Breaking Ground - February 2000

Housing 2000: An Agenda For the Future

Housing 2000: Agenda and Registration Materials

HUD: Back in Business

Lack of Affordable Housing Results in Student's Failure

Housing and Community Development Campaign 2000: Postcard Campaign

McKinney Legislative Update

City, ACLU OK Homeless Sleeping on Sidewalks

Prevent Cold Weather Injuries and Ohio Safety Congress

Elderly Tenants Facing Threat of Losing Home in Lancaster

Real Data on Families Leaving Welfare Now Available

New PAE's Come to Ohio Under the Mark-to-Market Program

A Living Wage

KeyBank Virtually Ignores Credit Needs of Minority and Low-Income Borrowers

Earned Income Outreach Kits Available

Hunger & Homeless in American Cities

COHHIO Membership

Financial Management Training

Resources

COHHIO Begins Project to Identify Key Issues Affecting Homeless Children and Youth

 

* * * PLEASE PLAN ON ATTENDING * * *

“Housing 2000: An Agenda For The Future”
COHHIO’s 2000 Annual Conference
March 13, 14, & 15
Are you looking for a reason to come to Columbus, Ohio in early March? If so, have we got a deal for you. “Housing 2000: An Agenda for the Future” promises to be one of the best conferences of the year. Join your colleagues from across the country and learn about innovative housing programs and successful service delivery models; exchange information and ideas; and get updates on federal and state legislative issues related to your work. This year’s conference includes a variety of keynote presentations, individual workshops, panel discussions and institutes.

The keynote presentations, including those of Dr. Janet Poppendieck of Hunter College, Nan Roman of the National Alliance to End Homelessness, and Barbara Sard of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, will offer unique and thought provoking perspectives on the issues related to your work. Hear about poverty and hunger related issues and how they are dealt with in this society. Find out what this means for issues relating to homelessness. Hear about real solutions to homelessness. Find out how practical, community-based approaches can end homelessness. Hear what welfare reform really means in terms of its impact on housing. Find out what has worked in other states.

This year’s workshops are divided into six tracks, including the preservation of affordable housing, welfare reform and its impact on housing, affordable housing development, strategies to end homelessness, community reinvestment, and capacity building/advocacy. Each track offers four individual workshops with topics such as:

Issues in Public Housing

Issues in Tenant-Based Section 8 Properties
Welfare Reform Opportunities in Your County

Creative Housing / Welfare Programs
Exclusionary Zoning / Siting Issues / NIMBY

Funding “Bricks & Mortar”
Corporation for Supportive Housing Program Plans for Ohio

What Role Does the Continuum of Care Play?
How to Use HMDA Data to Encourage Banks to Improve

CRA...Where Do We Go From Here?

Lobbying 101

Non-Profit Board Development
Issues in Project-Based Section 8 Properties

Tenant Organizing For a Change
ODHS State Housing Subsidy Program?

What’s Really Happening as Families Leave Welfare?
Tax Credits 101

Tax Credits 210
Direct Housing as a Component of the Continuum of Care

Preventing Homelessness
What Role Can Foundations Play in Furthering Your Cause?

Effectively Marketing your Agency / Program
How to Successfully Negotiate a CRA Agreement with a Bank

Predatory Lending...Legislative Possibilities

In addition to the individual workshops and keynote presentations, the 2000 conference will feature two panel presentations. Topics for the panel discussions will include “Faces of Homelessness” and “Predatory Lending in Ohio?,” which will be held on Monday, March 13 and Tuesday, March 14 respectively.


- "Faces of Homelessness” will offer you a unique opportunity to hear from formerly homeless persons and low-income tenants, about the state of our state’s housing policy. Sometimes, it’s easy to lose sight of the big picture. Let’s face it, when you are struggling to finish that application in the eleventh hour, trying to replace two or three employees, or preparing for a monitoring visit from one of your funders, it’s easy to lose sight of what this work is really about. When you hear that there were an estimated 97,500 homeless persons in Ohio’s ten largest counties in 1998, or that there were just over 19,000 households on the waiting list for federally-subsidized housing in three Ohio cities, it’s easy to get lost in the numbers. Unfortunately, there are real people behind these numbers; people with husbands, wives, sisters, brothers, sons and daughters. Hear firsthand from people on the other end of this state’s housing policy.
- "Predatory Lending in Ohio?” will offer you the chance to find out about predatory lending practices within the State of Ohio. More and more, it’s difficult to have a discussion of lending practices in this country without hearing the terms “sub-prime lender” and “predatory lender” being tossed around. Between 1993 and 1998, the number of loans made by sub-prime lenders increased by more than 800 percent. What makes a sub-prime lender different from a predatory lender? While most sub-prime lenders serve a need by targeting borrowers with sub-par credit histories, some go too far. Those that go too far are known as predatory lenders. Lending practices become predatory when lenders target specific populations (usually minorities and/or the elderly) with high pressure marketing techniques, charge excessive fees, frequently refinance or “flip” the loan, and often times mislead the borrower. Ohio is not immune to this practice. In low-and moderate-income and minority communities throughout the state, one or two predatory lenders often dominate the market, while prime lenders are nowhere to be found. Find out about Predatory Lending practices in the State of Ohio and how the Ohio General Assembly can take steps to address this problem.

The third and final day of the conference will feature individual institutes, which will offer attendees the opportunity for an in depth examination of four relevant issues. Topics for the institutes will include the Preservation of Affordable Housing (specifically the non-profit transfer of Section 8 properties), Welfare Reform and its Impact on Housing, Strategies to End Homelessness, and NIMBY (specifically community organizing to combat neighborhood opposition).
- Preservation of Affordable Housing will explore the various issues surrounding the transfer of project-based Section 8 properties to not-for-profit organizations. Just some of the topics to be covered....What can and should local communities do to facilitate transfers of Section 8 properties to stable local ownership? What has worked around the state and country? What do Section 8 owners need to get from a transfer, and what do they want? What resources are available for local capacity building of tenant-selected not-for-profits and tenant co-ops? How can housing authorities benefit from transfers?
- Welfare Reform and its Impact on Housing will offer in depth, practical experience from experts, including Barb Sard, for those intending to make use of the housing opportunities within welfare reform. Areas to be covered include: the range of possibilities available for housing assistance through TANF funds; exchange with others in Ohio who are in the process of designing and/or initiating TANF funded projects; more in-depth information from other states; making the case for housing subsidies - research which demonstrates that housing subsidies not only stabilize families but actually increase earnings; the importance of Welfare-to-Work vouchers; and Public Housing Admissions preferences.
- Strategies to End Homelessness discusses effective strategies to end homelessness with experts from the national, state and local levels. Does the Continuum of Care in and of itself really end homelessness, or does it merely “manage” the problem? Should the McKinney Homeless Assistance Programs be dismantled and emphasis be put on other “mainstream” programs? Would this approach open the door to additional resources? Who should be paying for supportive services for the homeless...the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) or the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)? Does the notion of “direct housing” end homelessness? Are we doing enough at the front end, by trying to prevent people from becoming homeless? These are some of the questions likely to be asked during this Institute.
- NIMBY discusses effective strategies to combat Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY) attitudes with experts from across the country. Find out how communities have tried to use zoning statutes, building codes, and even the fear factor to keep certain types of housing out of neighborhoods. Find out how community groups have fared when it comes to court rulings. Learn how a public opinion research firm might be able to help you find out what the community is really concerned about, and help you develop steps to address those concerns.

