Posts Tagged ‘100k Homes’

The Omaha Metro Area Continuum of Care for the Homeless said Tuesday that it’s been awarded $1.15 million for new permanent supportive housing programs. The agency says the some of that money will help provide 60 additional beds for the homeless. That’s on top of a previously announced $1.3 million renewal project award. Omaha mayor Jim Suttle said the award is a major stride for Omaha’s vision to end homelessness.

At the same time Sen. Ben Nelson said that he wants a complete audit of the Omaha Housing Authority’s finances to answer questions about how the agency handled more than $5 million of its federal funding.

OHA’s finances have been a problem in recent months. Earlier this year the agency had trouble paying its bills, leading the OHA board to pass a package of spending cuts and layoffs in March. OHA also received an “F” in financial management on a recent report card from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

OHA is required to repay $1.1 million in federal Section 8 voucher funds that were improperly used for the agency’s operations last year, Nelson and OHA board members said. In addition, over the years, OHA incorrectly used $1.5 million from another fund and loaned $2.5 million in public housing funds to its nonprofit development affiliate, Housing in Omaha.

Omaha is not alone in these problems of mismanagement of HUD funds. Many agencies in cities across the nation are being audited because of mismanagement of HUD funds.
http://www.hudoig.gov/recovery/ARRAaudits.php

The problems include financial mismanagement, fraud, and failure to comply with red tape. These problems were found in a broad array of programs. A Cato essay on HUD scandals explains why the department is particularly susceptible to such problems:
A root cause of HUD scandals is that the department has a large number of costly subsidy programs, and each involves a tangled web of stakeholders. Many HUD programs divide responsibilities between federal, state, and local policymakers, and they involve private interests such as developers and financial companies. The multiplicity of interests and the complexity of the programs create opportunities for people in the public and private sectors to take personal advantage of these programs.”

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/hud-auditor-finds-problems

I can’t help but wonder if this has anything to do with so many homeless families that have been denied Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing (H.P.R.P.) assistance. Many families are denied assistance because they have no sustainable income. (That’s why they’re homeless)

A 30-year-old mother of a 7-year-old daughter and a set of 16 month old triplets have been living at the Siena Francis House, 1702 Nicholas St. in Omaha, where she shares a tiny room with her four children.

She lost her apartment because the triplets’ father, who was working and paying rent, is no longer in the picture. It was too hard for her to juggle full-time employment and child care she tries to work out with help from relatives.

She has finished high school but has no college. None of the three jobs she’s interviewed for since arriving at the shelter March 16 have called her back. Her 1987 Crown Victoria barely runs. She doesn’t trust it to haul her children, and there isn’t enough space.

Therefore her family is living at the shelter in a tiny toy room just off the TV room and not separated by any door; there’s a tiny playground on a strip of grass fenced in that offers little privacy and separation.

There are a myriad of personalities sharing their limited space. Some women are in the shelter’s addiction recovery program. Some have mental illnesses. As cute and happy as those blue-eyed, round-faced chubby triplets are, they are hardly noticed by some women crashing out in front of the single TV.

She is trying to get into an affordable apartment or home. The Omaha Housing Authority, the state’s biggest landlord for the poor, has a two-year waiting list for its Section 8 program. Section 8 is the federal rent voucher program that reduces rents on the private market and offers more housing choice to low-income people.

The OHA’s attorney George Achola, informed about her situation Wednesday, said he’d see if there was a way to help her sooner. Her main advocate at the shelter is trying to get her federal aid like a small monthly welfare check but in the meantime, she has no other option for her family but to stay at the shelter.

She is not the only homeless mother. As of midweek, Omaha’s three emergency shelters counted 110 mothers and 148 children. The actual numbers are probably higher because the mothers often double up with relatives or friends and not part of an official count.

Due to privacy concerns I am unable to contact this woman (or anyone else who lives in shelters) but I would be curious to know if she was given the opportunity to apply for HPRP assistance or if she too, would be denied assistance. Even though many of the chronic homeless have been helped by this program such as the woman in the video below:

It seems that many hard working families have fallen through the cracks simply due to the fact that they have fallen on hard times and currently have no sustainable income.

I would also be curious to know just how the $2.45 million in funds that was awarded to the Omaha Metro Area Continuum of Care for the Homeless (MACCH) was used.

Is the funding for HPRP also going to be audited by Senator Nelson? Will the audit include funding for MACCH? Once the audit is done will the public have access to those documents?

These are just a few of the unanswered questions many may have.

As many of you know, I spent months investigating HPRP with an email and letter writing campaign contacting to many officials in city and state government including Senator Ben Nelson and HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan with very little success.

Now with recent reports of mismanagement of funds it appears that the saying is true that, “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Tad DeHaven of the CATO Institute wrote, “We have learned that when the government intervenes in the housing industry, politically driven decisions lead to corruption and economic distortion, not efficient public policies. The federal government should begin withdrawing from housing markets, including dismantling the Department of Housing and Urban Development.”
http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/hud/scandals

Maybe it’s time for the Homeless Community to march on Washington so that our leaders can see the enormity of the homeless problem up close and personal.

Remember, “By justice a king gives a country stability, but those who are greedy for bribes tear it down.” Proverbs 29:4 NIV

Is it better to be chronically homeless?

There are 671,859 people experiencing homelessness on any given night in the United States – roughly 22 of every 10,000 people are homeless.  Of that number, 37 percent are people in families and 63 percent are individuals.  18 percent of the homeless population is considered “chronic,” and 20 percent of the homeless population is made up of veterans.

