What is the name of your PHA (A1)
Housing Authority Of The City Of Pine Bluff
Jonesboro Urban Renewal & Housing Authority
Housing And Community Development Tucson
Housing Authority Of The City & County Of San Francisco
Housing Authority Of The City Of Los Angeles
County Of Contra Costa Housing Authority
Housing Authority Of The County Of San Mateo
Housing Authority Of The County Of San Bernardino
Housing Authority Of The County Of Riverside
Housing Authority Of The City Of San Buenaventura
Housing Authority Of Fhe County Santa Clara
Housing Authority Of The City Of San Luis Obispo
Housing Authority Of The City Of Santa Paula
Housing Authority Of The City Of Santa Barbara
City Of Oceanside Community Development Comm
Community Service Department Of El Dorado County
Housing Authority Of The City Of Norwalk
Housing Authority Of The City Of New Britain
Housing Authority Of The City Of Meriden
Housing Authority Of The City Of Danbury
Connecticut Department Of Social Services
Housing Authority Of The City Of Atlanta Georgia
Housing Authority Of The County Of Dekalb, Georgia
The Housing Authority Of City Of East St. Louis
Housing Authority Of The City Of Danville, Illinois
Housing Authority Of The City Of Rock Island
Housing Authority Of The City Of Waukegan
Housing Authority Of The County Of Williamson
Housing Authority Of The County Of Lake, Illinois
Housing Authority Of The City Of North Chicago, Illinois
Housing Authority Of The City Of New Albany
Department Of Housing & Community Development
Housing Authority Of Prince Georges County
Housing Authority Of St. Mary's County, Md
Carroll County Housing And Community Development
Maryland Department Of Housing And Community Development
Public Housing Agency Of The City Of St. Paul
Public Housing Authority For The City Of Minneapolis
Dakota County Community Development Agency
Olmstead County Housing And Redevelopment Authority
Metropolitan Council Housing And Redevelopment Authority
Scott County Community Development Agency
Housing Authority Of Kansas City, Missouri
Housing Authority Of The City Of Charlotte
Housing Authority Of The City Of High Point
Housing Authority Of The City Of Concord
Housing Authority Of The City Of Greensboro
Housing Authority Of The City Of Winston-Salem
Housing Authority Of The Town Of Laurinburg
Eastern Carolina Human Services Agency, Inc.
Twin Rivers Opportunities, Inc. Housing Authority
Mountain Projects, Inc. Housing Authority
Western Piedmont Council Of Governments Housing Agency
Housing Authority Of The Township Of Lakewood
Housing Authority Of The City Of Las Cruces
Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority
Housing Authority Of The City Of Oklahoma City
Housing Authority Of The City Of Muskogee
Housing And Urban Renewal Agency Of Polk County
Housing Authority Of The County Of Dauphin
Housing Authority Of The County Of Armstrong
Housing Authority Of The County Of Luzerne
Municipality Of Bayamon Housing Authority
Municipality Of Aguas Buenas Housing Authority
Charleston County Housing And Redevelopment Authority
Metropolitan Development & Housing Agency
Housing Authority Of The City Of Dallas, Texas
Housing Authority Of The City Of Beaumont
Tarrant County Housing Assistance Office
Central Texas Council Of Governments Housing Authority
Texoma Council Of Governments Housing Authority
Housing Authority Of The County Of Salt Lake
Alexandria Redevelopment & Housing Authority
Danville Redevelopment & Housing Authority
Roanoke Redevelopment & Housing Authority
Harrisonburg Redevelopment & Housing Authority
Fairfax County Redevelopment & Housing Authority
Arlington County Department Of Human Services
Prince William County Office Of Housing And Community Development
Housing Authority Of The City Of Vancouver
Housing Authority Of The City Of Kennewick
Housing Authority Of The City Of Pasco And Franklin County
Housing Authority Of The City Of Spokane
Housing Authority Of The City Of Milwaukee
Wisconsin Housing & Economic Development Authority
Housing Authority Of The City Of Huntington

Reasons serve youth: Specified text
We had always intended to serve 10 of the 100 vouchers for youth but the PCWA had difficulty determining who to refer.
PCWA subcontracted an agency to get FUP-youth referrals. PCWa does not have manpower to make FUP-family referrals
Non-profit social service agencies serve homeless youth and strongly supported the PHA and PCWA application for FUP-Youth.
We were hoping to pick up add'l FUP vouchers through the 2010 NOFA.
The City and County of Roanoke retain the detail assessment of youth aging out of foster care
A major local supportive services funder, Building Changes, encouraged local PHAs to apply for FUP vouchers

PCWA-provided training: Specified text
Intermountain Center for Human Development
The cases cannot be lumped together, there are different characteristics to each case.
We've had meetings/discussions, but no formal trainings
During the joint application process these areas were discussed and dissemainated to Kent County Housing Commission staff
We have not served FUP youth in several years but are setting up meeting with our partners early November. Our waiting list has just opened.
We met with both agencies early in the process to development forms and discuss the program
These issues were worked out in an MOU, and our agency provided training to them, but not vice versa.
we had an all partners orientation at program onset
The only training from DSHS was regarding the MOU agreement. The Housing Authority spends most of its time training the DSHS staff on an ongoing basis regarding eligibility and compliance.

