HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09262000 - SD3 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Dennis M. Barry, AICP
Community Development Director
DATE: September 26, 2000
SUBJECT: Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report for the FY 1909/00 CDBG, HOME,
and ESG Programs
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZE submission of the Consolidated Annual Performance AND Evaluation Report
(CAPER) for FY 1999/00 to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(executive summary attached): and
AUTHORIZE the Chair, the Director of Community Development, the Deputy Director of
Redevelopment, or their designee to execute the appropriate documents for transmittal to the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
FISCAL IMPACT
None
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) for FY 1999/00 is
required by the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, for
entitlement jurisdictions under the Community Development Block Grant (C BG), HOME
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: �X� YES SIGNATURE:
i
COMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMM NDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE 'APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION
OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED,_X_OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Source: Belinda Smith
335-1260
ATTESTED septembp6,
Orig. Dept. Community Development PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
cc: County Administrator THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY , DEPUTY
3�..��'
Investment Partnership Act (HOME), Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG), Housing
Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA) programs. The CAPER is a locally created
document that provides jurisdictions with an opportunity to evaluate its overall progress in
carrying out priorities and objectives identified in the Consolidated Plan and annual Action
Plan.
The CAPER is the primary tool used by HUD in its annual review to determine whether(1)
the County, on behalf of the Urban County and HOME Consortium has carried out
projects/programs as described in its Consolidated and Annual Action Plans;(2) CDBG,
HOME, ESG, and HOPWA assisted activities are eligible and meet a national objective,
and whether expenditures meet certain statutory requirements; and (3) the County has
demonstrated a continuing capacity to carry out CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA
programs.
The basic elements of the CAPER are: summary of resources and expeditures,
programmatic accomplishments, status of actions taken during the year to implement
objectives, and evaluation of progress made during the past year in addressing identified
priority needs and objectives.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND
EVALUATION REPORT FY 1999/2000
The following information is designed to inform the public and local governments on the results of projects and
programs funded by the Community Development Block Grant(CDBG),HOME Investment Partnership Act
(HOME), Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) and Housing Opportunities for People With AIDS (HOPWA)
programs. The Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report(CAPER) is a summary of grantee
progress in meeting local priorities and objectives during the fiscal year. Specifically,the CAPER must address
goals and objectives for housing,economic development,infrastructure/public facility improvements,and public
service as described in the five-year Consolidated Plan and the annual Action Plan.
OVERVIEW OF PROGRAMS
Contra Costa County on behalf of the Urban County'has participated in the Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) program since its inception in 1975. The primary purpose of the CDBG program is the
development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing, a suitable living environment, and
expanded economic opportunities, principally for persons of very-low and low-income. The purpose of the
HOME program is to expand the supply ofdecent,safe,sanitary,and affordable housing for very-low and low-
income families and households. In June of 1993,Contra Costa County as the Urban County representative,and
the Cities of Antioch,Concord,Pittsburg,and Walnut Creck joined together to form a Consortium for purposes of
participation in the HOME program. ESG funds may be used to improve and expand the supply of existing
shelters for the homeless,and to provide homeless prevention activities and support services. ESC'funds must
benefit Urban County, homeless. HOPWA funds may be used throughout the County for the development of
housing affordable to and occupied by low-income persons with HIV/AIDS.
Participation in the CDBG,HOME,ESG and HOPWA programs,sponsored by the U.S.Departmentof Housing
and Urban Development (HUD), has increased affordable rental and home ownership opportunities, and
expanded the availability of employment, recreation, health services, child care, and other social services.
Annually thousands of very-low and low-income Contra Costa residents have benefited from the activities and
projects funded through these programs.
In FY 1999/2000,73 projects were funded with over$5.9 million in CDBG,HOME,ESC'and HOPWA funds to
carry out a variety of activities to specifically benefit extremely-low, very-low, and low-income persons or
households residing in the County. Of those projects completed during FY 1999/2000, approximately 7,678
persons received services through CDBG funded public service programs, 178 persons were placed in jobs or
started their own business, and 4 public facilities were made accessible to handicapped persons or improved.