If you haven’t registered yet, please do so as soon as possible. This year’s conference is shaping up to be one of the best conferences of 2000. Please join us as we set out to craft an agenda for the future.

 

 

"Housing 2000: An Agenda For The Future"
COHHIO’s Annual Conference
March 13, 14 & 15
Tentative Conference Agenda

 

Monday, March 13
8:00 - 9:00 Registration & Continental Breakfast
9:00 - 10:00 Welcome and Opening Address
10:15 - 12:00 Workshop Set A
12:00 - 1:30 Lunch & Keynote Speaker
1:45 - 3:15 Panel Presentation
3:30 - 5:00 Workshop Set B
5:00 - 7:00 Reception

Tuesday, March 14
8:00 - 9:00 Continental Breakfast
9:00 - 10:00 Keynote Speaker
10:15 - 12:00 Workshop Set C
12:00 - 1:30 Lunch & Keynote Speaker
1:45 - 3:15 Panel Presentation
3:30 - 5:00 Workshop Set D

Wednesday, March 15
8:00 - 9:00 Breakfast Buffet
9:00 - 12:30 Institutes

COHHIO’s 2000 Annual Conference, “Housing 2000: An Agenda for the Future" is guaranteed to provide an arena to...learn about innovative housing programs and successful service delivery models; exchange information and ideas with other professionals in your field; and get updates on federal and state legislative issues related to your work. Workshop topics will be focused around the following six identified conference tracks: Preservation of Affordable Housing, Welfare Reform and its Impact on Housing, Affordable Housing Development, Strategies to End Homelessness, Community Reinvestment, and Capacity Building/Advocacy.

Keynote Speakers/Panel Presentations
The 2000 conference will have something for everyone! Hear from seasoned professionals, as they speak to topics relevant in the “housing business,” including: the increased usage of Section 8 vouchers as the housing strategy for the future; welfare reform and the corresponding burden on housing affordability; the economic disconnect and disparity between this country’s rich and poor; and the future of funding for homeless assistance programs.

In addition to the individual workshops and keynote presentations, the 2000 conference will feature two panel presentations. On Monday, the panel will be entitled “Faces of Homelessness,” and will offer you a unique opportunity to hear from both formerly homeless persons and low-income tenants, about the state of our state’s housing policy. On Tuesday, the panel entitled “Predatory Lending in Ohio?,” will offer you the chance to find out what about predatory lending practices here in Ohio, and how the Ohio General Assembly can take action to solve this problem.

 

Who Should Attend?
Housing & homeless advocates, social service providers, shelter & transitional housing operators, clients & program participants, nonprofit housing developers, welfare advocates, community development officials, fair housing advocates, supportive housing providers, federal, state & local government personnel, mental health & substance abuse professionals & anyone else concerned with the provision of decent, safe and affordable housing and services for low-income people.

Hotel Accommodations
The Columbus Marriott North is offering a discounted room rate of $109 per night! Conference participants are responsible for making reservations by calling the Marriott at 614/885-1885. Be sure to tell the hotel operator you are part of the COHHIO conference. To get the special rate, you must make your reservations by February 27. There are a limited number of rooms available.

Continuing Education Units
COHHIO will apply for approximatel¡y 15.0 CEU’s for Social Workers and Counselors.
Registration
Registration fee includes conference materials, two coffee breaks and soda breaks, two lunches, a reception, two continental breakfasts and breakfast buffet.

Scholarships
A limited number will be available to those who demonstrate a financial burden and would not otherwise be able to attend the conference. Please submit your written request, via fax or mail, to Rick Taylor at COHHIO. The deadline is February 18.

How to Become a COHHIO Member
You can become a memby attaching a check for your memip with your conference registration form. If you have questions, please call Janet Holcomb at COHHIO. Membership fees for organizations are based on your organization's budget. They are: $35 ($100,000 or less); $75 ($100,000-$250,000); $125 ($250,000 - $500,000); $200 ($500,000 - $1 million); $250 ( $1 million-$1.5 million); and $300 (over $1.5 million). An individual regular memip is $35.

For a complete conference brochure, please call COHHIO at 614/280-1984 or visit our website at index.html.

 

Registration
(1 person per form, form can be copied, please print clearly)

Name
Organization
Address
City, State, Zip
Phone, Fax, E-Mail
Counties Served
_____ Please check for vegetarian lunch

Conference Registration: $150 (COHHIO mem and $200 (non-mem, regardless of how many days you plan on attending the conference. Membership fee: ________ (optional)

TOTAL ENCLOSED: _____________ (COHHIO Federal Id. #31-1188028)
Payment Amount: Check # ____________ OR Purchase Order #__________________

Checks can be made out to COHHIO and registrations may be sent to 85 East Gay Street, Suite 603, Columbus, Ohio 43215-3118. Credit cards are not accepted. Payment must accompany registration. No phone or fax registrations. Registrations not guaranteed after March 6. Questions? Call 614/280-1984.

