1 / 36

Housing Choice Voucher Program Financial Update

Housing Choice Voucher Program Financial Update. Housing Choice Voucher Program Forum November 1-2, 2007. 2007 Funding Process. Lengthy process, due to late receipt of supplemental requirements

salvadorm
Télécharger la présentation

Housing Choice Voucher Program Financial Update

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. Housing Choice Voucher Program Financial Update Housing Choice Voucher Program Forum November 1-2, 2007

  2. 2007 Funding Process • Lengthy process, due to late receipt of supplemental requirements • Funding letters issued to all PHAs June 22 for renewal HAP and Fees • PHAs involved in ensuring HUD used accurate and complete data by reviewing or providing— • VMS data CY 2006 Transfer costs • Project-Based New Units

  3. 2007 Funding Process • 700+ PHAs responded to HUD’s invitation to review or provide data • All approved changes are reflected in final funding calculations; most were approved • Approved changes entered into VMS by HUD

  4. Funding Process Concerns • Too many changes – need stability • Changes should not be retroactive to prior months • Need appropriate reserve levels • Ensure sufficient admin fees • Allow spending without unit cap • Timely notification

  5. HAP Funding Highlights • HAP costs from CY 2006 (latest verifiable) • Mid-month costs added from PIC if PHA reported as of the first of each month • Additional eligibility ($$) added for the renewal of new increments, to ensure 12 months’ funding in 2007

  6. HAP Funding Highlights • Total actual leasing plus lease-up periods could not exceed total unit months available for 2006 • Beginning in an increment’s 4th month, leasing was assumed to be reported in VMS • Additional months added to eligibility if lease-up period plus VMS period plus original funding term equaled less than 12 months in CY 2007

  7. HAP Funding Highlights • Additional eligibility added to actual costs based on total units in new increment at higher of average 2006 PUC or originally funded amount • Eligibility added for vouchers withheld from leasing to meet a project-based commitment • Each PHA’s eligibility increased via applying the 2007 Annual Adjustment Factor

  8. HAP Funding Highlights • Eligibility adjusted for transfers into or from the PHA’s inventory • Total eligibility calculated for each PHA and national total compared to available appropriation of $14,336,200,000, creating pro-ration factor of 105.017%, applied to all • Remember these calculations are renewal only – many PHAs also have tenant protection funds covering some or all months of CY 2007

  9. Supplemental Appropriation • Provided alternate funding eligibility calculations for three groups of PHAs: • Certain disaster-impacted agencies (plan) (34 total) • PHAs in receivership or breech (plan) (5 total) • PHAs with negative reserves (11 total) • Eligibility calculation began with 2006 funded amount rather than 2006 VMS data; all other adjustments, AAF and pro-ration factor applied:

  10. Admin Fee Funding Highlights • Admin fee policy unchanged from 2006 • Base was CY 2006 eligibility • Adjusted for new units, to ensure 12 months of funding • Adjusted for transfers in or out • Total compared to appropriation of $1,251,000,000 to yield pro-ration factor of 101.528%, applied to all HAs

  11. Admin Fee Funding Highlights • Admin fees have now been recouped from HAs for failing to meet PIC reporting threshold – fees were offset beginning December 2006 • These fees are being re-distributed to all HAs on the basis of each one’s share of the 2007 renewal fees

  12. Admin Fee Funding Highlights • Notice to be issued concerning special admin fees from 2007 appropriation, to be used for: • HAs that require program-specific audits for FY 2007 – up to $1,000,000 • One-time $5000 fee for first homeownership closing – up to $500,000 • HAs who increased leasing since the fee base was established – up to $6,500,000

  13. Disbursements • HAP and Fees disbursed through June on basis of 2006 rules and funding level • HUD calculated amount each PHA was due through June under 2007 funding rules • Shortages were paid in July 1 payment • Reduction for excess disbursements are spread across remaining months – July to December

  14. $100 Million Renewal Set-Aside • Eligibility and processing of $100 million set-aside from renewal account • 2 categories of eligibility: (1) HAs who had experienced a significant increase in renewal costs, more than 3%, due to unforeseen circumstances or portability HAs must document the circumstance and calculate the funding needed, or provide data for HUD to do so

  15. $100 Million Renewal Set-Aside (2) PHAs who would experience a decrease in funding and loss of vouchers due to re-benchmarking – • 3% threshold • Higher of Dec 2006 or average Oct to Dec 2006 leasing and per-unit-cost compared to leasing the 2007 funding award will support • If funds support 3% fewer vouchers or less, PHA was eligible

  16. $100 Million Renewal Set-Aside • For second category, HUD calculated apparent eligibility and posted list of PHAs on HCV website; advisory only • For both categories, PHAs had to apply, using the Notice attachment • Ultimately there were two request periods • HAs were advised that, based on eligible requests, available funds might be pro-rated; this was not needed

  17. $100 Million Renewal Set-Aside • Eligible requests only required approximately $23.4 million to fund • Remaining $76.6 million is being distributed to all HAs on the basis of each one’s percentage of the total renewal eligibility - .5% of eligibility • Each HA’s share of the total will be added to eligibility for 2008 funding purposes, unless we re-benchmark again • These funds may be used for HAP purposes only; unused at FYE will accrue to Net Restricted Assets

