HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 04/25/2006 - THE SPRING CYCLE OF THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS FOR AL DATE: April 25, 2006 WORK SESSION ITEM
STAFF: Ken Waido FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
The spring cycle of the competitive process for allocating City financial resources to affordable
housing projects/programs and community development activities (CDBG/HOME/Affordable
Housing/Human Services funds).
The following summarizes the amount and sources of available funds:
AMOUNT SOURCE
$1,037,758 FY 2006 CDBG Entitlement Grant
$ 39,012 CDBG Reprogrammed Funds
$ 62,000 CDBG Program Income
$ 306,981 HOME Unprogrammed FY05 Funds
51,312 HOME Unprogrammed CHDO FY05 Funds
$ 74,541 HOME Program Income and Funding for Administration
$ 237,931 Affordable Housing Unprogrammed and Reprogrammed Funds
$ 332,000 Human Services Program Funds
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
$2,141,535 Total Funding available
Unprogrammed funding is the amount of grant funds available from a fiscal year federal grant that
has yet to be allocated to a specific project.Reprogrammed funding is the amount of grant funds that
were previously allocated to a project(s)but have been returned to the City due to failure to complete
the project(s).
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Does the City Council have any comments or questions with the recommendations for funding as
suggested by the CDBG Commission?
BACKGROUND
The CDBG Commission presents recommendations as to which programs and projects should
receive funding from the City's CDBG/HOME/Affordable Housing/Human Services Fund Program
for the FY 2006 Program year. The Commission's recommendations are presented below:
April 25, 2006 Page 2
PLANNING AND ADMINISTRATION - Maximum 20% of CDBG (Grant and Program
Income) Funds - $219,952 (grant received a 10%
decrease over previous level), maximum of 10% of
HOME (Grant and Program Income) Funds -
$74,541
City of Fort Collins CDBG Administration
Request: $212,306
Recommendation: $212,306
City of Fort Collins HOME Administration
Request: $74,541
Recommendation: $74,541
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Fort Collins Housing Corporation—Village on Swallow Rehabilitation
Request: $324,964 (Due on Sale Loan + 5%Simple Interest)
Recommendation: $300,000 (Due on Sale Loan + 5%Simple Interest)
Fort Collins Housing Authority — First Step Rental Assistance for Homeless and Near
Homeless Families
Request: $229,920 (Grant)
Recommendation: $194,912 (Grant)
Accessible Space, Inc. — Fort Collins Supportive Housing Development — Phase II
(Development Fees)
Request: $350,000
Recommendation: $350,000 (Due on Sale Loan + 5%simple interest)
Redstone Village Apartments
Request: $341,800 (Due on Sale Loan + 5%simple interest)
Recommendation: Withdrawn by request of applicant
CARE Housing"Green Built" Land Acquisition
Request: $700,000 (Due on Sale Loan + 5%simple interest)
Recommendation: $400,000 (Due on Sale Loan + 5%simple interest)
April 25, 2006 Page 3
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Harmony House Visitation Center Window Rehabilitation
Request: $7,025 (Due on Sale + 5%simple interest)
Recommendation: $7,025 (Due on Sale + 5%simple interest))
PUBLIC SERVICE - Maximum 15% of CDBG (Grant & Program Income) Funds -
$164,964 and City of Fort Collins Human Services Funding -
$332,000 (Total: $496,964)
Fort Collins Housing Corporation Case Management
Request: $60,171
Recommendation: 0
Springfield Court Sliding Scale
Request: $18,000
Recommendation: $18,000 (CDBG grant)
Springfield Court Pre-School
Request: $10,400
Recommendation: $10,400 (CDBG grant)
B.A.S.E. Camp Sliding Scale
Request: $33,815
Recommendation: $33,815 (CDBG grant)
RVNA Home Health Care
Request: $35,000
Recommendation: $25,000 (HSP grant)
Elderhaus Therapy Center
Request: $21,000
Recommendation: $16,920 (HSP grant)
ELTC Employment Skills
Request: $20,000
Recommendation: $20,000 (CDBG grant)
April 25, 2006 Page 4
PS-S Services for Single Parents
Request: $18,000
Recommendation: $18,000 (CDBG grant)
United Way BPI Rent Assistance
Request: $35,000
Recommendation: $35,000 (HSP grant)
VOA Meal Program
Request: $14,600
Recommendation: $14,600 (HSP grant)
N2N Housing Counseling
Request: $61,120
Recommendation: $58,599 (HSP grant)
DRS Access to Independence
Request: $20,002
Recommendation: $20,002 (HSP grant)
N2N Rent Assistance
Request: $15,000
Recommendation: $15,000 (HSP grant)
NCAP Case Management
Request: $19,000
Recommendation: $19,000 ($2,591 CDBG grant, $16,409 HSP grant)
CCN Shelter
Request: $42,158
Recommendation: $42,158 (CDBG grant)
CCN Senior Services
Request: $15,000
Recommendation: 0
April 25, 2006 Page 5
Turning Point STEP
Request: $16,000
Recommendation: 0
Respite Care Sliding Scale
Request: $20,000
Recommendation: $20,000 (CDBG grant)
Food Bank Kids Cafe
Request: $15,472
Recommendation: $15,472 (HSPgrant)
LCMH Case Manager
Request: $25,000
Recommendation: 0
United Day Care Sliding Scale
Request: $60,500
Recommendation: $60,500 (CDBGgrant)
United Way 2-1-1
Request: $35,300
Recommendation: 0
Crossroads Advocacy Program
Request: $46,800
Recommendation: $36,400 (HSPgrant)
Women's Resource Center
Request: $18,098
Recommendation: $18,098(HSP grant)
CASA Harmony House Scholarship
Request: $7,856
Recommendation: 0
April 25, 2006 Page 6
ATTACHMENTS
1. Summary of the CDBG Recommendations for Funding
2. Background Information on the Competitive Process
3. Ranking Criteria for Funding
4. Affordable Housing Board's List of Priority Projects
5. Background Information on the CDBG and HOME federal Programs
6. CDBG Commission's Comments on Proposals
7. Focus Questions for CDBG Commission
8. Formulation of Funding Recommendation
9. Power point presentation slides
Attachment 1
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION
At the May 16, 2006, regular City Council meeting, the Council is scheduled to conduct a public
hearing and consider the adoption of a resolution establishing which programs and projects will
receive funding with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment
r funds for the FY 2006-2007
Human Services Program Partnership, Affordable Housing and g
P> g
Program year, which starts on October 1, 2006.
The resolution establishing which programs and projects will receive funds represents the
culmination of the spring cycle of the Competitive Process approved in January 2000 by the
Council for the allocation of the City's financial resources to affordable housing
programs/projects and community development activities. Additional background material about
the Competitive Process is included in Attachment A.
Since early January of this year, the CDBG Commission and members of the City staff s
Affordable Housing Team have conducted public hearings to assess community development and
housing needs in Fort Collins, conducted technical assistance training workshops for applicants,
and solicited applications for funding. The City's Affordable Housing Board reviewed the
written applications for affordable housing projects and forwarded a priority ranking of proposals,
as well as comments and questions, to the CDBG Commission. See Attachment B for a copy of
the Board's materials sent to the CDBG Commission. The CDBG Commission, in addition to
reviewing the written applications, personally interviewed each applicant, analyzed the
• applications, and formulated a list of recommendations to the City Council as to which programs
and projects should receive funding.
The Competitive Process established refined criteria to determine priorities between proposals
received by the City. The ranking criteria are divided into five major categories. Each category is
given a total number of points that has been weighed according to its importance with respect to
local and federal priorities. The five major categories are:
1. Impact/Benefit
2. Need/Priority
3. Feasibility
4. Leveraging Resources
5. Capacity and History
The ImpactBenefit criteria provide greater rewards to proposals that target lower income groups.
The Need/Priority criteria help assure the proposal meets adopted City goals and priorities. The
Feasibility criteria reward projects for timelines and documented additional funding. The
Leveraging Resources criteria reward proposals which will return funds to the City(loans) and for
their ability to leverage other resources; and, the Capacity and History criteria help gage an
applicant's ability to do the project and reward applicants who have completed successful projects
in the past (have good track records). A sample ranking sheet used to assist the CDBG
Commission and the Affordable Housing Board is presented in Attachment A.
