Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1982/07/27 Item 8COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item 8 Meeting Date 7/27/82 I TITLE: Resolution ~~.~~ Approving an Agreement with East County Council on Aging for Shared Housing Program ITTED BY: Community Development Director ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X ) On ay 4, the Council approved submission of the Block Grant application for FY 1982-83, including the $20,000 funding of a Shared Housing Program. Sub equently, the Council directed staff to report further on the anticipated eff ctiveness of the proposed program. Further research has been done and an agr ement has been drafted. Therefore, it is my RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution approving the agreement for a Shared Housing Program. BO DS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Affordable Housing Subcommittee of the Human Relations Commission approved the Shared Housing concept on Sep ember 9, 1981. DISCUSSION: To satisfy the Council's desire for further information on the anticipated eff ctiveness and efficiency of the Shared Housing Program, I have researched fur her the experiences of other jurisdictions having shared housing programs, and I have obtained further details on proposed program operation from East Cou ty Council on Aging (ECCOA). The knowledge gained has upheld my belief tha the Shared Housing Program as proposed will be a valuable component of our Housing Assistance Plan. OTH R SHARED HOUSING PROGRAMS: It is difficult to establish criteria by whi h to measure the efficacy of a shared housing program, due to the newness of the concept. The oldest shared housing program I could discover had been in peration for only 3-1/2 years, and the total number of programs from which data was available was just seven. As program results might be expected to va with the size and character of the jurisdiction, with economic health and wi h housing conditions, and with the level of funding, the following list pr vides only a gross standard of evaluation: Average Average Ju isdiction Yearly Funding Yearly Matches Cost per Match Sa Jose, CA $95,000 193 $492 Se ttle, WA $40,000 42 $952 Na sau County, NY $18,000 80 $225 Lo Angeles, CA (1) $75,000 150 $500 Lo Angeles, CA (2) $175,000 350 $500 Wa hington, DC $15,000 18 $833 La Mesa, CA $5,000 14 $357 Page 2, Item 8 Meeting Date 7/27/82 ECCO PROGRAM: I have corresponded with ECCOA staff to further clarify prog am projections and the intended budget. Additionally, I have stipulated cond'tions in the attached agreement which will assist the City in gauging the succ ss of the program. On he issue of acceptable performance for the current fiscal year, some comp rison with the programs cited above may be somewhat instructive. ECCOA anti ipates making 50 matches for this fiscal year. If this goal is acco plished, the cost per match would be $400, which would compare very favo ably with the overall average for the programs above of $552. Given that star -up activities will occupy staff time and energies at the start of this prog am year, it is my opinion that 40 matches for the year would be an acce table level of success and would recommend refunding for fiscal year 1983 84. Forty matches for $20,000 yields a cost per match of $500, still bett r than the overall average for the programs investigated. Quar erly reports to the City on program activity are required by the agre ment. This monitoring device will allow the staff to evaluate the prog ess and performance of the Shared Housing Program, and to keep the Coun it apprised. I would anticipate coming to the Council prior to the deve opment of the 1983-84 Block Grant application with an evaluation of the Shard Housing Program based on these quarterly reports. Therefore, the Coun it would be able to deliberate at an early date on the desirability of fund ng the program again, and the Council would have the opportunity to make ECCO aware of its evaluation of their performance. The ouncil had asked some questions regarding the staffing levels for the prog am and whether reductions could be anticipated in ongoing years. The foil wing points should be made: The proposed staffing for FY 1982-83 is two half-time persons, a Coordinator and a Clerical/Intake Worker. Additionally, some volunteers will assist. Increase or decrease in staffing needs would principally be a product of program activity. It is true that in succeeding years, staffing costs per match would be less than the initial year, which involves start-up activities. However, it is also true that if the program does successfully address a real housing need in Chula Vista, and if a waiting list of participants exists, ECCOA might request additional funding for additional staffing. It is hard to say that increased efficiency would lead to reduced staffing needs, except on a staff-time per match basis. The Council decision on additional staffing funding for ongoing years would, then, be based on an appraisal of both the need for the program and performance of the program staff 1 PROP~SED AGREEMENT: Several points in the attached agreement with ECCOA (Exh bit 1) to fund a Shared Housing Program should be noted. -~o95s Page 3, Item 8 Meeting Date 7/27/82 Fi Co pr is is do re Ad SC Se ond, the total amount of the agreement will not exceed $20,000. The at ached budget (Exhibit 2) itemizes the allowable uses of these funds, and th agreement duplicates that itemization. Payment will be made by an initial pa ent of $10,000 to cover start-up costs, and when expenditures of these fu ds are justified by invoice, the balance will be paid by monthly payments, ag in justified by invoices. An third, the agreement stipulates that ECCOA will make detailed quarterly ac ivity reports to the City, allowing the City to monitor program progress, an allowing the City to exercise if necessary its right by the agreement to to urinate funding for deficiency or non-performance. SU MARY: The Shared Housing Program represents a potentially cost-effective me ns of accomplishing the City's housing assistance goals. If 40 matches are ac omplished in FY 1982-83, at a cost of $500 per match, that represents an ex enditure of $250 per person served. For a one-time expenditure of $250, we wi 1 have assisted an individual to arrange affordable housing which may last fo years. I know of no more cost effective housing program. FI CAL IMPACT: A maximum of $20,000 will be required by this agreement. By co tinuation resolution, a portion of those funds have been allocated to Block Gr nt Project Account # 631-6310-BG123. DG dl WP 0051X Chula Visa, Caiir'~rr,~a Dated st, the agreement recognizes the arrangement between ECCOA and South County ncil on Aging (SCCOA) regarding the program. The actual delivery of gram service will be done by SCCOA, under a subagreement with ECCOA. SCCOA a parallel agency to ECCOA operating in the Chula Vista area, and as such, the appropriate entity to deliver a Shared Housing Program. However, SCCOA s not have nonprofit corporate status, which disallows them from hiring loyees and necessitates that they operate under the auspicies of ECCOA's porate status. Under the terms of the agreement, ECCOA stands totally ponsible for use of the Block Grant Funds and for delivery of service. itionally, ECCOA is constrained from any subagreements other than with OA, and ECCOA guarantees the City auditing rights to SCCOA's records. iP ~~s