 

HUD: Back in Business
The Clinton Administration recently proposed the strongest budget for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in over 20 years. In his final budget, President Clinton is proposing a total of $32.1 billion for HUD programs for Fiscal Year 2001. This represents a $6 billion increase over the levels enacted by Congress for Fiscal Year 2000, and includes renewal of all expiring Section 8 rental assistance and increases in all core programs. Here’s an abbreviated list of some of the President’s proposals:

 

HUD Program FY 2000 enacted FY2001 proposed Increase
• Incremental Housing Vouchers $0 $690 $690
• Housing Production Program $0 $66 $66
• Public Housing Capital Fund $2,869 $2,955 $86
• Public Housing Operating Fund $3,138 $3,192 $54
• Community Development Block Grant $4,781 $4,900 $119
• Urban Empowerment Zones $55 $150 $95
• HOME Investment Partnership $1,600 $1,650 $50
• HOPE VI Revitalization $625 $575 $50
• Housing Opportunities for Persons w/ AIDS $232 $260 $28
• Homeless Assistance Grants (C of C)* $1,020 $1,200 $180
• Section 811 Disabled Housing Production $201 $210 $9
• Section 202 Elderly Housing Production $610 $629 $19
• Rural Housing and Economic Development $25 $27 $2
• Fair Housing $44 $50 $6

(dollars in millions)
*long-term contracts to renew vouchers under the Shelter Plus Care program will be paid for out of the Section 8 program in FY2001.

From here, the President’s proposal goes to Congress, where debate will begin in earnest. This budget represents a commitment on the part of the Clinton Administration to finish what has been started. As HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo put it ,“our cities and rural areas, once lagging behind, are doing better than they have in a decade...let’s build on this extraordinary success. Let’s not stop here. Let’s bring this prosperity to every corner of America.” Please stay tuned to the COHHIO newsletter and our web page for the most recent developments.

 

Lack of Affordable Housing Results in Student’s Failure
A recent editorial in the New York Times discussed the impact that the lack of affordable housing has on children’s performances in school. According to the editorial, “the General Accounting Office reported in 1994 that 30 percent of children from families earning less than $10,000 a year had attended at least three schools by third grade.”

According to the author, “rather than trying (and failing) to compensate with extra school programs, why not attack excessive mobility head-on? One cause is no mystery: the dearth of affordable housing. Many families double-up with relatives, moving on when stress becomes too great. Others fall behind in rent and are evicted, resettling in other school zones.”

We strongly encourage you to obtain a copy of the editorial. COHHIO is unable to reprint this article due to a $200 reprinting fee. The article can be obtained through the New York Times website at www.nytimes.com. Go to the 365 Day Archive Search and enter “LESSONS; Inner-City Nomads Follow A Track To Low Grades.” There is a $2.50 fee for the article, which can be paid for by a credit card.

 

Housing and Community Development Campaign 2000
POSTCARD CAMPAIGN
The National Low Income Housing Coalition, in conjunction with several other national organizations, is mounting a national POSTCARD CAMPAIGN to let presidential candidates know that voters care about the affordable housing crisis and the lack of living-wage jobs. To date, none of the candidates for this country’s highest office have addressed either of these issues. NLIHC is asking that we send postcards to each presidential candidate, enough to let them know that issues such as the lack of affordable housing and the lack of living-wage jobs are not only serious, but essential for this nation to achieve social and economic well being.

Here’s how can you help. Contact Janet Holcomb at COHHIO at 614/280-1984 and request to have postcards sent to you. They will be mailed, along with the addresses of all presidential campaigns (the information for the “front-runners” is below). Simply put your name on the postcards and address them to any and all campaigns. The presidential candidates will only address these issues if they believe voters care about them. It is up to all of us to ensure that issues such as the lack of affordable housing and the lack of living-wage jobs have a voice.

Democratic Party
• Bill Bradley, Bill Bradley for President, Inc., 395 Pleasant Valley Way, West Orange, NJ 07052, 973/731-2100, f - 973/324-9213, issues@billbradley.com, www.billbradley.com, Campaign Manager: Gina Glantz. • Al Gore, Gore 2000, P.O. Box 24387, Nashville, TN 37202, 615/340-2000, f - 615/329-0407, www.algore2000.com, e-mail access through web site, Campaign Manager: Donna Brazile.

Republican Party
• George W. Bush, Bush for President, P.O. Box 1902, Austin, TX 78767-1902, 512/637-2000, f - 512/637-8800, gwb@georgebush.com, www.georgebush.com, Campaign Manager: Joe Allbaugh. • John McCain, John McCain for President, 1158 East Missouri, #140, Phoenix, AZ 85014, 602/604-2000, f - 602/604-0028, mccain2000@mindspring.com, www.mccain2000.com, Campaign Manager: Rick Davis.

Since the Ohio primary is just around the corner, it is important that we make our voices heard. Please take a minute to send a postcard, letter, or e-mail to the presidential candidates.

 

McKinney Legislative Update...
Do you rememthe Homeless Housing Programs Consolidation and Flexibility Act (a.k.a. H.R. 1073) introduced by Representative Lazio last session? In case you’re not quite sure, H.R. 1073 would essentially scrap the Continuum of Care planning process and instead distribute McKinney funds on a formula basis to states and localities, based not on the merit of what they would do to prevent and end homelessness, but as an entitlement based simply on the formula adopted. Apparently, Representative Lazio, who chairs the House Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, returns to Congress with a renewed commitment to block-granting McKinney Homeless Assistance dollars.

On the Senate side, things are picking up steam. Senator Allard, chair of the Senate Subcommittee of Housing and Transportation, is indicating that he will introduce legislation in this session that would block-grant the McKinney programs. In addition to block-granting the Homeless Assistance Programs, Senator Allard’s legislation would also include “other HUD reforms,” which are unidentified at this time. Unfortunately, other details on the Senate side are rather sketchy.

Block-granting McKinney Homeless Assistance Funds would translate into a potential loss of millions of dollars, and would seriously jeopardize Ohio’s ability to effectively combat homelessness. We need to let Members of Congress know that the Continuum of Care process works, and that giving total control to states and localities is a step in the wrong direction. Please take a minute to express your concerns regarding the block-granting of McKinney Homeless Assistance Programs not only to Representative Lazio and Senator Allard, but to the entire Ohio Congressional Delegation. You can contact the Capital Hill Switchboard at 202/224-3121. For more information, contact Rick Taylor at COHHIO at 614/280-1984.

City, ACLU OK Homeless Sleeping on Sidewalks

Cleveland's homeless can sleep on sidewalks undisturbed, thanks to a settlement reached on Feb. 2 between the city and the ACLU.

"We are delighted," said Raymond Vasvari, legal counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio. "This is a clear-cut victory for the ACLU and the homeless."

But city officials say they lost nothing in settling the lawsuit, filed by the ACLU and four homeless men after the city began a holiday initiative to clear city streets.

Mayor Michael R. White said the city "preserved" the right to enforce all its laws under the settlement, including those against disorderly conduct and public intoxication. Thirteen arrests made during the initiative were for such acts and not for homelessness itself, White said at a news conference.