Staff provided PCWA with training on: Specified text
We attend weekly child protection team meetings where families are approved for FUP vouchers
LCHA MAKES CONTACT MONTHLY TO CHECK ON REFERALS
provided training on how to be a good renter
FHA requests case managers to accompany youth to the briefings and orientations.
No formal training, per se, but youth workers attend Sec. 8 briefings w/their clients, and do hsg search w/them. We've had meetings/discussions w/DCF staff about requirements, etc, and our Admin Plan spells out program requirements.
DHS staff have attended cllient orientation sessions
Training provided when DSS have new person on staff
Supporting FUP clients having trouble retaining their voucher
Most of the staff of partnering agencies are new. Our list has been closed for 3 years and we are setting up a meeting early November to share information regarding the FUP program

Apart from regular meetings, how often PHA communicates with PCWA: Specified text
Depends on vouchers avialable. Currently 100% leased so less communication than when actively referring and leasing.
We communicate by email and telephone when there is a new referral or an issue with someone on the program.

How often PHA communicates with PCWA: Specified text
works with the housing advocate on every applicant, then every briefing and interview
as needed based on referrals and information needed

Does PHA provide: Specified text
Copy of State Housing Services Directory including a list of Low Income Housing Tax Credit Properties, on-line housing search website, updated list of avaialble units.
prepare rental portfolios with voucher holders. Rental portfolios are similar to resumes
refer to website gosection8.com and socialserve.com
Receive the same info as given at regular HCV briefings in addition to FUP info
educate about the benefits of low-poverty areas
Again, we are arranging a meeting with our partner agencies in early November. Cannot answer these questions.
We provide lists of schools, buslines and we provide a resource booklet for area services

What does counseling include: Specified text
Move process and how to figure rent subsidy
rules and regulations of program, portability option
b, c, & d above are provided to FUPY FSS participants
We provide a mini Ready to Rent workshop for all FUP
Information about credit counseling and tenant mediation services available in the community

Reasons for youth to be terminated before 18 months of HAP is exhausted: Specified text
none have terminated yet, but none have reached 18-months on program yet
youth voluntarily terminate lease and voucher. Usually go back to living with family
We have no historical data since this is our first award and all youths are still on the program.

Factors affecting ability to administer FUP vouchers to youth: Specified text
assistance needed to understand rights and how to be a good tenant
We don't have project-based FUP vouchers.