Projects funded with CDBG, HOME and HOPWA resources and completed in FY 1999/2000 resulted in the
acquisition,rehabilitation and/or new construction of over 360 housing units, including 23 units affordable to
extremely-low income households and 280 for very-low income households. In addition,ESG funds were used to
help support the County's emergency shelters serving an estimated 800 persons annually,while HOPWA funds
were used to provide housing counseling services to over 100 persons with HIV/AIDS.
The following discussion provides a summary of programs and projects funded and/or completed during the FY
1999/2000 program year and assesses the County's progress in meeting identified goals for affordable housing,
economic development,public facilities/infrastructure, and public services.
1 The County's eligible area,know as the Urban County,is the entire County,teas the cities of Antioch,Concord,Pittsburg,Richmond,and Walnut creek
which operate independent CDBG programs.
SUMMARY OF RESOURCES
During FY 1999/2000 the County received over$7 million in resources through the annual allocation of CDBG,
HOME,ESG and HOPWA programs. These funds combined with an additional$50.9 million in other federal,
state,local public, and private resources were available to carry out projects and programs consistent with the
County's affordable housing and community development objectives,
The FY 1999/2000 allocations for CDBG,HOME, ESG,and HOWPA are as follows:
= CDBG $3,868,000
■ HOME $2,643,000
• ESG $ 137,000
• HOWPA $ 441,000
A major portion of the resources identified($44.7 million)were available to the County to increase affordable
housing opportunities for residents and employees of Contra Costa through the rehabilitation and new
construction of multifamily rental housing for low-income and special needs populations,homebuyer assistance,
and the development and operation of shelters for the homeless. The following new grant funds were available
for housing programs and projects in FY 1999/2000.
Annual Allocation of Housing Resources
CDBG $1,946,360
HOME $2,641000
ESG $ 137,000
HOPWA $ 441,000
Total $5,167,360
The remaining CDBG resources of $1.4 million were allocated to economic development, OPEN projects
(infrastructure and public facilities),and public service projects and activities. A statutory cap of 15percent ofthe
annual grant plus 15 percent of prior year program income, limits funding of public service programs. In
addition, the Board of Supervisors has approved additional funding guidelines for the annual allocation, 15
percent for economic development, and 5 percent for OPEN projects. The county also recaptured$110,948 in
unexpended prior year funds for non-housing community development projects in FY 1999/2000.
Annual Allocation for Non-Housing Community Development
Projects
Economic Development $ 580,200
Economic Development Assistance Fund $ 499,124*
Microenterprise Revolvin Loan Fund $ 132,062*
OPEN(infrastructure/public facilities) $ 193,400
Public Service $ 645,200
Total $2,049,986
*Includes$552,986 in prior year funds allocated to the Economic Development Assistance and Microenterprise
Revolving Loan Funds.
2
£J-,> c/
- a
N a 109 N a tT C` — 0 T-4 '
Na �, v�
oo 3 mcavCMlnc� � c5'' as �n: 00 -� 99an -• 'v3
M 1p C a r, M r•` 1D! G et i N .r Ln .., v Ca r" c r-y o
th M kn a M M M 00:01 Un C N to a W 00 4n I t--: try a
Cf 1 'Ct [ M •-y M 01 «Ρ- �+ In M 01 t ti0a t C7
en C14 C14
GR bel!464 (A,4+4 60.) 69 i 4q �iib j 1 69 i 69 464Qq 69 69 64 4#43 Q4 6 i3 00 CS
a'y WS V3
01 C7
1
6R
C al
C7 CT a CT 1 11 a1 M it
v1 Vl
r4:
w•i 04 M K'i 00
, .6569I fA fr4 I 1 I 69 69 63
a
t oo �aap a of C
00 v--r M M A CW
Vdo
N 0N9 Cas
1 14
-- aa � W C> �7 c <a - N va
a l a r M{a C 09 .-� N 00 'i C9 U p
I 1
is C7 c q c�
74:% a O 99 N � v W 000M 00 1p t- •-+ R 1CN •••+ 01 vs` '00M a M 00 m V) a C300 j hw C0.: vl 00 4'1 to M d• C n .w U
12
i
Ivo T 6+
y o .