Anthony Garofoli, a lawyer for the city, said the city never had a policy of forcing the homeless from sidewalks.

But White himself, in announcing the holiday initiative in late November, said downtown police patrols would "focus on curtailing the practice of sleeping on sidewalks and aggressive panhandling."

More than a dozen homeless people were ready to testify in federal court that police had told them to move along or they would go to jail, said Brian Davis of the Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless. These actions amounted to an unconstitutional targeting of the homeless, the ACLU said in its lawsuit.

In the settlement, the city agreed not to "arrest, or threaten to arrest or detain, any individual, including homeless individuals, for performing innocent, harmless, inoffensive acts such as sleeping, eating, lying or sitting in or on public property."

"It is everything we had hoped for," Davis said.

The ACLU and the homeless "got what they wanted," agreed Jon Entin, a constitutional law professor at Case Western Reserve University. "And the city got something, too, which is no formal finding that it had been acting unconstitutionally. In that sense, it's kind of a win-win."

"Simply refusing to go to a shelter cannot be the basis for an arrest," said Entin, who reviewed the settlement. "The city has always denied they were doing that, but whatever was going on before, it's clear it can't be done now."

White hinted that the city might use other legal tools to deal with the homeless, but he emphasized that the aim was not to punish them. He noted that the city had spent millions trying to help the homeless, and that the aim of the city's policy was to direct them to shelters so they would not spend their nights in winter weather.

Lost in the debate, White added, are the rights of residents who come downtown to work and shop. They are sometimes harassed, or intimidated or have to walk over "urine, litter and feces" left by the homeless, White said.

Written by Tom Breckenridge, Cleveland Plain Dealer, February 3, 2000. Reprinted with permission from The Plain Dealer © 2000. All rights reserved.

 

Prevent Cold Weather Injuries
Assume the temperature outside is zero degrees Fahrenheit. Add a 15-mph breeze, and that is the equivalent to a 32-below-zero air temperature when felt on exposed skin. If you walked outside for one minute, any skin areas exposed to these conditions are in danger of frostbite. Even worse, employees who work outside this time of the year are in danger of hypothermia. Fighting the cold:

Dress the Part - Layer. Wearing multiple layers of clothing not only provides ventilation for the body, but also allows you to remove an outer layer during heavy work or if the weather warms up during the day; Ventilate. Wear polypropylene clothing closest to the skin to keep the skin dry, allowing perspiration to escape, while keeping out environmental moisture; Insulate. For insulation, wear wool or synthetic fiber-filled materials for the outer layers of clothing. Although wool can absorb plenty of body moisture before losing its ability to insulate, synthetic materials are preferred because they absorb less moisture and dry more quickly; Wear socks. Socks made of polypropylene or other synthetic materials next to the skin with layers of wool on the outside are best; Wear boots. Make sure the boots are at least one size larger than your normal shoe size for the purpose of wearing layered socks and also for proper circulation; Wear gloves. The hands have poor blood circulation and are more susceptible to the cold; Wear a hat. Up to 50 percent of heat loss occurs through the head, ears and back of the neck.

Eat Smart - Eat breakfast. A carbohydrate-based breakfast, such as cereals and breads, is an ideal source of body heat for cold-weather work. However, a well-balanced diet is the best defense against hypothermia; Drink liquids. Drink plenty of liquids to prevent dehydration, which decreases the volume of blood being circulated. Information taken from the BWC Focus Magazine, Winter 2000.

Ohio Safety Congress
The 70th Annual All-Ohio Safety & Health Congress & Exhibit will be held on April 3-6 at the Columbus Convention Center. This multi-day training will include general sessions, over 150 educational sessions, and over 200 safety product displays and hands-on demonstrations. Admission to the Ohio Safety Congress is FREE! To receive a program and registration materials, call 800/644-6292, press 22 option 1, or fax to 614-728-3260 or visit their website at www.ohiobwc.com. The Ohio Safety Congress is sponsored by the BWC Division of Safety & Hygiene.

Elderly Tenants Facing Threat of Losing Home in Lancaster

Eighty-one low-income elderly people are being threatened with having to move from their homes in Lancaster, Ohio. That threat may be realized if HUD (OMHAR) and the property owner of Windsor Place cannot come to an agreement on how much rental subsidy HUD should pay to the project.

Approximately 60 tenants called a meeting in January, with the aide of their service coordinator. The tenants invited local HUD officials, a representative of Congressman Hobson’s office, the Housing Authority director, COHHIO, the property management and other local and area groups. Tenants stated that they are extremely concerned about the fact that their future is uncertain, and includes the prospect of having to move. While there are new low-income elderly projects under development, tenants continually expressed their concerns about the costs of moving and the stress that is caused by a move, especially for the elderly, many with health concerns.

While throughout the meeting fingers were pointed at HUD, the owner, and even Congress as who is to blame for this situation, no one could come up with an answer for the tenants as to what the future holds for them and the property. The contract for the property ends in April, but an extension will likely be granted by HUD as a private Participating Administrative Entity (PAE) reviews the property owner’s request to have rents reduced to a level acceptable to both parties.

One tenant just moved into the property in December after being on a waiting list, and relies on her sister to assist her with shopping and other matters. She was collecting information to share with her sister, who serves as the tenant’s guardian, to decide what she should do about the situation. She was concerned that her family would be upset with her if she had to move again. Another tenant moved into her apartment last February, and is concerned about having to move again so soon.
She is faced with high costs for medication and past hospital bills, and is concerned about not having enough money left over to pay for housing if she is forced to move.

In November, 1999, the owner of the property gave the tenants notice that they plan not to renew the project-based Section 8 contract with HUD if an agreement on the rental subsidy could not be reached. If the owner does opt-out of the project-based Section 8 program, tenants that are eligible will receive an “enhanced voucher” from the Fairfield Metropolitan Housing Authority. That voucher will allow the tenants to remain in the property for at least one year, and will cover any rent amount above 30 percent of the tenant’s income, as long as the rent is reasonable. HUD requires that the owner allow the tenants to remain in the property with the voucher for one year after the opt-out. However, the tenant may elect to take the voucher and move anywhere the voucher is accepted. In that case, the amount of the voucher is reduced to the payment standard set by the local Housing Authority.

The owner of Windsor Place has not indicated whether tenants will be allowed to remain in the property with vouchers after the first year if an opt-out does occur. In any event, the eighty-one elderly tenants at Windsor Place must continue to wait for their answer, and then either stop worrying and feel safe because the property owner has committed to the Section 8 program for another year or another five years, or start worrying more about where they will move if they have to leave Windsor Place.

