Volume Volume 1
2015-2020 Consolidated Plan for Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro
Cover photos of 2010-2015 CDBG and HOME projects: (Clockwise from the top left): City of North Plains Claxtar St. Waterline, Street and Sidewalk Improvements City of Hillsboro Walnut Park Improvements Northwest Housing Alternatives Alma Gardens Apartments, Hillsboro City of Hillsboro Dairy Creek Park Picnic Shelters and Accessibility Improvements WaCo LUT SW 173rd Sidewalk Improvements, Aloha City of Tualatin’s Juanita Pohl Center Centro Cultural de Washington County, Cornelius Bienestar, Inc.’s Juniper Gardens Apartments, Forest Grove Public Service activities funded by the City of Beaverton Home assisted by WaCo Office of Community Development’s Housing Rehabilitation Program Boys and Girls Aid Transitional Living Program, Beaverton Sequoia Mental Health Services Clinical Office Building (adjacent to Spruce Place Apartments)
Copies of this document may be accessed online at: http://www.co.washington.or.us/CommunityDevelopment/Planning/2015-2020-consolidated-plan.cfm
Approved by Washington County Board of Commissioners May 5, 2015 Minute Order #15-127
2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Volume 1
Washington County Consortium
Washington County and The Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro Oregon
Prepared by Washington County Office of Community Development In collaboration with City of Beaverton Community Development Division and City of Hillsboro Planning Department
Executive Summary
ES-05 Executive Summary - 91.200(c), 91.220(b) 1. Introduction
The 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan describes community needs and determines local priorities for using public resources to assist low- and moderate-income residents of Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro (the Washington County Consortium). It sets forth a five-year strategic plan consisting of actions and production targets to address community needs. The success of the plan depends on the participation of numerous agencies and local governments in the collaborative implementation of the strategies. The Washington County Office of Community Development is responsible for plan coordination and reporting. This plan has been developed in accordance with guidelines prescribed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) intended to result in “a unified vision for community development actions.” Federal statutes set forth three goals that frame the overall intent of Consolidated Plans: provide decent housing, support the development of a suitable living environment and expand economic opportunities.
While this plan addresses all three goals to some degree, the focus continues to remain on the first two, as it has been in prior Consolidated Plans. HUD requires jurisdictions receiving federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) or Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funds to develop a community-wide plan every three to five years as a condition of continuing to access these funds. The prior Consolidated Plan for the Washington County Consortium covered the time period of July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2015. This plan covers the time period of July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2020. This plan is augmented by annual Action Plans, which specify the use of funds in the coming year, and Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Reports (CAPER), which measure progress toward meeting goals in the prior year and cumulatively. In Washington County, three jurisdictions receive formula allocations of the federal programs described above. Washington County is a CDBG Entitlement Community. It receives a direct allocation of CDBG funds annually which can be used throughout Washington County, except for in the City of Beaverton. Although the City of Hillsboro is entitled to receive a direct allocation of CDBG funds, the City opted to remain part of the County CDBG program as a joint recipient. Under an Intergovernmental Agreement with the County, the County administers the City’s funds and manages its projects. The City of Beaverton receives its own allocation of CDBG funds annually and its CDBG funds must be used to benefit Beaverton residents exclusively. The Washington County Office of Community Development acts as the lead agency for the Washington County HOME Consortium and HOME funds can be used throughout the county. The Washington County Office of Community Development and City of Beaverton coordinates the development of the Consolidated Plan, Action Plans and CAPERs.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 1 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 2. Summary of the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan
The heart of the Consolidated Plan is the Strategic Plan (Chapter 6), which describes how federal funds and other resources will be deployed and what other actions will be taken to address community development and affordable housing needs over the next five years. The five-year housing strategies address the following areas: homelessness, affordable rental housing, owner-occupied housing, fair housing, planning and organizational support. The five-year community development plan addresses needs in the areas of public facilities, public infrastructure, public services and economic development. The anti-poverty strategy includes actions in the arenas of public policy development, service and support system improvements and building civic capital formation.
The Housing and Homeless Strategies call for using HOME funds to leverage the production of 352 new rental units and the preservation of 152 existing affordable housing units. All new HOME-assisted units will be affordable to households with incomes at or below 50% AMI. Included in these totals are units that serve persons with developmental and mental health disabilities, farmworkers, the elderly, and homeless or at-risk-of-homelessness individuals and households. The top priority is to use available resources to make progress in implementing the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness and the Anti- Poverty Strategy. The Housing and Homeless Strategies also call for the continuation of existing home repair, weatherization and accessibility programs, and the production of new owner-occupied housing for households with incomes at or below 60% AMI. Affordable housing is a critical part of the community’s investment in public infrastructure designed to promote greater social sustainability. The County also commits to a new blueprint for affirmatively furthering fair housing which includes development of new affordable housing in opportunity-rich areas, to examining a strategy to better integrate financing for affordable housing and off-site public infrastructure, and to prioritizing age- friendly and multigenerational housing which seeks to allow older adults and those with special needs to age in place in more accessible and visitable housing.
The Community Development Strategies reflect the evolution of a closer working relationship between the City of Beaverton and Washington County’s separate programs. In Washington County, a change in the local allocation formula will ensure that the maximum amount of funding allowed by federal statute is made available annually for public services. Services and facilities that implement strategies in the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness are the highest priority for funding. In recognition of the importance of services to the success of families in subsidized housing, the County will set aside a portion of the public services funding for resident services provided by the area’s most qualified (Tier I) Community Housing Development Organizations. The Anti-Poverty Strategies focus on core supports that enable low-income families to remain stable or progress: housing, income, food, health and employment. The Anti-Poverty Strategy calls for the formation of a new Anti-Poverty Work Group to analyze and, to the extent feasible at the local level, address this issue and also work on other public policy, service delivery and civic capital concerns.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 2 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 3. Evaluation of past performance Over the course of the five-year period, Community Development projected goals were to construct 26 public facilities, serve 9,600 persons with public infrastructure activities, provide 66,950 people with Public Services and provide Economic Development services to 19 persons and 8 businesses. Housing projected goals were to provide services to 6,063 persons who are homeless or at-risk of becoming homeless, support Affordable Rental Housing activities to serve 825 households, support development of 332 Special Needs Housing units and support Affordable Homeownership activities to serve 1,128 households.
The following summary is an evaluation of the past performance through year 4 of the current five year Consolidated Plan: Developed and improved 18 Facilities to benefit income-qualifying neighborhoods or income- qualified special needs populations. Provided Infrastructure improvements benefiting 3,927 low-income residents residing in income-qualified areas to ensure the health and safety of communities, and increase neighborhood pride and viability. Provided 70,773 low-income residents with Public Services that ensure the health and welfare of income-qualified people living in the community. Provided Economic Development services to 19 persons and 8 businesses that increase economic opportunities through redevelopment and job creation activities. Provided 4,043 persons with emergency shelter, permanent housing and public services such as homeless supportive services, including rent prevention assistance and other services specifically targeted to the homeless. Created, preserved or provided weatherization improvements to 553 affordable rental housing units for low-income rental households earning less than 50% of the Area Median Income (AMI). Provided assistance in the development 322 special needs housing units for low-income persons with special needs, including persons with developmental disabilities, mental health disabilities, and/or chemical disabilities. Provided assistance to 1,162 affordable homeownership units occupied by low- and moderate- income homeowners through housing rehabilitation programs, affordable homeownership opportunities, and owner-occupied housing weatherization activities. Barriers to meeting the Community Development and Housing production targets can be attributed to: escalating construction costs, increased regulatory barriers and decreases in the amount of funding, which limits the number of facilities, economic development storefront façade improvement projects and infrastructure projects that can be completed; limits the number of low-income homeowners and renters that can be assisted with rehabilitation or weatherization improvements; limits the number of affordable rental housing units that can be produced and reduces the number of persons who are homeless or at-risk of becoming homeless that can be served. Increased shelter operation costs, higher security deposits and landlord debt for persons with evictions on their records have also limited the ability to meet desired Homeless service production targets.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 3 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 4. Summary of citizen participation process and consultation process
Highlights of the Citizen Participation Process and consultations include:
• Formation of a ConPlan Work Group comprised of individuals representing diverse interests, including people who have not been involved in this planning process in the past. The Con Plan Work Group advised the Washington County Office of Community Development on the process and content of the plan.
• Conducting two sets of community workshops at strategic points in the planning process to meet with key stakeholders (local jurisdictions, agencies, non-profits and other partners) to discuss major trends likely to affect low income residents and their sense of community needs and priorities, and to review sections of the draft plan.
• Conducting focus groups with 35 low-income residents, including residents of color, to obtain their views about the challenges and barriers they face in their day-to-day lives.
• A public screening hosted to highlight the challenges and barriers faced by area residents for the general public through an award-winning documentary focused on the region. This included inviting one of the families featured in the film to relate their experiences living in Washington County, followed by a panel of social service providers who discussed identified needs in the community.
• Coordination of a county-wide community needs survey by the City of Beaverton for Washington County citizens. The City received 786 responses in electronic and paper format combined. This information helped inform the development of the Housing and Community Development strategies.
• Coordination of a county-wide community needs questionnaire from over fifty-five nonprofit agencies, citizens, cities and other applicants with 132 responses in electronic and paper format combined. This information helped inform the development of the Community Development strategies.
• Coordination with a County-sponsored housing preference study with 1,975 completed surveys from residents about preferences and attitudes regarding housing types, renting vs. owning and other trade- offs, commuting, and amenities with regards to housing.
• Solicitation of responses from a community-wide survey with 1,260 completed surveys from residents about how they receive information about housing and community development programs and what areas of interest might get them to attend public meetings and public hearings.
• Presentations by key agencies on relevant plans at ConPlan Work Group meetings. Presentations were made by key agencies such the Washington County Department of Housing Services; Community Action; Washington County Department of Community Corrections; Fair Housing Council of Oregon; Community Alliance of Tenants; Community Partners for Affordable Housing; Enterprise Community
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 4 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Partners; WorkSystems; Washington County Department of Disability, Aging & Veterans Services; Cascade AIDS Project; Boys and Girls Aid Society; Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Clinic; Tri-Met and others. These presentations and the follow-up that ensued formed the core of Washington County’s consultation process.
During the comment period for the draft plan (March 10 - April 9, 2015), two public hearings were held and additional comments were accepted by mail or e-mail.
5. Summary of public comments
Four official public comments were received from the period of March 10th – April 9th, 2015 from Ron Thompson, City Councilor for the City of Forest Grove; Bridget Cooke, Executive Director of Adelante Mujeres; Kathy Armstrong, Deputy Director of Proud Ground; and Lynn Boose, Executive Director of Community Services, Inc. Each comment received was addressed in writing by providing clarification of data and/or narrative contained within the plan, adding additional language to the Plan where applicable to better reflect the identified need described in the public comment, and acknowledging the importance of the need identified by those agencies and concerned citizens that provided public comment on the Plan. Copies of comments submitted in writing are contained in the Citizen Participation comments section of this plan, as well as a summary of comments received over the phone and reflected in public hearing meeting minutes.
6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them
All comments or views received were accepted with the exception of one: Public comment received from Bridget Cooke, Executive Director of Adelante Mujeres, advocated for priorities for farmworkers, LEP and GED learners who face barriers in obtaining housing and economic stability. Through the 18 month long process of data collection and analysis, the needs of all low-income populations were recognized and it was decided by the Con Plan Workgroup that prioritizing one population over another becomes difficult as it pits groups against one another. It was explained that the current priority in the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan instead focuses on a system-wide initiative (the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness) as opposed to one specific population over another. Within that system, needs of vulnerable populations as a whole are prioritized, including the special needs groups identified in this public comment by Adelante Mujeres. Copies of response letters to each public comment received are contained in the Citizen Participation comments section of this plan.
7. Summary
The 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan is a statement of how the Washington County Consortium, in collaboration with its many partners, intends to respond to the rapidly changing community development, housing and economic environment over the next five years. The 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan built on some of the innovative concepts first introduced in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan and attempted to introduce some new elements, which include the following:
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 5 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Offering an enhanced Citizen Participation process with a renewed focus on how residents receive information on housing and community development programs in an effective and meaningful way in an attempt to increase participation in the planning processes that inform the Consolidated Plan. Citizen Participation activities included focus groups with low-income residents, several electronic and paper community surveys, two sets of workshops and other public outreach activities intended to engage and educate the public about the causes and effects of poverty in our community as well as help determine the housing and community development needs in Washington County. The plan’s development also included numerous consultations with the Con Plan Work Group and other community stakeholders at key points in the process. This group brought knowledge and experience to bear on the planning process from a wide array of disciplines, including land use planning, public housing, advocacy, development finance, homeless and anti-poverty programs, fair housing, social services, law, economic development, mental health, community development financial institutions, public transit and corrections. Linking to other existing plans, such as the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness, with a focus on how resources can be used to help implement the Ten Year Plan as well as other identified needs in the community. Integration with the Aloha-Reedville Study and Livable Community Plan and Beaverton’s Creekside District Master Plan and Implementation Strategy as they relate to housing and community development. Continue building on the strong tradition of collaboration that characterizes Washington County’s social service, homelessness, housing and community development environment by working to provide a higher level of integration with the work of other local planning departments, private non-profit agencies, for-profit and non-profit housing developers, Community Action, mental health services providers and the community corrections system to ensure that the implementation of this plan will result in a coordinated approach to addressing the challenges of low-income residents in Washington County. Providing a new focus on incentives for development of affordable housing that enables elders, extended families and individuals with special needs to age in place in their existing housing and construct more accessible and visitable housing using universal design principles. New data sources and methods, including U.S. Census 2010 data, updated American Community Survey and CHAS data, Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 Providing parallel formats that ensure the new electronic submission of the Consolidated Plan into the Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS) is seamless in linking with the more reader-friendly version (Volume 4), made available for the community to review in a meaningful way.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 6 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) The Process
PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies - 91.200(b) 1. Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source
The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source.
Agency Role Name Department/Agency
CDBG Administrator Washington County Office of Community Development HOME Administrator Washington County Office of Community Development ESG Administrator Washington County Office of Community Development Table 1 – Responsible Agencies
Narrative
In Washington County, three jurisdictions receive formula allocations of the federal programs described above. Washington County is a CDBG Entitlement Community. It receives a direct allocation of CDBG funds annually which can be used throughout Washington County, except for in City of Beaverton. Although the City of Hillsboro is entitled to receive a direct allocation of CDBG funds, the City opted to remain part of the County CDBG program as a joint recipient. Under an Intergovernmental Agreement with the County, the County administers the City’s funds and manages its projects. The City of Beaverton receives its own allocation of CDBG funds annually and runs its program separately from the CDBG program for Washington County. Beaverton CDBG funds must be used to benefit Beaverton residents exclusively.
The Washington County Office of Community Development acts as the lead agency for the Washington County HOME Consortium. HOME funds can be used throughout the county. The Washington County Office of Community Development coordinates the development of the Consolidated Plan, Action Plans and CAPERs. Both the City of Beaverton and the City of Hillsboro contributed funding and staff time to the development of this plan. Other incorporated cities that have not yet reached the required population thresholds to be direct recipients of HUD funds still participate in and benefit from the programs through the Policy Advisory Board (PAB). Through the PAB, these jurisdictions participate in making policy and programmatic decisions as well as selecting projects to receive funding.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 7 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information
Jennie H. Proctor Program Manager Washington County Office of Community Development 328 W. Main Street, Suite 100 Hillsboro, OR 97123 (503) 846-8814 [email protected]
and
Cadence Moylan Community Development Department City of Beaverton P.O. Box 4755 Beaverton OR 97076-4755 Ph: (503) 526-2493 [email protected]
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 8 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) PR-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l) 1. Introduction
The key to the Consolidated Plan consultation process is to consult with a wide array of organizations whose mission and contribution to the community ensures a diverse yet comprehensive assessment of need, as well as input into the development of housing and community development strategies to address the need.
There were presentations by eighteen key agencies on relevant plans at ConPlan Work Group meetings. Presentations were made by the Washington County Department of Housing Services; Community Action; Washington County Department of Community Corrections; Families for Independent Living; Community Alliance of Tenants; Fair Housing Council of Oregon; Community Partners for Affordable Housing; Enterprise Community Partners; Work Systems; Washington County Department of Disability, Aging & Veterans Services; AARP Oregon; Cascade AIDS Project (HIV/AIDS Plan); Boys and Girls Aid Society; Westside Economic Alliance; Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center; Mental Health Services Division of Washington County Health and Human Services; and Tri-Met. These presentations and the follow-up that ensued formed the core of Washington County’s consultation process.
Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(I)).
During consultations, Washington County brought in the Washington County Department of Housing Services and nonprofit providers like Community Partners for Affordable Housing and private health agencies like Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center, public mental health agencies like the Mental Health Services Division of the Washington County Department of Health and Human Services. These agencies all presented on the County's needs regarding integration of health and mental health and housing. There was also a consultation presentation from Amanda Saul from Enterprise Community Partners regarding their privately funded Health and Housing Initiative Study to determine the health benefits of onsite healthcare in assisted housing. In addition, the Executive Director of the Community Housing Fund who is also a member of the Consolidated Plan Work Group is on the Board of Directors of one of the area Coordinated Care Organizations in Washington County and provided information regarding linkages of health and housing. Other efforts to support coordination include regular consultations with the Housing and Supportive Services Network (HSSN), the Continuum of Care (CoC) body for the area, and through the operation of Community Connect, the County's Coordinated and Centralized Assessment System (CCAS) for the provision of housing+ and homeless services in Washington County.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 9 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness
Washington County consulted with the HSSN, the Continuum of Care (CoC) body for the area, and participated in the strategic workgroup to support the creation and ongoing operation of Community Connect, the County's Coordinated and Centralized Assessment System (CCAS) for the provision of housing and homeless services in Washington County. These consultations helped to identify the current needs of homeless persons (specifically chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children and veterans) and persons at-risk of homelessness with the Consolidated Plan Work Group. The HSSN as well as Washington County Department of Housing Services staff have served an integral part of the Consolidated Planning process in providing data for the Housing Needs Assessment and Market Analysis, providing information on linking the Consolidated Plan with the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness and in developing the Homelessness Strategy. The work of the Anti-Poverty Work Group has also served in developing the Anti-Poverty Strategy for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan. For unaccompanied youth, Washington County brought in the Boys and Girls Aid Society to present to the Consolidated Plan Work Group on the needs and challenges facing homeless unaccompanied youth in Washington County. For public institutions potentially discharging individuals into homelessness, Washington County brought in the Director of the Washington County Department of Community Corrections to discuss the challenges facing offenders exiting incarceration in dire need of housing and services in Washington County. The Director was also an active member of the Consolidated Plan Work Group and provided substantial data on the needs of ex-offenders in Washington County.
Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS
Washington County consulted with the Housing and Supportive Services Network (HSSN), the Continuum of Care (CoC) body for the area, to discuss the allocation of Emergency Solutions Grant funding for eligible activities, develop ESG performance standards, and provide on-going evaluation of ESG projects to refine established ESG policies for the provision of housing and homeless services in Washington County. Consultation with the HSSN provided the forum for the participation of local homeless service providers and not less than one homeless individual or formerly homeless individual in considering and making policies and decisions regarding any facilities, services, or other eligible activity that receives funding under Washington County homeless programs. Policies and other decisions resulting from consultation with the HSSN include how to allocate funds between ESG-eligible activities, development of performance standards and a process for evaluating outcomes, and development of a process to ensure that policies and procedures related to the administration and operation of the County’s ESG-funded programs and Homeless Management and Information System (HMIS) are evaluated annually.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 10 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) The HSSN Strategic Planning Workgroup was consulted at their February 13, 2015 meeting to provide a recommendation for ESG allocations by activity and proposed policy changes. This recommendation was then taken before the HSSN at-large at their March 6, 2015 meeting to approve the proposed allocations. As part of this meeting, and before the HSSN approved proposed ESG-funded activities for the coming year, Washington County Office of Community Development staff and Community Action staff presented to the HSSN the outcomes of the previous year’s grant to ensure that decisions about proposed allocations are supported by the performance standards and outcomes from the previous year. More information about ESG policies and procedures can be found online at: http://www.co.washington.or.us/CommunityDevelopment/policies.cfm
2. Describe Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdictions consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities: (Table on following page)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 11 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Table 2 – Agencies, groups, organizations who participated 1 Agency/Group/Organization Washington County Department of Housing Services Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing PHA Services - Housing Services-homeless Other government - County What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Need Assessment by Consultation? Public Housing Needs Homelessness Strategy Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homelessness Needs - Veterans How was the The Washington County Department of Housing Agency/Group/Organization consulted Services was consulted in various ways in order to and what are the anticipated outcomes increase coordination with that Department and its of the consultation or areas for improved variety of linkages to the Consolidated Plan. In coordination? December 2013, the Department presented before the Consolidated Plan Work Group (the principal advisory body for the Consolidated Plan) on Section 8 program and Continuum of Care, as well as their Public Housing, Affordable Housing and Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing programs. Staff were instrumental in providing data and information for the Housing Needs Assessment and Market Analysis, as well as information on linking the Consolidated Plan with the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness and the Aloha-Reedville Community Plan. The Director of the Washington County Department of Housing Services (also Executive Director of the Housing Authority of Washington County) was a member of the Consolidated Plan Work Group throughout the planning process. 2 Agency/Group/Organization Jubilee Transition Homes Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing Services - Housing Services-Persons with Disabilities Services-homeless What section of the Plan was addressed Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless by Consultation? Homelessness Needs - Veterans
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 12 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) How was the In January 2014, Jubilee Transition Homes presented Agency/Group/Organization consulted before the Consolidated Plan Work Group on and what are the anticipated outcomes transitional housing and services for chronically of the consultation or areas for improved homeless individuals seeking housing, counseling, coordination? mentoring and access to employment in Washington County. 3 Agency/Group/Organization Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center Agency/Group/Organization Type Health Agency Foundation What section of the Plan was addressed Non-Homeless Special Needs by Consultation? Non-Housing Needs Assessment How was the In February 2014, the Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Agency/Group/Organization consulted Center and Foundation presented before the and what are the anticipated outcomes Consolidated Plan Work Group regarding the health of the consultation or areas for improved and dental needs of low-income children and families coordination? across Washington County. This included a presentation on the services provided to these individuals who are often uninsured or underinsured. 4 Agency/Group/Organization Westside Economic Alliance Agency/Group/Organization Type Regional organization Business and Civic Leaders Major Employer What section of the Plan was addressed Economic Development by Consultation? How was the In February 2014, the Westside Economic Alliance Agency/Group/Organization consulted presented before the Consolidated Plan Work Group and what are the anticipated outcomes regarding the organization and its representation of of the consultation or areas for improved major employers in Washington County. This coordination? presentation included information on workforce and economic development needs and the Alliance's sponsorship in bringing Philip Mangano to Washington County on reducing homelessness. Mr. Mangano's speech sponsored by Westside Economic Alliance led to a County-funded homeless cost study due to be released in 2015.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 13 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 5 Agency/Group/Organization Washington County Department of Community Corrections Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing Services - Housing Publicly Funded Institution/System of Care Other government - County What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Need Assessment by Consultation? Homelessness Strategy Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children Homelessness Needs - Veterans Non-Homeless Special Needs How was the In March 2014, the Director of the Washington County Agency/Group/Organization consulted Department of Community Corrections presented to and what are the anticipated outcomes the Consolidated Plan Work Group on the high needs of the consultation or areas for improved of incarcerated individuals exiting corrections in need coordination? of housing and services in Washington. The Director is also a member of the Consolidated Plan Work Group. The Director and his staff also provided information on facilities and services used in the Housing Needs Assessment and Market Analysis. 6 Agency/Group/Organization Washington County Department of Health and Human Services' Mental Health Services Division Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Housing Services-Persons with Disabilities Services-homeless Services-Health Health Agency Other government - County What section of the Plan was addressed Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless by Consultation? Non-Homeless Special Needs
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 14 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) How was the In March 2014, the Adult Mental Health Supervisor Agency/Group/Organization consulted from the Washington County Department of Health and what are the anticipated outcomes and Human Services' Mental Health Services Division of the consultation or areas for improved presented to the Consolidated Plan Work Group on coordination? the housing and services needs of Washington County low-income residents with mental health challenges. She presented on the facilities and housing available, best practices, and supportive housing models for the population. She also provided information on facilities used in the Housing Needs Assessment and Market Analysis. 7 Agency/Group/Organization TriMet Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Elderly Persons Services-Persons with Disabilities Regional organization Planning organization Major Employer What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Need Assessment by Consultation? Non-Housing Needs Assessment How was the In April 2014, the Senior Planner for TriMet presented Agency/Group/Organization consulted to the Consolidated Plan Work Group on the Westside and what are the anticipated outcomes Service Enhancement Plan for Washington County to of the consultation or areas for improved relay the transportation investments being made in coordination? the County to increase transit access for low-income residents. From September 2013 until June 2014, the Director of Real Estate for TriMet was also a member of the Consolidated Plan Work Group. 8 Agency/Group/Organization Washington County Department of Disability, Aging and Veterans Services Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Housing Services-Elderly Persons Services-Persons with Disabilities Services-Employment Other government - County What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Need Assessment by Consultation? Non-Homeless Special Needs Market Analysis
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 15 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) How was the In April 2014, the Program Coordinator for the Agency/Group/Organization consulted Washington County Department of Disability, Aging and what are the anticipated outcomes and Veterans' Services presented before the of the consultation or areas for improved Consolidated Plan Work Group on the housing and coordination? services needs of low-income seniors in Washington County. The presentation focused on developing more age-friendly and visit able housing and AARP of Oregon presented on the certification program for this type of housing. 9 Agency/Group/Organization Cascade AIDS Project Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing Services - Housing Services-Persons with HIV/AIDS Services-Health Services-Employment Services - Victims What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Need Assessment by Consultation? HOPWA Strategy Market Analysis How was the In May 2014, the Cascade AIDS Project presented Agency/Group/Organization consulted before the Consolidated Plan Work Group (on behalf and what are the anticipated outcomes of the Portland Housing Bureau who selected Cascade of the consultation or areas for improved AIDS Project to present on HOPWA in Washington coordination? County) regarding the housing and services needs of low-income residents with HIV/AIDS in Washington County. 10 Agency/Group/Organization Boys and Girls Aid Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing Services - Housing Services-Children Services-homeless Services - Victims Child Welfare Agency Publicly Funded Institution/System of Care What section of the Plan was addressed Homelessness Strategy by Consultation? Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 16 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) How was the In May 2014, the Vice President of Operations and the Agency/Group/Organization consulted Director for Shelter and Housing for the Boys and Girls and what are the anticipated outcomes Aid Society presented to the Consolidated Plan Work of the consultation or areas for improved Group on the housing and services needs of homeless coordination? and unaccompanied youth in Washington County. 11 Agency/Group/Organization Community Action Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing Services - Housing Services-Children Services-homeless Services-Employment What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Need Assessment by Consultation? Homelessness Strategy Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children Anti-poverty Strategy How was the In August 2014, Community Action Organization of Agency/Group/Organization consulted Washington County presented before the and what are the anticipated outcomes Consolidated Plan Work Group on the overall housing of the consultation or areas for improved and services needs for low-income residents of coordination? Washington County. This included a presentation on various homeless populations and low-income residents seeking employment and self-sufficiency. The Grants Manager for Community Action is also a member of the Consolidated Plan Work Group and Anti-Poverty Work Group directed with developing the Anti-Poverty Strategy. Community Action has been instrumental in working to develop the Homelessness Strategy as part of this Consolidated Plan, as well as the direction of Emergency Solutions Grant funding in Washington County. 12 Agency/Group/Organization Enterprise Community Partners Agency/Group/Organization Type Business Leaders Private Sector Banking / Financing What section of the Plan was addressed Strategic Plan by Consultation?
