H U D   S E C T I O N   8 1 1   P R A

Project Rental Assistance Program

Process

Evaluation

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Visit PD&R’s website

huduser.gov

to find this report and others sponsored by HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R).

Other services of HUD User, PD&R’s research information service, include listservs, special interest reports, bimonthly publications (best practices, significant studies from other sources), access to public use databases, and a hotline (800-245-2691) for help accessing the information you need.

H U D   S E C T I O N   8 1 1   P R A

Project Rental Assistance Program

Process

Evaluation

Prepared for

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Prepared by

Randal Pinkett

Christopher Jones

Kenya Crumel

Jie Dong

BCT Partners

Melissa Vandawalker

Gretchen Locke

Jill Khadduri

Abt Associates Inc.

January 2018

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgments

This Process Evaluation Report is the last of two major deliverables of the first phase of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Demonstration Program evaluation. BCT Partners grateful y acknowledges the talented efforts of many individuals and organizations that assisted in this work.

These organizations include the U.S. Department of Housing and Development (HUD), Technical

Assistance Col aborative (TAC), and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

We also acknowledge and are grateful for input from the fol owing 2012 811 PRA program grantees:

•  California Grantee Partnership: California Housing Finance Agency, California Department of Health Care Services, California Department of Housing and Community Development, Tax

Credit Al ocation Committee, and California Department of Developmental Services.

•  Delaware Grantee Partnership: Delaware State Housing Authority and Delaware Department of Health and Social Services.

•  Georgia Grantee Partnership: Georgia Housing and Finance Authority Department of Community Affairs, Georgia Department of Community Health, Georgia Department of Behavioral and

Health Developmental Disabilities, Georgia Department of Human Services Area Agency on

Aging, and Gateway Partners.

•  Il inois Grantee Partnership: Il inois Housing Development Authority, Il inois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, Il inois Department of Human Services, Il inois Department of Aging, and the Office of the Governor.

•  Louisiana Grantee Partnership: Louisiana Housing Corporation, Louisiana Housing Authority, and Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals.

•  Maryland Grantee Partnership: Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development, Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, and Maryland Department of Disabilities.

•  Massachusetts Grantee Partnership: Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (Division of Housing Development), Massachusetts Department of Housing

and Community Development (Bureau of Rental Assistance), Massachusetts Rehabilitation

Commission, and Executive Office of Health and Human Services and MassHealth.

•  Minnesota Grantee Partnership: Minnesota Housing Finance Agency and Minnesota Department of Human Services.

•  Pennsylvania Grantee Partnership: Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency and Pennsylvania Department of Human Services.

•  Texas Grantee Partnership: Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, Texas Health and Human Services Commission, Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services, Texas

Department of Family and Protective Services, and Texas Department of State Health Services.

•  Washington Grantee Partnership: Washington Department of Commerce and Washington

Department of Social and Health Services.

Disclaimer

The contents of this report represent the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development or the U.S.

government.

ii

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Contents

Contents

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................vii

Background of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Program and Report Overview .................. 1

Section 811 and PRA Programs ....................................................................................................................................... 1

Section 811 PRA Program Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 2

Interagency Partnership Agreements .............................................................................................................................................2

Property Selection and Contracting ...............................................................................................................................................2

Section 811 PRA Contract Rents ....................................................................................................................................................2

Resident Eligibility ...........................................................................................................................................................................3

Funding Awards Under the 811 PRA Program Demonstration  .....................................................................................................3

Evaluation of the Section 811 PRA Program .................................................................................................................. 3

Process Evaluation Data Sources and Limitations ....................................................................................................... 4

Organization of This Report ............................................................................................................................................. 5

Overview of Project Rental Assistance Demonstration Programs ......................................................... 7

Overview of Section 811 PRA Grants .............................................................................................................................. 7

Section 811 PRA Program Summaries ............................................................................................................................ 8

Target Populations of the 2012 PRA Grants ................................................................................................................. 10

Project Rental Assistance Partnerships ............................................................................................... 13

Overview of PRA Partnership Organization and Structure ....................................................................................... 13

How 811 PRA Partners Collaborate .............................................................................................................................. 15

Structures To Support Col aboration ............................................................................................................................................ 15

Communication ............................................................................................................................................................................. 16

Cross-Agency Entities for Program Coordination ........................................................................................................................ 16

Financial and Staffing Resources ................................................................................................................................................. 16

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................................ 17

Property Selection ................................................................................................................................. 19

Property Targeting Approaches: New Versus Existing Properties .......................................................................... 19

Strategies To Recruit Owners of New Properties .......................................................................................................20

Incentives for Tax Credits and Other Housing Funding Awards ..................................................................................................20

Adding New QAP Incentives for PRA ...........................................................................................................................................21

Using Existing QAP and Other Incentives To Encourage PRA Units ...........................................................................................21

Challenges to Recruiting Owners Through QAP Incentives  .....................................................................................22

Outreach and Marketing Strategies for Existing Properties .....................................................................................23

Procedures for Applying for 811 PRA ............................................................................................................................24

Challenges in Identifying Properties for the PRA Program .......................................................................................24

Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units ................................................................................... 27

Rental Assistance Contract Requirements .................................................................................................................27

Progress in Achieving PRA Unit Goals .........................................................................................................................27

Financing Sources of Properties ...................................................................................................................................28

Characteristics of Units Under RAC .............................................................................................................................29

Vacancy Status  .............................................................................................................................................................................29

Number of Units per RAC .............................................................................................................................................................30

Unit Bedroom Size ........................................................................................................................................................................30

Unit Accessibility ...........................................................................................................................................................................31

Unit Rent and Subsidy Levels ........................................................................................................................................32

Targeted Rent Levels .....................................................................................................................................................................32

iii

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Contents

Contract Rent and Rental Assistance Payments by Bedroom Size ............................................................................................32

Differences in Estimated and Actual Rental Assistance Payments .............................................................................................33

Leveraging Set-Asides of Housing Choice Vouchers .................................................................................................34

Conclusion  .......................................................................................................................................................................34

Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units ........................... 37

Outreach to PRA’s Program Target Population  ..........................................................................................................37

Overview of PRA Program Outreach and Referral Methods ........................................................................................................37

Oversight and Coordination of Outreach and Referrals ...............................................................................................................38

Outreach and Referral Agencies  ..................................................................................................................................................39

Outreach Models Adapted From Existing Housing Programs for People With Disabilities ........................................................39

Outreach Approaches Based on Target Population .....................................................................................................................39

PRA Resident Application Approaches  .......................................................................................................................40

Centralized and Targeted Outreach and Application Models ......................................................................................................40

Use of Waiting Lists for the PRA Program ....................................................................................................................................40

Implications of Different Application Practices  ........................................................................................................................... 41

PRA Program Eligibility Determination ........................................................................................................................ 41

Eligibility Based on Age and Eligibility for Medicaid Services .....................................................................................................42

Eligibility Based on Income ...........................................................................................................................................................42

Oversight of Eligibility Determination ............................................................................................................................................42

When To Conduct PRA Program Eligibility ...................................................................................................................................42

Applicants Determined Ineligible for the PRA Program .............................................................................................42

Matching Applicants to Available Units ........................................................................................................................43

Applicants Referred to PRA Units .................................................................................................................................................43

Applicants Who Did Not Meet Property Leasing Requirements ..................................................................................................44

Reasons Applicants Were Ineligible .............................................................................................................................................44

Conclusion  .......................................................................................................................................................................45

Characteristics of Project Rental Assistance Applicants and Residents ............................................ 47

PRA Applicants ................................................................................................................................................................ 47

Applicants by Referral Source ...................................................................................................................................................... 47

Applicants by Housing Status  ......................................................................................................................................................48

Applicants by Disability Type ........................................................................................................................................................49

Profile of PRA Residents ................................................................................................................................................49

Characteristics of PRA Households .............................................................................................................................50

Household Composition ...............................................................................................................................................................50

Household Income and Assets ..................................................................................................................................................... 51

Tenancy of PRA Residents ............................................................................................................................................................52

Transfers With Program and Program Exits .................................................................................................................................52

Service Provision and Coordination ...................................................................................................... 53

What Does Medicaid Cover and for Whom? ................................................................................................................53

Expected Services and Supports for PRA Residents .................................................................................................54

Early Lessons on Service Delivery for PRA Residents  ..............................................................................................56

Conclusions and Implications for Future Research .............................................................................. 57

Grantee Partnerships and Organizational Structures................................................................................................ 57

Target Populations  ......................................................................................................................................................... 57

Outreach and Referral Processes .................................................................................................................................58

Housing Strategies  .........................................................................................................................................................58

Service Provision and Coordination  ............................................................................................................................59

Looking Ahead to Future Research and Practice  ......................................................................................................59

References  ............................................................................................................................................ 61

iv

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

List of Tables

List of Tables

Table 2.1: Overview of 2012 Section 811 PRA Grant Awards .....................................................................................................7

Table 2.2: Target Populations of 2012 PRA Demonstration Programs .......................................................................................11

Table 3.1: Standard Division of PRA Program Responsibilities Between State Housing and Medicaid Agencies ....................13

Table 3.2: Grantee and Partnering Agencies and Their Previous Experience ...........................................................................14

Table 4.1: Targeted Versus Actual Property Recruitment Strategies ..........................................................................................19

Table 4.2: QAP Preferences and Strategies To Improve Unit Production  .................................................................................20

Table 5.1: Status of Section 811 PRA Program Implementation, June 2016 .............................................................................28

Table 5.2: RACs by Property’s Primary Financing Mechanism, as of June 2016.......................................................................29

Table 5.3: Occupancy and Vacancy Status of Section 811 PRA Units by Grantee, June 2016 ................................................30

Table 5.4: Section 811 PRA Units Under RAC and Under Lease by Bedroom Size, June 2016 ...............................................31

Table 5.5: Accessibility of Section 811 PRA Units Under RAC, as of June 2016 ......................................................................31

Table 5.6: Contract Rent and Rental Assistance Payment by Bedroom Size, June 2016 .........................................................32

Table 5.7: Difference Between Average Section 811 PRA Rental Assistance From Cooperative Agreements

and Actual Rental Assistance, as of June 2016 .......................................................................................................33

Table 5.8: Level of Commitment to Leveraging HCVs by State, as of June 2016 .....................................................................34

Table 6.1: Outreach and Referral Model by State ......................................................................................................................38

Table 6.2: Applicants Determined Ineligible for the Section 811 PRA Program by Reason, as of June 2016 ...........................42

Table 6.3: Applicants Determined Ineligible for the Section 811 PRA Program by Housing Status, as of June 2016...............43

Table 6.4: Households That Owners Screened Out by Housing Status, as of June 2016 .........................................................44

Table 7.1: PRA Applicants by Referral Source, as of June 2016 ...............................................................................................47

Table 7.2: PRA Applicants by Housing Status, as of June 2016 ................................................................................................48

Table 7.3: PRA Residents as of June 2016 ................................................................................................................................49

Table 7.4: PRA Residents by Prior Housing Status, June 2016 .................................................................................................50

Table 7.5: Household Composition of Section 811 PRA Residents, June 2016 ........................................................................50

Table 7.6: Characteristics of Section 811 PRA Heads of Household, June 2016 ......................................................................51

Table 7.7: PRA Household Sources of Income, June 2016........................................................................................................52

Table 7.8: PRA Participants by Tenancy, June 2016 ..................................................................................................................52

Table 8.1: Funding Sources for Services for PRA Residents .....................................................................................................54

v

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

vi

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Executive Summary

Executive Summary

occupancy more quickly than was possible under the

Section 811 PRAC program. The new option also gives

states opportunities to respond to incentives from the

Affordable Care Act that encourage community-based

housing and care. The 811 PRA program could also

This report presents the results of a process evaluation

contribute to state efforts to end homelessness and to

of 12 states’ experiences implementing the Section 811

respond to the goals of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1999

Project Rental Assistance (811 PRA) program, a new

Olmstead decision that established the right of people

approach to providing affordable rental housing for

with disabilities to live in the least restrictive settings

extremely low-income nonelderly people with disabilities.

possible that meet their needs and preferences.1

Background on HUD’s Section 811

In February 2013, HUD awarded a demonstration round

of PRA grants totaling $98 mil ion to 13 states to assist

PRA Program

an estimated 3,350 units. By early 2015, 12 grantees had

executed cooperative agreements with HUD to implement

Since 1991, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

the 811 PRA program under its inaugural funding round.

Development (HUD) has administered the Section 811

In March 2015, HUD awarded a second round of PRA

Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program,

funding to 25 state housing agencies for approximately

providing interest-free capital advances and Project Rental

$150 million.

Assistance Contract (PRAC) funds to nonprofit sponsors

to develop and operate group homes, independent living

Goals of the Section 811 PRA

projects, and condominiums for very low-income people

with disabilities. Some 35,000 households receive rental

Process Evaluation

assistance under the Section 811 PRAC program.

The Melvil e Act mandates an evaluation of the Section

The Frank Melvil e Supportive Housing Investment Act of

811 PRA program. In 2015, HUD’s Office of Policy

2010, or Melvil e Act, introduced several reforms to the

Development and Research issued a contract to a

Section 811 program, including the PRA option. The 811

research team to carry out the Phase I evaluation. The

PRA option connects services and expands affordable

Phase I evaluation focused on the 2012 demonstration

housing options for nonelderly people with disabilities

round of funding. This process evaluation report is the third

who have extremely low-income. The 811 PRA option

report produced by the Phase I evaluation and provides an

provides subsidies for scattered site units in affordable

aggregate summary of 811 PRA implementation in the 12

housing developments financed by other funding sources

states funded in the initial round of grants.

and occupied by people with and without disabilities. It

The primary goal of the Section 811 PRA process

creates or builds on incentives for owners and developers

evaluation is to describe the implementation of the PRA

to create additional supportive housing by tapping

program and the partnerships in the 12 initial states. The

available Medicaid funding streams. It also forms service

report draws on grantee funding applications and program

partnerships and develops referral networks to identify

documents, HUD administrative data, and in-person

eligible households that need service-enriched housing.

interviews with staff from state housing agencies, state

Households eligible for the 811 PRA must be extremely

Medicaid agencies, and other program partners. The

low-income, nonelderly persons with disabilities between

evaluation captures the early implementation successes

the ages of 18 and 61 at the time of admission and who

and challenges of the PRA demonstration funding round

are eligible for Medicaid or a similar program offering

between October 2014, when HUD and grantees signed

community-based, long-term services and supports. PRA

the first cooperative agreements to begin administering

assistance may be targeted to people who are living in

the PRA grant, and June 2016, the end of data col ection

institutions, homeless, or at risk of institutionalization or

for the evaluation. This report covers approximately the

homelessness. States had flexibility to further target or

first 18 months of program implementation, as HUD

prioritize groups within this target population, based on

and grantees signed cooperative agreements between

the local needs of persons with disabilities.

October 2014 and May 2015.

One goal of the Section 811 PRA option is to bring

The process evaluation describes the state agency

affordable rental housing for persons with disabilities to

partnerships, procedures developed to implement the

1

The Supreme Court’s 1999 decision in  Olmstead v. L.C.  established that segregating people with disabilities in institutional settings constitutes discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The court held that public entities must provide community-based services in the least restrictive setting that meets the person’s needs and preferences.

vii

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Executive Summary

811 PRA, and progress toward the goals of securing

The target population has implications for the way state

units under contract for PRA subsidies, matching eligible

housing and Medicaid agencies conduct outreach and

households to available units, and ensuring households

referral procedures. Outreach procedures and transition

access to appropriate services and supports. In addition,

services may also vary depending on whether PRA

the process evaluation identifies the successes and

applicants are participants in the state’s MFP program.

challenges encountered by the early grantees, the

strategies they developed to adapt programs to address

Partnerships and Organizational

arising chal enges, and the early lessons from grantees’

Structure

experiences for programs and policies.

Housing and Medicaid partners with previous experience

Lessons From the Process

working together had an advantage in launching

Evaluation

the program more quickly. State agencies that had

previously worked together to administer supportive

The 811 PRA option represented an entirely new approach

housing programs typical y had established mechanisms

to providing rental assistance to people with disabilities.

for communication between agencies, had a greater

During the initial 18 months after grant awards, the

understanding of target populations, and had existing

grantees and their partners (with assistance from HUD)

outreach procedures, systems, applicant pools, and

devoted much of their effort to startup activities and to

waiting lists adaptable for the PRA program.

putting systems and procedures in place to support this

In several states, housing and Medicaid agencies

new subsidy program. Key activities in the first 1 1/2 years

undertake 811 PRA program tasks together, necessitating

of the 2012 PRA grant included solidifying the roles and

learning a common language and training the other

responsibilities between housing and Medicaid partner

agency on areas of expertise. PRA program activities that

agencies, conducting outreach to owners to identify

staff from state housing and Medicaid agencies jointly

candidate properties for PRA units, and establishing

conduct are outreach to property owners to encourage

outreach and referral procedures to identify individuals

interest in the PRA program, review of owner applications

and match them with PRA-subsidized units.

for 811 PRA assistance, training to service providers who

The following are lessons learned from the process

work PRA applicants and residents, and monitoring and

evaluation about grantee and Medicaid agencies’ early

reporting for grant compliance.

experiences with the Section 811 PRA program.

Grantees commonly reported that the program required

PRA Program Target Populations

more time and resources than expected, and most

reported that administrative tasks still took longer than

All 12 states are targeting people who are institutionalized,

expected a year after the start of PRA programs.

a priority target population in 6 states (California,

Sustaining program staffing is a concern for Medicaid

Delaware, Il inois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, and

agencies with the expiration of MFP grants that fund staff

Pennsylvania). All but 2 grantees (Il inois and Texas)

and services in many states that help individuals who are

targeted people who are at risk of institutionalization.

transitioning out of institutions into community-based

All 12 states participate in the Centers for Medicare and

housing. To continue funding these activities, states

Medicaid Services’ Money Fol ows the Person (MFP)

may need to consider changing their Medicaid waiver

program, and several states prioritize the availability of

programs to make housing-related activities and services

PRA assistance to individuals participating in MFP.

eligible.

All but 3 grantees (California, Il inois, and Texas) target

people who are experiencing homelessness or at risk of

Identifying PRA Units

homelessness, but only a few states conduct targeted

As of June 2016, all 2012 grantees had units under

outreach to people experiencing homelessness or at risk

contract with property owners for PRA subsidies.

for homelessness. Several states (Delaware, Georgia,

Combined, the grantees had 604 PRA units under

Il inois, and Maryland) target PRA resources to members

Rental Assistance Contracts (RACs), about one-fourth

of groups covered by legal settlements under Olmstead

(28 percent) of the total number of estimated PRA units

or other laws. Most of the 12 grantees targeted multiple

funded in this demonstration round. When adding the

disability groups—that is, a combination of people with

number of units identified under other formal agreements

physical, developmental, or mental health disabilities.

or affordable housing competitions, grantees identified

43 percent of the total estimated 2,193 PRA units

viii

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Executive Summary

expected to be funded through the 2012 awards. The total

Outreach and Referral to PRA

number of PRA units to eventual y be funded under the

demonstration grants will not be known until all units are

Target Populations

under lease. The number could be less than 2,193. Most

Grantees report many advantages of centralizing the

grantees underestimated the amount of average rental

acceptance and review of applications at state, regional,

subsidies for PRA residents, and thus, will not be able to

or county levels and maintaining a single program waiting

assist as many units as projected in their notice of funding

list, especial y when using software to automate and

availability responses.

facilitate the process. PRA program staff also reported

The overall average number of units under executed RACs

chal enges when the centralized process relies on an

is 8.6 units per property. The number of units for each

individual staff person however.

RAC varies widely from 2 to 21 units per property, based

All grantees developed some type of 811 PRA program

on the size of the property and the incentives for PRA

waiting list that is maintained by the housing agency

subsidies. Some states developed a minimum number or

or their partners, but each PRA program uses waiting

percent of PRA units that owners must accept to receive

lists differently. Grantees and their partners maintain

funding through, or receive priority for, housing assistance

waiting lists at various levels, including by state, region,

programs.

outreach or referral agency (contracted service provider),

Creating incentives in state Qualified Al ocation Plans

and property. Two grantee programs combined the

(QAPs) for low-income housing tax credits, or LIHTCs,

PRA waiting list with waiting lists for other established

was a primary tool for grantees to secure units under

programs.

contract for PRA. Some states were able to target

Some grantees noted mismatches between locations of

QAP special population priorities to PRA subsidies or

available vacancies, available and accessible services,

otherwise provide incentives for developers to set aside a

and where eligible applicants want to live.

percentage of a property’s units specifical y for PRA.

Challenges with owner recruitment included owner

PRA Applicants and Residents

concerns about the 30-year use agreement, the 20-year

Through June 2016, grantees reported a combined 3,270

contract period, and the lower PRA rents that grantees

applicants for the 12 PRA programs. More than one-

established in the grant applications, a particular concern

third of applicants were either homeless (26 percent) or

in costlier urban areas. Some owners also had to learn to

at risk for homelessness (10 percent). More than one-

use HUD’s subsidy administration and reporting systems,

fourth of applicants were either residing in institutions (18

which they may not have previously used.

percent) or were at risk for institutionalization (9 percent).

At least three grantees report the lack of one-bedroom

People living in group homes, adult care homes, or other

units in the state’s affordable housing portfolio is a

residential settings constitute 11 percent of applicants.

challenge in identifying units for the program, although the

Grantees vary in the distribution of applicants by place of

percentage of units leased is general y proportional to the

prior residence, largely reflecting the states’ priorities and

breakdown of units under RAC. Some states address this

eligible populations. Most homeless applicants are from

concern by encouraging the production of one-bedroom

three states (Louisiana, Maryland, and Minnesota) that are

units in future affordable housing developments. For

specifical y targeting people experiencing homelessness

example, the Louisiana tax credit agency wil  increase the

or at risk for homelessness.

points in the state’s 2017 QAP for projects that agree to

set-aside 25 percent of units for PRA and give preference

Through June 2016, the 12 demonstration PRA programs

to the development of one-bedroom units.

assisted 133 households with rental assistance, and 124

residents were living in PRA-funded units at the end of

Of the 12 grantees, 9 committed to set aside housing

the month (8 households had exited the program since

choice vouchers, project-based vouchers, and public

January 2015). The 124 households represent just 6

housing units to extremely low-income households with

percent of the estimated 2,193 units that grantees expect

disabilities to supplement the 811 PRA units. Through

to fund with the 2012 PRA demonstration grant.

June 2016, 5 grantees reported that 432 vouchers were

issued as part of this commitment, representing 30

Approximately one-half of PRA residents came

percent of the total leverage commitment.

from institutions (35 percent) or were at risk for

institutionalization (15 percent) as defined by each PRA

ix

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Executive Summary

program. An additional one-fourth of residents had

As a new program, state housing agencies and their

previously experienced homelessness or was at risk for

partners faced some chal enges in the first 18 months

homelessness.

of implementation in identifying eligible properties and

PRA residents range in age from 19 to 60 but skew toward

securing units, matching individuals with disabilities to

the higher age limit of the 811 PRA program. The average

PRA-subsidized units, and navigating new reporting and

head of household is age 47, and the median age is 50.

data systems required to administer the rental subsidies.

Although this report addresses those challenges,

PRA residents have extremely low household incomes and

this report also identifies several ways state agencies

report few assets. After taking deductions into account,

successful y developed or expanded existing state-level

average adjusted annual income of PRA residents was

partnerships to meet the goals of state PRA programs.

$8,886. On average, adjusted PRA household income

was about 16 percent of the Area Median Income in

More recent data from March 2017 show that the 2012

the locations where PRA residents live. Most PRA

grantees identified most (81 percent) of the estimated

households receive only Social Security (42 percent),

units to be funded by the PRA grant and had significantly

only Supplemental Security Income (34 percent), or both

increased resident leasing efforts since conducting

Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (13

research for this process evaluation. Housing agencies

percent).

that received fiscal year 2012 grant funds have until

September 2025 to disburse grant funds. All PRA units

The average rental assistance amount for PRA residents

must be under lease by September 2020 in order for the

was $599, ranging from a low of $317 to a high of $1160.

grantee to fund all the PRA units for the full 5 years of

For data available on PRA residents as of June 2016,

available rental assistance.

actual assistance payments were about $141 a month

higher than estimated by grantees in the grant cooperative

Research conducted and lessons learned in this Section

agreements. The average resident payment for residents

811 PRA process evaluation report are informing

moving into PRA units by June 2016 was $223 a month,

subsequent phases of the evaluation of the program.

ranging from $5 to $443.

The Phase II evaluation is currently under way to address

ongoing program implementation, begin to examine

Provision and Coordination of

participant-level outcomes and access to services, and

estimate PRA program costs.

Services and Supports

•  Most grantees were still in the early stages of

implementing 811 PRA programs during the data

col ection period, few PRA residents were housed, and

grantees had little experience with service delivery for

individuals living in PRA units.

•  Different Medicaid waiver and state plan services

serve different target populations, and the types and

availability of healthcare and supportive services wil

vary. In a number of states, 811 PRA activities were

closely coordinated with the states’ MFP programs.

MFP staff and systems were critical resources in

identifying potential applicants for the 811 PRA

program, determining eligibility, and (for those found

eligible for an available unit) assisting with transitions.

•  Although states may have appropriate waiver programs

for the 811 PRA target populations, grantees noted

that a key factor in identifying suitable properties for

the program is confirming the proximity of appropriate

services. Some grantees noted concerns about the

availability of services in rural or suburban areas,

although the program was still early in implementation.

x

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 1. Background of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Program and Report Overview Background of the

The Frank Melvil e Supportive Housing Investment Act of

2010 (Melvil e Act) introduced significant reforms to the

Section 811 Project

Section 811 program, including creating the Section 811

PRA (811 PRA) program. The 811 PRA program provides

project-based rental assistance for integrated supportive

Rental Assistance

housing in affordable housing developments. For the 811

PRA program, integrated housing means that no more

Program and

than 25 percent of units in a building are set aside for

people with disabilities or supportive housing in general,

and units must be scattered throughout the property.

Report Overview

The 811 PRA program provides rental assistance funding

to state housing agencies that work in partnership with

state health and human services and Medicaid agencies

to create community-based supportive housing. This

approach responds to several recent policy priorities

This chapter provides a brief history of the Section 811

related to housing and support for people with disabilities.

