Health Care
  Divisions of Health Center Development and Health Center Management (301) 594-4300
  and (301) 594-4420
  www.bphc.hrsa.gov

Type Of Assistance: Competitive

Program Description
The Health Care for the Homeless (HCH) program delivers a full range of comprehensive
primary health care services to homeless people through a multi-disciplinary approach
that combines aggressive outreach with integrated systems of primary care, mental health
and substance abuse services, case management and client advocacy . Part of the allocation
for Community Health Centers (CFDA Code 93.224), Health Care for the Homeless is a
competitive grant program designed to promote and sustain the health status, outcomes and
well-being of homeless people, including homeless children. In addition to direct federal
grant funding, Health Care for the Homeless programs qualify for enhanced Medicaid
reimbursement provisions as Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs.)




                                                                                         A-45
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                  Table 1. Federal Assistance for HCH Grants

                      Federal Assistance for HCH Grants
                          Year               Appropriations
                                             (In millions)
                          1995                   $65.4
                          1996                  $65.4
                          1997                  $69.4
                          1998                  $71.3
                          1999                  $80.0
                          2000                  $88.0
                          2001                 $101.0
                          2002                 $116.0
                          2003                 $130.0
                          2004                 $137.0
                          2005                 $145.0




Eligible Target Populations:
Homeless individuals including but not limited to children, elderly persons, handicapped
persons, families with children, Native Americans, and veterans. Homeless individual is
defined as an individual who lacks housing (without regard to whether the individual is a
member of a family), including an individual whose primary residence during the night is
a supervised public or private facility that provides temporary living accommodations, an
individual who is a resident in transitional housing, or a person who was homeless and has
been living in permanent housing for one year or less.

Eligible Projects/Programs:
HCH programs are encouraged to integrate both health and social services into individual
care plans and to provide a coordinated, comprehensive approach to the care they provide
their homeless clients. Applicants for this program are further encouraged to include
homeless people in the development and oversight of the HCH program in order to foster
client-centered approaches to treatment. HCH funds can be used to provide eligible services


A-46
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




in shelters, transitional housing and for up to 12 months in permanent housing, if the services
were provided to the individuals when they were homeless. For ongoing funding for some
of the services paid for with time-restricted HCH grant funding, the HCH grantee may
pursue billing Medicaid for eligible services as a Federally Qualified Health Center (see the
Medicaid description for more information) or identify other sources of funds.

Eligible Use of Funds & Use Restrictions:
Outreach; primary health care, mental health and substance abuse services at locations
accessible to homeless individuals; 24-hour emergency primary health, mental health and
substance abuse services; referrals, as appropriate to medical facilities and to needed mental
health services; outreach services to inform homeless individuals of the availability of primary
health, mental health and substance abuse services; supplementary services (e.g., podiatry,
dental and vision care, etc.) and, aid in establishing eligibility for assistance, and in obtaining
services under entitlement programs and housing programs. HCC funds may be used to
continue to provide the services listed above for up to 12 months to individuals who have
obtained permanent housing if services were provided to these individuals when they were
homeless.

Eligible Applicants/Sponsors:
Eligible applicants include: private non-profit organizations and public entities, including
State and local governmental agencies. Applicants/sponsors may provide these services
directly or through contract. Grantees and other organizations with which applicants
contract for services under this program must have an agreement with a State under its
Medicaid program and be qualified to receive payments under the agreement. About half of
Health Care for the Homeless projects is administered by community and migrant health
centers; the other half is administered by nonprofit coalitions, inner city hospitals and local
public health departments.




Term of Awards:
Grants are awarded for five years, although funding for years two to five is contingent upon
available funding and project performance.




                                                                                              A-47
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Matching Requirements:
The applicant must assume part of the project costs determined on a case-by-case basis.

Application Process
Eligible sponsors apply for HCH for a five-year period, although funding for years two to
four is contingent upon available funding and project performance. After the initial year,
applications for funding are submitted annually as budget period renewals. After the five-year
project is completed, other local organizations can compete with the previous HCH grant
recipient in the same service area by submitting a grant application. The program accepts
applications for new service areas, called “new starts”, only when there is an increase in the
program appropriation.

For information about current HCH grant funding opportunities, look at the HRSA Preview,
published twice a year, which is a consolidated announcement of all of HRSA’s funding
opportunities. (Visit www.hrsa.gov, and click on Grants under the Funding site.)

CFDA Code: 93.151

Authorizing Legislation/statute
Public Health Service Act, as Amended under the Health Centers Consolidation Act of 1996,
Section 330(h), Public Law 104-299.

Regulations/guidelines
52 CFR 32347 “Availability of Funds for Project Grants for Health Services to the Homeless
Population”




A-48
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




HOME is authorized under Title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable
Housing Act, as amended. Program regulations are at 24 CFR Part 92. The HOME
program final rule is available electronically. Additional information about the HOME
program can be found by visiting the HOME program web pages.

HOME provides formula grants to States and localities that communities use—often in
partnership with local nonprofit groups—to fund a wide range of activities that build, buy,
and/or rehabilitate affordable housing for rent or homeownership, or provide direct rental
assistance to low-income people.

Purpose
HOME is the largest Federal block grant to State and local governments designed exclusively
to create affordable housing for low-income households. Each year HUD allocates
approximately $2 billion among the States and hundreds of localities nationwide. The
combined allocation of HOME funds to eligible jurisdictions within Riverside County in
Fiscal Year 2006 is: $6.3 million. The HOME program was designed to reinforce several
important values and principles of community development:
• HOME’s flexibility empowers localities to design and implement strategies tailored to their
  own needs and priorities;
• HOME’s emphasis on consolidated planning expands and strengthens partnerships among
  all levels of government and the private sector in the development of affordable housing;
• HOME’s technical assistance activities and set-aside for qualified community-based
  nonprofit housing groups builds the capacity of these partners;
• HOME’s requirement that participating jurisdictions (PJs) match 25 cents of every dollar in
  program funds mobilizes community resources in support of affordable housing.

Types of Assistance
HOME funds are awarded annually as formula grants to participating jurisdictions. HUD
establishes HOME Investment Trust Funds for each grantee, providing a line of credit that
the jurisdiction may draw upon as needed. The program’s flexibility allows States and local
governments to use HOME funds for grants, direct loans, loan guarantees or other forms of
credit enhancement, or rental assistance and security deposits.

                                                                                         A-49
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Eligible Grantees
States are automatically eligible for HOME funds and receive either their formula allocation
or $3 million, whichever is greater. Local jurisdictions eligible for at least $500,000 under the
formula ($335,000 in years when Congress appropriates less than $1.5 billion for HOME)
also can receive an allocation. Communities that do not qualify for an individual allocation
under the formula can join with one or more neighboring localities in a legally binding
consortium whose members’ combined allocation would meet the threshold for direct funding.
Other localities may participate in HOME by applying for program funds made available by
their State.

Eligible Customers
The eligibility of households for HOME assistance varies with the nature of the funded
activity. For rental housing and rental assistance, at least 90 percent of benefiting families
must have incomes that are no more than 60 percent of the HUD-adjusted median family
income for the area. In rental projects with five or more assisted units, at least 20 percent of
the units must be occupied by families with incomes that do not exceed 50 percent of the
HUD-adjusted median. The incomes of households receiving HUD assistance must not
exceed 80 percent of the area median. HUD publishes updated income limits annually.

Eligible Activities
Participating jurisdictions (PJs) may choose among a broad range of eligible activities, using
HOME funds to provide home purchase or rehabilitation financing assistance to eligible
homeowners and new homebuyers; build or rehabilitate housing for rent or ownership; or for
“other reasonable and necessary expenses related to the development of non-luxury housing,”
including site acquisition or improvement, demolition of dilapidated housing to make way
for HOME-assisted development, and payment of relocation expenses. PJs may use HOME
funds to provide tenant-based rental assistance contracts of up to two years if such activity
is consistent with their Consolidated Plan and justified under local market conditions. This
assistance may be renewed. Up to 10 percent of the PJs annual allocation may be used for
program planning and administration.

HOME-assisted rental housing must comply with certain rent limitations. HOME rent limits
are published each year by HUD. The program also establishes maximum per unit subsidy
limits and maximum purchase-price limits.


A-50
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Some special conditions apply to the use of HOME funds. PJs must match every dollar of
HOME funds used (except for administrative costs) with 25 cents from non-federal sources,
which may include donated materials or labor, the value of donated property, proceeds from
bond financing, and other resources, including redevelopment and State funds. In addition,
PJs must reserve at least 15 percent of their allocations to fund housing to be owned,
developed, or sponsored by experienced, community-driven nonprofit groups designated as
Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs). PJs must ensure that HOME-
funded housing units remain affordable in the long term (20 years for new construction
of rental housing; five-15 years for construction of homeownership housing and housing
rehabilitation, depending on the amount of HOME subsidy). PJs have two years to commit
funds (including reserving funds for CHDOs) and five years to spend funds.

Application
Program funds are allocated to units of general local government on the basis of a formula
that considers the relative inadequacy of each jurisdiction’s housing supply, its incidence of
poverty, its fiscal distress, and other factors. Shortly after HOME funds become available
each year; HUD informs eligible jurisdictions of the amounts earmarked for them.
Participating jurisdictions must have a current and approved Consolidated Plan, which will
include an action plan that describes how the jurisdiction will use its HOME funds. A newly
eligible jurisdiction also must formally notify HUD of its intent to participate in the program.

HOME and Homeless Housing
HUD has provided guidance to grantees as to the use of HOME Program funds to assist in
the development and operation of housing for homeless populations. HOME funds can be
used to develop transitional or permanent housing for individuals and families experiencing
homelessness. Additionally, HOME funds can be used as tenant-based rental assistance
(TBRA) to assist homeless persons to access permanent housing in the community. HUD
regulations, however, prohibit the use of HOME funds as project-based rental assistance.
HOME funds may not be used to provide emergency rental assistance, nor may funds be used
for the development or operation of emergency shelters.




                                                                                            A-51
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The HELP Program offers a three and one half percent (0.5%) interest rate loan to local
government entities for their locally determined affordable housing activities and priorities.
HELP Program funds can be used to assist with the acquisition, development, rehabilitation
or preservation of multifamily rental units and special needs housing. In addition, this
program also provides financing to facilitate the construction or rehabilitation of ownership
housing, as well as making funds available for the implementation of subordinate loan
programs for eligible home buyers. Open application periods are announced each spring and
fall (typically February and August). Applicants (local government agencies) compete for
approximately $7.5 million of HELP Program funding in each round.

Program Objective
To provide affordable housing opportunities through program partnerships with local
government entities, consistent with their affordable housing priorities.

Program Parameters
Affordable Housing. HELP Program funds must be used to directly provide affordable
housing units. Housing units must be affordable for at least 10 years, with “affordable” being
defined in the context of the unmet housing needs and priorities of the locality. HELP
Program funds may not be used for technical assistance or administrative costs.

Local Government Involvement. Local government entities (e.g., city and county housing-
related divisions and agencies, and redevelopment agencies) must have a direct involvement
with their programs. Local government entity involvement can include financial contributions
of Federal, State, and locality program funds, and contributions such as land write-downs, fee
waivers, density bonuses, and local agency program staffing and administration, and other
similar benefits.

Unmet Affordable Housing Needs. HELP funds are intended to help local government
entities address unmet affordable housing needs as determined by each participating locality.
Local government entities must demonstrate how the local priority was established and




A-52
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




approved Commonly, priorities are stated in Housing Elements, Consolidated Plans, or other
documented housing plans. Eligible housing activities under the program are as follows:
• Multifamily Rental Housing. Rehabilitation and code enforcement programs; and revolving
  loan programs to assist with site acquisition, predevelopment and construction of projects;
  or financing to support the development of a specific project. (This housing category
  accommodates shelters, special needs that include group homes, etc.)
• Single-Family Ownership Housing. Rehabilitation and code enforcement programs, revolving
  loan programs to assist with construction financing, and subordinate loan programs for
  homebuyers. Please Note: The Agency’s new Residential Development Loan Program
  (RDLP) provides financing for site acquisition and predevelopment activities for infill
  housing; you can obtain further information on this program at CalHFA’s website (www.
  calhfa.ca.gov). Additionally, HELP and RDLP cannot be accessed for the same project,
  unless HELP is used exclusively to provide construction financing or subordinate loans for
  the homebuyers of that project.

Loan Conditions and Repayment. HELP funds are available to a local government entity
as an unsecured loan from CalHFA for up to 10 years at three and one half percent (0.5%)
simple interest per annum, and carry minimal restrictions and conditions. Repayment is
backed by the general obligation of the local government entity and is required, in full, no
later than 10 years from the date a loan agreement is executed. The local government entity
shall assure and demonstrate that it possesses full authority to enter into the loan agreement
and to repay the loan under the terms and conditions of the loan agreement.

Loan-to-Lender Format. Under this format, the local government entity contracts to
repay CalHFA and re-lends or otherwise utilizes the funds for its stated purposes. The local
government entity does not provide property or other resources as collateral.

General Considerations for Program Design
Evaluation Criteria. Proposals will be ranked on a competitive basis, using the following
criteria:
• Extent to which assisted units are affordable (term, depth, amount, proportion of assisted units
  within project, relative affordability given the market)
• Efficiency of program costs (interest rate, administrative and staffing costs, source and



                                                                                                     A-53
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




  assurance of HELP loan repayment, timing of HELP repayment, etc.). NOTE: If the HELP
  Program funds are intended to be reloaned by the local government entity to their program
  participant(s), then the interest rate on the reloaned funds should be as low as practical to
  provide the maximum benefit to the assisted households.
• Maximization of benefit (number of units, HELP funds per unit, number of persons to benefit,
  etc.)
• Implementation readiness (local agency experience with the type of housing activity, staffing
  and administrative capacity, local agency financial capacity, site control, requisite zoning
  and entitlements, local programs in place, drafted implementation plan, market and risk
  analyses, other financing sources in place, authority to proceed has been provided by local
  government, etc.)
• Relative resource impact in directly achieving program objectives (the locality’s relative ability to
  contribute funds, staffing, administration and in-kind services; and the depth of leveraging
  provided)
• Comprehensiveness of physical design (physical design aspects that enable the residents and
  incorporation of the housing into the community; physical design aspects of consistency
  of residential development in relation to surrounding land use) and resident support structure
  (that potentially includes, as appropriate, homeownership education and training,
  community building, participatory management or governance, personal enrichment,
  direct support services, and linkages to local support services, etc.)

Documented Housing Plans. Proposals must include documented housing plans that
demonstrate that the proposed housing activity described in the application has been
identified as a local housing priority. Eligible documented housing plans include the Housing
Elements, Consolidated Plans, redevelopment plans or other general housing plans that the
locality’s governing board has ratified. Applications must also include evidence that a plan has
been approved.

Federal, State, and Local Requirements. Federal, State or local government requirements
may apply in this process depending on the nature and structure of the local program. These
requirements may include Davis-Bacon and/or State Prevailing Wages and compliance with
Article 34 of the California State Constitution.




A-54
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




If the applicant to the HELP Program is a city or county rather than a separate legal
entity such as a redevelopment agency or housing authority, the applicant must address
the requirements of Article 16, Section 18 (public finance indebtedness limitation), of the
California Constitution. If a city or county is awarded funding, the agency will require an
opinion letter from its legal counsel to confirm that entering into a loan agreement under the
Program is not in violation of this requirement.

Equitable Distribution of Funds. One of CalHFA’s goals is to ensure an equitable
distribution of HELP funds throughout California. CalHFA will utilize equitable distribution
as a factor in the application ranking process to the extent necessary to achieve this goal.

Proposal Limitations (These limitations were applicable in previous funding rounds and are
subject to change in future program announcements):
• Applicants are limited to local government entities (i.e., city, county, housing authority,
  redevelopment agency, etc.).
• Proposals are limited to a maximum request of $1,500,000.
• Applicants are limited to one proposal in a funding round.
• Applicants are limited to one approved proposal in a fiscal year (which begins July 1 and
  ends June 30).
• Only one proposal for a specific project or program may be submitted (e.g., multiple
  proposals for the same project or program from the redevelopment agency and housing
  authority located in the same city will not be accepted.)
• Proposals for a particular project or program, regardless of the applicant, will be limited to
  a maximum of one approved funding per fiscal year and two approved requests, overall.

To obtain additional program information, or to be placed on the mailing list to receive
program announcements for future funding rounds (occurring typically in February and
August of each year), pvlease contact HELP Program staff at (916) 323-8232. You may also
check this web site for future program funding announcements and news.




                                                                                            A-55
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




About The HOPWA Program
HUD’s Office of HIV/AIDS Housing manages the HOPWA program in collaboration with
44 state and area CPD offices in providing guidance and program oversight. The Office works
with other HUD offices to ensure that all HUD programs and initiatives are responsive to
the special needs of people with HIV/AIDS. One of the primary functions of the Office is to
administer the Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS (HOPWA) program.

The HOPWA Program was established by HUD to address the specific needs of persons
living with HIV/AIDS and their families. HOPWA makes grants to local communities, States,
and nonprofit organizations for projects that benefit low income persons medically diagnosed
with HIV/AIDS and their families.

HOPWA Programs
HOPWA funds are awarded as grants from one of three programs:
• The HOPWA Formula Program uses a statutory method to allocate HOPWA funds to
  eligible States and cities on behalf of their metropolitan areas.
• The HOPWA Competitive Program is a national competition to select model projects or
  programs.

HOPWA funding provides housing assistance and related supportive services as part of
HUD’s Consolidated Planning initiative that works in partnership with communities and
neighborhoods in managing Federal funds appropriated to HIV/AIDS programs. HOPWA
grantees are encouraged to develop community-wide strategies and form partnerships with
area nonprofit organizations. HOPWA funds may be used for a wide range of housing, social
services, program planning, and development costs. These include, but are not limited to:
acquisition; rehabilitation; or new construction of housing units; costs for facility operations;
rental assistance; and short-term payments to prevent homelessness. HOPWA funds also may
be used for supportive social services, including: health care; mental health services; chemical
dependency treatment; nutritional services; case management; assistance with daily living;
and other supportive services.


A-56
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Many beneficiaries receive supportive services that are funded by HOPWA or other related
public and private programs. In fact, states and cities have tended to leverage approximately
two dollars for every one dollar provided by the HOPWA program.

Ninety percent (90%) of program funds are distributed under a formula that is based on
AIDS surveillance information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),
including cumulative AIDS cases and area incidence. In Fiscal Year 2006, a total of $256.2
million was allocated by formula to 122 grantees, to the qualifying cities and one county for
83 eligible metropolitan statistical areas (EMSAs) and to 39 eligible states for areas outside of
EMSAs. Eligible formula areas have at least 1,500 cumulative cases of AIDS, as of March 31,
a population of at least 500,000 and have a HUD-approved Consolidated Plan. One-quarter
of the formula is awarded for metropolitan areas that have a higher than average per capita
incidence of AIDS. A description of the areas and allocation data for each HOPWA formula
program can be found at: www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/aidshousing/programs/formula.
Federal HOPWA Funding 2004-2006 (In millions $)

       Fiscal          Formula        Competitive      Technical
       Year           Allocations       Grants         Assistance            Total
       2004              263.1          29.2              2.5                294.7

        2005             251.3             27.9             2.4              281.7

        2006             256.2             28.5             1.5              286.1

Since 1992, the Federal government has made available over $ 2.3 billion in HOPWA funds
to support community efforts to create and operate HIV/AIDS housing initiatives. A statutory
requirement of the HOPWA program is that formula allocations are administered by the
largest municipality in the planning area. Accordingly, the City of Riverside was designated a
formula grantee in 1993. Its Fiscal Year 2006 allocation of $1,684,000 is allotted to agencies
throughout both Riverside and San Bernardino Counties.

Program Accomplishments
Activities carried out with HOPWA funds include housing rental assistance, utility payments,
acquisition and rehabilitation, home health care and counseling. The City of Riverside
contracts with the Riverside County Housing Authority and the San Bernardino County




                                                                                            A-57
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Public Health Department to administer funds delivered by Project Sponsors selected on the
basis of demonstrated background and experience in program delivery to HIV/AIDS patients.

The provision of housing has been identified as the highest priority service need for HOPWA
funds. The housing services are also funded through this program, including: assistance
with short-term rent, mortgage and utility payments and information services. This program
also funds the following supportive services: health care, home health services, and case
management.

For additional information, contact:
Tranda Drumwright
Housing and Community Development Manager
3900 Main St., 5th Floor
Riverside, CA 92522
Phone: 951-826-5608
Fax: 951-826-5744




A-58
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Administrative Agencies

Federal:
• U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA):
  Health Care for Homeless Veterans (HCHV) Programs
  (202) 273-5764
  www.va.gov/homeless/

Type Of Assistance
Authorization/mandate to Regional VA Medical Centers to provide clinical and case
management services to homeless veterans linked to housing

Program Description
Unlike many other services systems, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides,
rather than subcontracts out for many of the services commonly found in supportive housing
for homeless veterans. Some of the VA’s homeless programs are designed to leverage the
case management, primary and behavioral health care, and other services the VA provides
to homeless veterans with housing provided by others. The HUD-VA Supported Housing
Program and the VA Supported Housing Program are two such programs.



Begun in 1992, the HUD-VASH program is a partnership between HUD and the VA to
further the objectives of serving veterans who are homeless and mentally ill and those with
substance abuse disorders by closely linking two interventions:
(1) Permanent affordable housing through the provision of housing subsidies from a special
    needs set-aside of HUD’s Housing Choice Voucher Program (Section 8); and
(2) Community-oriented outreach, clinical care and case management services.




                                                                                         A-59
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Through 2002, HUD funded three rounds of almost 600 vouchers each (a total of 1,753) for
this special needs Section 8 program. (See the Introduction to the Operating section for more
information about how the special needs Section 8 programs work.) At the same time, VA
medical centers formed clinical case management teams at 34 sites, usually social workers or
nurses to provide outreach, clinical care and case management services to the veterans housed
through the program.

VA Supported Housing Program:
Like the HUD-VASH Program outlined above, staff in VA’s Supported Housing Program
provide ongoing case management services to homeless veterans, with an emphasis on
securing long-term transitional or permanent housing and assisting veterans in retaining
that housing. Emphasis is placed on helping veterans find permanent housing and
providing clinical support needed to keep veterans in permanent housing. Staff in these
programs operates without benefit of the especially dedicated Section 8 housing vouchers
available in the HUD-VASH program, but are often successful in locating transitional or
permanent housing through local means, especially by collaborating with Veterans Service
Organizations. VA staff work with private landlords, public housing authorities and nonprofit
organizations to find housing arrangements.

For supportive housing sponsors serving homeless veterans with mental health and
substance use issues, both of these programs can be sources of in-kind clinical care and case
management services linked to or provided on-site in supportive housing. Essentially these
programs are authorizations for VA Medical Centers and Supported Housing Program sites
to provide clinical care and case management services to homeless veterans. To facilitate
services to homeless veterans, each of the VA’s 206 Vet Centers has an identified staff person
who functions as a homeless veterans’ coordinator.




Eligible Target Populations:
HUD-VASH Program: Homeless veterans with mental illness and/or those suffering from
substance abuse disorders.

VA Supported Housing Program: Homeless veterans.



A-60
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Eligible Projects/Programs:
HUD-VASH Program: any project/program that has access to Section 8 vouchers through
this set-aside program (or because the local public housing authority has established a
preference for veterans within their existing mainstream Section 8 program) is eligible to
request clinical care and case management services from the VA.

VA Supported Housing Program: any project/program serving homeless veterans.

Eligible Applicants/Sponsors: Programs serving the target population.

Application Process
HUD-VASH Program: The best way to access these resources is by contacting the local
Public Housing Authority to determine if there are HUD-VASH vouchers and/or if it has a
preference for veterans. If either is the case in your community, after developing a partnership
with the housing authority about how the two interventions would be coordinated, contact
the Homeless Coordinator in the Regional Office of the VA (www.va.gov/homeless/index.
cfm) , go to Homeless Programs and Initiatives, and click on Homeless Veteran Program
Coordinators for access to state by state listings.)

VA Supported Housing Program. The best way to access these resources is to contact the
Homeless Coordinator in the Regional Office of the VA. (Go to Homeless Programs and
Initiatives, and click on Homeless Veteran Program Coordinators for access to state by state
listings.) (www.va.gov/homeless/index.cfm)

CFDA Code: N/A

Authorizing Legislation/statute: HUD-VASH: Section 12 of Public Law 107-95

Regulations/Guidelines: N/A

Additional Resources
For more information about the services provided to homeless veterans through the Veterans
Health Administration, go to the “VA Homeless Coordinators” page on the VA website at
www.va.gov/homeless/. The Homeless Coordinator at each Homeless Veteran Coordinator




                                                                                             A-61
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Office can provide information about the services for Homeless Veterans provided through
the Veterans Health Administration. Services include outreach, case management, referrals to
benefits counselors, linkage to health care and housing assistance. Each facility is unique and
services vary among each medical center. To find the Homeless Coordinator in your area, go
to the “VA Homeless Coordinators” page on the VA website at www.va.gov/homeless/.