~ — -- �i€s�I64 iral 4 iib - ' 00
IS I
ON vsl,p a N'la :71ai 1 u^+ N C. 00 vi Na C 09 N{a
a .... M:c7 a 1p:a a a ,-• •'•• N a:.•. r` tt1 C7 .-+ 00 r"•• °d• N p •.j'.
Q C7 a a C�':C3 C3 et C� C 1,a +r s 1D oc �n " a !, 00
M j 10 a P •- t^ 1p C 0i 0�0 v i'•-+ d� C^J 10 C7 IIi 4: tdO
*•-+ •e� M a M I M:w M h• 00:c 4l1 t/'3 a N V'1 r-- vt 1
yQj 1t7 00 t/R ei +-' Ch C1 .-+ to I N V1;00 V� P M CT 00 C; a O p 4? •y
CIF
M M fV N +'" �'Y fid �Y •moi v1 ,--i Ki 10 N `st ��C
°S y vs
9760416041,
I
ce 69 G9 404164 V9 69 iA 6+3 i.9 iia iA 64 69:.68 69 69. 69 64 69 iJj 59 69 6R3 69 iH G+5
Q I ( � � i•- �
N 11 °` C7C7
yam' � A� N
at
' Fry •i � A I .� I it ' rt'' ,� .a y
yy 4:11
'CS 1,
o W)
tu
a
' ' w1 0 .9
F
i 00 t] ",'YJ
fl N
00
r/ rte' U z,
SIA S S W U C3IUI ' xy' 1� Cil a1, 1 e i v e
...�.�
fl
u
GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS
Each year the Community Development Department holds public hearings to solicit information on the needs of
the community,and to gather comment on existing CDBG programs. CDBG,HOME,ESG,and HOWPA funds
are allocated annually through a competitive application process. To obtain funding, applicants' projects or
programs must meet federal eligibility requirements, goals and objectives of the Consolidated Plan, and
demonstrate that they meet the needs and ofvery-low,and Iow-income persons. Asa partofthe grant process the
Board of Supervisors holds a public hearing to obtain comment from the public on the projects recommended for
funding. The following table provides a summary of the geographic distribution of funds and Section IV C of the
CAPER provides more specific information on the location of each project.
East County West County Central County Urban County Total
Housing2 $2,199,750 $834,308 $1,108,000 $715,000 $4,857,058
Economic Development $245,000 $335,200 $580,200
OPEN $67,500 $92,400 $33,500 $193,400
Public Service $66,000 $156500 $95,200 $327,500 _ $645,200
Total $2,333,250 $1.328,208 $1,236,700 $1,377,700 $6,275,858
EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS
The County received a total of$7.1 million in combined CDBG, HOME, ESG and HOPWA funds during FY
1999/2000. (see Table below.) In combination with prior year unexpended resources of$8.4 million and
program income of $1.4 million, resources available for expenditures during the program year totaled
approximately $16.9 million. Expenditures during FY 1999/2000 were approximately $7.3 million, leaving
unexpended balances at the end of the year of approximately$9.6 million. It should be noted that$6.5 million
(68 percent)of the unexpended balances are fully committed to specific projects which are in the process of being
implemented. Remaining unexpended balances were allocated to the CDBG Housing Development Assistance
Fund($1.9 million),the Economic Development Assistance and Microenterprise Revolving Loan Funds($0.6
million). Six hundred thousand dollars in HOPWA funds remain unallocated to projects. Housing and Economic
Development Assistance funds are made available to affordable housing and economic development projects that
develop during the program year.
