1. The State of Ohio is an Equal Opportunity Employer and Provider of ADA Services Overcoming Capacity Challenges to Effectively Monitor and Manage Programs March 17, 2015 COSCDA Program Managers Meeting

2. Ohio’s CDBG History State program created in 1983 Formula Program developed to allocate most of CDBG funds Competitive programs: –Economic Development –Residential Water and Sewer –Housing

3. CDBG Formula Program Locally driven Eligible communities received annual funding allocation Projects required to: –meet CDBG eligibility –National Objective –Public service caps –Slum and blight caps –Planning caps

4. CDBG Formula Program Formula based on number of LMI individuals in community as a percent of LMI individuals in non- entitlement areas 130 eligible communities: 79 non-entitlement counties 51 cities - At least 25% LMI population - At least $50,000 allocation

5. Program Benefits On-going relationship between state and local governments Develop and maintain administrative capacity Residual community development benefit

6. Other Opportunities Funds allocated to competitive programs Competitive programs: Larger grant awards Additional eligible communities Required additional administrative capacity or specialized skills and expertise

7. Program Challenges Decreased CDBG funding: 29 percent decrease since PY 1995 20 percent decrease since PY 2010 Insufficient funding for projects and administration for all communities Community eligibility re-evaluated every three years Smallest allocations = $35,000-$40,000 Administration/Fair Housing = $7,000-$8,000

8. Impacts Small projects –Multiple phases –Insignificant outcomes –Projects/beneficiaries reduced Holdover requests Staffing –Shortages –Quality reduction

9. Unintended Consequences Poor performance –Entitlement mentality –Limited ability to sanction –Multiple open grants –Difficult application review –Long close-out process –No incentive to improve

10. PY 2013 Program Redesign Statewide planning process –Community development practitioners –Elected officials –State staff Supplemented Consolidated Planning process

11. Statewide Planning Process Formula-type allocation is beneficial, but to optimize: Institute minimum grant award to ensure funding for meaningful projects Limit eligible communities to substantial populations and high percent LMI

12. Statewide Planning Process Funding should be contingent on -past performance -application quality -timeliness Increase administrative capacity in funding decisions Limit amendments/extensions Aggressively recapture and reallocate funds

13. PY 2013 Program Redesign Reduced eligible communities Minimum grant award Reduced program funding Created competitive community development program Increased expectations

14. Realized Successes Vinton County –Increased allocation amount (PY 2013) –Received competitive grant (PY 2013) Ashtabula (County and City) –Reduced allocation overall (PY 2013) –Four competitive awards totaling $1,537,200 Hancock County/City of Findlay –Improved administrative performance –Received competitive award (PY 2014)

15. Ohio’s Administrative Benefits Less awards off-sets additional program administration Smaller grant awards reduces risk for poor performance Limiting amendments/extensions reduces open grants and expedites close-out Incentive to improve performance to receive competitive funds

16. The State of Ohio is an Equal Opportunity Employer and Provider of ADA Services Questions or Comments? Mary Richards Oakley Economic and Appalachian Development Supervisor 614-644-9226 Mary.Oakley@development.ohio.gov