Housing board seeks FY24 budget language change to fund homes for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities

Holly Major, director of policy and special projects for the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board (VHCB), told a legislative committee Tuesday that VHCB could use returned FY24 funds to help build permanent supportive housing for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) if the budget language is broadened.

Major said the 2024 Legislature appropriated $10,000,000 to VHCB to expand shelter capacity and permanent supportive housing. VHCB committed those dollars to community projects across the state, but one project that had planned to rely on HUD Continuum of Care funding for operating subsidy lost that federal support after a change in federal policy. That shift, Major said, made the project infeasible as designed and freed up $3,900,000 that would return to VHCB.

"If the FY24 budget is amended to broaden the eligible use of that fund to be not only permanent supportive housing for people exiting homelessness, but permanent supportive housing for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, that would enable the board next year to keep the momentum going," Major said.

Kirsten Murphy, executive director of the Vermont Developmental Disabilities Council and chair of the Act 69 stakeholder committee, described the population the proposal targets. She said the Act 69 "Road Home" report estimated the state needs roughly 600 homes for people with IDD who are eligible for developmental disability services — a group Murphy said numbers about 3,400 Vermonters. Murphy said most in that pool live with aging family members or in shared living arrangements and that many families are worried about long-term stability.

"A parent's greatest worry is what happens to my adult son or daughter after I can no longer care for them," Murphy said.

Murphy and Major said the housing for this population is primarily rental-based and can take several forms: small shared homes, clusters of apartments with services on site, or adaptations within affordable rental complexes. Murphy described the population as largely living on Supplemental Security Income, which she said is currently about $880 per month, and noted many in the group earn limited wages.

A committee member identified in the meeting as Senator Benson asked whether the driving problem was affordability and whether the housing is similar to assisted-living models. Murphy replied the scale and service model differ from typical assisted living and emphasized that many arrangements now are not sustainable as parents age and shared-living providers retire.

Major told the committee that the Road Home report had recommended creating a capital fund to subsidize the cost of building IDD housing so those costs are not borne by residents. She said VHCB has discussed the idea with the Agency of Human Services (AHS) but had not yet received feedback from AHS on the specific amendment proposed.

Major described the request before the committee as a policy decision and said the immediate mechanism would be to amend the FY24 budget language to broaden eligible uses; a legislative sponsor would be sought in the next session if the committee wants to pursue that path.

The committee did not take a formal vote on the proposal during the session and adjourned after brief discussion.