Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 2024 HCDC PacketIf you will need disability-related accommodations to participate in this program or event, please contact Brianna Thul at bthul@iowa-city.org or 319-356-5240. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Next Meeting: September 16, 2024 HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (HCDC) August 19, 2024 Regular Meeting – 6:30 PM Emma J. Harvat Hall 410 E Washington Street (City Hall) AGENDA: 1. Call to Order 2. Welcome New Members The commission will welcome two new members, Daouda Balde and George Kivarkis. This item provides an opportunity for new and existing commissioners to introduce themselves. 3. Officer Nominations The commission nominates and elects a Chair and Vice Chair each July in accordance with the by-laws. The commission will nominate and vote for the two positions. 4. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: June 13, 2024 5. Public Comment of Items not on the Agenda Commentators shall address the commission for no more than five minutes. Commissioners shall not engage in discussion with the public concerning said items. 6. Fair Housing Presentation Kristin Watson, Human Rights Investigator with the City’s Office of Equity and Human Rights will present educational information on fair housing laws. 7. Discuss Landlord Incentives Commissioner Szecsei requested to discuss landlord incentives for affordable housing. The commission will discuss and may consider recommendations to City Council. 8. Review and Consider Approval of FY26 Legacy Aid to Agencies Application Materials Applications for the Legacy Aid to Agencies funding round are accepted through United Way’s Joint Application. Commissioners will review and consider approval of the FY26 Legacy Aid to Agencies application materials including a draft of the Joint Application provided by United Way. The application window is anticipated to open September 1 st, 2024. 9. Staff & Commission Updates This item includes an opportunity for brief updates from staff and commissioners. Commissioners shall not engage in discussion on updates. 10. Adjournment Housing and Community Development Commission Meeting Packet Contents August 19, 2024 Agenda Item #4  June 13, 2024 Draft HCDC Meeting Minutes Agenda Item #8  Staff Memo – Upcoming FY26 Legacy Aid to Agencies Process o Current Aid to Agencies Definitions o Legacy Aid to Agencies Best Practices o United Way Joint Application Draft o FY26 Legacy Aid to Agencies Scoring Criteria Draft Agenda Item #9  Housing Survey Flyer (available in five languages)  Link to August 6, 2024 City Council Work Session Presentation on Repositioning Public Housing Project from Bloomberg Harvard Leadership Imitative Fellow Naomi Mehta: https://youtu.be/ZbORbFS1c7Y?si=wP4wX_IUTEK0j4kp&t=1810  Tentative FY25 HCDC Calendar MINUTES PRELIMINARY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 13, 2024 – 6:30 PM FORMAL MEETING THE CENTER ASSEMBLY ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Kaleb Beining, Horacio Borgen, Maryann Dennis, Karol Krotz, James Pierce, Kiran Patel Becci Reedus, Denise Szecsei, Kyle Vogel Erika Kubly, Naomi Mehta, Brianna Thul Ellen McCabe (HTFJC), Scott Hawes (Habitat), Megan Schmidt, Kathryn Davis (DVIP), Christine Hayes (Shelter House) RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Dennis moved to recommend approval of the FY25 Annual Action Plan. Patel seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Beining called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: MAY 16, 2024: Krotz moved to approve the minutes of May 16, 2024. Dennis seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the minutes were approved 6-0. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. CONSIDER CHANGING THE REGULAR MEETING DATE AND LOCATION OF THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: Based on Commission feedback, staff proposed shifting the regular meetings of the Commission to Emma Harvat Hall on the third Monday of each month at 6:30pm. Patel moved to shift the regular meetings to the third Monday of each month at 6:30pm. Krotz seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON APPROVAL OF FY25 (FFY24) ANNUAL ACTION PLAN: Thul noted this is a plan that staff brings to the Commission every year for review. The City determines community priorities through public input through the consolidated planning process which they are getting ready to do again. The Annual Action Plan includes specific projects for the next fiscal year that are designed to address the priorities identified in the five-year consolidated plan. Both plans are HUD required documents the City must complete in order to receive federal CDBG and HOME funding. The Housing and Community Development Commission June 13, 2024 Page 2 of 6 2 Annual Action Plan for FY25 includes the activities that HCDC recommended at the March meeting. Thul noted this process is a little bit delayed due to the federal budget this year and staff is bringing it to the Commission later than normal. Thul explained the plan is in a HUD required format and that the most concise way to view the projects and funding recommendations is Appendix B which is a summary of how the City will use the funding based on what HCDC recommended. Thul also wanted to point out the HOME allocation was reduced for FY25. When staff bring HCDC the funding recommendations they are operating on an estimated budget to complete the process in time. HUD grant allocations are posted later in the cycle. HOME funding across the board was cut about 20% at the federal level. Staff was not anticipating the adjustment but the City does have enough program income to still fund the projects HCDC recommended. Some of the sources of the funding in the Appendix B might be different based on final allocations from HUD and program income, but the budget amounts recommended are the same. The projects that were recommended by the Commission will support public facility improvements and affordable rental housing. HOME funds require a 15% grant set aside for community housing development organizations. They have to be certified and meet specific requirements in order to access that portion of HOME funding. Thul noted some communities struggle with that but Iowa City is lucky to have two organizations that meet the CHDO requirements. The Housing Fellowship through this last round of funding will be able to access the set aside. HUD also allows a portion of the CDBG funding for public services and that portion of funding supports the City's Aid to Agencies program. Thul pointed out the cover photos on the plan are from the Iowa City South District Program which is a program where the City purchases duplex properties, rehab the unis, and then they're sold as affordable homeownership to income eligible buyers. Both units pictured have been sold and are currently occupied. Kubly stated the plan has been posted for a public comment since May 17 and no comments have been received to date. Today, HCDC will consider a recommendation to City Council to approve the plan and staff will present the HCDC recommendations at the Council meeting next Tuesday. They will also present staff recommendations since the HCDC and staff recommendations were slightly different. If you remember from March, staff had concerns about the Shelter House project. Council will decide on the final approval and then staff will submit the plan to HUD and wait for approval to move forward with those projects. Krotz asked about the concerns mentioned for the Shelter House project. Kubly replied that Shelter House has applied for facility rehab for Cross Park Place. Staff had some concerns due to the number of projects Shelter House had ongoing and the capacity to take on another project. There are several facility improvements underway. One of those was an HVAC project that's just now closing out but was underway at the time of the staff recommendation. Additionally, some of the some of the work that's being