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 17 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) How was the In September 2014, Enterprise Community Partners Agency/Group/Organization consulted presented before the Consolidated Plan Work Group and what are the anticipated outcomes on its initiative to study healthcare and housing of the consultation or areas for improved utilizing existing assisted properties. The study is coordination? designed to manage costs more efficiently through development of on-site healthcare and other models associated with affordable housing. 13 Agency/Group/Organization COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing Services - Housing Services-Children Services-Elderly Persons Services-Victims of Domestic Violence Services-Education Services - Victims Neighborhood Organization What section of the Plan was addressed Workshops by Consultation? How was the In September 2014, the Executive Director and Agency/Group/Organization consulted Director of Operations for Community Partners for and what are the anticipated outcomes Affordable Housing presented to the Consolidated of the consultation or areas for improved Plan Work Group on the needs for affordable housing coordination? and resident services in Washington County in its position as a Community Housing Development Organization. This presentation also included information on the challenges faced by residents seeking affordable housing in Washington County and as providers in seeking resources to develop affordable housing in Washington County. 14 Agency/Group/Organization WORKSYSTEMS INC. Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Education Services-Employment Regional organization What section of the Plan was addressed Market Analysis by Consultation? Non-Housing Needs Assessment
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 18 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) How was the In October 2014, the Senior Project Manager for Agency/Group/Organization consulted WorkSystems presented to the Consolidated Plan and what are the anticipated outcomes Work Group on the workforce development and of the consultation or areas for improved employment needs of low-income residents of coordination? Washington County seeking economic self-sufficiency and stability. This involved a presentation on the demographic data on employment needs, as well as the programs offered in the community for education, job training and workforce development. 15 Agency/Group/Organization Families for Independent Living Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Persons with Disabilities What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Need Assessment by Consultation? Market Analysis How was the In November 2014, the President of Families for Agency/Group/Organization consulted Independent Living presented to the Consolidated and what are the anticipated outcomes Plan Work Group regarding the housing and services of the consultation or areas for improved needs for individuals with development disabilities. coordination? This included information on those individuals exiting care with their families seeking independent living in Washington County which can include a live-in caregiver. 16 Agency/Group/Organization Community Alliance of Tenants Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Education Service-Fair Housing Services - Victims Regional organization What section of the Plan was addressed Strategic Plan by Consultation? How was the In December 2014, the Executive Director of the Agency/Group/Organization consulted Community Alliance of Tenants presented to the and what are the anticipated outcomes Consolidated Plan Work Group regarding the needs of of the consultation or areas for improved renter households in Washington County who need coordination? access to decent, safe affordable housing. This can include tenants seeking housing as well as tenants experiencing problems with their landlord and need education on tenants' rights. The Executive Director of the Community Alliance of Tenants is also a member of the Consolidated Plan Work Group.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 19 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 17 Agency/Group/Organization FAIR HOUSING COUNCIL OF OREGON Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Education Service-Fair Housing Regional organization What section of the Plan was addressed Strategic Plan by Consultation? How was the In December 2014, the Education and Outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted Specialist for the Fair Housing Council of Oregon and what are the anticipated outcomes presented to the Consolidated Plan Work Group on of the consultation or areas for improved the concept of fair housing and the calls they receive coordination? from Washington County residents regarding potential fair housing violations, as well as the need for fair housing education for landlords and tenants in Washington County.
Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting
Three members of the Consolidated Plan Work Group were planners at Washington County and the City of Hillsboro and were active members in developing the Consolidated Plan with staff. There was also a Coordinated Planning Group that met twice during the planning process to review and update the planning strategies associated with the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan. This Coordinated Planning Group was comprised of planners representing Washington County and its three largest cities.
Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan
Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan? Continuum of Care Washington County There are high priority needs in the Strategic Plan for Department of Housing goals that address the Ten Year Plan to End Services Homelessness as a basis for the annual Continuum of Care grant. Aloha-Reedville Washington County There are goals set out in the Strategic Plan that were Community Plan Department of Housing first developed as recommendations in the Aloha- Services Reedville Community Plan. Ten Year Plan to Washington County There are high priority needs in the Strategic Plan for End Homelessness Department of Housing goals that address the Ten Year Plan to End Services Homelessness. Table 3 – Other local / regional / federal planning efforts
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 20 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Describe cooperation and coordination with other public entities, including the State and any adjacent units of general local government, in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan (91.215(l))
As part of the overall Consolidated Planning effort, Washington County promoted many opportunities for input by local and neighboring jurisdictions. Opportunities for comment and input were posted in publications of general circulation which include distribution in Portland, Multnomah County, and Clackamas County. The free public screening of the documentary entitle “American Winter” was widely publicized throughout the region utilizing newspapers, county and city websites, listserves, affordable housing associations which extend their outreach to our neighboring jurisdictions, etc. Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) consulted with the Office of Community Development on how it used the American Winter documentary screening to collect input from interested citizens on housing needs in this community. OHCS staff also attended the County’s Consolidated Plan kick-off event and Oregon Department of Human Services, Office of Disease Prevention and Epidemiology and the Office of Environmental Public Health were consulted about lead-based paint hazards and poisonings during the preparation of the Housing Needs Assessment. Oregon Department of Human Services staff attended on a regular basis the Anti-Poverty Work Group which is part of the Consolidated Plan process. Tri-Met also made contributions as a member of the Consolidated Plan Work Group as well as an agency with whom we sought consultation. We also received significant input from local universities including Portland State University, Pacific University and Portland Community College. While outreach happened in many different ways, local government input came almost exclusively from within our own jurisdiction with input from all of the incorporated cities. Development of Washington County's Coordinated and Centralized Assessment System (CCAS) was done in consultation with other adjacent units of local government such as Clackamas County (OR) and Clark County (WA). In addition, the Fair Housing Regional Collaborative meets quarterly to confer on fair housing issues in the Portland Metro area and work collaboratively in our jurisdictions' efforts to affirmatively further fair housing. Information sharing about the Consolidated Plan work we were undertaking and invitations to participate were part of the regular announcements, and the regular meetings provide an opportunity to have on-going discussions about adjacent jurisdictions’ program policies and requirements. Regular attendees of the Regional Fair Housing Collaborative include: Clark County (WA), Clackamas County, Multnomah County, Portland Housing Bureau, City of Gresham, City of Vancouver (WA), and Oregon Housing and Community Services.
Narrative
To understand the larger context in which the Consolidated Plan lies, the ConPlan Work Group asked that representatives from seventeen agencies and departments come to a meeting and describe the goals of their plans and how the Consolidated Plan could support their efforts. The following organizations made presentations to the Work Group over the course of several meetings: Homelessness and Public Housing/Section 8: Washington County Department of Housing Services Offenders: Washington County Community Correction
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 21 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Substance Abuse and Addictions: Jubilee Transition Homes Older Adults: Washington County Disability, Aging and Veterans Services and AARP Oregon HIV/AIDS: Cascade AIDS Project Children and Families: Boys and Girls Aid Society Mental Health: Washington County Health and Human Services Mental Health Services Division Public Health: Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Clinic Workforce Development: WorkSystems Developmental Disabilities: Families for Independent Living Economic Development: Westside Economic Alliance Affordable Housing Development: Community Partners for Affordable Housing Integration of Health and Housing: Enterprise Community Partners Anti-Poverty: Community Action Regional Planning Agencies: TriMet, City of Eugene and Lane County Sustainable Communities Grant Tenants and Renter Households: Community Alliance of Tenants Fair Housing: Fair Housing Council of Oregon, Multnomah County, Clackamas County, City of Gresham, City of Vancouver CCAS Development: Housing and Supportive Services Network (HSSN), Clackamas County, Clark County
The two workshops also represented a form of consultation with stakeholders. Breaking into small groups at these workshops staffed by OCD and the City of Beaverton ensured that all parties had an opportunity to bring up their ideas and concerns to those preparing the plan. The results of these workshops significantly informed the development of the Consolidated Plan.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 22 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) PR-15 Citizen Participation - 91.401, 91.105, 91.200(c) 1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting
The citizen participation process focused on activities and opportunities for stakeholder, beneficiary and public involvement in the planning process. The substantive information that resulted from undertaking these activities appears as workshop summaries and other reports in Volume 2 of this plan. The feedback received from these activities helped form the basis for the Strategic Plan and its associated goals. The following include the efforts made as part of this citizen participation process: Workshop 1: Kickoff Meeting October 16, 2013, Workshop 2A: What’s Working Workshop: Housing November 12, 2013, Workshop 2B: What’s Working Workshop: Community Development November 18, 2013, Stakeholder Survey on Community Development Needs November 2013 – May 2014, Community Survey on Public Engagement on Housing and Community Development Programs February 2014, American Winter Screening February 2014, Community Needs Survey February – July 2014, Housing Preference Survey March – September 2014, Focus Groups with Washington County Residents with Low Incomes April – June 2014, Formal Comment Period on Consolidated Plan March 10, 2015 – April 9, 2015, Public Hearings 1 & 2: Draft Consolidated Plan, Formal Adoption of Plan by Board of County Commissioners May 5, 2015, Monthly Work Group Meetings and Electronic Notices December 2013 – January 2015, Draft Plan Chapters Available Online June 2014 – May 2015 As they became available, draft sections of the Consolidated Plan were posted on the County website. The website contained information about how to submit comments (in addition to those submitted during the formal comment period).
The planning process was conducted in conformance with the standards set forth in Washington County Consortium’s Citizen Participation Plan, which contains policies and procedures that provide for participation by residents of Washington County and the City of Beaverton in the development of the Consolidated Plan. Volume 2 contains both a copy of the Citizen Participation Plan and a table that documents how Washington County addressed requirements pertaining to comment periods, meeting notices, availability of plan for review, and efforts to encourage participation by minorities, non-English speakers, and persons with disabilities.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 23 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Citizen Participation Outreach Sort Mode of Target of Summary of Summary of Summary of URL Order Outreach Outreach response/ comments comments (If applicable) attendance received not accepted and reasons 1 Public Non-targeted/ The Kickoff Meeting focused on There were no comments received. There were http://www.co.washin Meeting broad the larger environment and no gton.or.us/Community community major trends likely to affect comments Development/Planning affordable housing and not /2015-2020- community development in accepted. consolidated-plan.cfm 2015-2020. With the data highlighting that Washington County saw an increase of the residents living below the poverty line despite recent job growth, staff believed that it was particularly important to scan the broader environment and consider how it might affect life for low- and moderate-income people in Washington County. After an opening session with a keynote presented by Professor Ethan Seltzer from Portland State University School of Urban Studies and Planning, approximately 55 participants shared their ideas and concerns in break-out sessions.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 24 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Sort Mode of Target of Summary of Summary of Summary of URL Order Outreach Outreach response/ comments comments (If applicable) attendance received not accepted and reasons 2 Public Non-targeted/ Workshop 2A: What’s Working These affordable housing developers There were http://www.co.washin Meeting broad Workshop: Housing November and providers discussed opportunities, no gton.or.us/Community community 12, 2013. Approximately 22 threats, strengths and weaknesses of comments Development/Planning affordable housing developers the current system of providing not /2015-2020- and providers affordable housing. accepted. consolidated-plan.cfm
3 Public Non-targeted/ Workshop 2B: What’s Working These providers of public services, There were http://www.co.washin Meeting broad Workshop: Community public facilities and infrastructure no gton.or.us/Community community Development November 18, provided their ideas about how to comments Development/Planning 2013. Approximately 35 improve the community development not /2015-2020- providers of public services, project delivery system. accepted. consolidated-plan.cfm public facilities and infrastructure
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 25 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Sort Mode of Target of Summary of Summary of Summary of URL Order Outreach Outreach response/ comments comments (If applicable) attendance received not accepted and reasons 4 Online Non-targeted/ Fifty-five different agencies, Representatives from over 55 different There were http://www.co.washin Non- broad departments, or organizations organizations responded to the Community no gton.or.us/Community Housing community participated in an online survey Needs Survey, identifying a total of 131 comments Development/Planning Needs about community needs related to a wide variety of not /2015-2020- programs and facilities. Many Assessme development needs in the accepted. consolidated-plan.cfm organizations identified multiple needs. Of nt areas of public services, public the total, 41 needs were identified by
Questionn infrastructure, public facilities cities, 25 by the County, 62 by non-profit aire on and economic development. organizations and 3 by special districts or Survey similar organizations. It should be noted Monkey that certain needs were identified by multiple agencies; therefore, there is duplication in the associated cost of fully addressing each need. This should be taken into consideration when looking at the cost to address all needs.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 26 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Sort Mode of Target of Summary of Summary of Summary of URL Order Outreach Outreach response/ comments comments (If applicable) attendance received not accepted and reasons 5 Online Minorities From community residents The survey was available in paper form and There were http://www.co.washin Non- came 786 completed online, and it was translated into Spanish. no gton.or.us/Community Housing Non-English questionnaires about This survey was advertised to Washington comments Development/Planning Needs Speaking - affordable housing and County residents in The Oregonian, not /2015-2020- through the County and City of Beaverton Assessme Specify other community development accepted. consolidated-plan.cfm websites, through social media on nt language: needs. Facebook on the City of Beaverton
Questionn Spanish Facebook page, and handed out as a aire on bookmark at the American Winter Survey Non-targeted/ screening with a QRF code for residents Monkey broad with smart phones to take a photo of the community QRF code that would take them directly to the survey link on the Survey Monkey Residents of webpage without having to remember or Public and write down a long web address. Assisted Housing
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 27 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Sort Mode of Target of Summary of Summary of Summary of URL Order Outreach Outreach response/ comments comments (If applicable) attendance received not accepted and reasons 6 Internet Non-targeted/ From community residents A large majority of the respondents There were http://www.co.washin Outreach broad came 1,260 completed surveys noted that they access information no gton.or.us/Community community on the most effective tools affordable housing and community comments Development/Planning they utilize to learn about development needs through local TV, not /2015-2020- affordable housing and internet and e-mail listserv rather than accepted. consolidated-plan.cfm community development print media. needs, including local TV, print media, online publications, e- mail listservs and social media. The survey also asked respondents what topics might interest them in attending a public meeting or public hearing.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 28 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Sort Mode of Target of Summary of Summary of Summary of URL Order Outreach Outreach response/ comments comments (If applicable) attendance received not accepted and reasons 7 Online Non-targeted/ Over 75 community residents The film described the struggles of There were http://www.co.washin Non- broad attended a free public eight area families encountering no gton.or.us/Community Housing community screening of the award-winning homelessness, foreclosure, utility shut- comments Development/Planning Needs HBO Documentary American off, and other barriers over one winter not /2015-2020- Assessme Winter. during the recent recession in the accepted. consolidated-plan.cfm nt region. After the screening, one of the Questionn families featured in the film discussed aire on their participation, followed by a Survey discussion panel of four area service Monkey agencies who answered questions and provided information about area resources for those community members in need.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 29 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Sort Mode of Target of Summary of Summary of Summary of URL Order Outreach Outreach response/ comments comments (If applicable) attendance received not accepted and reasons 8 Online Minorities Ten community leaders at The three nonprofit agencies that responded to a There were http://www.co.washin countywide Request for Proposals from the City of Non- three area nonprofit agencies Beaverton and the Washington County Office of no gton.or.us/Community Housing Non-English conducted seven focus groups Community Development in March 2014 were Centro comments Development/Planning Needs Speaking - in four Washington County Cultural, Adelante Mujeres and the Beaverton not /2015-2020- Hispanic Center. The majority of the focus groups Assessme Specify other cities with approximately 35 were held in Spanish and materials for the focus accepted. consolidated-plan.cfm nt language: low-income Washington groups were all available in both English and Spanish. Questionn Spanish County residents, particularly The ten community leaders received over six hours of training over two days in April from a Pacific aire on from communities of color. University professor from the School of Social Work Survey Non-targeted/ on leading focus groups and eliciting responses of housing and community development programs from Monkey broad members of their community. The purpose of the community focus groups was to gain insight about the kinds of challenges these residents face on a daily basis so that the Consolidated Plan strategies would reflect a better Residents of understanding of the complexities of real life Public and experienced by vulnerable individuals. Each focus Assisted group also reviewed the types of services and programs available in the City of Beaverton and Housing Washington County to assist low-income residents in an effort to determine which programs are most needed by these residents. These programs and services included an array of affordable housing programs, public services, economic development programs, public facilities and public infrastructure. Most focus groups lasted ninety minutes or longer. Participants were typically low-income Latino residents of Cornelius, Hillsboro or Forest Grove with an average household size of more than 4 members. Most rented an apartment and a majority reported that someone in their family had either a reduction in job income or a job loss within the past five years.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 30 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Sort Mode of Target of Summary of Summary of Summary of URL Order Outreach Outreach response/ comments comments (If applicable) attendance received not accepted and reasons 9 Public Non- Two public meetings were held No comments were received. http://www.co.washin Meeting targeted/broa at night on July 21, 2014 in gton.or.us/Community d community Aloha and during the day on Development/Planning July 24, 2014 in Hillsboro to /2015-2020- discuss the Year 1 Strategic consolidated-plan.cfm Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan. No members of the public attended either meeting. Table 4 – Citizen Participation Outreach
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 31 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Needs Assessment
NA-05 Overview Needs Assessment Overview
This section highlights the assessment of housing, homeless, and non-housing community development needs of Washington County including the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro. This needs assessment details significant demographic and market-driven changes in Washington County over the last five years that have impacted low-income households across the County. This needs assessment is also formatted a bit differently in this Consolidated Plan and includes the required information from the Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS) from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in addition to information collected locally that has been added in order to tell a more complete story to the residents of Washington County about need. The housing and homeless needs assessments are primarily driven by U.S. Census Bureau data in the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) and American Community Survey (ACS) and in the HUD data through the Public and Indian Housing (PIH) Information Center populated in IDIS, as well as the 2014 Point-in-Time Shelter Count from the Washington County Continuum of Care. Where applicable, data has been updated if Washington County is able to access newer data through the U.S. Census Bureau. Washington County is providing additional locally determined information as part of the housing needs assessment and market analysis to provide further detail and depth to the needs of Washington County residents for rental and owner-occupied housing. For non-housing community development needs, the information on needs is derived from the community itself. Washington County and the City of Beaverton launched an online Needs Assessment Questionnaire in November 2013 to gauge the non-housing community development needs of residents, cities, nonprofit organizations and interested parties on public services, public facilities, public infrastructure and economic opportunity to assess the community development needs that would form the basis for the Community Development Plan and community development strategies within the Strategic Plan. The overall focus of this chapter is to describe the supply and demand of the entire housing market, assess who is not served by the market (focusing on low income and special needs populations), determine the number of households whose housing needs are not met by the market but are being met by existing public or non-profit programs, and determine the gaps that still exist for these groups. In discussing current housing market conditions and needs and in predicting future needs, the County is challenged by the fact that recent trends and conditions are unique, and in some respects, extreme. The last ten years have seen significant changes in poverty and vacancy rates coupled with significant growth in Washington County. Due in part to the recent recession, poverty rates in Washington County have risen since 2007, however, the suburbanization of poverty is also a factor. Because the City of Portland is seeing unprecedented rates of urban revitalization, poverty has been pushed to the fringes of its borders, including Washington County. Furthermore, the entire Portland Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) has seen unprecedented rental vacancy rates, due in part to significant in-migration into the area. In 2013, the Portland MSA had the second-lowest vacancy rate Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 32 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) (3.1%) of the 75 largest MSAs in the United States. These factors combined have resulted in an incredibly tight rental market, which is especially challenging for extremely low income and special needs households. These conditions will affect the housing market in a variety of ways, some of them unpredictable, for years to come.
Analysis of Impediments Discussion
Tables I - VI. below summarize the impediments to fair housing choice as identified in the County’s Analysis of Impediments (AI) submitted in 2012.
I. Awareness, Information and Training
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 33 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
II. Access to Decent and Affordable Rental Housing
III. Land Use and Zoning Tools to Promote Access to Opportunity
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 34 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
IV. Overcoming Linguistic and Cultural Isolation ÿ Serving Communities of Color
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 35 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
V. Overcoming Disability-Related Barriers
VI. Data Collection and Analysis
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 36 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment - 24 CFR 91.405, 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c) Summary of Housing Needs
Washington County faces a wide variety of housing needs, particularly for households with low incomes and special needs. Approximately one-third (33%) of households in the County have extremely low-, low- or moderate-incomes. A significant percentage of these households (approximately 77% of low/mod income households or 27% of all households) face some kind of housing problem, including a cost burden [i.e., spend more than 30% of monthly income on housing]. Those at the lowest income levels face the most significant obstacles in obtaining affordable housing and most, particularly in the extremely low-income category, cannot afford owner-occupied housing without multiple subsidies. Based on current trends, over one-third (35%) of renters with incomes at or below 50% of median are likely to pay more than half of their incomes for housing costs in 2010. The demand for low- cost affordable housing far exceeds the supply. In addition to market-rate units that serve low- and moderate-income households, there were approximately 7,000 subsidized rental housing units and 2,700 households with rental housing vouchers in Washington County in 2011, based on information in the Regional Affordable Housing Inventory prepared by Metro and data related to Section 8 vouchers from the Washington County Department of Housing Services. Since some vouchers are used in subsidized units, there are an estimated 7,000 - 9,000 households living in subsidized rental housing in Washington County, which represents 3.6% - 4.6% of all housing units in the County. Based on the estimates of available housing for households with incomes below 50% of the area median, there is an estimated need for 14,000 - 23,000 units for households with incomes below 50% of median available through private market (unsubsidized) and subsidized housing units and/or vouchers for subsidized units. This represents approximately 7 to 11% of all households in Washington County. A significant number of households in the County also have special needs, including older adults, people with substance abuse problems, survivors of domestic violence, people with AIDS, ex-offenders, people with physical and mental disabilities, farmworkers and the homeless. Housing needs for Washington County were gauged in the needs assessment utilizing both quantitative and qualitative data. This included a community needs survey, focus groups, a housing preference study, and a variety of other methods.