A-62
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (“Committee” or “TCAC”) administers
two low income housing tax credit programs – a federal program and a state program. Both
programs were authorized to encourage private investment in affordable rental housing for
households meeting certain income requirements.



The Committee has seven members, including three voting members and four advisors. The
voting members include the State Treasurer, who serves as chairman, the State Controller,
and the Governor, who may choose to designate the Director of the Department of Finance
as his representative. The non-voting members are the Executive Director of the California
Housing Finance Agency, the Director of the Department of Housing and Community
Development, and two representatives of local governments. One local representative must
be associated with a city and is appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly. The other member
is a county representative appointed by the Senate Rules Committee.




The Federal Program
Congress created the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program in 1986. It replaced
traditional housing tax incentives, such as accelerated depreciation, with a tax credit that
enables low-income housing sponsors and developers to raise project equity through the sale
of tax benefits to investors. Two types of federal tax credits are available and are generally
referred to as nine percent (9%) and four percent (4%) credits. These terms refer to the
approximate percentage of a project’s “qualified basis” a taxpayer may deduct from their annual
federal tax liability in each of ten years. (See “How Credit Amounts are Calculated” below).

The program is regulated through Internal Revenue Code Section 42, and is administered
by the Internal Revenue Service, which is part of the U.S. Treasury Department. Section 42
specifies that each state must designate a “housing credit agency” to administer the Credit
program. In California, responsibility for administering the program was assigned to the
California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC), first by a February 1987 gubernatorial




                                                                                         A-63
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




proclamation, and later by enactment of SB 113, Chapter 658, and Statutes of 1987. The
federal tax credit program was granted permanent status with passage of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1993.

The State Program
Recognizing the extremely high cost of developing housing in California, the state legislature
authorized a state low income housing tax credit program to augment the federal tax credit
program. Authorized by Chapter 1138, Statutes of 1987, the state credit is only available to
a project which has previously received, or is concurrently receiving, an allocation of federal
credits. Thus the state program does not stand alone, but instead, supplements the federal tax
credit program.

Annual Federal Credits Available
For 2006, each state has an annual housing credit ceiling of $1.90 per capita for nine percent
(9%) Low Income Housing Tax Credits. In addition, States may qualify for a pro rata share
of credits available annually in a national pool comprised of states’ unused credits. Also, any
credits returned to a state from a credit recipient may be allocated to new projects. From
the total ceiling amount available to California, the Committee allocates credit amounts
based upon assessments of eligible project costs, as defined by IRC Section 42. The housing
sponsor uses or sells ten times the allocation amount, since investors can take the annual
credit each year for a ten-year period. Although the credit is taken over a ten-year period, the
Internal Revenue Code requires that the project remain in compliance for at least 30 years.

Annual State Credits Available
The annual state credit ceiling is currently $72,992,217 and would be increased by any
unused or returned credits from previous years. Investors claim the state credit over a four-
year period, rather than the ten-year federal allocation period. The full four-year state credit
allocated to a project is deducted from the $70 million state ceiling, while only the annual
federal credit allocated to a project is deducted from the federal ceiling.




A-64
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Tax-Exempt Bond Financed Projects
Developments financed with the proceeds of tax-exempt bonds may also receive federal tax
credit. In this instance, the developer/owner of a tax-exempt development must apply to the
Committee and must meet both the federal and state statutory and regulatory requirements.
The tax credits available are tied to the private activity bond cap limits, but are not
deducted from the state’s annual tax credit ceiling. The annual credit available is based on
approximately four percent (4%) (instead of nine percent [9%]) of the “qualified basis” of the
development. Qualified basis consists of the costs attributable to the units that will be income
and rent restricted for a minimum of 30 years.

Eligible Projects
Only rental housing projects are eligible for tax credits in both the federal and state
programs. Credits can be allocated to new construction projects or existing properties
undergoing rehabilitation. Nine percent (9%) credits are allocated on a competitive basis so
that those meeting the highest housing priorities and public policy objectives, as determined
by the Committee, have first access to credits. Those utilizing tax credits must own the
project for which the credits are awarded.

Rent and Income Restrictions
The programs have both rent and income restrictions. Rents on tax credit units cannot
exceed 30 percent of an imputed income based on one and one half persons per bedroom
(i.e., in a two-bedroom unit, the income of a three-person household is used to calculate rent,
regardless of the actual family size of the household). Federal law requires that the initial
incomes of households in tax credit units not exceed either 60 percent or 50 percent of the
area median income, adjusted for household size.

When a project developer or sponsor applies for tax credits, he or she irrevocably elects one
of the following minimum federal set-aside requirements:
• a minimum of 40 percent of the units must be both rent-restricted and occupied by
  households whose incomes are 60 percent or less of the area median gross income, adjusted
  for family size, or
• 20 percent of the units must be both rent-restricted and occupied by households whose
  incomes are 50 percent or less of the area median gross income, adjusted for family size.



                                                                                           A-65
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Despite this minimum set-aside election, most project sponsors designate all of the units
in a project for occupancy by low-income households, since credits are allocated only
for restricted units. For instance, if a developer builds a project in which half of the units
are market-rate and half are affordable, only half of the eligible project costs would be
considered when determining how much credit may be allocated. Additionally, as described
below, sponsors generally target a certain number of units to tenants with incomes below 60
percent or 50 percent of median to compete successfully.



Under federal law, credit projects must remain affordable for at least 30 years; however,
California law generally requires a 55-year extended use period for nine percent (9%) tax
credit projects. Also, four percent (4%) tax credit recipients frequently access significant
boosts to their basis limits by agreeing to 55-year extended use restrictions. Regulatory
agreements are recorded against each tax credit project to ensure compliance.

Determination of Credit Need
As required by federal law, the Committee performs feasibility analyses on every project to
ensure that allocations do not exceed the amount required for project feasibility. While a
project’s qualified basis determines a maximum credit allocation, only the amount needed to
fill the financing shortfall may be allocated. The Committee must consider the sources and
uses of funds and the total financing planned for the development, including the projected
proceeds to be generated by the sale of tax credits. The Committee must also determine
the reasonableness of estimated development, operational and intermediary costs. For each
project, the amount of credits needed must be determined at least three times; at application,
allocation, and placed-in-service.

How Credit Amounts Are Calculated
In determining the amount of credit for which a project may be eligible, first, total project
cost is calculated. Secondly, “eligible basis” is determined by subtracting non-depreciable
costs, such as land, permanent financing costs, rent reserves and marketing costs. The
project developer may also voluntarily reduce the requested eligible basis in order to gain a
competitive advantage. If the development is located in a HUD-designated Difficult to




A-66
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Develop Area (DDA) or Qualified Census Tract (QCT), the eligible basis receives a 130
percent adjustment. Next, the eligible basis is multiplied by the “applicable fraction”, which
is the smaller of (1) the percentage of low-income units to total units, or, (2) the percentage
of square footage of the low-income units to the square footage of the total units. This figure
is known as the “qualified basis” of the project. The qualified basis is multiplied by the federal
tax credit rate, published monthly by the IRS, to determine the maximum allowable tax credit
allocation. For projects that are new construction or rehabilitation, which are not financed
with a federal subsidy, the rate is summarized as nine percent (9%). For projects involving a
federal subsidy (including projects financed more than 50 percent with tax exempt bonds),
the rate is summarized as four percent (4%). Due to the fluctuating federal tax credit rate
published monthly by the IRS, TCAC currently uses an eight and one-tenths percent
(8.1%) and three and one half percent (3.5%) rate to determine a project’s initial tax credit
reservation. A project’s final (placed-in-service) tax credit allocation is based on actual project
sources and uses of funds, the financing shortfall and the actual applicable federal rate. The
rate applicable to a project is the rate published for the month each building is placed in
service or in an earlier month elected by the sponsor. The allocation cannot exceed the
initial reservation amount and may be reduced if an analysis determines that the maximum
allowable amount would generate excess equity proceeds to the project.

Raising Equity Investment
Most credits are sold to corporate or individual investors through public or private
syndication. Investors benefit from the tax credit by purchasing an ownership interest in
one or more tax credit housing projects. In turn, investors claim a dollar-for-dollar credit
against their tax liability over a ten-year period. Partnership equity contributed to the project
in exchange for the credit typically finances 30-60 percent of the capital costs of project
construction. The net amount of equity proceeds contributed to a project is based on investor
contributions (the present value of the ten-year credit) less syndication overhead and fees and
other related costs. The Committee uses the net tax credit factor (net proceeds divided by
the total 10-year tax credit allocation) to determine the credit amount needed.




                                                                                             A-67
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




California’s tax credit program was structured to mirror the federal program with certain
exceptions. In addition to the state credit only being available to projects which also receive
a federal credit, other differences include:
• TCAC gives priority for state credit allocations to projects not located in a Difficult to Develop
  Area or Qualified Census Tract and those using HOME funds to finance eligible costs.
• The applicable percentage to be applied to the qualified basis for determining the amount
  of state credits is 30 percent for projects which are not federally subsidized, and 13 percent
  for projects which are federally subsidized, in contrast to nine percent (9%) and four
  percent (4%) for the federal credit.
• State credits are not available for acquisition costs, except for previously subsidized
  projects that qualify as “at-risk” of being converted to market rate.
• The state program has a rate of return limitation. Any surplus revenues generated above the
  limitation must be used to reduce rents.

Federal Preference and Selection Criteria
Each state agency is responsible for designing and implementing its housing tax credit
program in accordance with requirements of the Internal Revenue Code and its own
particular state housing needs. The Internal Revenue Code sets broad parameters that must
be considered by each state in its “Qualified Allocation Plan” (QAP), adopted after public
hearings and input that sets forth the state’s program. Section 42, for example, requires
that each state give preference to projects that serve the lowest income tenants, projects
obligated to serve qualified low income tenants for the longest period of time, and projects
located in qualified census tracts that contribute to a concerted community revitalization
plan. Additionally, the following selection criteria must be considered by each state in
awarding credit: project location, housing needs characteristics, project characteristics, tenant
populations with special housing needs, public housing waiting lists, tenant populations of
individuals with children, and projects intended for eventual tenant ownership.

California’s Program
In California, the demand for housing tax credit has recently exceeded the supply by
approximately two to one (2:1). This means, of course, many good, worthwhile projects are


A-68
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




unable to be awarded credit. It also means a rather elaborate set of legal and regulatory rules
for determining what projects are awarded credit has been established. State and federal law
require at least 10 percent of the annual credit be awarded to projects that materially involve
nonprofits. State law also requires 20 percent of the annual credit be awarded to projects
located in rural areas of the state, and two percent (2%) of the credit be set-aside for “Small
Development” projects of 20 or fewer units. Additionally, to assure geographic distribution
of the tax credit, a certain percentage of credit is awarded each year to projects located in
twelve geographic regions of the state. Public policies encouraging smart growth principles,
energy efficiencies, and the like are part of California’s housing tax credit program. In its
competitive scoring system, points are awarded for a variety of items, ranging from serving
lower income tenants, to achieving energy efficiency, to the degree that the project will
contribute to revitalization efforts in the area where it will be located.

Threshold criteria require that the applicant show the following: (a) the type of housing
proposed is needed and affordable to the targeted population within the community in which
it is to be located; (b) enforceable financing commitments of at least 50 percent of the total
estimated financing need; (c) control of the site; (d) compliance with all applicable local
land use and zoning ordinances; (e) development team experience and financial capacity to
ensure project completion and operation for the extended use period; (f) financial viability
throughout the compliance period of the project; (g) minimum construction standards; (h)
all deferred-payment financing, grants, and subsidies be “committed” at application; and (i)
new construction projects using nine percent (9%) tax credits are limited to no more than
150 units for non-rural set-aside applications, and 80 units for rural set-aside applications.
In addition, targeted projects must meet additional threshold requirements applicable to the
targeted populations they are intended to serve. These additional threshold requirements can
be found in the Regulations.

Application Cycles and TCAC Review Process
State law requires the Committee to hold two or more application cycles each year for
awarding nine percent (9%) tax credits, unless circumstances warrant a reduction in the
number of cycles. The funding schedule generally allows for a first round due date in late
March and a second round due date in late July.




                                                                                            A-69
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Application Process
TCAC has prepared an application package to help applicants to present clearly their
project’s characteristics. Staff reviews the application to determine the reasonableness of
project costs, the maximum allowable tax credit allocation, and the amount of credit needed
for financial feasibility. The application review process generally takes about sixty days to
complete.

Point System for Ranking and Scoring Applications
TCAC receives far more applications for tax credit than it has authority to award. Generally,
the demand is roughly twice the supply of available credit. For that reason, the Committee,
in 1999, implemented a point system by which to rank applications. Although it is somewhat
complicated by the overlay of statutory set-asides and geographical apportionments, the
basic point structure advantages applications that show evidence of leveraging public and
some private funds, projects for which the owner and management company have previous
affordable housing experience, projects that have location amenities (for example, being
located by a public transit stop), projects that will offer tenants various service amenities
(for example, after school computer classes), projects serving the lowest income tenants,
“mixed income” projects that have a non-tax credit component of renters, projects that are
ready to proceed, projects that attain energy efficiencies, and projects that contribute to
neighborhood revitalization. (See the regulations for a fuller explanation.)

Stages of Tax Credit Reservation
Federal law has stringent requirements for making allocations and placing projects in
service. A slip in timing could cause the state to lose credits and not be able to access unused
credits from other states. It is for this reason that the Committee has established progress
requirements that ensure California is in compliance with federal law.
(1) Preliminary Reservation - Generally, when applications are submitted to TCAC,
    projects are not yet ready to begin construction and the applicant seeks a Preliminary
    Reservation.
(2) Final Reservation - Project sponsors receive a Final Reservation when all conditions
    of the Preliminary Reservation have been met. The construction loan must be funded,
    permanent financing and any other financing required to complete the project must be




A-70
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




    committed, and a partnership agreement must be executed. A second feasibility analysis
    is completed. This reservation is in effect during the project’s construction period.
(3) Carryover Allocation - An applicant may obtain a Carryover Allocation prior to or after
    a Final Reservation, depending upon the time constraints imposed by federal law. Federal
    law requires that a Carryover Allocation be obtained if a project will not be placed-in-
    service in the same year the project receives a reservation. Once a Carryover Allocation
    is made, project owners have until December 31 of the second calendar year after the
    year in which the Carryover Allocation is made to place the project in service.
(4) Issuance of Tax Forms - This is accomplished when conditions of the Final Reservation
    have been met, the project is “placed in service”, or ready for occupancy, and the owner
    submits various documentation to TCAC for review. TCAC issues IRS Form 8609 (and
    the state Form FTB 3521A, if applicable) after performing a final feasibility and cost
    reasonableness analysis to determine the requisite amount of tax credits needed. The
    final analysis is based on an audited cost certification prepared by the owner’s accountant.
    One tax form will be issued for each residential building in a project. Before the tax
    forms are issued, the applicant must enter into a regulatory agreement with TCAC. This
    agreement is recorded against the land and holds the project owner to the specifications
    and characteristics of the project on which the tax credit reservation was awarded (rent
    and income restrictions, selection criteria, preference points and other requirements).

Compliance Monitoring
The Committee administers a compliance monitoring program involving all projects with
an allocation of federal or state housing tax credits. Projects are monitored according to
the requirements of Section 42, IRS regulations, and the terms of the regulatory agreement
entered into between the owner and the Committee. Each project will have a site visit from
TCAC staff or its agent every three years. During this visit, tenant files and rent rolls will
be examined to assure that the incomes and rents are properly restricted. Other items to be
inspected include promised amenities as well as the physical conditions of the development
and its units.

The Commercial Revitalization Deduction Program
AB 2010, signed into law in September 2002, designates the California Tax Credit Allocation
Committee as California’s Commercial Revitalization agency for the purpose of allocating


                                                                                            A-71
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




federally authorized Commercial Revitalization deductions to qualified businesses located in
California’s five federally designated Renewal Communities. The five communities include
the rural communities of Orange Cove and Parlier, and certain census tracts in the cities of
Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco. The deduction is available to businesses located
in these Renewal Communities that purchase, build, or renovate property for commercial
use. It must be allocated by the Committee, pursuant to a Qualified Allocation Plan that
the Committee has adopted, and can be claimed, once allocated, at the taxpayer’s election,
either in the amount of 50 percent of the qualified costs in the first year after the building is
placed in service, or at the rate of 10 percent per year for 10 years, beginning in the year the
building is placed in service.

A total of $12 million in deductions is available to each Renewal Community for each year
beginning in 2002 and ending in 2009. In 2005, the Committee allocated a total of $2.9
million in deductions to four such projects.




A-72
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Administrative Agencies

Federal:
• Department of Health and Human Services:
  Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)
  (410) 786-3870
  www.cms.gov/medicaid

California:
• California Department of Health Services (DHS):
  Medical Care Services (MCS)
  (916) 440-7800
  www.dhs.ca.gov/mcs/MedicalInformation/Med.htm and
  www.medi-cal.ca.gov

Type of Assistance: Formula

Program Description
The information in this summary is significantly drawn from the Corporation for Supportive
Housing’s white papers issued under its Medicaid Project. For more detailed information, see
the white papers titled “Medicaid in Supportive Housing: Lessons for Policy-Makers,” “The
Basics of the Federal/State Medicaid Program” and “Current Opportunities for Medicaid
Financing” issued in March-April 2003 and available on their website at www.csh.org.

Federal:
Medicaid is a Federal entitlement program, matched by state and local dollars, that funds
health care for low-income families and disabled or elderly individuals. The Medicaid health
care reimbursement program is jointly funded and administered by the Federal and state
governments.

In layperson’s terms, Medicaid is an insurance plan that has two payers -- the Federal and
state governments. That is, when a person insured by Medicaid gets sick and goes to a
provider that accepts Medicaid for health services, payment for those services is provided



                                                                                         A-73
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




by a combination of funding from the state and Federal governments. (The provider bills the
appropriate unit of state government and is paid by the state, at a price or “rate” set by the
state, with a combination of state and Federal funds.)

Working within parameters defined by Federal law and administrative rules, each state
develops a State Medicaid plan that defines:
• Who is eligible for Medicaid coverage;
• What kinds of services are covered under Medicaid (i.e., basic health services plus state
  options, the definition of “medical necessity,” where services must be provided);
• Who can provide services to be paid by Medicaid;
• Rate structure (i.e., fee-for-service, case rates, capitation, etc.); and,
• Other applicable requirements including billing procedures, record-keeping, and other
  administrative provisions.

Federal law establishes some requirements but many important provisions are established
under Medicaid “options” that are allowed but not required. Most states have enacted
Medicaid program changes to require or allow some or all Medicaid recipients to enroll in
managed care plans. Although most Federal requirements apply regardless of whether the
recipient is in a managed care or fee-for-service setting, the application of these rules may
shift from the state to managed care organizations.

In addition, many states have obtained Federal waivers to “carve out” mental health services,
or other services, separating the administration of these benefits from provisions which
govern and reimburse the delivery of other Medicaid benefits. A carve-out may allow a state
mental health agency to establish managed care programs (which may be administered by
county government or a local mental health authority) or otherwise limit service providers’
ability to obtain Medicaid reimbursement for a defined set of covered benefits. In that the
primary way Medicaid can pay for services provided in supportive housing is under benefits
around mental health services, carve-out arrangements may impact the administration of
Medicaid benefits for services provided in supportive housing.

Carve-out arrangements can result in a confusing division of health care services or
undermine the integrated delivery of health care including “wraparound services.” The




A-74
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




supportive housing provider may be able to contract with a state or county mental health
department (or a managed care organization) to provide, for example, rehabilitation services
to tenants. But another public or private agency may have responsibility for approving
tenants’ psychotropic prescriptions and/or hospital services; medical care may be provided
by yet another agency using a different set of administrative procedures. Because these
arrangements vary from state to state, supportive housing sponsors will need to determine
how each of the benefits they are to provide is administered.

Despite the challenges of using the Medicaid program to fund services in supportive
housing, there are numerous examples of governments and providers doing so; Medicaid
is increasingly being viewed as a reliable source of funding for services for residents of
supportive housing with a range of health care needs, particularly if the resident population
includes significant numbers of persons with mental illness.

There are several ways Medicaid can be used to fund some of the services provided to
supportive housing tenants. Strategies currently in use or being explored in some states
include funding services through:
• The Rehabilitation Option
• The Targeted Case Management (TCM) Option
• A combination of these first two options to fund Assertive Community Treatment (ACT)
  programs and other client-centered services
• Partnerships with Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs)
• Home and Community Based Services 1915(c) waivers
• Other Federal waivers
• The Assisted Living and Personal Care Option.

The two most successful strategies to date have been the Rehabilitation Option and
partnering with FQHCs to provide health and mental health services to supportive housing
residents.




                                                                                           A-75
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




California:
Medi-Cal is California’s Medicaid health care program. Local county welfare/social services
departments manage Medi-Cal eligibility determinations. In California, specialty mental
health services were carved out from the provision of other Medicaid covered benefits. The
State gives the counties a fixed amount of state funding, based on the amount the State was
paying to match Federal funds for Medicaid-covered mental health services in past years. The
counties are responsible for providing (or contracting for the delivery of) specialty mental
health services, including mental health services covered by Medi-Cal, and for paying the
State’s share to match Medicaid reimbursements from the Federal government. In essence,
the counties operate de facto mental health managed care plans wherein they contract with
a limited number of providers to provide these services, through which Medi-Cal recipients
access these services. (Note: counties also have to provide or pay for mental health service to
other indigent patients not insured by Medi-Cal in certain circumstances.)

There are two exceptions to the mental health carve-out arrangement in California:
(1) Primary care providers are still able to provide mental health-related services that fall
    under primary care, e.g., prescription of anti-depression medication.
(2) Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), generally community clinics or Health
    Care for the Homeless programs, can deliver primary care and specialty mental health
    services separate from the county’s managed care system. In such instances, FQHCs are
    paid for those services through an arrangement that pays for visits by licensed clinicians
    (including physicians, nurse practitioners, psychiatrists, and LCSW’s). It is important to
    note that FQHC reimbursement rates are relatively high because they are designed to
    capture all of the costs associated with comprehensive care for vulnerable patients.




Eligible Target Populations:
Federal law defines Medicaid eligibility in terms of “categorical” and “financial” criteria.
To establish eligibility, an individual must meet both criteria. Categorical criteria describe
population groups that are eligible; financial criteria require that recipients’ income and
resources do not exceed state limits set for each group. In addition, a Medicaid recipient must
be a citizen or have appropriate immigration status, and must be a resident of the state paying
for the services.

A-76
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Federal law requires states to provide coverage to some “mandatory” groups, while allowing
states flexibility to extend or restrict coverage for other “optional” groups. Mandatory groups
include: pregnant women; children; low-income families with children; aged, blind and
disabled individuals; and, low-income, elderly Medicare beneficiaries. (Low-income parents
and children are often eligible even if not receiving welfare/TANF benefits, but often they do
not apply.) Optional groups include: aged, blind or disabled individuals who meet income
and resource requirements of the SSI program but do not actually receive benefits; persons
enrolled in special home and community-based waiver programs; institutionalized individuals
with certain income limitations; and, disabled children 18 years and younger who would be
eligible if in an institution. The complex eligibility rules vary widely from state to state and
therefore the state Medicaid plan should be consulted for state-specific eligibility rules.

For service providers serving homeless people or supportive housing tenants, it is important
to understand that very low-income adults who are not “disabled” as defined by SSI eligibility
standards, and who do not have or are not living with dependent children, are generally not
eligible for Medicaid. (There are exceptions in a few states with 1115 waivers.) This group
includes adults who have health conditions or disabilities that are primarily attributable
to substance abuse (which since 1996 has been excluded from SSI eligibility.) In addition,
the following groups have limited or no eligibility for Medicaid: immigrants, people with
asymptomatic HIV, and incarcerated people.

In addition to these mandated, optional and ineligible groups, states may choose to offer
Medicaid coverage to medically needy persons, disabled individuals who work and other
groups covered under a Federal Medicaid demonstration waiver. (For example, states have the
option to extend eligibility for people who qualify for SSI, based on disability level, but have
earnings from work.)