done, such as carpet repair, would be considered maintenance under CDBG and is not eligible. Therefore, staff is recommending that Shelter House reapply next year and work with staff to find eligible costs. If City Council agrees and the funds aren't going to Shelter House, staff would recommend they go to The Housing Fellowship and fulfill their full request as they were the next highest scoring applicant based on HCDC scores. Dennis asked if they could apply for HOME funds. Thul noted Shelter House can apply for HOME but they need to meet the City's underwriting requirements. Any rental housing project is required to submit a pro forma that meets the standards. Krotz noted Appendix C states that the amounts with 30% median income from this year and last year went down this year which was interesting. For instance, for a one bedroom, the rent went down from $922 to $902 so that was a pleasant surprise. A question on page 49 when it's talking about the actions to reduce the number of poverty level families, it states the City has began exploring partnerships with Kirkwood Community College and Iowa Workforce Development - is Kirkwood still in Iowa City? The building looks vacant. Kubly replied they might not physically be in Iowa City, but the City does continue to work with them, especially through ARPA projects. Krotz thanked staff and noted the plan looks nice. Housing and Community Development Commission June 13, 2024 Page 3 of 6 3 Dennis moved to approve the FY25 Annual Action Plan. Patel seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. STAFF & COMMISSION UPDATES: Thul noted June is the end of HCDC terms for people serving a three-year term which includes Beining and Reedus. Staff wished to thank them both for their service, and noted Beining has served two full terms as chair. Beining noted he enjoyed his time with the Commission and gained a lot of valuable insight from all the community members as well as each Commissioner. Thul stated based on the decision tonight, the next HCDC meeting will be July 15 at the Emma Harvat Hall at City Hall. She will send out a reminder and also prepare a calendar of dates for the upcoming fiscal year. At the July meeting they can discuss if there's other presentations, updates from agencies, or other things the Commission is interested in and staff can work on plugging those into the calendar. Kubly noted staff has been working with a consultant to update the five-year Consolidated Plan and will be holding some stakeholder sessions sometime in July and August as well as public input meetings to gathering input to determine the priorities for the next five years of funding. Thul mentioned that Commissioner Borgen asked about alternative ways to track attendance. Asked if people like the attendance survey or if there's an easier way to get responses for people on meeting attendance. Would it be helpful for staff to send calendar invites as well. The Commission agreed the survey works well and adding calendar invites wouldn’t hurt. Dennis thanked Beining and Reedus for their time on the commission. She continued that Beining is the best chair she has seen and also highlighted that Reedus did not miss a single meeting in her entire term. Dennis stated she attended a panel last night at the Coralville Public Library of local experts to talk about the affordable housing issues and how their organizations are working to address the issues. The event was hosted by the Community Foundation and sponsored and facilitated by the Affordable Housing Coalition. There was an overview of the issue in the country, Johnson County, and Iowa City by Ellen McCabe with the Housing Trust Fund. She pointed out Iowa City as the most expensive place to live in Iowa to rent. Other panelists included representatives from The Housing Fellowship, Shelter House, Iowa Catholic Worker House, Open Heartland, Iowa City Community School District, Iowa Habitat for Humanity. The panel provided excellent information, not only about the issues, but also about strategies they implement to address the local crisis. Dennis shared the outreach data for Iowa which shows the affordable way of earning wages in Iowa City to afford apartments and some other information that's really fascinating. There are thousands of households in Johnson County who are cost burdened and to afford to live in Iowa City one would have to work two and a half full time jobs at minimum wage to afford a two-bedroom apartment. DISCUSS LANDLORD INCENTIVES: (Moved to end of meeting incase Commissioner Szecsei could be present). Krotz asked if there is anything else that the City does to assist landlords in helping the people who really are needing housing. Kubly replied the risk mitigation program is not open broadly to everyone, just specific populations so they may look at expanding it as a pilot project. At this point, the City does have security deposit assistance, that doesn't help landlords directly, but does help get people into units. There is also a Climate Action Pilot Program that gives $25,000 as a forgivable grant for energy efficiency improvements in exchange to the landlord accepting a voucher for five years. That program is for units in Iowa City that are duplex or single family. The City is trying to figure out ways to incentivize more landlords to accept vouchers. Krotz asked what ideas the staff has on ways to increase efforts. Kubly stated they have been doing some research and some of the things that came up are landlord bonuses, one-time payments, a signing Housing and Community Development Commission June 13, 2024 Page 4 of 6 4 bonus type thing. The City had a rehab program for rentals but that wasn't highly utilized – possibly the issue was related to the funding source that made it really complicated. They could try some sort of rental rehab program with a different source of funding that perhaps landlords might take advantage of. Krotz asked if that translate into landlords accepting more people with vouchers. Kubly explained it depends on what parameters are put on the program. Some other ideas online were more procedural like offering mediation services to support landlord tenant relations, or tenant and tenant disagreements, fast tracking inspections, and maybe waiving the permit fees. Overall, just more relationship building and working more closely with the landlords and learning what their issues are. Borgen noted when he was working for the Center for Worker Justice, he helped with a couple of cases where tenants were claiming that the landlords are charging them two or three months after they left the property. Egregious amounts of money for repairing the unit beyond taking the deposit from them. Claims were also passed to an agency collector and sometimes even the landlord didn't have any proof that the unit was broken they just charged the tenant knowing they didn’t understand their rights. Then it hampers those people from finding another place to live if there's a landlord who's claiming they owe money to them. Dennis stated there's a big body of landlord tenant law in the state of Iowa. The landlord legally cannot not return a security deposit without following the law. Even if they don't have the forwarding address, they have to at least send it to the place where the people live with an itemized bill of what they're using the security deposit for and if there's more damage, or if they haven't paid rent, landlords can add those costs on and the tenant then would have the opportunity to go to civil court to say it isn't true. Krotz noted there was a big case a few years ago where a landlord was charging tenants for carpet cleanings, and it went through the court system and was deemed as the landlord's responsibility not the tenant’s responsibility. But she is concerned if people have legal representation to help them through this, Dennis stated they can call Iowa Legal Aid. Dennis thinks it's a great thing to try and get for-profit landlords to accept vouchers but there's a lot of things