Demographics Base Year: 2000 Most Recent Year: 2011 % Change Population 443,906 520,562 17% Households 168,543 197,364 17% Median Income $0.00 $0.00 Table 5 - Housing Needs Assessment Demographics
Data Source: 2000 Census (Base Year), 2007-2011 ACS (Most Recent Year)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 37 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-1
Table 3-2
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 38 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Number of Households Table
0-30% >30-50% >50-80% >80-100% >100% HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI Total Households * 17,115 19,020 30,470 20,205 110,585 Small Family Households * 5,560 6,414 11,070 7,985 62,480 Large Family Households * 1,164 1,809 3,024 2,288 9,050 Household contains at least one person 62-74 years of age 2,443 3,144 4,543 3,538 15,964 Household contains at least one person age 75 or older 2,524 3,442 4,138 1,866 5,416 Households with one or more children 6 years old or younger * 3,236 3,916 5,840 3,694 15,988 * the highest income category for these family types is >80% HAMFI Table 6 - Total Households Table Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
Number of Households
The following table shows the number of households in Washington County across income levels. It includes the number of family households by size, senior households and households with young children.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 39 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
ELI Overall Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 40 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
LI Overall Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 41 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MI Overall Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 42 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Housing Needs Summary Tables
1. Housing Problems (Households with one of the listed needs)
Renter Owner 0-30% >30- >50- >80- Total 0-30% >30- >50- >80- Total AMI 50% 80% 100% AMI 50% 80% 100% AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Substandard Housing - Lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities 500 455 609 75 1,639 64 70 98 35 267 Severely Overcrowded - With >1.51 people per room (and complete kitchen and plumbing) 55 205 248 130 638 20 25 69 114 228 Overcrowded - With 1.01-1.5 people per room (and none of the above problems) 428 765 1,084 455 2,732 75 139 354 263 831 Housing cost burden greater than 50% of income (and none of the above problems) 8,910 4,033 865 155 13,963 3,567 3,279 3,893 1,370 12,109 Housing cost burden greater than 30% of income (and none of the above problems) 768 5,850 7,244 1,265 15,127 552 1,347 3,900 4,284 10,083 Zero/negative Income (and none of the above problems) 660 0 0 0 660 270 0 0 0 270 Table 7 – Housing Problems Table Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
Housing Needs Summary Tables The following tables show the number of households in Washington County across income levels encountering housing problems including residing in housing that lacks kitchen or complete plumbing facilities, residing in housing that is severely overcrowded, and encountering severe cost burden due to the cost of housing. These tables analyze across tenure and income and also include small or large related households, elderly households, single family or multi-family households and other households.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 43 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
ELI Substandard Map Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 44 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
LI Substandard Housing Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 45 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MI Substandard Housing Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 46 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 2. Housing Problems 2 (Households with one or more Severe Housing Problems: Lacks kitchen or complete plumbing, severe overcrowding, severe cost burden)
Renter Owner 0-30% >30- >50- >80- Total 0-30% >30- >50- >80- Total AMI 50% 80% 100% AMI 50% 80% 100% AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Having 1 or more of four housing problems 9,880 5,433 2,809 810 18,932 3,742 3,519 4,418 1,784 13,463 Having none of four housing problems 1,782 6,950 14,340 8,100 31,172 754 3,112 8,895 9,520 22,281 Household has negative income, but none of the other housing problems 660 0 0 0 660 270 0 0 0 270 Table 8 – Housing Problems 2 Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 47 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
ELI Severe Housing Problem Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 48 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
LI Severe Housing Problem Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 49 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MI Severe Housing Problem Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 50 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 3. Cost Burden > 30%
Renter Owner 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% Total 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% Total AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 3,977 4,169 3,178 11,324 1,206 1,577 3,407 6,190 Large Related 764 968 498 2,230 228 404 1,044 1,676 Elderly 1,870 2,389 1,504 5,763 1,939 2,018 2,204 6,161 Other 3,992 3,405 3,442 10,839 880 792 1,413 3,085 Total need by 10,603 10,931 8,622 30,156 4,253 4,791 8,068 17,112 income Table 9 – Cost Burden > 30% Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 51 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Housing Cost Burden Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 52 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 4. Cost Burden > 50%
Renter Owner 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% Total 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% Total AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 3,732 1,029 285 5,046 1,116 1,279 1,661 4,056 Large Related 764 229 24 1,017 173 339 484 996 Elderly 1,585 1,447 535 3,567 1,532 1,091 1,043 3,666 Other 3,694 1,695 234 5,623 837 708 800 2,345 Total need by 9,775 4,400 1,078 15,253 3,658 3,417 3,988 11,063 income Table 10 – Cost Burden > 50% Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 53 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
ELI Severe Cost Burden Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 54 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
LI Severe Cost Burden Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 55 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MI Severe Cost Burden Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 56 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 5. Crowding (More than one person per room)
Renter Owner 0- >30- >50- >80- Total 0- >30- >50- >80- Total 30% 50% 80% 100% 30% 50% 80% 100% AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Single family households 453 855 1,049 435 2,792 85 119 284 197 685 Multiple, unrelated family households 80 130 264 115 589 10 45 123 169 347 Other, non-family households 0 15 59 40 114 0 0 10 0 10 Total need by 533 1,000 1,372 590 3,495 95 164 417 366 1,042 income Table 11 – Crowding Information - 1/2 Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
Overcrowding
Generally, overcrowding is not a major concern in Washington County. In 2012, approximately 2.9% of all County households live in what the US Census defines as “overcrowded conditions,” which is more than one person per room. Cornelius is the most overcrowded city in the County, with nearly 10% of households overcrowded. The next three highest cities are Forest Grove (6.8%), Hillsboro (4.9%), and the Washington County portion of Tualatin (3.8%). Beaverton (1,092), unincorporated areas (1,330) and Hillsboro (1,586) have the most overcrowded units in absolute numbers.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 57 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
ELI Overcrowding Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 58 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
LI Overcrowding Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 59 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MI Overcrowding Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 60 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Renter Owner 0-30% >30- >50- Total 0-30% >30- >50- Total AMI 50% 80% AMI 50% 80% AMI AMI AMI AMI Households with Children Present 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table 12 – Crowding Information – 2/2 Data Source Comments:
Describe the number and type of single person households in need of housing assistance.
The number and type of single person households in need of housing assistance are derived from the Community Connect system from in-take at Community Action of Washington County. Community Connect is a centralized coordinated entry and assessment system that helps people experiencing homelessness or at imminent risk of homelessness to find housing resources in Washington County. From July 1st through the end of October 2014, Community Action screened 235 single person households in the Community Connect system. Of that amount, 130 single persons or 55% were male with 105 single persons or 45% were female. 104 or 44% were literally homeless. 22 single persons or 9% were chronically homeless. 37 single persons or 16% had a history with domestic violence. 132 single persons or 56% had a disabling condition. It is important to note that the data in this section only represents four months from July to October 2014 in the Community Connect system and can be extrapolated to be approximately three times the amount if calculated for the entire year. In addition to screening these households, Community Action also assessed single person households in the Community Connect system. Of the 108 single persons assessed, 83 single persons or 77% were previously homeless. 11 single persons or 10% had a past history of residing in foster care. 63 single persons or 58% had a criminal history. 80 single persons or 74% had chronic health issues. 17 single persons or 16% were United States military veterans. 4 single persons were convicted sexual offenders. 19 single persons or 18% had debt to previous or current landlords. 61 single persons or 56% had a history of mental health challenges. 31 single persons or 29% were on parole or probation. 27 single persons or 25% of those assessed had less than a high school education. One of the largest populations of single person households in Washington County in need of housing assistance is the senior population. There were 54,056 older adult residents in Washington County (people 65 years of age or older) in 2012. Forty-four percent of households with older adult residents were of low- to moderate- income (0-80% AMI), while 24% were extremely low/low income (less than 50% AMI) according to HUD¿s 2010 CHAS data. This compares to 17% of all households which earn less than 50% AMI. The population is continuing to age, as baby boomers started turning 60 years old in 2006. More than 32,000 residents will turn 60 between 2012 and 2016, and approximately 68,000 residents between 2012 and 2020. Forty percent of extremely low, low- and low-moderate income older adult households pay more than 30% of their income towards housing, according to the 2006-2010 CHAS data. This is true for approximately 85% of those households in the 0-50% AMI bracket. Only a small number of publicly assisted housing units (740) are designated for residents age 62 and older. There are approximately 4,200 to 4,400 beds in licensed long-term care facilities in the County for seniors and other adults with
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 61 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) physical or cognitive needs requiring housing integrated with social and medical services. Community Action also screened households within the Community Connect system from July 1st through the end of October 2014. Of the 315 households screened, 194 households or 62% were single parent households while 103 households or 33% were two parent households. 5% were other types of households. 131 of these 315 households were literally homeless representing 42% of the households. Three households were chronically homeless. 82 households or 26% had some history of domestic violence, while 101 households or 32% had a household member with some type of disability. 81 households or 26% had some member with a chronic health condition.
Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance who are disabled or victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking.
In terms of housing assistance for households with members who are disabled, American Community Survey (2008-2012) data shows that 51,218 people, or 9.6% of the County population, had at least one type of disability in 2012. It is estimated that about 22,100 households will include a person with a mobility or self-care limitation in the year 2020, based on the County's projected growth rate estimated by the Office of Economic Analysis at Portland State University and an assumption of 2.70 people per household, the average household size in the County according to the 2008 - 2012 ACS. There is a very limited supply of housing units specifically designated or designed for people with disabilities, with approximately 533 units designated for people with physical, development or mental disabilities, including people with substance abuse issues.
People with substance abuse issues are also included in the population of those who are disabled in need of housing assistance. In 2012, Washington County Department of Health and Human Services indicated that there are approximately 48,000 people in the County in need of drug or alcohol treatment. According to data from early 2014 from the Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS), the number of Washington County residents receiving treatment services from mental health programs for addiction problems in Washington County was 5,117. This represents about 11% of those in need of treatment. Several housing developments and three detoxification treatment centers provide residential and treatment options for this population. Approximately 267 units are targeted to provide housing for individuals with a dual mental health and addiction diagnosis, but they are also generally available to people with mental health disabilities. Thus, there is a significant unmet demand for housing for this population.
There are an estimated 583 people in Washington County known to be living with HIV or AIDS as of March 2014. This constitutes almost one-tenth of a percent of the total County population, and represents more than a doubling of cases of HIV/AIDS reported in 2002 (205 people). However, it is also notable that an estimated 50% of people living with HIV/AIDS are in danger of becoming homeless. There is an estimated supply of about 51 beds/units Washington County for people with HIV/AIDS, resulting in a relatively sizable unmet need for housing for this group.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 62 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) What are the most common housing problems?
The most common housing problems include the severe cost burden encountered by existing low- income renters of Washington County who continue to see increasing rents, utilities, and transportation costs due to high demand for affordable rental housing with limited subsidized housing supply and barriers to accessing market-rate units, the challenges faced by renters (especially those with poor credit or high barriers) seeking affordable rental housing due to this limited supply and low vacancy, and the increasing unattainability of owner-occupied housing due to a scarcity of housing programs for first- time homebuyers, strenuous conventional underwriting and skyrocketing sales prices. These housing problems include information conveyed by the Washington County Continuum of Care regarding the high barriers to accessing affordable rental housing. The information relates to the high cost of housing in Washington County compared to earning capacity (100% of households seeking assistance have earnings below 30% AMI), fair market rents in Washington County require an income above 30% AMI to sustain housing stability, the low vacancy rate combined with low income and/or negative rental history make it difficult to compete for available units, and the issue of previous landlord debt (the average amount owed by households coming through Community Connect is over $2,000). Low-income households lack the resources to pay off landlord debt and save for deposits, which in turn lengthens the amount of time these households remain homeless when they are not able to access deposit assistance.
Are any populations/household types more affected than others by these problems?
Three particular populations affected by these housing problems include the homeless, offenders and farmworkers. These are three populations who often encounter significant barriers in accessing affordable and permanent rental housing. It is partly due to difficulties in siting and zoning housing for these special needs populations, as well as the limited financing tools available to construct or acquire and rehabilitate housing for these special needs populations. In almost all cases, the need for housing to meet special needs far outstrips the supply of units designed and designated to meet those needs. In considering the needs of these populations, it also should be recognized that many individuals have multiple needs and/or low or moderate incomes. As a result, this population competes for a limited supply of affordable housing units available to people with limited incomes. While a variety of resources and facilities are available to help address the needs of low-income and special needs households in the County, there remains a significant gap between available resources and needs. In addition to these three populations, there are several other special needs populations who are challenged to access housing given the listed housing problems. Persons with disabilities, particularly those with mental health related disabilities are more difficult to house and struggle to retain housing because of behaviors associated with their disability. Survivors of domestic violence are also more vulnerable in that they often have similar housing barriers as described above but have the additional barrier of finding affordable housing that also in a confidential location unknown to their abuser. Additionally, survivors of domestic violence are more likely to have to move as a result of retaliation or threat that their abuser will find them at that confidential location. Persons who are limited-English proficient (LEP) face additional barriers in that the lack of General Educational
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 63 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Development (GED) and/or English as a Second Language (ESL) services will always continue to hinder employment opportunities. While these services are available, attendance has been low and there is a need to better market these opportunities in order to help produce better employment options and increase household income. Persons on fixed incomes are also very vulnerable in that their income from Social Security is not keeping up with the cost of rent. The amount of elderly persons on fixed incomes calling for rent assistance has increased dramatically in recent years. This is the first indication that there is a rental housing crisis looming on the horizon for our aging population.
Describe the characteristics and needs of Low-income individuals and families with children (especially extremely low-income) who are currently housed but are at imminent risk of either residing in shelters or becoming unsheltered 91.205(c)/91.305(c)). Also discuss the needs of formerly homeless families and individuals who are receiving rapid re-housing assistance and are nearing the termination of that assistance
In Washington County, there is a sizeable and growing population of low-income individuals and families with children (especially extremely low-income) who are currently housed but are at imminent risk of either residing in shelters or becoming unsheltered.
The top three characteristics of low-income individuals and families with children who access housing services in Washington County include: 1) the lack of adequate income (namely, employment opportunities); 2) the lack of affordable housing; and 3) the cost of childcare. Another common general characteristic is that the households have a recent eviction (which is often due to loss in employment). Many of these households will live in doubled up living situations ("couch-surfing"), which do not meet the federal definition of "literally homeless", and are households for which housing resources are scarce. They are a very mobile population that has managed to stay with family or friends until those resources have been exhausted. Unfortunately, once placed in housing, these families will often revert back to the "at-risk of becoming homeless" category as soon as the duration of available rent assistance has been reached, because there are not enough living wage jobs to support the substantial rent increases that have been seen in recent years.
Other more systemic characteristics include criminal history, substantial and insurmountable landlord debt, which has shown to be the biggest housing barrier in being able to rapidly re-house persons who are formerly homeless. There are there no other resources intended to handle this kind of debt once it has been accrued. The low-income status of those households prevents them from ever being able to repay this debt, and as a result will always face chronic financial and housing instability because of it. Community Connect data shows that approximately 71% of all households trying to access these services have previously been homeless. These are families that may be better served with a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher to address homeless recidivism, but are unable to because the Section 8 Waitlist is so long. Rapid- Re-housing and Homeless Prevent dollars are being used as a temporary fix for households that need a more long-term solution. The vast majority of household that receive Re- housing assistance are housing cost burdened when their assistance ends. All of these households in general need some element or type of trauma counseling, either because of the trauma that they have Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 64 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) experienced in their past , which often has contributed to their episode of homelessness, or because of the trauma caused by the episode of homelessness itself.
If a jurisdiction provides estimates of the at-risk population(s), it should also include a description of the operational definition of the at-risk group and the methodology used to generate the estimates:
For Washington County, "at-risk" includes all households with a residence prior to program entry that is either: staying with friends or family, rental by client, with or without subsidy, or owned by client. All clients must be at imminent risk of losing the housing within fourteen days to be considered "at-risk". Community Action screened 180 at-risk households who met this definition within the Community Connect system from July 1st through the end of October 2014. The average family size was 3.3 and 17% of the households had five or more members. Of the 180 households screened, 124 or 69% were single parent households and 49 or 27% were two parent households. 4% were other types of households. 46 households or 26% had a history of domestic violence. 53 households or 29% had a member with some type of disability. 41 households or 23% had a member with a chronic health condition. 11% of the households had a head of household with less than a high school education. Specify particular housing characteristics that have been linked with instability and an increased risk of homelessness
The particular housing characteristics that have been linked with instability and an increased risk of homelessness include the cost burden and severe cost burden faced by low-income and extremely low- income households, rising costs of rent and utilities in the region, the lack of available, affordable housing for these households, the lack of employment opportunities for these households to achieve economic self-sufficiency, and the housing barriers faced by these households caused by landlord debt and criminal history that makes it difficult for these households to access housing even when housing is available and affordable.
Discussion
The percentage of cost-burdened households (renters and homeowners combined) is projected to increase overall in the four-County Portland Metro area, with households spending more than 30% of their income on housing to increase to nearly 50% in 2035. In Washington County, the proportion of households paying more than 30% of their income on housing is expected to increase to between 36% and 64% by 2035, varying by sub-area within the County, with the highest percentage in the Cornelius/Forest Grove area and the lowest percentages in the Tualatin and unincorporated areas. In most sub-areas of the County, a higher percentage of renters are projected to be cost-burdened in 2035 than are homeowners or the overall population. For example, the percentage of cost-burdened renters in Beaverton and Hillsboro is expected to be 6-10% higher than the percentage of all households. The same is true as would be expected for renters of multi-family units.In the Portland Metro area, the percentage of significantly cost-burdened renters (i.e., spending 50% or 60% of their income on housing) is expected to be between 10% and 12% in 2035. Increases in Washington County are expected to be
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 65 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) lower than in Multnomah County or the region, on average. A significant percentage of single-family renter households currently spend more than 30% of their income on housing in the Portland region (just over 60%). However, this percentage is not expected to change significantly over the next 20 years, except for households at the lowest income levels that spend an even higher proportion of their income (50-60%) on housing. The percentage of single-family homeowners in the region who pay more than 30% of their income on housing is expected to increase to almost 50% in 2035, with most of the increase occurring relatively early in this time period. Increases are projected to be lower in most parts of Washington County than in other parts of the region.The percentage of owners of multi-family units (such as condos) paying more than 30% of their income on housing in the region is expected to rise to over 60% in 2020. The Beaverton, Hillsboro and Cornelius areas will be most affected by this trend.The demographic groups expected to be most affected by cost-burden issues in 2035 are owners of multi- family units (particularly those with lower incomes) and to a lesser degree owners of single-family units.Among renter households, emerging singles households, young and middle-income families, and successful middle-aged families are expected to see the most significant relative increase in the percentage of households that are cost-burdened. This is due in part to the fact that a much higher percentage of lower income households are already cost-burdened, with relatively little capacity for the percentage to increase. The percent of lower income households that spend more than 50% of their incomes on housing is expected to be 19-33% by 2035 among low-income households. These changes are expected to be most pronounced in portions of Beaverton and Hillsboro, compared to other parts of Washington County.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 66 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems - 91.405, 91.205 (b)(2) Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.
Introduction
As noted in the regulation at 91.205(b)(2), a “disproportionately greater need” exists when the percentage of persons in a category of need who are members of this particular racial group is at least 10 percentage points higher than the percentage of low income persons in Washington County with one or more of the four housing problems: lacks complete kitchen facilities; lacks complete plumbing facilities; more than one person per room; or housing cost burden is greater than 30% of household monthly income. Three racial or ethnic groups have disproportionately greater needs with regard to housing problems, as identified in Tables 13 – 16 across income levels ranging from 0% to 100% of the Area Median Income (AMI) derived from 2007-2011 CHAS data. Those racial or ethnic groups include: persons who are Black or African American, Pacific Islanders and persons who are of Asian descent.
0%-30% of Area Median Income
Housing Problems Has one or more of Has none of the Household has four housing four housing no/negative problems problems income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 14,927 1,461 1,014 White 10,624 1,097 714 Black / African American 280 34 35 Asian 865 220 115 American Indian, Alaska Native 143 10 0 Pacific Islander 25 0 0 Hispanic 2,558 84 55 Table 13 - Disproportionally Greater Need 0 - 30% AMI Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
*The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30%
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 67 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-14
Table 3-15
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 68 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-16
30%-50% of Area Median Income
Housing Problems Has one or more of Has none of the Household has four housing four housing no/negative problems problems income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 16,572 3,047 0 White 11,546 2,457 0 Black / African American 229 40 0 Asian 924 168 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 86 15 0 Pacific Islander 23 0 0 Hispanic 3,407 329 0 Table 14 - Disproportionally Greater Need 30 - 50% AMI Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
*The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30%
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 69 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
50%-80% of Area Median Income
Housing Problems Has one or more of Has none of the Household has four housing four housing no/negative problems problems income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 16,934 14,759 0 White 12,518 11,884 0 Black / African American 365 80 0 Asian 1,088 609 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 24 25 0 Pacific Islander 80 20 0 Hispanic 2,667 1,988 0 Table 15 - Disproportionally Greater Need 50 - 80% AMI Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
*The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30%
80%-100% of Area Median Income
Housing Problems Has one or more of Has none of the Household has four housing four housing no/negative problems problems income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 7,133 13,500 0 White 5,407 11,415 0 Black / African American 60 210 0 Asian 755 684 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 20 37 0 Pacific Islander 15 49 0 Hispanic 587 932 0 Table 16 - Disproportionally Greater Need 80 - 100% AMI Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
*The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30%
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 70 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Discussion
As indicated in Table 13, 14,927 or 86% of persons in the 0-30% Area Median Income (AMI) range reported having one or more of four housing problems: lacks complete kitchen facilities; lacks complete plumbing facilities; more than one person per room; or housing cost burden is greater than 30% of household monthly income. Of the described racial and ethnic categories, Pacific Islanders showed a disproportionately greater need in that 100% of persons in this category of need (0-30%AMI) reported having one or more housing problems (14 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of “disproportionately greater need”, it should be noted that 93% of American Indian/Alaska Natives (7 percentage points higher than the County as a whole) and 95% of Hispanic or Latino persons (9 percentage points higher than the County as a whole) in the 0-30% AMI income range reported having housing problems.
As indicated in Table 14, 16,572 or 84% of all persons in the 30-50% AMI range reported having one or more of four housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories, Pacific Islanders showed a disproportionately greater need in that 100% of persons in this category of need (30-50% AMI) reported having one or more housing problems (16 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of “disproportionately greater need”, it should be noted that 91% of Hispanic or Latino persons in the 30- 50% AMI range reported having housing problems (7 percentage points higher than the County as a whole).
Table 15 shows that 16,934 or 53% of all persons in the 50-80% AMI range reported having one or more of the four housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need (50- 80% AMI), Black or African Americans, Asians and Pacific Islanders all showed a disproportionately greater need. 82% of persons who are Black or African American reported having one or more of the four housing problems (29 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). 64% of persons who are Asian reported having one or more of the four housing problems (11 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). 80% of persons who are Pacific Islanders reported having one or more of the four housing problems (27 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). Table 16 shows that 7,133 or 35% of all persons in the 80-100% AMI range reported having one or more of the four housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need (80- 100% AMI), persons who are Asian showed a disproportionately greater need. 52% of persons who are Asian reported having one or more of the four housing problems (17 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). 39% of Hispanic or Latino persons reported having one or more of the four housing problems (only 4 percentage points higher than the County as a whole, but the only other racial/ethnic category that indicates a greater percentage of need in the 80-100% AMI range.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 71 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems - 91.405, 91.205 (b)(2) Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.
Introduction
As noted in the regulation at 91.205(b)(2), a “disproportionately greater need” exists when the percentage of persons in a category of need who are members of a particular racial group is at least 10 percentage points higher than the percentage of all low income persons with one or more of the four “severe housing problems”: lacks complete kitchen facilities; lacks complete plumbing facilities; more than 1.5 persons per room; or housing cost burden is greater than 50% of household monthly income. Three racial or ethnic groups have disproportionately greater needs with regard to severe housing problems, as identified in Tables 17 – 20 across income levels ranging from 0% to 100% of the Area Median Income (AMI) derived from 2007-2011 CHAS data. Those racial or ethnic groups include: persons who are Hispanic or Latino, Pacific Islanders and persons who are of Asian descent.