Add any comments about serving youth with FUP
Eliminate the 18 month time limit, please.
This is a very worthwile program serving an underserved population.
Ensure that partnering providers are following up on youth and are responsive to their needs.
question B69 would not accept my answer of 36 months
Only to reiterate that the 18-month limitation should definitely be extended and there is a need for additonal funding for supportive services. Also AB12 has significantly changed the FUP program administration between our PHA and Child Welfare Svcs re FUP youth
#B7 - Per our MOU, supportive services and housing search assistance is also provided by our contracted provider, First Place for Youth. #B16 & #B17- VHA had set aside a specific number of vouchers for FUP-youth but in order to utilize all the vouchers in a timely manner, a portion of FUP-youth vouchers were issued to FUP-families. In addition, none of our FUP-youth have exhausted their 18-months of HAP yet. We leased up our first FUP-youth in December 2011. Therefore, VHA does not have data for questions #B38-#B42 at this time.
The FUP voucher should only be authorized if the family remains intact and stable. We find that a family will receive an FUP voucher but then lose the children but keep the voucher. Generally families are not case managed as they should be and then end up losing their kids regardless of having adequate housing. Case management needs to be more intense and if a the head of household has his or her children removed, then the FUP voucher should be removed and given to another eligible family. Also youth aging out should not have a time limit. The only requirement should be that he or she will be employed or in school while participating. If the youth fails to go to school or become employed, then remove the family from the program. The 18 month time limit is not enough plus a youth making minimum wage may never be able to pay rent and utilities.
Strongly suggest that the 18 month time limit is eliminated !!
Our only concer is the amount of time it is taking to get referals.
Student income rule is an issue because some are not independent of their foster parents as guardians that claim them on their taxes so we have to ask for the foster parents income and then they don't qualify because they are over income.
Our housing agency don't really handle youth vouchers. Maybe one day we will because I feel its important we try to assist these youth as much as we possibly can, because of the many challenges they face outside of housing.
The 18 month time frame is completely unrealistic. Cooperating agencies spend time getting these youth ready to move in, finding furniture, turning on utilities, making them a home and then we take it all away in 18 months. Most adults can not turn their financial situation around in 18 months to be able to be self sufficient, it is unfair and irresponsibile to expect that a youth aging out of foster care or any youth could.
The ideal situation is a youth who is in school and working part-time but these kids have so many other issues that without a lot of coordination from both partners and almost constant vigilence they do not succeed. Most do not have the maturity to live in an apt on their own, it is a lot of responsibilty and most have had no good role models in their families or family support to succeed.
One of our 8 subcontractors has said that the teaching of self-sufficiency, budgeting & education should be a stronger focus. Would love to see a connection to FSS or a mini-version added as a requirement. As an MTW Agency, we have implemented a Youth in Transition Program to follow-up w/those FUP AOP youth whose 18 mo. time limit has ended. This program does have a FSS-like requirement,and youth are eligible for 36 months of housing subsidy. Another of our 8 subcontractors has said that so far they have 1 client, who has been very successful in our MTW Youth in Transition Program. HUD should extend the time past 18 months for the youth.
They are a challange to deal with because most of them do not have any income and that hinders them from becoming self sufficient. The 18 months is a problem with landlords because if they want to move they must sign a new years lease and we will only pay for 6 months for the remainder of the 18 months. Monitoring the 18 months does not coincide with HUD requirements and the last 6 months presents a big problem for PHA's.
It is my opinion that the time limit for assistance should be long enough for the youth to acquire a degree or a trade
The 18-month is generally supported by our partner-agency staff who work with homeless youth, who say that providing rent assistance too long can foster too great a dependency. They say the youth should be working from the start to get off assistance. Also the short time limit guarantees turnover so more youth can benefit from FUP. However, the 18-month limit is short for some youth with many barriers to self-sufficiency. We recommend that for individual cases, the PHA and PCWA could jointly approve extending the youth-FUP voucher for up to 6 months, for a total of 24 months. That would also allow an initial one-year lease to be renewed for a second full year.
MPHA strongly advocates for the elimination of the 18 month time limit on housing assistance. Does not provide youth with enough time to reach self-sufficiency.
Based on current policy, this program doesn't seem effective for youth aging out of foster care. HUD should mandate not only that the PCWA provide services, but youth and families should be required for at least the initial year of participation.
Additional training to PHA staff and PCWA's staff
Our agency leased the first youth in 2011, therefore, none have reached the 18-month limit. 1 left the program after 4 months - more case management is necessary to enable them to maintain their housing, applies to families also.
While the 18 - month period has not yet caused an issue for us, administratively it would be easier if the end of FUP eligibility coincided with an annual recertification (e.g. 24 months).
Being able to serve Youth under the FUP Program is great opportunity for this population the youth receive services and permanent housing.
FUP-Y do not seem to be receiving ongoing support once they get a FUP-Y voucher. They have trouble paying their rent portions and abiding by the lease terms. FUP-Y participants often vacate their units before their lease is up.
Youth transitioning out of Foster Care is a very big topic and issue in our community right now.
It is often difficult for the housing authority to keep track of the youth and we don't have the staff resources to follow up. Increased support for youth from PCWA is needed, but don't know if they necessarily have the resources either. It is sometimes difficult to coordinate security deposits, utility establishment, etc. for some youth, as the housing authority does not have funds available for such use.
We do not know why more youth do not take advantage of this program. We get very few referrals and would love to have more.
The 18 month time limit for youth is bewildering to all. In the regular HCV program, families in the self-sufficiency program are given 5-7 years to become self-sufficient. Youth who have aged out of foster care or run away from foster care have all faced major barriers in their lives and to expect them to be self-sufficient after 18 months is untenable. In our community, the PHA, which is an MTW agency, is making non-voucher, local rental assistance available to all youth after the 18 month time limit so long as that youth is making progress towards stability. Additionally, youth who are disabled will soon have a preference for a permanent voucher after the 18 month time limit expires.
If FUP youth have other members in their household, such as a child or spouse they should be able to remain on the program without a limitation
Our efforts with FUP-Y were very limited. Once we were not awarded the additional vouchers, the program fell into dis-use. Though I have let the Child Welfare agencies know the service is still available, I have not actively pursued this population. Our FUP voucher allocation is full and our waiting list is at 14. This means families are waiting up to a year before receiving their FUP voucher. Without additional FUP vouchers, we are unwilling to do a set-aside for this population.
This is a challenging group to work with. It is necessary work, but at times we are hamstrung by the program itself. The 18 month time limit doesn't fit with landlords that only do 12 month leases and it is not enough time for these youth to reach a level of stability. The time commitment involved with working with this program is significantly greater than with the regular HCV program. More resources need to be provided to us to be able to truly serve this population in a way that is effective.
Ongoing communication is needed. I worked for CPS for 12 years so I have advantage of program procedures but a meeting requirement is need for the PHA and CWHA.
The number of youth referrals has been low.
fup is a good program, help prevent homelessness, benefit to the community
would like a forum for sharing best practices. The questions on this survey gave me lots of ideas I hadn't considered before as options.
we have not had very many youth served on the program for a few reasons. First, we did not prioritize this group on our application until that last round because we don't feel that 18 months is a reasonable amount of time to give a youth a voucher. Time limited rental assistance is appropriate for this population but it needs to be longer. we also have multiple other ways that we serve youth with services so feel that our other programs, totalling 70 units of subsidized housing/rental assistance for young adults is a better way to address their needs. Now that we do have some FUP youth vouchers, our contracted service provider has only referred in a few youth, and just two qualified. They have also referred in some youth with children, so they received a regular FUP voucher. I think the need is real and this population is underserved, but FUP youth vouchers do not address the need adequately. Thank you to HUD for researching this important topic!
There is always a need for deposit/application fees for these clients.
This is the Housing Authority's first award for providing vouchers to FUP households including youth aging out of foster care. We currently have 7 FUP youth leased with their 18-month expiration period starting March 2013 through January 2014. Our DCFC (local Children's Administration office) contact changed in August 2013 and we learned that there has been a disconnect with the case managers for this program. We are back on track and continue to keep the dialogue going with the new staff at the DCFS office that provides our agency with referrals and ongoing assistance for the youth. We will know more about the challenges the youth face as their housing assistance ends. If HUD would allow the voucher to remain with the youth as they need the assistance, we would certainly advocate for that. Thank you.
Our biggest challenge is having youth identified who qualify for this program. The referrals we receive are sporadic. Some of our foster youth are being served with other local dollars through an agency who can provide extensive case management services.
There is a lack of funding for administrative and supportive services for FUP eligible youth and families. We are seeing an increase in success for FUP eligible youth in regards to obtaining employment, furthering higher education and job retention.

