Albuquerque CoC Independent Review Committee

Meeting Minutes

July 19, 2016

Present:Bobby Sisneros (CABQ),Debbie Johnson (TLCC), Quinn Donnay (New Day), Paul Lanier (Formerly Homeless), Natalie Michelback (MFA), Jonathan Mathis (BCBSNM), Lisa Huval (NMCEH), Lisa Maury (NMCEH)

Updated Evaluation and Ranking Criteria

Lisa Huval presented some proposed changes to the evaluation and rankingcriteriathat the review committee established in June. The NMCEH staff realized some changes to the criteria should be considered after it began calculating the data and after receiving feedback from some of the CoC agencies. The proposed changes included:

1)Including the percentage of households who entered the CoC program through Coordinated Assessment fromJuly 1, 2015 to April 30, 2016. The original evaluation/rankingcriteriaused the timeframe of May 1, 2015 to April 30, 2016. But the agencies were not "officially" required to use Coordinated Assessment until May 27, 2016. The reason for using July 1, notJune 1, is because some programs probably had a few households they had already started working with prior toMay 27thbut who had not yet obtained an apartment yet.

2)Reducing the amount of points for the Coordinated Assessmentcriteriafrom 10 to 3. The Coordinated Assessment system is fairly new, and this is the first time this data will be reviewed as part of the evaluation process. Therefore, it seems more appropriate to give this criteria a lower weight for the first year.

3)Using cost effectiveness as an evaluationcriteria, butnota rankingcriteria.Two group home projects in the Albuquerque CoC provide 24/7 services for participants. These types of projects are naturally more expensive than scattered site housing.There are a small number of people experiencing homelessness in our community who do need a group home setting in order to maintain housing, and it does not seem fair to penalize the additional expense for providing a group home setting to those who need it. Some projects have multiple CoC grants that fund the same housing program, while others receive all their CoC funding through one grant. Yet for ranking purposes, we need to calculate cost effectiveness by grant. This makes the projects with multiple grants seem more cost effective, relative to other projects that just have one grant.

4)Remove the Educational Outcome, at least for this year. Permanent supportive providers raised concerns about this outcome. There are two main concerns. One, this may not be a fair or useful outcome for programs that serve people with significant disabilities, who often havenon-employment related goals.Two, since this is a new outcome some agencies simply do not have this data available and are unable to obtain it on such short notice. Itis unfair to penalizethese programs for not having data they just learned they needed to provide. Lisa indicated that St. Martin’s, AHCH and TLS had provided letters expressing concern about this outcome, while Crossroads and Catholic Charities provided letters in support of it.

Paul Lanier moved to accept the updated version of the “FY16 CoC Evaluation and Ranking Criteriafor Albuquerque CoC Renewal Projects” with the proposed changes. Johnathan Mathis seconded the motion. There was no discussion and the motion passed unanimously.

The committee discussed, but did not come to a consensus on, whether or not to include an educational outcome for next year. This would allow more time to establish the data collection process and collect the data in HMIS. The committee considered including educational outcomes for RRH and TH projects and finding a comparable measure for PSH projects. The committee tabled the discussion until the next meeting of the IRC.

Evaluation of Renewal Projects

Each CoC project was evaluated on a pass/needs improvement basis for each of the evaluation criteria listed in the “FY16 CoC Evaluation and Ranking Criteria for Albuquerque CoCRenewal Projects”.A project that “passed” is deemed eligible for renewal. Projects that “need improvement” in one or more areas will be required to submit a corrective action plan to the IRC, and the project will be eligible for renewal if the IRC determines that the action plan is sufficient.

To evaluate the projects, the IRC used the following documents:

“Review of FY16 Albuquerque CoC Renewal Projects” chart which summarized any findings from the most recent financial audit, City of Albuquerque audit, MFA audit, HUD audit, date of most recent NMCEH monitoring visit, whether the project spent or was on track to spend its most recently completed/current grant, whether the last APR was submitted on time and whether the project fully participated in HMIS.

“Permanent Supportive Housing 2015-2016”, “Rapid ReHousing 2015-2016”, “Transitional Housing 2015-2016” charts, which summarized outcome data related to average utilization rates, serving the most vulnerable through coordinated assessment, returns to homelessness, housing stability, income and cost effectiveness.

The IRC proceeded to evaluate each of the renewal projects with the following results:

  • ABQ Healthcare for the Homeless – Supportive Housing Program: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Barrett Foundation – Milagro PSH: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Bernalillo County – Renee’s Project: Pass on some evaluation criteria, but Needs Improvement – Corrective Action Plan Requested on one evaluation criteria (see below for details)
  • Catholic Charities – La Luz Services: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Catholic Charities – Partners in Housing: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Catholic Charities – Proyecto La Luz: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • City of Albuquerque – Rapid Re-Housing: Pass on all evaluation criteria but additional information requested (see below for detail)
  • City of Albuquerque – Rental Assistance (AHCH/SMHC): Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • City of Albuquerque – Rental Assistance (TLS): Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • City of Albuquerque – Transitional Housing: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Crossroads for Women – PSH Chronic: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Crossroads for Women – PSH Non-Chronic: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • NewLifeHomes – Sundowner: Pass on some evaluation criteria, but Needs Improvement – Corrective Action Plan Requested on two evaluation criteria (see below for details)
  • Saint Martin’s Hospitality Center – Dual Diagnosis: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Supportive Housing Coalition – Downtown @ 700: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Supportive Housing Coalition – Homeward: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Supportive Housing Coalition – Pathways to Housing: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Supportive Housing Coalition – Sevegram: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Therapeutic Living Services – Frank Gray House: Pass on all evaluation criteria
  • Therapeutic Living Services – Mesa House: Pass on all evaluation criteria