around that. One is the stigma of having a voucher and secondly, the landlord has to do a few more things than if they don't accept the voucher like the pre-rental inspections, but they are guaranteed rent every single month. Krotz noted there was a pamphlet out one time that the City put out that prospective renters could hand to landlords outline the benefits of having somebody with a voucher, that might be something to resurrect. Dennis is not saying she doesn’t think private landlords should not provide affordable housing, but what it costs to actually operate rental housing is a lot. Last night, one of the panelists was saying insurance has gone up for landlords, protection insurance, then there's property taxes, maintenance, reserves, and all kinds of stuff that they have to do. They may have to take care of common areas if it's a big apartment complex, elevator, etc. In her experience, the way to reduce rent is to lower the amount of hard debt. This Commission can help with that if they want to come in and apply for the federal funds. HCDC would recommend to Council for funding. Vogel has stated for as long as she can remember that HCDC only recommends funding to 501(c)3 nonprofits - if they don't come in and apply for HOME or CDBG funds, they can’t help them. It’s like hoping to win the lottery, but never buying a ticket. Vogel would be a good one to do a presentation about his operations because he runs a lot of rental housing and he does have properties that accepts vouchers. Also maybe the City could get on the agenda of the Landlord Association to let them know there’s federal funding that the City receives for housing that they could apply for. Businesses would have to understand that if they receive federal funds, there's a whole lot of regulations that that come with those and a lot of private landlords don't have the expertise to comply. They also don't have the incentive because what they really want to do is make money. It’s a complicated issue. Krotz asked if they could put this on the agenda again and continue the conversation when Vogel and Szecsei are present. Housing and Community Development Commission June 13, 2024 Page 5 of 6 5 Dennis stated just as it behooves the Commission to educate themselves about the process. It really would help private landlords if they could educate themselves about how to comply with these regulations. Ellen McCabe (HTFJC) noted Tracy Hightshoe from the City did attend the Landlord Association meeting and gave a presentation within the last year but it’s hard to convince landlords without an incentive. Kubly stated there is a page on the City website with incentives for affordable rentals, it's more geared towards developers of housing and that stage, rather than an existing landlord that's looking for incentives. The City also has staff that regularly attends the association meetings, mainly Housing Authority and Housing Inspection staff. Thul added that it hasn’t happened during her time, but the City has worked with for-profits in the past on federal projects and also noted that when funding opportunities are announced, a press release is sent out and also forwarded to previous subrecipients which does include some for-profits. Krotz asked if there is a way to include private landlord information to that section that's already on the webpage about incentives for developers. Kubly replied as they develop incentives to offer, they would add them to the website. Kubly also stated one other thing that they've discussed at the staff level is working with the Affordable Housing Coalition to send out a survey to the private landlords and get some input from that group about what kind of incentives would benefit them, specific to the acceptance of the Housing Choice Vouchers. Patel moved to defer this agenda item number of the discussion of landlord incentives to the July 15, 2024, meeting. Pierce seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. ADJOURNMENT: Dennis moved to adjourn, Krotz seconded the motion and a vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. Housing and Community Development Commission June 13, 2024 Page 6 of 6 6 Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record 2023-2024  Resigned from Commission Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant Name Terms Exp. 4/20 5/18 7/20 9/21 10/19 11/16 3/21 4/18 5/16 6/13 Beining, Kaleb 6/30/24 X O/E X X X X X X X X Dennis, Maryann 6/30/25 O/E X X O/E X X X X X X Krotz, Karol 6/30/24 X X X X X X O/E O/E X X Reedus, Becci 6/30/24 X X X X X X X X X O/E Vogel, Kyle 6/30/26 O/E X X X O/E X X X O/E O/E Patel, Kiran 6/30/26 X X X X O/E X O/E O/E X X Pierce, James 6/30/26 -- -- X X X X O/E X X X Szecsei, Denise 6/30/25 -- -- -- -- -- X X X X O/E Borgen, Horacio 6/30/25 -- -- -- -- -- -- O/E O/E X X Date: August 13, 2024 To: Housing and Community Development Commission From: Brianna Thul, Community Development Planner Erika Kubly, Neighborhood Services Coordinator Re: Upcoming FY26 Legacy Aid to Agencies Process Background The Aid to Agencies (A2A) program offers flexible funding for agencies providing public services to low-to moderate income residents of Iowa City. The Aid to Agencies funding is split between Legacy Agencies and Emerging Agencies. Emerging A2A funding is offered annually while Legacy A2A funding is offered every two years. Agencies eligible for this funding source are identified in the City’s consolidated plan, City Steps 2025. As you know, the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) is approaching the FY26 Legacy A2A process. The purpose of this memo is to provide a brief background on the history of A2A and guidance for next steps. Legacy A2A History The Legacy A2A allocation process has evolved over time, and the commission and staff have implemented several changes in recent years based on feedback provided by participating agencies. Priority Levels Under the previous Consolidated Plan (City Steps 2016-2020), public services were given a high, medium, or low priority. As part of the application review process, HCDC assigned a priority category to each agency and considered this along with application scores when determining the funding allocation recommendation. Assigning a priority level to each agency was challenging because many agencies provide multiple services that do not fit neatly into one category. Additionally, nearly all agencies provided at least one service that was a high priority. As a result, this process was not particularly helpful in determining which agency should receive funding. The commissioners at the time also grappled with how much funding to assign to each priority level, or whether they should only fund high priority services. This in turn, led to frustration from the applicants who felt that their allocations were not justified based on the criteria set forth. During the FY20 allocation process specifically, HCDC allocated funds to the low priority agencies first which left limited funds available for high priority agencies that scored higher on their applications. The priority levels have since been removed from the process beginning in FY21 with the implementation of City Steps 2025. Budget During the FY20 A2A allocation process, commissioners requested an increase to the City’s A2A budget to fully fund each agency’s request for that year. City Council approved the budget request which increased the funding from approximately $393,000 to $625,500 that year. The City’s annual budget for A2A has increased 3% each year since then. The most recent FY25 A2A allocation was over $770,000. August 13, 2024 Page 2 Scoring Criteria In FY20, the scoring criteria for Legacy Aid to Agencies was substantially revised to increase objectivity in the scoring process. However, due to the budget increase, all agencies were fully funded that year and the scoring criteria was not utilized. The same scoring criteria was used for the FY21 funding allocation. Staff scored the applications and provided funding recommendations to