Eligible Projects/Programs:
As mentioned above, there are several promising strategies for using Medicaid in supportive
housing:

Rehabilitation Option: Under the “rehab option,” supportive housing providers can obtain
reimbursement for services intended to restore the skills tenants need to live independently
and to improve functioning impaired by mental illness (or in some states, chemical
addiction.) Some key issues related to using the rehab option are:


                                                                                             A-77
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• To qualify for reimbursement, services must be related to the tenant’s identified diagnosis
  and based upon an individualized plan of care.
• Some covered services can be delivered by staff with a broad range of skills and training
  levels, subject to appropriate clinical oversight.
• Only some of the supportive housing tenants covered by Medicaid will be eligible for
  rehabilitation services, based on diagnosed mental illness or other medical necessity criteria
  established by the state.

Most supportive housing providers that currently rely on Medicaid reimbursement for rehab
option services are nonprofit agencies that also deliver Medicaid-reimbursed services in
other settings, or have previously established contracts with local or state mental health (or
behavioral care) authorities for residential, outpatient, or case management programs.
(1) Targeted Case Management Option: Some states have established targeted
    case management (TCM) benefits that appear to match the service needs of many
    supportive housing tenants. However there is limited experience using this option to
    pay for supportive housing services. The TCM option provides Medicaid coverage for
    assessment, goal-setting, and flexible services that help tenants gain access to other
    needed medical, social, and education services or benefits, especially when they allow
    them to utilize necessary health services.
(2) Partnerships with Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs): FQHCs (including
    community clinics and Health Care for the Homeless Programs) can partner with
    housing providers to deliver services to meet tenants’ needs for health care, including
    health education and mental health or substance abuse treatment services. This strategy
    has some advantages: FQHC providers can use other grant funding; and FQHC
    providers often qualify for Medicaid reimbursement at rates that are higher than those
    available to other health care providers, in order to finance a more comprehensive array
    of services to patients with complex health and social services needs.
(3) Medicaid Waivers: Waivers of Federal rules allow states to use Medicaid in more
    creative ways. Some states have obtained waivers to expand Medicaid coverage to
    individuals who would not otherwise be eligible. For example, Massachusetts obtained a
    waiver to extend coverage to some very low-income adults without children, including
    people experiencing long-term unemployment and those with HIV who do not currently



A-78
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




    qualify for SSI based on disability. Michigan used a waiver to establish prepaid health
    plans, administered by county-sponsored mental health agencies. Theses plans have
    implemented “person-centered planning” for consumers with mental illness or chemical
    addiction. They have also established a structured partnership at state and local levels
    that facilitates the production of supportive housing and uses Medicaid financing to pay
    for flexible community living supports. Although providing numerous opportunities for
    flexible, creative approaches, Medicaid waivers require significant investment, leadership,
    and creativity to make them work for supportive housing.

Eligible Use of Funds & Use Restrictions:
In order to receive Federal Medicaid funding, states must offer basic services to the
mandatory, categorically needy populations described above under Target Populations.
Federal law requires all states to provide Medicaid reimbursement for a broad array of
clinical health services. These “mandatory” services include hospital and physician services;
certain dental services; nursing facility and home health care; family planning; and related
laboratory test and X-rays. States also receive Federal matching funds for “optional” Medicaid
services they may choose to cover, e.g., clinic services, prescription drugs, etc., within a wide
range of federally allowed options regarding eligibility, covered benefits and other program
specifications. All reimbursed services must be deemed “medically necessary” (although
the specific criteria and procedures used to apply this rule vary among states and types of
services.) Each State’s interpretation of Federally-mandated services and additional coverage
it has elected to provide are laid out in its Medicaid plan.

Many of the health, case management, and supportive services provided to supportive
housing tenants appear to qualify for Medicaid reimbursement. To access Medicaid funding
for supportive housing services, a supportive housing project must house Medicaid-eligible
tenants, provide services that are Medicaid-fundable, and include a qualified service provider.
Medicaid reimbursement requires that the client, the service, and the provider are all qualified
as Medicaid-eligible, with the provider having sufficient administrative capacity to meet state
and Federal billing and record-keeping requirements.




                                                                                             A-79
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Eligible Applicants/Sponsors:
States receive Federal funds to match their expenditures for Medicaid-covered health care
services. Within broad Federal guidelines, provider participation requirements vary widely
from state to state. In order to bill for Medicaid, health care providers may complete a
relatively simple certification or registration process in one state or may be required to enter
a detailed, executed contract in another. Administrative requirements will vary from state
to state as the state determines the billing structure that providers must use. States may
also delegate the administration of parts of the Medicaid program to local governments
(particularly in large urban areas such as New York City, and in states, such as California,
where counties play a large role in administering health and human services programs.
Medicaid managed care plans may further define provider eligibility. Again, states outline
their interpretation of Federal requirements and any additional requirements in the state
Medicaid plan.

In general four types of providers are relevant in terms of accessing Medicaid to pay for
services to supportive housing tenants:
(1) Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). FQHC is defined as a clinic that serves
    populations in particular need of health care services, such as homeless and very low-
    income people. Many public and nonprofit community health centers and Health Care
    for the Homeless Programs, migrant health clinics, and primary care centers located in
    public housing qualify for designation as FQHCs. Programs are designated as FQHCs
    either because they receive a grant specifically for such care, or because they have
    demonstrated to the Federal public health service that they are serving the targeted
    high-need populations. FQHCs also serve uninsured persons and provide a wide range of
    necessary, non-medical services, such as social assistance or translation services. FQHCs
    receive Medicaid reimbursement for health care visits provided to Medicaid-eligible
    consumers by physicians, psychiatrists, and other mid-level medical practitioners, as well
    as qualified clinical social worker and psychologists.
(2) Nonprofit community-based supportive housing agencies under contract with
    (or otherwise recognized as a Medicaid provider by) local or state governments.
    Although most supportive housing agencies are not eligible to directly bill Medicaid for
    health care services provided by their staff, states may allow these providers to receive
    Medicaid reimbursement through contracts with agencies that can bill for Medicaid
    services, usually state or local governments. Alternatively, some states allow providers

A-80
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




    to bill Medicaid without an established service contract, using instead procedures for
    provider certification by a state or local government agency (or by a managed care entity
    under terms specified by the state.)
(3) Nonprofit community-based supportive housing agencies not under contract with (or
    otherwise recognized as a Medicaid provider by) local or state governments. As noted,
    these agencies are generally not able to bill Medicaid, although state law may allow
    licensed or credentialed individual practitioners to bill for services provided in supportive
    housing settings.
(4) Individual Providers. State laws establish the qualifications, requirements, and
    administrative process for the credentialing and/or licensing of clinical practitioners. In
    general, sates allow most types of licensed professionals, e.g., doctors, to participate in
    Medicaid. States define the settings and circumstances under which individual providers
    may bill for their services and require additional administrative procedures in order to
    become a Medicaid provider.

Although a potentially a significant funding stream for services for supportive housing
tenants, Medicaid is a complicated program that requires sophisticated administrative and
financial capacity on the part of the provider. Supportive housing programs that have been
most successful in using Medicaid to fund services have been those that include as the service
provider an organization that has already been getting Medicaid reimbursement for more
traditional reasons, e.g., a community clinic, Health Care for the Homeless provider, or a
non-profit agency already delivering outpatient or residential mental health services under
contract with a county mental health department.




Minimum/Maximum Awards: N/A

Average Awards: N/A

Term of Awards:
States are awarded funds quarterly on a Federal fiscal year, based on their estimates of funds
needed to provide medical assistance to the needy.



                                                                                            A-81
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Matching Requirements:
States receive Federal funds to match their expenditures for Medicaid-eligible health care,
based on an allocation formula which renders the Federal share anywhere from 50 to 80
percent. In some states, local governments share responsibility for the state’s share of costs
for some Medicaid covered benefits. For Medicaid-eligible providers of services, there are
no match requirements, although providers often need to utilize other funds to cover costs
that exceed Medicaid payment rates, or for services to individuals who are not eligible for
Medicaid benefits. There are pre-determined reimbursement rates and in some cases some
Medicaid benefits are administered through managed care arrangements whereby providers
receive a fixed amount of resources per eligible beneficiary to provide a specific range of
services.

Formula:
States receive Federal funds to match their expenditures for health care, based on an
allocation formula that includes factors such as the state’s current fiscal year budget, the
relative income level of the state’s population, etc. These criteria are used to determine the
state’s match requirement for Medicaid funding.

Application Process
States apply to the Federal government making budgetary requests based on previous year
Medicaid expenditures.

The best ways for supportive housing providers to begin exploring using Medicaid
reimbursements to fund services in supportive housing is by:
a. Contacting the State or, in many places, the local public health or mental health agency;
   and/or
b. Contacting a community clinic, Health Care for the Homeless program, or other health
   care provider that provides medical or mental health services to Medicaid beneficiaries,
   homeless people, and other low-income people.

If Medicaid seems a likely funding process, supportive housing sponsors should begin to
ensure that those tenants and prospective tenants who are Medicaid-eligible receive




A-82
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




coverage. This oftentimes requires SSI advocacy, as some supportive housing tenants that are
eligible for Medicaid have difficulty getting through the process and/or have been denied.

CFDA Code: 93.778

Authorizing Legislation/statute: Social Security Act, Title XIX, as amended.

Regulations: 42 CFR, Subchapter C

Additional Resources
• CSH published five white papers under the CSH Medicaid Project on the challenges and
  opportunities of using the Medicaid program to fund services in supportive housing. www.
  csh.org (Go to Resources, Funding Resources, Medicaid Resources 854)
• “Casualties of Complexity, Why Eligible Homeless People are not Enrolled in Medicaid,”
  Patricia A. Post, National Health Care for the Homeless Council, 2001. (http://www.
  nhchc.org/Publications/)
• “Recovery in the Community, Funding Mental Health Rehabilitative Approaches Under
  Medicaid,” Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, 2001.
• Center for Health Care Strategies has published two reports on homeless people accessing
  Medicaid through managed care. www.chcs.org
• Links to state Medicaid pages can be found at: www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5974.




                                                                                         A-83
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The passage of Proposition 63 (now known as the Mental Health Services Act or
MHSA) in November 2004, provides the first opportunity in many years for the California
Department of Mental Health (DMH) to provide increased funding, personnel and other
resources to support county mental health programs and monitor progress toward statewide
goals for children, transition age youth, adults, older adults and families. The Act addresses
a broad continuum of prevention, early intervention and service needs and the necessary
infrastructure, technology and training elements that will effectively support this system.

This Act imposes a one percent (1%) income tax on personal income in excess of $1 million.
Statewide, the Act was projected to generate approximately $254 million in fiscal year 2004-
2005, $683 million in 2005-2006 and increasing amounts thereafter. Much of the funding will
be provided to county mental health programs to fund programs consistent with their local
plans. Any uncommitted funds during fiscal year 2005-01006 will be used to establish county
prudent reserve accounts as required by the Act. To provide for an orderly implementation
of MHSA, DMH has planned for sequential phases of development for each of the six
components of the Act. An extensive stakeholder process is being employed to inform the
state’s implementation efforts. Improvement in client outcomes is a fundamental expectation
throughout the implementation process.

MHSACommunity Services and Supports Project Updates
The State Department of Mental Health approved the Riverside County Community
Services and Support (CSS) Plan in June 2006 thereby providing the resources necessary to
begin implementation of the new MHSA services.

The CSS Plan was developed through a twelve-month extensive community planning process
that included 81 community focus groups, 20 specialty focus groups, four public forums,
three public hearings and numerous written surveys. The Department estimates that it heard
from over 1200 individuals in the planning process including consumers, family members,
the court system, law enforcement agencies, human services agencies, and organizations and
groups that advocate for and support the mentally health needs of our County residents.



A-84
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Services through the CSS Plan will be community based, focused on recovery, culturally
competent, and will include consumers and family members in treatment service provision.
Funding can only be used for voluntary services and no less than 50 percent must be targeted
to “full service partnerships” (FSP). FSP provides wrap-around services to help the most
severely mentally ill clients and their families with access to assistance twenty-four hours
a day, seven days a week. These wrap-around services include: psychiatric treatment; case
management; transportation; housing; crisis intervention; education; vocational training
and employment services; as well as socialization and recreational activities, based upon the
individual needs for successful treatment outcomes. MHSA funds can not be used to supplant
programs that existed prior to November 2004.

The seriously mentally ill populations given priority for services includes the homeless,
those in juvenile halls and jails, high-users of crisis and hospital services, and those at risk
of institutionalization and placement. The programs through MHSA must include services
for all ages and include: Children (0-16), Transition Age Youth (16-25), Adults (26-59), and
Older Adults (60+).

The CSS Plan includes six work plans that encompass the services to be provided to the
priority population described above.
• Community Collaboration
• Cultural Competence
• Client/Family Driven
• Wellness and Recovery Focused
• Integrated Services

$16.7 million of MHSA funding is available each year to the County for community services
and support to children and youth, transition age youth, adults and older adults. All four age
groups must be served and ethnic disparities addressed.




                                                                                               A-85
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Mission of Mental Health Services
That the residents of Riverside County facing the challenge of severe mental illness have a
quality of life that includes a reduction or absence of symptoms, meaningful relationships,
activities, and choices, stable housing and employment in supportive communities free of
stigma.

Vision for a Transformed Mental Health System
A transformed system would include all of the following characteristics:
• User-friendly, easily accessible services across the county
• Welcoming and engaging from point of first contact
• Services which are comprehensive, recovery focused and empowering
• Integrated Peer Support System with consumer and family involvement at all levels
• Active and continuous outreach to unserved populations with special attention to
  disparities in service use
• Sensitive, respectful, and responsive to client’s culture, gender, age, sexual orientation, and
  ethnicity
• Focused on the most effective clinical practices through a trained and supported workforce
• Actively develops community partnerships, provide education to enhance community
  support and resources and to reduce stigma
• Focused on consumer outcomes and utilizes feedback and evaluation to continually
  improve services.


Plan for Community Services And Supports
Building on the existing system, with a focus on transformation, the following is a
summary of the draft plan:




A-86
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




A. Proposed Priority Populations of Seriously Mentally Ill
    There was consistency across age groups of the populations who are priority to be served
    with two other populations tied only to a specific age group.
    1. Homeless
    2. Co-Occurring Disorders – Mental Illness and Substance Abuse
    3. Juvenile Justice and Forensic populations
    4. Adult & Transition age users of Hospital and Crisis Services.
    5. High risk of hospitalization or institutionalization.
    6. Co-Occurring Disorders Mental Illness and Health problems (Older Adults)
    7. Very young children (0-5)
B. Proposed Services Related to Homelessness
    Transition Age Youth (Ages 16-25): $1.85 Million of MHSA funds per year:
       • Three Integrated Service Recovery Centers (266 to be served per year)
       • Three Peer Support and Resource Centers (264 to be served per year)
       • Crisis Residential Program (45 to be served per year)
       • Augmented Board & Care, beds (30 to be served per year)
       • Evidence-based practices implemented in Children’s outpatient clinics serves the
         16-18 year olds also
    Adults: $5.49 Million of MHSA funds per year:
      • Outreach
      • Three Mental Health Court programs (345 to be served per year)
      • Jail Mental Health Follow-up (2500 to be served per year)
      • Integrated Service Recovery (365 to be served per year)
      • Expansion of Family Advocate Program
      • Crisis Residential Program (235 to be served per year)
      • Augmented Board & Care - 82 beds (120 to be served per year)
      • Expanded Outpatient and Case Management Services (315 to be served per year)

    Older Adults: $2.34 Million of MHSA funds per year:
      • Infrastructure Changes – Designated Older Adult Managers and Supervisors
      • Multidisciplinary – Mobile Outreach & Integrated Service Team (350 provided
        assessment per year and 163 provided ongoing services)




                                                                                         A-87
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




       • Peer & Family Support Services – Consumer and Family Advocates in each
         region plus Senior Peer Counseling (150 to be served by peer counseling)
       • Screening & Consultation in Public Health Clinics (250 to be served per year)
       • Augmented Board & Care (32 to be served per year)
       • Training of staff, consumers, and Board & Care staff (six trainings to be held per
          year)

    Peer Recovery/Support Services: $846,000 of MHSA Funds per year:
       • Three Consumer Operated Peer Support & Resource Centers (1200 served per year)
       • Consumer Advocate Position in Administrative Budget
       • Consumer/Family members on Mental Health Boards/Committees

    Outreach & Engagement: $265,000 of MHSA Funds per year:
      • General Community Outreach Strategies
       • Specific Targeted Ethnic Population Outreach Strategies
       • Outreach Coordinator

    One Time Funds:
      • Request has been made for one time funds to provide ongoing training and
        start up of programs. Additionally, $4.9 million has been requested to use
        under the CSS plan through fiscal year 2007-2008 to provide a range of
        housing options for transition age, adults and older adult populations

    Administration: $844,000 of MHSA Funds per year:
      • Includes MHSA Administrative & Support Staff, Housing Development Unit
        Staff, Research Analyst, and Consumer Advocate




A-88
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Administrative Agencies

Federal:
• Department of Health and Human Services (HHS):
  Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
  Center for Substance Abuse Prevention
  (301) 443-2332
  www.samhsa.gov or www.samhsa.gov/grants/grants.html

Type Of Assistance: Competitive

Program Description
Competitive grant program to help community-based organizations expand their capacity
to provide and sustain effective, integrated substance abuse prevention and HIV prevention
services in high risk minority communities disproportionately impacted by the HIV/AIDS
epidemic.

The goal of this program is to increase access to substance abuse prevention and HIV
prevention programs in areas with hard to reach populations and high incidence rates of
substance abuse and HIV infection, such as rural communities, by increasing both the number
and quality of prevention programs in traditionally under-served areas.

The program is designed to be implemented in three phases:

Phase I:    Strategic Planning/Start-Up to deliver effective, integrated substance abuse
            prevention and HIV prevention services. (Not to exceed nine months).

Phase II:   Implementation activities including involvement of target population and
            community representatives, recruitment and retention of target population
            participants, and delivery of substance abuse prevention and HIV prevention
            services.

                                                                                           A-89
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Phase III: Evaluation and Sustainability, including compiling, analyzing and reporting on
           the outcomes of the services delivered and completing the approved sustainability
           plan designed to ensure continuation of services.




Eligible Target Populations:
This program seeks to increase and sustain the availability of effective, integrated substance
abuse prevention and HIV prevention services for women, youth and other at-risk
populations in African-American, Hispanic/Latino, American Indian/Alaska Native, and
Asian-American/Pacific Islander communities which have traditionally been underserved or
not served at all.

Other at-risk populations may include:
• Adolescents
• Female adolescents and women
• Runaway youth
• Homeless individuals
• Commercial sex workers
• Individuals re-entering the community from prison, jail or juvenile justice facilities
• Partners of individuals in or re-entering the community from correctional facilities
• Gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transgender and questioning individuals
• Individuals, both male and female, with a history of sexual abuse or intimate partner
  violence
• Migrant workers, or other immigrant populations living away from home for extended
  periods
• Immigrants from countries with high HIV seroprevalence rates




A-90
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Eligible Projects/Programs:
Projects that increase the provision of effective substance abuse prevention and HIV
prevention services; increase the number of community based organizations that provide
such services; and increase the capacity of such organizations to successfully sustain their
integrated prevention services.

Eligible Use of Funds & Use Restrictions:
Effective, integrated substance abuse prevention and HIV prevention services in high risk
minority communities.

Funds may not be used for:
• Substance abuse treatment services
• Mental health treatment services
• HIV/AIDS treatment services
• Primary health care services
• Any services or treatments that would be covered under public or private programs such as
  Medicaid or Medicare

Eligible Applicants/Sponsors:
Domestic public and private non-profit entities. State and local government agencies are not
eligible.



SAMHSA/CSAP intends to achieve overall program balance in terms of geography and
race/ethnicity of target populations. An attempt will be made to distribute awards across
all regions of the country and across all targeted minority groups; however, this funding
criterion will be balanced against the priority score.

Minimum/Maximum Awards: Maximum: $350,000 in total costs per year.

Average Awards: FY 2003, $250,000 - 350,000 in total costs per year.




                                                                                            A-91
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Term of Awards:
Grants are awarded for up to five years. Annual continuation awards depend on the
availability of funds and progress achieved.

Matching Requirements:
No cost sharing requirements, however, all successful applicants will develop and implement
a sustainability plan to ensure continued provision of services subsequent to cessation of
Federal funding.

Formula: N/A

Application Process: Annual NOFA with one application submission per year.

Authorizing Legislation/statute: Public Health Services Act, Section 516

Regulations/guidelines
45 CFR Parts 74 and 92; PHS Grants Policy Statement; Last published Guidance for
Applicants: No. SP 03-005




A-92
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Program description

Program Summary

MHP provides low-interest loans to developers of affordable housing. Available MHP
General Funds may be used for multifamily rental and transitional housing projects
involving new construction, rehabilitation, acquisition and rehabilitation, or conversion of
nonresidential structures. HCD expects MHP funds to be leveraged with other resources,
including local government funds, the federal Continuum of Care programs, four percent
(4%) low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bond financing and private debt financing.

Projects using nine percent (9%) tax credits are ineligible. Projects receiving funding from the Department’s Local
Housing Trust Fund Matching Grant Program are not eligible to receive funds through MHP.

Program Regulations and Legal Authority
MHP was established by SB 1121, Statutes of 1999 (Alarcón), which created Chapter 6.7
of Part 2 of Division 31 commencing with Section 50675, of the Health and Safety Code.
Applications are subject to two sets of regulations (the MHP-specific regulations and the
Uniform Multifamily Regulations). The regulation text is available on the HCD website
at: http://www.hcd.fa.gov/ca/multifamilyregs.html. Applications are also subject to the
applicable statutory requirements, including those of Proposition 46 and SB 1227 of 2002 and
the requirements specified in this NOFA..

Eligibility Information

Eligible Project Sponsors
Sponsors and borrowing entities may be organized on a for-profit or not-for-profit basis. Any
individual, public agency or private entity capable of entering into a contract is eligible to
apply, provided that they, or their staff, have successfully developed at least one affordable
housing project. The Department will evaluate all Sponsors, including the roles of any
general partner(s) in a limited partnership, to determine if the Sponsor’s roles, responsibilities,
and benefits in the project development and operations are commensurate with activities
normally undertaken or controlled by project developers and owners. The Sponsor will be
reviewed to determine if adequate staffing levels exist to undertake and complete the project.

                                                                                                             A-93
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The same criteria will be applied to evaluate sponsor experience for purpose of awarding
points. Sponsors of projects where at least 70 percent of the units consist of Special Needs Population units may
be exempt from the requirement for previous development experience under limited conditions per Section 7303(d).

Sponsor entities must maintain sufficient control of the borrowing entity to ensure that the
Ultimate Borrower has the resources and experience to develop, own and manage the project.
Sponsors must have site control in the name of the Sponsor or an entity controlled by the
Sponsor as defined in UMR Section 8303.

Eligible Uses of Funds
MHP funds are provided as permanent financing only, and may be used to take out
construction loans used to cover normal project development (capital) costs, as detailed in
Section 7304. MHP funds may be used to capitalize a project operating reserve account up to
the limit required under UMR Section 8308. Program funds may not be used for the cost of supportive
services, although Department-approved costs of on-site supportive services coordination may be treated as a
project operating cost, payable from operating income. MHP funds must be attributable to the costs
of “restricted” units (MHP units and units subject to a long-term regulatory agreement with
occupancy and rent restrictions similar to those of MHP) or to the costs of facilities used for
childcare, after-school care, and social services that are integrally linked to the restricted units.

Eligible Projects
Projects must qualify as rental housing developments, as defined in UMR Section 8301, and meet the requirements
of Section 7302. For example, projects must contain five or more dwelling units. MHP General
funded units may be operated as permanent or transitional housing.

Projects are ineligible if construction has commenced as of the application due date per
Section 7302, or if the project is already fully funded. Projects must meet the underwriting
standards described in UMR Section 8310.

Maximum Loan Amounts
The maximum loan per project is $10,000,000. The maximum loan amount per “restricted”
unit is a function of unit size, location, and affordability level per Section 7307. The
maximum loan per restricted unit has been increased to $45,000 per unit for the Southern
California region to encourage the equitable distribution of funds for the area.




A-94
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Loan Terms and Security
Loans have 55-year terms, and bear simple interest at the rate of three percent (3%) per year.
For the first 30 years, annual interest payments are required in the amount of 0.42 percent
(0.42%) of the outstanding principal loan balance. The annual payment amount for the next
25 years will be set by HCD in year 30, and will be the minimum amount necessary to cover
HCD’s monitoring costs. Unpaid principal and accrued/deferred interest will be due at the
end of the loan term.