If you would like more information on Windsor Place, or any other other project-based Section 8 properties in Ohio, contact Jill Russ at COHHIO at 614/280-1984, or visit our web page at cohhio/html.

 

Real Data on Families Leaving Welfare Now Available
While there is much speculation and anecdotal information about families leaving welfare, the new study, “How Are They Managing?”, provides the first comprehensive look at the lives of a significant sample of families. The initial findings of this “leaver” (as in leaving welfare) study by Claudia Coulton of Case Western University, confirm the sense among housing and homeless service providers that many families leaving welfare have real hardships related to housing. This study of families leaving cash assistance in Cuyahoga County begins with the last quarter of 1998 and will follow families through the first quarter of 2001, providing pre and post time limits data. October 2000 is the date time limits take effect. For the families covered in the initial two quarter phase, which this report covers, housing expense is identified as the biggest hardship. Sixty percent of families reported paying more than one third of their monthly income for housing expenses. Fifteen percent reported losing their utilities at least once. The initial report, “How Are They Managing?”, is available on-line at http://povertycenter.cwru.edu. Claudia Coulton will be presenting at the COHHIO Annual Conference. For more information, contact Pam Argus at COHHIO at 614/280-1984.

New PAE’s Come to Ohio Under the Mark-to-Market Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Multifamily Housing Assistance Restructuring (OMHAR) has recently assigned three additional Participating Administrative Entities (PAEs) for the state of Ohio. The three private entities will, in addition to the Ohio Housing Finance Agency (OHFA), work on properties assigned to the Mark-to-Market (M2M) program. The three new PAEs are Heskin Signet Partnership, out of Denver, Colorado; ONTRA, located in Austin, Texas; and Real Estate Recovery, Inc. (RER), from Herndon, Virginia.

The three new private PAEs were assigned to Ohio because OHFA is no longer working on comp reviews, OHFA reached capacity in the number of projects that it could work on at one time, and OMHAR determined that certain conflicts of interest, whether real or perceived, existed between OHFA and its contractor, Ohio Capital Corporation for Housing, and certain project owners. OHFA started working on nine of these properties, which have now been turned over to one of the private PAEs.

 

OHFA has been assigned 42 other properties that have requested comp reviews, lites and full restructurings. Almost all of the comp reviews have been completed. Five of the lites have been completed, where it was determined by OHFA that two properties were feasible as lites, two were not feasible, and one property was receiving below market rents. Additionally, one project that entered the program under the full restructuring category has prepaid the FHA-insured mortgage on the property and is no longer eligible for M2M.

According to HUD, there are now 138 projects in Ohio that are in the M2M program. Not all have been officially assigned to a PAE. COHHIO’s Preserving Ohio’s Affordable Housing Project team, made of up Spencer Wells and Jill Russ and AmeriCorps*VISTAs Mabel Weaver and Warren Perkins, have been working with tenants at many of these properties. Team memattend tenant meetings, answer questions about the M2M process, and help tenants organize and provide comments to the PAE about the project’s physical condition, management and the restructuring process. Team memare also available to attend community meetings or forums and to provide information about the project-based Section 8 properties throughout Ohio. If you would like more information about the M2M program, or about project-based Section 8 properties, contact Jill Russ or Spencer Wells at COHHIO at 614/280-1984, or check out COHHIO’s web site at cohhio/html.

 

A Living Wage
In 30 communities around the country, proponents of what is called a "living wage" have won victories for local government employees and those who work for companies that contract with local governments. The concept is simple: the jobs that are covered by living wage ordinances must pay wages that have the potential to lift families out of poverty. This, of course, means that the wage must be significantly above the minimum wage, currently $5.15 an hour. A living wage proposal was introduced to the Cleveland City Council in November. The proposal has received the public support of 11 of the 21 memof City Council.

The proposal asks that the City of Cleveland and all private employers who enjoy a substantial financial benefit from the City must pay their employees a living wage. Substantial benefit is defined as receiving $50,000 or more a year, thereby exempting small employers who might argue that the ordinance would be an unbearable burden. Further protection is provided by the provision that the employers who would fall under the living wage ordinance would be those for-profit businesses with 20 employees or more and those not-for-profit entities with 50 employees or more. Those employers who are covered would be required to pay a wage equal to 125 percent of the federal poverty rate for a family of four, which currently translates to $10.04 an hour, as well as family health care coverage (or the financial equivalent) and guaranteeing the right of employees to organize into a union, if they chose to do so.

The ordinance is opposed by Cleveland's Chamber of Commerce and the Plain Dealer, and Mayor White has remained neutral. For more information, contact Steve Cagan of Cleveland Jobs for Justice at 440/333-6363. Information taken from the Hunger Network in Ohio newsletter, vol. 23, no. 1.

 

KeyBank Virtually Ignores Credit Needs of Minority and Low-Income Borrowers

For the past several months, the Ohio Community Reinvestment Project (OCRP), which is a project of COHHIO, has been reviewing the lending records of several financial institutions that do business in Ohio. This review is part of an overall effort to ensure that financial institutions are meeting the credit needs of all Ohioans, regardless of race or income. One of those lenders, KeyBank, which is headquartered in Cleveland and maintains a presence in several market areas throughout the State of Ohio, is the focus of this review.

“Until recently, KeyBank had been a partner in community reinvestment activities throughout the state,” said Bill Faith, Executive Director of COHHIO. He went on to say that “over the past couple of years, the bank has changed. We have seen them pull out of entire communities...either closing branches altogether or just not making loans to minority or low-income applicants. KeyBank is a bank going in the wrong direction.”

At a time when this country is experiencing an unprecedented economic boom and the homeownership rate is at an all-time high, far too many minority and low-income Ohioans do not have access to fair and equitable credit resources. In a side-by-side comparison, KeyBank consistently originates fewer and denies more applications submitted by minority or low-income applicants than most of its competitors in nearly every market area in the State of Ohio.

Akron/Canton/Youngstown
In this market area, African-American applicants had 47 percent of their refinancing applications denied by KeyBank, while White applicants had 12 percent of their applications denied. For all lenders in this market area, African-American applicants had an average of 25 percent of their applications denied, while White applicants had 13 percent of their applications denied.

Cincinnati/Hamilton/Middletown
In this market area, African-American applicants had 60 percent of their home improvement applications denied by KeyBank, while White applicants had 21 percent of their applications denied. For all lenders in this market area, African-American applicants had an average of 19 percent of their applications denied, while White applicants had 16 percent of their applications denied.