Project Rental Assistance Contract (PRAC) and Project

Rental Assistance (PRA) programs. The chapter then

First, it responds to renewed emphasis on achieving

describes the objectives and data sources for the process

the goals of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1999 decision in

evaluation and provides an overview of this process

Olmstead v. L.C.  to enable people with disabilities to live

evaluation report.

in the least restrictive settings possible that meet their

needs and preferences. In their decision, the Supreme

Section 811 and PRA Programs

Court ruled that, under title II of the Americans with

Disabilities Act, people with disabilities must be afforded

HUD has administered the Section 811 Supportive

opportunities to live in settings appropriate to their

Housing for Persons with Disabilities program since 1991.

abilities, with freedom to choose daily life activities and

The Section 811 program goal is to expand the supply

to interact with people without disabilities. As states

of supportive housing for very low-income nonelderly

and communities worked to implement the decision

people with disabilities. The program traditional y awarded

(sometimes in response to litigation), the limited supply

interest-free capital advances and contracts for project-

of affordable and appropriate housing and supports

based rental assistance to nonprofit organizations to

in community-based settings became a significant

develop supportive housing (such as group homes and

challenge.

smal  rental housing developments) occupied by very low-

Second, the Olmstead decision encouraged federal and

income households headed by nonelderly people with

state efforts to rebalance Medicaid systems to provide

disabilities aged 18 to 61.2

long-term services and supports away from institutional

The Section 811 supportive housing model provides

settings, such as nursing homes, and toward housing that

residents affordable housing and access to appropriate,

is integrated within communities. Medicaid programs offer

voluntary supportive services. Organizations that receive

community-based services to beneficiaries through home-

capital advances must develop a supportive services

and community-based services waiver programs and

plan that meets tenant’s health, mental health, and other

optional state plan services. Community-based services

needs. Grantees must either provide services directly or

provided by Medicaid and other programs help ensure

partner and coordinate with community service providers

that people with disabilities have the supports needed to

to provide services. Grantees must also ensure that

live successful y in the community.

services are available for the duration of the 40-year

In particular, the Money Follows the Person (MFP)

capital advance period. Capital advances continue to be

demonstration, administered by the U.S. Department

permitted for the development of group homes and other

of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Medicare

projects specifical y for people with disabilities, but no

and Medicaid Services (CMS), is a major initiative that

funds were appropriated for new projects since fiscal year

provides funding to many states to support transitions

2012.

2

Under the Section 811 statute, a person with disabilities is defined as an individual having a physical, mental, or emotional impairment that (1) is expected to be of long-continued and indefinite duration, (2) substantially impedes his or her ability to live independently, and (3) is of such a nature that the ability to live independently could be improved by more suitable housing conditions. In addition, under the Section 811 statute, persons with developmental disabilities as defined under the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act (P.L. 106-402) qualify for Section 811

housing.

1

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 1. Background of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Program and Report Overview from institutions to community-based settings. However,

such as low-income housing tax credits (LIHTCs), HOME

the lack of affordable housing often constrained the

Investment Partnerships Program funds, the Community

demonstration’s ability to transition large numbers of

Development Block Grant program, or other federal, state,

Medicaid beneficiaries to community settings.

or private sources.

The Affordable Care Act also created or strengthened

The 811 PRA program funds only rental assistance. It

programs to expand community-based care, but again,

does not provide any funding for capital costs. Grantees

the lack of available affordable housing is a barrier to

establish Rental Assistance Contracts (RACs) with owners

these efforts. HUD designed and implemented the 811

of eligible properties. The agreement sets forth the rights

PRA program in col aboration with CMS to help address

and duties of the parties with respect to the assisted

the lack of affordable housing resources for people with

unit(s) and identifies the number and sizes of units that

disabilities to live in the least restrictive setting possible.

the owner agrees to commit to the program, as well as

the contract rent of these units. The 811 PRA units are

Section 811 PRA Program

floating; that is, the RAC does not identify specific units

Requirements

al ocated to the program, simply the number and sizes of

units. Owners may commit to RACs even if the property

HUD designed the 811 PRA program to accomplish

does not have vacant units available for immediate

several objectives (HUD, 2013a).3 First, HUD envisioned

occupancy. This program feature means that 811 PRA-

the 811 PRA option would increase the supply of

eligible households may have to wait until current non-811

affordable housing linked with community-based

PRA residents move to occupy units.

supportive services that would serve as an alternative

As a precursor to a RAC, grantees and property owners

to more costly and restrictive institutional care. Second,

can also enter into a signed Agreement to Enter into a

the 811 PRA program would encourage state-level

RAC, or ARAC. ARACs are formal agreements between

col aboration between health and human services and

the grantee and the owner of an eligible multifamily

housing agencies, resulting in long-term, permanent

property that is either existing or under construction.

supportive housing strategies. Final y, the program would

New developments are under construction, or substantial

increase production of affordable housing units for

rehabilitation, at the time the ARACs are signed or that

people with disabilities and leverage funds by integrating

state housing agencies plan to develop through state-

the 811 PRA units in multifamily properties where other

controlled financing.  Existing developments are already

federal and state programs fund the capital costs for

constructed and placed into service as affordable rental

construction. This section describes the 811 PRA program

housing.

requirements aimed at achieving these objectives.

Property owners must agree to a 30-year use restriction

Interagency Partnership Agreements

for providing a specified number of units as supportive

To apply for 811 PRA funds, state housing agencies

housing for people with disabilities and a contract with

must partner with the state agency responsible for the

HUD for at least 20 years. The initial RAC provides funding

administration of the state’s Medicaid program, as well as

for 5 years of rental assistance. The use restriction and

the state’s health and human services agency (if different).

renewal funding are contingent on continued Section 811

An interagency partnership agreement—a memorandum

appropriations.

of agreement between the agencies that is required as

To ensure achievement of community integration goals

part of the grant application—outlines the state Medicaid

under the 811 PRA program, the Section 811 statute

agency’s commitment to identifying and conducting

specifies that no more than 25 percent of the units in the

outreach to the target population(s) the state’s 811 PRA

affordable housing development can be set aside for

program serves. The agreement also describes the

supportive housing or have an occupancy preference for

funding streams that will provide access to appropriate

people with disabilities. Moreover, the units need to be

services and supports.

scattered throughout the building and not concentrated in

one section or floor.

Property Selection and Contracting

State housing agencies select properties to award

Section 811 PRA Contract Rents

811 PRA subsidies. Eligible properties can be newly

Grantees determine the 811 PRA contract rents, the

built or existing multifamily developments in which the

maximum rents that property owners can charge for 811

development costs are subsidized by federal sources,

PRA units, which may or may not reflect current rental

3

Summarized in 2013 HUD budget summary https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=housing-disabilities-2013.pdf.

2

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 1. Background of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Program and Report Overview market conditions. The Section 811 PRA Notice of Funding

demonstration grants totaling $98 mil ion to provide

Availability (NOFA) required that the PRA rent not exceed

subsidies for an estimated 3,530 units.4 HUD awarded a

the applicable Fair Market Rent (FMR) or Small Area FMR

second round of funding in March 2015 under a combined

level for the property location, as determined annual y

NOFA for fiscal years 2013 and 2014. In the second round,

by HUD (with some exceptions). The NOFA provided

HUD awarded 811 PRA funding to 25 state housing

incentives for state housing agencies to target units that

agencies for approximately $150 mil ion to provide

would produce the lowest possible per-unit rental subsidy

subsidies for some estimated 4,584 units.5 Between the

costs by targeting properties that have existing rent

two funding rounds, selected states proposed to fund an

restrictions, such as those funded with LIHTC or HOME

estimated 7,900 units of affordable housing set aside for

funds.

nonelderly persons with disabilities.

Resident Eligibility

Evaluation of the Section 811 PRA

Section 811 PRA funds may be provided only for housing

Program

units set aside for extremely low-income households,

including at least one nonelderly person with disabilities

The Melvil e Act, which created the 811 PRA option,

who is 18 to 61 years old at the time of occupying the

mandates an evaluation of the program. In 2015, HUD’s

811 PRA unit. Participants in the 811 PRA program must

Office of Policy Development and Research issued a

also be eligible for community-based long-term care

contract to a research team to carry out the Phase I

services provided under the state’s Medicaid program.

evaluation of the demonstration round of 811 PRA grants.

Long-term care services may be provided under Medicaid

This process evaluation report focuses only on the 2012

1915(c) waivers, Medicaid state plan options, or other

grants.

comparable long-term services programs. Services paid

The Phase I evaluation’s overarching research questions

for under these Medicaid programs include services

are—

and supports that are not traditional medical services,

but those that people need during long periods of time

•  How are successful state and local partnerships

to maintain health and independence such as personal

structured to carry out the 811 PRA program?

care assistance, adult day health or habilitation services,

•  How are outreach and marketing efforts designed

or home modifications. The community-based nature of

to support compliance, provide tenant choice, and

the services means that services are provided in people’s

ensure efficient occupancy policies for housing owners

homes or in other residential settings such as group

or managers?

homes. Hospitals and institutions are not considered

•  How is the 811 PRA integrated with and adapted to

community-based settings.

state housing and service delivery systems operating

Grantees can choose to further specify the target

in varied political, fiscal, and housing market contexts?

population(s) to serve with their state 811 PRA programs

•  What are the preliminary outcomes of the initial funding

and, in partnership with Medicaid agencies, have

round?

further specific target populations who are currently in

institutions, homeless, or at risk of institutionalization or

The Phase I evaluation produced two major reports.

homelessness. Chapter 2 describes the target populations

This process evaluation report is the second and final

of the 2012 811 PRA grantees.

report. A separate case study report presents detailed

descriptions of the early implementation experiences of

Funding Awards Under the 811 PRA Program

six states funded in the initial funding round, with a focus

Demonstration

on (1) the housing and services context in each state, (2)

In fiscal years 2012, 2013, and 2014, congressional

the partnerships developed to implement the 811 PRA

appropriations language for the Section 811 program

program, and (3) the way in which the new program fits

required that any new Section 811 units be created under

within these contexts.

the 811 PRA option. An initial NOFA for 811 PRA grants

A second phase of the evaluation, under way between

was issued in 2012 with language that identified the

October 2016 and April 2019, will build and expand on

funding round as a demonstration round. In February

work conducted under Phase I. This evaluation focuses

2013, HUD selected 13 states to receive 811 PRA

on a subset of six states selected from grantees in the

4

HUD selected North Carolina in the fiscal year 2012 grant competition to fund an estimated 562 units, but North Carolina Housing Finance Agency decided not to sign the cooperative agreement and participate in the program.

5

HUD selected the District of Columbia Housing Authority in the fiscal year 2013 grant competition to fund an estimated 60 units, but the District of Columbia Department of Housing and Community Development did not to sign the cooperative agreement and is not participating in the program.

3

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 1. Background of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Program and Report Overview first and second rounds of funding: California, Delaware,

•  What are the program implementation’s challenges and

Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington. The

successes? What approaches achieved the expected

Phase II evaluation has four core components.

goals and outcomes of the Section 811 PRA program?

1.  An implementation analysis to continue documenting

the implementation of the 811 PRA program from

Process Evaluation Data Sources

Phase I.

and Limitations

2.  A descriptive analysis of all 29 Section 811 grantees

The research team used a combination of quantitative

funded in fiscal years 2012 and 2013–2014.

and qualitative data sources to address the process

3.  An impact analysis to examine the differences between

evaluation’s research questions. These data sources are—

the 811 PRA program, the PRAC program, and two

•  Grantee funding applications. Grantee responses

additional matched comparison groups on number of

to the 2012 Section 811 PRA Demonstration NOFA

outcomes.

provide information on the proposed 811 PRA program

4.  An economic analysis to measure the costs of

models, including target population, rent and subsidy

housing and supportive services provided to 811 PRA

assumptions for PRA units, and types of eligible

participants and to compare costs to benefits.

properties.

The goal of this Phase I process evaluation is to provide

•  Cooperative agreements and budgets. The

an overal  picture of the demonstration implementation in

cooperative agreements executed between grantees

the 12 states and analyze differences in 811 PRA program

and HUD specify total grant amounts, rental assistance

designs, target population, and housing and service

amounts, original 811 PRA unit and rental subsidy

strategies. This process evaluation report supports the

assumptions, planned implementation schedule, and

overall Phase I evaluation by describing the process by

expected administrative costs.

which the 811 PRA partnership between the state housing

•  Quarterly reports. Grantees submit quarterly reports

and Medicaid agencies implements the 811 PRA grants

to HUD on the number and characteristics of PRA

and the extent to which grantees identify and occupy

properties and units under contract, applicants and

units for 811 PRA subsidies, as expected in the 12 states

referrals to the 811 PRA program and to specific PRA

awarded grants.

units, households that have moved into PRA units,

The Phase I process evaluation addresses the following

and households ineligible for the PRA program or for

research questions.

specific properties.

•  What are the characteristics of the partnerships

•  Administrative data.  Administrative data for this

between state housing and health and human services

study came from two HUD data systems. Data from

or Medicaid agencies?

HUD’s Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System

(TRACS) include demographic characteristics of

•  What are grantees procedures in selecting properties

PRA households such as household composition,

to be assisted with 811 PRA funding?

race, ethnicity, age of head of household, household

•  How many units did grantees propose to assist and

income and income sources, unit size, and total tenant

occupy? What were the proposed characteristics of

payment. TRACS data also include dates of admission

these units? How many units did grantees actual y

into the 811 PRA program and, where applicable, exits

assist and occupy? What are the main characteristics

from the 811 PRA program and reasons for exiting. We

of these units?

obtained additional limited data on the characteristics

•  What are 811 PRA program procedures to reach target

of 811 PRA-assisted properties and units from HUD’s

populations, refer applicants to PRA units, and place

Integrated Real Estate Management System (iREMS).

them in 811 PRA units? Where do delays occur?

These data includes the contract rent and utility

al owances by bedroom size.

•  How many people did grantees propose to reach, refer,

and place in housing by target population? How many

•  Interviews with grantees and key partners. Two-

people did grantees actual y reach, refer, and place in

person research teams conducted field visits between

housing by target population?

October 2015 and June 2016 to each of the 12 states

to interview grantee representatives and their partners.

•  What services are offered to program participants?

The teams spent an average of 4 days in each state.

How are services managed and coordinated? Do the

Teams conducted in-person interviews (with telephone

services meet the service target population’s needs?

followup as needed) using standardized, semi-

What are the accountability measures?

4

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 1. Background of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Program and Report Overview structured interview guides that were tailored to each

Quarterly report data are available for all participants with

state’s 811 PRA program design and partners. In states

some exceptions. For a small percentage of applicants,

with occupied 811 PRA units, teams had informal

some information on PRA applicants is missing, either

conversations with PRA-assisted residents when

because this information was unknown or PRA program

convenient.

partners did not report it to grantees. Grantees reported

Data col ected for the process evaluation report have

3,270 applicants to the PRA program. Information on

some limitations. The process evaluation focuses on

type of applicant referral source was unknown for 241

a 15- to 22-month implementation period between the

applicants. Information on disability type was provided

signing of the first (August 15, 2014) and the most recent

only for 2,780 applicants, because grantees are required

(March 15, 2015) cooperative agreements and June 2016,

only to report the type of disability on an annual basis.

the date of the most recent data extract, acquisition of

Grantees and referring partners may also not know the

quarterly reports, and state interview updates. This data

disabling condition(s) of applicants. Grantees also did not

collection period was early in the implementation of the

report the housing status at time of application for 217

5-year grants. As of June 30, 2016, the 12 states had a

applicants.

combined 604 units under contract with owners for PRA

Final y, data reported to HUD via grantee progress reports,

subsidies, 124 residents currently living in PRA-funded

TRACS, and iREMS are self-reported by grantees and

units, and 9 households that had moved into PRA units

their partners and may include inaccuracies.

but subsequently moved out.

During the initial 18 months after grant awards, grantees

Organization of This Report

and their partners (with assistance from HUD) devoted

This report contains nine chapters, organized as fol ows.

much of their effort to startup activities and putting in

1.  This chapter outlines the history of the Section 811

place systems and procedures to support the new subsidy

program leading up to the PRA demonstration and

program. Key activities included solidifying agreements

summarizes the PRA evaluation efforts.

between housing and Medicaid partner agencies,

conducting outreach to owners to identify candidate

2.  Chapter 2 provides an overview of the 12 PRA

properties for PRA units, and establishing outreach and

demonstration programs, including target populations

referral procedures to identify eligible individuals and

and implementation status.

connect them to PRA-subsidized units.

3.  Chapter 3 describes the grantee partnership

During the field visits between October 2015 and May

organization and structure, describes PRA program

2016, few of the 811 PRA units had been occupied. As a

partners’ collaboration to administer the PRA program,

result, grantees and their partners had little experience

and identifies challenges that program partners

recruiting PRA-eligible households, transitioning them

experienced in administering the program, as well as

into units, and providing services. This report, therefore,

systems and procedures that appeared to work wel .

provides information on plans for tenancy supports

4.  Chapter 4 examines methods states used to identify

and service delivery but limited information on the

units for PRA subsidies and recruit owners into

implementation of these plans.

the program, chal enges experienced by grantees,

Also some inconsistencies exist across the administrative

and strategies states employ to overcome those

data sources because of lags in data entry and

challenges.

inaccuracies or grantees reporting incomplete data. As of

5.  Chapter 5 describes the property contracting

June 2016, contract rent and rental assistance payments

requirements, presents a profile of the properties

were only available in TRACS for 94 of the 133 current and

and units identified for the PRA program, and the

former PRA participants at the time of data extraction.

characteristics (number of bedrooms, accessibility,

Owners have 120 days after a lease starts to submit data

contract rent) of units.

to HUD.

6.  Chapter 6 describes the outreach and referral

PRA subsidies are not tied to properties or to specific

processes, including the PRA program application and

units within a property. As such, information about some

PRA-subsidized unit move-in procedures. The chapter

features of units under executed RACs, including bedroom

also describes the challenges that Medicaid agencies

size and accessibility, may not be known for units that

and grantees identified as they implemented their PRA

are occupied by non-PRA residents until the units turn

program outreach procedures and referred eligible

over. This information is unavailable for 24 percent of units

households to available units.

under RAC.

5

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 1. Background of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Program and Report Overview 7.  Chapter 7 presents profiles of applicants and residents

of the PRA program as of June 2016. Applicants are

described by referral source and the housing status

that made them a target population. Demographic

information on residents includes household

composition, age, income, and income sources.

8.  Chapter 8 reviews the services available to PRA

residents as they transition to PRA units and through

ongoing tenancy.

9.  Chapter 9 offers conclusions of the report and

implications for future research.

6

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 2. Overview of Project Rental Assistance Demonstration Programs

Overview of Project

Overview of Section 811 PRA

Grants

Rental Assistance

The initial 12 demonstration round PRA grantees executed

cooperative agreements with HUD to implement the

Demonstration

program under its first funding round. The $88,300,377

in grant funds provided subsidies for an estimated 2,625

Programs

units for nonelderly people with disabilities and extremely

low-income people during the 5-year grant term. The

grants range in size from approximately $2 mil ion for

Montana to more than $12 million for California, Illinois,

and Texas. The projected number of units to be assisted

This chapter provides an overview of the 12 Section 811

with 811 PRA funding ranges from 81 for Montana to

Project Rental Assistance grant programs that comprise

732 for Il inois. The average proposed per-unit monthly

this report. This chapter provides a summary of the

811 PRA subsidy is $458 and ranges widely, from $226

goals of each state’s PRA program, describes the target

in Il inois to $1,055 in Maryland (table 2.1). The average

populations of the 12 programs, and gives an update of

expected tenant rent contribution is $242 a month.

the implementation status of the grant programs as of

June 2016.

Table  2.1: Over view of 2012 Section 811 P R A Grant Awards

Average

Average

Estimated

Estimated

Total Section

per-Unit

per-Unit

811 PRA Funds

Section 811

Monthly Rental

Monthly Tenant

Grantee

Partner Agencies

Awarded ($)

PRA Units

Subsidy ($)

Contribution ($)

California Health and Human Services Agency,

California Department of Health Care Services,

California Housing

Department of Housing and Community

12,208,558

229

705

288

Finance Agency

Development, California Tax Credit Allocation

Committee, Department of Developmental

Services

Delaware State

Department of Health and Social Services

5,246,276

148

502

217

Housing Authority

Department of Behavioral Health and

Georgia Housing

Developmental Disabilities, Georgia Department

4,279,650

134

441

209

Finance Authority

of Community Health,

Georgia Department of Community Affairs

Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family

Illinois Housing

Services, Illinois Department of Human

12,324,352

732

226

249

Authority

Services, Illinois Department on Aging, Office of

the Governor

Louisiana Housing

Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals

8,489,928

199

597

216

Corporation

Maryland Department

of Housing and

Maryland Department of Health and Mental

11,229,308

150

1,055

180

Community

Hygiene, Maryland Department of Disabilities

Development

( cont )

7

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 2. Overview of Project Rental Assistance Demonstration Programs

Table  2.1: Over view of 2012 Section 811 P R A Grant Awards ( cont )

Average

Average

Estimated

Estimated

Total Section

per-Unit

per-Unit

811 PRA Funds

Section 811

Monthly Rental

Monthly Tenant

Grantee

Partner Agencies

Awarded ($)

PRA Units

Subsidy ($)

Contribution ($)

Massachusetts

Department of

Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and

Housing and

5,427,208

90

781

255

Human Services

Community

Development

Minnesota Housing

Minnesota Department of Human Services

3,085,500

85

503

240

Finance Agency

Montana Department

Montana Health and Human Services

2,057,000

81

351

245

of Commerce

Department

Pennsylvania Housing  Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare

5,870,880

200

378

300

Finance Agency

Texas Department

of Housing and

Texas Health and Human Services Commission

12,342,000

362

478

232

Community Affairs

Washington State Department of Social and

Washington

Health Services, Washington State Housing

Department of

5,739,717

215

354

235

Financing Commission, Washington State

Commerce

Health Care Authority

Total

88,300,377

2,625

458

242

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Source: Fiscal year 2012 cooperative agreements as of March 2015

HUD selected 13 states for the 2012 funding round,

Section 811 PRA Program

but only 12 state housing agencies signed cooperative

agreements with HUD to administer the Section 811

Summaries

PRA grant. The North Carolina Housing Finance Agency

The following paragraphs provide overviews of the 12 PRA

decided not to participate in the program or sign a

programs that comprise this report.

cooperative agreement with HUD. In their 2012 grant

applications, the 12 states proposed to support 2,968 PRA

California. California’s PRA program is a partnership

units with the awarded grant funds. The total estimated

among five state agency partners—the California

number of PRA units the 2012 grant could support was

Housing Finance Agency, California Tax Credit Al ocation

revised to 2,625 units in the cooperative agreements.

Committee, the California Department of Housing and

Estimated units were revised in response to additional

Community Development, the Department of Health

guidance from HUD about how to estimate rental subsidy

Care Services, and the Department of Developmental

amounts and new information about property locations

Services. The state received a grant of $12,208,558 to fund

and contract rent levels. Based on information that

an estimated 229 PRA units. The PRA program targets

average rental subsidies were higher than expected for

people in California Community Transitions, the state’s

the first 18 months of the PRA grant, HUD can expect

Money Fol ows the Person program since 2007, and others

the program to fund fewer than the 2,625 estimated to

eligible for Medicaid services. Two service agencies that

be funded in grantee’s cooperative agreement budgets.

are under California’s 13-agency Medicaid agency are PRA

Chapter 5 describes changes some grantees made to the

partners—the Department of Developmental Disabilities

estimated number of PRA units that states expect to fund

and the Department of Health Care Services that

with their 2012 grants.

administers the state’s Medicaid program and its MFP.

Delaware. The Delaware State Housing Authority,

partnering with the Delaware Department of Health

and Social Services, administers Delaware’s Section

811 PRA program. The state received a fiscal year 2012

grant of $5,246,276 to fund an estimated 148 PRA units.

8

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 2. Overview of Project Rental Assistance Demonstration Programs

Delaware’s Section 811 PRA program was built off the

Developmental Disabilities, and Department of Health

success of its State Rental Assistance Program, which

and Mental Hygiene. The state received a fiscal year 2012

launched in 2011. The target populations for the PRA

grant of $11,229,308 to fund an estimated 150 PRA units.

program are people with serious and persistent mental

Maryland built its PRA program approach on two previous

il ness covered under a 2011 Department of Justice

programs that provided rental- and project-based

settlement agreement, people exiting institutions, and

subsidies for people with disabilities and low-income.

other individuals identified as at risk of being admitted to

The Bridge Program that provided temporary tenant-

long-term care facilities.

based rental subsidies to assist people until they could

Georgia. Olmstead litigation mandates and a U.S.

obtain a housing choice voucher (HCV) and the Weinberg

Department of Justice settlement agreement drive the

Apartments program that provided rental housing in tax

Georgia 811 PRA program. Partners are the Georgia

credit properties.

Housing Finance Agency and the Departments of

Massachusetts. The Massachusetts 811 PRA program

Community Affairs, Behavioral Health, Disabilities, and

partners are the Department of Housing and Community

Community Health. Target populations are those covered

Development and the Executive Office of Health and

by settlement agreements and who have severe and

Human Services. Target populations are MFP participants,

persistent mental il ness and those eligible for the state’s

people living in institutions who are not MFP participants

MFP program. The Georgia Housing Finance Agency

but are waiver eligible, people living in institutions who are

received $4,279,650 in fiscal year 2012 grant funds for an

not in MFP and are  not waiver eligible, and people living

estimated 134 units.

in the community and waiver eligible. The state received

Illinois. Il inois designed its 811 PRA program to address

$5,427,208 in the fiscal year 2012 to fund an estimated 90

three Olmstead consent decrees and serve the MFP-

PRA units. The Medicaid agency coordinates four offices,

eligible population. The PRA partners are the Il inois

statewide housing coordinators, and five regional housing

Housing Authority, the Departments of Healthcare and

coordinators to conduct outreach and referral to PRA

Family Services, Human Services, and Aging, and the

applicants.

Office of the Governor. The Il inois Housing Authority

Minnesota. The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency and

received $12,324,352 for 732 units. Target populations are

the Department of Human Services, the state Medicaid

people eligible for the MFP program and those covered by

Agency, administers Minnesota’s PRA program. The state

settlement agreements. For the PRA program, five Lead

received a fiscal year 2012 grant of $3,085,500 to fund an

Referral Agents track and process referrals and manage

estimated 85 units. The PRA program built on the state’s

their own regional waiting lists under the supervision of

MFP and Bridges Rental Assistance subsidy programs

the statewide housing coordinator housed in the state’s

and other supportive housing initiatives for people

Department of Human Services.

experiencing homelessness and serious mental il ness. In

Louisiana. Louisiana’s PRA program builds on the

addition, the state views the PRA program as an important

state’s permanent supportive housing (PSH) program

source of community-integrated housing to support goals

developed in response to the 2005 hurricanes in the Gulf

an Olmstead class action lawsuit settlement.