Why has PHA never served youth: Specified text
we provide preference to youth transferring out of foster care and referred by human services agency through Independent Living Program (ILP)
Our FUP award only allows us to serve FUP eligible families.
FUP was awarded in the 1990's for the purpose of re-uniting families with their children. It was not awarded for foster youth.
Our agency has never been contacted by the PCWA in our area.
NAHA was awarded FUP vouchers in first year of availability. They were designatd for Family at risk and not FUP/Youth like current FUP vouchers. We have applied in last 2 rounds but not selected in lottery for youth FUP
(1) 18 months is not long enough to gain stable housing
FUP awarded under old regs where FUP Youth was not an option
All FUP voucers are utilized. We have an MOU with CYFD -State of New Mexico and a preferance for our youth aging out of the system.
we have a preference for regular vouchers for youth aging out of the foster care system
YMHA recently added a preference to keep the Waiting List open for referrals from the PCWA to obtain a regular voucher. This occurred in April, 2012.
We have not had any FUP eligible youth apply or have been notified that there is a need in Highland County for this type of assistance.
Single, non-elderly, non-disabled applicants go to the bottom of the list based on our local policy preferences
YOUTH NEVER RESPOND TO CORRESPONDENCE FROM PHA

Increase likelihood that PHA would serve youth with FUP: Specified text
referral received from Human Services Agency
If the admin fees were more in line with the actual cost of administering FUP.
We will house a youth if refered by the PCWA. They have refered only families thus far.
Will serve FUP eligible youths if referred by PCWA
If all FUP vouchers were flexible and eligible for youth
If the PCWA referred an FUP-Youth and we had vouchers available for them at the time. Right now, all of the referrals have been for FUP families and we are at the limit of FUP vouchers.
FUP vouchers have been very hard to lease and no additional FUP specific vouchers are needed by our agency
If our partner referred eligible youth to our housing authority
Funding for staff to assist youth with case managemen
Referral received or population to be served
funding availability for additional staff to assist with program maintenance
WE HAVE REQUESTED LOCAL PCWA TO ASSIST YOUTH COMPLETEING APPLICATIONS AND KEEPING APPOINTMENTS.