The Commission also considered the funding guidelines contained in the Priority Affordable
Housing Needs and Strategies report adopted by the Council on July 20, 2004. These guidelines
include:
• HOME funds should generally be allocated as follows: 90% for Housing projects
and 10% for Program Administration. HUD HOME Program regulations also
require the City to set aside 15% for Community Housing Development
Organization (CHDO) projects and allow an allocation of 5% for CHDO
operations;
• CDBG funds should generally be allocated as follows: 65% for Housing projects;
15% for Public Services, and the balance for Public facilities and Program
Administration.
• funds allocated to housing should generally be divided as follows: 70% for rental
projects and 30% for homeownership opportunities; and
• the average subsidy should be $7,400 per unit, with relatively more funding to
projects producing housing for lower income families.
The CDBG and HOME Programs are ongoing grant administration programs funded by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City of Fort Collins has received
CDBG Program funds since 1975 and HOME Program funds since 1994. The City is an
Entitlement recipient of CDBG funds and a Participating Jurisdiction recipient of HOME funds,
meaning the City is guaranteed a certain level of funding each year. The level of funding is
dependent on the total amount of funds allocated to the programs by Congress and on a formula
• developed by HUD, which includes data on total population, minorities as a percentage of
population, income levels, housing stock conditions, etc. Additional background information on
the City's HOME and CDBG Programs are presented in Attachments C and D respectively.
The Human Services Program (HSP)was formerly the Community Partnership Program, a joint
human services funding venture between the City of Fort Collins and Latimer County.
Historically administered by the County,the City's funding portion of the program switched to
internal administration as a result of the BFO process. In a focus towards streamlining
government processes, improving customer service, and fine tuning desired results, the Human
Services Program has been folded into the Spring Cycle of the City's semi-annual Competitive
Process,which manages a variety of funding streams. Current HSP funding for 2006 is $332,000.
Dollars awarded for projects target households in Fort Collins whose incomes are at 80%or
below of Area Median Income (AMI). Those monies help fill other funding gaps, and lower the
cost of housing and other basic services for our community citizens who are most vulnerable and
in need. By empowering and stabilizing families, these funds strengthen and improve the
fundamental building blocks of Fort Collins—neighborhoods.
AVAILABLE FUNDS
• The amount of the City's CDBG Entitlement Grant for FY 2006-2007 is $1,037,758. The
Entitlement Grant will be combined with $39,012 of Reprogrammed funds and anticipated
Program Income of $62,000 to create a total of $1,138,770 of CDBG funds available for
programs and projects during the next CDBG Program year. HOME funds available for the
Spring Cycle include unprogrammed funding of$306,981 available for eligible housing projects
and $51,312 unprogrammed funds available only to Community Housing Development
Organizations (CHDOs) along with $74,541 in administrative funding. The total HOME
allocation for FY 2006-2007 is $645,419 with anticipated program income of $100,000. This
funding will be allocated in the Fall Cycle. Reprogrammed/unprogrammed funds include funds
not expended in previously approved projects. Program Income includes anticipated repayments
from rehab loans and home buyer assistance loans along with repayments from development
loans. Also available are two local fund sources: the City's Human Services Program monies
for Public Service projects in the amount of $332,000 and Affordable Housing Funds
unprogrammed and reprogrammed from the Fall 2006 Cycle in the amount of$237,931.
The following summarizes the amount and sources of available funds:
AMOUNT SOURCE
$1,037,758.00 FY 2006 CDBG Entitlement Grant
39,012.00 CDBG Reprogrammed Funds
• 62,000.00 CDBG Program Income
306,981.00 HOME unprogrammed FY05 funds
51,312.00 HOME unprogrammed CHDO FY05 funds
74,541.00 HOME program income and funding for administration
237,931.00 Affordable Housing unprogrammed and reprogrammed funds
332,000.00 Human Services Program funds
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$2,141,535.00 Total funding available
SELECTION PROCESS
• The selection process for the City's FY 2006-2007 Competitive Process began on January 11,
2006, when the CDBG Commission held a public hearing to obtain citizen input on community
development and affordable housing needs. The Advance Planning office placed legal
advertisements in local and regional newspapers starting in January to solicit requests for housing
and community development projects for FY 2006-2007. The application deadline was Thursday
February 23, 2006. At the close of the deadline the City received 33 applications requesting a
total of approximately $2.6 million.
Copies of all applications were forwarded through the City Manager's office to the City Council
on March 2 2006 and placed in the Council Office for review. Also on March 2, copies of the
housing applications were distributed to the Affordable Housing Board and copies of all
applications were distributed to the CDBG Commission.
On Thursday March 23 the Affordable Housing Board conducted a special meeting to review the
housing proposals and prepared a priority listing of applications to the CDBG Commission. On
Tuesday March 28, Wednesday March 29, and Thursday March 30, the Commission met to hear
presentations and ask clarification questions from each applicant. The Commission then met on
Thursday April 6 for the purpose of preparing a recommendation to the City Council as to which
programs and projects should be funded for the FY 2006-2007 program year. At this meeting the
Commission reviewed the written applications, the applicant's verbal presentation, the
information provided during the question and answer session, and reviewed the performance of
• agencies who received funding in other previous years. The Commission then worked on the
formulation of their list of recommendations.
CDBG COMMISSION'S LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS
HUD CDBG and HOME regulations limit the amount of available funds which can be allocated
to various generic categories. Funds for Planning and Administrative purposes are limited to 20%
of the total of the CDBG Grant and any program income and 10% of the HOME grant and any
Program Income. This means the 20% limitation for Planning and Administrative purposes is
$219,952 for CDBG and $74,541 for HOME. CDBG funds for Public Services are limited to
15% of the total of the Entitlement Grant and Program Income, making the amount available in
that category a maximum of$164,964.
The Commission, thus, not only had to decide which applicants presented programs and projects
which best fit the City's needs, but also had to insure funding allocations were kept within HUD
regulations and follow the funding guidelines contained in the Priority Affordable Housing
Needs and Strategies report.
Listed below is a summary of each applicant's initial request for funding and the Commission's
list of recommendations.
•
PLANNING AND ADMINISTRATION
• PA-1 CITY OF FORT COLLINS HOME ADMINISTRATION
Proposal covers the administrative costs of the FY 2006-2007 HOME Program Administration
including salary, benefits and operating expenses for .8 FTE staff positions.
Request: $74,541
Recommendation: $74,541
PA-2 CITY OF FORT COLLINS CDBG ADMINISTRATION
Proposal covers the administrative costs of the FY 2006-2007 CDBG Program Administration
including salary, benefits and operating expenses for 2.6 FTE staff positions.
Request: $212,306
Recommendation: $212,306
AFFORDABLE HOUSING APPLICATIONS
HO-1: FORT COLLINS HOUSING CORPORATION — VILLAGE ON SWALLOW
REHAB
• Request: $324,964
Recommendation: $300,000 CDBG Due on Sale Loan+5% Simple Interest
($31,987 CDBG FY04, $52,700 CDBG FY06 Program
Income and $215,313 CDBG FY06 funding)
The Fort Collins Housing Corporation proposes to rehabilitate and modernize the 44-unit
Village on Swallow complex. Although the complex is only 10 years old, it was built
during a time when"bare bones" construction was standard for affordable housing. The
housing has had a low occupancy rate over the past 5 years in part due to its lack of
amenities. The upgrade will preserve the integrity of existing structures, improve the
quality of living for the families, decrease energy costs to the families and improve
marketability/retention for the project.
HO-2: FORT COLLINS HOUSING AUTHORITY — FIRST STEP RENTAL
ASSISTANCE
Request: $229,920
Recommendation: $194,912 HOME FY05 Grant
The Fort Collins Housing Authority proposes to continue the pilot program for Tenant
Based Rental Assistance started during the past year in cooperation with the Colorado
Division of Housing, City of Fort Collins, Fort Collins Housing Authority, City of
• Loveland and the Housing Authority of the City of Loveland. This program provides 2
years of transitional rental assistance for 20 extremely low-income Fort Collins
households along with intensive case management to help them work toward self-
sufficiency.