0%-30% of Area Median Income
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of Has none of the Household has four housing four housing no/negative problems problems income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 12,872 3,540 1,014 White 9,065 2,681 714 Black / African American 280 34 35 Asian 755 320 115 American Indian, Alaska Native 117 40 0 Pacific Islander 25 0 0 Hispanic 2,228 399 55 Table 17 – Severe Housing Problems 0 - 30% AMI Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
*The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50%
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 72 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 30%-50% of Area Median Income
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of Has none of the Household has four housing four housing no/negative problems problems income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 8,471 11,162 0 White 5,966 8,047 0 Black / African American 89 180 0 Asian 668 403 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 28 73 0 Pacific Islander 8 15 0 Hispanic 1,548 2,193 0 Table 18 – Severe Housing Problems 30 - 50% AMI Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
*The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50%
50%-80% of Area Median Income
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of Has none of the Household has four housing four housing no/negative problems problems income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 6,287 25,390 0 White 3,969 20,425 0 Black / African American 75 375 0 Asian 568 1,128 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 4 45 0 Pacific Islander 35 65 0 Hispanic 1,567 3,091 0 Table 19 – Severe Housing Problems 50 - 80% AMI Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
*The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50%
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 73 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 80%-100% of Area Median Income
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of Has none of the Household has four housing four housing no/negative problems problems income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 1,663 18,965 0 White 1,214 15,620 0 Black / African American 10 260 0 Asian 105 1,334 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 0 57 0 Pacific Islander 15 49 0 Hispanic 289 1,222 0 Table 20 – Severe Housing Problems 80 - 100% AMI Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
*The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50%
Discussion
As indicated in Table 17, 12,872 or 74% of persons in the 0-30% Area Median Income (AMI) range reported having one or more of four severe housing problems”(lacks complete kitchen facilities; lacks complete plumbing facilities; more than 1.5 persons per room; or housing cost burden is greater than 50% of household monthly income). Of the described racial and ethnic categories, Pacific Islanders showed a disproportionately greater need in that 100% of persons in this category of need (0-30% AMI) reported having one or more severe housing problems (26 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of “disproportionately greater need”, it should be noted that 80% of Black or African Americans (6 percentage points higher than the County as a whole) and 83% of Hispanic or Latino persons (9 percentage points higher than the County as a whole) in the 0-30% AMI income range reported having severe housing problems.
As indicated in Table 18, 8,471 or 43% of all persons in the 30-50% AMI range reported having one or more of four severe housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories, persons of Asian descent showed a disproportionately greater need in that 62% of persons in this category of need (30- 50% AMI) reported having one or more severe housing problems (19 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). None of the other racial and ethnic categories indicated a greater need with regard to severe housing problems than that which was reported for the jurisdiction as a whole within this category of need (30-50% AMI).
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 74 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Table 19 shows that 6,287 or 20% of all persons in the 50-80% AMI range reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need (50-80% AMI), persons who are Hispanic or Latino, persons of Asian descent and Pacific Islanders all showed a disproportionately greater need. 33% of persons of Asian descent reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems (13 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). 35% of Pacific Islanders reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems (15 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). 34% of persons who are Hispanic or Latino reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems (14 percentage points higher than the County as a whole).
Table 20 shows that only 1,663 or 8% of all persons in the 80-100% AMI range reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need (80-100% AMI), Pacific Islanders and persons who are Hispanic or Latino showed a disproportionately greater need with regard to severe housing problems. 23% of persons who are Pacific Islander reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems (15 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). 19% of persons who are Hispanic or Latino reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems (11 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). None of the other racial and ethnic categories indicated a greater need with regard to severe housing problems than that which was reported for the jurisdiction as a whole within this category of need (80-100% AMI).
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 75 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens - 91.405, 91.205 (b)(2) Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.
Introduction
As noted in the regulation at 91.205(b)(2), a “disproportionately greater need” exists when the percentage of persons in a category of need who are members of a particular racial group is at least 10 percentage points higher than the percentage of low income persons in the jurisdiction as a whole who are experiencing housing cost burden, defined as spending more than 30% of household monthly income towards housing costs. One racial/ethnic group, Pacific Islanders indicated disproportionately greater needs with regard to housing cost burden, as identified in Table 21 across income levels ranging from 0% to 30% of the Area Median Income (AMI) derived from 2007-2011 CHAS data.
Housing Cost Burden
Housing Cost Burden <=30% 30-50% >50% No / negative income (not computed) Jurisdiction as a whole 124,082 39,053 26,211 1,019 White 103,235 29,974 19,514 714 Black / African American 1,323 700 440 35 Asian 8,914 2,604 1,804 119 American Indian, Alaska Native 332 177 142 0 Pacific Islander 329 64 44 0 Hispanic 8,134 4,722 3,593 55 Table 21 – Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens AMI Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
Discussion
In the 0-30% AMI range, 124,082 or 65% of all persons in the jurisdiction as a whole reported experiencing housing cost burden. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need (0-30% AMI), 75% of persons who are Pacific Islander reported experiencing housing cost burden (10 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of “disproportionately greater need”, it should be noted that 67% of persons who are White in the 0-30% AMI range reported experiencing housing cost burden (2 percentage points higher than the County as a whole) and that 66% of persons
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 76 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) who are of Asian descent in the 0-30% AMI range reported experiencing housing cost burden (1 percentage point higher than the County as a whole).
In the 30-50% AMI range, 39,053 or 21% of all persons in the jurisdiction as a whole reported experiencing housing cost burden. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need (30-50% AMI), none met the threshold showing “disproportionately greater need”. While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of “disproportionately greater need”, it should be noted that 28% of persons who are Black or African American reported experiencing housing cost burden (7 percentage points higher than the County as a whole); 27% of persons who are American Indian or Alaska Native in the 30-50% AMI range reported experiencing housing cost burden (6 percentage points higher than the County as a whole); and that 29% of persons who are Hispanic or Latino in the 30-50% AMI range reported experiencing housing cost burden (8 percentage point higher than the County as a whole).
For persons in the >50% AMI range, 26,211 or 14% of all persons in the jurisdiction as a whole reported experiencing housing cost burden. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need (>50% AMI), none met the threshold showing “disproportionately greater need”. While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of “disproportionately greater need”, it should be noted that 18% of persons who are Black or African American reported experiencing housing cost burden (4 percentage points higher than the County as a whole); 22% of persons who are American Indian or Alaska Native in the >50% AMI range reported experiencing housing cost burden (8 percentage points higher than the County as a whole); and that 22% of persons who are Hispanic or Latino in the >50% AMI range reported experiencing housing cost burden (8 percentage point higher than the County as a whole).
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 77 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion - 91.205 (b)(2) Are there any Income categories in which a racial or ethnic group has disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category as a whole?
There are income categories in which racial or ethnic groups have disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole. The 0-30% AMI range, the Pacific Islander group shows a disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole in terms of housing problems and severe housing problems. At the 30-50% AMI level, the Pacific Islander group shows a disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole in terms of housing problems, but the Asian population shows a disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole in terms of severe housing problems. At the 50-80% AMI level, the Black or African American, Asian and Pacific Islander groups all have disproportionately greater needs with regard to housing problems, but the Asian, Pacific Islander and Hispanic or Latino groups all have disproportionately greater need with regard to severe housing problems as compared to the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole. At the 80-100% AMI level, persons of Asian descent show a disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole in terms of housing problems, but the Pacific Islander and Hispanic or Latino groups show a disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole in terms of severe housing problems.
If they have needs not identified above, what are those needs?
It appears that the 50-80% AMI range shows a disproportionately greater need than all other income categories in that three racial/ethnic groups were identified as having a disproportionately greater need for both housing problems and severe housing problems. The Pacific Islander group is small in population size but the data indicates that they showed a disproportionately greater need in the 0-30%, 30-50% and 50-80% AMI range for housing problems, as well as a disproportionately greater need in the 0-30%, 50-80% and 80-100% AMI range with regard to severe housing problems. A disproportionately greater need is not indicated for any of the income groups for the Hispanic or Latino group with regard to housing problems, however the data shows a disproportionately greater need for persons who are Hispanic or Latino in the 50-80% AMI range and 80-100% AMI for severe housing problems.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 78 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Are any of those racial or ethnic groups located in specific areas or neighborhoods in your community?
Racial composition has changed in the County during the last decade. Between 2000 and 2012, the proportion of White residents has decreased (from 82% to 69.8%) while most other racial groups have increased in relative size. In addition, the percentage of Latino residents has increased dramatically during this period.
Approximately 70% of the population of Washington County is White (alone). Approximately 12% are Asian, Black or African-American, American Indian, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (not including any people of mixed descent). About 3% are of two or more races. The largest single ethnic group is Hispanic or Latino (16%), followed by Asian (9%). Information on race and ethnicity for the County as a whole is described in the Table 3-26. It is based on 2012 American Community Survey data, projected to 2015 based on overall County population growth. This table also identifies the “concentration percent” of different ethnic or minority groups. A concentration is defined as a percentage of any minority population within the Census Tract that is 20% greater than the percentage of that minority group across the entire jurisdiction. For example, if 7% of the County’s population is Asian, a concentration could occur in Census Tract where 27% or more of the population is Asian.
Information on concentrations of ethnic and racial minority groups can be valuable when making funding decisions for housing programs. HUD rules require that all Consolidated Plans identify the areas within the jurisdiction that have a concentration of ethnic and racial minorities generally, or a concentration of any one ethnic or racial minority group. A concentration in Washington County is defined as a percentage of any ethnic or racial minority population within the Census Tract that is 20% greater than the percentage of that ethnic or racial minority group across the entire jurisdiction. The 2010 U.S. Census data and the Census Tract as the identified geographic area are used for this definition given their relatively low margins of error in comparison to American Community Survey estimates and Census Block Group data.
These racial or ethnic groups are located in specific cities or neighborhoods within our community. In 2010, there were 9 Census Tracts in the County that had some concentration of racial or ethnic minorities, according to the definition of concentration stated previously. This information was first noted in the 2012 Washington County Fair Housing Plan utilizing data from the 2010 U.S. Census. Two Census Tracts represent a concentration of Asian residents in the areas north of the City of Beaverton close to the Sunset Highway. These two Census Tracts also have percentages of non-white households that are at least 20% higher than the percentage of non-white households across the whole County overall. There are 7 Census Tracts in Washington County that represent a concentration of Latino residents primarily in parts of the cities of Beaverton, Tualatin, Hillsboro, Cornelius and Forest Grove. Two of these seven Census Tracts also have a concentration of “other” racial or ethnic minorities that is 20% higher than the percentage classified as “other” racial or ethnic minorities across the whole County overall.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 79 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) NA-35 Public Housing - 91.405, 91.205 (b) Introduction
The Washington County Department of Housing Services (DHS) owns and operates 626 units of publicly subsidized housing, of which 240 are public housing low-income units, 12 are Rural Development units, and 521 are affordable housing units financed by bonds and HOME. Information about the public housing units and the needs and programs of the agency are summarized in the DHS Public Housing Authority (PHA) Plan, which is updated annually. A copy of the most recently approved plan appears on the DHS website at the following address: http://www.co.washington.or.us/Housing/PoliciesPlans/plans.cfm
The DHS units are generally in good condition, and the agency places a high priority on providing and maintaining safe, well-maintained housing units for tenants. The agency continually improves the quality of its housing through preventative maintenance inspections and rehabilitation when necessary. The agency is also reviewing options for acquiring perhaps 2-4 new public housing units in 2014 or 2015. DHS had disposed of 40 scattered-site public housing units in an effort to reduce administrative and maintenance costs in light of federal budget cuts. Information about the number of families on public housing and tenant-based waiting lists, including results of the Section 504 needs assessment, is described in a following section. The Washington County Department of Housing Services reports that they distributed 2,784 Section 8 vouchers in Washington County in 2013, compared to 2,569 in 2007. More detailed information about waiting lists for both Section 8 vouchers and public housing can be found in the following section.
In addition to operating and maintaining housing for low-income and other families, the DHS implements a variety of other programs and activities to improve community quality of life and economic vitality and promote self-sufficiency and asset development of families and individuals through the following efforts, among others: Promotes income mixing in public housing by assuring access for lower income families into higher income developments. Voluntarily maintains its Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) Program enrollment limit over minimum requirements. Provides linkage to services to help FSS families overcome barriers to self-sufficiency, by partnering with other agencies, such as the State of Oregon Adult and Family Services Division, to provide services to participating households, including case management, supportive services, and/or employment services. Provides Section 8 Homeownership Vouchers to families who are eligible. Providing no-cost financial education to FSS program participants and Providing access to Individual Development Accounts (IDA). Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 80 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Partners with a variety of non-profit organizations to provide services to households receiving rental assistance through its Shelter Plus Care program. Works with non-profit agencies and other governmental bodies to promote community events serving families and persons who are homeless or at risk of homelessness, such as Project Homeless Connect. Totals in Use
Program Type Certificate Mod- Public Vouchers Rehab Housing Total Project - Tenant - Special Purpose Voucher based based Veterans Family Disabled Affairs Unification * Supportive Program Housing # of units vouchers in use 0 0 240 2,784 29 2,733 18 0 0 Table 22 - Public Housing by Program Type *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition
Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center)
Characteristics of Residents
Program Type Certificate Mod- Public Vouchers Rehab Housing Total Project - Tenant - Special Purpose Voucher based based Veterans Family Affairs Unification Supportive Program Housing Average Annual Income 0 0 14,068 12,007 7,319 12,038 12,578 0 Average length of stay 0 0 6 6 0 6 0 0 Average Household size 0 0 3 2 1 2 2 0 # Homeless at admission 0 0 0 44 6 38 0 0
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 81 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Program Type Certificate Mod- Public Vouchers Rehab Housing Total Project - Tenant - Special Purpose Voucher based based Veterans Family Affairs Unification Supportive Program Housing # of Elderly Program Participants (>62) 0 0 26 577 1 575 1 0 # of Disabled Families 0 0 47 1,173 26 1,137 10 0 # of Families requesting accessibility features 0 0 240 2,784 29 2,733 18 0 # of HIV/AIDS program participants 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 # of DV victims 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table 23 – Characteristics of Public Housing Residents by Program Type
Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center)
Race of Residents
Program Type Race Certificate Mod- Public Vouchers Rehab Housing Total Project - Tenant - Special Purpose Voucher based based Veterans Family Disabled Affairs Unification * Supportive Program Housing White 0 0 212 2,324 26 2,278 16 0 0 Black/African American 0 0 13 279 3 274 2 0 0 Asian 0 0 10 126 0 126 0 0 0 American Indian/Alaska Native 0 0 2 33 0 33 0 0 0
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 82 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Program Type Race Certificate Mod- Public Vouchers Rehab Housing Total Project - Tenant - Special Purpose Voucher based based Veterans Family Disabled Affairs Unification * Supportive Program Housing Pacific Islander 0 0 3 22 0 22 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Table 24 – Race of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center)
Ethnicity of Residents
Program Type Ethnicity Certificate Mod- Public Vouchers Rehab Housing Total Project - Tenant - Special Purpose Voucher based based Veterans Family Disabled Affairs Unification * Supportive Program Housing Hispanic 0 0 78 389 1 386 1 0 0 Not Hispanic 0 0 162 2,395 28 2,347 17 0 0 *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Table 25 – Ethnicity of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 83 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-36
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 84 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-37
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 85 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Section 504 Needs Assessment: Describe the needs of public housing tenants and applicants on the waiting list for accessible units:
On the Section 8 and public housing waitlists, households with persons with disabilities comprised 21% and 29% of the respective wait list, and 8% and 19% were elderly households, respectively. These are the households that tend to be the tenants and applicants on the waiting list most in need of accessible units.
When an applicant completes an Application for Rental Assistance, the Department of Housing Services (DHS) places the applicant on the waiting list for all types of rental assistance the applicant may qualify for. The waiting list is ordered by date and time of application. Some programs offer preference placement on the list for people who qualify. For example, the Housing Choice Voucher waiting list gives preference for applicants who qualify for one or more of the following preferences:
Homeless Applicant lacks a permanent, fixed, nighttime residence - or - is living in an emergency shelter - or - is living in a place not meant for human habitation (such as a car). Single applicants who are disabled or elderly also have preference over single applicants who are not disabled or elderly.
What are the number and type of families on the waiting lists for public housing and section 8 tenant-based rental assistance? Based on the information above, and any other information available to the jurisdiction, what are the most immediate needs of residents of public housing and Housing Choice voucher holders?
The Public Housing and Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher waiting lists provide a further indication of need. However, the Washington County Department of Housing Services (DHS) closed the waiting list in September 2011 for these two programs because the demand was too great. The waiting list was re- opened in May 2015 and DHS staff is in the process of evaluating the applications received that were randomly selected to be placed on the waitlist. [1] Data from the wait list still offers valuable insight into the demographics of the demand.
According to the 2014 PHA plan, there were a combined total of 2,077 households on the waiting list for Section 8 vouchers and 2,575 households on the waiting list for public housing units. It should be noted that there is overlap between these two waiting lists. Many people are on waiting lists for both Section 8 vouchers and public housing units. Therefore the total number of people on the combined waiting lists is not the sum of the two numbers and the degree of overlap is not precisely known. However, even if there is a significant degree of overlap (e.g., 65%), the two waiting lists indicate a significant unmet need for affordable units. The number of people on the combined waiting list is several times the number of available public housing units. Tables 3-36 and 3-37 below provides information about characteristics of those on waiting lists for both Section 8 vouchers and public housing.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 86 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) The race, income, and family-size profile of Section 8 voucher waiting list applicants and public housing waiting list applicants are similar. Applicants are predominantly White (approximately 78% and 79% respectively), and Hispanic/Latino applicants represent the second largest share (approximately 16 % and 22% respectively). Not surprisingly, applicants on both wait lists are overwhelmingly people with extremely low-incomes. More than half of the applicants on the public housing wait list are in need of a one-bedroom unit, and over 90% need a 2 bedroom unit or smaller.
Given the large number of people on the Section 8 voucher and public housing waiting lists—and the fact that the list has mostly remained closed due to great demand—there is clearly a need for more of both of these resources.
How do these needs compare to the housing needs of the population at large
In past planning efforts, research has indicated a strong need for housing units to accommodate larger households (3 or more bedrooms). While there is still a need for larger affordable housing units, the waiting list data shows that only 22% of households have expressed a need for homes with three or more bedrooms. Similarly, CHAS data indicates that approximately 21% of large related, low/mod income households are cost-burdened (spend 30% or more of their income on housing), which represents approximately 2,000 families. CHAS data also indicates that approximately 3% of County households are subject to overcrowding, defined as “a housing unit containing more than one person per room”). Although some of these households may need units with three or more bedrooms, data does not exist to quantify this unmet demand. To complicate matters further, it is possible that some of the real demand for larger units is suppressed because some residents may not report all of the household members included when occasional or permanent “doubling up” occurs. Census data provides some indication of the existing supply of larger housing units. While there are a significant number of owner-occupied units that can accommodate large families (86% of all owner- occupied units have three or more bedrooms), the supply of larger rental units is more limited. About 28% of all rental units have three or more bedrooms. Of those units with three or more bedrooms, only 24% had rents of $1,000 per month or less, according to 2006-10 CHAS data.
Discussion
The County’s Department of Housing Services (DHS) shared that they are reviewing options for acquiring perhaps 2 to 4 new public housing units in 2014 or 2015. The funding source for these acquisitions is the HUD Capital Fund Replacement Housing Factor (RHF) Fund Grants. The Capital Fund formula rule at 24 CFR 905.10(i) provides that a PHA may receive RHF grants for public housing units demolished or sold for a period up to five years, with an opportunity for an extension. Any new public housing units will likely be duplex- or triplex-units, which are more cost-effective. DHS’s success in finding something that is safe and decent in 2014 or 2015 will depend in large part on the availability of such housing on the market.[1]
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 87 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment - 91.405, 91.205 (c) Introduction:
In assessing the needs of homeless populations in Washington County, the Consortium looked to the 2014 Point-in-Time Shelter Count for data as well as sources such as the Washington County Department of Housing Services and the Oregon Department of Education for information on homeless children in Washington County school district.
Since 2003, HUD has required continuums across the country to report the number of people who are homeless at a particular time of the year (in the last seven days of January). The annual homeless count facilitates the need for continuums to collect data and report on the number of homeless. The point-in-time homeless count for Washington County was held from January 22 to 30, 2014. The survey accounts for those who were staying in shelters, those who were camping or were otherwise staying in places other than shelters and those who were in other homeless situations, such as people who are “doubled-up.” Table 3-38 shows the 2014 count.
For the 2014 count, the majority of people counted were sharing housing with other people—“doubled-up.” This category is an expanded version of the federal definition of homelessness, and is defined as people sharing other persons’ housing due to loss of housing, economic hardship, personal safety, or facing impending eviction from a private dwelling unit and have not found a subsequent residence and resources needed to obtain housing. Given that the total number of homeless is inevitably underrepresented in this count – it is practically impossible to find and account for every person who is homeless – it is assumed that the number of homeless people going without shelter is even greater than the number captured in the point-in-time count. Moreover, not everyone who is homeless seeks shelter for reasons including shelter requirements and restrictions and the threat – or perceived threat – of conflict or theft among those staying in shelters. For those who do seek shelter and housing, several types are available: emergency shelter, safe haven shelter, transitional housing, and permanent housing. Emergency shelters may allow people to stay up to six weeks before requiring them to seek shelter elsewhere. Safe haven beds are established for “chronic” homeless individuals, but not for families or youth. Chronic homeless are people who have been homeless for more than one year or had four or more episodes of homelessness in the past three years. Permanent housing refers to supportive housing for those who are homeless and have special service needs. The number of each type of shelter and housing units available in Washington County is presented in Table 3-38.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 88 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) Homeless Needs Assessment
Population Estimate the # of persons Estimate the # Estimate the # Estimate the # Estimate the # experiencing homelessness experiencing becoming exiting of days persons on a given night homelessness homeless homelessness experience each year each year each year homelessness Sheltered Unsheltered Persons in Households with Adult(s) and Child(ren) 551 96 950 368 230 36 Persons in Households with Only Children 15 2 35 20 26 35 Persons in Households with Only Adults 247 100 450 168 98 18 Chronically Homeless Individuals 100 10 110 4 4 200 Chronically Homeless Families 3 1 20 17 18 150 Veterans 27 51 83 8 6 35 Unaccompanied Child 12 1 30 20 5 200 Persons with HIV 1 0 2 1 1 35 Table 26 - Homeless Needs Assessment
Data Source Comments: 2014 Washington County Point-In-Time Shelter Count (January 22-30, 2014); estimates based on solid numbers, percentages, and extrapolation of HMIS data.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 89 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-38
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 90 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-39
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 91 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Figure 3-6
Indicate if the homeless population is: Has No Rural Homeless
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 92 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
If data is not available for the categories "number of persons becoming and exiting homelessness each year," and "number of days that persons experience homelessness," describe these categories for each homeless population type (including chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth):
The data on these categories from Community Connect for each homeless population type is not currently available.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 93 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Nature and Extent of Homelessness: (Optional)
Race: Sheltered: Unsheltered (optional)
White 160 868 Black or African American 16 50 Asian 1 7 American Indian or Alaska Native 2 25 Pacific Islander 4 18 Ethnicity: Sheltered: Unsheltered (optional)
Hispanic 30 244 Not Hispanic 168 767 Data Source Comments: 2014 Washington County Point-In-Time Shelter Count (January 22-30, 2014)
Figure 3-7
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 94 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Figure 3-8
Table 3-43
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 95 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-44
Table 3-45
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 96 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-46
Table 3-47
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 97 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-48
Table 3-49
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 98 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-50
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 99 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-51
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 100 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-52
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 101 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance for families with children and the families of veterans.
The Point-in-Time Shelter Count information shows 551 persons in families with adults and children in need of housing assistance as they are unsheltered. 27 persons are in households with veterans who are also in need of housing assistance as they are unsheltered.
Describe the Nature and Extent of Homelessness by Racial and Ethnic Group.