Cleveland/Lorain/Elyria
In this market area, applicants with incomes below 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI) had an average of 46 percent of their home improvement applications originated (they walk out of the bank with a loan) by KeyBank, while all lenders originated 59 percent of such applications.

Columbus
In this market area, African-American and White applicants submitted the same number of home purchase applications. Of the applications received by White applicants, 73 percent were originated and 13 percent were denied. Of the applications received by African-American applicants, 53 percent were originated and 33 percent were denied.

Dayton/Springfield
In this market area, African-American applicants had 29 percent of their refinancing applications denied by KeyBank, while White applicants had 13 percent of their applications denied. For all lenders in this market area, African-American applicants had an average of 19 percent of their applications denied, while White applicants had 9 percent of their applications denied.

Toledo/Lima/Mansfield
In this market area, African-American applicants were 1.9 times more likely to have their home purchase application denied by KeyBank than White applicants. For all lenders in this market area, African-American applicants were 1.2 times more likely to be denied a loan than White applicants.

For the purposes of this review, we looked at KeyBank in relation to other lenders throughout the state. We compared KeyBank to all lenders in six market areas by looking at three specific types of loans (home purchase, home improvement, and refinancing). This comparison was done using 1998 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data (the most recent available data) from KeyBank and the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC). The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requires financial institutions to collect certain demographic information from everyone that applies for a home purchase, home improvement, or refinancing loan.

Financial institutions must report information such as applicant race, income, gender, etc. to the federal government on an annual basis. In every one of Ohio’s large market areas, African-American applicants were either less likely than White applicants to have their applications originated or more likely than White applicants to have their applications denied by KeyBank. Though there was some variance by market area, KeyBank’s performance overall is troubling. “Even though the financial services industry, almost across the board, is skewed in favor of Whites, it’s always a bit of a shock to see lending practices reminiscent of the 1970’s,” said Bill Faith, Executive Director of COHHIO. He went on to say that “in spite of the progress made over the past 20 or so years, the color of one’s skin and the income of the household, seem to be the most important predictors of whether or not KeyBank makes a loan.”

Home purchase:
For the state as a whole, KeyBank received twice as many home purchase applications from White applicants than it did from African-American applicants. Of the applications received, African-American applicants were two times more likely than White applicants to have their application denied. For all lenders in the state, African-American applicants were 1.5 times more likely than White applicants to have their application denied.

Home improvement:
For the state as a whole, KeyBank received almost four times as many applications from White applicants than it did from African-American applicants. Of the applications received, African-American applicants were nearly two times more likely than White applicants to have their application denied. For all lenders in the state, African-American applicants were 1.5 times more likely than White applicants to have their application denied.

For the state as a whole, applicants with incomes below 80 percent of the Area Median Income ($39,670) had an average of 46 percent of their loans originated (they walk out of the bank with a loan) by KeyBank, while all lenders originated 54 percent of such applications. These same applicants (those with incomes below 80 percent of the AMI) had an average of 31 percent of their applications denied by KeyBank, while all lenders denied 27 percent of such applications.

Refinancing:
For the state as a whole, KeyBank received almost nine times as many applications from White applicants than it did from African-American applicants. Of the applications received, White applicants were nearly 1.5 times more likely to have their loan originated (they walk out of the bank with a loan), while African-American applicants were 2.5 times more likely to have their application denied.

Branch locations:
In addition to KeyBank’s lending activities, we also reviewed the location of their bank branches with respect to neighborhood income. The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) states that financial institutions must serve the credit needs of the communities in which they are chartered and from which they take deposits. The location of bank branches is a relatively easy way to determine if financial institutions are in fact meeting the credit needs of all communities in their market areas.

In 1997, KeyBank maintained a total of 238 branches or banking centers, of which 184 were located in Middle and Upper Income (MUI) neighborhoods, and 54 were located in Low and Moderate Income (LMI) neighborhoods. In 1998, KeyBank maintained a total of 231 branches or banking centers, of which 182 were located in MUI neighborhoods, and 49 were located in LMI neighborhoods. In a year, KeyBank closed seven branches, of which two were located in MUI neighborhoods and five were located in LMI neighborhoods. For more information, contact Rick Taylor at COHHIO at 614/280-1984.

 

Earned Income Outreach Kits Available
Looking for a way to help your working clients have more money? The Earned Income Credit (EIC) is a benefit for low-income workers. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has a free kit which will make it easy for you to get information to your clients. Each year, hundreds of thousand of workers fail to claim their EIC. The EIC can be a critical wage supplement for those who owe as well as those who don’t owe taxes. Workers have the option of receiving their entire EIC in a check from the IRS each year or, using the Advance Payment Option, can increase take home pay. For your free community outreach EIC kit, contact: EIC Campaign, c/o the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 820 First Street, NE, Suite 510, Washington, DC 20002; 202/408-1080, 202/408-1056 (fax); or eickit@cbpp.org.

 

Hunger & Homelessness in American Cities
To assess the status of hunger and homelessness in America's cities during 1999, the U.S. Conference of Mayors surveyed 26 major cities whose mayors were memof its Task Force on Hunger and Homelessness. The survey sought information and estimates from each city on 1) the demand for emergency food assistance and emergency shelter and the capacity of local agencies to meet that demand; 2) the causes of hunger and homelessness and the demographics of the populations experiencing these problems; 3) exemplary programs or efforts in the cities to respond to hunger and homelessness; 4) the availability of affordable housing for low income people; and 5) the outlook for the future and the impact of the economy on hunger and homelessness. Among the findings of the 26-city survey:

HUNGER
• Officials in the survey cities estimate that during the past year requests for emergency food assistance increased by an average of 18 percent, with 85 percent of the cities registering an increase. Requests for food assistance by families with children increased by an average of 15 percent. Requests for emergency food assistance by elderly persons increased by an average nine percent during the last year, with 60 percent of the cities reporting an increase.
• On average, 21 percent of the requests for emergency food assistance are estimated to have gone unmet during the last year. For families alone, 19 percent of the requests for assistance are estimated to have gone unmet. In 54 percent of the cities, emergency food assistance facilities may have to turn away people in need due to lack of resources.
• Fifty-eight percent of the people requesting emergency food assistance were memof families -- children and their parents. Sixty-seven percent of the adults requesting food assistance were employed.
• The overall level of resources available to emergency food assistance facilities increased by 16 percent during the last year. Fifty-eight percent of the survey cities reported that emergency food assistance facilities are able to provide an adequate quantity of food. In 73 percent of the cities, emergency food assistance facilities have had to decrease the number of bags of food provided and/or the number of times people can receive food. Of these cities, 58 percent have had to increase the limit on food provided. Eighty-five percent of the survey cities reported that the food provided is nutritionally balanced.
• In 100 percent of the cities, emergency food assistance facilities were relied on by families and individuals both in emergencies and as a steady source of food over long periods of time.
• Low-paying jobs lead the list of causes of hunger identified by the city officials. Other causes cited, in order of frequency, include unemployment and other employment-related problems, high housing costs, poverty or lack of income, substance abuse and food stamp cuts.