Coast region. The state received a fiscal year 2012 grant

Montana. Partners for Montana’s 811 PRA program are

of $8,489,928 for 200 units. The PSH program targets

the Montana Department of Commerce and the Health

people with disabilities, who are either homeless or living

and Human Services Department. The grantee also

in institutions, and have supportive service needs. PRA

works closely with the Missoula Housing Authority, which

partners are the Louisiana Housing Corporation and

oversees a large portfolio of tax credit properties in the

the Department of Health and Hospitals. An executive

Missoula area and was an early partner with the state

management council, made up of representatives from a

housing agency to apply for the PRA grant. The state

number of state agencies, oversees the program. With the

received $2,000,057 in fiscal year 2012 grant funds for

PRA grant, Louisiana hoped to expand the PSH program

an estimated 81 units. Montana’s target populations are

from the Gulf region to other parts of state and to address

people with physical disabilities or severe mental il ness

priorities in its  Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness and

who are served by Medicaid waivers or on waiting lists for

the terms of a class action lawsuit settlement under

Medicaid waiver services.

Olmstead ( Barthelemy v. Louisiana Department of Health

Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania State Housing Finance

and Hospitals).

Agency received $5,870,880 to fund an estimated 200

Maryland. In Maryland, the PRA program partners are the

PRA units statewide using a decentralized, county-based

Departments of Housing and Community Development,

approach. Pennsylvania’s PRA program builds on the

9

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 2. Overview of Project Rental Assistance Demonstration Programs

state’s Rental Subsidy Fund, an existing state program

a Medicaid home and community-based services or a

that provides incentives to developers to build housing for

similar plan for community-based long-term services

extremely low-income people with disabilities. PRA target

and supports. Beyond these basic criteria, grantees may

populations are people living in institutions or at risk for

establish more specific target populations as long as they

institutionalization and those in congregate settings who

are in accordance with grantee-approved tenant selection

want to live in the community. The state began the 811

policies and federal nondiscrimination laws PRA may be

PRA program as a pilot in a single county and plans to

used for people who are living in institutions, homeless,

expand.

at risk of institutionalization, or at risk of homelessness.

Texas. Texas designed its Section 811 PRA program to

Grantees may determine whether and how to prioritize

build on the success of its Project Access program that

outreach and recruitment within these groups.

uses Section 8 HCVs to assist low-income people with

Grantees took varied approaches to targeting 811 PRA

disabilities transition from institutions into the community

resources. Grantees identified PRA target populations

by providing access to affordable housing. The state PRA

based on the unmet needs for supportive housing

Program partners are the Texas Department of Housing

of people with disabilities in their states and on the

and Community Affairs and the Health and Human

opportunities provided by existing state-administered

Services Commission. Target populations are people with

supportive housing programs serving people with

disabilities living in institutions who wish to transition to

disabilities. Most of the 12 grantees targeted multiple

the community, people with serious mental il ness who are

disability groups—that is, a combination of people with

engaged in services but facing challenges due to housing

physical, developmental, or mental health disabilities.

instability, and youth exiting foster care. The state received

Some grantees prioritized populations covered by court-

$12,342,000 in fiscal year 2012 to fund an estimated 362

ordered settlement agreements or in required or voluntary

PRA units.

Olmstead plans.

Washington. In Washington, the Department of

All 12 states participate in the Centers for Medicare

Commerce and Department of Social and Health Services

and Medicaid Services’ MFP program. Several states—

are the key PRA program partners. The Department of

California, Delaware, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and

Commerce received a fiscal year 2012 grant of $5,739,717

Washington—prioritize the availability of PRA assistance

for 215 units. The PRA program has regional housing

to individuals participating in MFP more than others.

program managers who market to owners and coordinate

Most see PRA subsidies as a housing resource for MFP

housing referrals in three regions. The Bremerton Housing

participants moving out of institutional care, including

Authority administers the PRA rental assistance. The

those covered by legal settlements.

Washington Housing Finance Agency and the State Health

The target population has implications for the way in

Care Authority (the state Medicaid agency) coordinate

which state housing and Medicaid agencies administer

with the key partners but do not play active roles in

the PRA program in their state. Grantees may have

PRA program management. The 811 PRA fil s gaps in

different outreach procedures and referral procedures

Washington’s existing housing programs for people with

for different target populations. For example, identifying

disabilities.

individuals eligible for the PRA program is vastly different

Target Populations of the 2012 PRA

if a person lives in an institutional setting versus someone

experiencing homelessness. Different target populations

Grants

are served under different Medicaid waiver and state

plan services, and the types and availability of healthcare

The target population for the 811 PRA program is

and supportive services vary. Outreach procedures and

extremely low-income (household income is less than

transition services may also vary depending on whether

30 percent of a local area’s median income), nonelderly

PRA applicants are participants in the state’s MFP

persons with disabilities who are at least 18 but less than

program.

62 years of age at time of admission. Applicants must

meet HUD’s definition of disability for the 811 program

Table 2.2 presents an overview of the target populations

(HUD, 2013b).6 PRA residents must also be eligible for

for the 12 demonstration programs and priority levels for

6

In the Section 811 PRA program, a person with disabilities includes (1) any adult having a physical, mental, or emotional impairment that is expected to be of a continued and indefinite duration, substantially impedes his or her ability to live independently, and is of a nature that such ability could be improved by more suitable housing conditions; (2) a person with a developmental disability, as defined in Section 102(7) of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act (42 U.S.C. 6001(8)); (3) a person with a chronic mental illness; and (4) a person infected with the human acquired immunodeficiency virus (HIV) who are disabled as a result of HIV infection. For more information, see the definition of disability in Figure 3-6 of HUD’s Occupancy Handbook 4350.3 Rev-1. https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=43503c3HSGH.pdf.

10

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 2. Overview of Project Rental Assistance Demonstration Programs

those states with priorities. All 12 states target people

institutionalization. All but three grantees (California,

who are institutionalized, and this population is a priority

Il inois, and Texas) target people who are homeless or at

in 6 states (California, Delaware, Il inois, Louisiana,

risk of homelessness.7 The PRA program in Texas also

Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania). Al  but two grantees

targets people exiting foster care.

(Il inois and Texas) target people who are at risk of

Table  2.2 : Target Populations of 2012 P R A Demonstration Programs

Grantee

Target Population in Order of Priority (if Applicable)

1.  Individuals residing in inpatient facilities for at least 90 consecutive days, for which Medi-Cal has paid for at least 1 of those days, and who are enrolled in the California Community Transitions Money Follows the Person program.

California

2.  Individuals receiving Medi-Cal long-term home- and community-based services waiver or state plan services who are at risk for placement in inpatient facilities.

1.  Individuals exiting the Delaware Psychiatric Center, with serious and persistent mental illness, or both.

Delaware

2.  Individuals exiting institutions, with emphasis on Money Fol ows the Person participants.

3.  Identified as at risk of being admitted to long-term care facilities.

•  Eligible under the settlement agreement and who have serious and persistent mental illness.

Georgia

•  Eligible under the State of Georgia’s Money Follows the Person program.

•  Williams class action lawsuit members.

•  Colbert class action lawsuit members.

Illinois

•  Ligas class action lawsuit members.

•  Money Fol ows the Person participants.

•  Persons moving from state-operated developmental centers to the community.

1.  Persons who are inappropriately institutionalized.

2.  Homeless persons.

Louisiana

3.  Persons who are at risk of homelessness (including those living in transitional housing for persons who are homeless) and persons at risk of institutionalization.

1.  Institutionalized Medicaid recipients.

2.  Households at risk of institutionalization due to current housing situation.

3.  Developmental Disabilities Administration Community Pathways Waiver participants moving from group home and alternative living Maryland

units to independent renting and Mental Hygiene Administration Residential Rehabilitation Programs participants moving to independent renting.

4.  Homeless persons who are Medicaid recipients, prioritized in HEARTH Act of 2009 definition order.

•  Money Fol ows the Person participants.

•  Persons in institutions, not Money Fol ows the Person, waiver eligible.

Massachusetts

•  Persons in institutions, not Money Fol ows the Person, not waiver eligible.

•  Persons in the community, waiver eligible.

•  Individuals experiencing long-term homelessness who have a serious mental il ness.

Minnesota

•  Individuals with physical or mental disabilities exiting institutional settings after long-term stays (90 days or more) and are assisted by Minnesota’s Money Fol ows the Person program.

•  People with physical disabilities served by Medicaid waivers or on waiting list for Medicaid waivers.

Montana

•  People with severe mental illnesses served by Medicaid waivers or on waiting list for Medicaid waivers.

•  Persons institutionalized but able to live in the community with permanent supportive housing.

Pennsylvania

•  Persons at risk of institutionalization without permanent supportive housing.

•  Persons living in congregate settings, who desire to move to the community.

•  People with disabilities living in institutions who wish to transition to the community.

Texas

•  People with serious mental illnesses who are engaged in services but facing challenges due to housing instability.

•  Youth exiting foster care.

•  Individuals served through the Roads to Community Living (Money Follows the Person) Project.

•  Individuals with developmental disabilities served through the Developmental Disabilities Division.

Washington

•  Individuals with functional disabilities served through the Home and Community Services Division.

•  Individuals with mental illnesses served through the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery.

HEARTH = Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing. PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

7

California targets people experiencing homelessness with the 2013 811 PRA grant.

11

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 2. Overview of Project Rental Assistance Demonstration Programs

The following examples il ustrate the manner in which

severe mental il ness. This target population became the

grantees identified targeting priorities to address

first priority for Delaware’s PRA program. In Maryland, the

programmatic or policy priorities in their states.

city of Baltimore is under a consent decree as a result of a

Expanding existing supportive housing initiatives.

settlement agreement in the 2004 housing discrimination

Louisiana planned to expand its PSH program, which

lawsuit. The agreement requires the city of Baltimore to

had original y been established to respond to the critical

provide housing vouchers and other accommodations to

housing needs of vulnerable people that arose after

persons with disabilities. To address this need, Maryland

Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast region in

directs part of 811 PRA program resources to Baltimore.

2005. The PSH program serves populations similar to

those targeted in the 811 PRA program. Louisiana saw the

811 PRA grant as a way to expand the PSH program to the

central and northern parts of the state.

In Texas, the grantee wanted to build on the success of its

Project Access program and provide more housing choice

for persons with disabilities. The Project Access program

uses Section 8 HCVs administered by the state housing

agency to assist low-income persons with disabilities

transition from institutions to the community by providing

access to affordable housing. At the time of the evaluation

site visit, Project Access had 175 persons on its waiting

list. The 811 PRA grant will help the state address this

unmet housing need.

Addressing homelessness. In Minnesota, the grantee

integrated PRA resources with programs for people

experiencing homelessness, including the state’s MFP

program and their Projects for Assistance in Transition

From Homelessness (PATH) grants to counties. PATH

and MFP staff coordinate with the 811 PRA program’s

housing coordinator to engage people experiencing

long-term homelessness. The housing coordinator serves

as an intermediary between homeless clients, MFP or

PATH caseworkers, and properties with 811 PRA units to

facilitate housing placements.

Meeting the housing needs of members of groups

covered by legal settlements. Several states (Delaware,

Georgia, Il inois, and Maryland) target PRA resources

to members of groups covered by legal settlements

under Olmstead or other laws. For example, in Georgia,

the target population includes people with serious and

persistent mental il ness who are currently being served

in state hospitals, who are frequently seen in emergency

rooms, who are chronical y homeless, who are being

released from jails or prisons, or who are experiencing

some combination of these factors. Il inois has three

Olmstead consent decrees, creating a substantial need

for community-based housing options for people living

in institutions. The state committed to conduct outreach,

evaluate, and offer community placement to approximately

33,000 persons currently residing in institutions.

In Delaware, a settlement agreement created a need for

more housing units in the community for people with

12

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 3. Project Rental Assistance Partnerships

Project Rental

implementation efforts. The key research questions on

partnership are—

Assistance

•  What were the planned roles and responsibilities

across partner agencies as described in grantees’

applications?

Partnerships

•  Did the roles change during implementation? If so,

what changes occurred and why?

•  How are partner agencies held accountable?

This chapter describes the partnership structures across

The goal of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance

the 12 811 PRA grants, reviews the partners’ previous

program is to create effective, successful, and sustaining

experiences working together, examines partnership

partnerships between state housing or other appropriate

practices that support col aboration, and reviews grantee

housing agencies and state health and human service

experiences with the level of effort required to implement

or Medicaid agencies. In some of the 12 states involved

the 811 PRA program.

in this evaluation, housing and Medicaid agencies had

some history of working together, but in others, the

Overview of PRA Partnership

partnership was newly created for the 811 PRA program

or another recent initiative. In either case, the 811 PRA

Organization and Structure

program required partners to work together to establish

The 811 PRA program requires a partnership between a

and implement a new and complex approach to delivering

state housing agency and the state Medicaid agency. The

affordable rental housing to nonelderly persons with

distribution of program responsibilities across the two

disabilities.

agencies was general y similar among the 12 states and is

This chapter describes the partnerships established

summarized in table 3.1.

for the program and early lessons from the partners’

Table  3.1: S t andard Division of P R A Program Responsibilities

Bet ween S t ate Housing and Medicaid Agencies

State Housing Agency

State Medicaid Agency

•

•

Recruit and collaborate with direct service providers responsible for

Identify or finance eligible units for Section 811 PRA program.

implementing the program.

•  Execute Rental Agreement Contracts with property owners.

•  Oversee referral process in collaboration with direct service providers.

•  Perform outreach to developers and property owners.

•  Provide outreach, training, and technical assistance to direct service providers.

•  Monitor Section 811 PRA program unit occupancy and compliance with

•  Monitor processes on prioritizing individuals for housing placement.

eligibility requirements.

•

•

Monitor processes for ensuring residents have necessary access to housing and

Make rental payments to property owners.

support services.

•  Collect and report required occupancy and financial information.

•  Collect and report data on service delivery, costs, and outcomes.

•  Conduct ongoing communication with state health and human services or

•  Conduct ongoing communication with state housing agency, direct service

Medicaid agency and housing providers.

providers, and housing providers.

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Sources: Interagency Partnership Agreements; field interviews with staff from grantees and state Medicaid agencies Table 3.2 shows the partner agencies in each state, and

Agency is the 811 PRA grantee, but the California

where pertinent, examples of their previous experience

Tax Credit Al ocation Committee and the California

working together on similar initiatives. In most states,

Department of Housing and Community Development

one state housing agency partnered with the state’s lead

both play roles as wel . As discussed in more detail in

Medicaid agency. In a few states, multiple partners existed

chapter 4, the grantee as the tax credit al ocation agency

for one or both areas, as shown in the middle column. For

can play an important role in a state’s ability to secure

example, in California, housing functions are distributed

units for the 811 PRA program.

across several agencies. The California Housing Finance

13

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 3. Project Rental Assistance Partnerships

Table  3.2 : Grantee and Par tnering Agencies and T heir Previous E xperience

Previous Experience With Housing or Services

Grantee

Partner Agencies

for People With Disabilities

California Health and Human Services Agency, California

California Housing Finance

Department of Health Care Services, Department of Housing

No previous experience working together. Each had previous

Agency

and Community Development, California Tax Credit Allocation

experience with housing and providing services.

Committee, Department of Developmental Services

Delaware State Housing

Previous experience administering the State Rental Assistance

Department of Health and Social Services

Authority

Program, a program for low-income people with disabilities.

Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities,

Georgia Housing Finance

Georgia Department of Community Health, Georgia Department of  General experience with community-based supports.

Authority

Community Affairs

Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, Illinois

Previous experience with Money Follows the Person and Olmstead

Illinois Housing Authority

Department of Human Services, Illinois Department on Aging,

Consent Decrees.

Office of the Governor

Louisiana Housing

Previous experience administering the state’s Permanent

Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals

Corporation

Supportive Housing program developed in 2007.

Maryland Department of

Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Maryland

Previous experience with two programs that provide rental

Housing and Community

Department of Disabilities

subsidies to low-income people with disabilities.

Development

Massachusetts Department

Previous experience transitioning people with disabilities from

of Housing and Community

Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services

institutional settings into the community.

Development

Previous experience with Bridges rental subsidy program, as well

Minnesota Housing Finance

as Olmstead plan, Money Follows the Person, and Plan to End

Minnesota Department of Human Services

Agency

Homelessness, and targeting people who are homeless with severe

mental il ness.

Montana Department of

Agencies previously partnered with each other on Shelter Plus

Montana Health and Human Services Department

Commerce

Care program developed in 2007.

Previous experience through a program that used developers’

Pennsylvania Housing

Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare

fees to produce affordable housing for low-income people with

Finance Agency

disabilities.

Texas Department of

Previous experience on the Project Access Program, which

Housing and Community

Texas Health and Human Services Commission

partners the State’s Money Follows the Person program and

Affairs

housing choice vouchers for people with disabilities.

Washington State Department of Social and Health Services,

Previous experience working with housing authorities on Non

Washington Department of

Washington State Housing Financing Commission, Washington

Elderly Disabled vouchers. Additional experience with outreach or

Commerce

State Health Care Authority

referral mechanisms for institution-to-community transitions.

Sources: Grantee applications; field interviews with grantees and Medicaid agencies

On the Medicaid side, each state has a lead Medicaid

As the final column of table 3.2 shows, partner agencies

agency, known as the  single-state agency, but other

often have some experience working on similar initiatives

agencies may administer Medicaid-funded activities,

serving similar populations. In some cases, key staff

often based on beneficiary type (for example, elderly,

had previously collaborated on other supportive housing

people with developmental disabilities, people with mental

initiatives and programs for people with disabilities,

health issues). In California, the Department of Health

including developing and administering supportive

Care Services is the official Medicaid partner, although

housing rental subsidy programs or housing development

the Department of Developmental Services is also a key

programs for people with disabilities or other vulnerable

partner, because one of the 811 PRA program’s target

populations. Previous collaboration often meant the

populations is people with developmental disabilities.

partners had mechanisms to identify eligible applicants

The primary housing and Medicaid partners in Georgia,

that could be adapted to the 811 PRA program, as wel

Il inois, Maryland, and Washington similarly worked with

as knowledge of where people live, where the need for

other services agencies on the health side, as shown in

housing is, and the extent of need by type of disability

the table.

among the state’s 811 PRA target populations.

14

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 3. Project Rental Assistance Partnerships

Many state Medicaid agencies had already developed

through the Rental Subsidy Fund initiated in 2005.

outreach and referral mechanisms for transitioning people

Pennsylvania’s Section 811 PRA program is modeled

out of institutional care as part of their participation in the

after this program, through which the housing finance

Money Fol ows the Person program. Grantees in Il inois,

agency uses developer fees to create units affordable

Minnesota, and Washington developed their PRA program

to households with incomes at or less than 20 percent

based on procedures that were already in place for the

of Area Median Income (AMI).

MFP program and often relied on MFP-funded staff to play

key roles in outreach, referrals, and transition services.

How 811 PRA Partners Collaborate

Some grantees identify MFP participants as their priority

Given the complexity of the 811 PRA program and its

or only target population for the 811 PRA program.

novel structure compared with most affordable rental

Delaware and Washington had established previous

housing programs, partner agencies had to make a lot

outreach and referral systems for other state programs

of decisions, solve problems as they arose, and adapt

targeted specifical y to people with disabilities or people

the program over time. The grantees tried to accomplish

experiencing homelessness. In addition, the Washington

these goals by establishing clear roles and responsibilities,

state Medicaid agency had experience working with

setting up mechanisms for communication, cross-training

local public housing agencies to issue HUD’s nonelderly

staff, and undertaking tasks col aboratively.

disabled vouchers, a program serving a target population

very similar to those served in the PRA program. The

Structures To Support Collaboration

Montana Department of Commerce’s Housing Assistance

Each state developed structures and procedures for

Bureau and the Mental Health Services Bureau within

collaboration (or adapted existing ones) that worked

the Medicaid agency had previously worked together

for them. It was too early in the implementation period

on HUD’s Shelter Plus Care program, providing housing

to determine which practices were most successful in

subsidies for people with disabilities who were chronically

accomplishing the 811 PRA’s ultimate goals of securing

homeless.

units and housing eligible residents, but here, we offer

Previous experience with supportive housing programs

some examples of practices that these early grantees

was the most applicable to the new 811 PRA program.

found promising.

Some states were already administering programs very

Pennsylvania envisions a statewide 811 PRA program but

similar to the 811 PRA. For example—

began with a pilot program in one county. The housing

•  Minnesota’s Section 811 PRA partnership is built on

finance and Medicaid agencies worked together on the

several existing programs targeting people who are

application approach and program design and structure,

homeless and have severe mental il ness. Beginning

and they col aborated on decisions related to Section

in the 1990s, Minnesota’s housing finance and

811 PRA program implementation. In addition, both

Medicaid agencies col aborated on the Bridges Rental

agencies conducted outreach and marketing to encourage

Assistance Program, a state-funded program that

participation in the Section 811 PRA program. As a result,

provides interim supportive housing subsidies for

both agencies feel a shared responsibility for the role

people with severe mental il ness who are waiting for

of grantee, meeting weekly to review issues and track

other long-term rental subsides. Louisiana modeled its

progress on the Section 811 PRA program.

Section 811 PRA program on its permanent supportive

In Washington, the housing and Medicaid agencies work

housing program, which was implemented through a

together as a team, making most major decisions together

partnership between the state’s housing finance and

on both the health and housing issues. In addition,

Medicaid agencies. The state agencies established

Washington conducts cross training between departments

the PSH program in 2007 to provide stable housing for

to bring together housing and health staff in dialogue

people with disabilities and supportive service needs in

around key issues and necessary training.

response to the devastation of Hurricanes Katrina and

Rita in the Gulf Coast region. The Louisiana partners

In several states, housing and Medicaid agencies

saw the Section 811 PRA program as a way to serve

undertake 811 PRA program tasks together. Staff from

similar households in the northern and central regions

state housing and Medicaid agencies jointly conduct

of the state.

outreach to property owners to encourage interest in the

PRA program and to educate owners about the program’s

•  In Pennsylvania, the state housing finance and

target populations. Other tasks shared by cross-agency

Medicaid agencies developed partnerships around

teams are reviewing owner applications for 811 PRA

supportive housing programs for both elderly and

assistance, training service providers, and monitoring and

nonelderly people with disabilities, most notably

reporting.

15

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 3. Project Rental Assistance Partnerships

Communication

Grantees commonly reported that the program required

Grantees reported that effective communication between

more time and resources than expected. In NOFA

partner agencies is critical to share information and

responses, grantees estimated the expected level of effort

resolve problems. The states used a variety of means to

for the program in full-time equivalents. The estimates

coordinate activities, resolve issues, and communicate

ranged from 1.1 ful -time equivalent in Delaware to 7.65

progress among the partners. Nine grantees report using

full-time equivalents in Il inois. During field visits, the

in-person meetings, 10 use email, and 7 use systems for

evaluation team asked partner staff to estimate the level

document sharing.

of effort actual y required in the first year of the program.

Most reported the level of effort was higher than expected

In most states, partners meet monthly or every 2 weeks,

but were unable to quantify the difference. Four grantees

in person or by telephone. In California, partner agencies

did provide an estimate, and the estimates were much

initiated regular meetings after the grant was awarded but

higher than the estimates in the NOFA responses.

before the cooperative agreement had been signed and

Maryland original y estimated staff investment at 4.25 ful -

continued them thereafter. California partner staff report

time equivalents but reported an estimate of 6.75 full-time

that this preplanning contributed to California moving

equivalents after implementation, noting that the Section

the country’s first residents into 811 PRA funded units.

811 PRA program will cost the agencies a combined $2

Pennsylvania meets weekly to address problems and

mil ion to operate (versus the approximate $900,000 in

monitor progress, and Il inois partners meet every 2 weeks

administrative funds available through the 2012 grant).

to review progress and discuss program adjustments.

Grantees were asked if, after more than a year of program

In addition to meetings, staff reported that document-

implementation, they still felt the Section 811 PRA program

sharing platforms such as SharePoint are an effective

required a higher level of effort than original y expected.

communication tool, along with other software programs

This question was to determine if the increased effort

that facilitate sharing documents and data. For example,

was only for startup or continued throughout program

California noted the state has a system that enables

implementation. Of the 12 states, 7 states reported that

multiple agencies to concurrently review property owner

staff investment still exceeded their expectations, 3 states

applications for 811 PRA assistance. Some grantees

reported they were unsure, 1 state reported that the level

developed data sharing systems to share applicant and

of effort was no longer higher than expected, and 1 state

participant data between partners. In Delaware, both

did not report.

housing and health agencies use the same systems

(SocialServe and PAIR) to determine eligibility for 811 PRA

This study did not col ect detailed data on program costs,

assistance.

but it is clear that 811 PRA grantees must identify other

resources beyond the PRA grant to cover some costs of

Cross-Agency Entities for Program

the program. In at least five states, Medicaid agencies

Coordination

are not receiving any of the Section 811 administration

fee. The MFP grant may pay for staff time working on

Some of the grantees have cross-agency committees

the Section 811 program. In many states, MFP grants

that provide oversight and coordination. For example,

funded housing coordinator positions to help facilitate the

Louisiana developed an executive management council

transition of individuals from institutions to community-

that meets monthly to make program and property

based settings. In some states, MFP-funded housing

selection decisions, resolve disputes, and monitor the

coordinators play an essential role in the PRA program by

program. In Il inois, an interagency panel chaired by the

helping to market the program to owners, to identify where

statewide housing coordinator (housed in the governor’s

housing is needed, and in matching eligible applicants

office) convenes several housing and Medicaid-related

to available PRA units (chapter 6 describes the role of

agencies to make sure the referral process and service

housing coordinators in the PRA program.). MFP funding

delivery systems are working effectively.

is time-limited, however, and states have only until 2020

Financial and Staffing Resources

to expend MFP grant funds. Some states are particularly

concerned about ways to fund housing coordinator

Section 811 PRA program responsibilities were distributed

positions after MFP ends. One option is for states to

across staff in the housing and health agencies, as wel

incorporate housing-related activities and services into

as staff from other program partners. The 2012 notice of

state Medicaid waivers to support community integration

funding availability al owed for up to 5 percent of the grant

for individuals needing long-term services and supports

to be used for administrative costs. HUD increased the

(CMS, 2015).

al owable administrative fee to 8 percent in cooperative

agreements with grantees.

16

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 3. Project Rental Assistance Partnerships

Conclusion

activities, states may need to consider changes to their

Medicaid waiver programs to incorporate housing-

In general, the 12 states funded in the inaugural round of

related activities and services and supports as eligible

811 PRA grants established or strengthened partnerships

Medicaid waiver expenses.

between housing and Medicaid agencies and developed

policies and procedures to launch the program. Other

The Phase II evaluation will continue to fol ow the progress

chapters in this report address in more detail the ways in

of a subset of these grantees and will assess more

which the 811 PRA partners in each state carry out their

indepth the nature of the partnerships and the outcomes

roles. The complexity and novelty of the program proved

of the partners’ efforts. Partnerships will be evaluated

challenging, requiring substantial y more staff and financial

under a core set of categories—leadership, financial and

resources than the grantees expected, especial y in the

nonfinancial resources, collaboration, decisionmaking,

first year. Lessons from the early implementation include—

and sustainability. The second phase will also include a

more detailed cost analysis to explore 811 PRA program

•  The 811 PRA program necessitates ongoing

costs compared with other programs that serve similar

communication and collaboration between partners.

populations.