HO-3: ACCESSIBLE SPACE—SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PHASE 11
Request: $350,000
Recommendation: $350,000 HOME and Affordable Housing Fund Grant
($112,069 FY06 HOME funds and$237,931 AHF funds)
This project, first recommended for funding in the Fall Cycle of 2005, will develop a new
barrier-free 2 story project to provide permanently affordable housing for 22 very low-
income persons with disabilities. Funds allocated in the Fall will be used for acquisition
of the land. This funding request is to help with the cost of the City's development fees.
HO-4: DANCO COMMUNITIES—REDSTONE VILLAGE APARTMENTS
Request: $341,800
Recommendation: Withdrawn by the applicant
This project, first recommended for funding in the Fall Cycle of 2005, did not receive an
anticipated allocation of tax credits from Colorado Housing Finance Authority in March
of 2006 and their application has been withdrawn. A previous allocation of Affordable
Housing Funds in the amount of$200,000 was re-allocated in this Spring cycle.
• HO-5: CARE HOUSING—"GREEN BUILT" LAND ACQUISITION
Request: $700,000
Recommendation: $400,000 CDBG and HOME due on sale loan +5%
simple interest ($348,688 CDBG FY06 funds and
$51,312 HOME FY05 CHDO funds)
This project would involve the acquisition of land to be used to develop a Green Built
affordable housing demonstration rental development. The 60+units will be affordable to
households in the 25-50%of area median income range.
•
• PUBLIC FACILITY APPLICATIONS
PF-I: CASA- HARMONY HOUSE WINDOW REHABILITATION
Request: $7,025
Recommendation: $7,025 CDBG due on sale loan + 5% simple interest
($7,025 CDBG FY04 reprogrammed funds)
This project will complete the renovation of the historic Harmony House facility located
on Harmony Road. Previous funding provided a new roof along with window
replacement for the first floor. This application is for the remaining second floor windows
which will provide a significant savings in heating costs. Court Appointed Special
Advocates (CASA) has worked with the City's Historical Preservation Department to
maintain the historic integrity of this structure.
PUBLIC SERVICE APPLICATATIONS
PS-1: FORT COLLINS HOUSING CORPORATION: CASE MANAGEMENT
Request: $61,171
Recommendation: $ 0
. FCHA's request was to provide case management to 300 housing authority households to
stabilize families and develop economic self-sufficiency which will prevent eviction and
homelessness. It was not recommended for funding.
PS-2: SPRINGFIELD COURT: SLIDING SCALE SCHOLARSHIPS
Request: $18,000
Recommendation: $18,000 (CDBG grant)
Springfield Court will provide 30 scholarships to very-low-income families to help cover
the cost of child care. This assistance helps families to be able to work and maintain self-
sufficiency.
PS-3: SPRINGFIELD COURT: COLORADO PRE-SCHOOL
Request: $10,400
Recommendation: $10,400 (CDBG grant)
Springfield Court will provide 8 children with Colorado Pre-School services which allow
at-risk children to prepare for kindergarten and increases the chances of school success.
The funding is used to support a staff salary.
40
PS-4 B.A.S.E. CAMP: SLIDING SCALE SCHOLARSHIPS
• Request: $33,815
Recommendation: $33,815 (CDBG grant)
B.A.S.E. Camp will provide before and after school care scholarships for 120 children of
low-income families. The program seeks to enrich children's lives and build success in
school both academically and socially while allowing families to work without worrying
about their children.
PS-5: REHABILITATION AND VISITING NURSES ASSOCIATION: HOME HEALTH
Request: $35,000
Recommendation: $25,000 (HSP grant)
RVNA will provide skilled and non-skilled services to 51 low-income at-risk individuals
in the client's home. Services include nursing, physical therapy, occupational therapy,
speech therapy, medical social services, certified nurse aide service, personal care services
and homemaking activities which will help to keep people living independently. The
funding will provide funding for both skilled and unskilled service.
PS-6: ELDERHAUS THERAPY CENTER
Request: $21,000
Recommendation: $16,920 (HSP grant)
Elderhaus will provide daytime healthcare for 45 at-risk individuals. Services include
case management, respite care, mentoring and counseling, and therapeutic services in a
day program setting. Funding will be used to support staff salaries.
PS-7: EDUCATION AND LIFE TRAINING CENTER: EMPLOYMENT SHILLS
Request: $20,000
Recommendation: $20,000 (CDBG grant)
Education and Life Training provides 175 low to moderate income residents and families
the means to attain a basic standard of living by providing training and classes in literacy,
computer skills and special courses such as training as a Certified Nurse's Aid. The
funding will be used to support staff salaries.
•
• PS-8: PROJECT SELF-SUFFICIENCY: SERVICES FOR SINGLE PARENT FAMILIES
Requested: $18,000
Recommendation: $18,000 (CDBG grant)
Project Self-Sufficiency will assist 60 low-income single parents in becoming financially
independent and free from government assistance. The funding will be used to support
staff salaries.
PS-9: UNITED WAY: HOMELESS PREVENTION RENT ASSISTANCE
Request: $35,000
Recommendation: $35,000 (HSP grant)
The Homeless Prevention Rent Assistance Program will provide emergency rent
assistance to 152 households at risk of homelessness and facing eviction due to a
temporary financial crisis.
PS-10: VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA: HOME-DELIVERED MEAL PROGRAM
Request: $14,600
Recommendation: $14,600 (HSP grant)
The VOA Home Delivered Meal Program provides five to seven nutritious frozen meals
per week to seniors who are homebound or geographically isolated. This grant will
provide meals to 64 Fort Collins residents for one year.
PS-11: NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR: HOUSING COUNSELING
Request: $ 61,120
Recommendation: $58,599 (HSP grant)
Neighbor to Neighbor will provide housing counseling (emergency rent assistance, pre-
rental counseling, landlord/tenant counseling, pre-purchase counseling, mortgage default
counseling and reverse mortgage counseling) to 3,110 individuals over the next year. The
funding is used to support staff salaries.
•
• PS-12: DISABLED RESOURCES: ACCESS TO INDEPENDENCE
Request: $20,002
Recommendation: $20,002 (HSP grant)
Disabled Resources will provide the Access to Independence Service to 70 individuals
with disabilities. This service consists of comprehensive case management and
community assistance to help people live independently at home. The funding will be used
to support staff salaries.
PS-13: NEIGBOR TO NEIGHBOR: RENT ASSISTANCE
Request: $15,000
Recommendation: $15,000 (HSP grant)
Neighbor to Neighbor will provide emergency rent assistance to 220 households which are
at risk of homelessness and eviction due to temporary financial difficulties.
PS-14: NORTHERN COLORADO AIDS PROJECT: CASE MANAGEMENT
Request: $19,000
• Recommendation: $19,000 ($2,591 CDBG grant, $16,409 HSP grant)
NCAP will use $8,000 to support the provision of case management to 149 individuals
whose lives have been impacted by HIV/AIDS with a diminished ability to be financially
independent as health and ability to work fails. In addition, NCAP will use $2,000 for
emergency rent or mortgage payments, $2,000 for utility assistance and $4,000 for direct
assistance with medications, insurance and co-pays for households living with the effects
of HIV/AIDS.
PS-15: CATHOLIC CHARITIES NORTHERN: SHELTER
Request: $42,158
Recommendation: $42,158 (CDBG Grant)
The Catholic Charities Northern"Mission" focuses on the immediate needs of the
chronically homeless,the new homeless and those who slip in and out of homelessness.
The shelter provides a bed, an opportunity for personal hygiene, food and case
management to 800 individuals over the course of a year. This funding will assist with the
cost to staff the facility overnight.
•
• PS-16: CATHOLIC CHARITIES NORTHERN: SENIOR SERVICES
Request: $15,000
Recommendation: $ 0
This proposal would have provided half the cost of a case manager to provide assistance to
60 elderly citizens. The proposal did not receive a recommendation for funding.
PS-17: TURNING POINT: STEP PROGRAM
Request: $16,000
Recommendation: 0
Turning Point Center for Youth proposed to use funding to support staff salaries to serve
20 youth transitioning out of residential treatment facilities and corrections institutions.
The project did not receive a recommendation for funding.
PS-18: RESPITE CARE: SLIDING SCALE TUITION SCHOLARSHIPS
Request: $20,000
Recommendation: $20,000 (CDBG grant)
Respite Care will use funding to provide day care scholarships for 25 children of low-
income households. Respite Care provides day activities and some overnight care
specifically structured for children age birth to 21 who have developmental difficulties.