In the past weeks I have been looking into HUD’s Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) and how it has been affecting the homeless community. HPRP, when implemented correctly, has been very successful in many major cities across the country.

http://www.endhomelessness.org/content/article/detail/3057

Below is a video that highlights how communities across the country are decreasing homelessness among families:

http://www.endhomelessness.org/content/article/detail/1902

The problems I have found are not in the program itself, but with the sub grantors in many of the cities. Because while HUD established baseline eligibility criteria for the HPRP program, local communities have discretion to institute locally defined targeting and sustainability determinants that may be more detailed and specific than those established by HUD.

Several providers of time limited rental assistance question whether households can sustain their housing after their subsidy ends. This fear has led some of these programs, including some funded by HPRP, to screen out potential recipients because of concerns about future housing cost burden.

The HPRP funds represent a time-limited resource to assist households that are experiencing a housing crisis.  Administrators of the HPRP program are required to not only document eligibility for the program, but also assess a household’s ability to sustain housing after the temporary housing stability assistance is exhausted.  This determination of sustainability can be somewhat subjective but must be documented and verified at the time the household applies for HPRP assistance.

Unfortunately, for those families who are facing the prospect of homelessness, they must jump through all sorts of bureaucratic hoops in order to qualify for HPRP assistance. What the sub grantors don’t realize is that by the time these families get approved for HPRP assistance that would have allowed them to stay in their homes, many of them are forced to move out and either move into shelters or find other places to live. Some of them are forced to stay with friends or relatives who are struggling themselves or live in their cars because the feel that many shelters are not safe for their young children.

Chronic Homelessness

According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness an estimated 63 percent of people who experience homelessness at any given point in time are individuals – or single adults. Most enter and exit the homeless system fairly quickly. The remainder lives in the homeless assistance system; in a combination of shelters, hospitals, jails, and prisons; or on the streets. An overwhelming majority (80 percent) of single adult shelter users enters the homeless system only once or twice, stay just over a month, and do not return. Approximately 9 percent enter nearly five times a year and stay nearly two months each time. This group utilizes 18 percent of the system’s resources.

The remaining 10 percent enter the system just over twice a year and spend an average of 280 days per stay—virtually living in the system and utilizing nearly half its resources. Many of these individuals are defined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as chronically homeless.

They often cycle between homelessness, hospitals, jails, and other institutional care and often have a complex medical problem, a serious mental illness like schizophrenia, and/or alcohol or drug addiction. There are approximately 123,790 chronically homeless individuals nationwide on any given night. Although chronic homelessness represents a small share of the overall homeless population, chronically homeless people use up more than 50 percent of the services.

The 100,000 Homes Campaign launched by Common Ground has been initiated in many cities across the country with the goal of housing 100,000 chronically homeless by July of 2013. To date, 5,918 chronically homeless have been moved into permanent housing. So far 58 communities have gotten involved with this program.

I think it’s great that so many communities have joined this campaign but how can people maintain housing if they haven’t first addressed their substance abuse problems?

On the 100,000 Homes web site they say that their priority is to help the most vulnerable homeless get into housing first, then work with each person to improve their health, including addressing substance abuse problems that would interfere with their ability to remain housed.

The providers are able to quickly move people into permanent housing and many of the chronic homeless are only required to pay 30 percent of their income toward rent. So in most cases it’s fairly easy for them to afford to stay in an apartment they select to move into.

While I applaud this system I still see many honest hardworking families that are falling through the cracks simply because of our current economy they fell behind on bills and rent. These are people who are not considered to be chronically homeless. They do not have addictions or mental disabilities. They have simply run into some unfortunate financial difficulties.

Many of the chronically homeless that are being helped by the 100,000 Homes Campaign have abused their bodies with drugs and alcohol for years. That is the primary reason that some of them remain homeless for so long. I wonder if simply giving them permanent housing will change their lifestyle- Or will they use it to promote the lifestyle they’ve become so accustomed to?

Below is a video showing how the 100,000 Homes Campaign is working. Notice how they show her multiple apartments before she accepts the third one as her new home. Why so picky when you’re homeless at the time? Most families that I know who are struggling financially would accept the first one that was shown to them.

You Tube Video:

 

According to The National Alliance to End Homelessness, the federal government has established a benchmark of 30 percent of income as the maximum amount a household should pay for housing. This level helps ensure that households can afford housing and other necessities such as food, health care and clothing. Evidence indicates that housing is much more stable when housing costs meet this standard. For example, households that receive Housing Choice Vouchers—which limit housing costs to 30 percent of income—have much lower rates of homelessness and housing instability. However, many households do not become homeless even though they pay far more than 30 percent of their income for housing. More than half of households in poverty spend more than half their income for housing, which is generally considered the threshold for “severe housing cost burden.” In other words, reasonable housing cost burdens—such as the 30 percent federal standard—are the exception among households in poverty. Despite these housing cost burdens, no more than 10 percent of people in poverty become homeless over the course of a year.

The findings indicate that homelessness prevention and re-housing providers should not screen out potential recipients solely because of potentially high housing cost burden in the future. Once a prevention or re-housing program addresses the immediate housing crisis, most households will avoid future episodes of homelessness, even if they have very high housing cost burdens. Though these housing cost burdens cause hardship for the households that face them, and although deeper and longer term subsidy would be far preferable, when only short term assistance is available, it is preferable to homelessness.

So why do we spend so much more time and energy helping the chronic homeless than on helping low income families? I believe it’s because the chronic homeless are the ones that are more visible. They are the squeaky wheel that gets the oil.

Over the past few months I have contacted many political leaders in my own state as well as in Washington D. C. with little or no response. Most don’t want to address the issue.

Hopefully with the newly elected officials something will be done to decrease family homelessness. I pray that it does.