2 Housing tables include funds allocated through the Housing Development Assistance Fund.
4
Resources and Expenditures
FY
1999/2000 FY 1999/2000 Unex ended Prior Total Ex enditures End of Year
Program
Program Allocation Income Prior Year Period Resources During FY Unexpended
Balance Adjustments Available 1999/2000 Balance
CDBG
Housing $1,946,360 $1,259,718 $1,935,138 $0 $5,141,216 $3,917,762 $1,223,454
Economic
Development $580,200 $8,977 $1,174,7 4 $0 $1,763,881 $456,402 $1,307,479
Open $193,400 $100,000 $388,083 $0 $681,483 $79,420 $602,063
Public Service $645,200 $0 $106,768 $0 $751,968 $617,887 $134,081
Administration $502,840 $0 $181,419 $0 $684259 $554,686 $129,573
Unallocated 0 $11 388 1M.9-21 O $130,309 0 JIM309
Total CDBG $3,868,000 $1,380,083 $3,905,033 $0 $9,153,116 $5,626,157 $3,526,959
ROME
Projects $2,378,700 $243 $3,575,091 $0 $5,954,034 $1,117,929 $4,836,105
Administration 12k4,300 0139 475 0 403 775 lala,729 153 046
Total HOME $2,643,000 $243 $3,714,566 $0 $6,357,809 $1,368,658 $4,989,151
ESG
Projects $130,150 $0 $127,806 $0 $257,956 $169,575 $88,381
Administration jk,85Q O 7 884 $0 JIL7348 361 $6.373
Total ESG $137,000 $0 $135,690 $0 $272,690 $177,936 $94,754
HOPWA 3441,000 $0 $690,069 $143,420 $987,649 $112,060 $8757589
Grand Total 1$7,089,000 1$,1.,380,326 $8,445,358 $143,420 $16,771,264 $7 284,811 $9 486,453
LEVERAGING OF FUNDS
In accordance with federal regulations and County policy,matching funds are required for projects that receive
County CDBG, HOME and ESG funds. CDBG funded projects are required to provide matching funds
depending on the status of the project sponsor or subrecipient: projects implemented by nonprofit agencies are
required to have a minimum 10 percent match,public agency projects a 25 percent match,and for-profit projects
a 100 percent match.
Housing
Matching funds for CDBG and ESG projects typically include other federal, state or local public and private
funds. Projects receiving ESG funds are required to provide a 100 percent match.The HOME Program requires
an across the board 25 percent match from nonfederal sources. Common sources of matching funds for HOME
include State Low-Income Housing Tax Credits,local Redevelopment Agency funds,below-market interest rate
loans,and fee and property tax waivers. Based on funding provided to affordable housing projects completed in
5
_)ooIf
FY 1999/2000,each dollar of County housing funds (CDBG, HOME,and HOPWA)leveraged over$4.57 in
other resources,
Non-Housing Community Development
Public Service projects are required to have a minimum match of 10 percent,and up to 50 percent depending on
the number of years they receive CDBG funds and the type of agency applying for funds. Economic Development
projects carried out by non-profits must have a minimum 10 percent match. Funds allocated through the
revolving loan funds are charged interest of not less than 3 percent,with EDAF loans also requiring owner equity
of 10 to 20 percent. OPEN projects must provide a minimum 10 percent match. Sources of matching funds for
public service,economic development and open projects include: City Redevelopment Agency capital funds,state
funds, local sales tax and assessments, donations, and federal funds specifically for transportation and
infrastructure improvements,and in-kind services and volunteer hours.
Other Resources Available for Non-Housing Community Development
CDBG Other City Private Private Other Federal/ City RDA Category
Category &County Foundations& Lenders& State/ Capital totals
Funds Donations Investors Regional funds Funds
Economic $49,258 $15,323 $0 $110,119 $94,783 $269,483
Development
OPEN $104,148 $4,164 $0 $0 $10,000 $118,312
Public Service $1,321,795 $1,423,874 $0 $713,821 $72,600 $3,773,816
Total $1,839,314 $1,621,723 $0 $823,940 $177,383 $4,161,611
Based on funding provided to projects completed in FY 1999/2000,non-housing CDBG projects were successful
in leveraging other resources at the following levels: each dollar of CDBG funds allocated to public service
projects leveraged an additional$6.23 in other resources;economic development projects leveraged an additional
$.67 for each dollar of CDBG; and OPEN projects leveraged an additional $1.74 for each dollar of CDBG.