Add any comments about serving youth with FUP
Additional information about the program
We have a good working relationship with Human Services Agency. We utilize existing FUP vouchers to assist FUP families. We provide foster youth transitioning out of foster care with preference priority on our wait list
Our agency has reserved 10 regular HCV vouchers for youth aging out of foster care. We would also like to use our existing FUP allocation to serve FUP eligible youth but are limited to serving only FUP eligible families via the guidelines established in the Federal Register for our grant.
The DCF youth population is increasing in CT. Additional FUP - eligible youth dollars would help assist this increased population.
PCWA has not referred a youth FUP to our agency yet.
Our FUP is referred by DCHS - the referrals are with clients trying to get family back together. They have never addressed foster youths. Although currently, KCHA has a few, none are close to age requirements.
To the best of my knowledge we have never had a referral made to our agency for a youth aging out of foster care.
It is not logical to think that a young adult aging out of foster care can get it all together within 18 motnhs. They then lose their assistance which is not a realistic expectation for this population.
We are unable to be responsive to the NOFA because the PW doesn't have funding to continue the required case manageement services nor the supportive services so we are unable to serve the youth.
The need for FUP specific vouchers in our community has declined. We only have two FUP vouchers and only one is currently leasd to a eligible family. DSS has no one to refer for the remaining FUP voucher tht we have.
The agency and the pcwa have a good working relationship and we are willing to serve youth in the FUP program.
Local child welfare agencies need more training to be made aware of the opportunity to serve eligible youth aging out of foster care.
the 18 month time limit creates a discriminatory practice as no other voucher holders have time limits
I would love to serve this particular population, however the time limit and the difficulties we face with getting our local child welfare agency on board would be quite a burden to overcome.
Akron Metropolitan Housing Authority was not awarded vouchers in FY09. We did however, follow the framework of the grant and are continuing to work with our PCWA through our MOU and County Youth and Permanency Task Force. We have local preference points for aging out youth who were in the custody of the PCWA. Currently there are 17 youth in HCVP and 6 in Public Housing. Working closely with the PCWA we know the importance of developing a relationship with the youth from the moment they apply. The reality is that neither the housing authority nor the PCWA has staff funding to provide case management services and resources to “bridge the gap” for apartment deposits and case management. With additional resources we could monitor and develop relationships and better communicate with the youth in our housing for more positive outcomes.
The Licking MHA is very interested in serving this population! We have not been approached before and would love to learn how to do this.
We have inquired in the past and have been led to believe there is not a population of this need in our county. Also, our referrals are received for families who are in danger of losing their children due to lack of adequate or safe housing. It was our understanding this was the purpose of our FUP vouchers.
If HUD granted specific funding for Youth aging out of foster care under FUP, then we would be interested. Currently, all single, non-elderly, non-disabled are at the bottom of all waiting lists with no exception for youths aging out of foster care.
NO LOCAL PREFERENCE BECAUSE YOUTH WERE INCLUDED IN 2ND RUND OF 08/09 FUP FUNDING. WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH APPROX. 5 FUP YOUTH REFERRALS. WE ARE WORKING CLOSE WITH OUR LIASON AT THE CHILDREN'S BUREAU TO MAKE SURE THEY FOLLOW UP AND ASSIST THE YOUTH IN KEEPING THEIR ELIGIBILITY ELIGIBILITY & BRIEFING INTERVIEWS.
Applied for FUPY funding and was disapproved because a line on the funding form was not filled in. The rest of the application appeared to be fine.
need more vouchers for both youth and families
I do believe that we would consider serving such youth if we knew more about it. HUD has not provided much information about the FUP Program in recent years.
We received FUP vouchers many years ago before youth aging out of Foster Care was a targeted population. This is the primary reason we have not receievd any referrals.
In my experience the CPS referring agency leadership is well aware of the FUP resource however; the implementation staff are not well aware of the resource or how to initiate a referral to a PHA. PHAs are dependent on the referring agency to identify and refer the client for eligibity consideration to the PHA. As a result this creates a situation where PHAs are responsible for the administration and success of the program but not in a position where they can control the outcome. In my experience the FUP program has created a very challenging situation for PHAs. Referring agency staff need to become better informed about the available resource to make the program more effective.
I think it is a poor idea unless, there a a lot of resources and help available to help FUP youth to mature. It would require a full time job\education coach and extra funds for educational program not available in the community for free.
The local PCWA has not referred any FUP eligible youths. This is the only reason we have not served these households.