PS-19: FOOD BANK: KIDS CAFE
Request: $15,472
Recommendation: $15,472 (HSP grant)
The Food Bank will provide evening meals to over 869 disadvantaged children at after
school programs in areas where over 51%of the households are low income. Funds will
be used to purchase food and to support staff salaries.
PS-20: LARIMER CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH: CASE MANAGER
Request: $25,000
Recommendation: $ 0
r for Mental Health proposed the addition of a art-time case manager in
Larimer Center o p p p g
order to expand their staff hours of the Choice Support Center and increase its capacity by
20-25 individuals who receive intensive supervision and treatment/therapy. The proposal
was not recommended for funding.
•
. PS-21: UNITED DAY CARE CENTER: SLIDING SCALE TUITION SCHOLARSHIPS
Request: $60,500
Recommendation: $60,500 (HSP grant)
United Day Care will provide 53 children of low-income parents with day care
scholarships so the parents can attend work or education.
PS-22: UNITED WAY: 2-1-1- INFORMATION AND REFERRAL
Request: $35,300
Recommendation: $ 0
United Way 2-1-1 requested reimbursement for calls made for special populations to
access resources to meet their unique needs. The proposal was not recommended for
funding.
PS-23: CROSSROADS SAFEHOUSE: ADVOCACY PROGRAM
Request: $46,800
Recommendation: $36,400 (HSP grant)
• Crossroads Safehouse will use funding to support staff salaries for two confidential
advocates for Lacy's Place, the outreach center for abused women and children. They
expect to serve 1,598 individuals over the next year.
PS-24: WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: DENTAL PROGRAM
Request: $18,098
Recommendation: $18,098 (HSP grant)
The Women's Resource Center will use $10,098 to support staff salaries and$8,000 to
support the cost of dental care to serve 200 uninsured or underinsured women.
PS-25: CASA: HARMONY HOUSE FEES SCHOLARSHIPS
Request: $7,856
Recommendation: $ 0
Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) requested funding to offset the cost of
service to provide a safe and supervised place where non-custodial parents can meet with
their children. The proposal was not recommended for funding.
•
• A summary of the Commission's funding recommendations by category for the total amount of
funds available is as follows:
RECOMMENDED % of
FUNDING TOTAL CATEGORY
$ 286,847 13% Y PLANNING and ADMINISTRATION (Not to exceed 20%
of CDBG Grant and 10% of HOME grant plus Program
Income)
1,244,912 58% HOUSING
7,025 1% PUBLIC FACILITIES
496,964 23% PUBLIC SERVICES (Maximum $164,964 based on 15% of
Entitlement Grant and Program Income plus $332,000 in
HSP funding)
105,787 5% Uncommitted (CDBG carryover)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$2,141,535 100.0 TOTAL
The total amount of funding requests considered by the CDBG Commission was approximately
$2.6 million, however, only $2.1 million of funds are available. With the amount of total requests
far exceeding available funding, obviously not all applications could be funded. Due to HUD
funding li
mitations, some Public Service applications received no funds or less funds than
• requested in order to keep the g category generic cate o within program maximums.q
The CDBG Commission has recommended full funding for nineteen (19) proposals (one housing
proposal, 2 administration proposals, one public facility proposal and 15 public service
proposals). In the Commission's opinion, these applications recommended for full funding best fit
the City's funding objectives, the selection criteria, and the funding guidelines.
Proposals, which did not receive full funding, were deemed of a lower priority and, in some cases,
a lack of funds, program category limitations (especially in the Public Services category), or
funding guidelines prohibited their full funding.
The Commission has recommended no funding for six (6)proposals.
The remaining uncommitted amount of $105,787 in CDBG funds will be forwarded to the Fall
Competitive Process. The Commission is expecting that some housing projects from the Spring
Cycle may also resubmit applications in the fall along with new projects.
The Commission's reasons for either full funding, partial funding, or no funding are presented in
Attachment E.
Attachment F contains the focus questions used by the Commission to review the applications.
• Attachment G contains information on how the formulation of funding recommendations was
made.
Attachment 2
• Background Information on the Competitive Process
for the Allocation of City Financial Resources
to Affordable Housing Programs/Projects
and Other Community Development Activities
In February of 1999, the City Council approved the Priority Affordable Housing Needs and
Strategies report, which contained the following strategy:
Change from an administrative funding mechanism...to a competitive application process
for the Affordable Housing Fund.
Between September and November of 1999 a subcommittee consisting of members from the
Affordable Housing Board and the Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) Commission
met with staff to review issues and develop options for establishment of a Competitive Process.
In addition the staff solicited ideas from existing affordable housing providers. The
subcommittee established the following Mission Statement for their work:
Develop a competitive application process and establish a set of shared criteria for the
allocation of the City's financial assistance resources to affordable housing
projects/programs that address the City's priority affordable housing needs.
• Competitive Process
Five options for a Competitive Process were reviewed and discussed by the subcommittee. The
subcommittee reached a general consensus to support a Competitive Process that involved both
the Affordable Housing Board and the CDBG Commission The option selected would have the
Affordable Housing Board providing_recommendations to the City Council in regards to
affordable housing policy. In addition the option would have the Affordable Housing Board
reviewing all affordable housing applications for CDBG HOME and Affordable Housing funds.
The Board would then provide a priority listingof f proposals to the CDBG Commission. The
CDBG Commission would then make the final recommendations to the City Council for funding.
Funding Cycles
The subcommittee also agreed that there should be two funding cycles per year, one in the spring
and the other in the fall. CDBG Program funds would be allocated in the spring to affordable
housing programs/projects and other community development activities (public services, public
facilities, etc.). HOME Program and Affordable Housing funds would be allocated in the fall
primarily to affordable housing programs/projects.
The staff and subcommittee agreed that overlaying the new process and cycles would be
heightened staff technical assistance to applicants. Both the subcommittee and staff recognize
that a semi-annual process will require additional meetings by both the CDBG Commission and
Affordable Housing Board, and will require more time from current City staff, and increase the
City Council's involvement.
Schedule
The subcommittee also discussed two alternative schedules for the funding cycles. The option
selected incorporates a spring cycle that starts in January and ends in May, and a fall cycle that
starts in July and ends in November.
Review Criteria
The subcommittee also discussed and agreed to a new set of review criteria to be used to rank
proposals. The criteria are divided into the following five major categories:
1. Impact/Benefit
2. Need/Priority
3. Feasibility
4. Leveraging Resources
5. Capacity and History
• The Impact/Benefit criteria provide greater rewards to proposals that target lower income groups
and provide longer benefits. The Need/Priority criteria help assure the proposal meets adopted
City goals and priorities. The Feasibility criteria reward projects for timeliness and documented
additional funding. The Leveraging Resources criteria reward proposals which will return funds
to the City (loans) and for their ability to leverage other resources. And,the Capacity and History
criteria help gage an applicant's ability to do the project and reward applicants that have
completed successful projects in the past(have good track records).
See next page for a detailed criteria scoring sheet.
Application Forms
Two new application forms have also been developed. One form would be used for Housing
proposals while to other form would be used for Non-Housing Proposals (public services, public
facilities, etc.).
City Council Adoption
On January 18, 2000, the City Council approved Resolution 2000-13, formally adopting the
Competitive Process for the allocation of City financial resources to affordable housing
programs/projects and community development activities and the component parts discussed
above.
•
ATTACHMENT 3-RANKING CRITERIA
The ranking criteria are divided into five major categories.Each category is given a total number of points that has been weighed
according to its importance with respect to local and federal priorities.
