1 / 30

LESSONS LEARNED

LESSONS LEARNED. SALVATORE SCLAFANI September 14,2004. Consolidated Plan Pilots. Reference Other Documents Nonhousing CD Plan Develop Own Formats Enhance Citizen Participation Develop Streamlined Templates Coordinate with PHA Plan Develop/Test Automated Tools

don
Download Presentation

LESSONS LEARNED

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LESSONS LEARNED SALVATORE SCLAFANI September 14,2004

  2. Consolidated Plan Pilots Reference Other Documents Nonhousing CD Plan Develop Own Formats Enhance Citizen Participation Develop Streamlined Templates Coordinate with PHA Plan Develop/Test Automated Tools Useful Performance Measurement Practices

  3. California (8) Florida (3) Georgia (1) Illinois (1) Massachusetts (3) Missouri (2) New York (2) Ohio (1) Pennsylvania (2) Washington (1) Wisconsin (3) Pilot Locations

  4. Ideas Tested by Pilots Concise, summary data Cross referencing other plans Use bullets, templates, tables, charts Post plans and reports on Internet Report annual and multi-year goals Develop templates and outcome measures Automate tracking of performance

  5. Coordinate with other plans Integrate Consolidated Plan with: Comprehensive Plans Land Use Plans Site Plans Regional/Metropolitan Plans Neighborhood Plans Budgeting Process Reporting on Service Efforts and Accomplishments

  6. Evaluation of Pilots Shorter, clearer More readable User friendly Fewer pages Save preparation time Save review time Easier to assess progress

  7. New FY 2005 Approach Streamline all three documents Link Consolidated Plan and CAPER Compare Goals/Accomplishments Automate the Process Optional CP Management Tool Focus on results/outcomes

  8. Annual Action Plan Goals Clearly identify performance measures and units of measurement Clearly identify annual number of projected units completed by end of year annual number of projected units committed/obligated target areas of concentrated assistance Annual goals include units based on prior year funding

  9. Key Issues for Performance Measurement Systems Identify numeric goals and objectives Link goals and objectives with projects • Cross reference projects and objectives • Identify projects under each objective Long-term numeric goals and objectives Short-term numeric goals and objectives Ability to aggregate annual numeric goals Annual numeric goals in action plan

  10. Some Examples Require 10% of all new developments include affordable units Effective uses of Internet: Madison -- Goals and Accomplishments Westchester County –- Slide Show Post draft plan for comment Link goals and objectives with projects Los Angeles Matrix of goals and accomplishments Savannah Cross Reference Chart

  11. Matrix of Goals vs. Accomplishments by Priority2000-2001 Program Year

  12. Savannah Cross Reference Table

  13. Savannah Local Housing Objectives Objective HS1.1: Help 150 low or moderate-income families become first-time homebuyers from 2000-2004 Objective HS1.2: Increase homeownership by 25 households per year in neighborhoods with rate of homeownership under the city average Objective HS1.3: Assist 100 low income families in avoiding foreclosure Objective HS2.1: Increase percentage of standard structures from 74% to 79% Objective HS2.2: Rehabilitate at least 274 rental and 450 owner-occupied units Objective HS4.1: Provide 175 additional standard affordable rental units Objective HS4.2: Provide rental assistance to 2,390 very-low and low income rental units per year. This includes 1,043 tenant-based units per year and 1,347 project-based units per year.

  14. More Examples Cincinnati Action Plan Los Angeles Evaluation Portland Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting Rochester Benchmarks Charlotte Quality of Life Index

  15. Los Angeles Evaluation Foster Self-Sufficiency # of Programs % of Total Project Accomplishments Did Not Meet Goal 1 100% Met Goal Exceeded Goal Goal Not Reported Other Total 1 100% Invest in Human Capital # of Programs % of Total Project Accomplishments Did Not Meet Goal 7 15% Met Goal2 5% Exceeded Goal 26 58% Goal Not Reported 3 7% Other 7 15% Total 45 100%

  16. Los Angeles Evaluation Decent Housing # of Programs % of Total Project Accomplishments Did Not Meet Goal 4 29% Met Goal0 0% Exceeded Goal 6 43% Goal Not Reported 3 21% Other 1 7% Total 14 100% Employment # of Programs % of Total Project Accomplishments Did Not Meet Goal 3 13% Met Goal0 0% Exceeded Goal 1 4% Goal Not Reported 5 7% Other 14 61% Total 43 100%

  17. Outcomes Impact on individuals Reduction in cost burden Increased self-sufficiency Increased feeling of security Impact on neighborhoods Increased valuation of properties Increase in homeownership Reduction in abandoned buildings Reduction in crime

  18. Rochester Benchmarks Increase percentage of homeownership Reduce concentration of poverty, both in individual neighborhoods and city Increase value of residential and commercial property in constant dollars Reduce the number of vacant commercial and residential structures

  19. Charlotte, NC 2002 Quality of Life Variables Social Dimension Percent of Persons over Age 64 Average Kindergarten Score Percent of Children Passing Competency Exams Percent of Births to Adolescents Youth Opportunity Index Crime Dimension Violent Crime Rate Juvenile Arrest Rate Property Crime Rate Crime Hot Spots Economic Dimension Percent of Persons Receiving Food Stamps Percent Change in Income Physical Dimension Appearance Index Percent Substandard Housing Percent Homeowners Projected Infrastructure Improvement Costs Percent of Persons with Access to Public Transportation Percent of Persons with Access to Basic Retail Pedestrian Friendliness Index

More Related