Rent and Occupancy Limits
MHP assisted unit rent and tenant incomes will be restricted in accordance with the rent
and income limits proposed by the project sponsor in their MHP application, with rents not
exceeding 30 percent of the applicable income limit. The maximum possible income and rent
limits are those set by the Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC), using its calculation
methods: Sixty percent (60%) of Area Medium Income (AMI), adjusted by household size,
and 30 percent of 60 percent of AMI, adjusted by bedroom size. (These maximum limits are
available on the TCAC website at www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/.)

Projects will be underwritten at the rent limits for the income levels proposed in the
application. The Program’s 1.20 debt coverage ratio limit will be applied using the maximum
rents allowable.

Assisted unit rent increases will be limited in accordance with the rules governing tax credit
units and Section 7311 and 7312. Where the project receives Section 8 or other rental
assistance subsidies, “rent” is defined as the tenant’s contribution, rather than the contract rent
level. Sponsors of this type of project will be required to continue the rental assistance as long
as it is available. Projects with rental subsidies must also be feasible with 50 percent of AMI
rents for units garnering income-targeting points in the event the rental assistance is terminated.

Projects for Populations with Special Needs
Sponsors of Special Needs Populations projects must submit a specific, feasible plan for
delivery and funding of tenant services for Department approval and will be required to meet
minimum threshold criteria for experience and the provision of services. MHP funds may
not be used to fund tenant services. Sponsors must also be very careful to avoid violation
of laws barring housing discrimination. HCD will review proposed tenant selection criteria




                                                                                              A-95
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




for potential violations of these laws. HCD may condition funding on the elimination of
restrictions that it believes to be impermissible, or reject an application where it determines
that compliance with applicable law is not feasible.

Fair Housing is a very complex and in many ways unsettled area of law. Sponsors are
encouraged to seek professional advice if there is any doubt that their proposal may run
afoul of non-discrimination and fair housing laws. A useful resource is Between the Lines,
A Question and Answer Guide on Legal Issues in Supportive Housing published by the
Corporation for Supportive Housing. This document is available online at www.csh.org or
by calling the publisher at (510) 251-1910.

Geographic Distribution
MHP’s enabling statute requires the program to “ensure a reasonable geographic distribution
of funds.” To prevent an extreme imbalance in funding, no less than approximately 45
percent of the total funds are currently awarded to projects in Southern California (including
Riverside County), 30 percent will be awarded to projects in Northern California, and 10
percent will be awarded to projects in rural areas.

Transitional Housing
MHP funds may be used to finance the development of transitional housing for homeless
populations. The Supportive Housing Program component of MHP may only be used to
finance the development of permanent housing.

Loan Amounts
The table that follows shows the most recent allocation per unit and affordability level for
projects developed in the County of Riverside.

                       Riverside County MHP Loan Limits
Income Level              Efficiency 1 BR      2 BR       3 BR                     4+ BR
60% Income Level           $45,000 $45,000 $45,000      $45,000                  $45,000
55% Income Level           $52,202 $52,779 $54,363      $55,804                  $56,956
50% Income Level           $59,549 $60,557 $63,726      $66,607                  $69,056
45% Income Level           $66,751 $68,336 $73,089      $77,411                  $81,012
40% Income Level (MHP A) $73,954 $76,114 $82,308        $88,070                  $92,968
35% Income Level (MHP B) $81,300 $83,893 $91,671        $98,874                  $105,068
30% Income Level (MHP C) $88,502 $91,671 $101,034 $109,677                       $117,024


A-96
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Amendments Act of 1990 authorized a
Federal grant program to deal with the needs of people who are homeless and have serious
mental illnesses. The program -- known as Projects for Assistance in Transition from
Homelessness (PATH) -- funds community-based outreach, mental health, substance abuse,
case management and other support services, as well as a limited set of housing services.

In FY 2005, the PATH program distributed over $52 million through formula grants to each
State, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Territories to provide services
to people with serious mental illnesses -- including those with co-occurring substance
use disorders -- who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. The formula is based
on the urban population in the jurisdiction compared to the total U.S. urban population,
with minimum grants of $300,000 per year to each State. Latest available data indicate
that in FY 2005, States engaged 463 local organizations in the provision of services. These
organizations reported more than 82,000 enrollments for PATH- supported services.

The PATH program is administered by the Center for Mental Health Services, a component
of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, one of eight Public
Health Service agencies within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

PATH Providers Serve People with Mental Illnesses Who Are Homeless:
Local PATH-supported agencies reported they delivered services to more than 82,000 people
in FY 2005. Who were their clients? Demographic data reveal the following for the clients for
whom information was obtained.
• More than half the clients served (61 percent) were male.
• More than half the clients (54 percent) were Caucasian. Over a third (33 percent) were
  African American; 9 percent were of Hispanic origin; the rest represented Asian, Native
  American and other racial groups.
• Nearly 97 percent of the people served were between the ages of 18 and 64.




                                                                                         A-97
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• PATH clients have some of the most disabling mental disorders. Among clients for whom a
  diagnosis was reported, 27 percent had schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders and 44
  percent had affective disorders such as depression.
• Over 57 percent of the clients had a substance use disorder in addition to a serious mental
  illness.

PATH Projects Involve a Broad Range of Service Providers:
The PATH program involves a wide network of State and local agencies that contribute
comprehensive community-based services for people who are homeless and have serious
mental illnesses. PATH providers have succeeded in putting experience and expertise to work
to meet the needs of homeless people who have mental illnesses by engaging the services of
community mental health centers and other mental health providers, community-based social
service agencies, health care providers, and substance abuse service providers.



Local PATH-supported organizations provide a wide range of services to people who are
homeless. Among the services eligible for funding under PATH are:
• Outreach services,
• Screening and diagnostic services,
• Habilitation and rehabilitation services,
• Community mental health services,
• Alcohol or drug treatment services (for people with mental illnesses and co-occurring
  substance use disorders),
• Case management services,
• Supervisory services in residential settings and
• A limited set of housing services and services to help clients access housing resources.

In addition, virtually all States use PATH funds to provide outreach services to contact and
engage people who have not sought services. FY 2005 data reveal the following:
• Over 90 percent of all providers offer outreach to persons who are homeless.
• Eighty-three percent (3%) of providers offer case management services.



A-98
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• More than 78 percent of providers use PATH funds to assist clients in accessing primary
  health care services, job training, education services, and housing.

States also use PATH funds to train local provider staff on effective strategies to assist persons
who are homeless and have mental illnesses.

In many States, PATH funds are the only dollars available for outreach services within the
mental health system.

PATH Program Funds Stimulate State and Local Contributions:
PATH funds represent over 23 percent of the total dollar amount earmarked by provider
agencies for serving homeless people with mental illnesses. These funds are worth more than
their face value because they must be matched by State and local resources. For every $3 in
Federal funds, State or local agencies must put forward $1 in cash or in-kind services. At a
minimum, a $26 million Federal allocation would result in a $8.6 million match. However, in
FY 2005, States matched over $32.7 million in State and local funds against the $52.4 million
Federal allocation. In some States, PATH funds and the State and local match are the only
commitment of resources targeted to homeless people with serious mental illnesses.
For more information about the PATH program, please contact:
Michael Hutner, Ph.D., Director, and Dorrine Gross, Co-Director,
PATH Program
Homeless Programs Branch
Division of Service Systems Improvement
Center for Mental Health Services
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services




                                                                                             A-99
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Public housing was established to provide decent and safe rental housing for eligible low-
income families, the elderly, and persons with disabilities. Public housing comes in all sizes
and types, from scattered single family houses to high-rise apartments for elderly families.
There are approximately 1.3 million households living in public housing units, managed
by some 3,300 Housing Authorities (HAs). The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) administers Federal aid to local housing agencies (HAs) that manage
the housing for low-income residents at rents they can afford. HUD furnishes technical and
professional assistance in planning, developing and managing these developments.

Eligibility
Public housing is limited to low-income families and individuals. A Housing Authority
determines eligibility based on: 1) annual gross income; 2) age, disability, and family
composition; and 3) U.S. citizenship or eligible immigration status. The HA checks
references to verify an applicant’s previous rental history and experiences. Applicants whose
habits and practices may be expected to have a detrimental effect on other tenants or on the
project’s environment are denied access.

HAs use income limits developed by HUD to determine eligibility. HUD sets the lower income
limits at 80 percent and very low income limits at 50 percent of the median income for each
county or metropolitan area. Income limits vary by area and are adjusted for family size.

Application and Documentation
In Riverside the Economic Development Administration receives, reviews, and approves
applications for public housing. The documentation process requirements are as follows:
(1) Names of all persons who would be living in the unit, their sex, date of birth and
    relationship to the family head;
(2) Current address and telephone number;
(3) Family characteristics (e.g., veteran) or circumstances (e.g., living in substandard
    housing) that might qualify the family for tenant selection preferences;
4) Names and addresses of current and previous landlords for information about each
   household’s suitability as a tenant;


A-100
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




(5) An estimate of each household’s anticipated income for the next twelve months and the
    sources of that income;
(6) The names and addresses of employers, banks, and any other information the HA would
    need to verify income and deductions, and to verify the household (family) composition;
    and an authorization to release the information by contacting each to provide a written
    certification and/or documentation; and
(7) The PHA also may conduct home visits to assess how a household currently maintains its
    unit.

Tenancy
All units managed by Housing Authorities must be under (minimum 6 month) lease.

Waiting Lists and Selection Preferences
Because demand for public housing exceeds supply, each Public Housing Authority maintains
a waiting list of eligible applicants awaiting access to public housing. The waiting list is
managed by the HA which has the authority (with HUD approval) to designate specific
populations for priority. Currently the waiting list managed by the Riverside EDA includes
15,000 applicants for assisted housing. The management of the waiting list reflects public
policy priorities; it is the mechanism by which a Housing Authority may target its scarce
housing resources to households with the greatest housing needs. Each HA has the discretion
to establish preferences to reflect needs in its own community. These preferences are included
in the HA’s written policy manual. Among the most common preferences are:

Rent
HUD refers to the tenant’s portion of rent as the Total Tenant Payment (TTP). TTP is
established for each household based on anticipated gross annual income, less deductions,
if any. HUD regulations allow Housing Authorities to exclude from annual income the
following allowances: $480 for each dependent; $400 for any elderly family, or a person
with a disability; and some medical deductions for families headed by an elderly person, or
a person with disabilities. Annual income is the anticipated total income from all sources
received from the family head and spouse, and each additional member of the family 18 years
of age or older.




                                                                                       A-101
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The formula used in determining the TTP is the highest of the following, rounded to the
nearest dollar:
(1) 30 percent of the monthly adjusted income. (Monthly Adjusted Income is annual income
    less deductions allowed by the regulations);
(2) 10 percent of monthly income;
(3) Applicable welfare rent (established by the County), if applicable; or
(4) A $25 minimum rent or higher amount (up to $50) set by a Housing Authority.

Role of the Housing Authority
The Riverside County Economic Development Administration is responsible for the
management and operation of the local public housing program. It also operates other types
of housing programs. As regard public housing, the HA’s routine management responsibilities
include: (a) compliance with leases (b) establishing and collecting other charges (e.g.,
security deposit, excess utility consumption, and damages to unit); (c) performing annual
re-verifications of each household’s income and other eligibility criteria; (d) transferring
households from one unit to another, in order to correct over/under crowding, repair or
renovate a dwelling, or to satisfy a personal preference of the tenant; (e) terminating leases as
necessary; and (f) maintaining the development in a decent, safe, and sanitary condition.

Many Housing Authorities, including the EDA, provide other supportive services that may
include such things as: homeownership opportunities for qualified families; employment
training opportunities, and other special training and employment programs for residents;
and support programs for elderly and/or disabled residents.

In general, a household may remain in public housing as long as it is in compliance with the
terms of the lease. If, at re-certification a household’s income is sufficient to obtain housing on
the private market, the HA may terminate assistance so long as there are suitable affordable
units available in the private market.




A-102
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Purpose
For over 50 years, redevelopment agencies in California have effectively provided the
economic stimulus to rebuild declining communities. In today’s business and economic
climate, California cannot afford to let its communities decline. Yet, persons in local
government feel that the rebuilding of our communities is at risk due to actions taken by
State government.

Redevelopment has proven to be one of the most effective ways to expand businesses,
develop affordable housing, create jobs, and provide public infrastructure. Redevelopment
is a “smart growth” approach that encourages infill development in urban areas, slows
development of vacant farmland, cleans up contaminated sites, and revitalizes old
neighborhoods.

There are 417 community redevelopment agencies and 772 project areas in the state.
Throughout the County of Riverside, there are 24 redevelopment agencies administering
55 project areas. Statewide, 80 percent of all cities have redevelopment agencies and 45
percent of all counties and in Riverside, all Cities with the exception of Canyon Lake have
redevelopment agencies. In Riverside County, annual local property tax increment revenues
of approximately $360 million fund local redevelopment projects from jobs to housing to
public infrastructure. Just over $72 million has been allocated to meet the housing set-aside
requirements contained in redevelopment law as a result of a 1976 statute.

The State of California has not always recognized redevelopment’s contributions to
California’s economy. On five occasions, the State has taken away funds from redevelopment
investment. In 1992 and 1993, the State Legislature was confronted with a budget greatly
out of balance. As part of the solution, the Legislature established the Education Revenue
Augmentation Fund (ERAF) and required a portion of property tax increment to be allocated
to schools through this device. (An ERAF “shift” reduces dollar-for-dollar the amount of State
general fund aid to schools, making up for it with redevelopment funds.) In 1992, the shift
from redevelopment agencies to ERAF amounted to $205 million. In 1993-94 and 1994-95,
redevelopment agencies were required to transfer $65 million each year to ERAF. Funds were




                                                                                          A-103
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




transferred to ERAF again in 2002-03 and 2003-04 with redevelopment agencies: $75 million
and $135 million, respectively.

Assistance Type
An agency may allocate grants or loans linked to specific developments. It may also offer
annual operating assistance (subsidies).

Terms
Negotiable, but generally loans for affordable housing are residual receipt at a reduced
interest rate for 55 years.



California Community Redevelopment Law (CRL) requires that no less than 20 percent of tax
increment revenue derived from a redevelopment project area be used to increase, improve,
and preserve the supply of housing for very low-, low- and moderate-income households. If
none is provided within a redevelopment project area, then the funds must be used
to build twice that amount elsewhere. Possibilities include financial assistance to upgrade
existing units, the construction of new housing, and improvements to public facilities and
infrastructure that service low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. The following uses are
authorized housing set-aside expenditures:
• Acquisition of real property or building sites;
• Onsite or offsite improvements, if such improvements are part of a program which results
  in the new construction or rehabilitation of affordable housing, or if the redevelopment
  agency finds that such improvements are necessary to eliminate a specific condition which
  jeopardizes the health or safety of low- and moderate-income households;
• Donation of real property to private or public persons or entities;
• Financing insurance premiums during the construction or rehabilitation of properties by
  government entities or nonprofit organizations to provide lower-income housing;
• New construction or rehabilitation of buildings or structures;
• Acquisition of buildings or structures;
• Provision of subsidies to, or for the benefit of, lower-income households to the extent that
  these households cannot obtain housing at affordable costs in the private marketplace;



A-104
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• Development of plans, payment of principal, interest, financing or carrying costs on bonds,
  loans, advances or other indebtedness to finance low- and moderate-income housing;
• Preservation of the affordability of low- and moderate-income housing units which
  are assisted or subsidized by public entities and which are threatened with imminent
  conversion to market rates;
• Satisfaction of replacement housing requirements of CRL; and
• Reasonable administrative expenses (including operating support for nonprofit developers
  of redevelopment agency-assisted housing).

Whenever residential units housing persons of low or moderate income are removed from the
market as part of a specific project, an agency is required by law to rehabilitate or construct
an equal number of replacement dwelling units within the jurisdiction of that agency, within
four years of removal. Also, 75 percent of the replacement units must be affordable to the same
income level (very low, low or moderate) as the persons displaced from the removed units.

Inclusionary Housing Requirements
In addition to the 20 percent requirement, the California Community Redevelopment Law
(CRL) contains inclusionary housing requirements. If the agency develops the units, at least
30 percent of all new or rehabilitated dwelling units must be available at affordable housing
cost to persons of low and moderate income. Also, not less than 50 percent of those units
are to be available at affordable cost to persons of very low income. Within a project area,
new or rehabilitated dwelling units developed by public or private entities (or persons other
than an agency within a 10-year period) are to be available at costs affordable to persons of
low or moderate income with not less than 40 percent of these units made available to very
low-income households. Redevelopment law permits an agency to meet the inclusionary
requirements by constructing housing units outside a project area on a two for one basis, i.e.,
for every unit of inclusionary housing required, two units outside the project area must be
developed.

Application Procedure
Developers seeking financial assistance contact redevelopment agencies in the jurisdiction in
which the subject project is located.




                                                                                            A-105
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Administrative Agencies

Federal:
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA), HIV/AIDS Bureau, (301) 443-6745
www.hab.hrsa.gov and www.hab.hrsa.gov/programs.htm

CA:
California Health and Human Services Agency, Department of Health Services, Office of
AIDS, (916) 449-5900, www.dhs.ca.gov/ps/ooa/ooaindex.htm

Riverside/San Bernardino Counties:
Mr. Danny Perez, MSW, Public Health Program Coordinator, San Bernardino County,
Department of Public Health, 1280 East Cooley Drive, Suite C, Colton, CA 92324; (909)
876-3952; Fax: (909) 872-1505

Type Of Assistance: Formula and Competitive

Program Description
The Ryan White CARE Act provides funding to localities, states and other public or private
nonprofit entities to develop, organize, coordinate and operate more effective and cost-efficient
systems for the delivery of essential health care and support services to medically underserved
individuals and families affected by HIV disease. The Ryan White CARE Act established a




A-106
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




variety of AIDS programs to address the unmet health needs of persons living with HIV disease
in order to improve the availability and quality of community-based outpatient primary health
care and support services that enhance access to and retention in care.

CARE Act-funded services are intended to reduce the use of more costly inpatient care,
increase access to care for underserved populations, and improve the qualify of life for those
affected by the epidemic. CARE Act programs fund local and State programs that provide
medical care and support services; healthcare provider training; and, technical assistance to
help funded programs address implementation and emerging HIV care issues.

The CARE Act established programs under five titles or parts, of which Titles I and II are
most relevant for supportive housing providers. While Titles I and II do not directly fund the
development or operation of permanent or long-term supportive housing for people with
AIDS, they will fund housing-related services (including emergency financial assistance,
emergency housing, housing referrals, and some transitional housing assistance) and
supportive services to residents in supportive housing.

Title I: Grants to Eligible Metropolitan Areas (EMAs) or HIV Emergency Relief
Project Grants
Title I establishes formula and competitive supplemental grants to fund community-based
health care, and early intervention and support services in localities that are most severely
affected by the HIV/AIDS epidemic, called Eligible Metropolitan Areas (EMAs). Title I
funding to EMAs includes formula and supplemental components, and Minority AIDS
Initiative funds targeted for services to minority populations. Supplemental grants are
awarded competitively based on demonstration of severe need and other criteria. To be
eligible, an area must have reported at least 2,000 AIDS cases during the previous five years
and have a population of at least 500,000. When the first Title I grants were awarded in fiscal
year 1991, there were 16 EMAs. Today, 51 EMAs receive funding in 21 States, Puerto Rico,
and the District of Columbia.

Funding
In fiscal year 2006, $611.6 million was appropriated for Title I spending of which $7,074,521
was awarded to Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Title I funding to EMAs includes
formula and supplemental components, as well as Minority AIDS Initiative funds targeted



                                                                                          A-107
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




for services to minority populations. The funds allocated to Riverside and San Bernardino
Counties are administered by the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health.
• Formula grants are based on the estimated number of living cases of AIDS over the most
  recent 10-year period. Beginning in FY 2007, if accurate and reliable data are available,
  formula funds will be based on living HIV/AIDS cases (HIV-positive and AIDS cases).*
• Supplemental grants are awarded competitively based on demonstration of severe need and
  other criteria.

Title II: Grants to States or Territories or HIV Care Formula Grants
Title II establishes a formula grant program to all States and Territories to improve the quality,
availability, and organization of their health care and support services for individuals and families
with HIV/AIDS. Title II funds a wide range of services including (and in addition to direct health
and support services) continuation of health insurance coverage and pharmaceutical treatments.
Title II funding to States or Territories includes: a base formula component; the AIDS Drug
Assistance Program (ADAP); and grants to States for Emerging Communities -- those reporting
between 500 and 1,999 AIDS cases over the most recent five years. The base formula grant
component of Title II is most relevant for supportive housing sponsors. Decisions about the use of
Title II funds are made at the sate and/or local consortia level.

Some communities receive funding from both formula grant programs, some from one or the
other. Relative to supportive housing sponsors accessing these CARE Act funds, Title I and II
formula grants are generally not distinguished at the local level and are administered together
as CARE Act funds. Except where there are significant differences, the balance of this summary
will describe the formula grant components of Title I and II CARE Act programs together.




Eligible Target Populations:
Low-income individuals with HIV/AIDS and their families (including caregivers). The most
likely users of CARE Act services include people with no other source of health care and
those with MediCal or private insurance whose care needs are not being met.




A-108
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Eligible Projects/Programs:
Programs that provide an effective, appropriate and cost efficient continuum of health care
and support services for individuals and families with HIV disease.

Eligible Use of Funds & Use Restrictions:
Title I funds may be used for the provision of health and support services, including:
• outpatient and ambulatory health services including substance abuse and mental health
  treatment
• early intervention services, including outreach, counseling and testing, and referral services
  designed to identify HIV-positive individuals who know their HIV status
• support services (including case management, home health and hospice care, emergency
  and short-term housing assistance, transportation assistance, nutrition services, and day/
  respite care) to the extent that these support services facilitate, enhance, support, or sustain
  delivery, continuity or benefits of health services
• inpatient case management services that expedite discharge and prevent unnecessary
  hospitalization.

Title I funds may not be used for: construction, rehabilitation, or long-term rental assistance,
and only a small portion of Title I funds may directly provide housing services.

Title II funds may be used for all of the uses of Title I plus:
• establishment and operation of HIV consortia
• continuity of insurance coverage; and
• pharmaceutical treatments through the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP).

Ryan White funds can support the wide variety of health care needs and other supportive
services described above delivered in a variety of settings, including housing. As such, they
are commonly used to fund the supportive services in transitional housing and permanent
supportive housing targeted for people with HIV disease. For example, primary medical care
and support services for residents of permanent housing are eligible under the primary medical
care and supportive services categories, not out of housing assistance. Likewise, substance
abuse services can be provided to residents in a supportive housing program as long as they are
funded under the substance abuse category, not one of the housing-related categories.


                                                                                           A-109
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




There are two categories of housing related expenditures to which Ryan White funds may be
allocated: Housing Referral Services and Short-term or Emergency Housing.
• Housing Referral Services include assessment, housing search and placement, and
  advocacy to assist persons living with HIV/AIDS to obtain and maintain stable housing.
  To be eligible for Ryan White funding these services must be provided by case managers
  or other professionals who possess a comprehensive knowledge of local, state, and Federal
  housing programs and how they can be accessed.
• Emergency assistance refers to programs that are of very short duration and are intended
  to assist individuals or households in situations of immediate housing crisis. Examples of
  emergency assistance include hotel or motel vouchers, emergency shelter stays, homeless
  prevention assistance (such as one-time rent or utility payments), assistance moving to a
  new location, or payments to cover bed nights in an emergency alcohol or substance abuse
  detoxification program. Housing funds used for detoxification services are only allowed if
  the treatment provider requires payment for the housing and does not receive Ryan White
  funds from the substance abuse category to cover this expense.
• Short-term assistance refers to programs or payments that are designed to stabilize an
  individual’s housing situation, and to support his or her transition to long-term sustainable
  housing. Short-term housing assistance includes transitional housing programs, short-term
  rental assistance, temporary living assistance, and short-term residential treatment. As with
  funds to pay for detoxification services, Ryan White funds can pay for residential treatment if
  the treatment provider requires payment for the housing portion of the program and does not
  receive Ryan White funds from the substance abuse category to cover this expense.

Eligible Applicants/Sponsors:
Title I: Formula grants are awarded to Eligible Metropolitan Areas (EMAs) defined as
areas that have reported at least 2,000 AIDS cases during the previous five years and have
a population of at least 500,000. EMAs range in size from one city/county to more than
26 different political entities, and some span more than one state. Supplemental grants
are awarded competitively to EMAs that demonstrate: severe need; a plan to use the funds
responsively and in accordance with local demographics; an ability to use the funds cost-
effectively; the commitment of local resources to combat HIV/AIDS, and members on the
HIV planning council that is inclusive and representative of the population living with HIV



A-110
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




disease. Title I funding is evenly split between formula and supplemental grants. Public and
private nonprofit entities are eligible to receive sub-grants from Title I EMAs.