Name of PCWA that PHA said they partner with (B5)
Los Angeles County Department Of Children And Family Services
Tompkins County Department Of Social Services
State Of Vermont, Department Of Children And Families
WA State Department Of Social And Health Services, Children's Administration Division
County Of San Diego, Health And Human Services Agency, Child Welfare Services
Delaware Dept. Of Services For Children, Youth And Their Families
County Of Santa Barbara Department Of Social Services
Roanoke City & Roanoke County Deparments Of Social Services
San Mateo County Children And Families Services
Sonoma County Human Services, Family Youth And Children Division
Tri-County Of Plumas, Tehama And Lassen County Social Services
County Of Santa Cruz Health And Human Services Department
Department Of Social & Health Services, Division Of Childrens Administration
Forsyth County Department Of Social Services
Texas Department Of Children Protective Services
The Children's Network Of Southwest Florida
Oregon Department Of Human Services Child Welfare, District 2
Kenosha County Division Of Children And Family Services
Department Of Children And Families, Framingham, MA
Mecklenburg County Department Of Social Services
Washington State Department Of Social And Health Services - Division Of Child And Family Services
Department of Social and Health Services-Washington State
Colorado Department Of Human Services Division Of Child Welfare Services
Monterey County Department Of Family And Children Services
Ramsey County Community Human Services Department
Armstrong Co Children Youth & Family Services
Massachusetts Department of Children and Families
Solano County Health and Social Services-Child Welfare Services
Texas Department of Family and Protective Services
Kern County Department Of Human Services
Stanislaus County Community Services Agency
Boulder County Housing and Human Services
Fulton County Department of Family and Children Services
Arapahoe County Human Services - Division of Children, Adult and Family Services
Fairfax County Department Of Family Services
Lake County Department of Job and Family Services
Stark Count Department Of Job & Family Services-Children Services Division
West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources
The City Of Alexandria Division Of Services
Kent County Department of Human Services
State of Hawaii Department of Human Services
State of Vermont- Department of Children and Families
Napa County Health & Human Services Agency

Describe state's child welfare system: Specified text
State Supervised with community based care administering
Florida contracts with Community-Based Cae Lead Agencies for child welfare services.

Name PCWA said they are completing the survey on behalf of
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles
MA Dept. of Social Services Lynn Area Office
Plumas County Community Development Commission
Work with Tarrant County Housing Authority
Home Forward (formerly Housing Authority of Portland)
Housing Authority of the County of Armstrong
MA Department of Housing and Community Developement
Fairfax County Department of Housing and Community Development
Alexandria Redevelopment and Housing Authority (ARHA)
Prince George's County Department of Housing and Community Development

Does PCWA or provider provide youth preparing to age out: Specified text
Indep living skills, other vocational supports.
Intense one on one search for housing as it is very competitive and costly to rent in San Mateo County
Work with area colleges and dorm resources
transitional independent living housing coordinator
The children also have an independent specialist
Help youth complete the FUP application and refer youth to HA
Youth receive additional supports through the Independent Living Program
Youth are provided with housing information and assistance specific to their individual needs. This is a very rural county and housing choices/options are scarce.
provide follow-up services which builds relationships with landlords that can assist future clients locate housing
We assist youth in completing & submitting application & getting other required paperwork together for their orientation
There is a class in our Independent Living Program focusing on housing and how to obtain housing
Take youth through neighborhoods to look for 'for rent' properties not listed online or in other publications.
The Social Worker helps the youth in securing a unit.

Lease-up/move-in assistance: Specified text
Not completely sure about all the aspects as our Independent Living Coordinator handles case management and supportive service delivery.
Assist with rent and utility paymnts if needed
work with community to ensure youths have an identified mentor and or life coach as well as other natural and familial support in place.
Youth can receive funds for housing start-up related expenses through the Independent Living Program
If they are eligible they are given a stipend for completing a course of Independent Living Skills training.
financial assistance for clothes and miscellaneous items, including items needed to start employment

How PCWA identifies FUP-eligible youth: Specified text
Youth are referred by their assigned court social worker, if the youth is planning to emancipte from foster care.
Youth are referred by our county managed and licensed foster care system.
Youth are referred by youth services at our agency
The primary identification of eligible youth is done before the youth leaves care so they have a housing option right out of foster care.
Youth are identified by their social workers.
our own agency does most of the referring
We only provide FUP vouchers to youth in our custody who are leaving foster care due to aging out.
Youth are referred by their case workers
Most referrals are from Avondale Youth Center which is part of our agency.
referred through transitional conferences , social workers(current/former) ILp providers and Employment and Educational specialists
Youth are referred by our agencies social workers
Youth exiting foster care through SC social services may be referred to FUP
assigned social worker staff refer youth to FUP
The individual is a young adult (between 18-21 years of age) that exited Foster Care after turning 16 or transition into adulthood from the Foster Care system
youth who are receiving transitional independent living services from child welfare agency
Independent Living staff at the CBC or the subcontracted provider agency identify the youths who are referred.
We identify eligible youth who are in the care of child welfare
Referred by Independent Living service provider
Youth are referred internally from Youth and Family Services Division, which is under DSS umbrella
Foster care workers are our agency make referrals
By Comunity based agency I am referring to the child welfare lead agency
youth are in our foster care system, on voluntary foster care agreements.
Youth are referred by DCF and Outreach staff
Emancipated Youth Social Workers are aware of program and make referrals
We work with youth when they are in foster care, and continue to work with them, if FUP is appropriate.
The agency after care social worker also refer the youth to FUP Section 8 housing of Housing Authority
PWA Independent Living Case management staff
Agency refers youth based on individual needs assessment
youth are identified from existing foster care case loads
Most youth are self-referred, referred by family members, or identified upon emancipation as FUP eligible by our agency