Im act/Benefit maximum 30points)
1. Primarily targets low incomepersons? (0-10)
(all units 0-30%of AMI= 10 pis;at least half of the units at or below 30%of AMI and the remaining
units at 31-50%of AMI=8 pts;at least half of the units at 31-50%of AMI and at least half of the units
at 51-60%of AM1=6 pts;at least half of the units at 51-60%of AMI and half the units at 61-80%of
AMI=4 is; all units between 61-80%AMI=2 is)
2. Project produces adequate community benefit related to cost? 0-5
Does the project provide assistance for persons to gain self-sufficiency or maintain independence, or
3. serve a special population? 0-5)
4. Does the project provide long-term benefit or affordability? (0-10)
(1-10 s=3 pts, 11-19 yrs=6 pts,20-30 yrs=8 pts,permanent= 10 is)
Sub-total C
Need/Priorit maximum 15points)
1. Meets a Consolidated Plan priority? 0-5)
2. Project meets goals or objectives of City Plan and Priority Needs and Strategies study? (0-5
3. Has the applicant documented efforts to secure other funding? (0-5)
Sub-total C
Feasibilit maximum 15points)
L The project will be completed within the required timeperiod? 0-3)
2. Project budget is justified?(Costs are documented and reasonable.) (0-4)
3. The level of public subsidy is needed? (Private funds are not available.) (0-4)
4. Has the applicant documented efforts to secure other funding? (04)
Sub-total C
Le eraizine Resources maximum 20 oints
1. Does the project allow the reuse of our funding? (0-10)
A Prni andinterest(30-year amortization or less 10 points
B. Princ aland no interest or principal and balloon payment(repayment) 6 points
C. Due-on-sale loan 4 points
2. Project leverages other financial resources?(Including in-kind) (0-10)
A. Less than 1:1 0 points
B. la to 1:3 4 points
C. 1:4 to 1:6 7 oints
D. More than 1:7 10 points
Sub-total C
Cauacitv and History maximum 20 pointsl
1. Applicant has the capacity to undertake the proposedproject? (0-10)
2. If previously funded,has the applicant completed prior projects and maintained regulatory compliance? (0-10)
3. If new,applicant has capacity to maintain regulatory compliance? (0-20)
Sub-total C
GRAND
TOTAL C
Attachment 4
• March 23,2006
TO: CDBG Commission Members
FM: Fort Collins Affordable Housing Board
SUBJECT: Spring 2006 Competitive Process
After careful review and discussion of the housing applications, the Fort Collins
Affordable Housing Board established a list of priorities as a means for assisting the
CDBG Commission as they prepare for applicant interviews.
The priority listing is as follows:
1. Fort Collins Housing Authority Village on Swallow Rehabilitation
2. (tie) Fort Collins Housing Authority First Step TBRA
(tie) Accessible Space Rental Housing
3. CARE "Green Built" acquisition of land
. 4. Redstone Village (withdrawn by applicant)
•
ATTACHMENT 5
• ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION
on the
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
CDBG PROGRAM NATIONAL OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of the CDBG Program is the development of viable urban communities, by
providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic
opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate income. Programs and projects funded
with CDBG funds must address at least one of the following three broad National Objectives:
(1) provide a benefit to low or moderate income households or persons,
(2) eliminate or prevent slum and blight conditions, or
(3) meet urgent community development needs which pose an immediate and serious
threat to the health and welfare of the community.
Presented below is a comparison of City CDBG expenditures for programs and projects
categorized according to the National Objectives:
National Objectives
Low/Moderate Slum/Blight Urgent
Income Benefit Elimination Need
National Average 90% 10% 0%
City Expenditures
for: 2005 100% 0% 0%
2004 100% 0% 0%
2003 100% 0% 0%
2002 100% 0% 0%
2001 100% 0% 0%
2000 100% 0% 0%
1999 100% 0% 0%
1998 100% 0% 0%
1997 100% 0% 0%
•
CDBG PROGRAM ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES
CDBG funds can be used on a wide range of activities including:
(1) acquiring deteriorated and/or inappropriately developed real property (including
property for the purpose of building new housing);
(2) acquiring, constructing, rehabilitating or installing publicly owned facilities and
improvements;
(3) restoration of historic sites;
(4) beautification of urban land;
(5) conservation of open spaces and preservation of natural resources and scenic areas;
(6) housing rehabilitation can be funded if it benefits low and moderate income
people; and
(7) economic development activities are eligible expenditures if they stimulate private
investment of community revitalization and expand economic opportunities for
low and moderate income people and the handicapped.
Certain activities are ineligible, under most circumstances, for CDBG funds including:
(1) purchase of equipment,
(2) operating and maintenance expenses including repair expenses and salaries,
(3) general government expenses,
(4) political and religious activities, and
(5) new housing construction.
Attachment 5A
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION
on the
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM GUIDELINES
(Adopted by the Fort Collins City Council, July 18, 1995)
PURPOSE:
The purpose of the Home Investment Partnership (HOME) Program is to increase the supply of
decent, safe, and affordable housing in the City of Fort Collins for an extended period of time.
All of the HOME funds must benefit low and very low income households which are defined by
the Department of Housing and Urban Development as having a total household income not
exceeding 80% of the median household income for the Fort Collins area.
ELIGIBLE PROJECTS: HOME funds must be used in the following ways:
1. DIRECT HOUSING ASSISTANCE:
Down payment assistance: To help low-income individuals to purchase housing
for their principal residence. Applicants must meet income guidelines of no more than
80% of the current median household income for the Fort Collins area and will be required
to attend a homebuyer workshop. Assistance is in the form of zero percent deferred loan
up to a maximum of$10,000 to help cover downpayment and closing cost expenses. The
funding is repaid with a 5% simple interest charge when the property is sold or transferred
out of the buyer's name. Restrictions will apply which will assure the property remains
affordable. This is accomplished by the"recapturing"of the HOME investment.
Tenant based rental assistance: To help low-income households avoid eviction and
homelessness, TBRA provides up to two years of housing subsidy and case management
services to stabilize households and put them on the road to self-sufficiency.
2. NEW CONSTRUCTION of units for homeownership as well as rental occupancy targeted
for low-income individuals and families which are developed, sponsored, or owned by
community housing development organizations(CHDOs), non-profit agencies, and for-
profit developers.
3. ACQUISITION of undeveloped, or developed, land resulting in the development or
purchase of units for homeownership as well as rental occupancy. All regulations
regarding income guidelines,purchase price limitations, resale limitations, rental rates,
etc.,will apply to acquisition projects.
. ELIGIBLE PROPERTY TYPES:
• Eligible property types for purchase include both existing property or newly constructed homes.
Eligible property includes a single-family property, a condominium unit, a manufactured home
(including mobile homes on a permanent foundation), or a cooperative unit. For purposes of the
HOME program, homeownership means:
(1) ownership in fee simple title, or
(2) a 99 year leasehold interest, or
(3) ownership or membership in a cooperative, or
(4) an equivalent form of ownership which has been approved by the Department of
Housing and Urban Development.
The value and purchase price of the HOME assisted property to be acquired must not exceed 95%
of the area median purchase price for that type of housing as established by HUD. RECAPTURE
RESTRICTIONS WILL APPLY. (The value must be verified by a qualified appraiser or current
tax assessment.) Initial purchase price limit established by HUD is currently $212,015.
HOME PROGRAM PRIORITIES
The 2005-2009 Consolidated Plan identifies the following priorities for housing related needs:
1. Stimulate housing production for very low, low and moderate income households.
2. Increase home ownership opportunities for very low, low and moderate income
households.
3. Increase the supply of public housing for families and those with special needs.
Implementation and funding of activities to address these priorities will come, in part, from the
City of Fort Collins HOME Investment Partnership Program.
. ATTACHMENT 6
APRIL 2006 °FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
COMMISSION
Meeting held Thursday, April 6, 2006
6:00 p.m. — 8:15 p.;m.
218 North College Avenue
Fort Collins,<Colorado
Commission members present: Staff:
Bob Browning, Chair Maurice Head
Eric Berglund, Vice-Chair Heidi Phelps
Trina Buxton Flores Julie Smith
Michael Kulischeck Stephanie Sydorko
Theresa Ramos-Garcia Melissa Visnic
• Jeff Taylor
Dennis Vanderheiden
Jennifer Wagner
Guests:
Kay Rios, former Affordable Housing Board Chair
Mary Carrahar, Executive Director, Project Self-Sufficiency
MEETING HIGHLIGHTS
Mr. Browning called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m.
Comments from Ms. Zimlich were distributed. Mr. Browning reminded the Commission
of the formality of the session. The Council study session will be held Tuesday, April 25,
2006. At that time, Commission members will present the Commission's
recommendations to Council.
The Commission deliberated on funding recommendations for applications submitted for
the Spring 2006 Competitive Process.
• The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
Minutes Note — Housing, Administration, Public Facilities: All motions brought forth
• for applications are listed. The Final or Standing Motions for each application are noted
as such.