The CARE Act requires each EMA to establish an HIV Health Services Planning Council
which develops a comprehensive plan for the organization and delivery of health care and
supportive services to people living with HIV/AIDS in its area, along with strategies for
identifying HIV-positive persons not in care and strategies for coordinating services to be
funded with existing prevention and substance abuse treatment services. In addition, the
plan must comply with any local plan regarding the provision of such services to people
living with HIV/AIDS, e.g., Consolidated Plan, HOPWA funding. The Planning Council
identifies and prioritizes funding needs and advises on an effective mechanism to allocate
funds. Planning Council membership must “reflect the local epidemic” and include members
with specific expertise, e.g., health care planning, housing for the homeless, incarcerated
populations, substance abuse and mental health treatment, or represent other CARE Act and
Federal programs. At least 33 percent of Council members must be people living with HIV
who are consumers of CARE Act Title I services.

Ryan White Title I funds are commonly used for supportive services for HOPWA-funded
housing projects.

Title II: Formula grants are awarded to all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands and five newly eligible U.S. Pacific Territories and
Associated Jurisdictions. Most States provide some services directly, while others work
through subcontracts with public or nonprofit entities, and Title II HIV Care Consortia, for
the provision of services. A consortium is an association of public and nonprofit health care
and support service providers and community-based organizations that plans, develops, and
delivers services for people living with HIV disease.) In some limited cases, for-profit entities
are eligible for sub-contracts. Except where ADAP funds are concerned, decisions about the
use of Ryan White Title II funds are made at the local level by the state and/or local consortia.
Many communities receiving both Title I and II funds have one body that serves as both the
HIV Health Services Planning Council and HIV Care Consortia. Eligible sub-grantees of
Ryan White CARE funds include public or nonprofit entities. For-profit entities are eligible
only if they are the sole available providers of quality HIV care in the area.




                                                                                          A-111
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Minimum/Maximum Awards:
Title II: Minimum of 100,000 if state has fewer than 90 estimated living AIDS cases
or $250,000 if state has at least 90 living AIDS cases. (No minimum grant amount for
Territories.)

Average Awards: N/A

Term of Awards: Annual awards

Matching Requirements:
Title I: N/A

Title II: States with more than one percent (1%) of total AIDS cases reported in the U.S.
during the previous two years must contribute a match with their own resources, according to
a formula.

Formula:
Title I formula grants are based on the estimated number of living cases of AIDS over the
most recent 10-year period. Beginning in FY 2004, if accurate and reliable data exist, formula
funds will be based on HIV prevalence -- AIDS cases and HIV infections that have not yet
progressed to AIDS. Title I formula grants have no matching requirements.

Title II formula grants are based on a formula that historically has been based on reported
AIDS cases. Beginning in fiscal year 2004, if accurate and reliable data exist, formula funds
will be based on HIV prevalence -- AIDS cases and HIV infections that have not yet
progressed to AIDS.

Application Process
EMAs and States and Territories are the eligible applicants for formula components of CARE
Act programs. All previous EMAs are can apply for Title I Supplemental project grants. To
determine if you are located in an EMA, see the HRSA/HAB website (www.hab.hrsa.gov
Programs, Title I).



A-112
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Supportive housing sponsors wishing to access CARE Act funds to deliver services in
supportive housing should contact the local and/or state HIV Planning Council or CARE
consortium in charge of Ryan White CARE Act planning and fund allocation processes.
HIV planning councils or consortia typically do needs assessments no less than every three
years; develop plans that address particular service needs (e.g., primary health, substance
abuse and mental health treatment, housing, etc.); prioritize the service needs; outline which
service needs will be addressed by Ryan White funding and which will be addressed by other
funding. Sometimes the Planning Council or consortium issue RFPs or use other competitive
funding mechanisms to allocate the resources for the prioritized service needs to be addressed
by Ryan White funding.

(Tip: Permanent supportive housing sponsors seeking Ryan White Care Act funding for
supportive services should apply under supportive and early intervention services categories,
not under housing assistance categories. Transitional supportive housing sponsors may apply
under housing assistance categories for programmatic and operating costs of their programs)

CFDA Code: 93.914 & 93.917

Authorizing Legislation/statute
Public Health Service Act, Title XXVI, Parts A and B, as amended, Public Law 106-345, Ryan
White Care Act Amendments of 2000.

Regulations/guidelines
PHS Grants Policy Statement, DHHS (OASH) Publication No. 94-50,000 (Rev.) April
1, 1994. Program guidelines and instructions are included in the application kit. HHS has
developed a series of public policies that provide further guidance on allowable use of funds,
including HAB Policy 99-02 detailing eligible housing-related costs.

Additional Resources
• “Housing is Health Care: A Guide to Implementing the HIV/AIDS Bureau (HAB) Ryan
  White CARE Act Housing Policy”, funded by U.S. Department of Health and Human
  Services Health Resources and Services Administration, HIV/AIDS Bureau, with John
  Snow, Inc. and AIDS Housing of Washington. www.hab.hrsa.gov/tools/guidance/
  housing.htm



                                                                                         A-113
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• AIDS Housing of Washington (AHW), www.aidshousing.org, In particular, “Financing
  AIDS Housing”, “Ryan White CARE Act and Housing Assistance Fact Sheet”, “HIV/AIDS
  Housing Solutions” on the Resources/Resource Library page of the website.




A-114
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Tenant-based vouchers increase affordable housing choices for very low-income families.
Families with a tenant-based voucher choose and lease safe, decent, and affordable privately-
owned rental housing by providing a subsidy making up the difference between a household’s
ability to pay and a maximum rent. The maximum rent that the voucher may pay is established
by HUD which publishes annual Fair Market Rent schedules in the Federal Register.

Administration
The administration of the rental assistance is by the Public Housing Authority (PHA) which
is a branch of the EDA in Riverside County. PHAs receive vouchers by applying to HUD in
response to notices of funding availability (NOFAs) published in the Federal Register. Each
NOFA identifies allocation areas, amount of funds available per area, and the selection criteria
for rating and ranking applications.

Eligibility for Tenant-based Voucher Assistance
Eligibility for voucher assistance is limited to very low-income households (i.e., individuals
and families with incomes below 50 percent of area median income) and a few specific
categories of families with incomes up to 80 percent of the area median income. The higher-
income families include those that are already assisted under the 1937 U.S. Housing Act,
such as families physically displaced by public housing demolition and owners opting out of
project-based Section 8 housing assistance payments (HAP) contracts. Eligibility criteria and
verification of income procedures

Identifying Appropriate Housing Units
It is the responsibility of each household awarded a voucher to identify a unit that best meets
its needs. Units must meet minimum housing quality standards and the rent to be charged
must be reasonable based on market comparables. If the household and the unit are deemed
eligible, the PHA executes a HAP contract with the property owner which authorizes the
PHA to make subsidy payments on behalf of the tenant. Households are permitted to move
to another unit under this program (within limits established by the PHA).




                                                                                          A-115
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Assistance Levels
The PHA pays the owner the difference between 30 percent of adjusted family income
and a PHA determined payment standard or the gross rent for the unit, whichever is lower.
The family may choose a unit with a higher rent than the payment standard and pay the
difference to the owner.




A-116
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The SRO Program provides rental assistance for homeless persons in connection with the
moderate rehabilitation of SRO dwellings. SRO housing contains units for occupancy by one
person. These units may contain food preparation or sanitary facilities, or both.

The Single Room Occupancy (SRO) program is authorized by Section 441 of the McKinney-
Vento Homeless Assistance Act and the regulations can be found at 24 CFR Part 882. Under
the program, HUD enters into Annual Contributions Contracts with public housing agencies
(PHAs) in connection with the moderate rehabilitation of residential properties that, when
rehabilitation is completed, will contain multiple single room dwelling units. These PHAs
make Section 8 rental assistance payments to participating owners (i.e., landlords) on behalf
of homeless individuals who rent the rehabilitated dwellings. The rental assistance payments
cover the difference between a portion of the tenant’s income (normally 30 percent) and the
unit’s rent, which must be within the fair market rent (FMR) established by HUD.

Rental assistance for SRO units is provided for a period of 10 years. Owners are
compensated for the cost of some of the rehabilitation (as well as the other costs of owning
and maintaining the property) through the rental assistance payments. To be eligible for
assistance, a unit must receive a minimum of $3,000 of rehabilitation, including its prorated
share of work to be accomplished on common areas or systems, to meet housing quality
standards (HQS).

Assistance provided under the SRO program is designed to bring more standard SRO
units into the local housing supply and to use those units to assist INDIVIDUALS leave
homelessness for permanent affordable housing. While access to supportive social services
is encouraged, there is no requirement (as with the Shelter Plus Care Program) that the
residents participate in rehabilitative activities. The SRO program is therefore appropriate for
persons who are either resistant to services, but interested in accessing permanent housing,
or for those whose primary barrier to housing is low-income. The SRO units might be in a
rundown hotel, a “Y”, an old school, or even in a large abandoned home. One strategy has
been to undertake an adaptive reuse of an underutilized property.

                                                                                          A-117
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The availability of a ten-year housing assistance payments (HAP) contract makes this an
important resource for rehabilitation. Long-term HAPs allow for the amortization of debt and
provide confidence to investors in Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) properties that
the property will provide a positive cash flow over its initial 15-year compliance period.

The application for rental assistance is included in the Continuum of Care application
submitted to HUD. Eligible applicants are Public Housing Authorities and non-profit
organizations.




A-118
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The Shelter Plus Care Program provides rental assistance for hard-to-serve homeless persons with
disabilities in connection with supportive services funded from sources outside the program.
• Shelter Plus Care (S+C) is a program designed to provide housing and supportive services
  on a long-term basis for homeless persons with disabilities, (primarily those with serious
  mental illness, chronic problems with alcohol and/or drugs, and acquired immunodeficiency
  syndrome (AIDS) or related diseases) and their families who are living in places not intended
  for human habitation (e.g., streets) or in emergency shelters. The program allows for a variety
  of housing choices, and a range of supportive services funded by other sources, in response to
  the needs of the hard-to-reach homeless population with disabilities.

Program grants are used for the provision of rental assistance payments through four
components:
• Tenant-based Rental Assistance (TRA);
• Sponsor-based Rental Assistance (SRA);
• Project-based Rental Assistance with (PRAW) or without rehabilitation (PRA);
• Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program for Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Dwellings.

The supportive services are a required match and may be funded by other Federal, State, or
local sources, as well as private sources. Nearly all supportive social services count toward the
match requirement. Match is accounted for on an aggregate basis meaning that the there does
not need to be a one-to-one correlation between the rental assistance provided to a particular
program participant and the level of services he receives. The amount of grant funds is
determined by the number of units multiplied by the Fair Market Rent times the term of the
grant. Tenant-based, Sponsor-based, and Project-based assistance without rehabilitation are
awarded five-year terms; Project-based assistance and the Section 8 for SRO components are
awarded 10-year terms. Project-based and Section 8 for SRO components require a minimum
of $3,000 of rehabilitation per unit to prepare it for occupancy. All rehabilitation must be
completed within 12 months of grant execution. The costs of rehabilitation must be obtained
from sources other than the grant.

A description of tenant-based voucher assistance can be found in this section.



                                                                                               A-119
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Program Description
The Special Needs Financing Program offers low interest rate financing for the
development of rental housing to serve a broad range of special needs tenants in need of
supportive services. Loan types include bridge, permanent, or Loan to Lender and can be
used for new construction or acquisition/rehabilitation.



• Available to non-profit and public agency sponsors. This program is intended for housing
organizations that target special needs populations and supply supportive services. Special
needs projects may include mixed income tenants (as appropriate) for the target population

Loan Amount:
Negotiable. Loan funds must be used for the real estate component of the project, and not for
direct services.


Fees (subject to change)
Application Fee:                 $500, due at time of application submittal
Origination Fee:                 One percent (1%) of the loan amount, due prior to the
CalHFA                           Board Meeting
Credit Enhancement Fee:          Included in the interest rate

Rate & Terms (subject to change)
Fixed rate, fully amortizing; five to 30 year terms. Interest rate is typically three percent (3%)
or less, depending on several factors, including the number of special needs tenants, the
percent of very low income tenants served, and the financial need of the project. There must
be a clear link between the income level of the tenants, the cost of the special needs services
provided, and the amount of subsidy that CalHFA must commit to bring the interest rate
down to a level that supports the project financially.




A-120
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Subordinate Financing
Subordinate loans or grants are encouraged from local government and third parties to
achieve project feasibility. All loans, leases, development and regulatory agreements must be
subordinate to CalHFA financing.

Occupancy Requirements
Thirty-five percent of the units are required to be restricted to special needs households
earning 50 percent or less of the county median income (as adjusted by family size). Projects
that target either 60 percent or 100 percent special needs tenants may receive lower interest
rates (two percent (2%) and one percent (1%) respectively) from CalHFA

Due Diligence
All of the listed due-diligence efforts are required and are at the borrower’s expense:
• Property appraisal will be ordered by CalHFA;
• a market study may be required
• Phase I, seismic review and other studies may be required at CalHFA’s discretion
• Physical Needs Assessment for rehabilitation projects
• Construction period inspection fees are estimated at $1,500 per month
• Design standards must meet CalHFA’s goal to provide safe and sanitary special needs
  housing
• Service agreement with a qualified service provider with first year’s service financing
  secured

Special Needs Populations
To receive assistance under the Special Needs Financing Program, the proposed project needs
to serve a disabled population or other population that requires special or supportive services
to live independently. The Agency reserves the right to review and approve all “special needs”
populations for applicability for this funding program.




                                                                                            A-121
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Services & Asset Management
The borrower must provide a clearly articulated service delivery program and property
management plan. The services provided must be appropriate to the special needs
population, and designed to assist the special needs residents to live independently. The
borrower must have commitments for one-year of service funding at permanent loan closing.
The Borrower will be required to provide the services for 10 years. In addition, the borrower
and affiliate organizations will be scrutinized both for their ability to deliver high-quality
services to the tenants and to successfully develop and manage the real estate
component of the project.

Questions
Questions regarding the Special Needs Financing Program can be directed to CalHFA’s
Multifamily Programs Division:
Kathy Weremiuk, Loan Officer, Multifamily Programs
100 Corporate Pointe, Suite 250, Culver City, CA 90230
Phone: 310.342.1250 Email address: kweremiuk@calhfa.ca.gov




A-122
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The Supportive Housing Program is designed to develop supportive housing and services
that will allow homeless persons to live as independently as possible. Eligible applicants are
States, units of local government, other governmental entities such as PHAs, and private
nonprofits. The Supportive Housing Program Desk Guide highlights key aspects of the
Supportive Housing Program (SHP).

The Supportive Housing Program is authorized by Title IV, Subtitle C, of the McKinney-
Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1987, as amended. It is designed to promote, as part of
a local Continuum of Care strategy, the development of supportive housing and supportive
services to assist homeless persons in the transition from homelessness and to enable them to
live as independently as possible.

Assistance in the Supportive Housing Program is provided to help homeless persons meet
three overall goals:
• Achieve residential stability,
• Increase their skill levels and/or incomes, and
• Obtain greater self-determination (i.e., more influence over decisions that affect their lives).

Specific performance measures for each of these three goals must be established based on
the needs and characteristics of the homeless population to be served. Grant recipients are
required to monitor their clients’ progress in meeting their performance measures on an
ongoing basis. In addition to record keeping and evaluation that grantees may conduct for
their own purposes, HUD requires record keeping and annual progress reports. The annual
progress report includes questions that ask grantees to report on their progress in meeting
performance measures. Grantees are expected to make changes in their program or adjust
performance measures in response to ongoing evaluation of their progress.

Program Description
The Supportive Housing Program (SHP) is one of three sources collectively known as
Continuum of Care funding (the other two are the Shelter Plus Care and Section 8 Moderate


                                                                                            A-123
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Rehabilitation SRO Programs). These programs are also often referred to as HUD McKinney
funding or Targeted Homeless Assistance Programs.

The SHP program provides grants to build, operate and provide supportive social services
in supportive housing (both permanent and transitional) that enable homeless persons to
live as independently as possible. The program operates under a statutory directive that
30 percent of all funds must go to permanent supportive housing thus the majority of new
projects funded with this source in the recent past have been (and will likely continue to be)
permanent supportive housing.




Eligible Target Populations:
Only homeless persons may receive assistance from SHP-funded projects. The definition
of homelessness that applies to SHP funding may be found under the McKinney-Vento Act
section.

Eligible Projects/Programs:
• Transitional housing providing stays (generally of up to 24 months).
• Permanent housing for homeless persons and families with disabilities.
• Safe Havens, defined as projects with a 25 person maximum occupancy, serving hard-to-
  serve (i.e. chronic) homeless persons who have severe mental illness, are on the streets
  and have been unable and unwilling to participate in supportive services. Safe havens must
  provide 24-hour residence for an unspecified duration (i.e. no time limit on length of stay)
  and must provide private or semi-private accommodations.
• Supportive Services Only programs designed to address the special needs of homeless
  persons, where the sponsor is only providing the services.
• Innovative Supportive Housing programs or projects that are outside the scope of the four
  project types listed above.
• Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS). SHP funds may be used to pay the
  costs of implementing and operating a computerized HMIS. These funds may not be used
  for planning purposes.



A-124
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Eligible Use of Funds and Use Restrictions:
• New construction (up to a maximum of $400,000, regardless of where the project is
  located).
• Acquisition and/or rehabilitation (up to a maximum of $400,000 for both activities
  combined, regardless of where the project is located).
• Real property leasing (for either social service offices or residential units).
• Operation of housing facilities (with a 25 percent cash match requirement).
• Supportive services (with a 20 percent cash match requirement).
• HMIS activities.
• Administration (capped at five percent (5%)).

Eligible Applicants/Sponsors:
Eligible applicants apply through the local Continuum of Care (CoC) process. Applicants
may be:
• Non-profit organizations
• States
• Local governments
• Other government entities, including Public Housing Agencies (PHAs)

Only a locally constituted Continuum of Care may apply to HUD for CoC funding, which
includes requests for SHP, S+C and the Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation for SRO program.
The CoC funding process is described in the section titled Continuum of Care Programs,
Planning and Systems Change.




Minimum/Maximum Awards: N/A

Average Awards: N/A




                                                                                       A-125
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Term of Awards:
Initial awards for operating and/or services, leasing and HMIS may be two- or three-year
terms. The term of renewal grants is determined by the CoC based upon available funding.
Most CoCs renew grants for one-year terms.

Matching Requirements:
• Development: 1:1 (i.e. $100 percent)
• Operating: 25 percent of costs must be matched by another source
• Services: 20 percent of costs must be matched by another source
• Use of leveraged resources is among the criteria used to score the overall CoC plan. CoCs
  are strongly encouraged to seek out mainstream resources to support activities within their
  housing and service system.

Formula:
HUD allocates for each CoC a certain “pro rata need” funding amount. The pro rata need
is calculated based on a formula that uses the same indices of need as are used in the CDBG
program (including such factors as poverty and poor housing conditions). The pro rata need
is adjusted to help communities meet the burden of renewing existing SHP grants. In the past
years, HUD has also added incentives to create new permanent supportive by adding “bonus”
funds to each jurisdiction’s pro rata need.

Application Process
Sponsors must apply for funding through their local Continuum of Care process.
Each year HUD issues a NOFA announcing the availability of Continuum of Care funding.
CoCs are required to conduct a community-based planning process to determine goals and
strategies for addressing homelessness and priorities for funding for the coming year. The
CoC also is required to conduct a broadly publicized application process whereby individual
project sponsors submit proposal to the CoC body, which rates and ranks all applications
received. The CoC then submits its CoC Plan along with a ranked set of funding applications
to HUD. HUD awards funding to projects in the order they have been ranked by the CoC,
up the community’s adjusted pro rata need amount.




A-126
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




CFDA Code: 14.235

Authorizing Legislation/statute
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1987, Title IV, Subtitle C, as amended.

Regulations/guidelines
24 CFR Part 583
www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/homeless/rulesandregs/regulations/583shp/index.cfm

SHP Desk Guide:
www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/homeless/library/shp/shpdeskguide/index.cfm




                                                                                       A-127
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Legal Authority
MHP was established by SB 121, Statutes of 1999 (Alarcón), which created Chapter 6.7,
commencing with Section 50675, of the Health and Safety Code.

Program Summary
MHP is a streamlined, omnibus financing program for affordable multifamily housing
developments. It provides funds to cover development (capital) costs only, and cannot be
used for services or operating subsidies. Applicants may apply for funding for (1) projects
containing Supportive Housing units only; or (2) projects containing Supportive Housing
and Non-Supportive Housing units (mixed projects). Supportive Housing and Non
Supportive Housing units are defined below. The Supportive Housing units are funded from
the Supportive Housing funding component of MHP and the Non-Supportive Housing units
are funded from the “General” MHP funding component. The MHP “General” funds may be
made available in amounts sufficient to fund the Non-Supportive Housing units that qualify
for an MHP loan award.

“Supportive Housing Units” means units offered as permanent housing linked to supportive
services where occupancy is restricted to households that both (1) are homeless or at risk of
homelessness and (2) include a disabled adult.

“Non-Supportive Housing Units” means other housing units, including Special Needs
Population units (also defined below), in a qualified Supportive Housing project.

“Special Needs Population” Units are units restricted to certain groups, as described in
Section 7301(r), that may not meet all of the qualifications required to occupy Supportive
Housing Units, but who still need services linked to their housing, such as disabled
households who are not homeless.

To be eligible for a mixed population award, at least 35 percent of the units (and not less than
five units) in the proposed development must be Supportive Housing Units. Special Needs




A-128
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Population projects that do not meet the 35 percent test may apply under the separate MHP
General NOFA.

Eligible Project Sponsors
Sponsors and borrowing entities may be organized on a for-profit or not-for-profit basis.
Any individual, public agency or private entity capable of entering into a contract is
eligible to apply, provided that they or their principals have successfully developed at least
one affordable housing project. The Department will evaluate all Sponsors, including the
roles of any general partner(s) in a limited partnership, to determine if the Sponsor’s roles,
responsibilities, and benefits in the project development and operations are commensurate
with activities normally undertaken or controlled by project developers and owners. The
Sponsor will be reviewed to determine if adequate staffing levels exist to undertake and
complete the project. The same criteria will be applied to evaluate Sponsor experience
for purpose of awarding points. Sponsors of projects where at least 70 percent of the units
consist of Supportive Housing units or Special Needs Population units are exempt from the
requirement for previous development experience under limited conditions.

Sponsors must have site control in the name of the Sponsor or an entity controlled by the
Sponsor as defined in Uniform Multifamily Regulations (UMR) Section 8303.

Eligible Uses of Funds
MHP funds will be provided as permanent financing only, and may be used to take out
construction loans used to cover normal project development (capital) costs, as detailed in
Section 7304. MHP funds may be used to capitalize a project operating reserve account up
to the limit required under UMR Section 8308. Program funds may not be used for the cost
of supportive services, although Department approved costs of on-site supportive services
coordination may be treated as a project operating cost, payable from operating income.
MHP funds must be attributable to the costs of “restricted” units (MHP units and units
subject to a long-term regulatory agreement with occupancy and rent restrictions similar to
those of MHP) or to the costs of facilities used for childcare, after-school care, and social
service integrally linked to the restricted units.




                                                                                           A-129
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Eligible Projects
Projects must qualify as rental housing developments, as defined in UMR Section 8301, and
meet the requirements of Sections 7302 and 7342. For example, projects must contain five
or more dwelling units and contain Supportive Housing units equal to the greater of five
units or 35 percent of the total project units. Supportive Housing units must be restricted
to households with incomes not exceeding the greater of 30 percent Area Median Income
(AMI) or State Median Income (SMI). Supportive Housing units must be used for permanent
housing only.

Non Supportive Housing units may be used for either permanent or transitional housing.

Projects receiving nine percent (9%) low income housing tax credits (LIHTC) are ineligible.

Households Eligible for Supportive Housing Units
As defined in Section 7341, to be eligible for Supportive Housing units, households must
be homeless or at-risk of homelessness, and include a disabled adult as specified below.
Homeless or at-risk of homelessness means:
1. moving from an emergency shelter; or
2. moving from transitional housing; or
3. currently homeless, meaning:
  a. an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence; or
  b. an individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is:
1. a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living
   accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters, and transitional housing
   for the mentally ill); or
2. an institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be
   institutionalized; or
3. a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping
   accommodation for human beings; or
4. at-risk of homelessness, meaning:
c. households with incomes at or below the greater of 20 percent of SMI or AMI with no
   rental subsidy available to the household ; or


A-130
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




d. households with incomes above 20 percent but not exceeding 30 percent of the greater of
  SMI or AMI who:
  i. face immediate eviction and have been unable to identify a subsequent residence; or
  ii. face imminent release from an institution (i.e., jail, hospital or foster care system)
      where other housing placement resources are not available; or
  iii. reside in an overcrowded setting (more than two persons per living/sleeping area) in
       which the household does not hold a lease; or reside in substandard housing subject to
      a current official vacation notice; or
  iv. pay more than 50 percent of income in housing costs.

