HEARTH Funding Opportunities Task Group

3

Chicago Continuum of Care

HEARTH Funding Opportunities Task Group

March 27, 2017 meeting

All Chicago Offices, 651 W. Washington, Suite 504

10:30am – 12pm

Attendees

In person: Billy Sharpe, Larry Smith, Robert Cunningham, Anna Lee, Kat Johnson, LaTrecia Chance, Dan Hostetler, Chris O’Hara, Dorothy Yancy, Sharon Cargile

By phone: John Egan, Renita White

I.  Welcome & Introductions

Dave welcomed everyone to the first meeting. Introductions were made.

II.  Goal of HEARTH FOTG

Dave reviewed the goal of the HEARTH FOTG and solicited questions and feedback.

III.  Review & Complete Slate

The current slate was reviewed. There are open slots. The group provided recommendations to fill key stakeholder positions. Dave will reach out to those individuals.

IV.  Selection of Co-chairs

Co-chairs elected:

·  Chris O’Hara

·  Anna Lee

All voted in favor, no abstentions.

V.  Review of FY 2016 Ranking Policies & FY 2016 NOFA Highlights

Dave reviewed the FOTG recommendations and NOFA outcomes for 2016. Though the system saw a net gain of ~ $2mill, 7 existing programs at the bottom of Tier 2 were cut, which was the first time existing programs had been cut through this process. As a CoC, our overall score was higher in 2016 than the year before.

Programs are scored using an evaluation tool, which looks at several things, including:

·  Agency overall

·  Program component (asks each program to show through their model type what kinds of outcomes they’re having)

Dave will share the evaluation tool with the group.

The NOFA changes from year to year, but is generally similar to the year before. It can be released any time between May and June and CoCs generally have 2 – 3 months to complete the application.

VI.  2017 Evaluation Tool Process update

The evaluation tool subcommittee manages the evaluation tool process. All agencies submitted evaluations on time this year (end of February). Agencies who do not turn their evaluation in on time cannot be considered for funding.

Timeline and appeals process:

·  All Chicago gives a preliminary scorecard back to each agency within 7 days. Agencies can appeal an individual question. Appeals were due last week, are being reviewed this week, and next week an updated scorecard will go out (depending on the outcome of the appeal).

·  Agencies can appeal to the Collaborative Applicant Committee (All Chicago), or to the board, which has an appeal committee. There are various levels and opportunities for agencies to appeal their scores.

·  Final scores should be available by mid-April.

There was discussion of the NOFA process during this part of the agenda:

·  John recommended that the FOTG develop policies before applications are in and scored, to make decisions easier later.

·  Larry asked for guidance on what HUD’s priorities may be for the upcoming year.

o  Dave directed the group to the CoC program implementation considerations (page 2 of the NOFA highlights handout). There are some indications up front about what HUD is looking to fund, and there should be similar indications in the new NOFA.

o  Chris added that in addition to what’s in the document, transitional housing was still considered viable by HUD for youth and situations involving domestic violence.

o  Last year, All Chicago brought Norm Suchar from HUD to speak with leadership, and he reinforced these points. However, Dave emphasized that the group should look not only at HUD’s priorities but what works for the continuum.

VII.  Overview of HEARTH FOTG – 2017 activities

Dave went over a one-page handout outlining what the FOTG should work on this year leading up to and including the NOFA application process.

Dave suggested that after the FOTG reviews the Program Models Chart, leaders of agencies have a chance to explain their challenges and day to day work to the FOTG. Anna suggested that if possible, these conversations happen on site. Dave will consider this as planning moves forward.

John suggested service providers have an opportunity to speak with the FOTG about their priorities and suggestions, because they do not have a voting role. Dave let the group know that the SPC would send representatives to future meetings.

Dave reminded the group that the FOTG’s job is to manage the rankings toward the NOFA, not to evaluate agencies. To help the FOTG feel comfortable with the way evaluation is done, they want to bring members of those subcommittees in to present about their processes. Chris recommended Kathy Wilson as a representative from the evaluation tool group to keep the FOTG informed.

VIII.  Determine Data Needs

The group suggested the following needs for additional information:

·  Chris suggested the FOTG get a copy of the debrief from last year’s NOFA.

·  Anna suggested setting a template for reporting to the CoC board of directors so they are aware of what the FOTG is doing as we go along.

·  Chris asked if Dave could share who received TA.

·  John wonders if we have information about CoCs who have been successful and what we can learn from them.

o  Dave will keep his eye on this. The challenge is that each CoC ranks differently, so direct comparisons aren’t always possible.

o  Chris thought if we do this, we might look at the past 2 – 3 years, and at cities with similar populations, to get a fuller sense of patterns. For example, Houston is similar in size and population and lessons may be more comparable.

·  Chris requested more information on the Homeless Prevention Fund.

IX.  Set Next Meeting Dates

Group agreed to meet roughly every 3 weeks. The following dates were agreed:

·  April 17 from 9:30 – 11:30am

·  May 11 from 11:30am – 1pm

·  May 31 from 11am – 12:30pm

X.  Adjourn

The meeting adjourned at noon.