Glendale Housing Authority

1. Glendale Housing Authority Housing Choice Voucher Waiting List Overview

2. Glendale Housing Authority • Historical Overview • Selection Process • Processing & Managing • Current Status • Safeguards • Public Awareness • Impediments • Additional Housing Authority Efforts • Possible Strategies

3. Glendale Housing Authority • 4th Largest Housing Choice Voucher program in L.A. County • Federally Funded subsidy program • 1592 HUD-authorized vouchers • Administer an additional 1485 Incoming Portable families

4. Historical Overview • Pre-1989 • Accepted applications over-the-counter • 1989 • Opened WL • Only one preference (resident) • First come, first serve

5. Historical Overview • Creation of 2001 WL • Previous list dropped to 100 applicants • In 1999, Housing Authority approved Section 8 HCV Open Enrollment Plan establishing a system for processing applicants and new preferences

6. Historical Overview • WL Objectives • Replenish pool of applicants • Minimize disruption of services to current owners and tenants • Promote open, equitable and convenient application access to applicants

7. Historical Overview • WL Objectives • Preference Points establish the following: • Serve greatest community needs • Provide clear delineation of levels of need • Provide a fair and reasonable system of waiting list management

8. Historical Overview • List of Preference & Point Categories: • Displaced by Government Action (12pts) • Homeless living shelters including Domestic Violence (12pts) • Victims of hate crime, retaliation or witness relocation (12pts) • US Veterans (6 pts)

9. Historical Overview • List of Preferences & Point Category (1pt each) • Extremely low income • Elderly single persons over age of 62 • Households with disabled members • Residents who live or work in Glendale • Working families or unable to work due to age or disability • Cumulative Preference Point Totals based on information listed on application

10. Selection Process • How GHA met WL objectives • Through RFP, GHA secured third party clearing house (Willdan Corporation) to handle intake, data processing and quality control • In January 2001, two-week enrollment period completed • Applications distributed via local newspapers, community centers, GTV6, and 800 number • 12,553 valid applications received using a new system

11. Selection Process • Placement on WL • Each application assigned a random lottery identification number by computer system (in place of announcing names) • Each application assigned to WL by a two-step computerized sorting process • Assigned random lottery selection order number (serves as tie breaker) • Preference points (buckets)

12. Example of WL Sorting Process (Step 1)

13. Example of WL Sorting Process (Step 2)

14. Processing and Managing WL • WL Activities • Applicants required to report changes in income, address, etc.. which may in turn affect WL position • Purging of the WL • Periodic updates mailed to Applicants to gauge interest, update preferences, and keep list as current as possible • Conducted on monthly basis (200 mailers)

15. Processing and Managing WL • WL Procedures • Each applicant’s preference points verified at the time that application is pulled from WL • Qualified applicants move towards next step of voucher issuance; unqualified applicants removed or replaced on WL according to correct number of preference points • All applicants subject to HUD screening and eligibility policies

16. Current Status of WL • Voucher Turnover/Vacancies • Average Monthly turnover rate • 5 vouchers per month • Vacancies occur due to: • Tenant termination (self sufficiency or voluntary withdrawal) • PHA termination (fraud, noncompliance or death)

17. Current Status of WL • 5,768 applicants on list • 5 preference points being served (less than 20 individuals who claim 5 points remain)

18. Safeguards for WL • Internal Controls • Security • 32 Housing employees, only one with rights to make changes to WL • Software system (Elite) • Internal auditing (IT reports) • Applications under lock and key • Monitoring • All applications monitored for selection and accuracy on three levels (admin, advisor, supervisor) • Randomly assigned case management

19. Public Awareness • Portables • Glendale residents are being issued vouchers through other PHA’s • No person can influence placement on WL • Fraud (all claims investigated)

20. Impediments to WL • Instability of federal revenue streams • Federal actions (recaptures) • Decreases in tenant income results in increases in HAP • Takes time to take corrective action when implementing strategies • Manage shortfalls through attrition (most recently through reserves)

21. Additional HA Efforts • Apply for additional vouchers through NOFA’s • Non-elderly disabled (Lanterman Regional Center) • VASH • Market Affordable Housing projects to WL applicants i.e. • Casa de La Paloma • Vassar City Lights • Cost Saving strategies • Voucher payment standards & subsidy standards

22. Possible Strategies • Hire 3rd party agency to purge WL at one time + Possibly decrease # of applicants on WL - Possibly cause massive “preference” movement on waiting list • Criminal record check on all current participants (above and beyond HUD requirements) + Free up budget and possibly vouchers for eligible applicants - Administratively could trigger large number of informal hearings resulting in financial burden • Ask “targeted” households to voluntarily withdraw from WL