PCWA action if referred youth ineligible for Section 8: Specified text
The two youth who did not lease-up had not completed the process to apply and lost contact
provide community support and cast management services
Work with private landlords if youth has sufficient income
Work with aftercare THPplus housing programs
We have not had this experience but the options identified would be our next steps
Lee Coutny Housing Authority informs the youth and the agency if they youth does not meet the eligibility criteria.
Give the youth information on how to appeal Home Forward's decision if the youth feels that is in their best interest to pursue
Notice and info is given to the youth's worker.
Provide a smaller housing subsidy offered by the program
So far, all youth referred received their vouchers. The items checked above are what we would do if the youth were not eligible. We already know FUP eligiblity guidelines, so refer those who qualify when there are available FUP slots.
The Housing Authority notifies the youth and their case manager who then looks for other options

PCWA does to assist FUP-eligible youth: Specified text
one on one community worker to assist if need be or case manager from aftercare
Our contracted service provider for youth in transition works closely with youth in need of housing by doing all of the above including online and newspaper searches for rental uits and accompanies them on visits to potential housing.
take youth out to find rental properties not listed online or in other publications, such as the newspaper. Many rental properties only have the 'for rent' sign in the yard.
Social Worker helps them until they get a unit and through the process.
The FUP Liaison does not work directly with the youth..their individual case managers work with them

Counseling includes: Specified text
Unsure as to all the info provided, but it is extensive.
Ongoing case management support and community referrals
through our independent living program and transitional conferences
Information about housing and renting an apartment, budgeting for utilities.
Financial counseling through local credit union

How often someone from PCWA has contact with youth during 18 months: Specified text
Indep Living Social Worker works with the FUP youth on a regular basis. Face to face and phone check-ins driven by needs, plan and individual.
ongoing contracted case management support
Contact is determined by need and the youth
We have in person contact with open emancipated youth cases at least once per month, but it is usually more frequent. Our contracted workers all meet with our youth on average twice per month, sometimes more as necessary. Phone contact is frequent

Circumstance to contact owner/landlord: Specified text
To assist contracted casemanager support the youth if requested
I don't know because I don't work with youth directly.
To determine if the landlord will accept a voucher for payment from our agency until the next date checks for payment are issued.
This is a question for the ILP or AB12 social worker

Most common reason youth voluntarily leave program before 18 months of HAP exhausted: Specified text
youth left not needing the continuation of the subsidy
All youth who have leased up have not left the program to my knowledge
To live with a partner who cannot qualify to live with them in FUP housing.
ONe youth has been referred within the last year. The approval is currently in a pending status as it is being evaluated.
Possibly non compliance of rules and policy. However turnover rate for youth in this program is very low.
Have not yet had a youth leave before 18 months.
Youth currently in program; have not completed
We can not recall an instance of a youth voluntarily leaving before the 18th month period is exhausted.
we haven't had a youth voluntarily leave the program before the 18 months have ended
We have only begun using FUP vouchers for youth in the past few months. None of our youth have yet left the program.
They don't usually voluntarily leave, they get evicted
Do not follow the Tenant rules and are evicted.
dismissal from youth services by our agency

Type of transitional counseling: Specified text
Help in transition coordination as necessary.
Planning on next steps after the 18 months
THPplus and other self identified housing options
Our youth haven't reached the 18 month limit yet so this is what we plan to offer as they transition from the voucher
This is not yet established since none are near the 18-month limit.
Our youth in the FUP program are not yet near their 18 months, but we will provide all of the above services as necessary and appropriate.
This question can be better answered byt the AB12 social worker or other agency case manager

Former youth contact/return homeless: Specified text
THPplus, short term emergency housing ideas, youth homeless shelters, transitional housing such as Daybreak for transitional age youth
When it is a crisis we need to help the youth now.
housing coordinator at contracted agency
they are told about the contracted agency that handles the Transitional Independent Living Program which is also the way they can re-enter.
The can receive cash assistance and a housing subsidy from the program
There is subsidized housing in our county for those diagnosed with severe mental illness and there are agencies who provide assistane with security deopsits and rental assistance for limited timeframes. Some are also eligible to use PRC