HOMELESSNESS
• During the past year requests for emergency shelter increased in the survey cities by an average of 12 percent, with 69 percent of the cities registering an increase. Requests for shelter by homeless families alone increased by 17 percent, with 68 percent of the cities reporting an increase.
• An average of 25 percent of the requests for emergency shelter by homeless people overall and 37 percent of the requests by homeless families alone are estimated to have gone unmet during the last year. In 77 percent of the cities, emergency shelters may have to turn away homeless families due to lack of resources; in 73 percent they may also have to turn away other homeless people.
• People remain homeless an average of seven months in the survey cities. Fifty-four percent of the cities said that the length of time people are homeless increased during the last year.
• Lack of affordable housing lead the list of causes of homelessness identified by the city officials. Other causes cited, in order of frequency, include substance abuse and the lack of needed services, low paying jobs, domestic violence, mental illness and the lack of needed services, poverty, changes and cuts in public assistance, and the lack of access to affordable health care.
• Officials estimate that, on average, single men comprise 43 percent of the homeless population, families with children 37 percent, single women 13 percent and unaccompanied minors seven percent. The homeless population is estimated to be 50 percent African-American, 31 percent white, 13 percent Hispanic, four percent Native American and two percent Asian. An average of 19 percent of homeless people in the cities are considered mentally ill; 31 percent are substance abusers; 21 percent are employed and 14 percent are veterans.
• In 65 percent of the cities, families may have to break up in order to be sheltered. In 62 percent of the cities, families may have to spend their daytime hours outside of the shelter they use at night.
• Officials in the survey cities report that the Federal Government’s Continuum of Care policy has made a difference in their community’s effort to address homelessness, and that the increase in HUD funding to address homelessness has resulted in more homeless families and individuals accessing transitional and permanent housing and reaching self-sufficiency in their cities.

HOUSING
• Requests for assisted housing by low-income families and individuals increased in 79 percent of the cities during the last year. Twenty-seven percent of eligible low-income households are currently served by assisted housing programs. City officials estimate that low- income households spend an average of 49 percent of their income on housing.
• Applicants must wait an average of 19 months for public housing in the survey cities. The wait for Section 8 Certificates is 33 months and for Section 8 Vouchers, the wait is 32 months. Sixty-one percent of the cities have stopped accepting applications for at least one assisted housing program due to the excessive length of the waiting list.

THE OUTLOOK
• Officials in 84 percent of the responding cities expect requests for emergency food assistance to increase during 2000. Eighty-three percent expect that requests for emergency food assistance by families with children will increase during 2000. Officials in 92 percent of the cities expect that requests for emergency shelter will increase next year. Ninety-two percent expect that requests by homeless families will increase.
• The city officials report mixed views with respect to the effect that the current strong economy is having on problems of both hunger and homelessness. Some say that there is little or no impact, while some say in the long run the strong economy will lead to improved conditions. Still others say that the strong economy has made things worse, especially with respect to increased housing costs which leads to a lack of affordable housing.
• For additional information or to order a copy of the report, please visit the United States Conference of Mayors website at http://www.usmayors.org/uscm.

 

Coalition on Homelessness and Housing in Ohio Membership
Name
Organization
Address
City, State, Zip
Phone, Fax, County
Individual: _____ $35 (Regular) _____ $75 (Benefactor) _____ $250 (Sustainer) _____ $10 (Low-Income) _____ Fee Waiver Requested
Agency (according to budget): _____ $35 (100,000 or less) _____ $75 (100,001-250,000)
_____ $125 (250,001-500,000) _____ $200 (500,001-1 million)_____ $250 ($1 million-$1.5 million) _____ $300 (over $1.5 million)

Please send your tax deductible check to COHHIO at 85 E. Gay St, Ste. 603, Columbus, Ohio 43215.
Thank you for your support!

 

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT TRAINING
THE RITZ CATERING COMPANY, COLUMBUS
APRIL 19, 2000 - 9:00 AM to 4:30 PM
$25
COHHIO, with the support of the Ohio Department of Development, will be sponsoring a Fiscal Management Training on April 19 at the Ritz Catering Company, Columbus. The cost of the training will be $25. In conjunction with the Office of Housing and Community Partnerships, COHHIO is offering a one day training for fiscal managers and administrators of non-profits who receive public funds on the essentials of fiscal accountability strategies. This training will focus on advanced financial management. The trainings will cover issues related to fund accounting, grant monitoring and reporting, fiscal policies and procedures, updates regarding federal fiscal regulations and other applicable issues. Participants will include staff responsible for the financial management of an agency providing housing or serving homeless people, CPAs knowledgeable with non-profit requirements and state/federal grants and ODOD personnel involved in grant monitoring. The registration fee includes materials, coffee, soda and lunch. A fiscal management manual for non-profits that COHHIO has developed will be distributed at the training. Please complete the registration form and return with a check made out to COHHIO by April 10. For more information, call COHHIO at 614/280-1984. Directions will be sent once you have registered for the training. COHHIO has submitted training materials to the Accountancy Board of Ohio and has received a sponsorship number so those attending this training will be eligible for approximately 6.5 hours of CPE's. A training certificate will be sent to anyone who signs up for CPE's and pays a $5 administrative fee at the training.


REGISTRATION
(one form per person, form can be copied, please print clearly)

Name
Organization
Address
City, State, Zip
Phone, Fax, Email
_____ Please check for vegetarian lunch

REGISTRATION FEE = $25

____ Total Enclosed (COHHIO Federal ID. #31-1189029)

Checks can be made out to COHHIO and registrations with payment can be sent to COHHIO, 85 East Gay Street, Suite 603, Columbus, Ohio 43215-3118. Credit cards are not accepted. Payment must accompany registration. No phone registrations. Questions? Call COHHIO at 614/280-1984.

Resources

TRAININGS
March 7-8, Developing Permanent Supportive Housing Conference, Lakefront SRO, Illinois. This comprehensive workshop will take each prospective developer from project start-up and financing to completion and ongoing management. $175. Call Lynn Bergstrom at 773/561-0900, ext. 242.