Homelessness by racial and ethnic group in Washington County as shown in Table 3-46 and Table 3-47. Table 3-46 shows homelessness by ethnicity while Table 3-47 shows homelessness by racial group. Table 3-46 shows that the non-Hispanic population represents 84.8% of the sheltered homeless, 73.7% of the unsheltered homeless and 75.9% of the homeless population overall. Table 3-46 shows that the Hispanic population represents 15.2% of the sheltered homeless, 26.3% of the unsheltered homeless and 24.1% of the homeless population overall. Table 3-47 shows that white individuals represent 80.8% of the sheltered homeless, 87.1% of the unsheltered homeless and 85.9% of the homeless population overall. For Black/African Americans, Table 3-47 shows that these individuals represent 8.1% of the sheltered homeless, 4.2% of the unsheltered homeless and 4.9% of the homeless population overall. For American Indian/Alaskan Native, Table 3-47 shows that these individuals represent 1% of the sheltered homeless, 2.8% of the unsheltered homeless and 2.5% of the homeless population overall. For Asians, Table 3-47 shows that these individuals represent 0.5% of the sheltered homeless, 0.7% of the unsheltered homeless and 0.7% of the homeless population overall. For Native Hawaiian/ Pacific Islanders, Table 3- 47 shows that these individuals represent 2.0% of the sheltered homeless, 1.7% of the unsheltered homeless and 1.8% of the homeless population overall. For individuals representing one or more races, Table 3-47 shows that these individuals represent 6.6% of the sheltered homeless, 1.7% of the unsheltered homeless and 2.7% of the homeless population overall.
Describe the Nature and Extent of Unsheltered and Sheltered Homelessness.
As noted in the Homeless Needs Assessment table in this section, 78.4% of the homeless population in Washington County is unsheltered. Of the 944 unsheltered persons on a given night in Washington County, 58.4% are persons living in households with adults and children. 26.2% of the unsheltered are unaccompanited adults, 10.6% are chronically homeless individuals, and 2.9% are veterans. Of the 260 sheltered persons on a given night in Washington County, 36.9% are persons living in households with adults and children. 38.5% of the sheltered are unaccompanited adults, 19.6% are veterans and 3.8% are chronically homeless individuals.
Discussion:
Figures 3-7 and 3-8 show some interesting trends with regards to homelessness utilizing the federal and state definitions for the homeless in Washington County. Figure 3-7 shows the number of unsheltered persons according to the federal definition of homelessness has risen from 232 to 346 from 2013 to 2014. This is a rise of close to 50%. There was a rise in the number of unsheltered households with
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 102 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
adults and children and parents with babies during this time. There was also an increase of sheltered and unsheltered chronically homeless individuals and families with children during this time. Figure 3-8 shows that there has been a decrease since 2011 in the total number of unsheltered and sheltered homeless persons according to the State of Oregon definition of homelessness. However, there has been an increase since 2013 of 529 to 647 in the number of unsheltered and sheltered homeless persons residing in households with at lease one adult and one child.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 103 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment - 91.405, 91.205 (b,d) Introduction
This section of the plan describes the following populations and their housing needs. These groups are largely referred to as “special needs”• populations that the market frequently does not serve completely. Farmworkers Elderly residents People with disabilities People with alcohol or drug addictions Released offenders. Domestic violence survivors People with HIV/AIDS
In addition to housing information about special needs populations, this section also includes data about children with lead paint poisoning.
Describe the characteristics of special needs populations in your community:
For farmworkers, there is a housing need or just over 1,100 farmworkers in the County. Given the 6,700 farmworkers enumerated in the 2013 Larson Assistance Services study on migrant and seasonal farmworkers, this leaves an unmet need for more than 5,600 more beds or units of housing if it is assumed that all farmworkers are in need of affordable housing, as suggested by the 2009 data that found that farmworkers were earning about 20% of the AMI in Washington County. This unmet need must be met through the open market or through other housing subsidy programs. For elederly residents, there are 796 units of publicly assisted housing units designated for elderly and/or disabled residents in the County. The units accommodate a small fraction (about one-third) of the total number of housing units needed to accommodate senior renter households in the extremely low-income bracket that have housing problems. For every housing unit listed below (796), there are approximately eight older adults (6,000 total) who are renters in need of affordable housing. For people with disabilities, the need vary with the disability. Census and ACS data does not separately call out people with severe and persistent mental illness and their housing needs. Discretely quantifying the housing needs of those with severe and persistent mental illness in Washington County is difficult using state and local data because mental illness often overlaps with other special needs populations addressed in this report (e.g. alcohol and drug addiction and recovery, homelessness), there are many unregistered cases of mental illness, and income information is not available for cases that are registered and receiving services. That said, data from early 2014 from the Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS) shows that 9,901 Washington County residents received mental health treatment within Washington County. Again, these records are not accompanied by income or housing need information. The Washington County Developmental Disabilities Program, with the Department of Health and Human Services, has record of 2,075 people with developmental disabilities currently receiving County services. However, all of these Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 104 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
clients do not necessarily have housing needs; some may choose to live with family and friends to help with their day-to-day needs. Staff estimates that group homes, foster homes, and other supportive living facilities (usually apartments with additional services provided by various agencies) serve about 500 clients in the County. The Department receives requests from clients for subsidized apartments so that the clients can live more independently and afford to pay rent with Social Security income or other benefits. These clients typically are living with their families according to the County. According to 2008- 2012 ACS data, about 49,300 people, over 9% of the Washington County population, were found to have some form of disability. As reported in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan, a 2007 ODHS report on seniors and people with physical disabilities estimated that at least 550 Washington County residents with physical disabilities, are under age 65, have low incomes, are in need of supportive housing and services and receive in-home care, adult foster care, or residential care or are otherwise in assisted living or nursing facilities. Other special needs populations are discussed in the Discussion section of this Non- Homeless Special Needs Assessment.
What are the housing and supportive service needs of these populations and how are these needs determined?
To determine housing needs, the size of the population in need is compared to the supply of housing resources available to determine whether there is an unmet need and to assess the scope of that need. This is commonly referred to as a “gap analysis.”• To assist, Washington County contacted the variety of public and private agencies working with these special needs populations directly to obtain housing unit data and the type and extent of supportive services being provided. Supplemental data came from research, focus groups, needs assessment questionnaires and surveys where applicable. The housing and supportive service needs of these populations reflect the unique nature of each special need population. Given the special need population, the housing in need could take the form of a residential treatment facility, independent living, a shelter or a permanent supportive housing unit. Therefore, the housing need for these populations is often dependent on the supportive service needs. For instance, Census and ACS data does not separately call out people with severe and persistent mental illness and their housing needs. Discretely quantifying the housing needs of those with severe and persistent mental illness in Washington County is difficult using state and local data because mental illness often overlaps with other special needs populations addressed in this report (e.g. alcohol and drug addiction and recovery, homelessness), there are many unregistered cases of mental illness, and income information is not available for cases that are registered and receiving services. That said, data from early 2014 from the Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS) shows that 9,901 Washington County residents received mental health treatment within Washington County. Again, these records are not accompanied by income or housing need information.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 105 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Discuss the size and characteristics of the population with HIV/AIDS and their families within the Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area:
Cascade AIDS Project (CAP) estimates there are 583 people in Washington County known to be living with HIV or AIDS as of March 2014. This constitutes almost one-tenth of a percent of the total County population, and represents more than a doubling of cases of HIV/AIDS reported in 2002 (205 people). CAP records are a composite of data collected from County agencies, and include some demographic information but not on income or distribution within the County. Limited demographic information is available for cases of HIV/AIDS in the Portland metropolitan region and in Washington County. Cases of HIV/AIDS in Washington County account for roughly 10% of those reported in the region. As shown in Table 3-61, significantly fewer people living with HIV/AIDS in the County were White when compared to the region overall, and significantly more people were Latino. There was also a notable difference in the number of males and females with HIV/AIDS; the percentage of females with HIV/AIDS in Washington County is significantly higher than the region overall.
HUD established the Housing Opportunities for People with HIV/AIDS (HOPWA) program in 1992, which is the only federal program addressing the housing needs of people with HIV/AIDS. At least one person in HOPWA-funded housing must have HIV/AIDS and the household income must be 80% or less than the AMI in order to receive HOPWA services. Portland Housing Bureau (PHB) administers the HOPWA Program for the Portland Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area (EMSA), which includes Multnomah, Washington, Clackamas, Yamhill, Columbia, Clark, and Skamania Counties. PHB has contracted with Cascade AIDS Project (CAP), Clark County Public Health, Central City Concern, and Outside In to provide housing and related services to people with HIV/AIDS. CAP, founded in 1983, is the oldest and largest community-based provider of HIV services, housing, education and advocacy in Oregon and Southwest Washington.• Additionally, Portland Housing Bureau in partnership with CAP received a HOPWA Special Program of National Significance grant to better integrate employment and housing services. CAP uses flexible rent assistance to address housing needs and prioritizes people involved in the employment program called Working Choices. Through this grant, a WorkSource Liaison is embedded at CAP and facilitates integration of HIV specific employment services into mainstream services.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 106 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs - 91.415, 91.215 (f) Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Facilities:
The Washington County Consortium’s need for public facilities as a result of the needs assessment questionnaires processed is summarized below. Based on 31 responses from cities, the County, nonprofit organizations and special districts or similar organizations, there is a need for over $53.2 million in public facilities in Washington County that would assist 399,050 beneficiaries across a variety of public facility types.
How were these needs determined?
The Washington County non-housing (community development) component of this needs assessment was developed through an intensive information gathering process that involved local governments, non-profits, residents, and other organizations. The project team utilized surveys, focus groups, workshops, and other public involvement activities to gather public input. In November of 2013, the County, in conjunction with the City of Beaverton, held a “What’s Working Workshop: Non-Housing” to evaluate the current CDBG program. Staff worked with representatives from local governments, non- profits, and other organizations to review the program, and review the needs assessment process and forthcoming Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire for our service providers. The Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire was available for respondents to fill out online or through paper versions from November 2013 through May 2014. The Community Needs Survey was provided in an online format throughout the months of January to July. Outreach was conducted through email, direct mail and through various stakeholder meetings.
Representatives from over 55 different organizations responded to the Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire, identifying a total of 131 needs related to a wide variety of programs and facilities. Many organizations identified multiple needs. Of the total, 41 needs were identified by cities, 25 by the County, 62 by non-profit organizations and 3 by special districts or similar organizations. The responses included the needs for public facilities, public infrastructure, public services and economic development.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 107 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-62
Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Improvements:
The Washington County Consortium’s need for public improvements as a result of the needs assessment questionnaires processed is summarized below. Based on 20 responses from cities, the County, nonprofit organizations and special districts or similar organizations, there is a need for over $8.4 million in public infrastructure projects in Washington County that would assist 54,628 beneficiaries across a variety of public infrastructure types.
How were these needs determined?
The Washington County non-housing (community development) component of this needs assessment was developed through an intensive information gathering process that involved local governments, non-profits, residents, and other organizations. The project team utilized surveys, focus groups, workshops, and other public involvement activities to gather public input. In November of 2013, the County, in conjunction with the City of Beaverton, held a “What’s Working Workshop: Non-Housing” to evaluate the current CDBG program. Staff worked with representatives from local governments, non- profits, and other organizations to review the program, and review the needs assessment process and forthcoming Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire for our service providers. The Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire was available for respondents to fill out online or through paper versions from November 2013 through May 2014. The Community Needs Survey was provided in an online format throughout the months of January to July. Outreach was conducted through email, direct mail and through various stakeholder meetings.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 108 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Representatives from over 55 different organizations responded to the Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire, identifying a total of 131 needs related to a wide variety of programs and facilities. Many organizations identified multiple needs. Of the total, 41 needs were identified by cities, 25 by the County, 62 by non-profit organizations and 3 by special districts or similar organizations. The responses included the needs for public facilities, public infrastructure, public services and economic development.
Table 3-63
Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Services:
The Washington County Consortium’s need for public services as a result of the needs assessment questionnaires processed is summarized below. Based on 58 responses from cities, the County, nonprofit organizations and special districts or similar organizations, there is a need for over $504.4 million in public service projects in Washington County that would assist 653,278 beneficiaries across a variety of public service types.
How were these needs determined?
The Washington County non-housing (community development) component of this needs assessment was developed through an intensive information gathering process that involved local governments, non-profits, residents, and other organizations. The project team utilized surveys, focus groups, workshops, and other public involvement activities to gather public input. In November of 2013, the County, in conjunction with the City of Beaverton, held a “What’s Working Workshop: Non-Housing” to evaluate the current CDBG program. Staff worked with representatives from local governments, non- profits, and other organizations to review the program, and review the needs assessment process and forthcoming Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire for our service providers. The Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire was available for respondents to fill out online or through paper
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 109 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
versions from November 2013 through May 2014. The Community Needs Survey was provided in an online format throughout the months of January to July. Outreach was conducted through email, direct mail and through various stakeholder meetings.
Representatives from over 55 different organizations responded to the Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire, identifying a total of 131 needs related to a wide variety of programs and facilities. Many organizations identified multiple needs. Of the total, 41 needs were identified by cities, 25 by the County, 62 by non-profit organizations and 3 by special districts or similar organizations. The responses included the needs for public facilities, public infrastructure, public services and economic development.
Table 3-64
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 110 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Housing Market Analysis
MA-05 Overview Housing Market Analysis Overview:
This section of the Consolidated Plan describes the general housing characteristics of the housing market in Washington County, and its local jurisdictions. The purpose of this overview is to identify what kind of housing is currently being built by the private sector and how it compares with the needs and characteristics of County residents. It includes information based on the following topics: Geography of the County - i.e., how land and people are distributed within incorporated cities and unincorporated portions of the County Total housing units and their distribution by location and type, including owner-occupied and rental housing Other housing characteristics, including household size, overcrowding and housing condition Housing costs and housing income A general discussion of housing affordability Projections of future housing construction based on overall projected trends in population growth for 2015-2020
As noted above, this housing market assessment paints a broad picture of housing and demographic conditions in Washington County to ascertain how the private market is generally meeting County-wide needs. It sets the stage for a more detailed discussion of how housing needs are or are not being met for certain types of households or people with lower incomes and/or other special needs.
While this analysis provides an overall projection of future housing needs and trends, it recognizes that projecting future needs at this time is a significant challenge, given recent upheavals in national and local economies and housing markets. These significant recent changes indicate that the housing market has not behaved normally in many respects. For example, significant increases in housing value, coupled with lower interest rates and relatively easy access to credit resulted in inflated demand for owner-occupied dwellings followed by apparent over-supply and a more recent stagnant market. In light of these changes and public reactions to them, changes to federal regulation of the housing market are expected. It is difficult if not impossible to anticipate exactly how the housing market and conditions will change over the next five years and further into the future.
In light of these uncertainties, this housing market analysis should be considered as a faithful summary of existing conditions and recent trends and a relatively conservative or approximate projection of future needs and production. A variety of data sources were reviewed to ensure an accurate and up-to- date summary of housing conditions, recognizing that some types of information are relatively dated. For example, some of the housing characteristics discussed here can only be described using
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 111 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
2010 Census data. In addition to 2010 Census data, the following data sources were used in this analysis: 2008 - 2012 American Community Survey (2007-2011 ACS data if most recent) 2007-2011 HUD CHAS data (2006 – 2010 HUD CHAS data if most recent) HUD building permits data PSU Population Research Center 2011 Metro Affordable Housing Inventory Claritas Market Research
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 112 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MA-10 Housing Market Analysis: Number of Housing Units - 91.410, 91.210(a)&(b)(2) Introduction
There were an estimated 212,386 housing units in Washington County in the year 2012. The number of housing units has grown approximately 19% from 2000 to 2012. (2000 figures were based on 2000 decennial Census data, 2012 figures were estimated based on 2008-12 ACS data).
All residential properties by number of units
Property Type Number % 1-unit detached structure 124,035 59% 1-unit, attached structure 15,619 7% 2-4 units 14,468 7% 5-19 units 29,033 14% 20 or more units 20,809 10% Mobile Home, boat, RV, van, etc 5,852 3% Total 209,816 100% Table 27 – Residential Properties by Unit Number Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Unit Size by Tenure
Owners Renters Number % Number % No bedroom 60 0% 1,671 2% 1 bedroom 1,726 1% 16,929 23% 2 bedrooms 15,789 13% 34,355 46% 3 or more bedrooms 105,855 86% 20,979 28% Total 123,430 100% 73,934 99% Table 28 – Unit Size by Tenure Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Total Housing Units by Jurisdiction The largest cities in terms of number of housing units are Beaverton (18.3%), Hillsboro (16.3%) and Tigard (9.5%). Combined, the three cities contain 44.3% of all housing units in the County. Unincorporated areas contain 40.5% of all housing units. The remaining 15.4% of housing units are dispersed among the smaller communities. The City of Sherwood experienced the fastest growth rate in the area, with an increase in housing units of 40% (1,788 units) between 2000 and 2012. Hillsboro added the most absolute units, constructing an estimated 7,447 housing units between 2000 and 2012.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 113 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-66
Table 3-69
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 114 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-70
Describe the number and targeting (income level/type of family served) of units assisted with federal, state, and local programs.
The housing needs of low- and moderate-income people are met through housing produced in the private market, housing built with public subsidies to reduce the rent that the owner needs to charge, and housing vouchers that reduce the rent that households have to pay for private market and subsidized housing. In March 2012, Metro released a Regional Affordable Rental Housing Inventory that presented compiled information about “regulated” housing units for each County in the Portland metropolitan region. “Regulated” units were defined as those that have been built with some form of public subsidy. Affordability was defined by each of the participating agencies that shared its housing data with Metro, and those definitions were not included with the records in the inventory. The inventory includes 7,030 units on 256 sites in Washington County. The inventory does not include HUD Section 8 voucher units or information about the tenants. Table 3-69 Distribution of Subsidized Housing highlights where the 7,030 regulated and unregulated units are located in Washington County. A significant percentage of the units (almost a third) are located in Hillsboro. Tigard, Tualatin, Forest Grove and Beaverton each include nearly 500 or more units. A substantial number of units in the inventory are also located in unincorporated portions of the County. In comparing these numbers to the proportion of the population living in these areas of the County, Hillsboro, Forest Grove and Tualatin appear to have higher concentrations of units compared to their share of County population. The
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 115 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Washington County Department of Housing Services (DHS) manages public housing units owned by the County and administers the Section 8 vouchers. HUD directly administers the Section 811 and 202 housing assistance programs. Altogether, there are 7,030 subsidized housing units and 2,784 households with housing vouchers in Washington County. Some households with housing vouchers live in subsidized housing units and some live in private market units. There are about 7,000 – 9,000 households living in subsidized housing in Washington County, which represents 3.6% - 4.6% of all housing units in the County. As discussed in the following section, this supply of subsidized housing does not necessarily meet the demand for it, particularly for those in Washington County who are earning less than 30% AMI, given that there are approximately 29,000 low- and moderate-income households in Washington County that are “cost-burdened” (spend more than 30% of their income on housing). Table 3-70 is a result of analysis done by former HUD Portland Field Office Director Tom Cusack on the Oregon Housing Blog in reviewing the 2011 Metro Affordable Housing Inventory Report. The analysis highlighted the number and targeting of units by county in the four counties comprising the Portland metropolitan region. The table highlights the targeting of subsidized housing in Washington County by income level. Note that the analysis accounts for 7,011 units and not the 7,030 regulated and unregulated units tallied in the 2011 Metro Affordable Housing Inventory Report.
Provide an assessment of units expected to be lost from the affordable housing inventory for any reason, such as expiration of Section 8 contracts.
Potential exists to lose units in the subsidized housing inventory when existing Section 8 contracts or other controls on a project expire. HUD monitors the HUD Multifamily Assistance and Section 8 database (http://www.hud.gov/offices/hsg/mfh/exp/mfhdiscl.cfm) to identify and track projects with expiring agreements. As of January 2014, HUD identified four projects totaling 234 units with agreements that will expire between January 2014 and September 2020. The projects are Woodland Park in Hillsboro (111 units), Aloha Park Apartments (80 units), Aloha Project (10 units) and Metzger Park (33 units). Woodland Park Apartments was recently sold to an out-of-state affordable housing developer who intends to maintain its affordability restrictions. Aloha Park Apartments was refinanced by the Housing Authority of Washington County who will keep the property affordable for another thirty-five years. Metzger Park Apartments is being recapitalized and rehabilitated in 2015 by Community Partners for Affordable Housing using HOME funds and private debt. Specialized Housing’s Aloha Project (whose contract does not expire until 2018) will also see its affordability maintained by the current owner for at least another five years.
One concern relating to the potential loss of affordable housing is the prospect of new manufactured home park closures. As noted in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan, manufactured home parks represented a significant source of non-subsidized, market rate, low cost housing provided by private owners. Washington County was the epicenter of manufactured home park closures during the housing boom. From 2001-2007, fifteen manufactured home parks closed in the County, displacing more than 1,100 households and eliminating 20% of the County’s spaces. Washington County accounted for nearly 40% of the manufactured home park spaces lost statewide. Since 2009, however, there have been no reported manufactured home park closures in Washington County.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 116 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Does the availability of housing units meet the needs of the population?
The availability of rental housing units does not currently meet the needs of the population earning at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI). The vacancy rates for rental housing are low in the County currently driving up the rents and making Washington County have the highest median rent of all counties in Oregon at $961/month according to 2008-2012 ACS data. The inventory of 7,030 subsidized rental housing units is less than 10% of the 73,934 units in the County for renter households. Based on Table 3-14 of the Housing Needs Assessment, there is a significant gap between the existing supply of affordable rental housing and the needs of the population based on the number of households who are cost burdened paying more than 30% of their income towards housing and the number of households who are severely cost burdened paying more than 50% of their income towards housing. The need for affordable rental units estimated for 2015 is between 14,100 units to 24,000 units based on the supply and the number of cost burdened households between 0% to 80% AMI in Washington County using 2006-2010 CHAS data. Based on production levels of affordable rental housing currently at 110 units annually, it would be difficult to meet this substantial gap in need in the near future. This need includes the specific need for affordable rental housing for the 19,293 elderly households in Washington County earning between 0% to 80% AMI who comprise 9.6% of the entire county.
Describe the need for specific types of housing:
Beyond the general need for affordable rental housing for low-income renter households earning between 0% to 80% of the Area Median Income highlighted in Table 3-11, there is also a specialized need for specific types of housing targeted at special needs populations. Table 3-11 details an overall need for specific housing tailored to victims of domestic violence who have a need for 1,046 beds and only have 24 beds currently available to them in the county. This is also the case for individuals with HIV/AIDS who have a need for 532 beds and only currently have 51 available in the county. Individuals needing alcohol and drug treatment services and individuals with disabilities also comprise 9.1% and 9.3% of the county respectively but only have 267 and 533 respectively in a combination of beds and units to accommodate these special needs populations. Farmworkers are in need of 5,607 beds or units given the latest estimate of 6,700 farmworkers who work in Washington County and are in need of housing. There are 805 beds in registered farmworker camps and 288 units of farmworker housing provided by Bienestar for this population. Finally, released offenders are another population in dire need of affordable rental housing. They are in need of 319 beds annually given the limited supply in Washington County for this population that faces multiple barriers in accessing housing after exiting incarceration.
The availability of owner-occupied housing units also does not currently meet the needs of the population at or below 80% AMI who often are first-time homebuyers, current homeowners or renter households seeking more stable housing that brings economic benefits. As noted in Tables 3-7 and 3-8 of the Housing Needs Assessment, there are 17,112 owner-occupied households in Washington County who are cost burdened paying more than 30% of their income towards their housing and 11,063 owner-
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 117 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
occupied households who are severely cost burdened paying more than 50% of their income towards their housing. This comes as no surprise to Washington County residents who now have second-highest median ownership costs in state at $1,888/month (for housing units with a mortgage) according to 2008-2012 ACS data.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 118 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing - 91.410, 91.210(a) Introduction
Washington County is witnessing that the cost of housing is increasingly becoming unaffordable for low- income households in need of affordable options for both renters and owners alike. The median gross of rent of $961 in the 2008-2012 American Community Survey is the highest of all counties in the State of Oregon. It is important to use the gross rent as a basis for comparison since it can include tenant-paid utilities which are fairly common in Washington County. The Apartment Report published by Multifamily NW for Fall 2014 reported that 60% to 70% of projects pass on the cost of water and sewer to tenants now in suburban Portland markets. The median ownership costs for owner-occupied units in Washington County for those units that have a mortgage is $1,888/month. This is the second-highest median ownership cost in the State of Oregon.