HOUSING
HO-01 Fort Collins Housing Corporation - Village on Swallow. Request: $324,964
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Browning, seconded by Ms. Wagner: To
recommend funding of$300,000.
This was the number one priority for the Affordable Housing Board. There was a
reluctance to support the entire management fee; hence the reduction of some $24,000
in the recommendation. This project needs to be completed, and the existing housing
inventory needs to be maintained. A responsibility exists to keep housing stock in good
condition.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $300,000
HO-02 Fort Collins Housing Authority - First Ste Rental Assistance. Request:
• g v p
$229,920
Moved by Mr. Kulischeck, seconded by Mr. Taylor: To recommend funding of
$229,920, the amended requested amount.
If this program does not receive full funding, the State matching funds are not lost but are
scaled back to the approved amount. Discussion was held concerning available sources
of funds.
Motion withdrawn with consent of the second.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Kulischeck, seconded by Ms. Wagner: To
recommend funding of$194,912 from HOME funds.
This relatively new project is seen as solid and is expected to be successful. State funds
are leveraged well. The project brings money from the State to local recipients.
Motion approved 7-1.
Funding recommendation: $194,912
• HO-03 Accessible Space - Supportive Housing Development Phase II. Request:
$350,000
• FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Berglund: To recommend
full funding.
This program has been studied considerably. The City is in full support. The applicant
will provide much-needed housing for the disabled community in ways that are not
currently offered. The program has achieved good leverage with HUD funds.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $350,000
HO-04 Danco Communities - Redstone Villaae Apartments Phase II. Request:
$341,800
No action taken. [Application withdrawn by applicant.]
Request: 700 000
HO-05 CARE Housing - Green Built Land Acquisition. q $ ,
To recommend funding of 350 000. Motion died for
Moved b Ms. Ramos-Garcia: $ ,
Y
9
lack of a second.
Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To recommend funding of$200,000. Motion died for
lack of a second.
[Discussion was held and action taken on other items.]
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia, seconded by Ms. Wagner: To
recommend funding of$300,000. Subsequently amended, with consent of the
second, to recommend funding of$400,000.
This is a great project with green-build features. The applicant will leverage some of its
own money and may yet obtain a lower price per acre. $300,000 would not be enough to
move forward effectively.
The strategy of tax credits has an uncertain feel to it. With property becoming available in
future years with the Land Bank, it may be more beneficial to bring the project when that
land is available rather than paying market price for the land.
The applicant has a track record of successful projects. The ability to move forward at
this time can bring the land below full price. The availability of tax credits can be made a
contingent part of the contract. The applicant would have two years to successfully
complete land purchase.
Motion approved 6-1, with one abstention.
• Funding recommendation: $400,000
ADMINISTRATION
PA-01 City of Fort Collins - HOME Program Administration. Request: $74,541
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Berglund, seconded by Mr. Taylor: To recommend
full funding.
It was agreed that the administration's effectiveness speaks for itself.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $74,541
PA-02 City of Fort Collins - CDBG Program Administration. Request: $212,306
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Berglund, seconded by Mr. Taylor: To recommend
full funding. Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $212,306
PUBLIC FACILITY
PF-01 Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) - Harmony House Visitation
Center Window Rehabilitation. Request: $7,025
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Brown, seconded by Ms. Buxton Flores: To
recommend full funding.
This is a relatively small request, but the issue is important and needs to be done.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $7,025
Following deliberations, moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Berglund: To
accept the grid as constituted for Housing, Administration, and Public Facilities.
Motion approved unanimously.
•
PUBLIC SERVICE
Staff informed the Commission:
If approved, the Neighbor to Neighbor Rental Assistance contract would be for 15
months rather than for 12 months. If approved, the Women's Resource Center Dental
Care program would be for a 15-month rather than a 12-month contract.
From an administrative and monitoring standpoint, Human Services Program
funding would be preferred for the following projects, if approved in whole or in part:
Neighbor to Neighbor Rental Assistance; Women's Resource Dental Care; Elderhaus;
Disabled Resource Services; and Turning Point.
Minutes Note — Public Service: All motions brought forth for applications are listed.
The Final or Standing Motions for each application are noted as such. The Commission
went through one major initial review on Public Service applications and made ensuing
decisions. At that point, remaining funds were targeted toward the next tiers of need for
those applications which may have received partial funding on the first pass. Additional
motions are listed, where applicable.
PS-01 Fort Collins Housina Corporation - Villaaes: Intensive Case
ManagementlHomeless Prevention. Request: $60,171
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Kulischeck, seconded by Mr. Berglund: To
recommend no funding.
The applicant proposes to create new positions to offer services that are available
elsewhere. The plan is unconvincing in how to address needs that are not already being
met. The proposed funding would constitute the entire funding for the program. No
leverage has been demonstrated. The applicant's history suggests future returns for
continued funding.
Motion passed 6-1, with one abstention.
Funding recommendation: $0
PS-02 Springfield Court Early Learning Center - Sliding Scale Fee Tuition
Assistance. Request: $18,000
Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To recommend full funding of PS-02 and PS-03.
Motion died for lack of a second.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia, seconded by Ms. Wagner: To
recommend full funding.
• Funding for this program is returned to the local economy through the assistance it gives
families. Children have a great place for their care. The requested amount is consistent
Swith other providers, and the location fills a gap in that area of the City.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $18,000
PS-03 Springfield Court Early Learning Center - Colorado Pre-School Program.
Request: $10,400
Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To recommend full funding of PS-02 and PS-03.
Motion died for lack of a second.
Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To recommend funding of$10,000. Motion died for
lack of a second.
Moved by Ms. Wagner, seconded by Mr. Vanderheiden: To recommend no funding.
This State-initiated program has a high cost per client and a low number of clients
served. It is not filling a basic need. Reasons for the higher per child subsidy cost need
to be explored. Upon questioning by Commission members, Staff clarified that lack of
funding would not necessarily doom the program but may result in a financial loss that
• would lead to discontinuation at this site.
Discussion was held over the viability of the program, possible State-level organizational
issues, the possibility of higher fees, the tenuousness of the term "at risk," and the costs
involved in the issues that the program addresses.
Motion failed 3-5.
Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia, seconded by Mr. Kulischeck: To recommend full
funding.
The program takes care of children at a very young age and pays out for society many
times over.
Motion failed 4-4.
Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To recommend funding of$5,200. Motion died for
lack of a second.
Moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To recommend funding of
$6,000.
State staffing standards require a 1:8 rather than a 1:12 teacher-to-student ratio for this
Goprogram. Without proper leveraging, it is unclear how a small amount of funding will
benefit the program sufficiently.
Motion failed 3-5.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Kulischeck, seconded by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To
recommend full funding.
Motion approved 5-3.
Funding recommendation: $10,400
PS-04 B.A.S.E. Camp - Sliding Scale Fee Tuition Assistance. Request: $33,815
Moved by Ms. Buxton Flores, seconded by Ms. Wagner: To recommend funding of
$30,000.
This program is one of the few available to low-income families to help with daycare
expense. This fills a high need; the program has been highly successful and fills a
unique niche for before-and-after school care. Support was voiced for full funding.
FINAL MOTION: Motion amended by Ms. Buxton Flores for full funding, with
consent of the second.
• Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $33,815
PS-05 Rehabilitation and Visiting Nurse Association (RVNA) - Home Health Care
Scholarship Assistance. Request: $35,000
STANDING MOTION: Moved by Mr. Browning, seconded by Ms. Buxton Flores: To
recommend funding of$25,000.
This is a good program that serves a need in the community that is presently not met. It
provides care and aid in transitional and recovery issues. The costs for alternative
care/placement are much higher. Other funding is available for this program.
Motion approved 7-1.
Moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To recommend full funding.
Motion failed 4-4.
• Funding recommendation: $25,000
• PS-06 Elderhaus - Therapy Center Activity Program. Request: $21,000
Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia, seconded by Mr. Vanderheiden: To recommend no
funding.
The majority of clients are in the upper end of the targeted AMI range. The program can
continue without CDBG assistance. These funds would go to expansion of services, and
it is unclear how well this expansion fits into the framework of the program's essential
goals.
Motion approved, 4-3, with one abstention.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Berglund, seconded by Mr. Kulischeck: To
recommend funding of$16,920.