the HCDC ahead of their funding allocation meeting. The HCDC opted not to consider scores for their recommendation, and allocated funds based on the agency’s request amount and the total budget. Therefore, each agency received the same percentage of their request regardless of their application score. Due to the pandemic and a two-year funding cycle, FY21 allocations were carried through FY23 at a pro-rated amount based on the City’s annual A2A budget. Recent Activity The FY24 A2A cycle was the first time the commission fully utilized the scoring criteria to make funding recommendations. The HCDC prioritized funding for high scoring applications. In January 2023, the HCDC formed a subcommittee to review the Legacy A2A process following the FY24 funding round. The subcommittee included members of the HCDC, as well as agencies representatives. The subcommittee met at least nine times and presented recommendations to the HCDC in April of 2024. These recommendations were considered by City staff, United Way, and other funding entities during the development of the FY26 Joint Application. Considerations for FY26 While Iowa City is fortunate to have many qualified nonprofits in the community providing critical services to our most vulnerable residents, this makes the A2A allocation decision difficult for commissioners. 1. The Legacy A2A cycle is time intensive for the HCDC due to the number of applications to review and score. Staff continue to look for ways to reduce the workload on commissioners and are open to feedback on how to improve the process. 2. Legacy A2A is intended to be a stable funding source for core agencies. Major budget cuts from prior years can be disruptive for agencies that depend on the funding for ongoing operating expenses. 3. A significant amount of time is invested in developing grant applications so it’s important that the commission honors the time and effort of the agencies by considering each proposal against the scoring criteria established in advance. 4. The City is currently working on a new five-year plan, City Steps 2030, which will likely influence the A2A process in future fiscal years. Conclusion Staff developed the Legacy Aid to Agencies Best Practices document to assist with the upcoming funding round and will prepare summary sheets for each submission. Additionally, staff will offer an opportunity to meet with staff one-on-one for questions or assistance with scoring. Staff will be available throughout the process to answer questions from the HCDC and participating agencies. Attachments Current Aid to Agencies Definitions Legacy Aid to Agencies Best Practices United Way Joint Application Draft FY26 Legacy Aid to Agencies Scoring Criteria Draft Legacy Aid to Agencies Best Practices Overview Legacy Aid to Agencies offers flexible funding for organizations providing public services to low- income residents of Iowa City. Eligible organizations are those that are identified as a Legacy Agency in City Steps 2025, the City’s consolidated plan (p.150). Applications for Legacy Agency funding are accepted on a two-year cycle through the United Way Community Impact Funding Process. General Timeframe Step Timeframe 1 HCDC approves application materials August 2 Applications are received October 3 Question & answer (Q&A) session in writing November 4 HCDC discusses scores, rankings, and staff recommendations and makes a recommendation to City Council January Schedule is subject to change. Question and Answers Staff will provide an application summary that includes suggested questions that Commissioners may want to ask agencies. Commissioners are also encouraged to ask their own questions as it relates to the scoring criteria. Scoring  Staff scores and funding recommendations will be provided to HCDC for consideration.  Applications are reviewed and scored independently. Once scored, information is submitted to staff for compilation. Staff will provide a summary to aid discussion. Key Considerations  Aid to Agencies is a unique program. Iowa City is one of few municipalities providing substantial funding to nonprofits annually.  The Legacy Aid to Agencies budget is set to increase about 3% each year assuming an absence of financial challenges.  Aid to Agencies is intended to be a stable funding source for agencies serving LMI residents in Iowa City.  Grant writing is a time investment for agencies. Proposals are crafted based on the instructions and scoring criteria provided. By staying focused on the scoring criteria and prioritizing funding for high scoring agencies, HCDC can keep the process as fair as possible.  A highlight of Iowa City is the number of excellent organizations serving high need populations in the community. This can make funding decisions extremely difficult for the commission. Following the scoring criteria and honoring the priorities in City Steps 2025 that were developed through public participation helps the process fair and transparent. A low scoring agency, or an agency that receives less than full funding, is not a reflection on the agency’s value.  HCDC scores and staff scores will be presented to Council along with final funding recommendations. Funding recommendations that are not supported by an appropriate score must be explained. Suggestions for Developing Funding Recommendations The following method is suggested based on what has been successfully implemented by other City boards and commissions that regularly receive funding requests that exceed the amount of funds available. 1. Following the Q&A with applicants, Staff scores and recommendations are provided to commissioners. HCDC independently scores applications and submits to staff for compilation. 2. Staff creates HCDC scoring summary and shares with HCDC. 3. The commission reviews the scoring summary, staff scores, and staff recommendations. 4. Agencies are ranked based on score. a. Commissioners compare the HCDC rankings to staff rankings. How are they similar and/or different? 5. The HCDC develops final rankings based on scores and discussion of other factors. If other factors exist that change the rankings, they must be explained. An example of circumstances that could alter the rankings are an agency failing to meet their accomplishments from the prior year. 6. The HCDC develops funding recommendations and makes an effort to prioritize the requests of top-ranking agencies as applicable. 7. Short of a major change in circumstances, HCDC should be careful not to drastically decrease funds for an agency from the prior year as the funds are intended to be a stable funding source. 8. HCDC makes final funding recommendations to Council. Final Thoughts and Tips  Everyone scores slightly differently – the important part is to be consistent in your individual scores.  Score based on the information provided in the submission and the Q&A process – avoid personal assumptions.  Consider taking notes as you score. Your notes may be helpful during later discussions.  