ND-500 Continuum of Care
HUD CoC Project Ranking and Prioritization Requirements
Updated: September 2016
ND-500 will utilize the following ranking and prioritization requirements for the 2016 HUD CoC NOFA Competition. These conditions are designed to inform Ranking Committee deliberations and provide all applicants and renewing projects with clarity regarding how ranking and prioritization occur.
To be eligible for inclusion in the CoC Ranking and Prioritization process, all projects must pass all facets of the CoC Application process including:
1. Project Application is for an eligible new or renewal Transitional Housing, Rapid-Rehousing, HMIS, SSO-CES, or Permanent Supportive Housing project;
2. Project meets all HUD Eligibility Criteria and Quality Threshold Requirements;
a. Applicant has a DUNS # and has current SAM registration.
b. Applicant is a nonprofit organization, State or local government, instrument of a State or local government or Public housing agency, as such term is defined in 24 CFR 5.100.
c. Applicant participates or has ability and willingness to participate in HMIS.
d. Applicant demonstrates financial and management capacity and experience to successfully carry out project.
e. Applicant submits required certifications as required in the NOFA.
f. Applicant agrees to only serve persons who are eligible as defined in Hearth Act regulations.
g. Project draws down funds from LOCCS/eLOCCS at least quarterly.
3. Project meets all CoC Eligibility and Threshold Requirements;
a. Participation in CoC Membership and Committee meetings;
b. Participation or ability and willingness to participate in Coordinated Entry
c. Project agrees to link households to mainstream services.
d. Adherence to CoC Policies
e. Project agrees to adhere to and document participant eligibility.
4. Project adheres to all local CoC Competition deadlines;
o Initial Project Application submitted in esnaps & via PDF
GUIDANCE ON REQUIRED TIERS
HUD has made $1.9 billion available in the FY16 CoC Competition and expects to have sufficient funding for all renewal projects. However, CoC’s are still required to review and rank all projects, except Planning, into two tiers (Tier 1 and Tier 2). Tier 1 will equal 93% of the CoC’s Final Pro Rata Need Amount (FPRN). Tier 2 will equal 7% of the CoC’s FPRN plus eligible Bonus Project(s). The Planning Grant is not ranked.
· Tier 1 = $1,844,491
· Tier 2 = 7% ($138,833) + Potential Bonus ($99,166) = $237,999
· Planning Grant= $59,500
· Total Available request amount = $2,082,490
Projects will be able to straddle Tier 1 and Tier 2 in this year’s competition. CoC score and project score will determine which projects from Tier 2 will be conditionally selected. HUD will award a point value to projects in Tier 2 using a 100 point scale as outlined below:
· CoC Score 50 points;
· Ranking 35 points based on HUD formula;
· Project type 5 points for PH (PSH & RRH) renewals, HMIS CES and TH Youth, 3 pts for TH (non-youth), and 1 pt for SSO; and
· Housing First emphasis 1 point.
NEW PROJECT CRITERIA AND PRIORITY
There are four different types of projects that can be funded as new projects in the 2016 NOFA.
Justification for Priority
New Supportive Services Only (SSO) projects for centralized or coordinated entry systems.
· CE performance is a vital component to remaining competitive for future HUD funding.
New rapid re-housing projects for homeless individuals, unaccompanied youth, and families coming directly from the streets or emergency shelter or fleeing domestic violence.
Reallocation or Bonus
· Rapid rehousing has a higher unmet need than PSH based upon CES data.
New permanent supportive housing projects that serve chronically homeless individuals, unaccompanied youth, and families.
Reallocation or Bonus
· Continued HUD priority
· Hardest to serve population
· We sometimes struggle filling the PSH chronic beds already, thus lower local priority
HMIS expanded services carried out HMIS Lead.
· HMIS is required for
SCORING & RANKING PROCESS
The following describes the CoC process to score and rank projects for 2016 CoC funding. It should be noted that the CoC uses “scoring” and “ranking” as two distinct steps. Scoring informs but does not dictate the final ranking decisions. Where ranking and scoring do not correlate, the Ranking Committee provides comments to indicate why the project is ranked in their position.
The CoC Ranking Committee is responsible for developing and presenting Ranking Criteria to the CoC Membership for review and approval each year. The Criteria is designed to utilize a non-biased process based on HUD and CoC priorities and applicant quality.
The Ranking Committee thoroughly reviews each project during the ranking process utilizing the approved CoC Scoring Tool. Projects are assigned a score based on the following categories:
b. HUD Priorities
c. CoC Engagement
d. Project Plan
e. Project Performance (APR reviewed using calendar year 7/1/2015-6/30/2016)
g. HMIS Utilize & Data Quality