This is the minimum amount requested. The program itself provides a valuable service to
the community and provides a high level of service for the dollars received. It defrays
costs for people who would otherwise pay high fees to put family members in managed
care. The program needs to continue efforts in breaking down barriers in its outreach to
minority community members.
Motion approved, 6-2.
• Funding recommendation: $16,920
PS-07 Education & Life Training Center - Employment Skills Training. Request:
$20,000
Moved by Mr. Vanderheiden, seconded by Mr. Kulischeck: To recommend full
funding.
It is important to provide employment skills to people who do not have them. The
program is expanding appropriately to train within the growing health care arena. There
is some duplication of these services within the community. The program has a
successful history.
Motion failed, 2-6.
Moved by Mr. Vanderheiden, seconded by Mr. Kulischeck: To recommend funding
of$16,900.
This recommendation is intended to disallow the $3,800 figure for salary. This applicant
ranked high in the scoring but does not directly address a basic need issue. However,
the needs it addresses are important for empowerment and self-sufficiency. The charges
for this program are considerably below market and could be raised. In response to
specific comments, Staff clarified that the Workforce Center refers individuals to this
applicant for services that are unduplicated.
Friendly amendment offered by Mr. Taylor, with consent of Mr. Vanderheiden and Mr.
Kulischeck: To recommend funding of $16,200. This amount is the correct calculation
after disallowing the $3,800 salary figure.
Motion approved, 5-3.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Kulischeck, seconded by Mr. Vanderheiden: To
recommend full funding.
Motion approved 6-0, with two abstentions.
Funding recommendation: $20,000
PS-08 Project Self-Sufficiency - Essential Services for Single Parent Families.
Request: $18,000
Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To recommend full funding. Motion died for lack of a
second.
• Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia, seconded by Ms. Buxton Flores: To recommend
funding of$15,000.
The program is highly commendable for the energies it uses in enabling single parents to
realize their potential.
Motion approved 5-2, with one abstention.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia, seconded by Mr. Vanderheiden: To
recommend full funding.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $18,000
PS-09 United Way of Larimer County - Homelessness Prevention Initiative:
Emernencv Rent Assistance. Request: $35,000
Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia, seconded by Mr. Berglund: To recommend no
funding.
Other agencies provide similar services. United Way cannot be an all-encompassing
umbrella. The stated three-year plan to become an independent agency lacks definition.
The program lost CCP funding in the past. $35,000 is not an appropriate level of
• funding.
Motion failed, 2-7.
Moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kulischeck: To recommend full funding for
PS-9, PS-11, and PS-13.
The Commission was disinclined to consider three applications as one package.
Motion failed, 2-6, with one abstention.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Berglund, seconded by Mr. Taylor: To recommend
full funding.
The program achieves a high level of effectiveness for the dollars received. It
demonstrates good leverage from other sources. The program meets a basic need for
many in the community. The rental assistance does not overlap with other efforts, in that
it meets the need before the client reaches a level of desperate last resort.
Motion approved, 6-2.
Funding recommendation: $35,000
PS-10 Volunteers of America - Home Delivered Meal Proaram. Request: $14,600
Moved by Mr. Berglund: To recommend full funding. Motion died for lack of a
second.
Moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Vanderheiden: To recommend funding of
$6,000.
This is the minimum amount requested to obtain matching funds. The program provides
a valuable service and a basic need for this segment of the population. A happy
byproduct of the program is a level of case management as volunteers call upon the
clients.
Motion approved 4-3, with one abstention.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Berglund, seconded by Mr. Kulischeck: To
recommend full funding.
The program addresses basic needs.
• Motion approved 7-1.
Funding recommendation: $14,600
•
PS-11 Neighbor to Neighbor - Comprehensive Housing Counseling. Request:
$61,120
Moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kulischeck: To recommend full funding for
PS-9, PS-11, and PS-13.
The Commission was disinclined to consider three applications as one package.
Motion failed, 2-6, with one abstention.
Moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To recommend funding of
$61,120.
The intent of this motion is to cover the full-time housing counselor. This program is
valuable in providing counseling to first-time home buyers and advising on reverse
mortgages. This entity and Consumer Credit Counseling are the only two entities that
provide this service.
Motion approved unanimously.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Ms. Wagner, seconded by Ms. Taylor: To increase the
recommendation by the remaining Public Service funds, for a total
recommendation of$58,599.
Motion approved 6-1, with one abstention.
Funding recommendation: $58,599
PS-12 Disabled Resource Services - Access to Independence (ATI) Program.
Request: $20,002.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Kulischeck, seconded by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To
recommend full funding.
The program targets a high-needs segment of the population. This serves an important
role in the community for those who needs its help. It assists in independent living. The
housekeeping portion does constitute a newer program without plans for long-term
funding. Part of long-term funding for programs such as this is seeking grants. This
serves the lowest of income groups, and the services are very good. Case management
constitutes a more worthy area of funding than others within the program. The program
gained the highest ranking among the applicants.
. Motion approved unanimously.
• Funding recommendation: $20,002
PS-13 Nejahbor to Neighbor - Emergency Rent Assistance. Request: $15,000
Moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kulischeck: To recommend full funding for
PS-9, PS-11, and PS-13.
The Commission was disinclined to consider three applications as one package.
Motion failed, 2-6, with one abstention.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Ms. Buxton Flores, seconded by Mr. Taylor: To
recommend full funding.
Rent assistance needs endorsement. This applicant has a good track record. Applicants
are carefully screened for best provision of services. This is a last safety net for many of
its clients.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $15,000
•
PS-14 Northern Colorado AIDS Project - Case Management and Homeless
Prevention Program. Request: $19,000
Moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Buxton Flores: To recommend funding of
$15,000.
The motion is intended to encompass 20% of a case manager's salary and exclude rent
and utility assistance, which is duplicated elsewhere.
Motion approved 6-2.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Berglund, seconded by Ms. Wagner: To
recommend full funding.
This program is unique and provides a highly valuable service to the targeted population.
Rent and utility assistance is specific to this specialized clientele, who may have barriers
elsewhere. The clients of this program have nowhere else to turn.
Motion approved unanimously.
• Funding recommendation: $19,000
PS-15 Catholic Charities Northern - Shelter and Supportive Services. Request:
$42,158
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Browning, seconded by Mr. Berglund: To
recommend full funding.
The program is an essential part of the continuum of care for the affected population. It
fills a basic need and has a good track record. This program addresses the neediest
population in the community.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $42,158
PS-16 Catholic Charities Northern - Senior Services. Request: $15,000
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Browning, seconded by Ms. Wagner: To
recommend no funding.
This program duplicates services elsewhere and may be more focused on information
and referral than intensive case management. The program does not appear to be a
• high priority for the Archdiocese, and the apparent financial reserves can easily provide
the funding.
Motion approved, 7-0, with one abstention.
Funding recommendation: $0
PS-17 Turnina Point Center for Youth & Family Development - Structured
Transition Emancipation Proaram (S.T.E.P.). Request: $16,000
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Berglund, seconded by Mr. Kulischeck: To
recommend no funding.
The program was in existence before, and was stopped due to discontinued State
funding. The presentation and application did not clarify how the program framework
would differ and be more stable for this iteration. The applicant did not provide adequate
answers to the question of resolving upcoming debt. Without a good plan for the future,
it is not appropriate to revive plans from the past that have not worked. The financial
future for this program is uncertain. The entity can exist as-is without assuming the
obligations of this new program.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $0
•
PS-18 Respite Care - Sliding Scale Fee Tuition Assistance. Request: $20,000
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Kulischeck, seconded by Ms. Wagner: To
recommend full funding.
This program provides a unique service within the community. Clients are in desperate
need of the services provided. The facility provides a high level of care for the children.
Motion approved, 6-2.
Funding recommendation: $20,000
PS-19 Food Bank for Larimer County - Kids Cafe. Request: $15,472
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Browning, seconded by Ms. Buxton Flores: To
recommend full funding.
For some children, this is their only meal. It is difficult to take food out of kids' mouths.
The program apparently did not think through its continuing funding mechanisms, and
the future sources of funding are unknown. The need is not met elsewhere within the
community.
Motion approved, 6-2.
Funding recommendation: $15,472
PS-20 Larimer Center for Mental Health - Part-Time Case Manager. Request:
$25,000
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Kulischeck, seconded by Mr. Vanderheiden: To
recommend no funding.