In addition to meetings, staff reported that document-

sharing platforms such as SharePoint are an effective

communication tool, along with other software

programs that facilitate sharing documents and data.

•  In several states, housing and Medicaid agencies

undertake 811 PRA program tasks together,

necessitating learning a common language and

training the other agency on their areas of expertise.

Jointly conducted PRA program activities by staff from

state housing and Medicaid agencies are outreach

to property owners to encourage interest in the PRA

program, reviewing owner applications for 811 PRA

assistance, training service providers, and monitoring

and reporting for grant compliance.

•  Housing and Medicaid partners with previous

experience working together had an advantage in

launching the program more quickly. State agencies

that had previously worked together to administer

supportive housing programs typically had established

mechanisms for communication between agencies,

had a greater understanding of their target populations,

and had existing outreach procedures, systems,

applicant pools, and waiting lists that could be adapted

for the PRA program.

•  Grantees commonly reported that the program

required more time and resources than expected, and

most (7 out of 12) reported that administrative tasks

continued to take longer than expected a year after

PRA programs started.

•  Sustaining program staffing is a concern in Medicaid

agencies given the expiration of MFP grants that

fund staff and services in many states to help

individuals who are transitioning out of institutions into

community-based housing. To keep funding these

17

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

18

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 4. Property Selection

Property Selection

the 811 PRA population. According to the 811 PRA

grantees’ notice of funding availability responses, most

expected to contract with owners of a mix of new and

existing properties. Each strategy has both benefits and

disadvantages. The rationale for recruiting owners of new

The goal of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance

properties is that the units are newly coming on line, and

program is to provide appropriate, affordable housing for

thus, many could be available for occupancy at one time.

persons with disabilities that is integrated in multifamily

The downside is that the properties need to be built first,

developments serving people with and without disabilities.

a process that takes time (sometimes years). Existing

This chapter examines how state housing agencies

properties do not present the problem of construction

identify units for 811 PRA and enter into long-term rental

delays, but units are likely occupied and not available to

agreements with property owners.

811 PRA residents until resident turnover.

The chapter describes grantee strategies to secure

In their 811 PRA NOFA responses, grantees described the

units in both new and existing housing and in specific

ways in which they expected to recruit property owners

geographic areas. The chapter describes strategies that

for the program. Some revised their strategies over time

grantees perceive as most effective for identifying units

to address the challenges in recruiting interested owners

for PRA subsidies, as well as chal enges in identifying

with suitable properties. Table 4.1 shows grantees’ original

eligible owners and properties and in obtaining owner

plans as presented in their NOFA responses and their

participation. This chapter reviews the financing incentives

strategies as of June 2016, when researchers completed

and marketing tools grantees used to attract owners, the

data col ection for this study. All but three grantees

challenges encountered, and the strategies and tools used

(Delaware, Minnesota, and Montana) initial y planned

to address the challenges.

to recruit owners of both new and existing properties.

Delaware added new properties through the state’s tax

Property Targeting Approaches:

credit awards because of concerns of limited turnover

New Versus Existing Properties

in existing properties that would slow the ability to place

eligible 811 PRA applicants in housing. Over time, Georgia

Grantees were required to recruit owners of existing

and Maryland chose not to recruit existing properties for

or new (to be constructed), affordable multifamily

the same reason.

developments who were wil ing to al ocate units to

Table  4.1: Targeted Ver sus Actual Proper t y Recruitment S trategies

Targeted (Grant Application)

Actual (June 2016)

State

New

Existing

New

Existing

Comments

California

X

X

X

X

Unchanged

Delaware

X

X

X

Added new

Georgia

X

X

Xa

Removed existing

Illinois

X

X

X

X

Unchanged

Louisiana

X

X

X

X

Unchanged

Maryland

X

X

Xa

Removed existing

Massachusetts

X

X

X

X

Unchanged

Minnesota

X

X

Unchanged

Montana

X

X

Unchanged

Pennsylvania

X

X

X

X

Unchanged

Texas

X

X

X

X

Unchanged

Washington

X

X

X

X

Unchanged

a Includes rehabilitated.

Sources: 2012 Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Notice of Funding Availability responses; field interviews with grantee staff 19

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 4. Property Selection

In the remainder of this chapter, we review the specific

affordable supportive housing or housing for persons with

strategies grantees used to recruit owners, the chal enges

disabilities through the state’s Qualified Allocations Plans

encountered, and the ways grantees adapted their

(QAPs), which outline the state’s selection criteria for

strategies to secure units for the program.

distributing tax credits.

Strategies To Recruit Owners of

As discussed in chapter 5, all properties with units under

Rental Assistance Contract as of June 2016, were funded

New Properties

at least in part by tax credits. Some states could target

their QAP special population priorities to PRA subsidies or

Grantees recruited owners of new properties primarily

otherwise provide incentives for developers to set aside a

through incentives in the state’s affordable housing

percentage of the units in a property specifical y for PRA.

financing programs. Approaches include creating

Creating incentives in state QAPs for PRA units was a

incentives in awards for low-income housing tax credits

primary tool for grantees to secure units under contract for

and other housing financing programs for owners to

PRA.

al ocate PRA subsidies to a portion of units in their

properties and making subsidies available through a

Table 4.2 summarizes the extent to which each state’s

NOFA, either as a one-time competitive al ocation or on a

QAP includes any incentives for the Section 811 PRA

rolling basis.

program specifical y or incentives for housing to assist

special needs populations in general. One-half of the

Incentives for Tax Credits and Other Housing

2012 grantees had QAPs that gave preference, points,

Funding Awards

priority, or required an applicant for tax credit funds to

The LIHTC is the nation’s largest financing source for the

participate in the 2012 811 PRA program. Five states gave

development of affordable housing, funding approximately

a preference, priority, or required a tax credit applicant to

2.8 mil ion housing units since 1997. Many states already

participate or serve persons with disabilities in programs

include incentives to property developers to build

in general.

Table  4.2 : Q A P Preferences and S trategies To Improve Unit Production

QAP Incentives (Points, Priorities, or Preferences)

State

For Section 811 PRA

For Housing for Persons With Disabilities in General

A 4-percent set-aside for projects where at least 50 percent of

the units serve special needs populations, including persons with

California

No

disabilities. A 10-percent set-aside for projects serving homeless

persons.

Points for projects that set aside at least five units for the Section 811

Delaware

No

PRA program.

Georgia

Not at the time of the field visit but will going forward.

Points for projects offering units for persons with disabilities.

Developers can earn up to 10 points for allocating units to underserved

Illinois

Not specifically for PRA but PRA is eligible for general QAP priorities.

populations for six underserved populations, including low-income

persons with disabilities.

PRA is eligible for PSH priority points. In 2017, points for participating

Points to developers who set aside 5 to 10 percent of the project units

Louisiana

in PSH were increased for projects that agree to a 25-percent set-

for the state’s PSH program.

aside.

Requires that developers temporarily restrict 5 percent of units for

Maryland

Yes—compatible with PRA.

persons with disabilities. Additional points for restricting 25 percent of

the units for persons with disabilities.

Points for offering units for people who are homeless and persons with

Massachusetts

None specified.

disabilities.

Extra points for agreeing to incorporate PSH units into the development

Minnesota

None specified.

and for projects that provide units for people with certain disabilities.

10 points awarded for each 5 percent of the units targeted for person

Montana

No

with disabilities.

( cont )

20

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 4. Property Selection

Table  4.2 : Q A P Preferences and S trategies To Improve Unit Production  ( cont )

QAP Incentives (Points, Priorities, or Preferences)

State

For Section 811 PRA

For Housing for Persons With Disabilities in General

All else being equal, a developer who expresses interest in the Section

Pennsylvania

811 PRA program is given preference in receiving low-income housing

Yes

tax credits, or LIHTCs.

Requires developers to allocate 10 units per project for PRA or no more

Texas

No

than 18 percent of the total units in property.

Points for a project that sets aside 20 percent of the units for persons

with disabilities. Developments can earn maximum points by setting

Washington

No

aside 75 percent of the units for supportive housing for people

experiencing homelessness.

LIHTC = low-income housing tax credit. PRA = Project Rental Assistance. PSH = permanent supportive housing. QAP = Qualified Allocation Plan.

Sources: 2015–2016 grantee interviews; states’ Qualified Allocation Plans

Adding New QAP Incentives for PRA

program, that developer would be given preference in

Three states were able to specifical y add incentives for

receiving tax credits and would be required to provide

participating in the 811 PRA program. In all these states,

units for 811 PRA program residents.

the grantee is also the tax-credit al ocating agency and

Using Existing QAP and Other Incentives To

has the authority to develop priorities in the state QAP.

Encourage PRA Units

Delaware State Housing Authority (DSHA) had intended

Several grantees’ QAPs already had incentives that

to locate PRA units in existing developments, but did not

encouraged new developments for special needs

receive many eligible responses from their open owner

populations and were able to use these incentives to

application process. Before 2014, all properties had to

identify units for the PRA program. In two states, grantees

al ocate 5 percent of their units for special populations,

were able to identify PRA units through existing incentives

which were broadly defined and could include veterans,

in the state QAP. In Louisiana, PRA is part of the state’s

people experiencing homelessness, and people with

permanent supportive housing program focusing on the

disabilities. Due to the low response to the intent-to-

northern part of the state. Louisiana’s QAP, beginning in

participate form, DSHA established points in the 2014,

2007, provides points to LIHTC applications when those

2015, and 2016 QAPs for Section 811 units in new and

responsible for operating the tax-accredited projects

rehabilitated properties. Applicants received up to 3 points

agree to participate in the PSH program by al ocating

for accepting an al ocation of PRA subsidies. As a result,

5 to 10 percent of the project’s units to PSH-eligible

as of June 2016, DSHA had identified 97 of its 148 PRA

applicants. In 2017, the Louisiana tax credit agency wil

units in 17 properties. Maryland’s housing finance agency

increase the points for projects that agree to a 25 percent

modified its QAP to encourage property developers to

set-aside and give preference to the development of

participate in the 811 PRA program. Property developers

one-bedroom units, a particular need in Louisiana’s PRA

may earn bonus points in their applications if they agree

program.

to restrict up to 25 percent of the units in the property for

persons with disabilities who have incomes at or less than

In Il inois, a statewide comprehensive housing initiative,

50 percent of Area Median Income.

created under the Il inois Comprehensive Housing

Planning Act, sets aside approximately 16 percent of tax

Original y, Pennsylvania’s 811 PRA program application

credit funds to encourage development of housing for six

stated that it intended to obtain units for its 811 PRA

underserved populations, including low-income persons

program from units newly developed using LIHTC

with disabilities and persons who are homeless or at-risk

allocations from the 2011 through 2013 allocation rounds.

of homelessness. Developers can earn up to 10 points

The housing agency discovered that far fewer developers

for al ocating units to the Statewide Referral Network, a

were interested in participating in the program than

housing resource set up to link vulnerable populations

expected and, as a result, implemented preferences in

who are already connected to services to affordable and

its subsequent QAP for tax credit awards. Although the

available housing.

housing agency is not technical y awarding points, if

two developers submit applications that score exactly

Even if state QAP plans do not include a preference

the same and one expressed an interest in the 811 PRA

specifical y for the PRA program, all state QAPs include

some general preference for people with disabilities or

21

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 4. Property Selection

include people with disabilities as an eligible population

In Washington, the QAP includes points for projects

under more general special population incentives. State

that set aside at least 20 percent of units for people with

QAPs in Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Montana al

disabilities, but developers can earn maximum points

include general priorities for property development for

by setting aside 75 percent of the units for supportive

people with disabilities but do not include any incentives

housing for people who experience homelessness. The

directly for owners to accept PRA subsidies.

California state QAP includes a 10 percent set-aside

In addition to the LIHTC program, some states have

for projects exclusively serving people who experience

additional funding mechanisms for affordable housing

homelessness and a 4 percent set-aside for projects

and for supportive housing or housing for people with

that al ocate at least 50 percent of units to special needs

disabilities specifical y. Although California was unable

populations, including people with disabilities. Because

to al ocate tax credit points for the 811 PRA program,

both set-asides for maximum points exceed the 811 PRA

California was able to incorporate points into a state

program’s 25-percent maximum of units for people with

bond-funded Multifamily Housing Program (MHP), which

disabilities or supportive housing, general y only those

provides financing for the construction, rehabilitation, or

projects that do not apply for tax credits under the special

preservation of rental housing for low-income households.

needs or homeless set-asides can qualify for the 811 PRA

In 2015, the California Department of Housing and

program.

Community Development made available $47.5 mil ion in

Tax credit properties do not align with location of PRA

MHP funds and included priority points for properties that

need.  Even in states where QAP incentives align with the

include at least five PRA units in the funding application.

goals of the PRA program, locations of tax credit-funded

As a result, six applications for the MHP requested

properties may not always match the locations where

funding for 811 PRA units, and MHP funds were awarded

the programs’ target populations want to live or where

to three properties for 15 PRA units.

necessary services and housing supports are available

and accessible.

Challenges to Recruiting Owners

In Georgia, the state’s QAP includes points for projects

Through QAP Incentives

that would accept very low-income disabled persons

but not for 811 PRA program specifical y. The QAP’s

Grantees encountered a number of challenges

integration requirement matches well to the PRA program

to recruiting owners of new properties, including

however. To receive points for serving people with

disincentives to participating inherent in the program’s

disabilities, the property must have between 15 and

statutory regulations or grant requirements and the

20 percent of its units set aside for this population, the

availability of affordable housing not always matching

upper limit due to one of the state’s Olmstead settlement

locations where needs exist or where services and

agreements as described in chapter 2. Even with these

supports are available and accessible. In some states, the

preference points, Georgia’s housing agency reports

grantee is not the same agency that al ocates tax credits

chal enges with identifying units for the PRA program.

and does not have the authority to establish priorities

Georgia’s QAP gives preferences to properties in rural

for the PRA program in tax credit competitions. In some

areas. Conversely, housing agency staff report that

states, the grantee does not have authority for state-

most of the individuals who would benefit from 811 PRA

funded housing programs.

subsidies reside in and around the urban Atlanta area.

QAP incentives misaligned with the PRA program.  In

Although the grantee has been able to fill some of its rural

some states, the state’s general housing priorities were

units, an overall mismatch exists in the state between

not aligned with the integration goals for the Section

eligible PRA properties and the areas with access to the

811 PRA program. For example, PSH developed under

services and supports that PRA residents need to be able

the LIHTC program is often specifical y for people who

to live independently.

experience homelessness. This group may include people

Texas’s QAP also provides incentives for developers to

with disabilities, but the units are not specifically set aside

develop tax credit properties outside of urban areas,

for that population. In addition, supportive housing priority

which is not the location of most of the demand for

points are often awarded only when owners set aside a

supportive housing nor where residents are more likely

minimum percentage of units in a property for supportive

to have access to services and supports. Although the

housing. The threshold typical y exceeds the 811 PRA

Texas PRA program had no units under contract as of

program regulation that limits the number of supportive

June 2016, the state’s 2015 and 2016 QAP included

housing units for people with disabilities to 25 percent for

incentives for PRA participation, and the 2017 QAP

one property.

22

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 4. Property Selection

requires participation in the 811 PRA program. The 2017

In Washington, both the housing and Medicaid agency

QAP requires applicants to al ocate 10 units for the PRA

staff extensively marketed the availability of 811 PRA units

program or the maximum set-aside al owed for under the

to developers and owners of state-funded units. Staff

QAP for people with disabilities, which is 18 percent of

analyzed properties funded through the state’s housing

the units in each property and less than the PRA program

trust fund and owners that would be good candidates

maximum of 25 percent. The Texas QAP also gives

for the 811 PRA program, including properties with 40 or

owners a choice about whether they wil  place the PRA

more units or high numbers of accessible units. The 811

units in new tax credit-financed development or in another

PRA program staff attended local housing conferences

existing development. To receive approval for an existing

and met with regional support network providers and

development, a property’s vacancy rate must be less

homeless assistance providers. Through November

than 15 percent, and the property must be in an area with

2015, housing agency staff estimated they had spoken to

transportation and access to services.

approximately 50 owners.

Grantees that are not tax credit allocating agencies.

To gain interest in the 811 PRA program, key staff from

Some grantees are not the state agency that awards

California’s housing and Medicaid agencies extensively

tax credits and therefore do not have the authority to

marketed the 811 PRA program to owners of state-funded

create priorities for the 811 PRA program in state QAPs.

multifamily properties. Staff from the two agencies

In California, the California Housing Finance Agency is

held webinars, conducted in-person local meetings

the grantee, although the California Tax Credit Allocation

throughout the state, and responded to questions from

Committee is responsible for issuing tax credits and

developers. Contact information for housing and Medicaid

develops the priorities for the state’s QAP. Other states

staff was also provided in all marketing and application

where the grantee is not the tax credit-al ocating agency

materials and on the 811 PRA program website. Program

are Louisiana and Washington.

staff conducted limited targeted outreach to owners

of particular existing projects in their housing agency

Outreach and Marketing Strategies

portfolios, because agency data systems do not enable

for Existing Properties

staff to easily determine which properties may be eligible

for 811 PRA subsidies.

For states that do not have specific priorities for the

In Pennsylvania, staff at the state housing finance

811 PRA program in their QAP, grantees point to the

agency conducted both targeted and broad outreach

importance of extensive outreach and marketing to

to potential property owners. Before engaging property

property owners and developers to educate them on and

developers directly, staff researched their inventory of

gain interest in the 811 PRA program. Grantees conducted

affordable housing projects and screened out al  ineligible

targeted outreach to owners by identifying funded

properties, such as buildings for people aged 62 and

properties that met PRA requirements and broad outreach

older and properties constructed before 2011 because of

through presenting at owner or developer conferences or

the environmental requirements of the grant. The housing

events or through email or mass mailings.

agency held two regional meetings to explain and market

The Minnesota PRA program initially targeted PRA

the program to property owners and landlords. In addition,

units only to existing affordable housing properties.

the agency issued press releases on the program and sent

Both the housing and Medicaid agencies conducted

mass emails to eligible property owners to inform them of

extensive research to identify eligible properties and

the available subsidies.

educate property owners about the PRA program. The

Staff at the Il inois housing agency conducted extensive

Medicaid agency determined residential locations of its

research on both existing properties and planned

institutionalized participants, using data on residents of

new construction to identify eligible properties. Il inois

nursing home and other institutional settings. The housing

awards two rounds of tax credits each year, and staff

agency identified specific properties within its portfolio

are constantly reviewing property information to look for

that may contain housing units eligible for 811 PRA

properties coming available for lease.

program. For the 2016 811 PRA Request for Proposals,

Minnesota’s housing agency modified its Request for

Although the Montana housing agency maintains an open

Proposals process to encourage developers seeking

application process for PRA subsidies, the agency was

financing for new construction projects to participate in

able to secure most of its planned units under contract

the 811 PRA program.

by June 2016 through its relationship with the Missoula

Housing Authority. Most units under RAC (40 of 48) in

Montana are in Missoula and under contract with the

23

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 4. Property Selection

housing authority, which oversees a large portfolio of tax

for funding. They created an application form and sample

credit properties in the Missoula area and partners with

tools, such as memorandums of agreement between

the state housing agency to apply for the PRA grant.

owners and referral organizations, tenant selection plans,

board resolutions, and affirmative marketing plans.

Procedures for Applying for 811

Housing and Medicaid agency staff also provide technical

PRA

assistance to owners throughout the application process.

The five partnering agencies review and approve 811

Six 2012 grantees issue PRA units to owners through

PRA funding applications according to their respective

an open or closed NOFA or other formal application

expertise. Partner staff described the process as time-

procedures. Grantees in four states (California, Minnesota,

consuming but necessary, and ultimately, successful.

Montana, and Washington) use an application process

Although most of Delaware’s units have been identified

exclusively, in addition to outreach to eligible property

through the QAP process, the state’s housing agency

owners and developers as described in the previous

initial y established a formal application process for

section. PRA programs in Delaware and Maryland use a

existing properties. The agency developed an incentive

separate 811 PRA application process in addition to the

to participate form based on a similar form Washington

tax credit al ocation of PRA units. All but Maryland accept

developed for their 811 PRA program. The Delaware

applications on an ongoing basis.

housing agency emailed the form to large developers

In Washington, housing and Medicaid agency staff

and management companies in Delaware to ask about

developed a streamlined application process. Owners

interest in participating and property information.

can download the funding application on the housing

Although the agency received about 25 responses from

agency’s website and submit the application by email.

interested owners, most properties were not eligible for

The application is designed to help owners determine if

PRA subsidies, because the proportion of units set aside

their properties are eligible for the 811 PRA program and

for residents with special needs already exceeded the 25

the number of 811 PRA units a property could support.

percent cap or because the owner was unable or unwil ing

Staff from both agencies review applications for eligibility

to meet environmental review or other 811 PRA program

based on the number of units a property contains, the

requirements.

811 PRA units requested, and the types of subsidies

already attached to units at the property. Both agencies

Challenges in Identifying

also review the owner for organizational capacity and

Properties for the PRA Program

the property’s proximity to transportation and services.

The agencies review applications as they are received

Across the 12 states, owner interest in the 811 PRA

and keep the application process open until the housing

program was less than expected. Through June 2016,

agency achieves its goal for units under contract. Housing

2012 grantees had 23 percent of the estimated PRA

agency staff provide technical assistance to owners

rental subsidies under contract with property owners.

throughout the application process. Applications are

Grantees experienced difficulty attracting sufficient new

usual y submitted after several conversations between

and existing properties or units to meet their goals for

owners and housing agency staff.

several reasons. Although the most commonly cited

In California, staff from the housing finance’s partnering

reason (mentioned by 7 of the 12 grantees) was that the

agency, the Department of Housing and Community

recruitment process simply took more time and effort than

Development, developed the 811 PRA NOFA for property

anticipated, several of the remaining grantee responses

owners and the funding application review process. As

provide deeper insight into the reasons for the difficulty, as

the housing agency provides funding for the development

discussed in the following paragraphs.

and rehabilitation of affordable housing through

Properties exceed the 25-percent cap on housing for

multiple state and federal funding programs (including

special needs populations. In six states, the grantees

HOME Investment Partnerships Program, Community

reported that they found owners who were interested

Development Block Grant, and Emergency Solutions

in the 811 PRA program, but the owners proposed

Grants program), agency staff lent their expertise to

properties already exceeded the 25-percent limit on

develop the funding application for the PRA subsidies. The

supportive housing units. California and Washington

811 PRA application period began August 1, 2014 and is

encountered this issue, because existing affordable

open until all 811 PRA funds are awarded. Housing staff

housing programs for people with disabilities gave

streamlined the application process to make it as easy

incentives for higher concentrations of special needs units

as possible for owners interested in the program to apply

(as high as 75 percent).

24

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 4. Property Selection

The 811 PRA program is a new and unfamiliar

finding appropriate properties with one-bedroom units,

program. The fact that the 811 PRA program was new

and three grantees mentioned challenges finding units

and operated differently from other affordable housing

with good access to services. As noted previously in this

programs meant that grantees and their partners had to

chapter, Georgia has suitable properties in rural areas, but

educate owners about the new approach. In some states,

most of the eligible and interested households are in urban

available alternative programs were more familiar to

areas in or near Atlanta. As expected, of the 76 persons on

owners and, in some cases, potential y more profitable. In

Georgia’s waiting list, 36 are in the Atlanta area, where the

five states, the grantee said owners were more interested

grantee has no 811 PRA units under RAC.

in other affordable housing programs that had the

In the next chapter, we review the characteristics of the

potential for higher rental income. Grantees in California,

properties and units thus far secured for the 811 PRA

Maryland, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Washington

program.

reported that robust rental markets, high development

costs, and modest 811 PRA program rents raised owners

concerns about the financial feasibility of the program.

Grantees in Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Washington

reported that owners also expressed concern over the

30-year use restriction and 20-year RAC with only a 5-year

PRA funding commitment, and three grantees said that

the environmental review requirements deterred owners.

Maryland, for example, reported that these requirements

eliminated potential properties. To address this challenge,

Minnesota set aside $50,000 from its operating budget to

help fund environmental reviews.

Four grantees mentioned that owners were unfamiliar

with HUD systems and requirements for the 811 PRA

program, which operates differently from other tax credit

or multifamily programs. According to grantees, owners in

Louisiana, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Washington al

expressed unease about program requirements. Payment

systems are different for the 811 PRA program as wel ,

with payments routed from HUD to the state grantee, and

then, to the property owner, instead of going directly from

HUD to the owner.

Owners were also unfamiliar with entering tenant data

into the Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System

and using HUD’s Model Lease forms, which may include

additional provisions that owners do not have to meet

under existing leases. For example, Washington reported

that one large property management group came close

to signing a contract for PRA-subsidized units but backed

out, because they did not want to have to use TRACS. The

group said they could find renters on the open market and

avoid the PRA administrative requirements.

Grantees encountered challenges matching

appropriate housing supply, eligible and interested

applicants, and locations with access to services.

Grantees also mentioned various mismatches in the

locations of interested owners with suitable properties

relative to the desired locations of eligible applicants

and the availability of accessible services. Grantees in

Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and Texas al  mentioned difficulty

25

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

26

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 5. Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units

Project Rental

RAC execution. In these cases, owners committed the

availability of occupied units to eligible 811 PRA residents

Assistance Properties

on tenant turnover.

Prior to executing a RAC, grantees and property owners

can also enter into signed Agreement to Enter into a

and Units

Rental Assistance Contract or other formal agreements

that indicate a commitment to eventual y enter into a

RAC for an assisted unit. HUD requests that grantees

execute only RACs for properties that are expected to be

leased within 6 months. Grantees can execute ARACs

This chapter provides a snapshot of properties and units

with owners if properties are expected to be leased

under contract for Section 811 Project Rental Assistance

beyond this timeframe. ARACs can be effective tools for

subsidies. The chapter addresses the number of units

securing units that are still under construction. Grantees

grantees proposed to assist and occupy compared with

may secure other formal agreements to eventual y enter

how many units had been committed and occupied as

into a RAC, such as a memorandum of understanding

of June 2016. In their funding applications, grantees

signed by the state and an owner, a letter of agreement

established annual and targets for the total number of

signed by an owner, or a funding award (for example, low-

811 PRA units to be assisted during the initial PRA 5-year

income housing tax credits, HOME, state funds) letter that

grant period based on assumptions about locations of

includes the commitment of PRA units.