Of increasing concern is the number of households who are able to secure housing but are cost burdened or severely cost burdened in Washington County. These households are seeing increasing rents or increasing ownership costs are the median gross rent and median home value continues to climb. This is due to increasing demand for these units in Washington County and low vacancy rates for rental units, which is particularly indicative of the Portland metropolitan region overall. The 2008-2012 American Community Survey highlighted that 46.5% of renter households and 37.7% of owner households in Washington County are now cost burdened paying 30% or more of their gross income towards housing. Meanwhile, 22.2% of renter households and 13.0% of owner households in Washington County are now severely cost burdened paying 50% or more of their gross income towards housing. This indicates that more than 2/3 of Washington County renters and over half of Washington County homeowners are now cost burdened in some way with their housing costs comprising a larger and larger portion of their gross income leaving little money for other necessities. This is of special concern as transportation costs are becoming a larger portion of expenditures in Washington County households given longer commute times.
Rental Costs: Per the 2008-12 ACS data, the median gross rent countywide was $961. During that same time, the median contract rent was $839. The difference in amount can be attributed most likely to monthly utility costs. Gaston had the lowest median gross rent ($627) while Sherwood the highest ($1,212). The median gross rent in Washington County grew at an estimated 2.4% per year between 2000 and 2012. This is roughly the rate of inflation during that period. Median gross rents are lowest in some of the smaller outlying communities (e.g., Banks, Gaston and Forest Grove) and highest in Sherwood, Tualatin and King City.
Home Ownership Costs: In 2012, median monthly homeownership costs (for homeowners with a mortgage) were $1,888 for Washington County. In 2000, the median costs were $1,358, which represents an increase of 3.2% per year. This increase outpaced inflation during that time. In 2012, ownership costs (with a mortgage) were highest in Rivergrove (partial) at $2,076 and lowest in King City ($1,148). Similar to rental costs, owner costs were also relatively lower in several smaller outlying
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 119 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
communities (e.g., North Plains, Gaston, Cornelius and Forest Grove). The median owner-occupied home value in 2012 per the American Community Survey was $290,900 for Washington County. Beaverton was close to the countywide median value with $290,800 and Hillsboro values were lower at $250,900. Countywide, home values have increased 61% since 2000, with Beaverton (56%) and Hillsboro (54%) increasing at a slightly lower rate than the County as a whole. The vacancy rate for owner-occupied units is only 1.2% as of the 2012 ACS.
Cost of Housing
Base Year: 2000 Most Recent Year: 2011 % Change Median Home Value 180,400 290,900 61% Median Contract Rent 626 839 34% Table 29 – Cost of Housing
Alternate Data Source Name: 2008-2012 ACS Data Source Comments: Default data from 2000 Census (Base Year) and 2007-2011 ACS (Most recent year) was not able to be populated into the Table above and so data taken from the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan for Washington County (citing 2000 Census data in that Plan) and the 2008-12 ACS data.
Rent Paid Number % Less than $500 6,013 8.1% $500-999 50,363 68.1% $1,000-1,499 14,160 19.2% $1,500-1,999 2,280 3.1% $2,000 or more 1,118 1.5% Total 73,934 100.0% Table 30 - Rent Paid Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 120 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-73
Housing Affordability
% Units affordable to Households Renter Owner earning 30% HAMFI 1,691 No Data 50% HAMFI 7,994 2,080 80% HAMFI 39,810 5,973 100% HAMFI No Data 17,398 Total 49,495 25,451 Table 31 – Housing Affordability Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 121 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Monthly Rent
Monthly Rent ($) Efficiency (no 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom bedroom) Fair Market Rent 659 766 912 1,344 1,615 High HOME Rent 666 774 922 1,200 1,319 Low HOME Rent 638 684 821 949 1,058 Table 32 – Monthly Rent Data Source: HUD FMR and HOME Rents
Table 3-76
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 122 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-77
Is there sufficient housing for households at all income levels?
As mentioned earlier, there is not sufficient housing for all income levels due to the decreasing affordability of rents and ownership costs in Washington County. This is especially true for households at or below 80% AMI. While there is need for between 100 to 1,000 units for renter households between 51% to 80% AMI, the number skyrockets to 14,000 units to 23,000 units for renter households earning at or below 50% AMI in Washington County. This is not only due to unavailability of affordable rental housing for these households but also due to the fact that subsidized housing is often financed for targeted units for households earning between 61% to 80% AMI. The incomes of the households that
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 123 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
reside in these units are much lower, oftentimes at or below 30% AMI. Thus, cost burden becomes the preeminent factor for many households at or below 50% AMI.
How is affordability of housing likely to change considering changes to home values and/or rents?
Unfortunately for these households, affordability is likely to decrease considering the 57% increase to the median home value between 2000 and 2012 and significant increase to rents as well. While median monthly contract rent rose from $650 to $839 from 2000 to 2012 (a 29% increase), the median monthly gross rent rose 33.5% from $720 to $961 during that same time. Overall rents in the region continue to increase at an annual rate now of 11% and the region’s vacancy rate now stands at 3.66%, according to The Apartment Report from Multifamily NW for Fall 2014. The report notes that vacancy rates in places like Tigard, Aloha and Beaverton are now 3.8% or less on average, while only slightly better at 4.1% in Hillsboro and Washington County north of Highway 26. It is even lower in the report for Low-Income Housing Tax Credit properties in the region where the average vacancy rate is 2.48% and average rent per square foot is $1.13. Overall, the vacancy rate in Washington County in the 2012 ACS was 5.2% for rental units. Supply of affordable rental housing is extremely limited. Landlords with available units oftentimes highly scrutinize tenants’ credit history and rental background making even available units difficult to occupy for many households.
How do HOME rents / Fair Market Rent compare to Area Median Rent? How might this impact your strategy to produce or preserve affordable housing?
Median gross rents are a good basis of comparison to HOME rents since both include utility allowances. Therefore, the median gross rent of $961 in the 2008-2012 ACS data is considerably higher than the HOME rents for efficiency, one-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments. The HOME rents for three- bedroom and four-bedroom apartments do exceed the current median gross rent. In the past, the market rents were much closer to the Fair Market Rents and HOME rents. Now, it will cause Washington County to rethink its strategy in order to produce or preserve affordable housing moving forward. Washington County will continue to require all new HOME units to meet Low HOME rents in order to increase affordability as market rents continue to increase in available units. Washington County will also continue to encourage developers producing additional affordable housing to layer their Low HOME units with Project-Based Section 8 vouchers for households earning at or below 30% AMI in order to add additional affordability to HOME units.
Discussion
Owners & Renters
Owner-occupied units accounted for 61.7% of all occupied housing units in 2012. The highest concentrations of owner-occupied units were in Sherwood (79.8%), Cornelius (78.6%) and Banks
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 124 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
(73.9%). The lowest percentages occurred in the Washington County portion of Portland (40.6%), Beaverton (49.2%), Washington County portion of Tualatin (53.1%), and Hillsboro (55.4%).
Since 2000, roughly three times as many single family homes have been built than multi-family units. This suggests that many more ownership units were built than rental units. This has changed the 2012 ratio presented above, by raising the ownership share to an estimated 61.7% of units. However, 2012 HUD building permit data suggests that multi-family units may start taking a larger share of future housing development. In 2012, 1,239 building permits were issued for single family homes and permits for 817 units within multi-family dwellings were issued.
Overall, less populous cities in Washington County have a larger proportion of single-family, owner- occupied households than the larger cities.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 125 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing - 91.410, 91.210(a) Introduction
The housing stock in Washington County is generally in good condition, due in large part to the fact that a significant percentage of the units were constructed within the past 35 years. As of 2000, the largest portion of the housing stock in Washington County was built in 1990s (25.4%), followed by the 1970s (20.5%). Fifty eight point six percent of the housing stock has been built since 1980. The condition of housing is defined according to its age as condition and age are generally linked. This chapter also explores condition of housing determined by certain types of facilities available (kitchen, plumbing and heating).
Describe the jurisdiction's definition for "substandard condition" and "substandard condition but suitable for rehabilitation:
Washington County defines housing in a "substandard condition" as housing lacking complete plumbing facilities, kitchen facilities or both. Housing that is defined as "substandard condition but suitable for rehabilitation" may be housing that lacks complete plumbing facilities, kitchen facilities or both but is suitable for rehabilitation since these facilities can realistically be rehabilitated in order to make the housing habitable in the future. Another condition of whether the housing is substandard but suitable for rehabilitaiton is whether or not it has a functioning source of heat. It is rare to see housing in Washington County in such a condition. The overwhelming majority of units have complete plumbing facilities (99.6%) and complete kitchen facilities (98.9%). Fewer than 4% used an alternative heating source, such as fuel oil, wood, or solar power. Slightly more than 0.1%, or 232 housing units, had no source of heat.
Condition of Units
Condition of Units Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number % Number % With one selected Condition 38,194 31% 32,911 45% With two selected Conditions 814 1% 2,633 4% With three selected Conditions 74 0% 132 0% With four selected Conditions 0 0% 50 0% No selected Conditions 84,348 68% 38,208 52% Total 123,430 100% 73,934 101% Table 33 - Condition of Units Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 126 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Year Unit Built
Year Unit Built Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number % Number % 2000 or later 23,661 19% 11,641 16% 1980-1999 47,362 38% 33,392 45% 1950-1979 44,580 36% 26,094 35% Before 1950 7,827 6% 2,807 4% Total 123,430 99% 73,934 100% Table 34 – Year Unit Built Data Source: 2007-2011 CHAS
Table 3-80
Table 3-81
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 127 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number % Number % Total Number of Units Built Before 1980 52,407 42% 28,901 39% Housing Units build before 1980 with children present 16,238 13% 8,307 11% Table 35 – Risk of Lead-Based Paint Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS (Total Units) 2007-2011 CHAS (Units with Children present)
Lead-Based Paint Hazard Summary
Lead-based paint presents potential health hazards, particularly to small children. State policy requires these hazards to be removed in housing units occupied by children under 6. Homeowners and landlords face liability issues associated with these requirements and risks. Some landlords may address these issues by refusing to rent to families with small children even though this practice raises housing discrimination issues.
The Federal Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that blood lead levels of 10 micrograms or above can cause health problems in children, including lower intelligence, behavior problems and problems with blood vessels, blood pressure, the liver and kidneys. The most common cause of high blood lead levels in children is from lead dust in the home.
Because funding for lead poisoning and prevention programs at the Oregon Department of Human Services was cut in July 2013, ODHS staff is unable to fulfill requests for recent data on lead poisoning in Washington County. As a result, all data pertaining to lead poisoning comes from the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan. Data from that Consolidated Plan show that from 2000 to 2007, there were 104,889 blood lead tests conducted in Oregon. Of that amount, almost 4.5%, or 4,732 tests, have been conducted on Washington County residents over that seven year period. In 2007, 902 tests were conducted. During that year, the results showed that six people (less than one percent) had blood lead levels consistent with lead poisoning, and four of those six were children under the age of six. Thirty- one people had elevated blood levels. A normal reading of the level of blood would be between 2-3 micrograms, a level as high as 10 micrograms would indicate lead poisoning and according to the Department, a reading of higher than 10 warrants some kind of action or follow-up. In general, this indicates a very low percentage of residents who tested positively for lead poisoning (approximately 0.7% of those tested).
In looking at the results of lead based paint test by age, 818 tests were conducted on children aged 0–5 years. Of that amount, four tests reflected levels at 10 micrograms and over. In general, this indicates a very low percentage of residents who tested positively for lead poisoning (approximately 0.7% of those tested).
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 128 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-84
Vacant Units
Suitable for Not Suitable for Total Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Vacant Units 12,226 0 12,226 Abandoned Vacant Units 0 0 0 REO Properties 54 0 54 Abandoned REO Properties 0 0 0 Table 36 - Vacant Units Data Source Comments: The number of REO properties comes from an October 2014 search of REO properties on RealtyTrac. 27 properties were in the process of being sold. 10 were bank-owned, 13 were foreclosures being sold at auction and 4 were pre-foreclosures. This is a relatively small number of REO properties after witnessing considerably more inventory during the most recent recession.
Occupancy and Vacancy Summary
The Washington County portion of Tualatin, Hillsboro and Beaverton and had the highest vacancy rates (rental and owner-occupied units combined) in the County in 2012, at 7.7% and 6.7% respectively. In general, a vacancy rate in the range of 5% to 6% is considered healthy, reflecting a manageable turnover of apartments and for-sale homes. Most of Washington County met this standard in 2012, with the County as a whole demonstrating vacancy of 5.8%.
Of the vacant units in Washington County in 2012, roughly 35% were for rent, 22% were for sale, and 12% were rented or sold, but not currently occupied.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 129 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-86
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 130 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-87
Describe the need for owner and rental rehabilitation based on the condition of the jurisdiction's housing.
The quantitative and qualitative data from the community both speak to the need for weatherization and rehabilitation of owner-occupied and rental units for low and moderate income households in Washington County. As mentioned earlier, it is estimated that approximately 2,603 extremely low-, low- and moderate-income renter households and 2,017 extremely low- , low- and moderate-income homeowner households are exposed to lead based paint hazards. There are still 232 households who have no source of heat and 3.7% of housing units do not utilize an efficient source of energy for heating. 20.3% of housing units were built before 1960 so these units may either need weatherization and rehabilitation soon or the upcoming years. The need for rehabilitation of vacant units is also not entirely significant. Approximately 5% of housing units are currently vacant in Washington County. One of the newest challenges is that over half of the total occupied housing units mainly use natural gas for heating. Recently, state utility regulators are discontinuing incentives for weatherization programs for homes with natural gas, including insulation for walks, floors and ducts. From data from the Energy Trust of Oregon as of October 10, 2014, these regulators explain that low costs for natural gas heating have stunted the savings expected from the weatherization measures. Going forward, the Washington County Consortium feels as though these programs become more important than ever as a locally funded tool to increase energy efficiency, improve housing quality and durability and assist low-income households and often vulnerable populations in need of preventative repairs to keep their housing stable.
In November 2010, the City of Beaverton published the results from a survey of its residents that included questions about housing conditions and repairs. Housing condition was assessed by respondents in terms of features such as foundation, exterior, roof, windows and doors. Respondents reported that these features were mostly in satisfactory condition. However, there was variation among the type of structure that was surveyed, as single-family and multi-family homes were found to be in better condition than mobile homes. The survey also evaluated the condition of stairs, rails and porches. These particular features are important when considering the safety of building occupants. Safety concerns were greatest in the Central Beaverton area, however, the survey found that mobile homes were oversampled in that area, which may result in a misleading conclusion about housing conditions.
As a result of the focus groups conducted with low-income residents as part of the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan, respondents were asked to prioritize three types of affordable housing if they were Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 131 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
only able to fund three types of affordable housing. Housing education, homeownership and repairs and renovation programs for owner-occupied and rental housing seemed to be the overarching themes of their priorities. Housing-related education was the highest priority with 18.1% followed by affordable homeownership at 16.1%, homeowner repair, renovation or rehabilitation programs at 14.8% and affordable rental housing at 14.2%. Renovation and rehabilitation of affordable apartment complexes and improvements in resident’s homes and apartments for those with physical limitations were also notable as priorities with 12.3% and 10.3% of the responses respectively.
Estimate the number of housing units within the jurisdiction that are occupied by low or moderate income families that contain lead-based paint hazards. 91.205(e), 91.405
Lead-based paint hazards generally are correlated with the age of housing units and their condition. Typically, homes constructed before 1978 have the highest potential for lead-based paint hazards. Based on data from the 2008-2012 ACS, there are approximately 87,000 housing units that were constructed before 1978. While no data is available to determine which units still have lead-based paint hazards, data from the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan indicated that in the year 2000, an estimated 11% of all owner-occupied housing (estimated 11,795 units) and 9% of all rental housing (estimated 5,829 units) may have had lead-based paint hazards. Extremely low-, low- and moderate-income families represent about 47% percent of renters and 18% percent of homeowners. Assuming that these households are relatively evenly distributed among housing units of different ages, it is estimated that approximately 2,603 extremely low-, low- and moderate-income renter households and 2,017 extremely low- , low- and moderate-income homeowner households are exposed to lead based paint hazards.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 132 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MA-25 Public And Assisted Housing - 91.410, 91.210(b) Introduction
The Public Housing units owned and operated by the Housing Authority of Washington County consist of 243 scattered site developments comprised of 111 single family homes and 132 multifamily sites. The largest single development is Dove Court at 17 units. 20 units have been converted to fully ADA accessible for residents with mobility needs.
Totals Number of Units
Program Type Certificate Mod-Rehab Public Vouchers Housing Total Project -based Tenant -based Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Family Disabled Affairs Unification * Supportive Program Housing # of units vouchers available 0 0 243 2,635 16 2,619 98 0 0 # of accessible units *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Table 37 – Total Number of Units by Program Type Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center)
Describe the supply of public housing developments:
Describe the number and physical condition of public housing units in the jurisdiction, including those that are participating in an approved Public Housing Agency Plan:
All 243 units are included in the Housing Authority’s annual Public Housing Authority Plan. Overall, the condition of the units is good. The Agency continues to utilize the Capital Fund Program (CFP) to maintain a decent, safe and sanitary environment for the residents.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 133 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Residents who reside in units older than 1978 have been informed about the possible concerns of lead based paint hazards. In 2011, the Housing Authority hired an independent contractor to identify and mitigate all known lead paint hazards in Public Housing properties. A recent Green Physical Needs Assessment was completed providing an overall condition report of all unit conditions. The Housing Authority has developed a plan to be included in the 2015-2016 CFP Plan to address items of concern. This would include energy saving work to reduce all utility consumption.
In August 2014, the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners approved a HUD mandated increase to flat rents while a month earlier all utility allowances were adjusted to compensated for the spiraling cost of all utilities.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 134 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Public Housing Condition
Public Housing Development Average Inspection Score OR 022 AMP 1 94 Table 38 - Public Housing Condition
Source
E-mail from Asset Manager, Housing Authority of Washington County on October 16, 2014
Describe the restoration and revitalization needs of public housing units in the jurisdiction:
In general, Public Housing units are in good condition. Normal preventive maintenance and in-house REAC formatted inspections assist in identification of potential physical problems. Typical repairs and replacements include of siding, roofs and various areas of concrete such as driveways. Upon unit turnover, other capital items such as cabinets, counter tops, appliance and carpet replacement are considered. The Housing Authority anticipates that several of the houses require replacement of old piping that is now becoming clogged with mineral deposits. This will be factored into future capital need requirements.
One notable item not directly related to the physical properties but essential for ongoing care is the aging maintenance vehicle fleet. Several of the vans used by the maintenance staff to provide service to Public Housing units have reached their useful life and will require replacement. The cost of the vehicle replacement is funded by capital funds, thus reducing the amount available for other property physical needs. The Housing Authority is exploring various options to mitigate these costs including seeking donations from dealers.
Describe the public housing agency's strategy for improving the living environment of low- and moderate-income families residing in public housing:
The Housing Authority continues striving to improve both the physical environment and the economic environment of the Public Housing properties and residents. For example, qualified residents are encouraged to participate in the Family Self Sufficiency (FSS) program. This includes various financial and self-improvement goals over a five-year period.
The Housing Authority is also reviewing options for recapitalization of the properties using the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) project. This allows for debt to be placed on Public Housing units to generate funds for additional physical improvements.
Residents are encouraged to participate in the Resident Advisor Board which meets quarterly. The Agency also encourages contractors to participate in the Section 3 program of employing low income residents for work performed in public housing properties.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 135 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services - 91.410, 91.210(c) Introduction
This section highlights the facilities and housing targeted to homeless households, provides a Homeless Housing Inventory chart for Washington County, describes the mainstream services complementing the services targeted to homeless persons in Washington County and an inventory list of the services and facilities designed to meet the needs of homeless persons in Washington County.
Facilities Targeted to Homeless Persons
Emergency Shelter Beds Transitional Permanent Supportive Housing Housing Beds Beds Year Round Beds Voucher / Current & New Current & New Under (Current & New) Seasonal / Development Overflow Beds Households with Adult(s) and Child(ren) 93 4 33 197 0 Households with Only Adults 3 0 104 354 0 Chronically Homeless Households 0 0 0 0 0 Veterans 0 0 80 121 0 Unaccompanied Youth 0 0 14 0 0 Table 39 - Facilities Targeted to Homeless Persons Data Source Comments: 2014 Washington County Point-In-Time Shelter Count (January 22-30, 2014)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 136 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Figure 3-10
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 137 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Describe mainstream services, such as health, mental health, and employment services to the extent those services are use to complement services targeted to homeless persons
Within Washington County, there is a focus on connecting homeless persons to the mainstream services, such as health, mental health, and employment services, to the extent those services are used to complement services targeted to homeless persons. This is due to a countywide resource and referral network that includes 211info and the centralized assessment for homeless and at-risk households operated by Community Action. These agencies serve as entry points for homeless persons to access mainstream resources. Households seeking assistance are assessed for participation in mainstream resources, including TANF, SNAP, public health plans, employment and housing services, and referred to programs for which they may be eligible. For health, case managers and agencies routinely look to enroll uninsured clients in the Oregon Health Plan and ensure access through the Affordable Care Act. Agencies such as Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center and Southwest Community Health Center look to fill the void in providing mainstream health care to homeless clients who may have chronic health conditions. For mental health, area agencies like Sequoia Mental Health Services, Luke-Dorf, and LifeWorks NW also work to enroll clients in the Oregon Health Plan and link them with access to a mental health provider who can create an individualized plan to manage their mental health challenges. The mental health providers are actively involved in the Continuum of Care and work closely with homeless services providers to provide access to mental health services. These agencies not only work with these clients to address their supportive service needs associated with their mental health conditions but work diligently to house them in their own properties or through use of Shelter Plus Care vouchers within a Housing First model that will help stabilize them. For access to employment services, agencies such as Luke-Dorf, Community Action and the Washington County Department of Housing Services partner with WorkSystems to ensure clients can begin to receive the training, education, mentoring and coaching they need to gain employment and a road to self-sufficiency. In addition, the Department of Housing services operates the Homeless to Work program, a transitional housing program that is focused specifically on supporting homeless individuals as they regain employment.
List and describe services and facilities that meet the needs of homeless persons, particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth. If the services and facilities are listed on screen SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure or screen MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services, describe how these facilities and services specifically address the needs of these populations.
Tables 3-49 to 3-52 of this chapter list the facilities designed to meet the needs of homeless persons, particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families and unaccompanied youth. Prevention services designed and targeted to meet the needs of homeless persons in a given year (dependent on annual funding) include: CASA for Children (Court Appointed Special Advocates) to advocate for foster children and unaccompanied youth Good Neighbor Center’s Children’s Program HomePlate Youth Services, Inc.’s Street Outreach and Employment Opportunities for Youth Experiencing Homelessness
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 138 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Community Action’s Basic Needs Program to provide emergency rent assistance for one month St. Vincent de Paul/ St. Matthew Conference Rent Assistance St. Vincent de Paul/ St. Anthony Conference Rent and Utility Assistance Open Door Counseling Center’s Housing Supportive Services Community Action’s Homelessness Prevention Program Community Action’s Supportive Services for Veterans’ Families Program to provide rent assistance Community Action’s Homeless Prevention and Intervention Program Community Actions’ Emergency Rent and Utility Assistance Program Family Promise’s Advocates for the Homeless Program Domestic Violence Resource Center—Empowerment Fund and Monika’s House Care to Share Emergency Summer/ Fall Assistance Luke Dorf’s Eviction Prevention Program Boys and Girls Aid
Other services include: Lutheran Community Services Northwest’s HopeSpring program designed to provide rapid re- housing for homeless women heads-of-household with children in sixteen to eighteen units for up to a year. Good Neighbor Center and the Housing Authority of Washington County partner on the Housing Stabilization Program to case management for 12 homeless families exiting emergency shelter Project Homeless Connect held annually as a one-day event providing services and resource referral to homeless persons or persons at risk of homelessness. Open Door Counseling Center provides mental health outreach services to homeless persons at its drop-in day center
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 139 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services - 91.410, 91.210(d) Introduction
The needs for facilities and services for individuals and families with special needs in Washington County are as great as the vulnerability of these populations. Persons with special needs are often on fixed incomes, live in cost burdened housing situations, and have accessibility needs that may not be met by their housing. Persons with special needs may also need access to facilities rather than transitional or permanent housing that caters to their particular special need with the appropriate supportive services. As a result, it is imperative that Washington County continue to invest in special needs facilities and services that seek to help these individuals and families get access to and maintain stable supportive housing.