Specified text
FUP vouchers are not currently available so youth are currently not being referred for FUP
Aftercare and ESS services available to the youth until 24 years of age
The agency assures all youths aging out of foster care has secured housing prior to the ir 18th birthday. older young adults 18-23 who are eligible to receivie Independent Living financial services receive funding to secure housing
youth are given a packet of community resources.
Contact is usually directly from youth- referred to any community resources available
Youth received housing advocacy, cash assistance and a housing subsidy until they turn 21
Youth from other counties receive emergency assistance and are referred to their county of dependence for reentry if eligible
we assist youth financially with rent, utilities, security deposits, short-term hotel stays, Job Corp, transitional housing programs, subsidized housing for mentally ill adults, or any available community financial assisance through other agencies
youth can only re-enter care within 60 days of discharge
This question should be answered by the AB12 social worker

Housing options available: Specified text
not certain multiple outcomes, better asked of social worker.
Youth who opt in to remain in foster care beyond age 18 are placed in semi independent living programs or in their own apartmetns and receive independent living stipend. They continue to be under the supervision of the local agency.
IDCFS provides housing advocacy, cash assistance and a housing subsidy as well as an opportunity to re-enter DCFS care until they turn 21.
I am not clear about the population you are interested in with this question. Would these be youth who remain voluntarily in our agency care after age 18,?
Other than our FUP vouchers, the waiting list for LMHA is more than 6 months. Extended Housing offeres subsidized housing to those with a severe mental illness, but the waiting list is more than 6 mo. Transitional living providers hesitant to take youth

Factors that affect PCWA's ability to administer FUP: Specified text
Insufficient FUP vouchers for transitional youth needing housing resources
Chafee services are underfunded and end at 21. FUP can end at 22. Disconnect
Many landlords are hesitant to rent to youth age 18-21, do not want to take the LMHA voucher, or require the youth to pass a credit check

Add any comments about serving youth with FUP
-Voucher should be extended, if youth are attending school.
2 years or 24 months is a better fit timewise for leases and certificate programs at technical colleges.
The significant lack of financial resources to assist homeless youth with first/last/security deposit is a critical challenge. Issuing FUP vouchers on an 'as needed' basis so that they are always available would be the solution to this growing crisis.
Our agency identifies youth for FUP vouchers before they leave care and begin the paperwork process.
the 18 month time frame should be extended to allow youth to become stabil enough to become self sufficent )work or school. Further youth should have more time to lease up given the rental market of today in the San Mateo County area,
We think that the 18 month time limit for youth vouchers is a short time line for youth with a lot of challenges to reach stability and try to find housing options after 18 months. There are very few housing resources for this population.
This is great program. More funding is needed to serve this population. Youth aging out of foster care most of the time they are not ready to be independent.
Chafee and other funding in child welfare is not adequate to cover minimal levels of need.
Each case is handled individually, there is no 'one size fits all' and therefore I would have to say that all answers were not 100% accurate. Most of the questions did not allow for an accurate answer. Survey is too generalized.
Regarding referrals while youth still in FC, more evaluation should be made as to whether this should happen, particularly in the light of extended foster care as is currently being implemented in California.
There should be some vouchers set aside for youth transitioning from foster care. The cost of living in Northern Viriginia is beyond the means of youth who are working even when they are employed full time.
Keep 'in reserve' at least 1 youth FUP voucher. Allow houfsing to find a solution to their requirement to have vouchers full all the time.As it is we cannot plan ahead.
There is an obvious disconnect between HUD and DHHS and it’s out job to work through them and usually we can.It gets hard with this and it resolves around the 18 months that the youth is required to stay in the program.Illinois provides that service through the PCWA. We believe that we are required to provide these services,that we cannot just make a community referral and expect it can happen. We take that serious,maybe more seriousthan other communities. Because we take it seriously we only refer youth that we can make that commitment to. We fund the services that we provide through Chaffee,and Chaffee allows us to provide the services up to the 21st birthday. That means that we either have to find another funding source or we have to make sure that the client 18 monthsends before their 21 st birthday. Which means that we have to refer them before they turn 19. In IL we usually keep cases open until they turn 21. IL has made that commitment to youth long before we wereserving youth w
This is a fantastic program, but the need for vouchers for our Transitional YOuth as well as CPS families is much higher than the 80 we are allotted.Right now our Waiting List is 9 months to a year.
Our agency and county's Housing Authority have excellent partnership. We would like to hae the ability to refer youth between 1 and 3 months before they leave foster care and be eligible to stay for AP for 24 months.
After 18 mos. there should be an option to extend the youth voucher. For family FUP, when the minor children become adults or if they are removed, that FUP voucher should be returned so the PCWA.
Our major issue has been that ARHA has experienced an ongoing budget deficit over the last several years therefore they are no longer accepting our referrals at this time.
It would be nice to eliminate the 18 mth limit for FUP Youth. It makes little or no sense especially for youth who have aged out of the foster care system.
This survey should have been directed to the ILP social worker and the AB12 social worker that works directly with the youth that are aging out of the foster care system. Napa County has not had any FUP Vouchers available since February 2012.