6
ACCOMPLISHMENTS-COMPLETED PROJECTS AND OTHER ACTIONS
A. HOUSING
During FY 1999/2000,the County's Affordable Housing Programs increased the supply of affordable
housing in Contra Costa by 366 units'. The majority of housing units provided were rental(246 units or
67 percent of the total).All of the rental units produced are required to be affordable to and occupied by
lower income households: 90 percent are affordable to extremely low and very-low income households
and the remaining 10 percent are affordable to low income households. In addition to rental units,
assistance was also provided to owner-occupant and first-time homebuyers(120 units or 33 percent of
the total affordable units produced). Sixty-nine percent of the homeowner households assisted were
very-low income and the remaining 32 percent were low-income.
Minority households represent 69 percent of total households occupying the additional affordable units,
including Black(25 percent of the total),Hispanic(23 percent),and Asian/Pacific Islander(7 percent).
Senior populations also benefited significantly from County affordable housing efforts:39 percentof all
housing units funded by the CoLtl]tV werc for senior populations.
In addition to 29 SRO rental units reserved for homeless populations, the substantial increase in units
affordable to very-low income households in FY 1999/2000 will benefit households at-risk of becoming
homeless due to rent burden. The Sheltcr-Plus Care Program was successful in providing rental
assistance to stabilize the housing situation of 102 homeless individuals and 77 families,while Mountain
View House provided transitional housing and support services to an additional 11 homeless families
and 22 persons. Finally, the Central County and Brookside Homeless Shelters provided emergency
shelter and services to 644 homeless adults during this same period.
B. PUBLIC SERVICES
Thirty-seven(37)public service programs were allocated funds during FY 1999/2000,Of those projects,
34 were completed,serving 7,678 urban county residents and 2,567 households/families. Three of the
programs allocated funds in FY 1999/2000 were cancelled and one additional program allocated funds in
a prior program year was started and completed during FY 1999/2000.
The beneficiaries of Public Service programs are designated by the following categories: Children an d
Youth, Family, Food and Shelter, Senior, Special Needs, and Miscellanies. Households or persons
served by categories as follows: Children and Youth(29 households and 3,343 persons), Family(304
households and 98 persons), Food and Shelter (2,154 households and2,346 persons), Senior (80
households and 1,080 persons), Special Needs (462 persons), Miscellanies (249 persons). Of those
persons served,97percent were very lore-and low-income. Of households served,85percent were very
low-and low-income and 38percent were female head of household.
C. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
During FY 1999/2000 the County funded a total of 8 projects under the economic development
category. One project was a training and placement programs that provided training 150 extremely low,
and very low-income,homeless,underemployed or Cal Work's clients. Of those trained,88 were placed
in permanent full-time and part-time jobs. Another two programs were funded to assist micro-
Data refers only to projects completed during the FY 1999/2000 program year.
7
i
enterprises and small businesses for business creation,expansion,or retention,in order to retain or create
new jobs. One program resulted in 70 persons starting businesses as in-home childcare providers and
the other program created 20 new businesses in a variety of areas. Two projects were provided funding
for business expansion and job creation, and are expected to be completed during FY 2000/01. One
planning study was funded to examine the feasibility of developing a light industrial incubator. The
remaining two programs funded in the Economic Development category,EDAF and the Microenterprise
Revolving Loan Fund(R.LF)program were evaluated and restructured to be more responsive to the needs
of small businesses and microenterprises. The RLF funds are available throughout the program year.
One loan was successfully completed.
D. OPEN
OPEN is the categorical designation for infrastructure and public facilities improvements. Activities
undertaken in this category include streets,sidewalks,accessibility improvements,park improvements,
and public facility renovation or rehabilitation. Of the 8 projects funded one was for a community
facility renovation,five were for sidewalk accessibility and two were for neighborhood improvements of
sewers,lighting and streets.
Of the 8 OPEN projects funded,only 1 was completed this year. Generally,OPEN projects take 12 to
18 months for completion. However,4 projects funded in prior program years were completed in FY
1999/2000. The CAPER provides information on completed projects by type of activity and need
category.