Including the elderly, frail elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons with alcohol or other drug addictions, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, public housing residents and any other categories the jurisdiction may specify, and describe their supportive housing needs
An estimated 19% of Washington County’s older adults (age 65 and older) not living in an institution such as a nursing home had two or more disabilities. This represents approximately 10,000 individuals. The disability types are sensory, physical, mental, self-care and go-outside-the-home disabilities. There were approximately 1,900 older adults not living in an institution whose incomes were below the poverty level and who had one or more disabilities.There are a limited number of housing facilities and units designated for those with disabilities in Washington County. For those persons with severe and persistent mental illness, there are twelve facilities in the County under a varierty of sponsors. These include both residential treatment homes and facilities. They are typically for people discharging out of the State Hospital, or who are in acute care and on the State Hospital waitlist. The focus in these homes is on building daily living skills and community mobility skills, while the facilities are used to build skills for daily living and symptom management. There are 2,075 people with developmental disabilities currently receiving County services who may choose to live with family and friends. At any one time, there are approximately 10-15 clients with developmental disabilities that need long-term and more intensive services in settings like a group home or foster home. Staff estimates that group homes, foster homes, and other supportive living facilities serve about 500 clients in the County. Housing identified for the developmentally disabled in the County would only provide for about 10% of those in active case management and are found in Hillsboro, Forest Grove and Sherwood. There is a housing gap for the 550 Washington County residents with physical disabilities, are under age 65, have low incomes, are in need of supportive housing and services and receive in-home care, adult foster care, or residential care or are otherwise in assisted living or nursing facilities. The 44 units identified in Washington County fall significantly short of meeting the population’s housing needs. 3 adult residential facilities in Washington County provide detoxification and other services for those in severe stages of drug and alcohol addiction and recovery. In addition to the housing listed in Table 3-98, there are 10 male beds and 2 female beds at the Homeless to Work Program and 3 single-family homes in Aloha in the Homes for Families program primarily utilized for offenders exiting incarceration. There
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 140 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
are also 10 male beds at the IRISS house in Aloha and 4 female beds through Contracted Housing through various providers. Housing dedicated to those with HIV/AIDS in the Portland metropolitan region is concentrated in Multnomah County. Caritas Housing Initiatives and Cascade AIDS Project (CAP) partner in Washington County to provide housing. Villa Capri still provides three apartments subsidized for HOPWA participants. CAP works with the County’s Shelter Plus Care program to provide rental assistance vouchers to approximately 51 households. There are 551 beds for singles and families available in permanent supportive housing, sponsored by a combination of CAP, LifeWorks NW, Luke- Dorf, and Sequoia Mental Health Services and provided, in part, through Shelter Plus Care tenant-based rental assistance. CAP sponsors 45 beds in permanent supportive housing units in Washington County and 6 beds in a Rapid Re-housing unit.
Public Comment - OHCS Strategic Plan
There is a growing need to provide residential treatment facilities to serve adults with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) who are eligible for State of Oregon support programs under the Addictions and Mental Health Division (AMH) of Oregon Health Authority (OHA). Adults with SPMI are defined as individuals age 18 or older who have one or more mental illnesses recognized by the DSM IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), excluding substance use disorders and addiction disorders, and a score of 40 or less on the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale as a result of such illness. The OHA has defined in their 2015-2018 Behavioral Health Strategic Plan for AMH services support for individuals in residential treatment facilities or group homes of this type, which would not be programs developed specifically for persons with developmental disabilities, but that would allow co- dwelling of persons with mental health and intellectual/developmentally disabled adults. Increasing access to safe, affordable housing in an integrated community-based residential group homes is a model intended to ensure these individuals’ rights to reside in the least restrictive environment possible. The OHA Strategic Plan also implements development of certification standards for behavioral health homes, needed to help promote the integration of primary care services in behavioral health settings.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 141 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-91
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 142 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-92
Table 3-93
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 143 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-94
Table 3-95
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 144 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-96
Table 3-97
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 145 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-98
Describe programs for ensuring that persons returning from mental and physical health institutions receive appropriate supportive housing
Persons returning from mental and physical health institutions are able to receive supportive housing through seven residential treatment homes, three residential treatment facilities and up to 300 Adult Foster Homes in Washington County. The residential treatment homes are typically for people discharging out of the State Hospital, while the residential treatment facilities contain seven beds each and are used to build skills for daily living and symptom management. There are approximately 300 Adult Foster Homes that are licensed by the Oregon Department of Human Services’ Aging and People with Disabilities (APD) for a variety of persons with disabilities.
Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. 91.315(e)
Not applicable. See text for entitlement/consortia grantess.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 146 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
For entitlement/consortia grantees: Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. (91.220(2))
In the next year, Washington County and the City of Beaverton will continue to fund activities that address the housing and supportive services needs of persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. For housing needs in Year 1 of the 2015-2020 Strategic Plan, the jurisdictions will prioritize and fund the following activities as high priority needs for persons with disabilities, the elderly and frail elderly: construction of new affordable rental housing, preservation of existing affordable rental housing (including acquisition, acquisition and rehabilitation, rehabilitation and refinancing activities), and weatherization, rehabilitation, and accessibility improvements to affordable rental properties. For owner-occupied housing, the jurisdictions will prioritize and fund rehabilitation of housing owned and occupied by low income households including, but not limited to rehabilitation, weatherization and accessibility improvements as a high priority need for elderly, frail elderly and persons with disabilities. For housing facilities, a low priority need will be given for public facilities looking to acquire or rehabilitate existing facilities to house persons with special needs or improve existing facilities designed to provide services to seniors. These facilities are targeted to persons with development disabilities, elderly/frail elderly, and persons with severe and persistent mental illness. In terms of supportive service needs for special needs population, Year 1 of the 2015-2020 Strategic Plan will have a low priority need to provide a vast array of supportive services designed to assist low-income and vulnerable households to overcome barriers. These supportive services include the supportive service needs of the following special needs populations: persons with disabilities and abused/neglected children. For more information on these activities, please consult the Year 1 Strategic Plan in Chapter 6.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 147 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing - 91.410, 91.210(e) Describe any negative effects of public policies on affordable housing and residential investment
The following barriers adversely affect public policies for affordable housing and residential investment in Washington County. These include Tier 1 and Tier 2 barriers. Tier 1 barriers are barriers that Washington County is unable to address locally, while Tier 2 barriers are barriers that Washington County is able to affect locally. Tier 1 barriers include the following: inadequate federal funding for affordable housing, little incentive to spur homeownership, conservative investment criteria for LIHTC (low income housing tax credit) investors, lack of alternatives to the LIHTC program, the Oregon state law prohibits inclusionary zoning, and federal programs that are not in alignment. Tier 2 barriers include the following: multiple reporting requirements from the multiple funding sources, the lack of system development charges waiver programs, the vulnerability of community development corporations to financial instability, the difficulty of providing service-enriched housing, multiple jurisdictions and multiple development pathways with each jurisidiction having its own planning and permitting process, affordable housing not considered to be high enough of a priority, land costs are high, the limited incentive of density bonuses, and the need for property tax exemption to be expanded as a tool. The County’s strategies to address Tier 2 barriers appear in Chapter 6, Strategic Plan.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 148 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets - 91.410, 91.210(f) Introduction
Within the constructs of the Market Analysis, non-housing community development assets in the form of workers and jobs, transportation and education are analyzed to determine economic development and employment opportunities over the next five years. Based on information presented as a consultation to the Consolidated Plan Work Group by Nick Knudsen of Worksystems using 2013 American Community Survey and Oregon Employment Department data, Washington County has a population of 432,938 persons over the age of 16 who could theoretically be in the labor force. As it stands, 299,201 or 69% of these individuals are in labor force through temporary, part-time or full- time employment. 133,737 individuals are not in the labor force. Only 36% of 16-19 year-olds are in the labor force. Economic Development Market Analysis Business Activity Business by Sector Number of Number of Jobs Share of Workers Share of Jobs Jobs less workers Workers % % % Agriculture, Mining, Oil & Gas Extraction 2,995 2,844 2 2 0 Arts, Entertainment, Accommodations 17,448 14,683 11 10 -1 Construction 8,098 10,131 5 7 2 Education and Health Care Services 26,089 23,833 16 16 0 Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 11,714 9,710 7 6 -1 Information 5,631 5,128 4 3 -1 Manufacturing 28,494 34,754 18 23 5 Other Services 6,777 5,942 4 4 0 Professional, Scientific, Management Services 16,967 13,417 11 9 -2 Public Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Retail Trade 19,381 20,329 12 13 1 Transportation and Warehousing 4,005 2,401 3 2 -1 Wholesale Trade 11,174 9,407 7 6 -1 Total 158,773 152,579 ------Table 40 - Business Activity Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS (Workers), 2011 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (Jobs)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 149 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Labor Force
Total Population in the Civilian Labor Force 233,001 Civilian Employed Population 16 years and over 213,081 Unemployment Rate 8.55 Unemployment Rate for Ages 16-24 24.43 Unemployment Rate for Ages 25-65 5.85 Table 41 - Labor Force Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Occupations by Sector Number of People Management, business and financial 65,362 Farming, fisheries and forestry occupations 9,222 Service 19,979 Sales and office 53,413 Construction, extraction, maintenance and repair 16,083 Production, transportation and material moving 11,120 Table 42 – Occupations by Sector Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Travel Time
Travel Time Number Percentage < 30 Minutes 130,438 66% 30-59 Minutes 55,761 28% 60 or More Minutes 11,059 6% Total 197,258 100% Table 43 - Travel Time Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Education: Educational Attainment by Employment Status (Population 16 and Older) Educational Attainment In Labor Force Civilian Employed Unemployed Not in Labor Force Less than high school graduate 14,678 2,114 5,441 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 30,346 3,014 9,108 Some college or Associate's degree 59,045 5,310 14,164 Bachelor's degree or higher 78,913 3,655 14,878 Table 44 - Educational Attainment by Employment Status Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 150 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Educational Attainment by Age
Age 18–24 yrs 25–34 yrs 35–44 yrs 45–65 yrs 65+ yrs Less than 9th grade 1,024 3,101 3,158 4,575 2,636 9th to 12th grade, no diploma 5,044 4,425 3,026 3,948 2,633 High school graduate, GED, or alternative 10,375 11,994 10,269 20,260 12,285 Some college, no degree 12,952 16,172 14,074 27,082 10,556 Associate's degree 1,275 5,282 5,489 10,480 2,147 Bachelor's degree 3,545 17,803 20,223 26,426 7,682 Graduate or professional degree 351 7,873 9,982 15,174 4,900 Table 45 - Educational Attainment by Age Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
2008-2012 ACS
Educational Attainment – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months
Educational Attainment Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Less than high school graduate 19,420 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 27,171 Some college or Associate's degree 35,262 Bachelor's degree 51,961 Graduate or professional degree 71,563 Table 46 – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Based on the Business Activity table above, what are the major employment sectors within your jurisdiction? The major employment sectors within Washington County based on the Business Activity table in order are: Manufacturing, Education and Health Care Services, Retail Trade, and Arts, Entertainment, Accommodations. These four sectors contain 58% of the workers and 61% of the jobs in Washington County. According to WorkSystems in their 2014 consultation to the Consolidated Plan Work Group, Washington County is expected to add 60,383 jobs added across all industries over the next decade. The semiconductor & electronic component manufacturing industry is the top industry in Washington County. It now comprises 9% of all jobs across all industries. There are 45,636 total manufacturing jobs, which comprises 39% of all metro area manufacturing jobs. In the health care area, there are 11,842 ambulatory jobs (i.e. physicians’ offices, dentist offices, specialty health care, etc.), 4,818 jobs in hospitals, and 5,805 jobs in long term-care. Within the tech industry, there are 7,837 jobs in the software, data processing/hosting and computer systems design industries. There are 13,942 jobs across Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 151 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
all industries for software developers, computer support specialists, network/system administrators, web developers, computer systems managers and computer systems analysts.
Describe the workforce and infrastructure needs of the business community:
Despite the high number of jobs in the semiconductor & electronic component manufacturing industry, the industry is expected to grow and this represents a workforce need of the business community in Washington County. This industry is expected to grow from 22,804 jobs to 27,025 jobs by 2024. With almost five thousand jobs added in ten years, this growth indicates that business community will need highly skilled workers to fill these jobs with the appropriate education, certification and training. These jobs are important to the community as they are accessible, are now less focused on traditional educational degrees and more on what an individual can do and pay well enough to enable households to meet the Washington County Self-Sufficiency Standard of $65,800 for a four-person household, which is currently the highest standard in the state. Figure 3-12 describes how the Self-Sufficiency Standard (earnings needed to be able to afford all necessities) in Washington County is still considerably higher than the median income for low and moderate income households in the County. Thus, there is an emphasis on the employment opportunities needed to bridge the gap from current median incomes to the incomes needed for households in Washington County to become self-sufficient.
Describe any major changes that may have an economic impact, such as planned local or regional public or private sector investments or initiatives that have affected or may affect job and business growth opportunities during the planning period. Describe any needs for workforce development, business support or infrastructure these changes may create.
In August 2014, Washington County, the City of Hillsboro and Intel signed a strategic investment agreement that would ensure Intel maintains a large local employment presence with 17,500 jobs and invests up to $100 billion into the local community over the next thirty years. Intel is the largest employer in Washington County and the State of Oregon, with $2.8 billion payroll in 2012 and generating $327.7 in state income and local property taxes, according to ECONorthwest. This is the fifth strategic investment program agreement Intel has signed with Washington County. It comes on the heels of Intel investing $3 billion in constructing D1X, a mammoth semiconductor and electronic component manufacturing facility in Hillsboro expected to generate 6,000 to 8,000 jobs in its first phase alone by the company’s estimates. The strategic agreement will be vital for future job and business growth opportunities in Washington County for this industry, as well as the supplementary industries that support it such as construction, real estate, education, accommodations and healthcare. It is important to note that the median wage in the industry is high but there are job opportunities at a variety of income levels for skilled workers as the industry expands its presence in Washington County. As a result, these changes will create workforce development needs for the next generation of workers in this industry. While there are resources available to train workers in the semiconductor & electronic component manufacturing industry (and manufacturing and technology sectors overall), there is still a challenge in linking the skills of job-seekers and the long-term unemployed in Washington County with the specialized skills needed in this industry. In addition, infrastructure investments will still need to be
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 152 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
made by the jurisdictions in Washington County to accommodate such job growth without significant resources available for additional land, streets and street improvements, sidewalks, bike lanes, stormwater infrastructure, and other infrastructure improvements needed to accommodate such rapid growth.
How do the skills and education of the current workforce correspond to employment opportunities in the jurisdiction?
The education of the current workforce is not as much the barrier to employment opportunities in Washington County as are the skills of the current workforce in relation to the high number of growing employment opportunities in the semiconductor & electronic component manufacturing industry (and manufacturing and technology sectors overall) that require different skills. Worksystems is attempting to address this gap in skills because the industry is less focused on educational attainment than on coding skills and other highly technical skills in the industry that do not require a Bachelor’s or graduate level degree. WorkSource Portland Metro has almost $11 million in grants and other financial resources to pay for any type of training for individuals looking to obtain jobs in the Manufacturing and Tech (Information/Technology) sectors in Washington County. Worksystems and Treehouse (an online learning system for software coding skills that is badge-based for coding skills as a proficiency marker instead of community college credits) have developed a partnership called Code Oregon, which is a totally free service to anyone looking to obtain these vital coding skills. This partnership is a great opportunity for self-paced development for job seekers looking to develop skills for jobs in the technology sector (and is fully subsidized). There are resources for over 10,000 slots in Code Oregon and they’re currently at 5,000 so there’s still room for additional interested job-seekers.
Describe any current workforce training initiatives, including those supported by Workforce Investment Boards, community colleges and other organizations. Describe how these efforts will support the jurisdiction's Consolidated Plan.
In addition to this partnership, the Aligned Partner Network (APN) is another initiative where Worksystems (supported by the Workforce Investment Boards, community colleges and other organizations) partners with public agencies and community partners who have the time to coach their clients on employment goals and job searches. These agencies have the time and investment in the network and participate in case management services to enable their clients to more effectively find a job. This particular network follows the same integrated service delivery model but also includes Career Coaches (from the APN Agencies) and WorkSource Liaisons (WIA staff). This network expands integrated delivery to public agencies & community partners in order to increase accessibility for people with multiple barriers, ensure case management for populations that need relationship-based support, and further align resources to reduce duplication and maximize expertise. In Washington County, these partners include CODA, Community Action, County Community Corrections (and its Reconnect and PREP programs), County Dept. of Housing, Experience Works and Luke-Dorf. APN job-seekers in Washington County numbered 75 to 80 of the more than 18,000 job-seekers in Washington County but Worksystems set aside 1/3 of its training dollars for these APN job-seekers through a set-aside training program due to
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 153 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
their agencies’ participation in the APN since Worksystems knows that they have the supports for the job seeker (with career coaches). Worksystems has also been active in working with job-seekers who have multiple backgrounds including offenders exiting incarceration. Washington County Community Corrections is an APN partner and that Oregon HB 3194 has enabled Worksystems to go into Washington County Community Corrections in a prelease program and work with job-seekers for career preparation before they are released through the Reconnect Program. The program is for people who have particular offenses and have been released to get the case management they need to succeed in the job market. HB 3194 takes the legislative money that would have paid for them to go back to prison to get the case management they need instead to get a job and get stability in their lives. Washington County Community Corrects feels as though it is a well-established practice in corrections that getting someone into housing, employment and substance abuse services helps reduce the recidivism rate. Policymakers looking into recidivism view housing, employment and social peers as the top tier of contributors reducing recidivism that need to be addressed and issues like alcohol and substance abuse are usually factors falling in a secondary tier of things affecting recidivism. In terms of 2013 stats for APN regionally, there were 963 participants, 2,422 workshops attended, 23 internships, 167 certifications programs (entered by participants) and 389 resulting employments. These participants encounter high barriers so these stats show some success in getting job-seekers with multiple barriers trained and employed.
Does your jurisdiction participate in a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)?
No
If so, what economic development initiatives are you undertaking that may be coordinated with the Consolidated Plan? If not, describe other local/regional plans or initiatives that impact economic growth.
Washington County does not participate in a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) at this time, so no further information is provided on a local CEDS. The other local initiatives that impact economic growth have been listed in this section. Westside Economic Alliance provided a staff person to participate in the Consolidated Plan Work Group during the planning process. This staff person also provided a consultation to the Consolidated Plan Work Group on local initiatives and plans based on the major employers in Washington County.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 154 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Figure 3-12
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 155 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion Are there areas where households with multiple housing problems are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration")
As discussed in detail in sections NA-15 through NA-20 on housing problems, a housing problem exists when there are one or more of the following: lack of complete kitchen facilities; lack of complete plumbing facilities; more than one person per room; or housing cost burden is greater than 30% of household monthly income. A severe housing problem exists when there are one or more of the following: lack of complete kitchen facilities; lack of complete plumbing facilities; more than 1.5 persons per room; or housing cost burden is greater than 50% of household monthly income. Based on the analysis provided in those sections, we know that certain racial/ethnic groups in certain income categories face a disproportionate impact as compared with the county population as a whole. In the combined 0-50% range for housing problems, Pacific Islanders showed a disproportionally greater need. However, their numbers relative to the County as a whole are quite small. In those cases, it would be difficult to map concentrations across a county as large in area as Washington County. Minority concentration data does not demonstrate that there are any areas where Pacific Islanders are concentrated. In this case, we can assume there are no areas where these households are concentrated. In the 50-80% range, there were three groups that showed a disproportionately greater need: Black or African Americans, Asians and Pacific Islanders. However, minority concentration data does not demonstrate that there are any areas where Black/African Americans or Pacific Islanders are concentrated. With the data available through this process, we do not identify specific areas where these housing problems for these populations are concentrated. There are two census tracts that show a concentration of Asians (CT 316.13 and CT 316.11). These census tracts are in/near the North Bethany area of the County. These are not considered low-income areas and much of the building is relatively new; therefore, these are not likely to be areas where multiple housing problems are concentrated. With respect to severe housing problems (defined above), in the 0-30% range the Pacific Islanders face a disproportionate need. However, for the reasons stated above, we do not believe there are areas where these households/persons are concentrated. In the 30-50% range, the Asian population faces a disproportionate need. However, as stated above, we are unable to correlate the disproportionate need with the geographic concentration area. In the 50-80% range, Asian, Pacific Islanders and Hispanic groups faces a disproportionate severe housing problem. In Washington County, there are several census tracts (Hillsboro, Beaverton, Tualatin) with a concentration of Hispanic persons. In that this group disproportionally faces these problems, one could make the observation that there could be a likelihood of some concentration of severe housing problems in these areas. Finally, in the 80-100% range, the Asian population faces a disproportionate need. For reasons described above, we do not identify a concentration at this level.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 156 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Are there any areas in the jurisdiction where racial or ethnic minorities or low-income families are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration")
As noted in the Housing Needs Assessment, there were nine Census Tracts in the County that had some minority concentrations or areas of concentration of racial or ethnic minorities. A minority concentration in Washington County is defined as a percentage of any ethnic or racial minority population within the Census Tract that is 20% greater than the percentage of that ethnic or racial minority group across the entire jurisdiction. The 2010 U.S. Census data and the Census Tract as the identified geographic area are used for this definition given their relatively low margins of error in comparison to American Community Survey estimates and Census Block Group data. This information was first noted in the 2012 Washington County Fair Housing Plan and Analysis of Impediments utilizing data from the 2010 U.S. Census. Two Census Tracts represent a concentration of Asian residents in the areas north of the City of Beaverton close to the Sunset Highway. These two Census Tracts also have percentages of non-white households that are at least 20% higher than the percentage of non-white households across the whole County overall. There are seven Census Tracts in Washington County that represent a concentration of Latino residents primarily in parts of the cities of Beaverton, Tualatin, Hillsboro, Cornelius and Forest Grove. Two of these seven Census Tracts also have a concentration of “other” racial or ethnic minorities that is 20% higher than the percentage classified as “other” racial or ethnic minorities across the whole County overall. A table listing the Census Tracts and a map is included in this section.
Those areas where the percentage of low-income persons earning at or below 50% AMI is higher than that of the County as a whole are a measure of the concentration of low-income persons. An area of low-income concentration is defined as a Census Tract where the percentage of low -income households is at least 10% higher than for the County as a whole. The greatest concentrations of low-income persons in Washington County are found in eighteen Census Tracts within the communities of Beaverton, Cornelius, Forest Grove, Tigard, Tualatin, Hillsboro and unincorporated Washington County. The table below includes a list of the number and percentages of low-income persons (earning at or below 50% AMI) in these low-income concentrations in the County. Washington County is using the Census Tract as the defined geographic area for determination of low-income concentration. Washington County defines a low-income concentration as a Census Tract where the percentage of households earning at or below 50% AMI (which is $34,700 for a family of four as of May 1st, 2014) is at least 10 percent higher than the County average percentage of households earning at or below 50% AMI (19.03%) across all 104 Census Tracts in Washington County. The data is derived from the Low and Moderate Income Summary Data (LMISD) released by HUD in June 2014 using the 2006-2010 American Community Survey (ACS). A table listing these Census Tracts and a map is included in this section. Because there is often an intersection between Low-Income Concentrations and Minority Concentration areas, a table and two figures in this section notes the preponderance of dual low-income and racial/ethnic concentrations at the Census Tract level. As such, the two figures show the four Census Tracts that specifically have a concentration of Hispanic/Latino residents and also have a concentration of low- income people.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 157 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
What are the characteristics of the market in these areas/neighborhoods?