A disabled adult is a person 18 years of age or older, or an emancipated minor with a
qualifying disability. Qualifying disabilities are:
1. Mental illness; or
2. HIV or AIDS; or
3. Substance abuse; or
4. Developmental disability; or
5. Long-term chronic health condition that qualifies them for:
  a. Eligibility under either of two Medicaid Waiver programs, the Multipurpose Senior
      Services Program or the Assisted Living Waiver Pilot Program (or its successor);
  b. Eligibility for 20 or more personal care hours per week under the In-Home Supportive
     Services Program; or
  c. Eligibility for services under the Program of All Inclusive Care for the Elderly.

Supportive Service and Property Management Requirements
Projects shall be designed to provide affordable housing with access to an array of services
and amenities for tenants whose ability to live independently would be improved by the
availability of such services and amenities. Supportive Housing projects shall be linked to on-
site or off-site services that assist the tenant to: retain the housing, improve his or her health,
and to maximize his or her ability to live and where possible, work in the community.




                                                                                               A-131
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




As part of the MHP application, Sponsors must submit a supportive services plan
documenting that the project will ensure the availability of services that meet the needs of
the target population served by the project, along with a line-item budget for the supportive
services, itemizing all expenses and indicating the sources, amounts, and status (i.e., proposed
or committed) of supportive service funds. The primary service provider for the project must
demonstrate a minimum of 24 months experience in the provision of services to the targeted
population, and a successful history of securing funds for similar activities. The property
manager must also have a minimum of 24 months experience in managing a Supportive
Housing or Special Needs Population housing project that would qualify as a rental housing
development pursuant to UMR Section 8301(o).

Maximum Loan Amounts
The maximum loan per project is $7,000,000. The maximum loan amount per “restricted” unit
is a function of unit size, location, and affordability level. The minimum loan per restricted
unit in Riverside County is $45,000. The per-unit loan limits for Riverside County follow.

                            Riverside County MHP Loan Limits
Income Level                    Efficiency 1 BR            2 BR        3 BR         4+ BR
60% Income Level                $45,000   $45,000         $45,000     $45,000      $45,000
55% Income Level                $52,202      $52,779      $54,363     $55,804      $56,956
50% Income Level                $59,549      $60,557      $63,726     $66,607      $69,056
45% Income Level                $66,751      $68,336      $73,089     $77,411      $81,012
40% Income Level (MHP A)        $73,954      $76,114      $82,308     $88,070      $92,968
35% Income Level (MHP B)        $81,300      $83,893      $91,671     $98,874      $105,068
30% Income Level (MHP C)        $88,502      $91,671      $101,034    $109,677     $117,024

Loan Terms and Security
Loans have a 55-year term, and bear simple interest at the rate of three percent (3%) per
year. For the first 30 years, annual payments will be required in the amount of 0.42 percent
(0.42%) of the outstanding principal loan balance. The annual payment amount for the
next 25 years will be set by the Department in year 30, and will be the minimum amount
necessary to cover the Department’s monitoring costs. Unpaid principal and accrued and
deferred interest will be due at the end of the loan term.



A-132
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Summary
HUD provides funding to nonprofit organizations to develop rental housing with the
availability of supportive services for very low-income adults with disabilities, and provides
rent subsidies for the projects to help make them affordable.

Purpose
The Section 811 program allows persons with disabilities to live as independently as
possible in the community by increasing the supply of rental housing with the availability
of supportive services. The program also provides project rental assistance, which covers
the difference between the HUD-approved operating costs of the project and the tenants’
contribution toward rent. The program is similar to Supportive Housing for the Elderly
(Section 202).

Type of Assistance
HUD provides interest-free capital advances to nonprofit sponsors to help them finance the
development of rental housing such as independent living projects, condominium units and
small group homes with the availability of supportive services for persons with disabilities.
The capital advance can finance the construction, rehabilitation, or acquisition with or
without rehabilitation of supportive housing. The advance does not have to be repaid as long
as the housing remains available for very low-income persons with disabilities for at least 40
years.
HUD also provides project rental assistance; this covers the difference between the HUD-
approved operating cost of the project and the amount the residents pay--usually 30 percent
of adjusted income. The initial term of the project rental assistance contract is five years and
can be renewed if funds are available.

The available program funds for a fiscal year are allocated to HUD’s local offices according to
factors established by the Department. In Fiscal year 2006, the Department allocated just



                                                                                          A-133
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




under $5,000,000 to projects within the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles area HUD. This
funding was anticipated to result in the development of 45 units of housing for disabled
persons, an investment by HUD of approximately $110,000 per unit.

Each project must have a supportive services plan. The appropriate State or local agency
reviews a potential sponsor’s application to determine if the plan is well designed to meet the
needs of persons with disabilities and must certify to the same. Services may vary with the
target population but could include case management, training in independent living skills
and assistance in obtaining employment. However, residents cannot be required to accept
any supportive service as a condition of occupancy.

Eligible Grantees
Nonprofit organizations with a Section 501(c) (3) tax exemption from the IRS can apply to
develop a Section 811 project if they can, among other requirements, submit a resolution that
they will provide a minimum capital investment equal to 0.5 percent (0.5%) of the capital
advance amount, up to a maximum of $10,000.

Eligible Customers
In order to live in Section 811 housing, a household which may consist of a single qualified
person must be very low-income (within 50 percent of the median income for the area) and
at least one member must be 18 years old or older and have a disability, such as a physical or
developmental disability or chronic mental illness.

Application
Applicants must submit an application for a capital advance, including a Request for Fund
Reservation (Form HUD-92016-CA) and other information in response to a Notice of
Funding Availability (NOFA) published in the Federal Register each year. Applications must
be submitted to the local HUD field office with jurisdiction over the area where the proposed
project will be located. Those selected for funding must meet basic program requirements,
including nonprofit status, financial commitment, and a certification from the appropriate
State or local agency that the supportive services are well designed to meet the needs of the
intended residents. Awards are usually announced in September.




A-134
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Technical Guidance
This program is authorized by Section 811 of the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990
(P.L. 101-625) as amended by the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992
(P.L. 102-550), the Rescission Act (P.L. 104-19) and the American Homeownership and
Opportunity Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-569). Program regulations are in 24 CFR Part 891. To
learn more about the Section 811 program, see Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons
with Disabilities (HUD Handbook 4571.2) and Supportive Housing for Persons with
Disabilities, Conditional Commitment to Final Closing (HUD Handbook 4571.4) which is
available on HUD clips.




                                                                                       A-135
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Administrative Agencies

Federal:
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration (SAMHSA), Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, (301) 443-
8453, www.samhsa.gov or www.samhsa.gov/grants/grants.html

Type Of Assistance
Competitive grants with one third of TCE funds for applicants within states and communities
with no active TCE grants at time awards are made.

Program Description
Competitive program to expand or enhance substance abuse treatment capacity in local
communities. The Targeted Capacity Expansion (TCE) program is designed to address gaps
in treatment capacity by supporting rapid and strategic responses to demands for alcohol
and drug treatment services and/or innovative solutions to unmet needs in communities with
serious, emerging substance abuse problems.

Because States receive substantial funding for substance abuse treatment services via the
Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) Block Grant, SAMHSA/CSAT uses
TCE to target specific local needs that address national treatment priorities and has an
interest in funding projects that are consistent with SAMHSA priorities, especially: co-
occurring disorders, closing the substance abuse treatment gap, homelessness, aging and
criminal justice; and that are consistent with SAMHSA cross-cutting principles: evidence-
based treatments, collaboration across community agencies, recovery, cultural competence,
community and faith-based programs, violence prevention, and cost-effectiveness.




A-136
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Two of the examples listed that are consistent with these priorities and principles are:
substance abuse treatment and related support services for homeless persons and substance
abuse treatment and related supported services for the elderly and individuals with physical
and emotional disabilities.




Eligible Target Populations:
Not specific as such however indicates that SAMHSA is interested in funding projects that
are consistent with its priorities. (See above.)

Eligible Projects/Programs:
In addition to basic eligibility requirements, provision of direct substance abuse treatment
must be part of the proposed project and at least one provider of substance abuse treatment
services must be identified within the proposal to provide them. TCE grants will not be
awarded to applicants that propose only to provide screening, referral or case management
when these services are not clearly and specifically linked to treatment services. The TCE
program must provide treatment in outpatient, day treatment or intensive outpatient, or
residential programs. If the applicant organization is not a direct provider of substance
abuse treatment services, the applicant must document a commitment from an experienced,
licensed substance abuse treatment provider to participate in the proposed project.

Eligible Use of Funds & Use Restrictions:
Substance abuse treatment service expansion and/or enhancement. Expansion of substance
abuse treatment services by increasing the availability of treatment services and access to
treatment for a larger number of clients. Enhancement of services by improving the quality or
intensity of treatment services.
• No more than 15 percent of the total grant award may be used for developing the
  infrastructure necessary for expansion of services.
• No more than 20 percent of the total grant award may be used for evaluation and data
  collection, including GPRA and incentives for completing the evaluation.




                                                                                           A-137
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Eligible Applicants/Sponsors:
Local governments and federally recognized Tribal authorities and their major organizational
units with broad planning, policy, and service coordination responsibilities. Hospitals,
community health centers, school systems, or court systems are not eligible. Community-
based organizations are not eligible to apply directly for these grants, even if providing
services under contract to a unit of government. However, CSAT encourages local
government applicants to develop partnerships with these organizations for the provision of
services as part of their proposed TCE projects.

Applicants must meet two additional criteria:
(1) All direct providers of substance abuse services involved in the proposed project must be
    in compliance with all requirements for licensing, accreditation or certification.
(2) All direct providers of substance abuse treatment services must have been providing
    treatment services for a minimum of two years prior to the date of application. At least
    one substance abuse treatment provider must meet the two-year requirement within the
    jurisdiction covered in the application.




Minimum/Maximum Awards: Maximum: FY 2003, $500,000 in total costs per year.

Average Awards: N/A

Term of Awards:
Grants are awarded for up to three years. Annual continuation awards depend on the
availability of funds and progress achieved.

Matching Requirements: N/A

Formula:
N/A, however, CSAT reserves up to one third of TCE funds for applicants within States and
communities that have no active TCE grants at the time awards are made.




A-138
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Application Process
SAMHSA anticipates an annual NOFA with two submission/review cycles per year (in
January and September)

Authorizing Legislation/statute: Public Health Services Act, Section 509

Regulations/guidelines
45 CFR Parts 74 and 92; PHS Grants Policy Statement; Last published Guidance for
Applicants: No. PA 03-001




                                                                                       A-139
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Overview
The State of California permits the issuance of Qualified 501(c)(3) Bonds (the “Bonds”)
to finance the acquisition, construction, installation, expansion or rehabilitation of land,
buildings, and equipment to be owned by a nonprofit organization as described under
Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code of 1986 (including religious, charitable,
scientific, testing for public safety, literary or educational purposes). The interest on the
Bonds is exempt from federal income taxes; therefore, a nonprofit organization can finance
capital projects at a lower interest than conventional financing. The Bonds are limited
obligations to the conduit issuer, payable solely from revenues or other funds provided by the
nonprofit organization.

A particular issuer, California Statewide Communities Development Agency (CSCDA) can
assist nonprofit organizations seeking to finance projects from $1.0 million to $5.0 million
through a specialized program it has developed, its Small Issue Public Benefit Program.
The California Communities Program Manager will work with the nonprofit organization
to privately place the tax-exempt note with a qualified institutional buyer. The Small Issue
Public Benefit Program advantages include low-cost access to tax-exempts markets at a
fixed-rate and flexible terms. Since its inception, CSCDA has issued more than $10 billion in
Qualified 501(c)(3) bonds for more than 250 nonprofit organizations throughout California
including:
• Hospital and mental health facilities
• Private colleges, universities, and K-12 schools
• Student dormitories
• Multifamily housing facilities
• Assisted living facilities
• Substance abuse centers
• Museums




A-140
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The State requires that requires that each nonprofit applicant and the proposed project
demonstrate a clear public benefit to the community in which the project will reside.
Examples of public benefits include (but are not limited to): charitable care or benevolence
programs for the indigent, tuition assistance, non-discriminatory enrollment policies, and
community outreach (i.e. health and wellness programs, grants and donations, community
service initiatives, open campus during non-operating hours).




                                                                                         A-141
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The California Debt Limit Allocation Committee (CDLAC) is a three-member body
comprised of the State Treasurer as Chair, the Governor, and the State Controller. CDLAC
was created in 1985 by Governor proclamation in response to the 1984 Tax Reform Act,
which imposed an annual limit on the dollar amount of tax-exempt private activity bonds that
may be issued in a state. Private activity bonds included student loan bonds and industrial
development bonds (including exempt facility bonds, small-issue industrial development
bonds, and bonds for industrial parks). The annual limit was derived by multiplying the state’s
population by $150, resulting in a $3.8 billion ceiling at that time. The Act also required each
state to designate an entity to allocate the state’s ceiling among various state and local issuers.

The 1986 Tax Reform Act made major changes to the allocation of private activity bond
authority. It reduced the annual volume cap to $75 per capita in 1986 and 1987 and $50 per
capita thereafter. The Act also brought bonds for single-family and multifamily housing under
the state ceiling. As a result, a new Governor’s proclamation was issued in 1986 re-affirming
CDLAC as the state’s sole entity responsible for allocating the annual ceiling, and expressly
uthorizing CDLAC to establish procedures and reserve amounts of the ceiling for certain
purposes or issuers. In 1987, the California State Legislature statutorily established CDLAC
by enacting Chapter 943.

The 1998 Omnibus Budget Act raised the volume cap on private activity bonds to $75 per
capita or a minimum of $225 million. However, the increase would take place incrementally
over the years 2003 through 2007.

The Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of 2000 accelerates the scheduled increase
contained in the 1998 Act by raising the volume cap to $62.50 per capita of the state’s
population or $187.5 million, whichever is higher, for calendar year 2001 and $75 per capita
or $225 million, whichever is higher, in calendar year 2002 and thereafter. The 2000 Act also
allows for the volume cap to be indexed for inflation starting in calendar year 2003

Federal
The purpose of CDLAC is to implement Section 1301 of the Federal Tax Reform Act of 1986
and Section 146 of the Internal Revenue Code which impose a limit on the amount of tax-



A-142
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




exempt private activity bonds which a state may issue in a calendar year (i.e. the annual state
ceiling). Section 146(d), as amended by the Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of 2000,
permits a state to set its annual ceiling at $187,500,000 or an amount equal to $62.50 per
capita of its population, whichever is higher, in calendar year 2001. In calendar year 2002 and
thereafter, the ceiling will rise to $225,000,000 or an amount equal to $75 per capita, whichever
is higher. Beginning in calendar year 2003, the ceiling will be adjusted annually for inflation.

The actions of CDLAC are fundamentally defined and limited by federal tax law. Federal
tax law defines the term “private activity bond”; limits the volume of private activity bonds
which a state may issue in a calendar year; defines the types of programs and projects which
qualify for tax-exempt bond financing under the volume cap; and specifies recordkeeping
requirements.

State
CDLAC was statutorily created by Chapter 943, Statutes of 1987, in response to the 1986
Federal Tax Reform Act. California Government Code Section 8869.80 et seq. defines
CDLAC’s responsibilities as follows:
• Set the Annual State Ceiling: CDLAC is required to establish the state ceiling as soon as
  is practicable after the start of each calendar year.
• Allocate the State Ceiling: CDLAC is granted the sole authority for allocating the annual
  ceiling.
• Other Administrative Functions: CDLAC is authorized to prepare forms, establish
  procedures, set priorities, require a performance deposit, assess fees, and perform other
  administrative functions as necessary. Additionally, in establishing CDLAC the Legislature
  emphasized the substantial public benefit of promoting housing for lower income families
  and individuals and of preserving and rehabilitating existing governmental assisted housing
  for lower income families and individuals.



State and local governmental agencies and joint powers authorities can issue tax-exempt
housing revenue bonds. These bonds assist developers of multifamily rental housing units to
acquire land and construct new units or purchase and rehabilitate existing units. The tax-




                                                                                             A-143
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




exempt bonds lower the interest rate paid by the developers. The developers in turn produce
market rate and affordable rental housing for low and very low-income households by
reducing rental rates to these individuals and families. Projects that receive an award of bond
authority have the right to apply for non-competitive four percent (4%) tax credits. www.
treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac

Bond authority for Rental Projects is awarded to three sub-pools: the General Pool (Projects
having more than 50 percent of total units designated as Restricted Rental Units); the Mixed
Income Pool (Projects having 50 percent or fewer of total units designated as Restricted
Rental Units); and the Rural Project Pool (Projects located in a rural area as defined by
California Health and Safety Code Section 50199.21 but shall not include a Mixed Income
Project).




A-144
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Administrative Agencies

Federal:
• Department of Health and Human Services:
  Administration for Children and Families
  Office of Family Assistance
  (202) 401-5139
  www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/index.htm

California:
• California Department of Social Services:
  California Health and Human Services Agency
  www.dss.cahwnet.gov/cdssweb/california_169.htm

Riverside:
Department of Public Social Services
www.dpss.co.riverside.ca.us/dpss/CalWorks.aspx

Type Of Assistance: Formula

Program Description
In 1996, Congress established the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program
(TANF), creating a flexible block grant that replaced the former cash assistance entitlement
program, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). TANF, called CalWORKS in
California, provides funds that must be matched by the states for income support and a wide
range of service for eligible needy families and individuals.



                                                                                       A-145
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




There are two sources of CalWORKS program spending, each with its own requirements
and restrictions: (1) the federal TANF block grant to the states; and, (2), state of California
spending required to match the Federal block grant called “maintenance of effort” (MOE)
spending. (States must spend 75–80 percent of the fiscal year 1994 state spending level they
had spent under the AFDC program.) TANF and MOE funds are disbursed to subdivisions of
government, including the County of Riverside which administers this program through the
Department of Social Services.

Federal TANF funds are provided to states with different restrictions on use, depending on
what types of benefits are provided. Regulations impose time limits on aid (generally 18
months for a single period of assistance and not more than 60 months in a lifetime for most
welfare recipients) as well as work and child support requirements for any family receiving
benefits from CalWORKS funds. Welfare benefits and Medicaid are de-linked as well.

States are afforded a great deal of flexibility in deciding how to spend TANF funds as long as
the expenditure is reasonably calculated to accomplish a purpose of the TANF program, as
follows:
• assisting needy families so that children can be cared for in their own homes
• reducing dependency of needy parents by promoting job preparation, work and marriage
• preventing out-of-wedlock pregnancies
• encouraging the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.

In general, states have more discretion in spending MOE funds than Federal TANF funds
as follows: state MOE funds may be used for more flexible purposes, but must serve a more
limited pool of TANF-eligible families; Federal TANF funds can serve a broader population,
but may have more restrictions or prohibitions regarding allowable uses. While benefits
provided under the first two TANF purposes are limited to parents and families that meet
the state’s definition of “needy” (defined as financially deprived according to income and
related criteria), Federal TANF funds may be used to provide services that are not considered
“assistance” to a broader population of families (e.g., non-custodial parents). That is, under
certain circumstances states may extend benefits to persons who may not meet the strict
definition of “needy.” Under TANF purposes 3 and 4, states may use Federal TANF funds
to extend benefits that are not considered “assistance” to individuals or family members



A-146
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




regardless of their income or household composition (i.e., who are not “needy”), but who
meet other objective eligibility criteria established by the state.

Regardless of whether Federal TANF or California MOE funds are used to provide
“assistance,” the TANF requirements prevail. When planning to use TANF funds for a
particular service, the State Department of Public Social Services determines whether Federal
or state funds are the most appropriate source for that activity. (For further details on the
definition of “assistance” see the final TANF regulations 45 CFR 260.31.)

Annual TANF block grant allocations to the states are based on federal funding levels from
1994 or 1995 (by choice of the state), when welfare caseloads were much higher. Because
of significantly declining caseloads and fixed funding levels, periodically a number of
states (but not California) have had surplus TANF dollars. These excess funds create new
opportunities to provide a wide range of needed work supports to eligible families, including:
transportation; child care assistance; substance abuse treatment; mental health treatment;
domestic violence counseling; and housing assistance.

As such, CalWORKS can be an important revenue source for housing assistance and services
in supportive housing for homeless families, non-custodial parents, and transition-aged youth,
subject to certain limitations. The goal of assisting homeless populations with supports may
thus be furthered with CalWORKS funding.




Eligible Target Populations:
States determine eligible target populations within Federal guidelines that provide:
• Low-income families who meet the state’s income guidelines, have a minor child living
  with an adult relative in the home, and have not exceeded their five-year lifetime limit for
  receiving assistance (i.e., “needy” families with children.)
• Former recipients of TANF cash assistance (for certain TANF activities)
• Non-custodial parents of TANF-eligible families (for certain TANF activities)
• Non-needy families or individuals (who don’t meet the state’s TANF income level or certain
  other restrictions) for activities related to prevention of out-of-wedlock pregnancy and
  encouragement of the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.


                                                                                        A-147
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




TANF imposes complex requirements regarding the immigration status of TANF recipients.
(Consult PRWORA.)

Homeless services providers serving CalWORKS-eligible families and/or non-custodial
parents of CalWORKS families who have multiple barriers to work or transition-aged youth
have the best case for getting surplus TANF funds based on their ability to meet fundamental
TANF purposes, i.e., stable affordable housing improves employment outcomes; housing
and services to transition-aged youth to prevent and end homelessness can meet the goal of
preventing out of wedlock births.

Eligible Use of Funds & Use Restrictions:
In addition to cash benefits, CalWORKS permits the use of TANF funds for: job training;
employment services (e.g., job search, job placement, work subsidies, etc.); childcare
assistance (e.g., child care, subsidies, after-school and summer activities, etc.); transportation;
education and training; substance abuse counseling; mental health treatment; non-medical
substance abuse services (e.g., counseling, room and board costs at residential treatment
programs); vocational rehabilitation services, housing/rental assistance (including security
deposits, payments of back rent to prevent evictions, subsidies, loans, etc.); case management
services; and other supportive services in support of TANF’s program purposes. States
also may transfer a limited portion of their assistance grant funds to the Child Care and
Development Block Grant (CCDBG) and the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) Programs.
TANF funds may not be used for capital costs or medical services.

In general, TANF funds and/or state funds used to match them may be used to pay for many
of the services that would be included in a comprehensive system of care for homeless
persons and families. This is particularly the case if the services are designed to help families
participate in welfare to work activities or address barriers to employment like substance
abuse addictions. TANF funds may also be used for some services in projects serving youth
leaving the foster care system. As is usually the case with Federally-funded programs, the
eligible activities and populations (i.e. the funding source) determines what services may be
available to homeless populations. Moreover, CalWORKS funds may also be used for time-
limited assistance with housing operating costs (e.g., rent subsidies) making them appropriate
as a source of operations funding for transitional housing programs.




A-148
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Eligible Applicants/Sponsors:
State governments, Territories, the District of Columbia, and all federally recognized Tribes
in the lower 48 states and 13 specified entities in Alaska are eligible.




Minimum/Maximum Awards: N/A

Average Awards: N/A

Term of Awards: Annual awards

Matching Requirements:
The TANF program has an annual cost-sharing requirement, referred to as “maintenance of
effort” (MOE). Every fiscal year, each state must spend a certain minimum amount of its own
resources to help eligible families in ways that are consistent with the purposes of the TANF
program. The rate is determined by whether the state meets the work participation rates: if
it does, it must match TANF funds with an amount equal to 75 percent of what it spent for
fiscal year 1994 or 1995 (by choice of state) on AFDC and AFDC-related programs; if it does
not, it must provide an 80 percent match.

Formula:
TANF funding is allocated to states based on a formula that matches state spending for AFDC
in fiscal year 1994 or 1995 (by choice of state). (See Matching Requirements above.)

Application Process
States and others that operate TANF programs must develop a State plan that must be
approved by the Department of Health and Human Services. Federal and state matching
funds are generally administered by local government welfare departments.

Supportive housing sponsors serving tenants who are TANF-eligible will, in most instances,
need to advocate at the state and local levels to access TANF funds for services in supportive
housing. The leverage (or “selling point”) for supportive housing sponsors is the comprehensive,
wraparound support provided in supportive housing for people with multiple barriers to work.


                                                                                         A-149
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




California:
California’s TANF program is called CalWORKs. -- California Work Opportunity and
Responsibility to Kids.

