Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hap6 Allocation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Task force debates HAP6 allocation strategy, forms ad hoc committee to finalize interim-shelter recommendations
Summary
Tulare County staff and task force members discussed HAP6 (interim shelter and PSH) funding rules, eligibility constraints and allocation methods; the task force created a small ad hoc committee to review partner-submitted funding gaps and recommend how to allocate the county's HAP6 dollars before the application deadline.
Tulare County staff led a detailed discussion of the HAP6 Notice of Funding Availability and asked the Tulare County Task Force on Homelessness to provide strategic direction on how to allocate roughly $1.4 million in HAP6 funds.
Noah Whitaker, who presented the funding rules and constraints, said HAP6 requires the county to prioritize transitional housing first, then permanent supportive housing (PSH), and then other uses if money remains. Whitaker told the task force that the funding rules also require applicants to document multi‑year revenue and expense forecasts, which complicates eligibility because some revenue sources do not commit that far in advance.
Whitaker and other staff filtered local programs by HAP6 eligibility and materials the task force maintains (a housing inventory and HIC report). The filtered list highlighted four interim-shelter/PSH sites that appeared to meet the funding criteria (Visalia Navigation Center, Porterville Navigation Center, Visalia Warming Center and Eden House) and several other sites that were currently ineligible because they were not low-barrier, not operating, or were allocation-based programs.
Task force members discussed several allocation methodologies — pro rata by bed count, pro rata by point-in-time (PIT) count, or fully funding one site — and raised operational concerns including HMIS usage, system performance measures (shelter-to-housing outcomes), integration with managed-care reimbursements (CalAIM) and the risk that state or federal reimbursement streams could change in future years.
By consensus the task force moved to create a short ad hoc committee to finalize recommendations quickly after affected providers submit required financial-gap information. The ad hoc is composed of voting members representing programs and jurisdictions that could receive funds (for example, the Visalia and Porterville representatives, Self Help/operational partner representatives and Eden House representation). The task force chair said partner organizations must submit the required financial forms to county staff by the end of the month so staff can prepare the HAP6 application ahead of the August deadline; if a partner fails to submit its form, staff will assume it does not need HAP6 funding.
Whitaker discussed a funding mechanism (capitalized operating subsidies and reserves, or COSR) that would place awarded dollars in an account for each recipient to offset rental assistance needs over time; the county would report those funds as expended to the state when placed in COSRs. Several members warned that spreading the available funds thinly across many providers would dilute impact and urged either a point-in-time or need-based approach; others emphasized equity and recommended proportional distribution by PIT or bed count.
The task force also reviewed an encampment mapping approach to meet a separate HAP6 requirement. Staff said they will provide a Google Map spreadsheet of encampment sites and coordinate with local outreach teams; the map will be refined over the next few months and may be replaced with a county IT solution at additional cost.
The task force did not finalize specific dollar allocations at the meeting. Instead it authorized an ad hoc to evaluate provider-submitted budgets and to prepare a recommendation for either an email approval or a special July meeting before the county's application deadlines and the group’s required board-of-supervisors presentation.