The program is interesting in concept and has apparent value, but other programs
address higher priorities. Revenues are significant, and other funding sources may well
be available. There may be some changes and other options with the proposed
Community Corrections ballot issue in November. There is not much current leveraging
in this program in terms of staffing salary requested.
Motion approved 4-1, with three abstentions.
• Funding recommendation: $0
• PS-21 United Day Care Center - Sliding Scale Fee Tuition Assistance. Request:
$60,500
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Browning, seconded by Mr. Berglund: To
recommend full funding.
Children need this service. The program has demonstrated success and helps to keep
parents working and self-sufficient.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $60,500
PS-22 United Way of Larimer County - 2-1-1 Community Resource Referral.
Request: $35,000
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Ms. Ramos-Garcia, seconded by Mr. Kulischeck: To
recommend no funding.
The 40-hour training for paid employees is extensive, but not unrealistic for volunteers to
complete instead. Being included in the United Way umbrella does not improve flexibility
• for the program. This program does not directly impact critical issues of food, health,
safety, and shelter for its entire spectrum of clients served.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $0
PS-23 Crossroads Safehouse. Inc. - Advocacy Program. Request: $46,800
Moved by Ms. Buxton Flores: To recommend funding of$36,400. Motion died for
lack of a second.
Moved by Ms. Buxton Flores, seconded by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To recommend full
funding.
There appears to be an imminent need for this program to provide resources other than
strict housing. It is disheartening to hear that the program could be unstaffed at times,
although it may be because this outreach facility is new. The facility has apparently been
opened with a "if we build it, they will come' approach, but it is necessary to provide
better planning. Crossroads Safehouse addresses basic safety issues, while this facility
does not address basic needs.
. Motion failed, 0-8.
• Moved by Ms. Wagner, seconded by Mr. Vanderheiden: To recommend no funding.
The program provides for new services, while a higher need exists for the fundamental
program already in operation.
Motion approved, 6-2.
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Browning, seconded by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To
recommend funding of$36,400.
This level is the minimum requested. The entity performs a basic service to an at-risk
population and needs ongoing support. The need in the community has increased
substantially.
Motion approved 4-3, with one abstention.
Funding recommendation: $36,400
PS-24 Women's Resource Center - Dental Care Assistance Program. Request:
$18,098
• FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Berglund, seconded by Ms. Ramos-Garcia: To
recommend full funding.
There is a high need for this program. Often those people with health insurance do not
even have dental needs covered.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation - $18,098
PS-25 Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) - Harmony House Visitation
Center Scholarship Assistance. Request: $7,856
FINAL MOTION: Moved by Mr. Berglund, seconded by Mr. Browning: To
recommend no funding.
The service that this program provides is phenomenal, but the scholarship supports the
wrong side of that service. The targeted people have made poor choices and appear
under court order. Funding is more appropriately targeted to children than perpetrators. If
the program is seeing a shortage in funding, it should raise its fees.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation - $0
Following deliberations, moved by Mr.Vanderheiden, seconded by Mr.
Kulischeck: To accept the grid as constituted for Public Service. Motion approved
unanimously.
lie
Attachment 7
• Public Service Category
Focus Questions for CDBG Commission Decision Making
"The Big Framework"
• One of the three main national objectives for CDBG funds is "benefit to low and moderate
income persons or households."
• Historically, the City's Human Service Program funds have been used for various services
benefiting primarily low and moderate income persons in Fort Collins.
Questions:
1) Is it serving the lower end income levels?
2) How many is it serving?
3) Is there a majority of Fort Collins area residents being served?
4) Is it a good cost/unit(understanding that the cost of case management is more than the cost of
a hot meal)?
. 5) Who else needs to be stepping up to the plate in terms of funding or service (volunteers)?
6) Maslow's Hierarchy: Is it a more "feel-good service", or is it critical in terms of:
a) Food, shelter or other basic needs
b) Health and safety issues
c) Serving a special population, or
d) Self-sufficiency or major empowerment(teaching to fish vs. giving a fish)?
7) Is there anyone else in the community who can or is serving this need (i.e.,trying to avoid
duplication of service)?
8) Is City money being used as "gap financing", match money, or seed money?
9) Is this a program/project where City $ is really making a difference for, i.e., -- it's nobody
else's"baby" or there's been a critical cut in funding?
10) Has project/program been aggressively seeking other funding sources?
Rev: 2/06
•
ATTACHMENT 8
• City of Fort Collins Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Commission
Formulation of Fundina Recommendations Session
The CDBG Commission has prepared this hand-out to help you to understand how the
Commission's meeting for the purpose of formulating funding recommendations to the City
Council is conducted. It is the Commission's wish that our methodology be understandable to
even the most casual observers. As you might imagine, the entire process is complex and time-
consuming, especially given that grant requests greatly exceed the amount of available funding.
City Staff will prepare an electronic matrix showing each application, the funding requested, and
the total funds available. The Commission will discuss the pros and cons of every application.
The order which applications are discussed is not important and there is no danger of `running
out' of funds before all applications are fully discussed. There will be preliminary funding
motions made, seconded, and approved throughout the process and these recommendations will
be added into the matrix. It must be emphasized that the matrix is a working document, and any
figures used, whether they be for full, partial, or zero funding, are for discussion purposes only. It
is also possible that the total funds listed in the matrix might exceed the total of funds available at
this point of the process.
After each application has been discussed, the Commission will start to adjust the matrix to start
producing its recommendation for funding to Council. Funding contained on the matrix may be
drastically changed in either a positive or negative manner during this part of the process. When
the Commission agrees on the matrix as indicated by a motion to accept it, a second to the
motion, and a positive majority vote, the process is over and the recommendation will be
forwarded to the Council.
While the Commission's main purpose is to provide Council with the best funding alternative, the
Commission is also sensitive that the funds being recommended for expenditure are taxpayer-
provided. For this reason, it is entirely possible that not all funds will be recommended for
expenditure, even if there are some applicants recommended for zero, or reduced, funding.
The last point to be made is while this meeting is open to the public, to be fair to applicants who
are not present at the meeting, no public comments will be taken.
ATTACHMENT
COMPETITIVE PROCESS
2006 SPRING CYCLE
City Council Work Session
April 25,2006
Applications for Funding
• 33 Proposals Submitted
5 Affordable Housing Applications
1 Public Facility Application
—25 Public Service Applications
2 Administration Applications
(HOME&CDBG).
Overall Funding Picture
Approx.$2.6 Million in Requested
Funding
$2,141,535 in Available Funding
—CDBG Program-HUD
—Human Services Program(HSP)-City
—HOME Program-HUD
—Affordable Housing Fund-City
1
Recommendations
for
Funding
by the
CDBG Commission
Recommendations Summary
$2,141,535 Available Funds
• $2,035,748 Programs and Projects(95%)
$ 105,787 CDBG Carryover to
Fall 2006 Cycle(5%)
Recommended %of
Funding Total HUD Category
$1,2",912 58% Affordable Housing
$ 7,025 1 % Public Facilities
$ 286,847 13% Administration
2
Recommended %of
Funding Total HUD Category
$ 496,964 23% Public Service
(15%HUD&City HSP)
$ 105,787 5% Carryover CDBG
$ 2,141,535 100% Total
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
• $300,000 FCHC:Village on Swallow
Rehab
• $ 194,912 FCHC: First Step
Rental Assistance
• $350,000 ASI :Supportive Housing Ph II
City Development Fees
AFFORDABLE HOUSING (cont.)
• $400,000 CARE Housing
Land Acquisition
• $ 0 Danco
[Application Withdrawn]
3
PUBLIC FACILITY
• $7,025 CASA-Harmony House:
Window Rehab
PUBLIC SERVICE
BFO Process:
• City Human Services Program funds
(former Community Partnership$)
now part of Competitive Process
• So far, has transitioned well to City
oversight
PUBLIC SERVICE
• $164,964 CDBG Public Service$
(15%limit-HUD)
• $332,000 Human Services Program$
7 Projects-CDBG$
11 Projects-Human Services
Program$
1 Project-Combined Funds
4
PUBLIC SERVICE
25 Proposals
Recommendations:
• 15 Full Funding
• 4 Partial (mosti)Funding
• 6 No Funding
COMPETITIVE PROCESS
2006 SPRING CYCLE
City Council Work Session
April 25,2006
5