CFDA Code: 93.558

Authorizing Legislation/statute
Social Security Act, Title IV, Part A, as amended: Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), Public Law 104-193; Balanced Budget
Act of 1997, Public Law 105-33.

Regulations/guidelines
TANF Final Rule, published in Federal Register on April 12, 1999 (Vol. 64, No. 69). Program
rules for State programs found at 45 CFR Parts 260-265. Tribal TANF Final Rule, published in
Federal Register on February 18, 2000 (Vol. 65, No. 34). Tribal program rules found at 45 CFR
Part 286.

Additional Resources
• “Using TANF Funds to Finance Essential Services in a Supportive Housing Program for
  Homeless Families and Young Adults,” Doreen Straka, Constance Tempel, Corporation
  for Supportive Housing, and Karen Lipson, Kalkines, Arky, Zall & Bernstein LLP,
  www.csh.org (Resources by Topic, Services Planning/TANF)
• “The Increasing Use of TANF and State Matching Funds to Provide Housing Assistance
  to Families Moving from Welfare to Work - 2001 Supplement”, Barbara Sard and Tim
  Harrison, The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, www.cbpp.org/12-3-01hous.pdf
• “Helping Families Achieve Self-Sufficiency: A Guide on Funding Services for Children
  and Families through the TANF Program,” Department of Health and Human Services,
  Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, www.acf.hhs.gov/
  programs/ofa/funds2.htm
• HUD’s website describing using surplus TANF funds to fund services http://www.hud.
  gov/pih/programs/ph/wtw/4HH.html
• All the State Welfare Children and Families home pages are accessed at www.acf.dhhs.
  gov/news/welfare/stlinks.htm

A-150
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




HUD collects and publishes information about surplus federal property that can be used to
help homeless persons. Eligible grantees include states, local governments, and nonprofit
organizations.

Federal Agency
Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 7th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20410.

Authorization
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1987, as amended November 29, 1990, Title V,
Public Law 101-645 (42 USC 11411).

Program
Title V of the McKinney-Vento Act provides suitable Federal properties categorized as
unutilized, underutilized, excess, or surplus for use to assist homeless persons. Properties are
made available to States, units of local government, and non-profit organizations. Properties
can be used to provide shelter, services, storage, or other uses of benefit to homeless persons.

The program provides no funding, and the properties are made available on an “as is” basis.
Properties are leased without charge, although the homeless organization must pay for
operating and repair costs. Depending on the availability of the property, and other factors,
surplus properties may also be deeded to the organization.

Suitability Process
HUD collects information from Federal agencies concerning their unutilized, underutilized,
excess and surplus properties and determines which are suitable for use to assist homeless
persons. The determination is based on information submitted by the agency controlling the
property. HUD publishes a weekly (every Friday) Federal Register notice listing property
determinations and availability.




                                                                                          A-151
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Application Process
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) handles the application portion of
the program. Interested providers should notify HHS of their intention to apply for property
within 60 days of the Federal Register notice. Applicants have 90 days after an expression of
interest is received by HHS to submit an application. Once an application is complete, HHS
acts on it within 25 days.

The landholding agency enters into a license, permit, or lease agreement for homeless
provider’s use of unutilized or underutilized property. HHS handles the lease or deed
document for surplus properties.

Information Contacts
HUD Field Offices: Contact the HUD field office for your state to obtain property
information and/or to be put on a mailing list.

Landholding Agencies: Further information on specific properties can be obtained from the
landholding agency. The name and number to contact can be obtained from the HUD field
office or the HUD toll-free number (below).

HUD Headquarters Office: Kathy Ezzell, Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs,
Office of Community Planning and Development, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Room 5B-17, 451 7th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20410. Telephone
Number: (202) 708-1234.

HUD’s Toll Free: Title V information number at 1-800-927-7588.

HHS: To obtain an application packet for a particular property, write to the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services, Division of Property Management, Program Support Center,
Room 5B-41, Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857. Telephone
Number: (301) 443-2265. Your letter should identify the property in which you are
interested, including the date of the Federal Register notice in which it was published, and
request an application packet.




A-152
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Federal:
• Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS):
  Administration for Children & Families (ACF)
  Family and Youth Services Bureau (FYSB)
  (202) 205-8102
  www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/fysb/tlp.htm

Type Of Assistance: Competitive

Program Description
Part of the Runaway and Homeless Youth Program, the Transitional Youth Program for
Older Homeless Youth (TLP) is a national competitive grants program to fund transitional
living projects that provide shelter, skills training and support services for homeless youth,
including pregnant and parenting youth, ages 16 to 21 for a maximum of 18 months. The
goal of the program is to help older homeless youth achieve self-sufficiency and avoid long-
term dependency on social services.




Eligible Target Populations:
Homeless youth, including pregnant and parenting youth, ages 16 through 21 years old.

Eligible Projects/Programs:
Transitional Living Programs are required to provide youth with stable, safe living
accommodations and services that help them develop the skills necessary to move to
independent adult life within eight months.




                                                                                         A-153
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• Shelter or Living accommodations must be provided through: a group home facility, family
  host homes and/or “supervised apartments” (either agency-owned apartment buildings or
  “scattered site” apartments rented directly by young people with support from the agency).
  Maternity homes are also eligible for funding.
• Skills training must include, but is not limited to: basic life skill-building (including
  consumer education and instruction in budgeting, using credit, housekeeping, menu
  planning and food preparation); interpersonal skills building (including enhancing young
  people’s abilities to establish positive relationships with peers and adults, make decisions,
  and manage stress); educational advancement (such as GED preparation, post-secondary
  training or vocational education); and, job preparation and attainment (such as career
  counseling and job placement)




A-154
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Administrative Agencies

Federal:
• Department of Health and Human Services (HHS):
  Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
  Center for Substance Abuse Treatment
  (301) 443-7945 www.samhsa.gov or www.samhsa.gov/grants/grants.html

Type of Assistance: Competitive

Program Descripton
Competitive program to enable communities to expand and strengthen their treatment
services for homeless individuals with substance abuse disorders, mental illness, or with co-
occurring substance abuse disorders and mental illness.




Eligible Target Populations:
Homeless individuals with a diagnosable substance abuse disorder, diagnosable mental illness,
or with co-occurring substance abuse disorder and mental illness. This population includes
single adults, families, veterans, and runaway and street youth with long or multiple episodes
of homelessness.

“Homeless” persons are those who lack a fixed, regular, adequate nighttime residence,
including persons whose primary nighttime residence is: a supervised public or private



                                                                                         A-155
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




shelter designed to provide temporary living accommodations; a time-limited/nonpermanent
transitional housing arrangement for individuals engaged in mental health and/or substance
abuse treatment; or a public or private facility not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a
regular sleeping accommodation. “Homeless” also includes those who are “doubled up”
defined as sharing another person’s dwelling on a temporary basis where continued tenancy is
contingent upon the hospitality of the primary leaseholder or owner and can be rescinded at
any time without notice.

Eligible Projects/Programs:
Applicant projects must demonstrate a thorough understanding of the current knowledge
and practices in the identification and treatment of homeless people with substance abuse
disorders, mental illness, and/or co-occurring disorders. Programs must be able to show that
their program design and service interventions are founded on evidence-based practice, best
practice, or promising practice.

Applicants need to describe the treatment, services and housing resources within the
community where the proposed project will be conducted as well as the roles of participating
organizations, how they will support the proposed project, including letters of commitment
from participating and coordinating organizations. Applicants must show how treatment
services are linked with housing programs and other services for homeless persons.

Eligible Use of Funds & Use Restrictions:

Substance abuse and/or mental health treatment services for homeless people, including:
• Strengthen or expand an existing substance abuse treatment and/or mental health services
  program to include persons who are homeless;
• Provide substance abuse treatment and/or mental health services to persons participating in
  homeless programs;
• Provide substance abuse treatment and/or mental health services and related supportive
  services to maintain persons in stable housing;
• Develop referral linkages with community services providers to create a “no wrong door”
  approach for accessing substance abuse and mental health treatment and services for their
  clients;



A-156
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• Promote immediate entry to substance abuse treatment and/or mental health services by
  increasing treatment capacity where gaps exist;
• Enable participation in substance abuse treatment and/or mental health services by
  providing wrap-around services such as transportation or child care.
Housing Access and Stability:
• Link homeless people with substance abuse and/or mental illness to housing and promote
  residential stability;
• Build linkages among substance abuse treatment providers and/or mental health services
  providers, housing providers, and homeless service providers;
• Purchase groceries or household supplies and pay utility bills, on an emergency or short-
  term basis, which are necessary to enable a person to remain housed.

Education Activities:
• Educate individuals on how to refer persons who are homeless to appropriate substance
  abuse treatment and/or mental health services;
• Train direct care providers and other in the system serving the target population about
  provision of substance abuse treatment and/or mental health services to persons who are
  homeless.

Grant funds may not be used to pay for housing (other than residential substance abuse
treatment or residential mental health programs), to carry out syringe exchange programs, or
to pay for pharmacologies for HIV antiretroviral therapy, STDS, TB and hepatitis B and C.

Eligible Applicants/Sponsors:
Community-based public and private non-profit entities. Community-based public entities
are those public entities located in the community and would include tribal and local
governments that provide community-based services. Private nonprofit entities include
community-based and faith-based organizations. States are not eligible to apply. Applicants
need not be direct providers of substance abuse treatment or mental health services. Eligible
applicants also include providers of homeless services, primary health care, housing, and
other closely linked services for persons with substance abuse, mental illness, or co-occurring
disorders.



                                                                                         A-157
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Only existing, experienced providers with demonstrated infrastructure and expertise will
be funded: if the applicant or any partners in the proposed system is a direct provider of
substance abuse treatment or mental health services, a minimum of two years experience and
licensure/accreditation prior to the date of the application is required. If the applicant is not
a direct provide of substance abuse treatment or mental health services, the applicant must
document a commitment from such to participate in the proposed project.

Currently there are about 30 grants made under this program of which approximately half have
been for services in permanent supportive housing or transitional housing/residential settings.



To meet the goal of geographic diversity, SAMHSA usually funds no more than two
applications per state per year.

Minimum/Maximum Awards:
FY 2003, maximum amount was $600,000 per year in total costs.

Average Awards:
FY 2003, average awards were from $450,000 - $600,000 per year in total costs.

Term of Awards:
Grants were awarded for a period of up to three years (although statutorily the period can
be up to five years.) Annual awards are made subject to continued availability of funds and
progress achieved by the grantee.

Matching Requirements: N/A

Formula: N/A

Application Process
Annual NOFA with one application submission per year.

Authorizing Legislation/statute
Public Health Services Act, Section 506, as amended




A-158
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Regulations/guidelines
45 CFR Parts 74 and 92; PHS Grants Policy Statement; Last published Guidance for
Applicants: No. SP 03 -005; Last published Guidance for Applicants: No. TI 02-006




                                                                                       A-159
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Program Description:
VA’s Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program is offered annually (as funding
permits) by the Department of Veterans Affairs Health Care for Homeless Veterans (HCHV)
Programs to fund community agencies providing services to homeless veterans. The purpose
is to promote the development and provision of supportive housing and/or supportive
services with the goal of helping homeless veterans achieve residential stability, increase their
skill levels and/or income, and obtain greater self-determination.

Only programs with supportive housing (up to 24 months) or service centers (offering
services such as case management, education, crisis intervention, counseling, etc.) are eligible
for these funds. The program has two levels of funding: the Grant Component and the Per
Diem Component.

Grants: Limit is 65 percent of the costs of construction, renovation, or acquisition of a building
for use as service centers or transitional housing for homeless vets. Renovation of VA properties
is allowed, acquiring VA properties is not. Recipients must obtain the matching 35 percent share
from other sources. Grants may not be used for operational costs, including salaries.

Per Diem: Priority in awarding the Per Diem funds goes to the recipients of Grants. Non-
Grant programs may apply for Per Diem under a separate announcement, when published in
the Federal Register, announcing the funding for “Per Diem Only.”

Operational costs, including salaries, may be funded by the Per Diem Component. For
supportive housing, the maximum amount payable under the per diem is $29.31. Veterans in
supportive housing may be asked to pay rent if it does not exceed 30 percent of the veteran’s
monthly-adjusted income. In addition, “reasonable” fees may be charged for services not paid
with Per Diem funds. The maximum hourly per diem rate for a service center not connected
with supportive housing is 1/8 of the daily cost of care, not to exceed the current VA State
Home rate for domiciliary care. Payment for a veteran in a service center will not exceed 8
hours in any day.




A-160
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Applications are not accepted for Capital Grants or “Per Diem Only” funding until the
Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) is published in the Federal Register. Funds will
be awarded to programs determined to be the most qualified. The contact person for the
Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program is Roger Casey. Mr. Casey’s address is
VA Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program, Mental Health Strategic Healthcare
Group (116E), VAHQ, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20420; telephone
(toll-free): 1-877-332-0334; E-mail: roger.casey@mail.va.gov. The HCHV programs are
administered nationally by Paul Smits, Associate Chief Consultant, Homeless and Residential
Rehabilitation and Treatment Programs, VA Headquarters in Washington, D.C.




                                                                                        A-161
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




One-third of adult homeless men and nearly one-quarter of all homeless adults have served in
the armed forces. While there is no true measure of the number of homeless veterans, it has
been estimated that fewer than 200,000 veterans may be homeless on any given night and
that twice as many veterans experience homelessness during a year. Many other veterans are
considered at risk because of poverty, lack of support from family and friends and precarious
living conditions in overcrowded or substandard housing. Ninety-six percent of homeless
veterans are male and the vast majority is single. About half of all homeless veterans suffer
from mental illness and more than two-thirds suffer from alcohol or drug use problems.
Nearly 40 percent have both psychiatric and substance abuse disorders.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is the only federal agency that provides substantial
hands-on assistance directly to homeless people. In 2005, VA provided health care to more
than 100,000 homeless veterans and other services to over 60,000 veterans in its specialized
homeless programs. More than 40,000 homeless veterans receive compensation or pension
benefits annually. Although limited to veterans and their dependents, VA’s major homeless
programs constitute the largest integrated network of homeless assistance programs in the
country, offering a wide array of services to help veterans recover from homelessness and live
as self-sufficiently and independently as possible. Nearly three-quarters of homeless veterans
we have contacted use VA health care and 55 percent have used VA homeless services.

VA, using its own resources or in partnerships with others, has secured more than 15,000
residential rehabilitative, transitional and permanent beds for homeless veterans throughout
the nation. VA spends more than one billion dollars from its health care and benefit assistance
programs to assist homeless and at-risk veterans. To increase this assistance, VA conducts
outreach to connect homeless veterans to both mainstream and homeless-specific VA
programs and benefits. These programs strive to offer a continuum of services that include:
• Aggressive outreach to veterans living on the streets and in shelters who otherwise would
  not seek assistance;
• Clinical assessment and referral for treatment of physical and psychiatric disorders,
  including substance abuse;




A-162
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




• Long-term transitional residential assistance, case management and rehabilitation; and,
• Employment assistance and linkage with available income supports and permanent
  housing.

VA has awarded more than 400 grants to public and nonprofit groups to assist homeless
veterans in all states and the District of Columbia to provide transitional housing, service
centers and vans to provide transportation to services and employment.

VA sponsors and supports national, regional and local homeless conferences and meetings,
bringing together thousands of homeless providers and advocates to discuss community
planning strategies and to provide technical assistance in such areas as transitional housing,
mental health and family services, education and employment opportunities for the homeless.

Homeless Programs
VA’s Health Care for Homeless Veterans Program (HCHV) operates at 132 sites, where
extensive outreach, physical and psychiatric health exams, treatment, referrals and ongoing
case management are provided to homeless veterans with mental health problems, including
substance abuse. This program makes assessments and referrals for more than 40,000 veterans
annually.

VA’s Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans (DCHV) Program provides medical care
and rehabilitation in a residential setting on VA medical center grounds to eligible ambulatory
veterans disabled by medical or psychiatric disorders, injury or age and who do not need
hospitalization or nursing home care. There are more than 1,800 beds available through the
program at 34 sites. The program provides residential treatment to more than 5,000 homeless
veterans each year. The domiciliaries conduct outreach and referral; admission screening
and assessment; medical and psychiatric evaluation; treatment, vocational counseling and
rehabilitation; and post-discharge community support.

Veterans Benefits Assistance at VA Regional Offices is provided by designated staff
members who serve as coordinators and points of contact for homeless veterans. Homeless
coordinators at VA regional offices provide outreach services and help expedite the
processing of homeless veterans’ claims. The Homeless Eligibility Clarification Act allows
eligible veterans without a fixed address to receive VA benefits checks at VA regional offices.




                                                                                          A-163
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




VA also has procedures to expedite the processing of homeless veterans’ benefits claims. Last
year more than 34,000 homeless veterans received assistance and nearly 4,000 had their
claims expedited by staff members.

Acquired Property Sales for Homeless Providers Program makes properties VA obtains
through foreclosures on VA-insured mortgages available for sale to homeless providers at
a discount of 20 to 50 percent. To date, more than 200 properties have been sold. These
properties have been used to provide homeless people, including veterans, with over 400,000
sheltered nights in VA acquired property since the program began.

Readjustment Counseling Service’s Vet Centers provide outreach, psychological
counseling, supportive social services and referrals to other VA and community programs.
Every Vet Center has a homeless veteran coordinator assigned to make sure services for
homeless veterans are tailored to local needs. Annually, the program’s 207 Vet Centers see
approximately 130,000 veterans and provide more than 1,000,000 visits to veterans and
family members. More than 10,000 homeless veterans are served by the program each year.

Veterans Industry/Compensated Work-Therapy (CWT) and Compensated Work-
Therapy/Transitional Residence (TR) Programs Through its CWT and TR programs, VA
offers structured work opportunities and supervised therapeutic housing for at-risk and homeless
veterans with physical, psychiatric and substance abuse disorders. VA contracts with private
industry and the public sector for work by these veterans, who learn new job skills, re-learn
successful work habits and regain a sense of self-esteem and self-worth. Veterans are paid for
their work and, in turn, make a payment toward maintenance and upkeep of the residence.

VA operates 66 homes with more than 520 beds in transitional residences. Nine sites with
18 houses serve homeless veterans exclusively. Two-thirds of all CWT and TR beds served
homeless veterans. There are more than 140 CWT operations nationwide. Approximately
14,000 veterans participate in CWT programs annually.

VA’s National Cemetery Administration and Veterans Health Administration have formed
partnerships at national cemeteries, where formerly homeless veterans from the CWT
program have received therapeutic work opportunities while providing VA cemeteries with a
supplemental work force.




A-164
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




HUD-VA Supported Housing (VASH) Program, a joint program with the Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD), provides permanent housing and ongoing treatment
to homeless mentally ill veterans and those suffering from substance abuse disorders. HUD’s
Section 8 voucher program has designated more than 1,400 vouchers worth $44.5 million
for chronically mentally ill homeless veterans, and VA personnel at 34 sites provide outreach,
clinical care and case management services. This approach significantly reduces homelessness
for veterans plagued by serious mental illness and substance abuse disorders.

VA’s Supported Housing Program allows VA personnel to help homeless veterans secure
long-term transitional or permanent housing. They also offer ongoing case management
services to help the veterans remain in housing they can afford. VA staff work with
private landlords, public housing authorities and nonprofit organizations to find housing
arrangements. Veteran service organizations have been instrumental in helping VA establish
these housing alternatives nationwide. VA staff at 20 supported housing program sites helped
more than 1,500 homeless veterans find transitional or permanent housing in the community.

Stand Downs are one-to three-day events that provide homeless veterans a variety of
services and allow VA and community-based service providers to reach more homeless
veterans. Stand downs give homeless veterans a temporary refuge where they can obtain
food, shelter, clothing and a range of community and VA assistance. In many locations,
stand downs provide health screenings, referral and access to long-term treatment, benefits
counseling, ID cards and access to other programs to meet their immediate needs. Each year,
VA participates in more than 100 stand downs coordinated by local entities. Surveys show
that more than 20,000 veterans and family members attend these events annually with more
than 13,000 volunteers.

VA Excess Property for Homeless Veterans Initiative provides federal excess personal
property, such as clothing, footwear, sleeping bags, blankets and other items, to homeless
veterans through VA domiciliaries and other outreach activities. This initiative has been
responsible for the distribution of nearly $150 million in material and currently has more
than $15 million in inventory. This initiative employs formerly homeless veterans to receive,
warehouse and ship these goods to homeless programs across the country that assist veterans.




                                                                                          A-165
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




The Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program provides grants and per diem
payments to help public and nonprofit organizations establish and operate new supportive
housing and service centers for homeless veterans. Grant funds may also be used to purchase
vans to conduct outreach or provide transportation for homeless veterans. Since the program’s
inception in fiscal year 1994, VA has awarded more than 400 grants to faith and community-
based service providers, state or local government agencies and Native American tribal
governments in all states and the District of Columbia. Up to 20,000 homeless veterans are
expected to receive supported housing under this program annually in more than 10,000 beds.

Project CHALENG (Community Homelessness Assessment, Local Education and
Networking Groups) for Veterans is a nationwide initiative in which VA works with other
federal, state and local agencies and nonprofit organizations to assess the needs of homeless
veterans. CHALENG groups have held conferences, developed directories of local resources
available to homeless veterans and established local action plans to fight homelessness and
prepare strategies for future actions.

Program Monitoring and Evaluation conducted by the Northeast Program Evaluation
Center at the VA Connecticut Health Care System provides important information about the
veterans served and the therapeutic value and cost-effectiveness of VA’s specialized homeless
programs. Information from these evaluations also helps program managers determine new
directions for expanding and improving services to homeless veterans. VA conducted a one-
day census to determine the extent of homelessness among veterans in VA’s acute inpatient
programs (1995-2000) and found that one-quarter of all veterans in VA beds were homeless.

The Multifamily Transitional Housing Loan Guarantee for Homeless Veterans
Program has made conditional commitments to two projects to establish housing for
formally homeless veterans. Efforts continue to locate additional projects.

VA’s 15-member Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans submitted its fourth annual
report to provide advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on the
provision of benefits and services to homeless veterans.

Nine new Domiciliary Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Programs (DRRTP) have been
funded to address the needs of homeless veterans. New DRRTPs will be located in areas
identified as having the greatest need. This funding will add 408 additional beds to the



A-166
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




homeless DRRTPs to serve homeless veterans. This will bring the total number of programs
to 43 with over 2,000 operational beds.

VA is working to expand dental care to homeless veterans.

VA will expand Veterans Industry/Compensated Work Therapy Program to twenty
five additional facilities. When the expansion is completed the VA will have over 150
Compensated Work Therapy Programs.

VA has initiated outreach to veterans at risk of homelessness who are being discharged or
released from incarceration. State-specific resource guides for incarcerated veterans have been
developed that provide contact information and outline steps that veterans can take to plan
their re-entry into the community.

For more information:
• Visit the VA website at www.va.gov,
• Contact VA’s Homeless Veterans Programs Office at (202) 273-5764, or
• E-mail VA at www.homelessvets@mail.va.gov.