Call or email City staff at any point in the process with questions! Agency Profile Agency Mission Statement Agency Description Year Organization Established Number of Years in Operation Phone Number Address Website Community Need: What specific need in the community is your agency addressing? (Describe the extent of the need--including current local data with source information and the major factors in the community contributing to the need.) FY26-FY27 Application Draft General Information Agency Name Agency Executive Director Board President Requestor Requestor Phone Requestor Email Funder Requests and Priorities United Way Community Priorities Please indicate the United Way Priority Areas that your agency services support: • [Checkbox] Youth Opportunity • [Checkbox] Financial Stability • [Checkbox] Healthy Communities • [Checkbox] Community Resilience City of Iowa City – City Steps Priorities Please indicate the City Steps Priority Areas that your agency services support: ● [Checkbox] Services to the homeless and those at-risk of homelessness ● Childcare ● Transportation ● Health/mental health services ● Youth activities and programming ● Elderly activities and programming ● Assistance for persons with disabilities ● Food pantries ● Services for victims of domestic violence ● Services for immigrants and refugees ● Utility assistance ● Financial literacy and credit repair programs ● Other (please specify): ___ United Way Request for Funding If you are requesting funding from United Way, you are required to include a total budget amount. ▪ United Way: Request for Funding FY26-FY27: [NUMBER] ▪ Agency Total Budget: [NUMBER] ▪ United Way: % of Total Budget: [AUTO CALC] Johnson County Request for Funding If you are requesting funding from Johnson County, you are required to include a total budget amount. ▪ Johnson County: Request for Funding FY26-FY27: [NUMBER] ▪ Total Budget: [NUMBER] ▪ United Way: % of Total Budget: [AUTO CALC] City of Iowa City Request for Funding* If you are requesting funding from the City of Iowa City you are required to include a total budget amount. ▪ City of Iowa City: Request for Funding FY26-FY27: [NUMBER] ▪ Agency Total Budget: [NUMBER] ▪ United Way: % of Total Budget: [AUTO CALC] *Iowa City: Agency must be a Legacy Agency. Funding decisions from Iowa City will be for FY26 & FY27. Agency will receive same amount each year for two years (prorated for dollars available in second year). City of Coralville Request for Funding If you are requesting funding from the City of Coralville you are required to include a total budget amount. ▪ City of Coralville: Request for Funding FY26-FY27: [NUMBER] ▪ Agency Total Budget: [NUMBER] ▪ United Way: % of Total Budget: [AUTO CALC] City of North Liberty Request for Funding If you are requesting funding from the City of North Liberty you are required to include a total budget amount. ▪ City of North Liberty: Request for Funding FY26-FY27: [NUMBER] ▪ Agency Total Budget: [NUMBER] ▪ United Way: % of Total Budget: [AUTO CALC] Grant Narratives (formerly “Agency Information”) 1. United Way JWC Question: Tell us about your services to Johnson and/or Washington County and how United Way priorities are represented in your operation. If your agency serves a larger regional area, please provide the percent of overall clients that are Johnson or Washington County residents. If your request is program specific, please provide the percentage of Johnson and Washington County clients for that program. 2. Johnson County Question: Tell us about your services to Johnson County and how Johnson County priorities are represented in your operation. If your agency serves a larger regional area, please provide the percent of overall clients that are Johnson County residents. If your request is program specific, please provide the percentage of Johnson County clients for that program. 3. Iowa City Question: Tell us about your services to Iowa City and how the City Steps Priorities are represented in your operation. If the agency serves a regional area, please provide % of overall clients that are Iowa City residents, if your request is program specific, please provide % of Iowa City clients for that program. 4. Coralville Question: Tell us about your services to Coralville and how the City Steps Priorities are represented in your operation. If the agency serves a regional area, please provide % of overall clients that are Iowa City residents, if your request is program specific, please provide % of Iowa City clients for that program. 5. NL question: How will this program/project benefit the community of North Liberty? What percentage of the program/project benefits North Liberty residents, and approximately how many North Liberty residents will you be serving with this program/project? 6. Provide a succinct, specific description of your primary target populations(s). Describe clients as a group in terms of their primary needs and strengths. What barriers to success do they face? If your agency serves a regional area, please provide % of overall clients that are Johnson County residents. 7. Please explain how your agency promotes racial equity and inclusivity for historically oppressed and marginalized populations (including BIPOC, LGBTQ, immigrants/refugees, individuals with disabilities) through your services, for your clients and for staff. 8. Please describe how the Agency is collaborating with other service providers in the community to reduce costs, increase efficiency or improve services for community members. How are you addressing duplication of services or how are you serving a unique unmet need? 9. What costs are required of clients for services provided? Describe your fee structure and services available for those without ability to pay. 10. Describe how local funding received by your organization helped leverage other revenue in the last fiscal year. Identify and include specific grant/funding sources and amounts that were awarded that require a match. FY25-26 Form A: Agency Salaries & Benefits Please provide the information for employees and volunteers in your agency. If you do not find the position on the list, please add the position in the "other" section. You will need to individually add positions in "other" category. Please indicate if the position has paid leave, Health Insurance or Retirement by playing a "1" in the box if the position receives that benefit. Employees Position Paid Leave Health Ins Retirement Plan Average Salary FTE (Last Year) FTE (This Year) FTE (Next Year) Volunteers Please indicate the number of volunteers active with your Agency. Last Year This Year Volunteers FY25-26 Form B: Demographics Please present a summary from your Agency detailing the self-identified categories of clients served over the past two years, along with a projected count for the current Fiscal Year, using unduplicated data. In the case your Agency lacks client count data for any of the categories, please input "0" in the corresponding box. Please do not leave any boxes blank. Gender FY23 FY24 Projected FY25 Male Female Non-binary Unknown For numbers entered into unknown category please explain:[Open Text] Race FY23 FY24 Projected FY25 Asian Black or African American American Indian or Alaska Native Multiple Races White Other Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Unknown For numbers entered into unknown category please explain: [Open Text] Ethnicity FY23 FY24 Projected FY25 Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish Origin Not of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish Origin Unknown For numbers entered into unknown category please explain: [Open Text] Age FY23 FY24 Projected FY25 0-5 6-17 18-29 30-61 62-75 75+ Unknown For numbers entered into unknown category please explain: [Open Text] Area Median Income FY23 FY24 Projected FY25 <30% AMI <50% AMI <80% AMI >80% AMI Unknown For numbers entered into unknown category please explain: [Open Text] Geographic Location FY21 FY22 FY23 Johnson County (combined unduplicated) Washington County Iowa City Coralville North Liberty Unknown For numbers entered into unknown category please explain: [Open Text] FY25-26 Form C: Agency Budget Please complete ALL information. If there is an item that does not apply to your budget or the value is zero, you MUST enter a "0" in that box. Do not leave an item blank. Some columns have auto-calculation, but they will not auto-calculate until the information is saved. Please save information often to activate the calculated fields. For the items that require itemization, click the link to enter specific information in the itemization form. Budget Type Please enter in a corresponding letter to indicate your Budget type: A = Agency Level C = County Specific Definition FY24 FY25 Projected Budget REVENUE Coralville Funding Iowa City Funding City of North Liberty Funding Johnson County Funding (Block Grant Funding) Other Johnson County Funding UWJWC allocation UWJWC designations Community Foundation of Johnson County Grant Grants - Federal, State, Foundation Fees for Services