Affirmative Marketing
Contra Costa provides access to services and projects funded with County resources to all lower income
County residents on an equal opportunity basis without regard to race,religion,disability,sex,sexual
orientation, marital status, or national origin, Marketing and outreach strategies are reviewed and
evaluated as part of the application review process and during project monitoring.Emphasis is placed on
outreach to underserved populations. Information on County funded on programs and projects is widely
disseminated through the local media, neighborhood and community service groups, and faith
organizations. The following table summarizes the ethnicity distribution of households and individuals
served during FY 1999/2000.demonstrating the effectiveness of this outreach effort.Over 56 percent of
those served were minorities: 26 percent were black and 23 percent were Hispanic.
8
Summary of persons served by ethnicity and income.
Female
Beneficiaries Ethnicity Income HH
o
c
cCc y v H
a�
Activit p• d „� 7 ° " w S 70 E 41 � o
Housing4 Units 366 149 91 12 85 25 303 63 100%
Services 170 88 57 0 20 5 132 17 88%
Economicz --
320 85 134 2 79 20 243 67 97%
Development
ESG$ 555 211 250 0 83 11 555 100%
Public 2567 1362 653 49 342 161 1577 594 85% 982 38%
Service 7678 3184 1848 63 2067 516 6558 892 97%
Grand Total 2,933 8,723 5,079 3,033 126 2,676 738 9,368 1,633 94% 982 38%
4 Housing total(366)includes 4 with no ethnicity information
5) SG income number reflects presumption that all homeless fit 0-30%income class
9
EVALUATION OF PROGRESS IN MEETING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBJECTIVES6
FY 1999/2000 Affordable Housing Goals
Action Plan Completed' Underway/
Funded
CDBG,HOME,HOPWA,RDA
Housing Development
Extremely-Low Income N/A 15 25
Very-Low Income 200 49 235
Low-Income 110 20 56
TOTAL 310 84 316
Fair Housing
Fair Housing Counseling 150 82 N/A
Fair Housing Legal Assistance 100 88 N/A
TOTAL 250 170 N/A
Other Resources
New Mortgage Credit 40 26 17
Certificates
New Section 8 Certificates 0 250 NIA
During the current program year,Contra Costa made significant progress toward meeting its affordable housing
goals.In measuring the County's accomplishments,it must be noted that the majority of funded housing projects
are complex,involving new construction or acquisition and rehabilitation of multifamily housing and requiring
multiple funding sources. In general,these projects require one to three years from initial development planning to
completion and occupancy. In order to facilitate the ability of the project sponsor to obtain additional funding
from other sources (e.g., LIHTCs, FHLB Affordable Housing Program, HUD 202 and 811),the County often
commits resources relatively early in the process. Therefore,the number of units funded and completed with FY
1999/2000 resources is significantly less than the number funded and in development.
6I order to be consistent with the discussion ofgoals in the FY 1998/99 Action Plan for the County,this discussion
includes only programs and projects which have been allocated FY 1998/99 funds, including County CDBG,HOME,
HOPWA,RDA.Comprehensive Grant Program and M.C.resources.
This table includes activities funded with FY 1999/2000 funds,including program income.
10
Using FY 1999/2000 CDBG,HOME,HOPWA and RDA funds to leverage other federal and local public and
private resources,the County completed projects to provide affordable housing opportunities for 84 low-income
households,including 15 extremely-low income households and 49 very-low income households. FY 1999/2000
funded projects in development will,when complete,maintain and/or increase the supply of affordable housing by
an additional 316 units, including 260 affordable to extremely-low and very-low income households. An
additional 250 very-low income households were served through the provision of Section 8 Vouchers. These
results compare favorably with the County's goals of providing a total of 316 affordable housing units with 200
affordable to extremely-low and very-low income households.
The County did not serve as many households through its fair housing programs as anticipated. However,
program sponsors indicated that the nature of housing discrimination cases is increasing in complexity,resulting
in an increase in staff resources required for their resolution.Of those households receiving legal representation,
60 percent successfully resolved their fair housing issue and remained in housing or received a reasonable
accommodation from the property owner.