                                                                                       A-167
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                                                            B
                                                                          APPENDIX




                                                                                          B-1
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                Emergency Shelter Inventory, County of Riverside by District
                                                                                    Year-Round             Total
                                                                                                           Year-
                                                                                  Family         Indiv.   Round   Other Beds
 Provider Name                       Facility Name        City      District   Units    Beds     Beds      Beds Seasonal Voucher
 Unincorporated County Inventory
 Alpha Omega Homes Shelter           Alpha Omega Ranch                          0       0         40       40      0       0
 Alternative to Domestic Violence    Horizon House                              3       10         5       15      0        0
 EFSP Local Board & DPSS             Motel Voucher                              0        0         0        0      0       75
                                     Program
 Riverside County                    Countywide                    1,2,3,4,5    3       10        45       55      0       75
 ALLOCATION                                                                     1        2         9       12      0       15
 District 1
 Countywide Allocation                                                 1        1        2         9       12       0      15
 EFSP Local Board & DPSS             WS Program           Riv.         1        0        0         0        0      80       0
 Operation Safe House                Safe House           Riv.         1        0       0         17       17      0       0
 Path of Life Ministries, Inc.       Family Shelter       Riv.         1        0       50         0       50       0       0
 Path of Life Ministries, Inc.       Year Rd Shelter      Riv.         1        0       0         64      64       0       0
 Total District 1                                                               1       52        90      143      80      15
 District 2
 Countywide Allocation                                                 2        1        2         9       12      0       15
 EFSP Local Board & DPSS             WS Program           Riv.         2        0        0         0        0      40       0
 Corona Homeless Task Force          Circle of Hope       Corona       2        0       25        25       50       0       0
 Total District 2                                                               1       27        32       61     140      15
 District 3
 Countywide Allocation                                                 3        1        2         9       12      0       15
 Valley Restart Shelter, Inc.        Restart Center       Hemet        3        0       40        35       75      0       12
 Total District 3                                                               1       42        44       87      0       27
 District 4
 Countywide Allocation                                                 4        1        2         9       12      0       15
 ABC Recovery Center                 ABC Center           Indio        4        0        0        15       15      0        0
 Coachella Valley Rescue Mission     Coachella Valley     Indio        4        4       12        46       58      0       0
                                     Mission Shelter
 EFSP Local Board & DPSS             WS Program           Indio        2        0        0        0        0      100       0
 Jewish Family Services, Inc.        Coachella Vly Ser.                4        0        0        25       25      0        0
                                     & Sh.
 Shelter From the Storm              Mary Stuart          PD           4       15       60         0       60      0        0
                                     Rogers Center
 Episcopal Community Services        Nightingale          PS           4       12      40         0       40       0        0
 Martha’s Village                    St. Vcnt de Paul     Indio        4        0       0          0       0      100       0
 Total District 4                                                              32      114        95      210     200      15
 District 5
 Countywide Allocation                                                 5        1        2         9       12      0       15
 None                                                                  5        0        0         0       0       0       0
 Total District 5                                                               1        2         9       12      0       15
 TOTAL EMERGENCY SHELTER INVENTORY                                             34      185       215      398      40      87




B-2
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                    Transitional Housing Inventory, County of Riverside by District
                                                                                   Year-Round             Total
                                                                                                          Year-
                                                                                 Family         Indiv.   Round
 Provider Name                      Facility Name      City       District   Units    Beds      Beds      Beds
 Unincorporated County Inventory
 Department of Mental Health        AB 2034            County-                0        0         42       42
                                    Scattered Site     wide
 Riverside County                   Countywide                                0        0         42       42
 ALLOCATION                                                      1,2,3,4,5    0        0         8         8
 District 1
 Countywide Allocation                                                        0        0          8        8
 Jefferson Transitional Housing
 Jefferson TH                       Riv.               1             0        0       30         30
 Lutheran Social Services           Genesis            Riv.          1       8       32           0       32
 Lutheran Social Services           Amelia’s Light     Riv.          1       32       88          0        88
 Operation Safe House               Main Street        Riv.          1       0        0          20       20
 Total District 1                                                            40      120         58       178
 District 2
 Countywide Allocation                                                        0        0          8        8
 Corona Homeless Task Force         Circle of Hope     Corona        2       0        15         20       35
 MFI Recovery Center                A Women’s Place    Riv.          2       14       42                   42
 Whiteside Manor                    Dly Diag. Pgm.     Riv.          2       0         0        30        30
 Whiteside Manor                    Recovery Pgm.      Riv.          2       0         0        52        52
 Total District 2                                                            14       57        110       167
 District 3
 Countywide Allocation                                                        0        0          8        8
 Total District 3                                                             0        0          8        8
 District 4
 Countywide Allocation                                                        0       0           8       8
 ABC Recovery Center                Village            Indio         4        0       0          40       40
 Episcopal Community Services       Navajo Trails      PS            4        0       0          34       34
 Martha’s Village & Kitchen         Martha’s Village   Indio         4       0       84          36      120
 Shelter from the Storm             Shelter from       PD            4       18      108          0      108
                                    the Storm
 Total District 4                                                            18      192        118       310
 District 5
 Countywide Allocation                                                       0         0         8        8
 US Vets                            Inland Empire      Riv.          5       26        0         50       50
                                    Veterans Housing
 Total District 5                                                            26        0         58       58
 TOTAL TRANSITIONAL HOUSING INVENTORY                                        98      369        354      723




                                                                                                                  B-3
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                    Permanent Supportive Housing, County of Riverside by District
                                                                          Year-Round                        Total
                                                                        Family Family   Indiv.   Chronic Year-Round
 Provider Name                   Facility Name      City     District   Units    Beds   Beds      Beds      Beds
 Unincorporated or Countywide Inventory
 County Housing Authority        Tenant-Based                1,2,3       0       15      23        23       38
                                 – West County
 ALLOCATION A                                                            0       5        8        8       13
 County Housing Authority        Tenant-Based                3,4,5       12      12      11        11      19
                                 –East County
 ALLOCATION B                                                            4       4       4         4        8
 County Housing Authority        Tenant-Based               1,2,3,4,5    0       0       44        44       44
                                 S+C Countywide
 ALLOCATION C                                                            0       0       9         9        9
 District 1
 Coachella Valley Housing        Geel Place         Riv.        1        0       0       42         0       42
 Coalition/DMH
 Path of Life Ministries                            Riv.        1        0       0       6          6       6
 Dept. of Mental Health          Safe Haven
                                 (in development)   Riv.        1        0       0       25        25       25
 Subtotal                                                                0       0       73        31       73
 ALLOCATION A                                                            0       5       8         8       13
 ALLOCATION C                                                            0       0       9         9        9
 Total District 1                                                        0       5       90        48       95
 District 2
 ALLOCATION A                                                            0       5       8         8       13
 ALLOCATION C                                                            0       0       9         9        9
 Total District 2                                                        0       5       17        17       22
 District 3
 Valley Restart                  Stable Horizons    Hemet       3        8       32      3          2       35
 Subtotal                                                                8       32      3          2       35
 ALLOCATION A                                                            0       5       8         8       13
 ALLOCATION B                                                            4       4       4         4        8
 ALLOCATION C                                                            0       0       9         9        9
 Total District 3                                                        12      41      24        19       65
 District 4
 Coachella Vly. HC/DMH           La Hacienda                    4        0       0       36         0      36
 Desert AIDS Project             CASAS              PS          4        0       0       20         0      20
 Episcopal Com. Services         Desert Vista       PS          4        0       0       40        40      40
 Subtotal                                                                0       0       96        40      96
 ALLOCATION B                                                            4       4       4         4        8
 ALLOCATION C                                                            0       0       9         9        9
 Total District 4                                                        4       4      109        49      113
 District 5
 ALLOCATION B                                                            4       4       4         4        8
 ALLOCATION C                                                            0       0       9         9        9
 Total District 5                                                        4       4       13         9       17
 TOTAL INVENTORY                                                        20      59      250      151      305


B-4
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                                                           C
                                                                          APPENDIX




ACF                Administration for Children and Families
ACF - OFA          Administration for Children and Families - Office of Family Assistance
AHP                Affordable Housing Program
AMI                Area Media Income
CARE               Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency (Care) Act
                   Programs: Title I & II
CCDBG/CCDF         Child Care and Development Block Grant
CDBG               Community Development Block Grant
CEQA               California Environmental Quality Act
CMHS BG            Community Mental Health Services Block Grant
CMS                Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
CofC               Continuum of Care
CSAT               Center for Substance Abuse Treatment
CSBG               Community Services Block Grant
DOE                Department of Education
DOJ                Department of Justice
DOJ OJP            Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs



                                                                                           C-1
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




DOL                Department of Labor
DOL ETA            Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration
DOL SVORI          Department of Labor Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative
ELHSI              Ending Chronic Homelessness Services Initiative
ESG                Emergency Shelter Grants (McKinney Act)
FHLB               Federal Home Loan Bank
FMR                Fair Market Rent
HACR               Housing Authority of the County of Riverside
HCH                Health Center Grants for Homeless Populations (Health Care for the
                   Homeless)
HHS                Dept of Health & Human Services
HMIS               Homelessness Management Information System
HOME               Home Investment Partnership Program
HOPWA              Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS
HPS                Historic Preservation Services
HRSA               Health Resources & Services Administration
HTC                Historic Tax Credits
HUD                US Dept Housing & Urban Development
HVRP               Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program
IRS                Internal Revenue Service
LAHSA              Los Angeles Homeless Services Agency
LIHTC              Low Income Housing Tax Credits
MHBG, SABG         SAMHSA Discretionary Grants
MHSA               Mental Health Services Act (Proposition 63)
NEPA               National Environmental Protection Act
NIMBY              Not in My Backyard



C-2
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




NMTC               New Markets Tax Credits
ODEP               Office of Disability Employment Policy
OPCC               Ocean Park Community Center
PATH               Projects for Assistance in Transition From Homelessness
PHA                Public Housing Authority
PWA                Persons Living with Aids
RHS                Rural Housing Service Guaranteed Rural Rental Housing Program
RHYC               Runaway and Homeless Youth Coalition
S+C                Shelter Plus Care
SAMHSA             Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
SAPTBG             Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant
Section 108        Section 108 Loan
Section 202        Supportive Housing for the Elderly
Section 514/516    RHS Section 514/516
Section 515        RHS Section 515
Section 521        RHS Section 521 Rental Assistance
Section 538        RHS Section 538
Section 8 - PBA    Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Project Based
Section 8 - TBA    Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Tenant Based
Section 811        Supportive Housing for People with Disabilities
SELHA              Services to End Long-Term Homelessness Act
SHP - ISH          Supportive Housing Program - Innovative Supportive Housing
SHP - TH           Supportive Housing Program - Transitional Housing
SHP - Perm         Supportive Housing Program – Permanent Housing for Persons with
                   Disabilities and Safe Havens Components
SHP - PHPWD        Supportive Housing Program - Permanent Housing for Persons with
                   Disabilities


                                                                                          C-3
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




SHP - SSO          Supportive Housing Program - Support Services Only
SHP - Trans        Supportive Housing Program – Transitional Housing, Support Services
                   Only, Innovative Supportive Housing and HMIS Components
SNAPS              HUD Special Needs Assistance Programs Office
SRO                Single Room Occupancy
SSA                Social Security Administration
SSBG               Social Services Block Grant
SSDI               Social Security Disability Insurance
SSI                Supplemental Security Income
TANF               Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
TAY                Transitional Age Youth
TCAC               Tax Credit Allocation Committee
TCE                Grants to Expand Substance Abuse Treatment Capacity in Targeted Areas
                   of Need (Targeted Capacity Expansion)
TCE-SAP            Targeted Capacity Expansion Initiatives for Substance Abuse Prevention
                   and HIV Prevention in Minority Communities
THP                Development of Comprehensive Drug/Alcohol and Mental Health
                   Treatment Systems for Persons who are Homeless (Treatment for
                   Homeless Persons)
TLP                Transitional Living Program for Older Homeless Youth
USDA               US Dept of Agriculture
USDT               US Dept of Treasury
VA                 Veteran’s Administration
VAWA               Violence Against Women Act
VWIP               Veterans’ Employment Program (Veterans’ Workforce Investment
                   Programs)
WIA                Workforce Investment Act




C-4
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                                                           D
                                                                          APPENDIX




BIBLIOGRAPHY



Cities:
City of Corona, dated April 2001, Amended December 2, 2004
City of Hemet, 2005-2010 Five Year Consolidated Plan and 2005-2006 Annual Action Plan
City of Moreno Valley, 203-2008 Consolidated Plan
City of Palm Desert, Five-Year Consolidated Plan/Community Development Block
Grant FY 2003-2004 to FY 2007/2008
City of Palm Springs, 2005-2010 Five Year Consolidated Plan and 2005-2006 Annual
Action Plan
City of Riverside, City of Riverside 2005-1010 Consolidated Plan and Annual Action
Plan 2005-2006

County of Riverside:
Streamlined 5-Year Plan for Fiscal Years 2005-2010 and Streamlined Annual Plan for Fiscal
Year 2006

City And County Of Riverside:
“2005 Continuum of Care Plan”
“2006 Continuum of Care Plan”




                                                                                            D-1
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Federal Government:
Federal Register, v. 71, No. 45, (March 8, 2004), p. 12034

Notices:
HUD, “Implementing the New Freedom Initiative and Involving Persons with Disabilities in
the Preparation of the Consolidated Plan through Citizen Participation,” CPD-05-03 Issued
June 6, 2005
HUD, “Guidance on Combining Program Funds of the McKinney Act Programs and the
HOPWA Program with the HOME Program,” CPD 01-01 Issued January 17, 2001
HUD, “Using HOME Program Funds to Address the Challenges of Homelessness,”
CPD-03-08-Issued July 30, 2003 “
HUD, “Notice of Funding Availability for the Collaborative Initiative to Help End Chronic
Homelessness,” Federal Register, Vol. 68, No. 17/Monday, January 27, 2003, 4019
HUD, Public and Indian Housing, “Homeless Initiative in Public Housing and Housing
Choice Voucher Programs,” HUD, Notice PIH 2003-25, October 3, 2003


Publications:
HUD, “Calculating Unmet Need for Homeless Individuals and Families” (Homeless
Assistance Programs April 2006)
HUD, “2007 Budget Summary, (Message from Secretary Jackson)”

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS (VAD)
VAD, “Part 61—VA Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program,” VAD, CFR Parts 61,
published in the Federal Register September 26, 2003


State of California:
Legislative Analyst’s Office, “Analysis of the 2006-07 Budget Bill (Education),” February 2006

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (CDE):
CDE, “2006-2007 Local Planning Councils’ Priorities/County Funding Priorities—General Child
Care and Development Program,” Child Development Division, Revised September 8, 2006




D-2
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (HCD):
HCD, “Memorandum dated June 17, 2002 to Planning Directors and Interested Parties re
‘Housing Element Legislation Effective January 1, 2002’”
HCD, Division of Housing Policy Development, California Redevelopment Agencies,
“Housing Activities During Fiscal Year 2004/2005,” June 2006
HCD, “Myths and Facts About Affordable & High Density Housing, a Report,” HCD
California Planning Roundtable
HCD, “California’s Deepening Housing Crisis,” HCD, November 16, 2006
HCD, “California Redevelopment Agencies—Fiscal Year 2004/2005, Project Area
Contributions to Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund,” May 1, 2006

DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH (DMH):
Notices:
DMH, “DMH Information Notice No. 06-08 re ‘Initial Mental Health Services Act Contract’”
DMH, “DMH Information Notice No. 06-02 re ‘Notification of New Mental Health Services
Act and Federal Accountability Reporting Requirements: Tracking of Services, Outcomes,
Cost, and Program Oversight’”
“DMH Information Notice No. 06-02 re ‘Allowable Use of Community Services and
Supports Funding for Enhancement of Local Infrastructure’”


Other Publications:
DMH, “Vision Statement and Guiding Principles for DMH Implementation of Mental Health
Services Act” (February 16, 2005)
DMH, “FY 2006-2007 Governor’s Budget (Preliminary) Allocation/Statewide Allocation
Summary” Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs dated May 19, 2006
DMH, “Statistics and Data Analysis,” California Health and Human Services Agency, January
2005
DMH, “Statistics and Data Analysis,” California Health and Human Services Agency, June 2006




                                                                                          D-3
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES (DSS):
DDS, “2006-2007 Appropriation Table,” Administration Division/Estimates Bureau.
DDS, “Rights, Responsibilities and Other Important Information for the Cash Aid and Food
Stamp Programs, and/or Medi-Cal/State-Run County Medical Services Program (CMSP)”
from the Department of Health Services/Health and Human Services Agency
DDS, “Fiscal Year 2006/2007 County Services Block Grant and Adult Protective Services
General Fund Planning Allocations,” County Fiscal Letter No. 05/06-50, June 26, 2006
DDS, “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Performance Incentives – Final Allocation
for Fiscal Year 2005-06 and Planning Allocation for Fiscal Year 2006/07,” County Fiscal Letter
No. 06/07-12, September 28, 2006
DDS, “Fiscal Year 2006/07 California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids Program
– Mental Health and Substance Abuse Allocation,” County Fiscal Letter No. 06/07-14,
September 28, 2006
DDS, “Fiscal Year 2006/07 California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids
(CalWorks) Program Planning Allocation, County Fiscal Letter No. 06/07-11, July 28, 2006
DSS, “Detail Tables/Cost Comparisons,” Administration Division, Estimates and Research
Services Branch, Financial Management & Contract Branch, November 2006 Subvention
DSS, “Title XX Block Brant Post-Expenditure Report July 1, 2003 through June 2004,” Health
and Human Services Agency


Other Publications:
Beatty, David F., et al., Redevelopment in California, McDonough, Holland & Allen, Solano
Press Books, Third Edition, 2004
BUILDING CHILD CARE PROJECT (BCC), “Potential Resources for Child Care Facilities
Development in California,” BCC (a California Statewide Collaborative), May 2006
CENTER FOR LAW AND SOCIAL POLICY (CLASP), “Child Care and Development Block
Grant Participation in 2005,” September 7, 2006
CORPORATION FOR SUPPORTIVE HOUSING (CSH), “Mental Health Services Act—
Housing Toolkit,” CSH, November 2005 (funded by DMH)
Gans, Herbert J., The War Against the Poor—The Underclass and Antipoverty Policy, Basic
Books, 1995




D-4
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Institute for Urban Research and Development (IURD), County of Riverside: County of
Riverside 2004/2005 Homeless Assessment, 2005
MARTHA’S VILLAGE & KITCHEN, “2006 Program Summary;” “January 27, 2006 Mission
Statement;” and “Village News” (Winter 2005)
Porterfield, David, “Planning, Designing, Siting and Financing Safe Haven Housing
(Chapter 2), Wisconsin Partnership for Housing Development, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin.
Raubeson, Andy, “Case Study of the Marshal House, a Transitional Housing Facility for
Recovering Substance Abusers,” Andy Raubeson, Presented at the 4th Annual Members
Conference National Alliance to End Homelessness, Washington, D.C., June 21, 1996
Rawson, Mike, “Laws Prohibiting Discrimination Against Affordable Housing & Its
Residents,” Public Interest Law Center
Sherwood, Kay E., Connecticut Supportive Housing Demonstration Program Evaluation
Report, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Department of Psychiatry, 1999
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SCAG), “Draft
Regional Housing Need Allocation Plan,” (Planning Period 1/1/2006-6/30/2014), SCAG




County Of Riverside:
County of Riverside, “Demographics/Progress Report,” County of Riverside, http://www.
rct\ma.org/tcd/introduction.html
County of Riverside Department of Public Health, 2005 Communicable Disease Report,
County of Riverside, http://www.rivcohealthdata.org/downloads/reports/CommDisease/cdr_
05.pdf


Federal Government:

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES:
HHS, “Overview of the Child Care and Development Fund (Fiscal Years 2006-2007)
(October 2006),” HHS, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ccb
HHS, Administration for Children & Families/Family and Youth Services Bureau(FYSB), “Fact
Sheet,” HHS, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/opa/fact_sheet/fysb_printable.html




                                                                                          D-5
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




HHS, Home Page for Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation-
Homelessness, HHS, http://www.aspe.hhs.gov/homeless/index.shtml
HHS, “HHS Awards $579.7 Million for HIV/AIDS Care,” News Release dated March 14,
2006, HHS, http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2006pres/20060314.html
SAMSH:A
SAMSHA, “SAMHSA Grant Awards by State FY 2005,” SAMHSA www.samhsa.gov/
Grants/2006/fy2006awards.aspx
SAMSHA, “Projects for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness-California,” SAMSHA,
www.pathprogram.samsha.gov/pdf/2005-Profiles/ca.pdf


HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT:
HUD, “AMI’s,” HUD, http://www.efanniemae.com/sf/refmaterials/hudmedinc/
HUD, “Statewide HOPWA Information – California,” HUD, http://www.hud.gov/offices/
cpd/aidshousing/local/ca
HUD, “Housing Opportunities for Persons with Aids (HOPWA Program,” HUD, http://
www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/aidshousing/programs
HUD, “HUD’s Public Housing Program,” HUD, http://www.hud.gov/renting/phprog.cfm
HUD, “HOME Investment Partnership Program,” HUD, http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/
affordablehousing/programs/home/index.cfm
HUD, “Final FY 2006 Fair Market Rent Documentation System,” HUD, http://www.huduser.
org/datasets/fmr/fmrs/2006summary


U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (SSA):
SSA, “SSI Recipients by State and County, 2005,” SSA, Office of Policy, http://www.ssa.gov/
policy/docs/statecomps/ssi_sc/2005/ca.html


State of California:

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (CDE)
CDE, “Funding Results: Education for Homeless Children and Youth,” CDE, www.cde.ca.gov/
fg/fo/r16/homeless06result.asp




D-6
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
HCD, “HCD’s Loans, Grants and Enterprise Zone Programs (Funds Available Calendar),”
HCD, http://www.hcd.ca.gov/fa
HCD, “Financial Assistance Programs—Annual Report—FY 2005-2006,” December 2006,
HCD, http://www.hcd.ca.gov/fa/Annual Report _FY05-06.pdf
HCD,“Housing Policy Development,” HCD, http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/hrc/plan/he/sb520_
hpd.pdf
HCD, “NIMBY Resources,” HCD, http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/nimby.htm
HCD, “Emergency Housing and Assistance Program (EHAP), Funding Round 14, Fiscal
Year 2006/2007, Statewide Notice of Funding Availability for Operating Facility Grants,”
September 22, 2006
HCD, “Awards and Projected Production by County, Fiscal Year 2005-2006,” HCD.


DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH (DMH):
DMH,“Olmstead/New Freedom Initiative,” DMH, http://www.dmh.ca.gov/AOAPP/
Olmstead/default.asp
DMH, “AB 2034 Program Allocations,” DMH, http://www.dmh.cahwnet.gov/AOAPP/Int_
Services/docs/03-04


Other Websites:
Institute for Community Economics, “California Redevelopment Law,” Institute for
Community Economics, www.people.cornell.edu/pages/rjp17/SharedEquityHome.pdf
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK (FHLB), “Affordable Housing Program and Community
Investment Program,” FHLB, http://www.fhlbanks.com/html/programs.html
NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION (NLIHC), “Out of Reach,” NLIHC,
http://www.nlihc.org/oor/index.cfm
OXFORD HOUSE, “Oxford House: Housing, Fellowship, Self-Reliance, Self-Respect for
Recovering Individuals,” Oxford House, http://www.oxfordhouse.org/leases.html




                                                                                           D-7
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




                                                                            E
                                                                          APPENDIX




Claudia Castorena
Division Director/Co-Founder
Martha’s Village & Kitchen
83791 Date Ave.
Indio, CA 92201-4737

Gary M. Christmas
Deputy County Executive Officer
Executive Office

Leticia DeLara
Legal Assistant
Board of Supervisors, 4th District
County of Riverside
4080 Lemon St., 5th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501

Carrie Harmon
Department of Public Social Services
County of Riverside
4060 County Circle Drive
Riverside, CA 92503

Opal Hellweg
Legislative Team Member
Board of Supervisors, 3rd District
4080 Lemon St., 5th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501


                                                                                          E-1
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Cynthia Hinckley, Ph.D.
Director
Department of Public Social Services
County of Riverside
4060 County Circle Drive
Riverside, CA 92503

Jaime Hurtado
Legislative Assistant to Supervisor Marion Ashley
Board of Supervisors, 5th District
County of Riverside
4080 Lemon St., 5th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501

Wendy Kolk
Legislative Assistant
Board of Supervisors, 1st District
County of Riverside
4080 Lemon St., 5th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501

Susan K. Low
Assistant Director, Administrative Services
Department of Public Social Services
County of Riverside
4060 County Circle Drive
Riverside, CA 92503

Heidi M. Marshall
Deputy Director
Economic Development Agency
5555 Arlington Ave.
Riverside, CA 92504-2506




E-2
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Maria Marquez, M.F.T.
Mental Health Services Manager
Department of Mental Health
County of Riverside
769 Blaine St., Suite B
Riverside, CA 92507

Emilio Ramirez
Economic Development Agency
County of Riverside
5555 Arlington Ave.
Riverside, CA 92504-2508

Robin Reid
Legislative Team Member
Board of Supervisors, 3rd District
4080 Lemon St., 5th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501

Anne Stephens
Senior Legislative Assistant
Board of Supervisors, 2nd District
County of Riverside
4080 Lemon St., 5th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501

Ronald A. Stewart, Ph.D.
Interim Administrative Manager
Homeless Programs
Department of Public Social Services
4060 County Circle Drive
Riverside, CA 92503




                                                                                          E-3
DESTINATION HOME: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELESS HOUSING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY




Jeff Stone
Supervisor, Third District
Board of Supervisors
County of Riverside
4080 Lemon Street, 5th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501

Lori Stone
Legislative Team Member
Board of Supervisors, 3rd District
County of Riverside
4080 Lemon St., 5th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501

David L. Terrell
Administrative Manager
Department of Public Social Services
County of Riverside
P. O. Box 7789
Riverside, CA 92507

Jerry Wengerd, L.C.S.W.
Director
Department of Mental Health
County of Riverside
4095 County Circle Drive
Riverside, CA 92503-7549

Robin Zimpfer
Assistant County Executive Officer
Economic Development Agency
P. O. Box 1180
Riverside, CA 92502




E-4

								
To top