1
HCV UTILIZATION
TRAINING
Serving More Families and Stabilizing HCV
Overview
2





Program Basics- Policy Choices and Outcomes
Projecting Leasing and Spending
Optimizing the Program
Stabilizing the Program
Making well informed trade-offs
Quick
Exercise
3
4
Exercise – Year 2
5
Exercise Continued
6
Success
Rate
70%
14% reach HAP
in 30 days, 70%
in 60days, 26% in
90 days
Exercise- Monthly issuance results
7
Necessary Conditions for Successful Leasing
8
PHA
Management
Capacity
Sufficient
Applicants
with the
Ability to Find
and Lease
Units
Willing Landlords with Sufficient Units meeting HQS
Available at Affordable Rents in Good Locations







9
Landlord Outreach/Education - Landlord seminars and fairs, attending Apartment Assoc. Meetings,
newsletters, etc.
Setting Payment Standard - Determining level of PS needed to reach extended areas of the market.
Could include seeking exception rents. In addition, this helps mitigate the 40th percent of income rent
burden limit, which would otherwise limit the rent payable by participants in first time units.
Rent Reasonableness - RR process must be sound and flexible in order to pay a fair rent to landlords
reflecting the market.
Maximum use of Tax Credit Properties - Enforcement of required acceptance of vouchers by Tax
Credit properties.
Customer Service for Landlords 
prompt and professional responses to inquiries,

initial inspections conducted speedily after landlord Request for Tenancy Approval,

on time checks each month,

minimal delay in initial check,

periodic landlord satisfaction survey
Establishing Sec 8 Landlord Group - Used to obtain feedback, input on policy and process
development, problem solving.
PHA Screening of Participants and Terminating program violators - At minimum criminal background,
can consider more. Program will get reputation for having good tenants, or at least will not have
negative reputation.
Sufficient Applicants with the Ability to Find and
Lease Units





10
Participant Outreach and Waiting List Management- Particularly where demand for
program is weak. Maintains sufficient number of eligible applicants to meet needed voucher
issuance volume.
High Quality Briefings of Participants - Informing and equipping participants with
information about how the program works, and about the housing market, resources, etc.,
some including role playing on selling a landlord on Sec 8, and coaching participants.
Case Management /Customer Service- PHAs that organize staff around the client often
lead to greater success by the participant. This provides for better follow-up.
Security Deposit Assistance - Many PHAs either operate or facilitate use of a revolving
loan fund, or work with landlords to accept partial payments.
Search Assistance/Counseling - Providing assistance beyond the briefing to link
participants with landlords, including transportation, support, etc., particularly in locations
outside poverty or minority concentrations.
PHA Management Capacity





11
Managing the Voucher Issuance Process - PHAs track: unit months under lease, participant
turnover, participant success rate, average time to lease a unit, and PUC at least monthly to
determine the number of vouchers that must be issued to reach a target number of unit
months leased for the year. PHAs may also use this information to attempt to influence these
factors, e.g. increasing success rate.
Managing the Waiting List - Maintains sufficient number of eligible applicants to meet
needed voucher issuance volume.
Managing Budget Process - Finance staff and Sec 8 Program staff collaborate to track
program costs and Annual Budget Authority to fully utilize dollars to issue vouchers. VMS
reporting is reviewed and is accurate and shared within the HA.
Managing Human Resources - PHA staff are sufficient in number, skills and provided with
support to handle the workload and give excellent service.
Managing Processes and Procedures - Effective procedures are developed covering key
leasing and related processes. Quality control checks are used to ensure process is working
or is fixed.
Variables Factors Impacting Leasing
and Spending
13
Need to Master Estimating Variables
 Historic
experience
 Near term tracking
Critical Variables:
 Turn-
Over Rate
 Success Rate of Issued Vouchers
 Average time from issuance to HAP Contract
 Cost per unit
Turn Over Rate
14


Good Turnover vs. Bad Turnover
Trend and Comparison – Using
PIC
 Comparison – EOP Report
 Trend – Viewer Report Page by
Type Code
PIC Viewer report – EOP History
15
Success Rate: % Issued that are Leased
16

Policy Decisions Impacting Success Rate
 Payment
Standards
 Voucher Expiration Date
 Tolling

Performance Impacting Success Rate
 Landlord
Outreach
 Rent Reasonableness
 Quality briefings
 RFTA Processing – Prompt Inspections and RR
 Customer Service for both LL and Participant
Projection Arithmetic: Adding Units
17


Number Issued 80
 X Success rate
60%
 = Number Leased 48
X Number of Months Leased = UMLs
 {Variable Time from Issuance to HAP = 2 months}
Issuance and Leasing Activity
18
Vouchers leased
960 issued >>> 576 Leased >>> 2,067 UMLS gained
Projection Arithmetic – Losing UMLs
19