ASSESSMENT OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN USE OF COUNTY RESOURCES AND
CONSOLIDATED PLAN PRIORITIES
The Contra Costa Consolidated Plan establishes objectives and priorities for the use of CDBG,HOME,HOPWA
and ESG funds to increase and maintain the supply of affordable housing,expand economic opportunities and
improve the quality of life for the County's to\1.,er-income households.The following discusses the performance of
the County in utilizing these resources to achieve those objectives.
Affordable Housing
The FY 1995-1999 Consolidated Plan established the following affordable housing development goals for the
County:
• acquisition,rehabilitation and/or new construction of 350 affordable rental units for low-income senior
households and 950 additional affordable rental units for low-income families and individuals,resulting
in a combined total of 1300 rental units, and
• housing rehabilitation assistance and/or affordable homeownership opportunities for 350 low-income
households.
The County has been successful in achieving its overall objectives of increasing the availability of affordable
rental and homeownership opportunities.During the f ve years covered by the Consolidated Plan,projects funded
with CDBG, HOME and HOPWA resources resulted in the completion of 915 affordable rental units,with an
additional 583 units in development.When complete.the total number of rental units provided(1,598)will have
exceeded the Plan objective by just under 300 units. However, the County did not achieve the anticipated
distribution of rental units between senior households and all other households. The number of affordable rental
units completed and underway for low-income seniors—a total of 739 units-Y more than doubled the objective
established in the Plan. In contrast,the number of units completed and in development for all other households
(862 units) fell short of the Plan objective by 88 units. Finally,the County exceeded its goal of assisting low-
income homeowners by 267 units.Over the five-year period of the Plan,the County assisted 431 owner-occupant
households through rehabilitation loans and/or first-time homebuyer assistance,with an additional 136 units in
development.
11
Non-Housing Community Development
Goals established for non-housing community development activities were broad based in order to respond to the
needs identified in the individual entitlement communities participating in the HOME Consortium. The goals are
intended to result in:a reduction of the number of persons living in poverty through employment opportunities,
and access to a variety of social services; an improved living environment through investments to improve and
maintain the quality of public facilities and infrastructure; and to ensure that opportunities and services are
available to people with special needs.
The application and evaluation process for the allocation of CDBG funds helps to ensure that all funded projects
will result in meeting the objectives and goals of the Consolidated Plan. Projects in the Public Service category
were very successful on achieving quantitative goals outlined in the FY 99/00 Action Plan. The majority of
subrecipients met or exceeded established quantitative goals serving a total of 2,567 households and 7,678
persons. Creation of a uniform quarterly report form, used by all the CDBG entitlements in the HOME
Consortium,has resulted in more efficient and accurate quarterly and year-end close out reports.
Economic development projects were also very successful in meeting or exceeding quantitative goals. During
99/00 320 persons were provided assistance in job training and placement or in starting their own business. Of
those 88 persons were placed in permanent jobs, and 90 persons started their own microenterprise.
The OPEN projects have been slow to develop with only four projects completed during the program year. The
review process for OPEN projects will be evaluated to determine if changes should be made in process to increase
the timeliness of infrastructure and public facilities projects.
During the past five years several changes have occurred to improve the process for the allocation of funds,
provisions of technical assistance,reporting,and tracking of projects. These changes have resulted in undertaking
activities that; better meet the needs of the target population; improved communication; and a better
understanding of the interrelationship between prograrn areas.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The narrative statement of the FY 1999/2000 CAPER provides more detailed information on each of the projects
funded during the year, together with HUD CDBG financial Summary Report with attachments A, B, and C,
Appendix A- Additional Contra Costa Consortium HOME Program Information, Appendix B - Additional
Contra Costa Urban County HOME Program Information and Appendix.C—Affirmative Marketing Procedures,
and a computer printout of the Integrated Disbursement and Information System-Grantee Performance Report,
will give the reader a comprehensive view of the CDBG,HOME,ESG programs.
These documents and copies of the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plans are available through the Contra
Costa Community Development Department, Redevelopment and Housing Division. If you have any question
regarding this document please call the Community Development Department at(925)335-1262
12