PRA units and the amount of rent residents would pay

based on expected incomes. The chapter also presents

The RAC lays out the agreed-on maximum rent, the

characteristics of units that are under agreement for PRA

estimated amount of monthly PRA funding that owners

subsidies as of June 30, 2016, such as bedroom size, unit

receive (based on an estimated resident contribution of

accessibility, unit rent, and subsidy levels. For unit rent

$0), and the number of units set aside for PRA subsidies

and subsidy levels, this chapter also compares the actual

at a property. To ensure that community integration goals

rent and subsidy amounts to date with the assumptions

are achieved under the 811 PRA program, the Section 811

that grantees used to develop estimated PRA grant and

statute specifies that no more than 25 percent of the units

unit amounts.

in the affordable housing development can be set aside

for supportive housing or have an occupancy preference

Rental Assistance Contract

for people with disabilities. The PRA program statute

Requirements

requires that PRA subsidies be added to multifamily

properties with at least five units. The units under contract

Property owners must agree to a 30-year use restriction to

are floating, which means that the PRA subsidy is not tied

provide a specified number of units as supportive housing

to any specific unit and can move from unit to unit within

for people with disabilities and must execute a RAC with

a building based on vacancies. To maintain integrated

the state housing agency for at least 20 years. The initial

housing, PRA residential units cannot be grouped in

RAC provides funding for 5 years. The use restriction and

proximity to one another.

renewal funding are contingent on continued Section 811

appropriations made by Congress.

Progress in Achieving PRA Unit

RACs are formal agreements between the grantee

Goals

and the owner of the eligible multifamily property. The

Table 5.1 shows the PRA program implementation for

agreements set forth the rights and duties of the parties

the 2012 grantees as of June 30, 2106, based on grantee

with respect to assisted units and identifies the number

quarterly reports. The table shows the grantees’ 5-year

and size of units that owners agree to commit to the

unit goal, the number of units under RAC, the number of

program. The units covered by a RAC might be vacant and

units under ARACs and other formal agreements, and the

available immediately, but, in many cases, other residents

number of 811 PRA units leased.

occupied some or even all the units at the time of the

27

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 5. Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units

Table  5.1: S t atus of Section 811 P R A Program Implement ation, June 2016

Percent of

Units Under

5-Year Unit

Percent of

PRA Units

Percent of

ARAC

Goal Under

5-Year Unit

Total 5-Year

PRA Units

5-Year Goal

or Other

RAC or

PRA Units

Goal Under

State

Goala

Under RAC

Under RAC

Agreements

Identified

Under Lease

Lease

California

233

88

38

20

46

38

16

Delaware

148

97

66

26

83

9

6

Georgia

143

67

47

156

156

0

0

Illinois

369

4

1

34

10

4

1

Louisiana

199

103

52

28

66

19

10

Maryland

150

21

14

0

14

13

9

Massachusetts

90

6

7

0

7

0

0

Minnesota

85

72

85

0

85

15

18

Montana

81

48

59

0

59

5

6

Pennsylvania

200

52

26

10

31

2

1

Texas

362

10

3

32

12

0

0

Washington

133

36

27

28

48

19

14

Total

2,193

604

28

334

43

124

6

ARAC = Agreement to Enter into a Rental Assistance Contract. PRA = Project Rental Assistance. RAC = Rental Assistance Contract.

a As of March 2017.

Sources: 2012 cooperative agreements; 2014, 2015, and 2016 811 PRA quarterly reports

The PRA unit goals in table 5.1 reflect some changes

more than one-fourth (28 percent) of the total number of

grantees made to their PRA unit goals, because they

estimated PRA units funded in this demonstration round.

signed cooperative agreements with HUD. The number of

When adding the number of units identified under ARACs

units that grantees expect to fund decreased from 2,625

or other formal agreements, grantees identified 43 percent

to 2,193, between March 2015 and March 2017. Four 2012

of the total estimated PRA units expected to be funded

grantees modified the number of PRA units they expect to

through the 2012 awards.

fund based on updated information on actual contract rent

The number of PRA units under contract varies by state.

levels and tenant rent contributions. The largest change

Reasons for variations include the promptness in which

in unit goals was in Il inois. The Il inois Housing Authority

the grantee began implementing the program or started

determined its PRA unit goal based on rents that were

recruiting property owners, which may be related to state

affordable to households with incomes 30 percent of Area

schedules for awarding tax credits or other affordable

Median Income and committed to funding an estimated

housing program awards, as well as chal enges with

732 units with an average monthly rental subsidy of $226,

obtaining owner interest in PRA subsidies. The housing

the lowest of any of the 2012 grantees. The state had

agencies with the most units under RAC relative to

difficulty attracting owners at these rent levels and was

their goals as of June 2016 are Minnesota (85 percent

authorized a waiver by HUD to increase al owable contract

of planned units under RAC), Delaware (66 percent),

rent up to the Fair Market Rent.

Montana (59 percent), and Louisiana (52 percent).

Two states, California and Georgia, increased the number

of PRA units they expect to fund. California increased its

Financing Sources of Properties

5-year unit goal from 229 to 233, and Georgia increased

A key goal of the PRA program is to offer a more cost-

the number of PRA units the state expects to fund from

effective method of providing supportive housing to

134 to 143.

extremely low-income people with disabilities and to

As of June 2016, all 2012 grantees had units under

leverage additional resources. Eligible properties can

contract with property owners for PRA subsidies.

be new or existing multifamily developments in which

Combined, the grantees had 604 PRA units under RAC,

the development costs are subsidized by other public

28

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 5. Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units

or private sources, such as the LIHTC, HOME funds, the

properties with PRA units under RAC in quarterly reports.

Community Development Block Grant program, or other

Most properties have more than one funding source and

federal, state, or private sources. The 811 PRA program

may have multiple sources of funding. Through June

funds only project-based rental assistance. It does not

2016, LIHTC was the primary financing mechanism for 79

provide any funding for capital costs to the properties

percent of all properties with units under RAC. In addition

where PRA subsidies will be used.

to LIHTC and state funds, California, Delaware, Louisiana,

The state housing agency grantees select the properties to

and Washington entered RACs for properties financed

receive the PRA subsidies and define the eligible sources

with HOME funds. Delaware and Pennsylvania executed

of funding for properties that will receive PRA subsidies.

RACs for properties financed with U.S. Department of

Table 5.2 shows the primary financing mechanism for

Agriculture Rural Development funds, and Minnesota used

72 of the 78 properties under RAC through June 2016.

other HUD assistance to develop a property targeted for

Grantees report only the primary source of funding for

PRA assistance.

Table  5.2 : R AC s by Proper t y’s Primar y Financing Mechanism, as of June 2016

Primary Financing Mechanism

Number of RACs

Percent of RACs

Low-income housing tax credits

57

79

HOME Investment Partnerships Program funds

4

6

Community Development Block Grant

0

0

Rural development

2

3

State capital funds

5

7

Other HUD assisted

1

1

National Housing Trust Fund

0

0

Other

3

4

Total

72

100

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. RAC = Rental Assistance Contract.

Sources: 2014, 2015, and 2016 Section 811 Project Rental Assistance quarterly reports

Characteristics of Units Under RAC

occupied them.8 These units will be available for PRA

residents on tenant turnover. In some cases, the number

This section presents characteristics of the 604 units

of units reported as unavailable are in properties that are

under RAC as of June 30, 2016. The data on bedroom

newly constructed or renovated, and the units are not yet

size, unit accessibility, unit rent and subsidy levels,

available for leasing.

contract rent, and rental assistance payment were

available only in HUD’s TRACS for 94 of the 133 PRA units

currently or formerly leased as of June 2016. Owners have

120 days from the time of a new admission until they must

report tenant data to HUD. Although grantees report unit

size and accessibility of properties under RAC in quarterly

reports to HUD, they are not required to report this

information for leased units.

Vacancy Status

Through June 2016, 604 units were under RAC, and 124

residents were living in PRA-funded units (see table 5.3).

Of the remaining 480 units under contract, 57 units were

vacant and 423 were not available, because other tenants

8

Most of the vacant units were in Delaware and, based on a vacancy reporting system, may overstate the actual number vacant units as of June 2016.

29

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 5. Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units

Table  5.3 : Occupancy and Vacancy S t atus of Section 811 P R A Unit s by Grantee, June 2016

Number of Occupied

Number of Unavailable

Total Number of Units

State

Units

Number of Vacant Units

Units

Under RAC

California

38

1

49

88

Delaware

9

46

42

97

Georgia

0

7

60

67

Illinois

4

0

0

4

Louisiana

19

0

84

103

Maryland

13

0

8

21

Massachusetts

0

0

6

6

Minnesota

15

0

57

72

Montana

5

0

43

48

Pennsylvania

2

3

47

52

Texas

0

0

10

10

Washington

19

0

17

36

Total

124

57

423

604

Percent of Units Under RAC

21

9

70

100

RAC = Rental Assistance Contract.

Note: Ten units in Texas have unknown occupancy status.

Sources: 2014, 2015, and 2016 Section 811 Project Rental Assistance quarterly reports

Number of Units per RAC

Unit Bedroom Size

The number of units under RAC may reflect owners’

Most grantees (10 out of 12) report that they based their

wil ingness to commit to PRA subsidies, incentives or

PRA rental subsidy estimates on the expectation that

limits in awarding PRA units or tax credits, the size of

most PRA residents will be one-person households,

the properties, or a combination of the three. Properties

based on previous experience serving similar populations.

must be multifamily properties with at least five units, and

Although grantees expect that one-person households

no more than 25 percent of the units can be set aside

will make up most of PRA residents, residents may have

for PRA. The overall average number of units under RAC

a range of household arrangements, including married

is 8.6 units per property. The number of units for each

couples and families with children or other dependents.

RAC varies widely from 21 units per property in Louisiana

Some residents may need an additional bedroom for

and 18 in California (where PRA units are in larger

visiting staff or medical equipment. HUD has also issued

developments) to an average of 3 PRA-subsidized units

guidance to PRA grantees that provides greater flexibility

in properties in Massachusetts and 4 in Pennsylvania and

for PRA residents to have roommates. Chapter 7 presents

Il inois. In Delaware, the grantee required property owners

early information on household composition of the first

applying for LIHTCs to agree to accept PRA subsidies for

PRA residents.

at least 5 percent of the property’s units. As a result, the

Table 5.4 provides details on units under agreement and

agency reports 97 units under RAC in 17 properties, for an

leased by bedroom size. The percentage of units leased

average of about 5.7 units per property. The Pennsylvania

is general y proportional to the breakdown of units under

Housing Finance Agency has RACs in place for 14

RAC. Approximately 20 percent of units under RAC are

properties to fund an expected 52 units, an average of 3.7

two-bedroom units, and 4 percent of units under RAC are

per property.

three-bedroom units compared with 23 percent of units

under lease that are two-bedroom units and less than 2

percent that are three-bedroom units. A larger percentage

of units are available for single-person households under

RAC (69 percent of units under RAC are efficiencies or

one-bedroom units) than under lease by PRA residents (51

percent combined).

30

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 5. Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units

Table  5.4 : Section 811 P R A Unit s Under R AC and Under Lease by Bedroom Size, June 2016

Number of PRA Units

Percent of PRA Units

Number of PRA

Percent of PRA

Under RAC

Under RAC

Units Leased

Units Leased

SROs or efficiencies

121

20

20

16

One-bedroom units

296

49

44

35

Two-bedroom units

123

20

28

23

Three-bedroom units

24

4

2

< 2

Unit size unknown

40

7

30

24

Total

604

100

124

100

PRA = Project Rental Assistance. RAC = Rental Assistance Contract. SRO = single room occupancy Sources: 2014, 2015, and 2016 Section 811 PRA quarterly reports; Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System data Although these data suggest that a significant mismatch

accommodation requests. Most affordable housing

does not exist between bedroom size, needs, and

properties typical y have only a small number of units that

availability, at least three grantees (Louisiana, Montana,

are accessible for people with mobility, hearing, or vision

and Pennsylvania) report that the lack of one-bedroom

impairments, depending on federal and state regulations.

units in the state’s affordable housing portfolio was a

As table 5.5 shows, through June 2016, 58 units under

challenge in identifying units for the program.

RAC (10 percent) were designated as accessible for

Unit Accessibility

people with mobility impairments (52 units), hearing

impairments (5 units), and vision impairments (1 unit).

PRA subsidies are  floating, not tied to specific units in the

Because units are floating and accessibility will not be

property, and are assigned based on unit availability. As

known until future turnover, the reported percentage of

such, grantees do not yet know the accessibility status

accessible units under RAC may be underestimated.

of nearly one-third of the program’s units under RAC

Of the 124 PRA units occupied as of June 2016, 11

(33 percent). These units are under RAC but currently

(9 percent) are accessible for people with mobility

occupied by other residents. Accessibility features

impairments, and none are accessible for people with

will become known at the time of tenant turnover. As

vision or hearing impairments. The actual accessibility of

current tenants vacate units and units become occupied

the remaining units cannot be determination until current

by PRA residents, additional units may be modified

residents vacate PRA-designated units.

to meet residents’ needs in response to reasonable

Table  5.5 : Accessibilit y of Section 811 P R A Unit s Under R AC, as of June 2016

Number of PRA Units  Percent of PRA Units  Number of PRA Units  Percent of PRA Units

Type of Accessibility

Under RAC

Under RAC

Leased

Leased

Hearing impaired

5

< 1

0

0

Visually impaired

1

< 1

0

0

Mobility impaired

52

9

11

9

Units that are not accessible

136

23

83

67

Accessibility unknown

410

68

30

24

Total

604

100

124

100

PRA = Project Rental Assistance. RAC = Rental Assistance Contract.

Sources: 2014, 2015, and 2016 Section 811 PRA quarterly reports; Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System data 31

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 5. Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units

Unit Rent and Subsidy Levels

rent was an average of $993. In Montana, the estimated

monthly rent was $596. Massachusetts set the maximum

Grantees determine the maximum rent amounts that

contract at FMR for 80 percent of its estimated PRA units,

property owners can charge for PRA units, which may

with the remaining units set to be affordable to households

or may not reflect current rental-market conditions. The

with incomes between 20 and 50 percent of AMI.

Section 811 PRA Notice of Funding Availability required

that the PRA rent not exceed the applicable FMR or Smal

Grantees in four states (California, Georgia, Il inois,

Area FMR level for the property location, as determined

and Washington) that had committed to lower subsidy

annual y by HUD. Grantees can set target rent levels

amounts in their 811 PRA applications experienced

higher than FMR if substantiated by market studies that

difficulty securing units from property owners at these rent

meet HUD’s guidelines or approval.

levels. These grantees subsequently received a waiver

from HUD to increase the rents they can charge, up to

The NOFA provided incentives for state housing agencies

the maximum al owable local FMR, to make it easier for

to target units that produce the lowest possible per-unit

these grantees to compete with other housing assistance

rental subsidy costs by targeting properties that have

programs and attract property owners and lease units.

existing rent restrictions, such as those funded with

Rent increases were al owable for the four aforementioned

LIHTC or HOME funds. The 2012 NOFA awarded points

2012 grantees, because their cohort was considered a

to grantees that proposed to attract units with lower rents

demonstration round of funding. As of the time of this

relative to their market area. Rents under contract for the

report, HUD was also considering issuing waivers to 2013

811 PRA program are set to be affordable to persons with

grantees on a case-by-case basis.

up to 50 percent of Area Median Income.

Contract Rent and Rental Assistance

Targeted Rent Levels

Payments by Bedroom Size

Within the grant parameters, state housing agencies

Table 5.6 shows rents owners charged for units, plus cost

determined the maximum rent levels that owners can

estimates of any utilities paid by tenants (contract rent),

charge for units leased under the PRA program. Although

and rental assistance payments by bedroom size for 94

the 811 PRA program enables grantees to set their rents

of the 124 PRA households that lived in PRA units as of

up to FMR, several grantees chose to limit PRA units to

June 2016. The average contract rent across all bedroom

those with rents less than FMR to receive additional points

sizes was $821 per month, ranging from $565 to $1,118.

in the grant competition. Most states established contract

Rents general y increase by bedroom size and vary widely

rents that are affordable to households with incomes up

based on local housing markets. The rental assistance

to 50 percent of AMI. Exceptions to this rent level are

payment is the difference between the approved contract

California and Montana, two states that set contract rents

rent and tenants’ contributions to rent, which is based on

to be affordable to households with incomes at 40 percent

household income. The average rental assistance amount

of AMI, and three states (Il inois, Massachusetts, and

for these 94 PRA residents was $599, ranging from a low

Texas) that proposed a combination of different contract

of $317 to a high of $1,160.

rent levels. In California, the estimated monthly contract

Table  5.6 : C ontract Rent and Rent al A ssist ance Payment by Bedroom Size, June 2016

Contract Rent ($)

Studio or no

Bedroom

One Bedroom

Two Bedrooms

Three Bedrooms

All Bedrooms

Minimum contract rent

669

565

827

1,049

565

Average contract rent

778

707

1,011

1,119

821

Maximum contract rent

838

892

1,185

1,188

1,188

Rental Assistance Payment ($)

Studio or no

Bedroom

One Bedroom

Two Bedrooms

Three Bedrooms

All Bedrooms

Minimum rental assistance payment

407

317

426

899

317

Average rental assistance payment

528

497

784

964

599

Maximum rental assistance payment

833

887

1,160

1,029

1,160

32

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 5. Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units

Note: Contract rents and rental assistance payments were available in Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System (TRACS) for only 94 of 133 Project Rental Assistance participants.

Source: TRACS data

Differences in Estimated and Actual Rental

income of $0 so that the RAC reflects the maximum

Assistance Payments

annual amount of HUD’s commitment for rental assistance

Grantees determined requests for 811 PRA funds by

payments under the contract.

calculating an expected average per-unit PRA rental

Grantees’ estimates of tenant rent and rental assistance

assistance payment based on either the incomes of

payments did not always align with actual rents and

households living in PRA units or local FMRs for expected

payments for PRA residents as of June 2016. Table 5.7

PRA unit locations. Grantees based estimates of tenant

shows the difference between average estimated 811

rents and rental assistance payments on experiences

PRA rental assistance payments and actual average

from administering other similar programs or in response

payments. For data available on PRA residents as of June

to NOFA incentives for the 2012 grant that provided

2016, actual assistance payments were about $141 a

points for targeting lower rent units. Similar to other HUD

month higher than the grantees’ estimates in their grant

rental subsidy programs, PRA residents pay rent based

cooperative agreements. Three grantees overestimated

on income. Total resident payment (rent and utilities)

average rental assistance payments (differences ranging

is calculated as the greatest of 30 percent of adjusted

from $9 in Louisiana to $181 in California), and five

monthly income, 10 percent of monthly gross income,

grantees underestimated average rental assistance

welfare rent (for some localities), or a $25 minimum rent.9

payments (average rental assistance payments ranged

In executing RACs with owners, HUD instructs grantees

from $59 to $266 higher than the grantees’ estimated

to estimate the number based on a presumed household

monthly payments in their cooperative agreements.)

Table  5.7: Dif ference Bet ween Average Section 811 P R A Rent al A ssist ance

From C ooperative Agreement s and Actual Rent al A ssist ance, as of June 2016

California

705

524

181

Delaware

502

647

– 145

Georgia

441

NA

NA

Illinois

226

NA

NA

Louisiana

597

589

9

Maryland

1,055

927

128

Massachusetts

781

NA

NA

Minnesota

503

708

– 205

Montana

351

617

– 266

Pennsylvania

378

437

– 59

Texas

478

NA

NA

Washington

354

517

– 163

Average

458

599

– 141

NA = Not applicable, because grantees do not have leased units. PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Note: Contract rents and rental assistance payments were available in Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System (TRACS) for only 94 of 124 PRA residents.

Sources: 811 PRA Cooperative Agreements, Exhibit 6; TRACS data

Differences in estimated and actual assistance amounts

residents, or locations of PRA units in higher or lower

can be attributed to several factors, including needing

cost areas than planned. As the data represent a smal

a larger or smal er number of bedrooms than assumed,

percentage of expected units to be assisted under the

higher or lower actual household incomes of PRA

2012 grant program, it is too soon to determine whether

9

Welfare rent is the portion of a welfare benefit explicitly designated for rent payments.

33

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 5. Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units

initial trends in rents and tenant payments will continue.

extremely low-income households with disabilities to

Initial data suggest that the PRA program will have

supplement—or  leverage as per NOFA language—the 811

higher contract rents than grantees initial y estimate in

PRA units. Through June 2016, five grantees reported that

cooperative agreements.

432 vouchers were issued as part of this commitment,

representing 30 percent of the total leverage commitment

Leveraging Set-Asides of Housing

(table 5.8).

Choice Vouchers

Of the 12 grantees, 9 committed to set aside HCVs,

project-based vouchers, and public housing units to

Table  5.8 : Level of C ommitment to Leveraging HC Vs by S t ate, as of June 2016

Percent of Committed

State

HCVs Committed to Leveraging

HCVs Issued

HCVs Issued

California

0

0

NA

Delaware

74

0

0

Georgia

175

117

67

Illinois

695

171

25

Louisiana

125

0

0

Maryland

97

34

35

Massachusetts

50

26

52

Minnesota

60

84

140

Montana

0

0

NA

Pennsylvania

152

0

0

Texas

0

0

NA

Washington

9

0

0

Total

1,437

432

30

HCV = housing choice voucher. NA = Not applicable.

Sources: 2014, 2015, and 2016 Section 811 Project Rental Assistance quarterly reports

In several states, grantees are also public housing

al ocation, and 25 were new tenant-based vouchers that

agencies tasked with administering the HCV program

will be issued through the state’s Alternative Housing

in all or part of their states. These agencies were able

Voucher Program that serves individuals up to age 60 with

to commit to setting aside additional housing resources

long-term or chronic disabilities.

for the PRA program from their own inventories. For

Aside from points in the Section 811 PRA NOFA, no direct

example, the Delaware State Housing Authority is the

relationship exists between the Section 811 PRA program

public housing agency for two out of four counties in

and the use of vouchers PHAs set aside, or leveraged, by

Delaware and committed to issuing 74 HCVs to the

the Section 811 program. The commitment of leveraged

PRA target population. In Georgia, the Department of

units does not expand the total number of affordable

Community Affairs is the state public housing agency

units to low-income households, but it does increase the

for the HCV program in 149 out of Georgia’s 159

number of units available specifical y for low-income,

counties and committed to leveraging 175 HCVs for the

nonelderly households with a person with disabilities.

Section 811 PRA grant. Through June 2016, the agency

had leased 117 HCVs to people with disabilities in the

Conclusion

state. The Massachusetts Department of Housing and

Community Development also committed to leveraging

This chapter provided a snapshot of properties and units

its own housing resources for the 811 PRA grant. The

under contract for 811 PRA subsidies and compared

agency committed to issuing 50 vouchers to extremely

grantee goals for the number of units grants will fund

low-income households; 25 were from the agency’s HCV

with the number of units committed and occupied as

34

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 5. Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units

of June 2016. Through June 2016, 124 residents were

As of June 2016, grantees that committed to leveraging

living in PRA-funded units. Of the remaining 480 units

additional HCVs for the program’s target populations

under contract, 70 percent were not available because

issued 432 HCVs, or 30 percent of their leverage

of occupancy by other, non-PRA, tenants and, therefore,

commitment. Although no direct relationship exists

unavailable until tenant turnover.

between the Section 811 PRA program and vouchers

The number of PRA units under contract varies by state.

set aside by PHAs for the Section 811 program, the

Reasons for variations include the promptness in which

commitment increased the number of housing subsidies

grantees began implementing the program or started

set aside specifically for nonelderly people with disabilities

recruiting property owners, which may be related to state

in the study states.

schedules for awarding tax credits or other affordable

housing program awards. Eligible properties can be

new or existing multifamily developments in which

development costs are subsidized by other public or

private sources. Although most properties wil  have

more than one funding source, through June 2016, the

LIHTC program was the primary financing mechanism

for 79 percent of all properties with units under RAC. The

overall average number of units under RAC is 8.6 units

per property. The number of units for each RAC varies

widely from 2 to 21 units per property, based on property

size and state-developed incentives for property owners

to administer PRA subsidies. Some states developed a

minimum number or percentage of PRA units that owners

must agree to lease to program recipients in order to

receive funding or priority through housing assistance

programs.

This chapter presented the characteristics—such as

bedroom size, unit accessibility, unit rent, and subsidy

level—of units under agreement, as of June 30, 2016.

Most grantees (10 out of 12) report that they based PRA

rental subsidy estimates on expectations that most

PRA residents will be one-person households and, as

presented in the next chapter, these households make

up most of the existing PRA applicants. Although the

percentage of units leased is general y proportional to the

breakdown of units under RAC, at least three grantees

report that the lack of one-bedroom units in the state’s

affordable housing portfolio was a challenge in identifying

units suitable for the program. As PRA subsidies are

floating and not tied to specific units in the property,

grantees do not yet know the accessibility status of nearly

one-third of the program’s units under RAC. For leased

units, 11 percent are accessible.

This chapter also compared actual rent and subsidy

amounts to date with the assumptions grantees used

to develop estimated PRA grant amounts and number

of units. For data available on PRA residents as of June

2016, actual assistance payments were about $141 higher

per month than grantees had estimated in their grant

cooperative agreements.

35

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

36

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 6. Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units Identifying Project

Outreach to PRA’s Program Target

Population

Rental Assistance

Medicaid agency staff (or their contractors) are typical y

responsible for identifying eligible applicants and referring

Residents and

them to available PRA units. Most grantees developed

centralized or regional application and referral methods

Matching Them

(usual y using a combination of software systems and

staff) to identify PRA applicants and match them to

units, but others developed decentralized or targeted

to PRA Units

approaches that matched service provider organizations

with specific properties. Several states adapted outreach

and referral methods already in place for Money Fol ows

the Person programs or other programs that target people

with disabilities.

This chapter describes the processes by which people

Potentially eligible individuals typically learn about

with disabilities learn about and apply to live in Project

available PRA subsidies through providers of services

Rental Assistance units, as well as determining eligible

they are in contact with or serve their area. In contrast to

applicants for the PRA program and the specific

other affordable housing programs like public housing

properties where they would like to live. Although each

or housing choice vouchers, the process of applying to

PRA partnership established its own procedure to refer

PRA-subsidized units or being placed on waiting lists

a potential applicant to the PRA program, at a minimum

is general y not open to the public. An exception to this

grantees and their partners must:

practice is in Louisiana, where the PRA application is

•  Conduct outreach to PRA program’s target

available to the public on the state housing agency’s

populations.

website. Individuals eligible to live in PRA units must also

•  Determine a method for selecting residents, including

be eligible for Medicaid services. Individuals served by

developing program application requirements and

Medicaid waivers or other state plan services general y

waiting lists.

learn about the PRA program and application procedures

through case managers as part of the overall receipt of

•  Determine applicant eligibility for the PRA program.

services and supports. Individuals not currently served

•  Determine applicant eligibility for specific properties.

by Medicaid waivers, such as some people experiencing

•  Match program-eligible applicants with available PRA

homelessness, may learn about the PRA program when

units.

seeking services from shelters or service providers.

