1. REENTRY INITIATIVE PAHRA CONFERENCE JUNE 22, 2016 HUD Philadelphia Office of Public Housing

2. BACKGROUND  Approximately 100 million (or nearly one in three) Americans have some type of criminal record. 1  Since 2004, an average of over 650,000 individuals have been released annually from federal and state prisons. 2  One in 200 adult Pennsylvanians is currently incarcerated in a Pennsylvania State Correctional Institution. Ninety percent of the inmates currently in a Pennsylvania state prison will eventually be released. 3  According to a study in New York City, more than 30 percent of single adults who enter homeless shelters are individuals recently released from city and state correctional institutions. The study also indicates that many continually cycle in and out of incarceration. 4 ________________________________________ 1 Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Survey of State Criminal History Information Systems, 2012, 3 (Jan. 2014) 2 E. Ann Carson, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Prisoners in 2014 (Sept. 2015) 3 Recidivism Report 2013, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections 4 New York City Department of Homeless Services, “Summary of DOC/DHS Data Match” (Draft of data analysis submitted for review as part of the New York City Department of Correction and Department of Homeless Services Discharge Planning Initiative, January 22, 2004).

3. HUD’S ROLE  Active member of the Federal Interagency Reentry Council; 23 Federal Agencies meet regularly to act on issues that affect the lives of those released from incarceration: a) Collaborate at the Cabinet-level to enhance community safety and well-being, assist those returning from prison/jail in becoming productive citizens, and save taxpayer dollars by lowering direct and collateral costs of incarceration. b) Identify and address the “collateral consequences” that individuals and their families face because of incarceration or involvement with criminal justice system. c) Reduce barriers to public and subsidized housing; i. Stable housing paired with appropriate supportive services, is a key factor in preventing or ending homelessness and reducing recidivism.  Additional information about the Reentry Council: https://csgjusticecenter.org/reentry/

4. HUD’S ROLE  Notice PIH 2015-19, FAQs on November 2, 2015 and OGC Guidance on April 4, 2016: a) HUDs commitment to providing “second chances” to formerly incarcerated individuals. b) Ensure that individuals are not denied access to HUD-subsidized housing on the basis of inaccurate, incomplete, or otherwise unreliable evidence of past criminal conduct.

5. PIH NOTICE 2015-19  Issued November 2, 2015  Notices are sent to Housing Authorities by local HUD Field Offices and are posted on HUD’s website http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD Three Main Objectives: 1. Inform PHAs and owners of other federally-assisted housing that arrest records may not be the basis for denying admission, terminating assistance or evicting tenants. 2. Remind PHAs and owners that HUD does not require the adoption of “One Strike” policies. 3. Reiterate obligation of PHAs and owners to safeguard the due process rights of applicants and tenants.

6. FAQS FOR NOTICE PIH 2015-19: EXCLUDING THE USE OF ARREST RECORDS IN HOUSING DECISIONS  Issued to address important questions raised by Notice PIH 2015-19  10 most commonly asked FAQs and answers Q: Why is the fact of an arrest not itself a permissible basis for making a housing decision? A: An arrest means only that the person was suspected of having committed an offense and does not prove that a person engaged in criminal activity. Q: Does notice PIH 2015-19 completely exclude the review of arrest records in housing decisions? A: No, although a record of an arrest might properly trigger an inquiry by a PHA or owner into whether a person actually engaged in disqualifying criminal activity. Police reports, record of disposition of any criminal charges and other evidence with an arrest can assist in informing eligibility determination. Q: What is the threshold that must be met before a PHA or owner may disqualify housing assistance? A: Preponderance of evidence is needed before terminating assistance.

7. FAQS: EXCLUDING THE USE OF ARREST RECORDS IN HOUSING DECISIONS Q: What is an example of an admissions policy that complies with Section 4 of Notice PIH 2015-19? “The fact that an applicant or tenant was arrested for a disqualifying offense shall not be treated or regarded as proof that the applicant or tenant engaged in disqualifying criminal activity. The arrest may, however, trigger an investigation to determine whether the applicant or tenant actually engaged in disqualifying criminal activity. As part of it’s investigation, [the PHA or owner] may obtain the police report associated with the arrest and consider the reported circumstances of the arrest. The PHA may also consider any statements made by witnesses or the applicant or tenant not included in the police report; whether criminal charges were filed; whether, if filed, criminal charges were abandoned, dismissed, not prosecuted, or ultimately resulted in an acquittal; and any other evidence relevant to determining whether or not the applicant or tenant engaged in disqualifying activity.”

8. FAQS: EXCLUDING THE USE OF ARREST RECORDS IN HOUSING DECISIONS Q: Does Notice PIH 2015-19 require a PHA to rewrite its (1) Admissions and Continued Occupancy Policies (ACOP), or (2) Section 8 Administrative Plan (Admin Plan) if the ACOP or Admin Plan does not include the same language as used in the previous example? A: Maybe. All PHAs must comply with Notice PIH 2015-19. PHAs should therefore review their ACOPs and Admin Plans and revise them where a policy treats the fact that someone was arrested as a reason to deny admission, terminate assistance, or evict tenants. Q: Must a PHA or owner provide an applicant with notice and the opportunity to dispute the accuracy or relevance of a criminal record before denying admission on the basis of that record? A: Yes. Before a PHA denies admission to the public housing or Section 8 program on the basis of a criminal record, the PHA must notify the applicant of the proposed decision and provide the applicant and the subject of the record with a copy of the criminal record and an opportunity to dispute the accuracy and relevance of that record. In addition, public housing and Section 8 applicants have the right to request an informal review of the decision after their application has been denied. For further guidance, please consult 24 C.F.R. §§ 960.204(c), 960.208(a), 982.553(d), 982.554.

9. OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL GUIDANCE ON APPLICATION OF FAIR HOUSING ACT STANDARDS TO THE USE OF CRIMINAL RECORDS BY PROVIDERS OF HOUSING AND REAL ESTATE-RELATED TRANSACTIONS  Issued April 4, 2016 by HUD’s Office of General Counsel (OGC) concerning how the Fair Housing Act applies to the use of criminal history by providers or operators of housing and real-estate related transactions.  Outlines how the discriminatory effects and disparate treatment methods of proof apply in Fair Housing Act cases in which a housing provider justifies an adverse housing action based on an individual’s criminal history.  Policies that exclude persons based on criminal history must be tailored to serve the housing provider’s substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interest and take into consideration such factors as the type of the crime and the length of time since the conviction.

10. OGC GUIDANCE  Disproportionate rates of arrest and incarceration consequently leads to disproportionate impact on minority home seekers.  A housing provider violates the Fair Housing Act when the provider’s policy or practice has an unjustified discriminatory effect, even when the provider had no intent to discriminate.  Where a policy or practice that restricts access to housing on the basis of criminal history has a disparate impact on individuals of a particular race, national origin, or other protected class, such policy or practice is unlawful under the Fair Housing Act if it is not necessary to serve a substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interest of the housing provider, or if such interest could be served by another practice that has a less discriminatory effect.

11. MYTH VS. FACT Myth Fact Individuals who have been convicted of a crime are “banned” from public housing. Public Housing Authorities have great discretion in determining their admissions and occupancy policies for ex-offenders. While PHAs can choose to deny ex-offenders, it is not HUD policy to do so. In fact, in many circumstances, formerly incarcerated people should not be denied access to participating in the public housing and section 8 program.

12. MYTH VS. FACT Myth Fact Confined youth easily return to school after release from juvenile confinement.  The majority of youth involved in the juvenile justice system have strong aspirations to continue their education, yet face many barriers that reduce their access to education upon reentry.  While more than half of confined youth have not completed the eighth grade, the majority -- 66% -- do not return to school after release.

13. There are only two convictions for which a PHA MUST prohibit admission: 1. If any member of the household is subject to a lifetime registration requirement under a State sex offender registration program; and, 2. If any household member has ever been convicted of drug- related criminal activity for the manufacture or production of methamphetamine on the premises of federally assisted housing. Exceptions

14.  Many PHAs have established admissions and occupancy policies that have promoted reuniting families in supportive communities and using stable housing as a platform for improving their quality of life. Examples of PHA Best Practices on Screening for Criminal Activity: a)Allow applicants to address and present mitigating circumstances regarding criminal backgrounds prior to admission decisions. b)Adopt lookback periods. c)Adopt admissions policies that enumerate the specific factors that will be considered when the PHA evaluates an individual’s criminal record. d)Pilot programs to allow incarcerated persons to be added to an existing voucher of a family member (six months to one year of supportive services with nonprofit partners). e)Hiring an offender reentry housing specialist to collaborate with parole officer, landlord, and treatment provider to ensure successful reentry. Best Practices and Peer Examples HUD Notice PIH 2015-19

15. Examples of PHA Best Practices on Evicting and Terminating Assistance for Criminal Activity: Adopt policies that list the circumstances that will be considered prior to termination of the lease on the basis of criminal activity: A.Seriousness of offending action, especially with respect to how it affects other residents. B.Extent of participation or culpability of the leaseholder, other household members in offending action. C.Effects that the eviction will have on other family members who were not involved in action. D.Effect on the community of the termination, or of the PHA’s failure to terminate tenancy. E.Effect of the PHA’s decision on the integrity of the public housing program. F.The demand for housing by eligible families who will adhere to lease responsibilities. G.Extent to which the leaseholder has shown personal responsibility and steps have been taken to mitigate or prevent offending action. H.Length of time since violation occurred, family’s recent history, and the likelihood of favorable conduct in the future. Best Practices and Peer Examples

16. INNOVATIVE APPROACHES Union County Housing Authority’s Justice Bridge Program  Funded housing for recently released persons until a Housing Choice Voucher becomes available.  Allows inmates eligible for parole that do not have housing arrangements to leave jail sooner.  Program has saved approximately $20,000 per inmate per year.  Recidivism reduced from 53% to 23%

17. HUD PHILADELPHIA OPH ROLE  Support to Housing Authorities; clarification, additional guidance on admissions policies.  Accompanied HUD Secretary Castro and U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch on April 25, 2016 during an announcement in Philadelphia of $1.75 million in funding to 18 public housing authorities nationwide as part of the Juvenile Reentry Assistance Program (JRAP).  $100,000 JRAP grant awarded to Philadelphia Housing Authority.  Communicate any future guidance or changes to HUD policies and requirements (Notices, FAQs, etc.).  Participate on local HUD working group.

18. CONTACT INFORMATION Philadelphia Office of Public Housing Monica A. Hawkins, Director (215) 861-7593 Judith Axler, Division Director (215) 861-7604 Reentry Coordinators: Deanda Wilson, Public Housing Revitalization Specialist (215) 861-7612 Ashley Couture, Program Analyst (215) 861-7606