Fundraising/Contributions/Donations Interest/Investment Income Annual Endowment Draw Other (please specify source in the comment below) Total Revenue auto calculated Other Revenue Explanation/Comment EXPENSES Personnel (Salaries/Benefits) All Other Operational Expenses Other (please specify other expense in comment below) Total Expense OPERATING RESERVE BALANCE OTHER RESERVE (please specify purpose in the comment below) FUND BALANCE ENDOWMENT BALANCE Revenue pulled from above Carryover Balance previous years revenue - the previous years expenses Other Expense Explanation/Comment: Other Reserve Explanation/Comment: FY25-26 Form D: Performance Measures and Outcomes Previous Service Delivery: Please provide a specific outcome/performance measure your organization achieved in the last grant cycle. How are people/conditions better because of the services you provided? Were there any unanticipated outcomes you’d like to share? Applicants will report on the common outcomes listed for each of the services for which funding may be used. Applicant may also use metrics you’ve recorded in the past that are no longer part of the common list or select your own outcome metrics you feel represent the services provided (for example: # individuals receiving nutrition education services, # of individuals receiving case management services, # of attendees at youth summit). See common metric list below FY25 Actual # FY26 Projected # [Common Provided Outcome] [Common Provided Outcome] [Common Provided Outcome] [Common Provided Outcome] [Common Provided Outcome] [Common Provided Outcome] [Common Provided Outcome] [Common Provided Outcome] [Common Provided Outcome] [Common Provided Outcome] [Common Provided Outcome] [Common Provided Outcome] FY25 Actual # FY26 Projected # [Agency identified Outcome] [Agency identified Outcome] [Agency identified Outcome] Please explain agency identified metrics. What is being measured and how is each metric an indicator of the expected outcome. How does the indicator show impact to those you serve? [Open Text] Common Outcome Options Common Outcome Options Individuals # Services # Services to people experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness # of unique individuals receiving services for stable housing # of nights of shelter provided Affordable Housing Services # of unique individuals receiving stable housing # of affordable housing units created and/or maintained Utility & other housing services # of unique individuals receiving utility or other housing services # of utility or other housing services provided Early Childcare # of unique children involved in early learning programs # of early childcare slots created or maintained Transportation # of unique individuals served # of rides provided Healthcare Services # of adults (18 & over) receiving healthcare services # of adults (18 & over) receiving oral health care # of children (under 18) receiving healthcare services # of children (under 18) receiving oral healthcare # of adult (18 & over) healthcare services provided # of adult (18 & over) oral health care services provided # of child (under 18) healthcare services provided # of child (under 18) oral healthcare services provided Mental Healthcare and Substance Use/Abuse Services # of adults (18 & over) receiving mental health services # of adults (18 & over) receiving substance use/abuse services # of children (under 18) receiving mental health services # of children (under 18) receiving substance use/abuse services # of adult (18 & over) mental health support services provided # of adult (18 & over) substance use/abuse support services provided # of child (under 18) mental support services provided # of child (under 18) substance use/abuse services provided Youth activities and programming # of students receiving enriching out-of- school programming # of enriching out-of-school services provided Elderly activities and programming # of seniors receiving services to live safely at home # of services provided so seniors can live safely at home Assistance for persons with disabilities # of persons with disabilities served # of services provided to persons with disabilities Food assistance (served or delivered meals, pantries,etc) # of unique individuals or households # of meals provided (pantry service or hot meals) For agencies that record pounds of food, please calculate the number of meals by dividing by 1.2. Services for victims of sexual assault # of individuals receiving sexual assault support services # of sexual assault support services/sessions provided Services for victims of domestic violence # of individuals receiving domestic and family violence support services # of domestic and family violence support services/sessions provided Services for immigrants and refugees # of individuals with immigrant or refugee status served # of support services/sessions provided to individuals with immigrant or refugee status Utility assistance # of individuals receiving utility assistance # of utility assists provided (allows to count multiple utility payments for the same individual) Financial literacy and credit repair # of individuals involved in financial literacy education # of individuals receiving credit repair services # of financial literacy education sessions provided # of credit repair services provided Workforce Development # of adults (18 & over) receiving workforce skill training # of workforce skill training services offered to adults (18 & over FY26 Aid to Agencies Scoring Criteria Agency: Amount Requested: Note: A high score on the rating sheet is not a guarantee of funding. City staff and the Housing and Community Development Commission considers the rating sheet one of many tools to help make funding recommendations to the City Council. The City will use other information and sources including but not limited to: needs identified through City planning processes, prior year reports, consistency with goals and priorities in the Consolidated Plan (City Steps), public input, working knowledge of the organization, and availability of funds, to assist in funding recommendations. Need and Priority (20 Points) Community Need Unscored yes or no by staff Services Provided (Narrative Q3) 20 Impact and Delivery (40 Points) Benefit to Low Income Persons (Narrative Q6, Narrative Q9, Form B) 15 Racial Equity and Inclusivity for Marginalized Populations (Narrative Q7 and Form B) 5 Proposed Outcome Measures (Form D) 5 Completed Outcome Measures (Form D and staff summary) 10 Persons to Benefit (staff to provide calculation based on application) 5 Evidence of Financial Capacity (20 Points) Collaboration/Operations Plan (Narrative Q8 and Form C) 10 Agency Financials (Narrative Q9 and Form C) 5 Leveraging Funds (Narrative Q10 and Form C) 5 Evidence of Administrative Capacity (20 Points) Quality of Application (Overall App) 5 Experience and Success (Staff input on past performance, Form A, and Overall App) 15 Total 100 2 NEEDS AND PRIORITIES (20 Points) Community Need (Agency Profile and Iowa City Funding Priorities) This item is not part of the total score but will be reviewed by city staff to determine eligibility. Agencies funded by the City of Iowa City must address a community need that is consistent with City Steps. The applicant must clearly and completely describe the significance of the need and provide supporting documentation and statistics fully substantiating this need. The applicant must address the described need and successfully work to resolve the problem through realistic and reasonable actions. Services Provided (Primarily Narrative Question 3) 20 pts Services are consistent with City Steps. They support a strategic goal, address the problem/ need in Iowa City, and are identified activities. Information provided in the application is comprehensive and provides reasonable and clear indication that funding will help satisfy an unmet strategic goal and activity and will fully generate the expected outcome(s) as identified in City Steps. Services identified reach Iowa City residents proportionate to the funding request. 