This chapter describes how grantees and their partners

Overview of PRA Program Outreach and

conducted outreach to target populations and referred

Referral Methods

target populations to available units. This chapter identifies

PRA grantees and their partners developed procedures

early chal enges partners reported in reaching, referring,

to recruit applicants, determine PRA program eligibility,

and placing participants, as well as some promising

and identify and refer applicants to available PRA units.

outreach and referral practices that PRA programs use

Table 6.1 provides an overview of the outreach and referral

to successful y reach target populations and match

procedures for the 12 demonstration grantees.

interested and eligible applicants with available PRA-

subsidized units. This chapter also describes the number

and characteristics of applicants ineligible to live in PRA-

funded units due to 811 PRA program requirements or

property occupancy criteria.

37

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 6. Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units Table  6.1: Outreach and Referral Model by S t ate

Outreach and Referral

Grantee

Waiting List

Outreach and Referral Procedures

Contracted regional referral organizations (one for Money Fol ows the Person; one for developmental Decentralized by referral

California

disabilities population) administer waiting lists. Property owners partner with referral organizations for organization and property

referrals.

Contracted case managers from four Medicaid divisions use SocialServe to determine eligibility and refer Delaware

Centralized by area or region

applicants. Housing agency manages the waiting list on SocialServe and works with the housing agency’s housing coordinator to match applicants to available units.

Housing agency’s housing coordinator works with contracted service providers under the Medicaid agencies Georgia

Centralized by area or region

who conduct outreach and eligibility screenings. Housing agency manages the waiting list, which is organized by region, and notifies applicants in the region of available units.

Decentralized by lead referral

Five lead referral agents track and process referrals and manage their own regional waiting lists under the Illinois

agents

supervision of the statewide housing coordinator housed in the Illinois Department of Human Services.

Medicaid agency coordinates a permanent supportive housing outreach implementation team, including staff from four offices, Medicaid, Money Follows the Person Program coordinator, homeless services, Louisiana

Centralized by parish

and healthcare providers. Waiting lists by parish; referrals to Section 811 Project Rental Assistance units tracked by parish.

Case managers screen applicants and enter information into a central Project Rental Assistance system that Maryland

Centralized

also tracks available units. Medicaid agency manages waiting list, which includes applicants for Weinberg and Bridge programs.

Medicaid agency coordinates four offices, statewide housing coordinators, and five regional housing Centralized by outreach or referral

Massachusetts

coordinators to conduct outreach and referral and place applicants on consolidated statewide waiting list. A agency

housing locator system is used to match applicants with appropriate units.

Medicaid agency housing coordinator works with Projects for Assistance in Transition From Homelessness, Minnesota

Centralized by area or region

or PATH, and Money Follows the Person staff to perform outreach. Coordinator manages waiting list, matches referrals to available units, and ensures service coordination.

Medicaid agency coordinates case managers of three divisions to conduct outreach, determine eligibility, Decentralized by outreach or

Montana

make referrals, and manage individual waiting lists. Housing coordinator notifies case managers of unit referral agency

availability.

Three Medicaid offices oversee 34 local lead agencies as single point of contact for service providers, Pennsylvania

Centralized by county

landlords, and applicant intake.

Medicaid agency oversees 50 or more qualified referral agencies (trained by Texas Department of Housing Texas

Centralized by area or region

and Community Affairs) that conduct outreach, including prescreening checklists and applications, matching referrals, and identifying appropriate service coordinators.

Medicaid agency oversees contracted service providers who conduct outreach and screen applicants using Washington

Centralized by area or region

online assessment tools for eligibility and service needs. Money Follows the Person program managers keep waiting lists and make referrals of eligible applicants to available units within the three regions of the state.

Oversight and Coordination of Outreach and

Most grantees have some version of a  housing

Referrals

coordinator who is ultimately responsible for matching

In all 811 PRA programs, state Medicaid agency

PRA-eligible applicants with available PRA units. This

partners have the primary responsibility for conducting

position is usual y housed at the state Medicaid or health

and overseeing outreach to eligible target populations.

and human services agency, but in some states (Delaware

Housing and Medicaid agencies developed outreach

and Georgia), the housing agency has taken on this role.

policies and procedures as part of their PRA grant funding

In Il inois, the statewide housing coordinator in the Il inois

applications. As discussed in chapter 3, interagency

Department of Human Services works with five statewide

partnership agreements lay out the specific tasks that

lead referral agents to track and process referrals. The

each agency will perform. According to interviews

housing coordinator is responsible for tracking PRA

conducted with staff from grantees and Medicaid

referrals and reporting information to the housing agency.

agencies, no major changes were made to the processes

The housing coordinator may coordinate housing and

by which states conduct outreach since agencies began

services for other programs besides the PRA program,

implementing the program.

particularly when PRA outreach activities are coordinated

38

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 6. Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units with or integrated with outreach activities for other

apply for affordable housing. Maryland administers the

programs. In states that administer an MFP program,

application process for the Section 811 PRA program

the PRA housing coordinator is also often the MFP

and two related programs, the Bridge Program and the

coordinator, a position that is partial y or wholly funded by

Weinberg Apartments Program, through a single portal.

the MFP demonstration program. In some states, housing

Maryland leveraged the existing referral networks of

coordinators make some determination of applicant

these permanent supportive housing programs to identify

eligibility for the PRA program before placing applicants

an applicant pool. As a result, most applicants on the

on waiting lists or referring applicants to property owners

Maryland waiting list came from Bridge and Weinberg

to complete applications.

Apartment Program waiting lists.

Outreach and Referral Agencies

Outreach Approaches Based on Target

Housing coordinators interact with and provide some

Population

oversight to  referral agencies.   These referral agencies

Within state PRA programs, states may have different

are service providers and other organizations that are

outreach procedures for different target populations.

responsible for directly engaging potential PRA residents

Outreach strategies may be  disability-specific (that is,

and offering support as they apply for PRA-funded

state or contracted service providers are responsible for

housing and transition to their new homes. Referral

targeting specific disability populations) or  cross-disability

agencies educate individuals about the availability of PRA

(state or contracted service providers are responsible

subsidies as part of the services already provided to target

for targeting multiple disability populations as part of

populations. Referral agencies are state or local agencies

the MFP or Projects for Assistance in Transition From

serving people with disabilities or contracted direct

Homelessness programs or other outreach efforts)

service providers. The agency type is general y a function

strategies. MFP programs that assist people who are

of the ways in which long-term Medicaid and state plans

institutionalized transition into community-based housing

provide and coordinate services in the state and depend

and PATH programs that conduct outreach to people

on whether state agencies provide these services directly

experiencing or at risk for homelessness are both

or contract with outside organizations to provide services.

examples of cross-disability outreach organizations.

Organizations that provide transition services to people

Although most states use a combination of disability-

moving from institutional settings or experiencing

specific and cross-disability outreach organizations,

homelessness may be aware of existing affordable

a few demonstration programs use only one or the

housing resources in the state, but the 811 PRA program

other. Louisiana uses five referring sources, depending

is a new program resource. Grantees reported that service

on population and type of disabilities, and relies on

providers may not be aware of the 811 PRA program or

population-specific state-level agencies. Pennsylvania

its eligibility and application requirements. In many states,

uses a cross-disability approach for outreach and referral

Medicaid agency and grantee staff gave extensive PRA

that relies on an existing network of county-based local

program training and its application procedures to service

lead agencies with housing and service experts.

providers and other agencies that regularly engage

Outreach strategies to reach people who are homeless

target populations. For example, in Texas, one primary

or at risk for homelessness differ greatly from outreach

agency is responsible for oversight of al  referral agencies.

strategies to reach people living in institutions or other

The housing agency trained all 50 referral agencies to

target populations. For example, about one-third of

participate in and to make referrals to the PRA program.

Minnesota’s applicants (29 percent), as of June 2016,

Outreach Models Adapted From Existing

are people experiencing homelessness or at risk for

Housing Programs for People With

homelessness. Minnesota’s strategy to target homeless

Disabilities

people includes outreach by PATH workers in streets,

shelters, hospitals, and jails. The state’s strategy to target

State approaches to outreach are highly dependent on the

people residing in institutions includes outreach in nursing

target population and the state’s institutional framework.

homes, intermediate care facilities, and behavioral health

In some states, outreach methods build on procedures

hospitals.

developed for existing supportive housing resources

and initiatives. In Georgia and Il inois, state agencies

were responding to Olmstead settlement agreements

and already had established an application process for

people with some categories of disabilities to search and

39

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 6. Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units PRA Resident Application

Washington’s PRA program has a  regional outreach

Approaches

model that matches coordination services within the state.

Each of Washington’s three geographic regions employs

Of the 12 Section 811 PRA grantees funded in 2012, 6

a regional housing coordinator who works with al  the

use centralized outreach and referral models, and 6 use

case managers in a region. As units become available in

regional or targeted models (see table 6.1).

a region, the regional housing coordinator notifies case

managers with clients in the region about upcoming

Centralized and Targeted Outreach and

housing availability. Case managers help individuals

Application Models

submit applications to property owners. Each regional

In centralized models, one central point of contact exists

case manager maintains a waiting list of people interested

for PRA applicants, regardless of in which part of state the

in PRA units in their areas.

applicant lives or which agency or service provider refers

In Georgia, the outreach and referral system for the PRA

the applicant. PRA applications are all routed through a

program also uses a regional approach. Case managers

central system, person (typically the housing coordinator),

from supportive service agencies contact clients that

or both. Applicants may be placed on waiting lists for units

would benefit from the 811 PRA program to determine

if no units are available that meet their needs. Applicants

interest and likely eligibility. Case managers then provide

are then matched to available PRA units as units become

completed applications to the housing agency.

available for lease, often based on their place on waiting

lists (described in detail in the fol owing section, desired

Use of Waiting Lists for the PRA Program

location, and unit size. Referrals and waiting lists can be

All grantees developed some type of 811 PRA program

ordered based on the state’s target population priorities

waiting list that housing agencies or their partners

or, in states with no ordered priorities, by application date.

maintain, but each PRA program uses waiting lists

Delaware has a centralized outreach model. All applicants

differently. Grantees and their partners maintain waiting

work with case managers from the Medicaid agency to

lists at various levels, including state, region, outreach

take program applications and refer eligible applicants

or referral agency (contracted service provider), and

to property owners. Similarly, Minnesota routes al

property. The grantees with a centralized application

applications to the housing coordinator at the state

process also maintain statewide PRA program waiting

Medicaid agency.

lists. Two grantee programs combine the PRA waiting list

with one for another established program. The Maryland

In a  decentralized application model, no centralized

Department of Disabilities maintains a statewide,

person or system exists that accepts applications and

centralized, waiting list that includes PRA applicants

refers applicants to available units. California requires

and applicants for two related programs serving people

property owners to partner with one or more regional or

with disabilities. The Maryland Department of Disabilities

local tenant referral organizations who refer applicants to

selects individuals from the waiting list based on three

their properties. Some tenant referral organizations also

established priorities for the PRA program and instructs

conduct preliminary criminal background checks and

property owners to review applications according to the

credit checks to ensure that applicants are eligible before

predetermined order.

making the referral.

Grantees and Medicaid agencies maintain waiting lists

In Pennsylvania, county-based local lead agencies handle

using a variety of tools, including automated software

outreach to potential applicants and referrals. The local

tools, spreadsheets, or (particularly for staff who work

lead agencies are community organizations that assist

in the field) paper. Of the 12 grantees, 8 report using

people with disabilities find affordable housing, manage

automated software tools or resident management

outreach and referrals in their areas, and serve as a single

software (such as SocialServe and Yardi) to maintain

point of contact for service providers and owners. Local

centralized waiting lists. In Washington, where three

lead agencies enter into agreements with direct service

regional housing program managers in the state Medicaid

providers who reach out to people already served through

agency oversee applicant outreach in their respective

existing programs and that may be eligible for PRA

regions, the managers each maintain their own, separate

assistance.

waiting list for their region.

40

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 6. Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units Most grantees determine some level of PRA program

community and resources. These advantages help the

eligibility prior to placing residents on waiting lists,

referral process operate more efficiently. However, service

although exceptions exist. In Maryland, where the PRA

providers and specific case managers will vary in their

waiting list is combined with two other waiting lists, no

program knowledge and the speed with which they inform

PRA program eligibility determinations are made before

their clients of available units. As a result, some eligible

residents are placed on the waiting list. In Louisiana,

applicants may have access to PRA units sooner than

once an applicant is on the waiting list, their application is

others may.

reviewed for eligibility for services, income, and age. If the

One of the benefits of formal waiting lists is the

applicant is determined eligible for a PRA unit, a letter is

prioritization of applicants to ensure that individuals are

sent requesting additional information on unit preferences,

matched to units in the order or priority established for

including bedroom size. The waiting list is organized by

the PRA program. Waiting lists can also be organized by

parish and sorted by preference according to the state’s

desired bedroom size, location, and accessibility needs.

PRA target population priorities.

A disadvantage of waiting lists is that the lists can very

Implications of Different Application

quickly become outdated when considering the changing

Practices

preferences, interests, eligibility profiles of applicants,

and the potential time difference between application

Grantees report many advantages of centralizing the

submittal and unit availability. Massachusetts addresses

acceptance and review of applications and maintaining a

this problem by cal ing its waitlisted PRA applicants every

single program waiting list, especially when using software

6 months to determine continued eligibility and interest.

tools to facilitate the process. Grantees report several

benefits of using case management, spreadsheet, or

In large states, statewide waiting lists or lists that cover

database software to maintain PRA applicant lists. These

large geographic areas may be less effective tools

benefits include the ability to automate some functions,

to match applicants with available units. Georgia has

such as making unit referrals to those on waiting lists, and

a regional outreach model with a centralized waiting

the ability to sort applicants by target population priority,

list organized by the six outreach regions in the state.

desired locations, and unit size and accessibility needs.

Because the regions in Georgia are so large, an applicant

Grantees can use software for program reporting to HUD

may not be near a particular property when a unit

and for sharing data internal y and with partners. Waiting-

becomes available, or no applicants may be available for

list information can also help determine whether PRA units

a specific property, even though several applicants may

under contract match the needs and desires of applicants.

be in the region. This challenge led Georgia’s housing

This information may help grantees determine where to

coordinator to combine the broad, regional waiting lists

focus additional property outreach efforts.

with more focused, property-based waiting lists.

Grantees also report the chal enges they experienced

PRA Program Eligibility

with centralized application approaches .  Centralized

application models that rely on a single staff person can

Determination

bottleneck or suffer from diminished quality of service if

All PRA residents must be determined eligible for the 811

the staff person has difficulty keeping up with demand,

PRA program and for the specific property where they

is out of the office, or leaves the position. Another

would like to live. This section addresses an applicant’s

disadvantage of relying on an individual staff person

eligibility for the PRA program. The fol owing sections of

manual y matching applicants to housing is that such a

this chapter will address eligibility at the property level.

labor-intensive process can be difficult to administer when

The program statute requires that all Section 811 PRA

large numbers of applications or referrals to units exist at

program-assisted households have extremely low-

one time.

incomes and a person between the ages of 18 and 61 at

Interviews with grantees also identified some advantages

the time of move-in who has a disability and is enrol ed

of regional or targeted outreach models. Regional or

in or eligible for state Medicaid services or similar state-

targeted, decentralized outreach models have the ability

funded program. Applicants must meet HUD’s definition

to scale to larger programs, because the administrative

of disability (see chapter 2). Grantees and their partners

work can be more widely distributed across a larger

must also determine whether applicants meet their

number of organizations and staff. Regional or local

specific target population definitions.

housing coordinators may have more familiarity with the

target population, available services and supports, and

may have more knowledge of the local affordable housing

41

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 6. Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units Eligibility Based on Age and Eligibility for

When To Conduct PRA Program Eligibility

Medicaid Services

Grantees vary in the manner and the timing of determining

State Medicaid agencies and their contracted service

eligibility for the 811 PRA program. Every grantee except

providers generally conduct the program eligibility

California and Massachusetts performs some form

determinations for age, disability status, and eligibility

of eligibility determination or prescreening, such as

for Medicaid services on behalf of an applicant. If a

age, income, and criminal background, before placing

contracted service provider determines eligibility, state

applicants on waiting lists. Il inois conducts a complete

agencies stil  typical y confirm this information and

eligibility determination prior to units becoming available.

compare it with available state records.

Maryland conducts prescreenings fol owed by eligibility

verification prior to units becoming available.

Eligibility Based on Income

Tradeoffs exist in the timing of eligibility determination.

State Medicaid agencies may confirm whether household

Grantees report that confirming applicant eligibility before

incomes meet the requirements for PRA units, but

placing applicants on waiting lists or referring applicants

property owners also confirm tenant income as part

to available PRA units can save staff time later, but it takes

of the resident certification process. Property owners

extra time and effort for applicants and staff.

typical y conduct income eligibility determinations, as they

are responsible for certifying resident income to HUD.

Applicants Determined Ineligible

However, referral agencies may do some prescreening to

determine if an applicant’s income is in the general range

for the PRA Program

for eligibility.

Of the 3,270 PRA applicants grantees reported through

the second quarter of 2016, 403, or roughly 14 percent,

Oversight of Eligibility Determination

were determined ineligible for the 811 PRA program

When service providers or referral agencies conduct

based on age, income, or eligibility for Medicaid services

program eligibility, a state’s Medicaid agency typically

(table 6.2). The most common reason for ineligibility

oversees this process and confirms eligibility. For

was applicants being ineligible for Medicaid services (61

example, in Pennsylvania, the local lead agencies decide

percent). Of the 246 applicants, not eligible for Medicaid

together whether an applicant is eligible for the 811 PRA

services, 155 were in Louisiana, where applications are

program, but the Department of Human Services retains

accepted online before determining eligibility. Other

oversight by confirming eligibility. Similarly, in Texas, the

reasons applicants were ineligible for the 811 PRA

referring agency conducts an initial 811 PRA program

program include exceeding the maximum age of 62 (10

eligibility screening, but then the housing agency does

percent) and household income above 811 PRA program’s

further evaluation of program eligibility. In some states,

income limit (8 percent).

the Medicaid agency may have access to state systems to

help confirm age and eligibility for services.

Table  6.2 : A pplicant s Determined Ineligible for the Section 811 P R A Program by Reason, as of June 2016

Number of Ineligible

Percent of Ineligible

Categories of Applicants

PRA Applicants

PRA Applicants

Not disabled

13

3

Over income

32

8

Not eligible for Medicaid services

246

61

Criminal history

5

1

Older than age 62

42

10

Unknown

9

2

Other

56

14

Total

403

100

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Sources: 2014, 2015, and 2016 Section 811 PRA quarterly reports

42

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 6. Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units Table 6.3 shows the number of ineligible applicants for

homeless at the time of applying, 12 percent were

the PRA program grouped by housing status at the time

living in institutions, and 10 percent were at risk for

they applied. Applicants at risk of homelessness had

institutionalization. Of ineligible applicants, 2 percent

the highest rate of program ineligibility at 43 percent.

were leaving group homes, adult care homes, or other

An additional 12 percent of ineligible applicants were

residential settings.

Table  6.3 : A pplicant s Determined Ineligible for the Section 811 P R A Program

by Housing S t atus, as of June 2016

Number of Ineligible

Percent of Ineligible

PRA Applicants

PRA Applicants

Institutionalized

45

12

At risk of institutionalization

36

10

Homeless

43

12

At risk of homelessness

160

43

Leaving group homes, adult care homes, or other residential settings

7

2

Exiting foster care

0

0

Other

77

21

Total

368

100

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Sources: 2014, 2015, and 2016 Section 811 PRA quarterly reports

Matching Applicants to Available

For PRA programs with prioritized waiting lists, housing

Units

coordinators provide property owners the order in which

to consider eligible applicants for PRA units. If the state

Grantees and partner agencies refer PRA-eligible

does not have a prioritized list, applicant selection is left to

households directly to specific properties with units under

the discretion of property managers and is usual y based

contract to complete an application in order to occupy a

on the date of application. Housing coordinators typical y

residence in that property. In general, this referral process

refer between two and four applicants to each available

does not occur until appropriate units are vacant or soon

PRA unit, assuming that some applicants will not be

coming available. Some grantees, particularly those who

interested in the property or will not meet the property’s

are targeting people experiencing homelessness, do not

leasing requirements.

match PRA applicants to units until units are actual y

Applicants Referred to PRA Units

available for occupancy. Once units are available, state

Medicaid agency staff or contracted service providers

As of June 2016, grantees and their partners referred 542

reach out to eligible members in their caseloads and

PRA-eligible households to specific properties, referring

identify those interested in living in the available PRA units

most applicants during the second half of 2015 and the

that match unit size and accessibility needs. However,

first two quarters of 2016. As programs matured, the pace

owners can also accept applications for PRA units that

of new applications in the 12 states trended upward.

are not vacant and place PRA-eligible households on

On average, 1 household moved into a PRA unit for every

property-based waiting lists until an appropriate unit

4 referrals to a PRA unit. Of the 542 households referred

becomes available.

to properties after meeting PRA eligibility requirements,

For most grantees, the state Medicaid agency also

14 percent (78 households) were ineligible at the property

coordinates matching applicants to available units.

level, and 24 percent (133 households) moved into PRA

Exceptions to this practice are Delaware, where the

units. The remaining 61 percent of applicants referred

Delaware State Housing Authority maintains the PRA

to specific PRA unit openings either dropped out of the

waiting and referral lists (with service providers submitting

application process and self-selected to be removed from

applications), and Georgia, where the housing agency

consideration, did not complete or fol ow up with required

plays this role. In Maryland, the Department of Disabilities,

documentation, or were not selected due to higher priority

a statewide cross-disability organization, maintains and

status of other applicants.

prioritizes the waiting list and coordinates applicant

referrals with available units.

43

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 6. Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units The time of submitting an application to a property owner

for their properties’ PRA units, but grantees and partner

may be the first opportunity for an applicant to see a

agencies still need to determine whether applicants are

property, unit, or neighborhood and may decide that the

eligible for the 811 PRA program.

offer does not meet their needs. Grantees require owners

The program requires owners to establish tenant selection

to report when they deny applicants housing and the

procedures for leasing to PRA applicants. Each property’s

reasons why, but grantees do not report on (or may not be

written tenant selection plan, developed as part of an

able to track) applicants who decide not to move forward

owner’s initial agreement with the grantee, establishes

with applications or the reasons.

the procedures for selecting residents to live in specific

Some lags exist in the data on lease ups. Households

properties. Tenant selection plans outline the procedures

referred to PRA units during a given quarter may not move

for resident selection, eligibility, and support for continued

in until the following quarter. In addition, PRA-eligible

occupancy. Several grantees developed plan templates

households that fail to move into a particular property may

that owners could modify.

receive a subsequent referral to a different property with

Approximately 14 percent of households did not to

PRA units or to other affordable housing programs.

meet property eligibility requirements, or 78 out of the

Applicants Who Did Not Meet Property

542 individuals that grantees referred to complete lease

Leasing Requirements

applications with property owners. Table 6.4 shows the

target populations of the 72 PRA-eligible households

To move into PRA units, applicants must meet application

that did not pass landlord screening. Applicants who

requirements for the property where they would like to

were denied by property owners were most likely to

live. Property owners can establish their own admission

be homeless (45 percent), fol owed by those residing

criteria and general y require that PRA applicants meet the

in institutions (28 percent), individuals at risk for

same application criteria as other non-811 PRA residents

institutionalization (11 percent), or persons leaving group

of the same multifamily rental property, such as previous

homes or adult care homes or other residential homes (11

rental history, criminal history, or minimum credit score.

percent). Given the smal  number of households, these

An applicant’s bedroom size and accessibility needs

patterns may not reflect the overall pool of PRA applicants

must also match an available unit. Property owners may

or eligible households.

maintain their own waiting lists of interested applicants

Table  6.4 : Households T hat Owner s S creened Out by Housing S t atus, as of June 2016

Institutionalized

20

28

At risk of institutionalization

8

11

Homeless

32

45

At risk of homelessness

2

3

Leaving group homes, adult care homes, or other residential settings

8

11

Exiting foster care

0

0

Other

2

3

Total

72

100

Note: Total adds greater to 100 percent, because one grantee reported two target populations for one applicant.

Sources: 2014, 2015, and 2016 Section 811 Project Rental Assistance quarterly reports

Reasons Applicants Were Ineligible

outreach staff reported that PRA applicants were typical y

The most common reasons property owners gave for

denied housing because they had a history of nuisance

applicant ineligibility were criminal history (61 percent),

crimes stemming from homelessness. As a result,

poor credit (13 percent), and poor rental history (10

Minnesota state agency staff report that they have taken

percent). Nearly one-third of applicants who were

steps to reduce the number of denials of PRA applicants

screened out were in Minnesota, and the reason was

at the property level. These steps include educating

criminal history. Of the 24 applicants screened ineligible

property owners about the availability of tenancy support

in Minnesota, 23 were homeless. During field interviews,

services to PRA residents and instituting prescreening

44

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 6. Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units forms for applicants to disclose potential barriers to

information effectively and equitably. A few grantees

residency in order to preemptively discuss them with the

reported that some staff may be more effective than

property manager.

others at this function, raising some concerns about

equity. Further, such staff-intensive approaches may be

Conclusion

difficult to scale up as volume increases.

This chapter addressed what is arguably the most

chal enging aspect of the 811 PRA program—matching the

right applicant to the right unit at the right time. Lessons

from the first round of PRA grantees include:

•  Grantees developed a variety of tools and procedures

to identify and track eligible applicants and match

them to appropriate PRA units. For both applicant and

property tracking, the processes may be statewide or

regional, centralized or decentralized, and organized

by target population or geography.

•  Housing coordinators, often funded by MFP grants,

play a critical role in a number of states in coordinating

this complex process. The expiration of the MFP

funds is a concern as states consider how to pay for

this function after 2020. States may want to consider

changes to their Medicaid waivers to fund housing-

related activities with Medicaid funds after the MFP

demonstration ends. States could also consider

incorporating some PRA housing coordinator functions

into the state housing agencies, as the Delaware and

Georgia PRA programs have done.

•  Multiple layers to eligibility exist. An applicant must be

eligible for Medicaid long-term services and supports,

for the 811 PRA program (based on age, income, and

disability), and for the property where the applicant

would like to live (based on the property’s tenant

selection plan). In addition, a property must meet an

applicant’s needs and preferences. Many steps exist

in which the approval process can slow down or derail

entirely.