Requested Information

  • Bernalillo County – Renee’s Project: This grant has underspent its grant for four years in a row. The IRC has requested that Renee’s Project submit a corrective action plan detailing how it will fully expend its FY15 grant.
  • New Life Homes Sundowner: This grant has struggled to serve people who meet HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness and to operate at fully capacity. The IRC requested that NLH submit a corrective action plan detailing how it will address these two issues.
  • City of Albuquerque – Rapid Re-Housing: The housing outcome for SAFE House’s RISE program was below HUD’s benchmark, other scattered site TH/RRH programs and RISE’s outcomes from previous years. The IRC requested that SAFE House provide a written explanation.
  • City of Albuquerque – TLS Rental Assistance: The FY14 grant was underspent by at least $68,000. The IRC requested that the City provide a written explanation for why the grant was underspent.

Ranking of Renewal Projects

Lisa Huval presented the tentative project rankings, based on the approved “FY16 CoC Evaluation and Ranking Criteria for Albuquerque CoCRenewal Projects”. The tentative project rankings include full funding for all the renewal projects.There were no questions or comments from the IRC regarding the tentative rankings. The tentative rankings are on the last two pages of these minutes.

There are two reasons these are tentative, not final. One, the IRC will decide on the final ranking and funding amounts for the two coordinated assessment system grants after receiving the special review committee's recommendations. The IRC will make a final decision on the projects that have been asked to submit a corrective action plan after reviewing their corrective action plan.

The IRC will meet again on August 5th to ​finalize the project rankings and funding amounts.

Next Meeting

The next meeting will be on August 5th from 1:00 – 4:00 pm at the MFA (344 4th St.). Our agenda will be:

1) Decide on final rankings and funding amounts for the coordinated assessment grants, based on recommendations from the special review committee

2) Review the corrective action plans for NewLife Homes and Bernalillo County

3) Score the permanent housing bonus proposals to decide who can apply to HUD for a bonus project(s)

4) Decide whether to include educational outcomes as part of the evaluation and ranking criteria in 2017

Tentative FY16 Continuum of Care Project Rankings

Grantee / Grant Name / Score / Type of Grant / Award Amount / Cumlative Total / Tier
Supportive Housing Coalition of NM / Pathways to Housing / 19.2 / PSH / $147,442 / $147,442 / 1
Therapeutic Living Services / Mesa House / 18.55 / PSH / $109,233 / $256,675 / 1
Catholic Charities / Partners in Housing / 18.35 / PSH / $284,170 / $540,845 / 1
Catholic Charities / La Luz Services / 18.3 / PSH / $52,350 / $593,195 / 1
Crossroads for Women / Permanent Housing
Non Chronic / 17.7 / PSH / $240,627 / $833,822 / 1
City of Albuquerque / Rental Assistance - AHCH/SMHC / 17.55 / PSH / $1,439,728 / $2,273,550 / 1
Supportive Housing Coalition of NM / Sevegram / 17.29 / PSH / $229,599 / $2,503,149 / 1
AHCH / Supportive Housing (formerly STARS) / 17.06 / PSH / $127,641 / $2,630,790 / 1
Supportive Housing Coalition of NM / Downtown@ 700-2nd / 17 / PSH / $70,510 / $2,701,300 / 1
Supportive Housing Coalition of NM / Homeward / 16.95 / PSH / $167,653 / $2,868,953 / 1
City of Albuquerque / Rental Assistance -TLS / 16.81 / PSH / $457,265 / $3,326,218 / 1
NewLife Homes / Sundowner / 16.65 / PSH / $42,800 / $3,369,018 / 1
Bernalillo County / Renee's Project / 16.15 / PSH / $67,892 / $3,436,910 / 1
Crossroads for Women / Permanent Housing Chronic / 16.1 / PSH / $144,508 / $3,581,418 / 1
Barrett Foundation / Milagro PSH / 16.05 / PSH / $92,028 / $3,673,446 / 1
Therapeutic Living Services / Frank Gray House / 15.58 / PSH / $157,383 / $3,830,829 / 1
Catholic Charities / La Luz RRH / 15.48 / RRH / $238,073 / $3,830,829 / 1
City of Albuquerque / Transitional Housing / 16.7 / TH / $138,982 / $4,207,884 / 1
St. Martin's / Dual Diagnosis / 16.58 / TH / $92,700 / $4,300,584 / 1
NMCEH / Coordinated Assessment / n/a / SSO / $25,000 / $4,325,584 / 1
AHCH / Coordinated Assessment / n/a / SSO / $71,140 / $4,396,724 / 1
City of Albuquerque / CLNkids RRH / n/a / RRH / $226,599 / $4,623,323 / 1
City of Albuquerque / Rapid ReHousing / 15.16 / RRH / $905,261 / $5,528,584 / $518,261 (57%) of this grant will be in Tier 1.
$387,000 (43%) of this grant will be in Tier 2.
TBD / Permanent Housing Bonus Project(s) / RRH or PSH / $276,429 / $5,805,013 / 2
PSH = Permanent Supportive Housing RRH = Rapid ReHousing
TH = Transitional Housing SSO = Supportive Services Only

1