Less Attrition:
 Number
leased X Annual Attrition Rate
 Monthly calculation & Cumulative Impact
e.g. (4628 under lease * 7%)/12) = 27 est.
attrition for the month, AND each month
thereafter.
Attrition
20
•
At a 7% annual rate
Annual UMLs lost from attrition originating in March :
10 Months * 27 Families leaving = 27 Unit Months
Total Estimated
UMLs lost for the Year
PUC
21

PUC = Gross Rent Minus TTP
 Gross
Rent
 Utility
Allowance
 Owner Rent
 Tenant
Contribution: Higher of 30% adj. Income or
Minimum Rent
 Impacted by:
 Payment
Standard, Utility Allowance, Participant Income –
population served, EIV use, Rent Reasonableness, Market
Conditions, Location options and choices.
Per Unit Cost (PUC)
22


Tracking, Trending (use of Monthly Spreadsheet
2009 to date)
Program
Program
PUC Choices
Impacts
Trade-offs
Seeking Stable Leasing
23
• Deliberate Choices of Issuance Patterns
over 2 year period
• Use of Year Two Re-Benchmarking
Modeling
•Making trade-offs to gain steady state
•Lower leasing level Year One
•Possible funding consequences –
PHAs set goals
ADVANTAGES
•More efficient and economical to
administer
•Less prone to error and
shortfall/overleasing
•Better dependability for applicants
Typical Lease-up Attrit-Down Pattern
24
A Stable Leasing Alternative Path
25
Funding Basics
26

“Re-benchmarking”
2011 Probabilities
 Using HAP spending from prior Calendar Year
according to current Appropriations language
(2009 and 2010 - used Fed. Fiscal Year )
 UMA cap used in re-benchmarking
 Set-Aside – CHANGE IN APPROPRIATIONS – no
late year leasing increase set aside
 Pro-ration ??
NRA
27



History: 2005 began paying out all ABA
NRA = ABA minus HAP spending
+ Interest earned
+ fraud recoveries (over 50%)
+ FSS forfeitures
What level to maintain?
Two Year Forecast- Spreadsheet Basics
28

Workbook with multiple Spreadsheet – see tabs
 Main
spreadsheet is “Projection Analysis”. Other tabs
support it and display workings for user
 Admin Fee Tab contains Column A and B data for all
PHAs
Two Year Forecast- Spreadsheet Basics
29



Data entry in Yellow Cells: for HAP and Leased units
cell color changes once entered
Comment Flags for key columns – just put cursor
over red corner of cell
All other cells protected
Two Year Forecast Spreadsheet
Page 1
30
Two-Year Forecast – page 2
31
Year Two &
Three
Funding
Proration
Top Left Section:
32
• Data Entry in
Yellow cells for
Current Year
• Funding ReBenchmarking
Estimate and
Beginning Yr NRA
For Following
year and Year
Three calculated
Admin Fee
info – get
from Admin
Fee Tab
Central top Section of
Spreadsheet
33
• Enter Success Rate
•Enter % of leased vouchers that
reach HAP contract within 30, 60,
90, 120 days of Issuance.
• Must add to 100%
•Enter Annual Turnover rate –
number participants leasing as a
percent of all leased units.
Converts %’s leased
in time categories to
an average # of
months from issuance
to leased
Keeps running total
for user to assure
percentages add to
100%
Right Top Section: Basic Dashboard
CURENT AND FOLLOWING YEAR
• Leasing Percentage
34
•Spending as % of ABA and as % of
all funds i.e. plus NRA
•Projected NRA at end of CY and
Following Year
•Projected Admin Fees Earned
•PUC Funded: ABA divided by UMA.
Can be compared to current PUC to determine if
UMAs are supportable.
• Year Three Beginning status – Using
the Year Three benchmarking funding
level, compares monthly Yr 3 ABA
against December Year Two monthly
spending. If a deficit, calculates number
of months deficit can be financed by
estimated Yr Two ending NRA
Two Year Forecast – current year monthly left half
35
Input cells.
“Other Planned additions
or reductions “ E.G. Adds thru absorbing
ports, Reductions from Receiving PHA
absorbing reducing units , etc.
Results from Attrition and new
leasing from issuance. Net actual
and projected units leased
Two Year Forecast – current year monthly data
right half of spreadsheet
36
Allows user to project
using different PUC
from that month
forward
Graphs: Total Leased, Issued, Leased from Issuance
37
25
500
450
20
400
350
15
300
250
10
200
150
5
100
50
0
0
Vouchers issued or projected to be issued
Projected New Leasing from Issued Vouchers
Actual or Projected Units Leased (Enter actual when known, otherwise formula projects leased)
Graphs: Spending, ABA, All Funds
38