•  In the early implementation period covered by this

research, a substantial share of applicants were

ineligible for the 811 PRA program, because they did

not qualify for Medicaid, but this outcome was largely

because of the public application process Louisiana

uses.

•  Also, some early evidence exists that people with

histories of homelessness experienced higher rates

of ineligibility, an issue for careful monitoring going

forward.

The matching process in some states is largely manual.

This manual process can result in successful matching,

because it is so individualized, but the efficiency and

success depend on staff making matches and distributing

45

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

46

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 7. Characteristics of Project Rental Assistance Applicants and Residents Characteristics

throughout the 5-year grant term. Through June 2016,

grantees reported a combined 3,270 applicants for the

of Project Rental

12 PRA programs. Grantees report the percentage of

applicants by type of reported disabling condition, place

of prior residence prior to PRA, and type of disability.

Assistance Applicants

As discussed in chapter 2, grantees can target their 811

PRA subsides to nonelderly people with specific disability

and Residents

types such as physical, mental health, or intel ectual

or developmental disabilities. Some states focus on

people with disabilities who live in institutions, at risk

for institutionalization, who are homeless, or at risk for

homelessness in support of state efforts to assist these

populations.

This chapter provides a profile of Project Rental

Assistance applicants and residents through June

Applicants by Referral Source

2016. It summarizes information on applicants of the

811 PRA program by previous housing status (that is,

As discussed in chapter 6, referral agencies typical y are

institutions, group homes, homeless) or risk factor (at risk

agencies that provide services or supports to address

of homelessness or institutionalization without access to

mental health, intel ectual, or developmental disabilities,

affordable housing), and source of applicant referral or

or independent living needs. Referral agencies may be

type of agency that referred the individual residents.

disability specific or may serve individuals with a number

of different types of disabling conditions. As table 7.1

PRA Applicants

shows, across all states as of the second quarter of 2016,

service providers accounted for 64 percent of all PRA

Grantees report aggregate information on applicants

applications, fol owed by state or local health agencies or

to the PRA program to HUD on a quarterly basis

authorities (27 percent) and other (10 percent).

Table  7.1: P R A A pplicant s by Referral S ource, as of June 2016

Number of PRA

Percent of PRA

Applicant Source

Applicants

Applicants

State or local mental health agency or authority

277

9

State or local intellectual or development disability agency or authority

94

3

State or local aging or adult services agency or authority

212

7

State or local child or family agency or authority

48

2

Other state or local human services agency or authority

174

6

Total State Agencies or Authorities

805

27

Service provider—mental health

810

27

Service provider—intellectual or development disabilities

336

11

Service provider—center for independent living

257

8

Service provider—other

505

17

Total Service Providers

1,908

63

Other

316

10

Total

3,029

100

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Note: Grantees did not report applicant source for 241 applicants.

Sources: 2014, 2015, 2016 Section 811 PRA quarterly reports

47

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 7. Characteristics of Project Rental Assistance Applicants and Residents Among service providers, about a one-fourth of applicants

districts, faith-based organizations, and other nonprofit

came from providers of mental health services (27

organizations.

percent), fol owed by providers of services to people with

intel ectual or developmental disabilities (11 percent), and

Applicants by Housing Status

centers for independent living (8 percent). Within state

Grantees report applicant characteristics based on the

agencies or authorities, state mental health agencies

housing circumstances of the individual at the time of

referred 277 of the 805 applicants, with the remaining

application to the PRA program. Table 7.2 shows the

applicants referred by agencies that serve people with

percentage of PRA applicants by place of prior residence

intellectual or developmental disabilities, local aging or

through June 2016. More than a one-fourth of applicants

adult services agencies, local child or family agencies.

were either residing in an institution (18 percent) or were

The remaining 10 percent of applicants fall into the  other

at risk for institutionalization (9 percent). PRA programs

category, which includes numerous other organizations

can determine the definition of  at risk. More than a third of

focused on aging and elder services, veterans services,

applicants are either homeless (26 percent) or at risk for

healthcare providers, emergency homeless services and

homelessness (10 percent). People living in group homes,

shelters, housing authorities, health insurance providers,

adult care homes, or other residential settings constitute

nursing facilities, community action agencies, school

11 percent of applicants.

Table  7.2 : P R A A pplicant s by Housing S t atus, as of June 2016

All Grantees

Target Population

Number of PRA Applicants

Percent of PRA Applicants

Institutionalized

549

18

At risk of institutionalization

279

9

Homeless

785

26

At risk of homelessness

315

10

Leaving group homes, adult care homes or other residential settings

322

11

Exiting foster care

1

0

Other

802

26

Total

3053

100.0

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Note: Grantees did not report the housing status for 217 applicants.

Sources: 2014, 2015 and 2016 Section 811 PRA quarterly reports

Grantees vary in the distribution of applicants by place

for PRA units, and 100 percent of applicants in the state

of prior residence, largely reflecting the states’ priorities

were either living in institutions (67 percent) or at risk for

and eligible populations. Most homeless applicants are

institutionalization (33 percent). In Il inois, 74 percent of

from three states that specifical y target people who are

PRA applicants were institutionalized, and 22 percent

homeless or at risk for homelessness. The three states

were at risk for institutionalization. These high percentages

are Minnesota (200 applicants), which targets individuals

reflect the state’s target populations as discussed in

through its Projects for Assistance in Transition From

chapter 2. Two-thirds of Pennsylvania’s applicants

Homelessness program, Louisiana (292 applicants),

are either institutionalized (38 percent) or at risk for

which uses PRA as a resource as part of its permanent

institutionalization without affordable housing (30 percent).

supportive housing program, and Maryland (548

Most of applicants from group homes, adult care homes,

applicants), which has a combined application process

or other residential settings are from Maryland (267 of

and waiting list for PRA and two other housing programs.

322 applicants, or 83 percent), reflecting the state’s PRA

All states target people who are institutionalized, and five

program’s third priority for people wishing to move out of

states give priority for PRA units to applicants who reside

these residential homes.

in institutions at the time of application. In California,

applicants who are institutionalized receive first priority

48

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 7. Characteristics of Project Rental Assistance Applicants and Residents Applicants by Disability Type

reasons those individuals exited the PRA program. This

Through June 2016, grantees reported that 41 percent of

profile of PRA residents also provides some demographic

applicants have mental health disabilities, 33 percent of

information about the households that have been assisted

applicants have physical disabilities, and 16 percent have

by PRA including age, gender, and household income.

an intel ectual or developmental disability. Distributions

Through June 2016, the 12 demonstration PRA programs

of applicants by disability type vary greatly across state

assisted 133 households with rental assistance, and 124

grantees.

residents were living in PRA-funded units at the end of

Caution should be taken when interpreting these

the month (8 households had exited the program since

percentages. Data were available for only 2,780 of 3,270

January 2015).

applicants. Based on information in the grantee quarterly

Table 7.3 shows the number of PRA residents by state.

reports and the fact that applicants and residents can

As of June 30, 2016, the states with the most residents

report more than one disability type, it was not possible to

were California (38 residents, or 16 percent of their 2012

determine the exact proportion of applicants who report

grant goal), Washington (19 residents, or 9 percent of

a specific type of disability or the percentage of residents

their grant goal), Minnesota (15 residents, or 18 percent

with co-occurring disabilities.

of their goal), Louisiana (19 residents, 10 percent), and

Maryland (13 residents, 10 percent). HUD authorized four

Profile of PRA Residents

states (California, Georgia, Il inois, and Washington) to

increase their contract rents, which likely will reduce the

This section presents the characteristics and tenancy of

total number of PRA units that the PRA grant will ultimately

the first 133 households assisted by 811 PRA between

fund. PRA programs in three states had no residents,

January 2015 and June 2016. The chapter provides a

because they had not yet begun or had just begun the

breakout of residents by place of prior residency and

PRA leasing process (Georgia, Massachusetts, and

length of stay. For the few residents who exited the

Texas). The remaining three grantees all had less than 10

program to date, the section provides information on the

residents each.

Table  7.3 : P R A Resident s as of June 2016

PRA Units Leased Through June

Percent of 5-Year Unit Goal Under

State

PRA Units Total 5-Year Goala

2016

Lease Through June 2016

California

233

38

16

Delaware

148

9

6

Georgia

143

0

0

Illinois

369

4

1

Louisiana

199

19

10

Maryland

150

13

9

Massachusetts

90

0

0

Minnesota

85

15

18

Montana

81

5

6

Pennsylvania

200

2

1

Texas

362

0

0

Washington

133

19

14

Total

2193

124

6

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

a As of March 2017.

Sources: 2014, 2015 and 2016 Section 811 PRA quarterly report

49

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 7. Characteristics of Project Rental Assistance Applicants and Residents Grantees report the prior housing status of residents. Table

or 23 percent), 18 residents (14 percent) were at risk for

7.4 shows that approximately one-half of PRA residents

homelessness, and 10 residents (8 percent) moved from

came from institutions (35 percent) or were at risk for

group homes, adult care homes, or other residential

institutionalization as defined by each PRA program

settings. An additional 8 residents moved from other

(15 percent). An additional one-fourth of residents were

housing situations.

previously experiencing homelessness (30 residents,

Table  7.4 : P R A Resident s by Prior Housing S t atus, June 2016

All Grantees

Target Population

Number of Residents

Percent of Residents

Institutionalized

47

35

At risk of institutionalization

20

15

Homeless

30

23

At risk of homelessness

18

14

Leaving group homes, adult care homes or other residential settings

10

8

Exiting foster care

0

0

Other

8

6

Total

133

100

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Sources: 2014, 2015 and 2016 Section 811 PRA quarterly reports

Characteristics of PRA Households

Household Composition

Information on income and rent is only available for 94 of

Most PRA households were single-person households (78

the first 133 residents who moved into PRA units between

percent). Two-person households represent 16 percent of

January 2015 and June 30, 2016. The missing data for the

total households, and households of three or more people

remaining residents are due to lags in tenant reporting to

(6 percent) made up a smal er proportion (table 7.5).

HUD.

Some 15 percent of households have dependents. Eleven

PRA residents reported a family member with a mobility

impairment, and none reported a family member with a

hearing or vision impairment.

Table  7.5 : Household C omposition of Section 811 P R A Resident s, June 2016

Number of Households

Percent of Households

Household size

One person

73

78

Two person

15

16

Three or more person

6

6

Households with dependents

14

15

Families with member who has

Hearing impairment

0

0

Vision impairment

0

0

Mobility impairment

11

12

Total households

94

100

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Note: Data are available on only 94 of the first 133 PRA participants.

Source: Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System data

50

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 7. Characteristics of Project Rental Assistance Applicants and Residents Table 7.6 provides demographic characteristics of PRA

PRA heads of household are female (52 percent), and 48

resident heads of households. PRA residents range in

percent are male. PRA residents self-reported race as:

age from 19 to 60 but skew toward the higher age limit of

48 percent White, 35 percent Black or African American,

the 811 PRA program. The average head of household is

3 percent Native American or Alaskan Native, 1 percent

47 years old, and the median age is 50. Nearly one-half

Asian or Pacific Islander, and 6 percent are classified

of the PRA head of households (49 percent) were at least

as other.

51 years of age in June 2016. Approximately one-half of

Table 7.6 : Characteristics of Section 811 P R A Heads of Household, June 2016

Number of Heads of Household

Percent of Heads of Household

Age of head of household

18–24

4

5

25–30

5

6

31–50

39

42

51–61

45

48

62 or more

1

1

Sex of head of household

Male

45

48

Female

49

52

Race of head of household

White

45

48

Black or African-American

33

35

Native American or Alaskan Native

3

3

Asian or Pacific Islander

1

1

Other

6

7

Total households

94

100

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Notes: Data are available on only 94 of the first 133 PRA participants. Data on ethnicity of the heads of household were not available.

Source: Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System household data

Household Income and Assets

household, spending 30 percent of monthly income on

The reported household income represents the most

rent, could afford a monthly rent of $236. Actual total

recent income reported to HUD as of June 2016. HUD

monthly resident payments for this period range from $5

requires households to recertify their incomes at least

to $443, with an average resident rent payment of $223.

annual y as part of their lease agreements but may

On average, adjusted PRA household income is about 16

recertify it more often if they have increases or decreases

percent of AMI.

in household income.

Actual total resident payments were less than expected

PRA participants must have extremely low-income, no

through June 2016. All PRA residents report at least

more than 30 percent of Area Median Income, when

one source of household income (table 7.7). Most PRA

they move into PRA units. Most households (91 out

households (88 percent) receive Social Security benefits,

of 94) report extremely low household incomes as of

either Social Security (42 percent), Supplemental Security

June 2016. The average household income for 811 PRA

Income (34 percent), or both (13 percent). Fewer residents

households reported through June 2016 was $9,113,

had income from wages (6 percent), receive welfare

ranging between $0 and $18,128. After taking deductions

assistance (6 percent), or have other income sources

into account, average adjusted income of PRA residents

(7 percent).

was $8,886. Based on this adjusted income, the average

51

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 7. Characteristics of Project Rental Assistance Applicants and Residents Table  7.7: P R A Household S ources of Income, June 2016

Source of Income

Number of Households

Percent of Households

Wage

6

6

Pension

0

0

Social Security

39

42

Supplemental Security Insurance (SSI)

32

34

Both Social Security and SSI

12

13

Welfare

6

6

Other

7

7

Total households

94

100

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Note: Households may report more than one source of income.

Source: Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System data

PRA residents report very low values of assets and

tenancy is largely a reflection of the demonstration

savings. Two-thirds of PRA households (61 percent)

programs’ implementation status at the time of the

reported cash assets on moving into PRA units, typical y

process evaluation. Of 121 households residing in PRA-

amounts in checking or savings accounts. For households

subsidized units as of June 2016, 61 percent lived in the

with reported assets, the average value of these assets

PRA unit for 6 or fewer months, and 29 percent lived in

was $729, and the median was $170. Many PRA residents

PRA units between 6 months and 1 year (table 7.8). Less

(42 percent) reported less than $100 of value in assets.

than 10 percent of residents had lived in PRA-funded units

for longer than 1 year as of June 2016.

Tenancy of PRA Residents

As the PRA program is new and the first residents did not

move in to PRA-assisted units until January 2015, resident

Table  7.8 : P R A Par ticipant s by Tenancy, June 2016

Of the Total Number of Households Living in PRA Units at the End of

Number of PRA

the Quarter, Number by Length of Tenure

Participants

Percent of PRA Participants

6 months or fewer

74

61

7–12 months

35

29

13–24 months

12

10

25–48 months

0

0

Total

121

100

PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Note: Does not include Maryland tenancy data.

Sources: 2014, 2015, and 2016 Section 811 PRA quarterly reports

Transfers With Program and Program Exits

the reasons residents move out of units or no longer

As of June 30, 2016, grantees report only one resident

participate in the PRA program, but property owners may

transfer from one unit to another within the same property.

not always be aware of the reasons.

Grantees reported that eight PRA households exited the

Section 811 PRA program—three were reinstitutionalized,

two died, one exit was owner-initiated for reasons other

than nonpayment of rent, and two left for unknown

reasons. The program requires property owners to report

52

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 8. Service Provision and Coordination

Service Provision

What Does Medicaid Cover and for

Whom?

and Coordination

Medicaid is a health insurance program implemented

through partnerships between states and Centers for

Medicare and Medicaid Services. Although states develop

Medicaid state plans within the basic parameters set by

The Section 811 Project Rental Assistance program

the CMS in accordance with federal law, each state’s

targets extremely low-income households with disabilities

Medicaid program is different. States must include a core

who live in institutions, are homeless, or are at risk of

set of benefits and may choose to offer additional benefits

institutionalization or homelessness without access to

than the set required by CMS. Through waivers and state

affordable housing. Participants in the 811 PRA program

plan amendments, states may add benefits for specific

must also be eligible for community-based long-term care

purposes or populations, establish structures for care

services provided under the state’s Medicaid or similar

delivery such as managed care organizations, and fol ow

program, but services are voluntary and participation

other approaches to fit the program to state needs and

in services is not a requirement for receiving rental

budget constraints.

assistance.

Before full implementation of the Affordable Care Act,

The research questions for the process evaluation

most Medicaid beneficiaries were eligible, because (1)

included what resources are used to pay for services for

they were disabled as defined by eligibility criteria for

811 PRA-assisted residents, what services are offered

Supplemental Security Income, (2) they were children,

during the transition to housing and after residents have

pregnant, or members of households that met Medicaid

moved in, how are services coordinated across providers,

eligibility criteria, or (3) they were Medicare beneficiaries

whether available services adequately address the needs

whose incomes were low enough to qualify them for

of the target population, and how services are monitored

Medicaid (these beneficiaries are known as dual-eligibles).

to ensure accountability. However, because most grantees

As implemented, the Affordable Care Act enabled states

were still in the early implementation stages of their 811

to expand eligibility to people with incomes less than

PRA programs during the data col ection period for this

133 percent of the federal poverty level, starting in 2014.

study, few PRA residents were housed, and grantees

This change resulted in more adults without children

had little experience with service delivery for individuals

becoming eligible for Medicaid in states that implemented

living in PRA units. As a result, this chapter reviews the

the expansion. All but 2 of the 12 states in this evaluation

expected sources of services funding and the planned

(Georgia and Texas) had expanded Medicaid eligibility

structures for service delivery and monitoring based

under the Affordable Care Act to people with annual

on program documents and discussions with program

incomes less than 133 percent of the federal poverty level,

staff during field visits, but the chapter has few findings

regardless of their age, family status, or health.

to present on grantees’ actual experiences with service

Medicaid cannot pay for housing outside of institutional

provision, coordination, adequacy, or monitoring. As

care, but it can pay for medical, mental health, and other

described in chapter 9, a Phase II evaluation will col ect

services and supports that people with disabilities may

data on the implementation of the first and second round

need in order to maintain their health and, for 811 PRA

811 PRA grants and will assess resident outcomes. The

participants, live stably in a community-based setting.

Phase II study will col ect more indepth information on

Long-term care services may be provided under Medicaid

service delivery (including resident outcomes) as more

waivers, Medicaid state plan options, or other comparable

residents move to housing with 811 PRA assistance. The

long-term services programs. In addition, in 2016, CMS

second phase of the evaluation includes surveys with PRA

issued guidance on the use of Medicaid to provide

residents in six states.

certain housing and tenancy supports to help Medicaid

This chapter begins with a brief overview of Medicaid, its

recipients obtain and retain housing, such as assessing

coverage, and those eligible. It then summarizes the types

housing and supporting needs, preparing housing

of services the 811 PRA grantees planned to provide and

support plans, helping prepare housing applications, and

the Medicaid and other resources they expected to draw

identifying resources for covering transition expenses. The

on to pay for services for 811 PRA residents during their

guidance also covers the use of Medicaid for support to

transitions to housing and after living in 811 PRA units.

ensure successful tenancy, such as coaching residents

on sustaining tenancy (for example, paying rent on

53

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 8. Service Provision and Coordination

time, getting along with neighbors and landlords) and

period, grantees identified resources for services and

monitoring and intervening if any behaviors jeopardize

supports to ensure successful tenancy in the community.

tenancy. Final y, the guidance encourages state-level

These services were to be tailored to individual resident

collaboration across agencies to identify resources and

needs and preferences but could include supports,

opportunities for coordinating housing, health, and long-

such as inhome skil ed nursing, home health aide,

term services and supports to help Medicaid beneficiaries

transportation to medical appointments, medication

live successful y in community settings (CMS, 2015).

management, and specialized medical equipment.

Services also include case management, homemaker

Expected Services and Supports

and chore services, personal care, recreational services,

for PRA Residents

supported employment, accompaniment to medical

appointments, and respite care for informal caregivers.

In responses to the 2012 Section 811 PRA Notice of

Medicaid is expected to be the primary source of services

Funding Availability, grantees proposed a variety of

funding, but other federal and state sources may support

service types they planned to make available to 811 PRA

811 PRA residents as wel . This section briefly describes

residents, including transition services and supports to

the resources states plan to use to provide services. First,

help eligible households search for appropriate units,

we provide a brief description of the Medicaid authorities

complete housing applications, obtain household

the 811 PRA grantees plan to use to pay for services.

supplies, and move into units. Fol owing the transition

Table 8.1 summarizes sources by grantee.

Table  8.1: Funding S ources for Ser vices for P R A Resident s

Medicaid Waiver Programs Expected to Serve Section 811 PRA  Other Medicaid or State Programs for Section 811 PRA State

Participants

Participants

Nine 1915c waiver programs; two specifically for people with developmental

California

disabilities.

MFP; Health Homes starting in 2017.

1115 renewal proposed to have tenancy supports services.

1115 waiver consolidates several previous HCBS waiver programs under one

Delaware

MFP, PATH, HUD Continuum of Care.

Medicaid managed care program for people with long-term care needs.

Georgia

1915c waivers for physical or functional and developmental disabilities.

MFP, PATH.

1915c waivers for people with brain injuries, developmental disabilities,

Illinois

MFP. State Plan Community Health Services.

mental il ness.

1915c for housing stabilization and housing transition or crisis intervention;

MFP, 1915i State Plan Amendment for behavioral health includes

Louisiana

four 1915c waivers for adults (two for people with developmental disabilities,

services or skill building to get or keep housing.

two for physical disabilities).

MFP. Under state plan: Community First Choice to consolidate three

Waivers: Community Pathways (developmental disabilities); brain injury;

Maryland

previous waivers for disabled adults; Balancing Incentive Program to

medical daycare; HCBS options.

supplement MFP and augment HCBS.

MFP. Independent living supports for intermittent needs. State plan

Massachusetts 1915c for adults with intellectual disabilities, adults with brain injury.

services that facilitate community living.

1915c waivers for developmental disabilities, brain injury 1915(i) for mental

MFP. Three state-funded services programs: two for mental health

Minnesota

health population; proposed tenancy supports.

and one for homeless populations.

1915c waivers for people with physical disabilities, developmental disabilities,

Montana

MFP.

mental il ness.

1915c waivers for intellectual disabilities supports and services; Adult Autism  MFP, 1915i (managed care), Nursing Home Transition, state block Pennsylvania

Waiver; and HCBS waivers for physical disabilities.

grants to counties.

Texas

1915c waivers for people with developmental or physical disabilities.

MFP, 1115, state plan services for mental health.

MFP plus state-funded supplement to MFP program. Medicaid

Two 1915(c) waivers for people with functional disabilities; five HCBS waivers  rebalancing funds al ocated to create temporary rental subsidy Washington

for developmental disabilities.

program for people transitioning from institution to community.

Under state plan—Community First Choice, private duty nursing.

HCBS = Home- and Community-Based Services. HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Community Development. MFP = Money Follows the Person.

PATH = Projects for Assistance in Transition From Homelessness. PRA = Project Rental Assistance.

Sources: Grantee Notice of Funding Availability responses; field interviews with Section 811 PRA program staff in each state 54

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 8. Service Provision and Coordination

Although states may have appropriate waiver programs

Choice provides an enhanced federal matching rate for

for 811 PRA target populations, grantees noted that

expenditures related to this option.

confirming that appropriate services are available in the

The Balancing Incentive Program is a new mechanism

vicinity is a key factor in identifying suitable properties

under the Affordable Care Act that offers enhanced

for the program. Early in program implementation, some

federal matching funds to states for long-term services

grantees (Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Texas) noted

and supports that are provided in noninstitutional settings.

concerns about the availability of services in rural areas.

States must meet some other requirements, including

The Louisiana grantee mentioned having difficulty finding

developing a statewide, single entry point system and a

interested property owners with one-bedroom units

standardized assessment tool to determine service needs.

(which are general y in short supply compared with larger

Maryland and Washington have each used Medicaid

units) in communities with good access to services.

rebalancing efforts in ways that support the 811 PRA. To

All 811 PRA residents are expected to be eligible for

reassure owners interested in the 811 PRA, Maryland’s

Medicaid, and many residents are expected to receive

Money Fol ows the Person program contributed $1

services through Medicaid waiver programs, as briefly

mil ion in rebalancing funds to be held in trust by the state

described in the next paragraphs. The numbers refer to

housing agency. The funds wil  fund housing subsidy

sections of the Social Security Act that authorize waivers.

payments for 811 PRA participants for up to 6 months

Under Section 1915(c) Home- and Community-Based

if HUD PRA funding is interrupted or discontinued.

Services waivers, states may offer services in community

Washington allocated Medicaid rebalancing funds to

settings to people who have disabilities severe enough

create a temporary rental subsidy bridge program for

that they qualify for institutional care. With review and

people transitioning from institutions to the community.

approval from CMS, states can provide a variety of

The Affordable Care Act also established Health Home

services, such as homemaker services, home health and

State Plan Options. This program targets people who

personal care assistance, and adult day health care to

have, or are at risk for, multiple chronic health conditions.

people living in the community. The waiver services must

To address the complex needs of this population, states

be  cost neutral for the state; that is, the cost of waiver

receive 2 years of enhanced federal matching funds

services cannot exceed the cost of providing the same

to provide comprehensive care coordination, health

services without the waiver. States may limit the number

promotion, transition assistance from inpatient to other

of people served, the scope and duration of services, and

community-based settings, and community, social and

the geographic area the waiver covers.

family supports.

Section 1915(i) State Plan Option waivers enable states to

In addition to waiver programs, the MFP Rebalancing

provide services similar to those provided under 1915c but

Demonstration Grant is a key source of transition services

to people with a lower level of care need. These waivers

funding for 811 PRA residents. This CMS grant program

are for people who meet state-defined need criteria but do

provides funds to states to help people living in institutions

not meet the institutional level of care requirement. States

transition to community living with help from grant-funded

may target these services to particular disability groups.

transition coordinators and home- and community-based

No cost neutrality requirement exists, but states must

services-funded services. States received enhanced

offer the program statewide, and they may not limit the

federal matching funds from CMS for this program. The

number of eligible people served or establish waiting lists.

grant period ended in 2016, and states have through 2020

Section 1115 research and demonstration waivers can

to spend grant funds. Transition services may include

be used to give states broad flexibility to design and test

help locating community-based housing, purchasing

innovative ways to deliver and pay for Medicaid coverage.

household furnishings, moving expenses, transition

With CMS review and approval, states can implement

support, and supported employment assistance.

projects that test policy innovations. States can use an

Transition assistance is available for 1 year after move-in.

1115 waiver to obtain approval to use Medicaid funding to

In a number of states, MFP funds state staff who help

pay for the costs of services that do not otherwise qualify

identify and refer eligible people for 811 PRA assistance

for federal matching funds.

and who provide transition services.