The Ohio Department of Development (ODOD) is offering two trainings - 2000 Housing Development Finance Professional Certification Program and 2000 Lead Abatement Licensure Training.
• Housing Development Finance Professional Certification Program - this three week program, being held in Columbus, will focus on the financing of affordable housing projects, including single family home ownership finance (April 3-6), multi-family housing development finance (June 12-16) and housing development finance: problem solving and deal structuring (September 25-29). The April 3-6 training, Single Family Home Ownership Finance, explores the skills required to successfully develop affordable, owner-occupied, single-family housing. The session focuses on the role of financing in affecting affordability - both of the unit's sale price and they buyer's monthly mortgage payment. The registration fee is $350 for each training and those completing the course and passing the exam will be certified as development finance professionals. The registration deadline for the April training is February 28. For more information, call Mary Dupler at ODOD at 614/466-2285.
• Lead Abatement Licensure Trainings. Lead-Based Paint Maintenance Worker Training - February 23, Columbus. The course is designed to provide maintenance workers, employed by multi-family residential housing complexes, with a basic understanding of the adverse effects of lead; and proper cleaning, maintenance and repair methods that will minimize lead hazards to themselves and the residents. The course curriculum was prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Residential Lead Hazard Abatement For Workers, February 29-March 3, Athens. This course uses the latest EPA model curriculum for workers. In addition, the course features hands-on practice skill development sessions; Occupational Safety and Health Administration; EP and HUD compliance methods; and worker/occupant protection strategies. The registration fee is $100 for each training. For more information, call Tom Sherman at ODOD at 614/466-2285.

PUBLICATIONS
Meeting the Housing Needs of Rural Residents: Results of the 1998 Survey of USDA's Single Family Direct Loan Housing Program. The study found that most borrowers are satisfied with the Section 502 direct program. Borrowers are typically under 40, have low or modest incomes, have a home that is better than their previous residence, and are satisfied with their current home, neighborhood and the Section 502 program. Most believed that, without assistance from the program, they would have been unable to afford a comparable home for at least two years and possibly never. The report is free at http://www.econ.ag.gov/epubs/pdf/rdrr91 or $16 from 800/999-6779 (refer to RDRR-91).

Homeless in America: A Children's Story, Homes for the Homeless. This report explores homeless children's educational experiences, physical and emotional health, hunger and nutrition, and exposure to violence, based on a study of children in 24 places. $10. To order, call 212/529-5252.

Housing Our Elders: A Report Card on the Housing Conditions and Needs of Older Americans. Free at http://www.huduser.org or $5 from HUD User at 800/245-2691.

JOB OPENING
• Executive Director, Tender Mercies. A private non-profit agency providing housing and supportive services to homeless mentally ill adults, seeks an Executive Director. Position oversees Transitional and Permanent housing programs, $2 million budget and funding requirements, 55 staff and eight properties. Requires Master's in Human Services or related field, with minimum eight years clinical/management experience. Residential services experience, LISW or LPCC preferred. Competitive salary and benefits. Reply with salary requirements to: Tender Mercies, Attn: HR-ED, 27 W. 12th Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45210, 513/977-5328 (fax).
• Executive Director, Columbus Habitat for Humanity. Seeks person to lead 13 year-old, housing non-profit. Experience in housing and executive management preferred. Send cover letter and resume to Habitat Search Committee, c/o 650 S. Grant Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43206 by February 23. For further inquiries, you may contact Patrick Grady, Search Committee Chair, at 614/469-3435 (evening).

WEB PAGE
• http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/1999/cb99-232.html. Estimates of housing units for each state as of July 1998, and growth since the 1990 Census by the Census Bureau. Estimates per state include numbers of units and households, number by age of householder, and person per household, but not by urban-rural or metro-nonmetro geography.
• http://fdncenter.org/onlib/lnps/index.html. The US Foundation Center has put together a very large database of literature on philanthropy. The database incorporates the contents of the Foundation Center's five libraries, and contains over 17,000 bibliographic citations, 11,000 of which have descriptive abstracts. The site also has a useful list, with full contact information, of dozens of periodicals in the nonprofit and philanthropy sectors.

 

CONGRATULATIONS
Michelle Carpenter and Roberta Longfellow, both registered advocates with Haven of Hope in Cambridge, Ohio, were two of 16 women chosen from around the world for the annual Peacepower Amigas Awards from the Women's Peacepower Foundation. Recipients of the award receive $250, while Haven of Hope, a domestic violence shelter, will receive technical assistance in the areas of long range planning and fund development as the employer of the honorees. For more information, contact Haven of Hope at 740/439-7233.

HUD Awards $900,000 Grant to Local Fair Housing Groups. The Metropolitan Strategy Group (MSG) and Housing Advocates in Cleveland and the Fair Housing Contact Service in Akron were selected to receive $600,000 in funding under the 1999 Fair Housing Initiatives Program for private enforcement activities. This is the largest federal fair housing grant ever awarded in the State of Ohio. The grant will support comprehensive testing efforts, including rental housing, real estate sales, mortgage landing, homeowner's insurance and housing for disabled individuals. Credit workshops, which help to educate underserved populations about the importance of credit in achieving home ownership, how to repair poor credit, and the consequences of borrowing from "predatory" lenders will be expanded. MSG is seeking the pro bono services of legal firms in Ohio to help with this effort. For more information , please call MSG at 216/371-4285. In addition, the Toledo Fair Housing Center was selected to receive $300,000 to provide fair housing functions and awareness in the Northwest Ohio region that would otherwise be undeserved. For more information on this project, call Kathy Broka at 419/243-6163.

 

COHHIO Begins Project to Identify Key Issues Affecting Homeless Children and Youth
With a grant from the Gund Foundation, COHIO will begin to explore what types of problems affect homeless children and youth. The project started February 1. COHHIO staff memAngela Lariviere along with the assistance of four VISTA Members will begin conducting surveys and focus groups in five areas of the state. These areas include: Athens County, Cleveland/Akron, Columbus, Cincinnati and portions of Northwest Ohio. Our goal is to identify ways in which we can improve the situation of these children and youth. COHHIO will post the progress of this project in the COHHIO newsletters and on the COHHIO web page. All information regarding the project's findings will be made available to service providers upon the completion of the project. Survey and focus groups are scheduled to begin in March. For more information, please contact Angela Lariviere at COHHIO at 614/280-1984.

(614) 280-1984 Voice
(614) 463-1060 Fax

cohhio@cohhio.org