15 pts Services are consistent with City Steps. They support a strategic goal, address the problem/ need in Iowa City, and are identified activities. Information provided in the application is not as clear and comprehensive, but it appears probable that funding will help satisfy an unmet strategic goal and activity and will generate the expected outcome(s) as identified in City Steps. Services identified reach Iowa City residents proportionate to the funding request. 10 pts Services are consistent with City Steps. They support a strategic goal, address the problem/ need in Iowa City, and are identified activities. Information provided in the application is minimally sufficient; however, it also appears that funding will only somewhat help address, and it is unclear as to the degree of which it will satisfy, an unmet strategic goal and activity and generate the expected outcome(s) as identified in City Steps. Services identified do not reach Iowa City residents proportionate to the funding request. 5 pts Services are consistent with City Steps. They support a strategic goal, address the problem/ need in Iowa City, and are identified activities. Information is incomplete, inaccurate or contradictory to the need it proposes to address OR the City Steps goal and expected outcome has already been fulfilled and/or the problem/ need has already been addressed. Services identified do not reach Iowa City residents proportionate to the funding request. 3 IMPACT AND DELIVERY (40 Points) Benefit to Low Income Persons (Primarily Question 6, Question 9, and Form B) 15 pts Direct benefit will primarily serve extremely low-income persons (<30% AMI) or those at a similar standard income level (such as the poverty line). 12 pts Direct benefit will primarily serve very low-income persons (<50% AMI) or those at a similar standard income level (such as the approximately 150% of the poverty line). 9 pts Direct benefit will primarily serve low-income persons (<80% AMI) or those at a similar standard income level (such as the approximately 250% of the poverty line). 0 pts Direct benefit will not primarily serve low-income persons or those at a similar standard income level Racial Equity and Inclusivity for Marginalized Populations (Primarily Questions 7 and Form B; specifically disabled, 65+, non-white, LGBTQ+, or other populations) 5 pts Applicant documents that it actively and robustly promotes racial equity and inclusivity for marginalized populations. 90-100% of clients are from a disadvantaged class or otherwise demonstrated. 4 pts Applicant documents that it actively promotes racial equity and inclusivity for marginalized populations. 70-89% of clients are from a disadvantaged class or otherwise demonstrated. 2 pts Applicant documents that it promotes racial equity and inclusivity for marginalized populations. 30-69% of clients are from a disadvantaged class or otherwise demonstrated. 0 pts Applicant documents that it does not promote racial equity and inclusivity for marginalized populations. <30% of clients are from a disadvantaged class or otherwise demonstrated. Proposed Outcome Measures (Agency Selected Performance Measures, Form D) 5 pts Applicant identified outcomes/metrics that will be strong indicators of service success. Outcomes are measurable and able to demonstrate maximum impact and benefit for those served. 3 pts Applicant identified outcomes/metrics that will be moderate indicators of service success. Outcomes are somewhat measurable and able to demonstrate maximum impact and benefit for those served. 0 pts Applicant did not identify outcome/metrics or identified metrics that are unrealistic or poor indicators of service success. Completed Outcome Measures (Form D and staff summary based on prior year reporting) 10 pts Applicant met or exceeded the outcome objectives identified. Measures showed maximum impact and benefit for those served. 8 pts Applicant was close to meeting its outcome objectives identified. Measures showed substantial impact and benefit for those served. 5 pts Applicant did not meet their outcome objectives identified. Measures showed a moderate impact on those served. 2 pts Applicant met some outcome objectives identified. Measures showed minimal impact on those served. 0 pts Applicant met few or none of the outcome objectives identified and/or measures showed no impact on those served. 4 Persons to Benefit (Staff to provide) 5 pts Cost of $1-$19.99 in total Iowa City Funding per Iowa City resident OR provides strong evidence that the cost for the number served are highly cost effective for the extent of services. 3 pts Cost of $20.00-$49.99 in total Iowa City Funding per Iowa City resident OR provides strong evidence that the cost for the number served are cost effective for the extent of services. 2 pts Cost of $50.00-$149.99 in total Iowa City Funding per Iowa City resident OR provides evidence that the cost for the number served are cost effective for the extent of services. 1 pt Cost of greater than $150.00 in total Iowa City Funding per Iowa City resident OR provides minimal evidence that the cost for the number served are somewhat cost effective for the extent of services. EVIDENCE OF FINANCIAL CAPACITY (20 Points) Collaboration & Operations Plan (Primarily Question 8 and Form C) 10 pts Application shows strong evidence of collaborating with numerous other service providers in the community. Application fully and thoroughly describes how partnerships are cultivated and prioritized to reduce costs, increase operational efficiencies, and enhance services for consumers. 7 pts Application shows evidence of collaborating with other service providers in the community. to reduce costs and of utilizing community partnership to further goals. Application describes how partnerships are cultivated and prioritized to reduce costs, increase operational efficiencies, and enhance services for consumers. 4 pts Application shows limited evidence of collaborating with other service providers in the community. to reduce costs and of utilizing community partnership to further goals. Application somewhat describes how partnerships are cultivated and prioritized to reduce costs, increase operational efficiencies, and enhance services for consumers. 0 pts Application shows no evidence of collaborating with other service providers in the community. Application fails to describe how partnerships are cultivated and prioritized to reduce costs, increase operational efficiencies, and enhance services for consumers. Agency Financials (Question 9, Form C, and applicant financial statements) 5 pts Based on agency revenues and expenses, budget appears accurate, comprehensive and detailed. Costs appear reasonable and justified. 3 pts Based on agency revenues and expenses, budget appears reasonable, but not clear, comprehensive, or detailed. The budget is substantively mathematically accurate (i.e. minor errors noted), and/or does not appear complete 0 pts Based on agency revenues and expenses, budget appears questionable and/or unreasonable. The budget is substantively mathematically incorrect. 5 Leveraging (Staff to provide) 5 pts Other sources of funds have been secured and maximized. Aid to Agencies request is less than 25% of total budget. 3 pts Plans to secure or leverage other sources of funds are underway and information is presented to conclude that it is probable other sources of funding will be obtained. Aid to Agencies request is between 26% and 50% of total budget. 0 pts Other sources of funding appear to be minimal and the agency relies primarily on A2A funding to sustain programming. Aid to Agencies request is more than 50% of total budget. EVIDENCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY (20 Points) Quality of Application (Overall Application) 5 pts Application is logical, clear, well written, accurate and attentive to detail, but also concise with appropriate statistical information and supporting documentation provided to thoroughly support any conclusions provided. 