The Affordable Care Act established Section 1915(k),

Some 811 PRA grantees proposed other federal sources

the Community First Choice Option. This option enables

of services funding to assist 811 PRA residents who have

states to provide home- and community-based attendant

experienced homelessness. For example, Georgia and

services to some Medicaid enrol ees with disabilities who

Minnesota plan to use funding from the Department of

otherwise qualify for institutional care. Community First

Health and Human Services’ Projects for Assistance in

55

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 8. Service Provision and Coordination

Transition From Homelessness program. Administered

transition services and supports may differ based on the

through the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services

disabling condition of the individual and the Medicaid

Administration with the Department of Health and Human

waiver or state plan program under which residents are

Services, the PATH program provides formula-based

eligible to receive services.

grants to states to provide a variety of services not usual y

Transition services and supports also vary depending

covered by mental health programs, such as outreach,

on whether or not an applicant is a MFP participant.

screening and diagnostic services, community mental

Individuals need to reside in an institution for at least

health, substance use treatment, and some housing

90 days to be eligible services and supports through

transition services. HUD’s Continuum of Care Program

the MFP program. Services and supports available

may also be a source of service resources for grantees

through the MFP program are available for up to a year

serving people who have experienced homelessness.

after the person moves into a PRA unit, although some

Final y, most of the 811 PRA grantees will use state-funded

MFP programs make transition services and supports

services or services funded through Medicaid state plans

available for less time. For example, MFP participants in

to supplement these federal programs.

Pennsylvania receive only transition services through MFP

Early Lessons on Service Delivery

for up to 180 days after moving into PRA units.

for PRA Residents

Coordination with the MFP program. In a number

of states, 811 PRA activities were closely coordinated

Given the small number of 811 PRA residents housed at

with the states’ MFP programs. MFP staff and systems

the time of data col ection for this evaluation, it is too early

were critical resources for identifying potential 811 PRA

to produce findings on the appropriateness, sufficiency,

program applicants, determining eligibility, and (for those

or the quality of services provided to residents during

eligible for available units) assisting with transitions.

housing transitions and after settling into 811 PRA units or

A number of grantees expressed concerns about the

to comment on quality of coordination of services across

impending expiration of the MFP program in 2020 (sooner

providers. It is apparent that states identified appropriate

in some states), given its important role in outreach and

funding sources for target populations, including various

transition services.

Medicaid waiver programs and other federal initiatives.

Phase II of the Section 811 PRA evaluation will explore

the availability and appropriateness of transition and

long-term services and supports through additional field

interviews with staff from service provider organizations

and state Medicaid agencies, surveys with PRA residents,

and tenant-level administrative data on healthcare

diagnoses, utilization, and costs. The second phase of

the evaluation will explore the fol owing early lessons on

service delivery and funding for PRA residents, as more

811 PRA residents are housed.

Availability of long-term supportive services and

supports. Some grantees expressed concern about the

availability of services in rural areas. Some also mentioned

mismatches between locations of suitable properties and

locations of appropriate services.

Access to transition services. All 12 grantees reported

assigning all people transitioning into PRA units a service

coordinator or case management services coordinator

to help the transition to PRA units. However, transition

services may vary based on the waiver programs and

specific services for which an individual is eligible. Al

grantees (no response from Maryland) responded that

56

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 9. Conclusions and Implications for Future Research

Conclusions and

new or different for grantees or Medicaid agencies to

implement. These decisions and activities include ways to

Implications for

communicate and collaborate among partners facilitate

with HUD contracting, payment, and tenant reporting

systems; establish coordinated applicant outreach and

Future Research

referral networks; and procedures to match applicants to

available PRA units.

Many states were still resolving the details of these

arrangements at the conclusion of data col ection.

Although the partnerships are a work in process in many

Within the statutory requirements and goals of the

states, partners reported strategies they found helpful in

Section 811 Project Rental Assistance program, HUD’s

laying the groundwork for effective partnerships.

2012 notice of funding availability for the demonstration

round gave housing agencies and partnering Medicaid

•  Most states met every 2 weeks or monthly during the

agencies latitude to tailor the 811 PRA program to meet

early implementation period. Document and data-

the state needs and to design policies and procedures

sharing platforms such as SharePoint proved useful

to meet their goals. This process evaluation report is the

for col aboration and communication among grant

final report produced by the Phase I evaluation of the

stakeholders.

PRA program and provides an aggregate summary of the

•  Sustaining program staff is a concern in Medicaid

implementation of the program and the partnerships in the

agencies because of the approaching expiration of

12 initial states.

Money Fol ows the Person grants that, in many states,

The grantees and their partners spent much of the period

fund staff and services helping individuals transition

this research covers by solidifying partner roles and

out of institutions into community-based housing.

responsibilities and developing systems and procedures

To keep funding these activities, states may need to

needed to accommodate this new and complex approach

consider changes to their Medicaid waiver programs to

to providing affordable housing for nonelderly people with

incorporate housing-related activities and services and

disabilities. This chapter briefly summarizes key lessons

supports as eligible Medicaid waiver expenses.

learned from the experiences of this inaugural group

•  Partners reported the program took much more time

of grantees and looks ahead to implications for future

and effort than expected, especial y in the first year,

research and practice.

considerably more than the 811 PRA’s 8-percent

administrative fee covers.

Grantee Partnerships and

Organizational Structures

Target Populations

The 811 PRA program requires housing agencies that

Each PRA partnership developed target population

al ocate the PRA subsidies to work together with state

criteria based on the type of disabling condition (physical

Medicaid or health and human services agencies that

health, mental health, and intel ectual and developmental

provide and coordinate services for residents. Beyond

disabilities). Partners also identified target populations

the state-level partnerships of housing and Medicaid

based on whether individuals reside in institutions or

agencies, the program also requires coordination among

at risk for institutionalization or homeless or at risk for

other partners and stakeholders, including divisions within

homelessness.

the housing and Medicaid agencies, other state agencies,

•  Five partnerships established priorities of target

referral agencies, service providers, property owners,

groups based on state affordable housing priorities for

public housing authorities, and most importantly, the

nonelderly people with disabilities or in response to

program’s intended residents.

settlement agreements or lawsuits that required states

Many states built PRA program partnerships from

to develop affordable housing options for certain

existing partnerships that were created for supportive

classes of people.

housing initiatives or other programs that support people

•  States had to identify eligible applicants based on

with disabilities. Regardless of whether partnerships

their previously defined target populations, as wel  as

were new or preexisting, the program requires a broad

applicant age, income, and individual interest in the

range of program decisions and activities that may be

811 PRA program. States with higher rates of program

57

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 9. Conclusions and Implications for Future Research

ineligibility had open application systems or combined

Housing Strategies

application systems and waiting lists for the PRA

program and other housing programs, which may or

The pace of attracting properties and units to the PRA

may not have the same eligibility requirements as PRA.

program and leasing units identified for the program was

slower than HUD and grantees expected. Grantees and

•  State-selected target populations informs the way in

their partners identified a variety of obstacles that had

which a program conducts outreach, refers eligible

slowed the owner recruitment process.

households to properties with PRA subsidized units,

and supports residents through the transition and

•  It was difficult to identify interested property owners

ongoing tenancy. Transitioning a person from an

whose properties met the program’s eligibility criteria

institution is a different process than transitioning

and who were wil ing to enter into lengthy contracts

a person who is homeless or moving from a family

with HUD for only a few units. Grantees reported

home. For example, partners may need more lead time

that some property owners had concerns about the

to work with discharge staff to transition individuals

30-year use agreement, the 20-year contract period,

coming from institutions. People who are homeless or

and the lower PRA rents that grantees established in

at risk for homelessness have more immediate housing

their grant applications, a particular concern in costlier

needs, and maintaining contact with the person may

urban areas. Some owners also had to learn to use

be difficult during the application process if they are in

HUD’s subsidy administration and reporting systems,

temporary or unstable housing situations.

with which they may not have prior experience.

•  Based on early data from quarterly reports and

•  Grantees reported that tax credits or other state

discussions with program staff, some evidence

resources fund many properties, already exceeding

exists that people with mental health disabilities and

the 25-percent limit of units set aside for people with

people who are at risk for homelessness are ineligible

disabilities, often because other state affordable

for admission to PRA-assisted properties at higher

housing initiatives provide incentives to build

rates than other groups. This finding is an issue for

properties with high concentrations of units for people

continued monitoring.

with disabilities or other vulnerable populations. Some

states adjusted their Qualified Allocation Plans for

Outreach and Referral Processes

tax credit properties or funding priorities for other

programs to better align incentives with the 811 PRA

Grantees adopted varied approaches to referring,

requirements.

screening, and placing participants. Lessons on outreach

and referral from the early 811 PRA grantees and their

•  To reduce per-unit PRA costs and increase the number

partners include—

of units assisted, many states chose to limit PRA units

to those affordable to lower income households. Low

•  Initial research suggests a centralized application and

contract rents have posed a chal enge for grantees to

referral model is an effective and scalable model for

attract developers or owners. The PRA program may

processing applications and referring applicants to

be competing with other housing assistance programs

available units. Most (8 of 12) grantees report using

that al ow for higher rent limits, such as the Housing

a centralized (at the state, regional, or county level)

Choice Voucher program or tax credit programs that

approach that, although not without some challenges,

enable rents up to Fair Market Rent or higher.

helps them process resident applications and refer

applicants to units efficiently.

•  Incentives in the Section 811 PRA NOFA encouraged

grantees to propose cost effective uses of the PRA that

•  Several states used or adapted case management or

may not be realistic. Since cooperative agreements

waiting-list software programs developed for other

were signed, four grantees received waivers from HUD

housing programs, in some cases specifically modified

to increase contract rents. Rent and subsidy levels

for the PRA program, to manage applications and

should be closely monitored (and reevaluated) as the

waiting lists. Others report using standard spreadsheet

number of subsidized units grow in order to determine

or database software.

the extent to which grantees are accurately estimating

•  States that provided cross-training—that is,

rent and subsidy levels over time.

training housing staff on Medicaid terminology and

•  States that were not able to identify PRA units through

procedure and vice versa—reported this strategy both

the funding process conducted extensive outreach

strengthened the partnerships and improved program

to potential property owners and developers to

operations, particularly outreach and referral where

encourage interest in the program. Grantees also

coordination is particularly critical.

developed streamlined funding applications and

58

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 9. Conclusions and Implications for Future Research

procedures and provided technical assistance to

Overal , grantees secured fewer units under RAC (28

property owners and developers to make the funding

percent) than their proposed target goal, although

process less complicated and more inviting.

variation exists across grantees. Grantees established

Grantees adopted various strategies to secure Rental

PRA unit goal targets based on assumptions of expected

Assistance Contracts for PRA units in newly built or

locations for PRA units, contract rent levels, and tenant

rehabilitated housing, in existing affordable developments,

rent contributions that may have been unrealistic or that

or in a combination of the two. Newly built or renovated

changed since grantees signed cooperative agreements

housing offers the advantage of having a number of units

with HUD. Grantees also developed unit goals in response

coming online at once, but construction can take a long

to incentives in the 2012 Notice of Funding Availability

time. Existing housing has the advantage that it is already

that encouraged them to make cost effective use of the

built, but in many markets affordable developments

PRA subsidies. As a result, the 2012 PRA grant could fund

have low vacancy rates. Units become available to PRA

fewer than the grantee reported goal of 2,193 units. The

residents only on tenant turnover. Lessons from these

actual number of units subsidized through the program

choices include—

will not be known until all the PRA units are under lease.

•  Although the property strategies for nine grantees

Service Provision and Coordination

remain unchanged, grantees that made changes

in their housing strategies either removed existing

Given the few number of people housed in 811 PRA units

properties or added new properties to their strategies,

at the conclusion of data col ection for this study, it is too

mainly through incentives in state housing finance

early to assess the appropriateness or effectiveness of the

competitions. Grantees have until September 2020

offered services. Grantees and their Medicaid partners

to lease their PRA units to al ow for 5 years of rental

identified appropriate Medicaid waivers, state plan

subsidies as funded by the grant. As new construction

services, and other service sources to address the likely

projects can take 1 to 2 years or more to build,

service needs of PRA residents in each state.

grantees have to identify new construction properties

During administrative interviews conducted for the study,

for PRA units by 2017 or 2018 in order for the units to

some respondents raised concerns that the large number

be subsidized for the full 5 years.

of service providers who work with their target populations

•  Few RAC units were leased as of June 2016, largely

and the high turnover in some positions (such as home

because non-811 PRA residents occupied 70 percent

health aides) make monitoring service delivery and quality

of the units under RAC. PRA residents cannot lease

difficult. Further, given the newness of the 811 PRA

units until non-PRA residents vacate them. Turnover

program, some service providers are more knowledgeable

rates vary considerably and sometimes unpredictably

than others about the program’s procedures and

by property.

requirements. States wil  need to provide ongoing training

to familiarize service provider staff about the program.

•  Most PRA applications are for one-person households,

and in most cases, applicants qualify for one-bedroom

HUD and grantees should assess access to services

units. Three grantees reported that the demand for

to determine possible links between services and long-

one-bedroom apartments is greater than the supply

term housing tenure. Adequate transition and long-term

and spoke to the complexities associated with

services and supports were often not equal y available

matching the supply with demand. Louisiana is an

in all geographic areas, and some states have difficultly

example of a grantee that uses tax credit competitions

linking services to resident needs. A tool to map residents

to increase the production of affordable one-bedroom

to available services would be beneficial.

units in the state.

Looking Ahead to Future Research

•  Some grantees also noted mismatches between

locations of available vacancies in proximity to

and Practice

available and accessible services and desired

As of spring 2017, the research team for Phase II of

residential locations of eligible applicants. Grantees

the Section 811 PRA evaluation completed the design

that are tax credit-al ocating agencies may consider

phase and will begin col ecting data soon. The Phase I

using tax credit competitions to encourage the

evaluation informed all aspects of the design approach

production of affordable housing in neighborhoods

for Phase II. Data col ection in Phase II will continue to

with access to transportation and services and

assess implementation as the 811 PRA program matures.

supports necessary for people with disabilities to live

The study will further explore the partnerships, assess

independently.

59

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

Chapter 9. Conclusions and Implications for Future Research

success, and provide a framework for interpreting the

partnership’s effect on program outcomes. The study

will also continue documenting states’ experiences

with outreach and referral methods and will identify

characteristics of successful and effective outreach and

referral methods.

The Phase II research will also begin to look at participant-

level outcomes and access to services and to estimate

PRA program costs compared with the outcomes and

costs of comparison groups with similar characteristics

and disabilities. A resident survey in the Phase II

evaluation will provide residents’ points of view on their

experiences with transitioning to PRA-subsidized housing,

views on the quality of properties and neighborhoods in

which they live, and ability to access the needed supports

and services to successful y maintain tenancy. A final

report on the Phase II evaluation is expected in the spring

of 2019.

60

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

References

References

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). 2015. “CMCS Informational Bul etin: Coverage of Housing-Related Activities and Services for Individuals with Disabilities. ” https://www.medicaid.gov/federal-policy-guidance/

downloads/CIB-06-26-2015.pdf.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 2013a. “Housing: Housing for Persons With Disabilities (Section 811).”  https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=housing-disabilities-2013.pdf.

. 2013b. “HUD Handbook 4350.3: Occupancy Requirements of Subsidized Multifamily Housing Programs.”

https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/43503HSGH.PDF.

61

H U D S e c t i o n 811 P R A P ro g r a m – P ro c e s s E v a l u a t i o n

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Office of Policy Development and Research

Washington, DC 20410-6000

January 2018

Document Outline

- Executive Summary

- Background of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Program and Report Overview

- Section 811 and PRA Programs

- Section 811 PRA Program Requirements

- Interagency Partnership Agreements

- Property Selection and Contracting

- Section 811 PRA Contract Rents

- Resident Eligibility

- Funding Awards Under the 811 PRA Program Demonstration

- Evaluation of the Section 811 PRA Program

- Process Evaluation Data Sources and Limitations

- Organization of This Report

- Overview of Project Rental Assistance Demonstration Programs

- Overview of Section 811 PRA Grants

- Section 811 PRA Program Summaries

- Target Populations of the 2012 PRA Grants

- Project Rental Assistance Partnerships

- Overview of PRA Partnership Organization and Structure

- How 811 PRA Partners Collaborate

- Structures To Support Collaboration

- Communication

- Cross-Agency Entities for Program Coordination

- Financial and Staffing Resources

- Conclusion

- Property Selection

- Property Targeting Approaches: New Versus Existing Properties

- Strategies To Recruit Owners of New Properties

- Incentives for Tax Credits and Other Housing Funding Awards

- Adding New QAP Incentives for PRA

- Using Existing QAP and Other Incentives To Encourage PRA Units

- Challenges to Recruiting Owners Through QAP Incentives

- Outreach and Marketing Strategies for Existing Properties

- Procedures for Applying for 811 PRA

- Challenges in Identifying Properties for the PRA Program

- Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units

- Rental Assistance Contract Requirements

- Progress in Achieving PRA Unit Goals

- Financing Sources of Properties

- Characteristics of Units Under RAC

- Vacancy Status

- Number of Units per RAC

- Unit Bedroom Size

- Unit Accessibility

- Unit Rent and Subsidy Levels

- Targeted Rent Levels

- Contract Rent and Rental Assistance Payments by Bedroom Size

- Differences in Estimated and Actual Rental Assistance Payments

- Leveraging Set-Asides of Housing Choice Vouchers

- Conclusion

- Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units

- Outreach to PRA’s Program Target Population

- Overview of PRA Program Outreach and Referral Methods

- Oversight and Coordination of Outreach and Referrals

- Outreach and Referral Agencies

- Outreach Models Adapted From Existing Housing Programs for People With Disabilities

- Outreach Approaches Based on Target Population

- PRA Resident Application Approaches

- Centralized and Targeted Outreach and Application Models

- Use of Waiting Lists for the PRA Program

- Implications of Different Application Practices

- PRA Program Eligibility Determination

- Eligibility Based on Age and Eligibility for Medicaid Services

- Eligibility Based on Income

- Oversight of Eligibility Determination

- When To Conduct PRA Program Eligibility

- Applicants Determined Ineligible for the PRA Program

- Matching Applicants to Available Units

- Applicants Referred to PRA Units

- Applicants Who Did Not Meet Property Leasing Requirements

- Reasons Applicants Were Ineligible

- Conclusion

- Characteristics of Project Rental Assistance Applicants and Residents

- PRA Applicants

- Applicants by Referral Source

- Applicants by Housing Status

- Applicants by Disability Type

- Profile of PRA Residents

- Characteristics of PRA Households

- Household Composition

- Household Income and Assets

- Tenancy of PRA Residents

- Transfers With Program and Program Exits

- Service Provision and Coordination

- What Does Medicaid Cover and for Whom?

- Expected Services and Supports for PRA Residents

- Early Lessons on Service Delivery for PRA Residents

- Conclusions and Implications for Future Research

- Grantee Partnerships and Organizational Structures

- Target Populations

- Outreach and Referral Processes

- Housing Strategies

- Service Provision and Coordination

- Looking Ahead to Future Research and Practice

- References

- Table 2.1: Overview of 2012 Section 811 PRA Grant Awards

- Table 2.2: Target Populations of 2012 PRA Demonstration Programs

- Table 3.1: Standard Division of PRA Program Responsibilities Between State Housing and Medicaid Agencies

- Table 3.2: Grantee and Partnering Agencies and Their Previous Experience

- Table 4.1: Targeted Versus Actual Property Recruitment Strategies

- Table 4.2: QAP Preferences and Strategies To Improve Unit Production

- Table 5.1: Status of Section 811 PRA Program Implementation, June 2016

- Table 5.2: RACs by Property’s Primary Financing Mechanism, as of June 2016

- Table 5.3: Occupancy and Vacancy Status of Section 811 PRA Units by Grantee, June 2016

- Table 5.4: Section 811 PRA Units Under RAC and Under Lease by Bedroom Size, June 2016

- Table 5.5: Accessibility of Section 811 PRA Units Under RAC, as of June 2016

- Table 5.6: Contract Rent and Rental Assistance Payment by Bedroom Size, June 2016

- Table 5.7: Difference Between Average Section 811 PRA Rental Assistance From Cooperative Agreements and Actual Rental Assistance, as of June 2016

- Table 5.8: Level of Commitment to Leveraging HCVs by State, as of June 2016

- Table 6.1: Outreach and Referral Model by State

- Table 6.2: Applicants Determined Ineligible for the Section 811 PRA Program by Reason, as of June 2016

- Table 6.3: Applicants Determined Ineligible for the Section 811 PRA Program by Housing Status, as of June 2016

- Table 6.4: Households That Owners Screened Out by Housing Status, as of June 2016

- Table 7.1: PRA Applicants by Referral Source, as of June 2016

- Table 7.2: PRA Applicants by Housing Status, as of June 2016

- Table 7.3: PRA Residents as of June 2016

- Table 7.4: PRA Residents by Prior Housing Status, June 2016

- Table 7.5: Household Composition of Section 811 PRA Residents, June 2016

- Table 7.6: Characteristics of Section 811 PRA Heads of Household, June 2016

- Table 7.7: PRA Household Sources of Income, June 2016

- Table 7.8: PRA Participants by Tenancy, June 2016

- Table 8.1: Funding Sources for Services for PRA Residents

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Background of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance Program and Report Overview

Section 811 and PRA Programs

Section 811 PRA Program Requirements

Interagency Partnership Agreements

Property Selection and Contracting

Section 811 PRA Contract Rents

Resident Eligibility

Funding Awards Under the 811 PRA Program Demonstration

Evaluation of the Section 811 PRA Program

Process Evaluation Data Sources and Limitations

Organization of This Report

Overview of Project Rental Assistance Demonstration Programs

Overview of Section 811 PRA Grants

Section 811 PRA Program Summaries

Target Populations of the 2012 PRA Grants

Project Rental Assistance Partnerships

Overview of PRA Partnership Organization and Structure

How 811 PRA Partners Collaborate

Structures To Support Collaboration

Communication

Cross-Agency Entities for Program Coordination

Financial and Staffing Resources

Conclusion

Property Selection

Property Targeting Approaches: New Versus Existing Properties

Strategies To Recruit Owners of New Properties

Incentives for Tax Credits and Other Housing Funding Awards

Adding New QAP Incentives for PRA

Using Existing QAP and Other Incentives To Encourage PRA Units

Challenges to Recruiting Owners Through QAP Incentives

Outreach and Marketing Strategies for Existing Properties

Procedures for Applying for 811 PRA

Challenges in Identifying Properties for the PRA Program

Project Rental Assistance Properties and Units

Rental Assistance Contract Requirements

Progress in Achieving PRA Unit Goals

Financing Sources of Properties

Characteristics of Units Under RAC

Vacancy Status

Number of Units per RAC

Unit Bedroom Size

Unit Accessibility

Unit Rent and Subsidy Levels

Targeted Rent Levels

Contract Rent and Rental Assistance Payments by Bedroom Size

Differences in Estimated and Actual Rental Assistance Payments

Leveraging Set-Asides of Housing Choice Vouchers

Conclusion

Identifying Project Rental Assistance Residents and Matching Them to PRA Units

Outreach to PRA’s Program Target Population

Overview of PRA Program Outreach and Referral Methods

Oversight and Coordination of Outreach and Referrals

Outreach and Referral Agencies

Outreach Models Adapted From Existing Housing Programs for People With Disabilities

Outreach Approaches Based on Target Population

PRA Resident Application Approaches

Centralized and Targeted Outreach and Application Models

Use of Waiting Lists for the PRA Program

Implications of Different Application Practices

PRA Program Eligibility Determination

Eligibility Based on Age and Eligibility for Medicaid Services

Eligibility Based on Income

Oversight of Eligibility Determination

When To Conduct PRA Program Eligibility

Applicants Determined Ineligible for the PRA Program

Matching Applicants to Available Units

Applicants Referred to PRA Units

Applicants Who Did Not Meet Property Leasing Requirements

Reasons Applicants Were Ineligible

Conclusion

Characteristics of Project Rental Assistance Applicants and Residents

PRA Applicants

Applicants by Referral Source

Applicants by Housing Status

Applicants by Disability Type

Profile of PRA Residents

Characteristics of PRA Households

Household Composition

Household Income and Assets

Tenancy of PRA Residents

Transfers With Program and Program Exits

Service Provision and Coordination

What Does Medicaid Cover and for Whom?

Expected Services and Supports for PRA Residents

Early Lessons on Service Delivery for PRA Residents

Conclusions and Implications for Future Research

Grantee Partnerships and Organizational Structures

Target Populations

Outreach and Referral Processes

Housing Strategies

Service Provision and Coordination

Looking Ahead to Future Research and Practice

References

Table 2.1: Overview of 2012 Section 811 PRA Grant Awards

Table 2.2: Target Populations of 2012 PRA Demonstration Programs

Table 3.1: Standard Division of PRA Program Responsibilities Between State Housing and Medicaid Agencies

Table 3.2: Grantee and Partnering Agencies and Their Previous Experience

Table 4.1: Targeted Versus Actual Property Recruitment Strategies

Table 4.2: QAP Preferences and Strategies To Improve Unit Production

Table 5.1: Status of Section 811 PRA Program Implementation, June 2016

Table 5.2: RACs by Property’s Primary Financing Mechanism, as of June 2016

Table 5.3: Occupancy and Vacancy Status of Section 811 PRA Units by Grantee, June 2016

Table 5.4: Section 811 PRA Units Under RAC and Under Lease by Bedroom Size, June 2016

Table 5.5: Accessibility of Section 811 PRA Units Under RAC, as of June 2016

Table 5.6: Contract Rent and Rental Assistance Payment by Bedroom Size, June 2016

Table 5.7: Difference Between Average Section 811 PRA Rental Assistance From Cooperative Agreements and Actual Rental Assistance, as of June 2016

Table 5.8: Level of Commitment to Leveraging HCVs by State, as of June 2016

Table 6.1: Outreach and Referral Model by State

Table 6.2: Applicants Determined Ineligible for the Section 811 PRA Program by Reason, as of June 2016

Table 6.3: Applicants Determined Ineligible for the Section 811 PRA Program by Housing Status, as of June 2016

Table 6.4: Households That Owners Screened Out by Housing Status, as of June 2016

Table 7.1: PRA Applicants by Referral Source, as of June 2016

Table 7.2: PRA Applicants by Housing Status, as of June 2016

Table 7.3: PRA Residents as of June 2016

Table 7.4: PRA Residents by Prior Housing Status, June 2016

Table 7.5: Household Composition of Section 811 PRA Residents, June 2016

Table 7.6: Characteristics of Section 811 PRA Heads of Household, June 2016

Table 7.7: PRA Household Sources of Income, June 2016

Table 7.8: PRA Participants by Tenancy, June 2016

Table 8.1: Funding Sources for Services for PRA Residents