  18. $100 Million Renewal Set-Aside • Portability and Re-benchmarking approvals were based solely on formulae • if an HA was eligible and applied, the HA was funded • HAs were eligible for portability funds on the basis of portable vouchers administered by other HAs – if receiving HA did not enter data into PIC, the initial HA was not funded under this category

  19. $100 Million Renewal Set-Aside • Unforeseen circumstances requests depended on HA submittal • Most common problem was that HA did not identify an unforeseen circumstance, but just a normal occurrence or HA decision -- • Re-benchmarking • Desire to lease to baseline • HA decided to raise payment standards or utility allowances

  20. Implementation Notice 2007-14 • No over-leasing may be supported using appropriated funds, including current year and excess HAP from prior years • Quality Assurance reviews continue – funding subject to reduction if PHA knowingly provided false data; HAs were reduced in the initial funding calculations and additional ones are being reduced now, affecting Nov and Dec payments

  21. Implementation Notice 2007-14 • FY 2007 HAP renewal funds recouped through this process will be redistributed to all HAs • HAP funds and HAP equity may be used for HAP purposes only, even though held at PHA • May not be used for administrative costs • May not be used for Public Housing program costs

  22. 2008 Proposed Funding • Renewals: House: $14,744,506,000 Senate: $14,936,200,000 2007 Enacted: $14,436,200,000 • Tenant Protection: House: $ 150,000,000 Senate: $ 150,000,000 2007 Enacted: $ 150,000,000

  23. 2008 Proposed Funding • Family Self-Sufficiency: House: $ 48,000,000 Senate: $ 50,000,000 2007 Enacted: $ 47,500,000 • Administrative Fees: House: $ 1,351,000,000 Senate: $ 1,351,000,000 2007 Enacted: $ 1,281,100,000

  24. 2008 Proposed Funding • Other: House: Incremental Vouchers $30,000,000 (non-elderly disabled and homeless vets) Senate: VASH $75,000,000 Family Unification $30,000,000

  25. 2008 Proposed Funding • House: Budget-based approach – PHAs’ 2008 renewal eligibility would be based on 2007 funding $75,000,000 set-aside Administrative fees paid on the basis of units leased Leasing limited to baseline unit months

  26. 2008 Proposed Funding • Senate: Re-benchmarking approach – PHAs’ 2008 renewal eligibility would be based on actual HAP expenditures for most recent 12 months of verifiable data 3 categories of PHAs to be funded based on 2007 funding: PHAs in receivership, disaster PHAs, PHAs spending more than funds available $100,000,000 set-aside Administrative fees paid on the basis of units leased Leasing limited to baseline unit months

  27. 2008 Proposed Funding HUD has estimated all HAs’ funding under 4 scenarios: budget-based and re-benchmarking, for both House and Senate funding amounts Result was pro-ration factors of 101% to 104% Point: If HA leasing is generally stable, 2008 funding will not vary significantly from 2007 funding – HAs can lease with confidence before receiving final funding amounts

  28. Administrative Fee Changes • Due to proposed payment of fees on the basis of leasing, HUD will develop and issue new fee tables (last updated for FY 2003) • HUD is also contracting for a major study to determine the appropriate level of fees for a well-run agency, for use in establishing future fee rates

  29. Utilization • High pro-ration factor in 2007 was due to under-utilization in 2006 • Some under-utilization due to statutory leasing cap; some not • Due to program size, small percentage of unused funds equates to major dollar amount • Cumulative effect from 1/1/05 forward is critical

  30. Utilization • As of June 30, 2007, calculated excess HAP (NRA) totaled $2.121 Billion – 6.07% of all BA for the period 1/1/2005 thru 6/30/2007 • As of 12/31/2006: Useable: $802,000,000 Additional unit months that could have been assisted: 1,516,000 Unuseable: $407,000,000

  31. Utilization • Voucher Unit Months Assisted: 2005: 23,804,827 2006: 23,351,498 2007 (6 months): 11,669,704 • New Tenant Protection Units Awarded: 2006: 22,638 2007: 25,350

  32. Voucher Management System • PHA reporting rates improved significantly, but • too many HAs are still not reporting unless reminded • HAs must remember to enter corrections that they provide during validation process • Data integrity is critical • Funding (Congressionally-mandated) • Congressional reporting • Determination of NRA • Decision-making

  33. Voucher Management System • Modifications underway, for release for January reporting – • Many unneeded data items and sections deleted • Few new items added • Form re-organized for clarity • Update procedure for locked quarters • Revised user instructions

  34. 2003 Admin Fees Adjustments • Appropriations required – • reduction of fees if 1/31/03 admin fee reserve > 105% of 2002 fees earned • recapture of fees if 2003 excess fees would generate a reserve > 5% of 2003 fees • Some offsets initially done when YESTs were closed • HUD developed calculations, notified HAs of outcomes, paid HAs who had excess funds offset and began collecting amounts due via offset in 12/06

  35. 2003 Admin Fees Adjustments • Decision by federal court modified slightly the time periods used for the reduction calculations • Offsets were suspended pending ruling and final calculations • In immediate future, HAs will be notified of new calculations; repayments and offsets will resume

  36. SEMAP Issue • Leasing indicator based on higher percentage of UMLs/UMAs or HAP expenses/HAP BA • Formula uses BA attributable to each month • Jan to June 2007 BA attributable did not generally equal BA disbursed, affecting 23% of June 30 PHA leasing scores • Re-scoring that indicator

More Related