3 pts Application is adequately written, but statistics, observation and/or conclusions are not well documented, and inconsistencies and/or errors were noted. 1 pts Application is adequately written, but statistics, observations and/or conclusions are not well documented; inconsistencies and/or errors were noted; and some application instructions were not followed. The credibility of information and statistics provided appear questionable. 0 pts Application is poorly written, statistics, observations and conclusions are not documented, and apparent and substantive internal inconsistencies and material errors were noted. Most of the application instructions were not followed. The credibility of Information and statistics provided is questionable. Experience and Success (Staff input on past performance, Form A, and overall application) 15 pts Applicant clearly shows evidence of the necessary competencies, skill set, management capacity, professional experience and qualifications to successfully manage and implement the activities listed. Applicant has extensive experience with Grant Funds and/or other City funding programs. The applicant has been directly involved in 5 or more City funded projects within the past 5 years, 4 of which have been favorably completed. This applicant has had no problems with timeliness and/or compliance for past projects. This applicant has been timely, complete and accurate with reporting requirements. 10 pts Applicant clearly shows evidence of the necessary competencies, skill set, management capacity, professional experience and qualifications to successfully manage and implement the activities listed. Applicant has adequate experience with Grant Funds and/or other City funding programs. The applicant has been directly involved in 3 or more City funded projects within the past 5 years, 2 of which have been favorably completed. Applicant has realistically identified any problem(s) relating to its application, but they appear relatively minor and the applicant exhibits the understanding and capacity to address these concerns. The applicant has had some problems with timeliness and/or compliance for past projects, but any problems were fully resolved. The applicant has been timely, complete and accurate with reporting. 5 pts Applicant appears to have most of the necessary competencies, skill set, management capacity, professional experience and qualifications to successfully manage and implement the activities listed, but it is not well documented. Applicant has some experience with Grant Funds and/or other City funding programs. The applicant has been directly involved in 1 or more City funded projects within the past five years and has favorably completed it. The applicant may have difficulty complying with program requirements. Applicant has realistically identified action(s) and/or problem(s) relating to its application or other issues may exist. The actions are somewhat complicated to resolve, but the applicant has developed and implemented a plan and is in the process of addressing these concerns. The applicant 6 may have experienced some problems in implementing past projects, but the problems were fully resolved. This applicant has had minor problems with timeliness and/or compliance for past projects. The applicant may have difficulty complying with program requirements. 3 pts Applicant appears to have some of the necessary competencies, skill set, management capacity, professional experience and qualifications to successfully manage and complete the activities listed (documentation is unclear). Applicant has little experience with Grant Funds and/or City funded projects. Applicant has realistically identified action(s) and/or problem(s) relating to its application or other issues may exist. The actions are complicated to resolve, but the applicant has developed a plan to address these concerns. The problems appear to be fully resolvable, but expending funds may be problematic. 0 pts Applicant appears to have minimal or none of the necessary competencies, skill set, and capacity to successfully manage the activities listed (documentation is unclear). Applicant appears to have no related professional experience with Grant Funds and/or other City funded projects or had extensive problems in implementing past projects timely, substantiating compliance, and/or meeting reporting requirements or requests for information by the City. Extensive actions and/or problems have been identified or pose a potential significant concern. The applicant appears unsure as to how to address the issues and/or the problems do not appear to be fully resolvable without negatively impacting implementation. The applicant does not appear knowledgeable, committed, and/or able to complete the project. The City is seeking public input on affordable housing, community development, and economic development needs in Iowa City over the next five years as part of its City Steps 2030 plan. Your opinion matters. Feedback will help in determining how federal funds will be spent to best benefit low-to-moderate income households. City Steps 2030 Take the online survey If you have questions or need disability-related accommodations to participate in the public meetings, contact Erika Kubly, Neighborhood Services, at ekubly@iowa-city.org, or 319-356-5121. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. icgov.org/2030 LEARN MORE Seeking Public InputSeeking Public Input Community and HousingNeeds in Iowa CityCommunity and HousingNeeds in Iowa City Subject to change Revised 8/12/2024 Tentative HCDC Calendar FY25 (July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025) Meetings typically held on the 3rd Monday of each month Meeting Date Regular Agenda Items Notes Fiscal Year 2025 July 15, 2024 6:30pm Cancelled – items postponed to August August 19, 2024 6:30pm  Welcome new members  Officer nominations  Fair Housing Training  Review and approve Legacy Aid to Agencies application materials  Discuss landlord incentives September 16, 2024 6:30pm  Approval of FY24 CAPER  Update on City lead projects and programs  Project updates October 21, 2024 No October HCDC Meeting Staff will offer optional one on one assistance to commissioners. United Way Joint Application is due in October (FY26 Legacy Aid to Agencies) November 18, 2024 6:30pm  Approve FY26 CDBG/HOME and Emerging Aid to Agencies application forms  Discuss CDBG projects without agreement - Unsuccessful and Delayed Projects Policy checkpoint  Presentation from community partner (tentative) December 16, 2024 Winter Break January 20, 2025 6:30pm  Discuss Legacy Aid to Agencies score summary, rankings, and staff recommendations. Consider a budget recommendation to City Council. Meeting includes group discussion to form funding recommendations to City Council. Staff scores and recommendations will be provided to HCDC in advance. Subject to change Revised 8/12/2024 FY25 CDBG/HOME and Emerging Aid to Agencies applications are due in January February 17, 2025 No February HCDC Meeting Staff will offer optional one on one assistance to commissioners in lieu of meeting. March 24, 2025 (4th Monday due to Spring Break) 6:30pm  Discuss and consider FY26 CDBG/HOME budget recommendation to Council  Discuss and consider FY26 Emerging Aid to Agencies budget recommendation to Council Meeting includes group discussion to form funding recommendations to City Council. Staff scores and recommendations will be provided to HCDC in advance. April 21, 2025 6:30pm  Review City Steps 2030 and FY26 Annual Action Plan and consider recommendation to City Council  Discuss projects not conforming to the City’s Unsuccessful and Delayed Projects Policy  Presentation from community partner (tentative) May 19, 2025 6:30pm  Presentation from community partner (tentative) June 16, 2025 Summer Break This calendar is intended to be a general reference. Staff will provide a detailed funding calendar of dates and duties to commissioners for each funding cycle.