These 4 Census Tracts have both a concentration of Hispanic or Latino residents that is at least 37% of the Census Tract’s overall population. This is considerably higher than the 15.6% Hispanic or Latino population of Washington County overall. These four Census Tracts also have a concentration of low- income households earning at or below 50% of the AMI that is at least 41% of the Census Tract’s overall population. The location of the 4 Census Tracts are identified in the two figures in this section. For the eastern submarket, the poverty rate is 16.2% which is higher the County’s poverty rate of 10.4%. The percentage of family households living in poverty is 79.6% which is higher than the County’s percentage of 71.7%. There are a higher number of single-person households in this area too with 34.7% single- person households in the submarket compared to 25.3% in the County overall. 49.5% of households are cost burdened by paying 30% or more of their incomes towards housing costs (County percentage is 37.5%). The bulk of these households are renter households earning less than $35,000 annually. The most cost burdened households seem to be small family households earning at or below 30% AMI. There is a lower vacancy rate in the eastern submarket than in the County overall. 59.1% of structures are single-family detached units in the two Census Tracts. The tenure is almost evenly split between renter and owner-occupied housing units. 79.4% of the housing stock was built between 1950 and 1979, making it much older stock than the County overall. The unemployment rate for the area is 14.85% which is significantly higher than the County overall at 8.58%. Approximately 36.1% of the workers are employed in the service occupations and sales and office occupations. The Hillsboro submarket identified in Figure 3-14 is an area of Hillsboro primarily south of downtown with significant access to services, hospitals and clinics, commercial development and retail stores. It is also well located to light rail and a few grocery stores. For the Hillsboro submarket, the poverty rate is 32.95% which is higher the County’s poverty rate of 10.4%. These are areas with significant more families with children living in poverty. The percentage of family households living in poverty is 72.02% which is slightly higher than the County’s percentage of 71.7%. There is a high percentage of households with one or more persons under the age of 18 years at 41.5% compared to 35.95% in the County overall. This is a highly cost burdened submarket with 58.1% of households cost burdened paying 30% or more of their incomes towards housing costs (County percentage is 37.5%). The bulk of these households are renter households earning less than $35,000 annually. More households are severely cost burdened here than just cost burdened. The most burdened households seem to be small family households (both renter and owner) earning at or below 30% AMI. There is a higher vacancy rate in the submarket than in the County overall. 75% of structures are single-family detached units in the two Census Tracts. There are over two times the number of renter units as owner-occupied units in the area. 74.4% of the housing stock was built before 1979, making it much older stock than the County overall. The unemployment rate for the area is 13.76% which is significantly higher than the County overall at 8.58%. Approximately 31.4% of the workers are employed in the service occupations and sales and office occupations. There is also a notable percentage that work in the construction, extraction, maintenance, and repair occupations at 21.8%.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 158 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Are there any community assets in these areas/neighborhoods? There are significant assets in these areas. These areas are significantly accessible to transit, employment centers and hospitals and clinics. There are an abundance of grocery stores and other markets for fresh and natural produce given their locations near downtowns in Washington County. These areas contain substantial subsidized housing whose affordability is not necessarily expiring anytime soon and also host an array of supportive services and childcare for low-income households.
Are there other strategic opportunities in any of these areas?
There may be significant strategic opportunities in all of these Census Tracts. As the jurisdictions continue to develop the Housing Elements of their Comprehensive Plans in these areas, they may choose to invest in purchasing land for future residential or commercial development with the anticipation that the well-suited locations in these areas will cause the values and sales prices of land in these areas to escalate over time. The hope is that the land value escalation does not displace the low- income households who have traditionally lived in the area. There also may be opportunities in Census Tracts 310.05 and 320.05 as Qualified Census Tracts where there is an incentive to site Low-Income Housing Tax Credit projects in those areas given the possibility of increasing equity in projects in those areas. Parts of Census Tracts 324.09 and 325.01 are included in the downtown Hillsboro area that is undergoing significant investment as an Urban Renewal District. As such, there may be significant opportunities to ensure there is affordable housing in these highly accessible Census Tracts as the affordability of these Census Tracts may decrease over time. Finally, there may be strategic anti-poverty opportunities including economic development activities such as microenterprise assistance and business development loans in these Census Tract areas. These areas have access to community events such as farmers’ markets and festivals, as well as accessible retail stores that enable low-income residents to become more self-sufficient through these activities.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 159 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Figure 3-13
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 160 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Figure 3-14
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 161 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-28
Table 3-29(a)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 162 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-29(b)
Table 3-30
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 163 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-31
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 164 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Strategic Plan
SP-05 Overview Strategic Plan Overview
The heart of the Consolidated Plan consists of the Strategic Plan, which describes how federal funds and other resources will be deployed and what other actions will be taken to address community development and affordable housing needs over the next five years. This introduction describes how the draft Strategic Plan is organized and how to interpret it. By federal statute, the over-arching goals of the plan are the provision of the following: 1) Decent housing, 2) A suitable living environment and 3) Expanded economic opportunities for low- and moderate-income households.
HUD requires jurisdictions to develop five-year strategies in three areas: • Housing and homelessness • Community development • Anti-poverty
Our strategies have two principal components: Actions to help advance the strategy and Production targets (such as number of people assisted, housing units created, public facilities created, etc.) The actions describe the steps that a number of different entities (public agencies, non-profit organizations and others) will take to help advance the overall strategy during the next five years. A lead contact is designated for each action. The lead contact has agreed to report to the Office of Community Development annually on the progress made on the action so that updates can be included in the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER). Additionally, the lead contact may choose to go a step further by taking the lead on implementing that action alone or in concert with other partners.
The production targets represent a projection of the estimated output resulting from the expenditure of CDBG, ESG and HOME funds, together with other funds, to advance the strategy. They are derived from considering several things: the targets set in the current Consolidated Plan, the actual outputs reported in the CAPER, and knowledge of proposed projects in the pipeline. They include the numerical benchmarks against which the County reports progress to HUD and the community each year in the CAPER.
The years that appear in the Progress Targets are as follows: Year 1: Program Year (PY) 2015-2016 Year 2: PY 2016-17 Year 3: PY 2017-18 Year 4: PY 2018-19 Year 5: PY 2019-20
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 165 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
The strategies were developed through extensive consultation with stakeholders and community partners and through public participation activities, both of which are described in Chapter 2. The four sections that follow present the Housing and Homelessness, Community Development and Anti-Poverty Strategies and the Implementation Process that will be used to achieve them in 2010-2015. Link to 2015-2020 Strategic Plan
Please note that Table 6-1 is included under section SP-90, Program Specific Requirements, and that Table 6-5 is included under section SP-70, Anti-Poverty Strategies.
Please visit Washington County's website below to review a copy of the 2015-2020 Strategic Plan:
http://www.co.washington.or.us/CommunityDevelopment/Planning/idis-consolidated-plan-template- references.cfm
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 166 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 6-2 Five Year Strategic Plan
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 167 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 6-3 Other Jurisdictional Goals
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 168 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 6-4 Con Plan Jurisdictional Strategies (Page 1)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 169 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 6-4 (page 2)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 170 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 6-4 (Page 3)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 171 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-10 Geographic Priorities - 91.415, 91.215(a)(1) Geographic Area
Table 47 - Geographic Priority Areas 1 Area Name: Washington County Area Type: CDBG Entitlement and HOME Entitlement Area Other Target Area Description: CDBG Entitlement and HOME Entitlement Area HUD Approval Date: % of Low/ Mod: Revital Type: Other Revital Description: Identify the neighborhood boundaries for this target area. Include specific housing and commercial characteristics of this target area. How did your consultation and citizen participation process help you to identify this neighborhood as a target area? Identify the needs in this target area. What are the opportunities for improvement in this target area? Are there barriers to improvement in this target area? 2 Area Name: City of Beaverton Area Type: Local Target area Other Target Area Description: HUD Approval Date: % of Low/ Mod: Revital Type: Comprehensive Other Revital Description: Identify the neighborhood boundaries for this target area. Include specific housing and commercial characteristics of this target area. How did your consultation and citizen participation process help you to identify this neighborhood as a target area?
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 172 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Identify the needs in this target area. What are the opportunities for improvement in this target area? Are there barriers to improvement in this target area? 3 Area Name: City of Beaverton - Allen Blvd. Area Type: Local Target area Other Target Area Description: HUD Approval Date: % of Low/ Mod: Revital Type: Comprehensive Other Revital Description: Identify the neighborhood boundaries for this target area. Include specific housing and commercial characteristics of this target area. How did your consultation and citizen participation process help you to identify this neighborhood as a target area? Identify the needs in this target area. What are the opportunities for improvement in this target area? Are there barriers to improvement in this target area?
General Allocation Priorities
Describe the basis for allocating investments geographically within the state:
This Strategic Plan does not designate any geographic area as a priority, CDFI Area, Local Target Area or Strategy Area. The needs in Washington County and the cities of Hillsboro and Beaverton are great and spread throughout the County.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 173 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.415, 91.215(a)(2) Priority Needs
Table 48 – Priority Needs Summary 1 Priority Need Homelessness Name Priority Level High Population Extremely Low Low Rural Chronic Homelessness Individuals Families with Children Mentally Ill Chronic Substance Abuse veterans Persons with HIV/AIDS Victims of Domestic Violence Unaccompanied Youth Persons with Mental Disabilities Persons with Physical Disabilities Persons with Developmental Disabilities Geographic City of Beaverton Areas CDBG Entitlement and HOME Entitlement Area Affected Associated Homeless Supportive Services Goals Projects That Implement 10 Year Plan Strategies Description The associated goals to this high priority need will be to provide the provision of supportive services for homeless persons and families; and provide support to projects that implement strategies from the Washington County Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness. The populations targeted in this priority need include (but are not limited to) extremely low- and low-income households, persons with disabilities and persons experiencing or at-risk of homelessness. Basis for Washington County has designated homelessness as a high priority in order to Relative support furthering of the 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness goals and to further Priority align federal programs for streamlined services.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 174 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
2 Priority Need Rental Housing Name Priority Level High Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Families with Children Elderly Elderly Frail Elderly Persons with Mental Disabilities Persons with Physical Disabilities Persons with Developmental Disabilities Other
Geographic City of Beaverton Areas CDBG Entitlement and HOME Entitlement Area Affected Associated Assistance to Affordable Rental Properties Goals New Construction of Affordable Rental Housing Preservation of Existing Affordable Rental Housing
Description The associated goals to this high priority need will be to provide focus on the construction of new affordable rental housing; preserve existing affordable rental housing, including acquisition, acquisition and rehabilitation, rehabilitation and refinancing activities; provide new project-based rental assistance for extremely low-income households; and provide weatherization, rehabilitation, and accessibility improvements to affordable rental properties. The populations targeted under this priority need include (but are not limited to) Extremely Low-, Low- and moderate-income households, families with children, elderly and frail elderly, persons with disabilities, and farmworkers.
Basis for The rental housing priority need is high due to the large estimated gap of Relative affordable rental housing in Washington County. Priority
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 175 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
3 Priority Need Owner-Occupied Housing Name Priority Level High Population Low Moderate Elderly Elderly Frail Elderly Persons with Mental Disabilities Persons with Physical Disabilities Persons with Developmental Disabilities
Geographic City of Beaverton Areas CDBG Entitlement and HOME Entitlement Area Affected Associated Homebuyer Programs Goals Owner-Occupied Housing Rehabilitation/ Assistance
Description The associated goals to this high priority need will be to provide support for affordable homeownership opportunities through community land trust and homebuyer sweat equity programs; and provide support for rehabilitation of housing owned and occupied by low-income households, including, but not limited to, rehabilitation, weatherization and accessibility improvements. The populations targeted under this priority need include (but are not limited to) low- and moderate-income households, elderly and frail elderly, and persons with disabilities.
Basis for The owner-occupied housing priority need is high due to the large estimated gap of Relative affordable owner-occupied housing in Washington County. Priority
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 176 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
4 Priority Need Public Facilities Name Priority Level Low Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Elderly Rural Chronic Homelessness Individuals Families with Children Mentally Ill Chronic Substance Abuse veterans Persons with HIV/AIDS Victims of Domestic Violence Unaccompanied Youth Elderly Frail Elderly Persons with Mental Disabilities Persons with Developmental Disabilities Other Geographic City of Beaverton Areas CDBG Entitlement and HOME Entitlement Area Affected Associated Public Facility Investment Goals Public Facility Investment for Seniors Public Facility Investment for Special Needs Pop. Description The associated goals to this low priority need will be to acquire, construct or rehabilitate public facilities benefitting eligible populations; acquire and/or rehabilitate existing facilities to house persons with special needs; and improve existing facilities designed to provide services to seniors. The populations targeted under this priority need include (but are not limited to) extremely low-, low- and moderate-income persons, persons with disabilities, elderly and the frail elderly, persons who are homeless, persons with severe and persistent mental illness, and youth. Basis for Washington County stipulates that this low priority designation does not mean that Relative a proposed activity will not be funded; a “low” priority designation simply means Priority that special rating points are not provided for these activities.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 177 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
5 Priority Need Public Infrastructure Name Priority Level Low Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Geographic City of Beaverton Areas CDBG Entitlement and HOME Entitlement Area Affected Associated Public Infrastructure Construction Goals Public Infrastructure Improvements Description The associated goals to this low priority need will be to construct or improve infrastructure in income-qualified areas to ensure the future health and safety of communities; and increase neighborhood pride and viability through improvements to existing infrastructure. The populations affected under this priority need include (but are not limited to) extremely low-, low- and moderate-income persons. Basis for Washington County stipulates that this low priority designation does not mean that Relative an activity will not be funded; a “low” priority designation simply means that Priority special rating points are not provided for these activities. 6 Priority Need Public Services Name Priority Level Low Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Families with Children Persons with Mental Disabilities Persons with Physical Disabilities Persons with Developmental Disabilities Other Geographic City of Beaverton Areas CDBG Entitlement and HOME Entitlement Area Affected Associated Supportive Services Goals
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 178 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Description The associated goals to this low priority need will be to provide a vast array of supportive services designed to assist low-income and vulnerable households overcome the barriers in an effort to achieve self-sufficiency. The populations targeted under this priority need include (but are not limited to) extremely low-, low- and moderate-income persons, persons with disabilities, families with children, and children who have been abused and/or neglected.
Basis for This priority need is for public services activities that do not specifically address a Relative strategy identified in the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness. Washington County Priority stipulates that this low priority designation does not mean that an activity will not be funded; a “low” priority designation simply means that special rating points are not provided for these activities.
7 Priority Need Economic Development Name Priority Level Low Population Low Moderate Other Geographic City of Beaverton Areas City of Beaverton - Allen Blvd. Affected CDBG Entitlement and HOME Entitlement Area Associated Microenterprise Assistance Goals Description The associated goals to this low priority need will be to provide microenterprise assistance and provide a storefront improvement program. The populations affected under this priority need include low- and moderate-income persons, microenterprises owned by low- and moderate-income persons, and buildings in designated Small Business Administration (SBA) areas.
Basis for Washington County stipulates that this low priority designation does not mean that Relative an activity will not be funded; a “low” priority designation simply means that Priority special rating points are not provided for these activities.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 179 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Narrative (Optional)
The County adopts the following definitions of Priority Need Level: High Priority: Washington County plans to make funds available for activities that address this unmet need during 2015-2020. In the annual application process, proposals fulfilling these needs will receive the highest number of points available under the criterion “Relative Priority of Need.” The County intends to advocate for applications to other funding sources for projects meeting this need, subject to the project’s congruence with other community objectives (such as zoning, etc.). Low Priority: While Washington County does support the category of a Medium Priority, the current IDIS template does not allow a medium priority of need for the Strategic Plan. Washington County would like to make funds available for housing activities that address this unmet need during 2015-2020. In the annual application process, proposals fulfilling these needs will receive a low number of points available under the criterion “Relative Priority of Need.” The County intends to support applications to other funding sources for projects meeting this need, subject to the project’s congruence with other community objectives (such as zoning, etc.).
Homelessness: High Priority Needs: Extremely Low-Income Households, Low-Income Households, People with Disabilities, Persons Experiencing or At Risk of Homelessness
Rental Housing: High Priority Needs: Low- and Moderate-Income Households, Families with Children, Elderly/ Frail Elderly, People with Disabilities, Farmworkers
Owner-Occupied Housing: High Priority Needs: Low-Moderate Income Households, Elderly/ Frail Elderly, People with Disabilities
Public Facilities: Low Priority Needs: Low-Moderate Income Persons, Persons with Developmental Disabilities, Elderly/ Frail Elderly, Homeless, Persons with Severe and Persistent Mental Illness, Youth
Public Infrastructure: Low Priority Needs: Low-Moderate Income Persons
Public Services: Low Priority Needs: Low-Moderate Income Persons, Persons with Disabilities, Families with Children, Abused/ Neglected Children
Economic Development: Low Priority Needs: Low-Moderate Income Persons, Microenterprises owned by Low-Moderate Income Persons, Buildings in Designated Small Business Administration (SBA) areas.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 180 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions - 91.415, 91.215(b) Influence of Market Conditions
Affordable Market Characteristics that will influence Housing Type the use of funds available for housing type Tenant Based The characteristics of the market that will influence the use of funds available for Rental Assistance tenant based rental assistance (TBRA) is the cost burden and severe cost burden (TBRA) experienced by low-income households in Washington County and the cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro. Gross rents are rising dramatically, based on the lack of affordable and available housing coupled with a desirability to live in Washington County as the economy expands. Oftentimes, private market units become one of few options for low-income households seeking affordable and available housing. Unfortunately, these units are not rent restricted and subject to dramatic rent increases in hot rental markets like the one in the Portland metropolitan region currently. Utilities are also rising dramatically, while wages remain relatively stagnant. These characteristics expand the cost burden and severe cost burden for low-income households, so tenant based rental assistance becomes a potential tool to address these burdens.
TBRA for Non- Based on the cost burdens experienced by low-income households in Washington Homeless Special County, there remains a dramatic need for tenant-based rental assistance Needs (TBRA) for low-income households to address the cost burden and severe cost burden due to rising rents and utilities in the current rental market. This is especially true for the non-homeless special needs populations living in Washington County who more often live on fixed incomes. Due to their fixed incomes, the rising rents they are being asked to pay become too expensive for them to continue to reside in their housing and TBRA increasignly becomes the source to make up the difference between what non-homeless special needs populations can afford and the rent. In addition, these populations have pressing needs to pay for medications, supportive services, room and board and healthcare that impact their ability to pay rent regularly.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 181 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Affordable Market Characteristics that will influence Housing Type the use of funds available for housing type New Unit Based on the current rental market, it is apparent that new unit production will Production be a valuable tool to begin to address the unmet need in affordable rental housing. This Strategic Plan proposes new unit production of 316 new rental units over the five-year period between July 1, 2015 and June 30, 2020. This number takes into account the current and proposed pipeline of affordable rental projects that may utilize federal housing dollars towards production. The market characteristics that make new unit production such a significant housing type is the growing unavailability of land, rising rents, rising construction costs, scarce public resources and heightened competition for development opportunities. These characteristics demonstrate the need and response of the affordable housing community including funders and cities to prioritize new unit production before the development opportunities evaporate given quick action.
Rehabilitation The current rental market also influences the need for rehabilitation as a viable housing type based on the current condition and life of existing housing in Washington County. Subsidized and unsubsidized housing alike in the County rarely has adequate replacement reserves to address all the capital needs of rental housing. Therefore, rehabilitation is increasingly need to extend the lives of rental housing projects throughout the County, making them viable and sustainable over the long term. Rehabilitation also enables these rental housing projects to remain desirable and competitive in the current rental market. As rental properties now approach twenty to thirty years in age. Rehabilitation is likely to become necessary for the long-term financial viability of an increasing number of rental projects in Washington County.
Acquisition, The market conditions that highlight the need for acquisition, including including preservation, of affordable rental housing include the rising rents, increasing preservation interest from private out-of-state developers and owners, expiring terms and affordability periods of rental housing, external markets outside Oregon, and expanded access to capital. These conditions coupled with the existing pipeline of rental projects in the Portland metropolitan region nearing Year 15 or the end of their affordability periods influence the prioritization of funds for preservation of 152 existing rental units in this Strategic Plan. This is a substantial increase in the preservation of rental units from the last Consolidated Plan period and is mainly due to the increasing number of existing pipeline of rental projects in the Portland metropolitan region nearing Year 15 or the end of their affordability periods. Table 49 – Influence of Market Conditions
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 182 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 3-1
Table 3-2
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 183 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-35 Anticipated Resources - 91.420(b), 91.215(a)(4), 91.220(c)(1,2)
Introduction
The anticipated resources identified in this section include Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program funds for Washington County, the HOME Investment Partnerships Program funds for the Washington County HOME Consortium, the Emergency Solutions Grant program funds for Washington County, and the Competitive McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act funds for the Hillsboro/Beaverton/Washington County Continuum of Care. They are based on the most recent allocations for these programs from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Anticipated Resources
Program Source Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Narrative Description of Annual Program Prior Year Total: Amount Funds Allocation: Income: Resources: $ Available $ $ $ Reminder of ConPlan $ CDBG public - Acquisition These CDBG funds are used federal Admin and towards public services (capped at Planning 15%), public facilities, and public Economic improvements. Development Housing Public Improvements Public Services 2,489,553 104,598 21,374 2,615,525 10,462,100
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 184 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Program Source Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Narrative Description of Annual Program Prior Year Total: Amount Funds Allocation: Income: Resources: $ Available $ $ $ Reminder of ConPlan $ HOME public - Acquisition These HOME funds are primarily federal Homebuyer used towards new unit production, assistance rehabilitation, acquisition, Homeowner preservation and homebuyer rehab assistance. They are also used Multifamily towards CHDO set-aside activities, rental new CHDO predevelopment loans for construction Tier 1 CHDOs and CHDO Operating Multifamily Grant funds for Tier 1 CHDOs. rental rehab New construction for ownership TBRA 1,083,771 489,139 209,312 1,782,222 7,128,888
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 185 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Program Source Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Narrative Description of Annual Program Prior Year Total: Amount Funds Allocation: Income: Resources: $ Available $ $ $ Reminder of ConPlan $ ESG public - Conversion and These ESG funds are used towards federal rehab for Street Outreach, Shelter transitional Operations, Homelessness housing Prevention, and Rapid Re-Housing Financial activities; up to but not to exceed Assistance the 7.5% of each year's annual Overnight allocation will be used for admin shelter costs. Rapid re- housing (rental assistance) Rental Assistance Services Transitional housing 165,058 0 0 165,058 660,232 Competitive public - These Continuum of Care funds McKinney- federal Housing include Supportive Housing Vento Overnight Program and Shelter Plus Care Homeless shelter funding for the Hillsboro, Assistance Act Rental Beaverton, Washington County Assistance Continuum of Care managed by the Transitional Washington County Department of housing 2,720,993 0 0 2,720,993 9,404,548 Housing Services.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 186 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Program Source Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Narrative Description of Annual Program Prior Year Total: Amount Funds Allocation: Income: Resources: $ Available $ $ $ Reminder of ConPlan $ HUD-VASH public - Rental These VASH resources supported federal Assistance 60 VASH vouchers in Washington Services 382,493 0 0 382,493 1,529,972 County. Other public - These 75 Project Based Section 8 federal vouchers support a variety of Rental homeless and special needs Assistance 1,112,703 0 0 1,112,703 4,450,812 populations. Table 50 - Anticipated Resources
Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied
As a result of both federal mandate and local policy, each of the County’s entitlement programs require or encourage some level of “match” or "leveraging” - financing from other sources in addition to the requested entitlement funds. For instance, locally adopted policies for the HOME program require that 25% of the project cost be accounted for by matching funds. In addition, the County’s CDBG funding process awards a higher point value to project proposals that will leverage significant additional resources. Under the ESG program, federal regulations require that there be a dollar-for-dollar match from other public and private sources. These federal funds will leverage additional resources on the state and local levels for public resources and private resources. The last program year saw federal funds leverage $2,732,465 (or 14% of all resources) in public resources on the state and local levels and $12,180,729 (or 62% of all resources) in private resources. This is due to the fact that these federal funds are often the first funds generated for housing and community development projects and generate interest for additional leverage and demonstrate local commitment towards a housing or community development project. For public resources, this can include leveraged resources from the state for homeless assistance projects, weatherization activities, infrastructure projects on state highways running through local jurisdictions, and public services projects. It can also include microenterprise assistance and state housing dollars for Washington County rental housing developments. Locally, leveraged resources include resources for homeless assistance projects, infrastructure projects, public facilities, public service projects and economic development projects. In private resources, leveraged resources include resources from Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 187 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
foundations and churches, donations, in-kind services, private loans, sweat equity, tax credits, volunteers and private funds. These sources are all non-federal so may count for the federal programs towards non-federal match.
If appropriate, describe publically owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan
There is some publicly owned land or property located within Washington County that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan. For housing, the cities of Forest Grove, Beaverton, Cornelius and Sherwood have all identified parcels that may be used to address housing needs in the future.
Discussion
With the loss of Section 811 and Section 202 funding to support the capital grants for construction, HOME projects are almost exclusively pursuing 9% tax credits through the State of Oregon’s annual NOFA. These housing dollars are extremely competitive and Participating Jurisdictions are dependent on successful projects in order to meet HOME commitment deadlines. A recent 58 unit affordable housing project was successful in competing for over $9 million in equity from tax credit allocations. Assuming one project per year over the course of the five year strategic plan, that would equate to leveraging approximately $45 million in tax credit equity. While it is impossible to predict success in the State’s NOFA and the possibility of other funding sources that may become available, this is a reasonable approximation of possible tax credit investment over the five year Consolidated Plan period. The National Housing Trust Fund is also a possible new source of funds that could come to the State of Oregon. However, appropriations battles currently on-going make this source hard to estimate as does the lack of sufficient information on the level of funding that could come out of the first year’s appropriation. It is expected that funding will flow to the State of Oregon – not to Participating Jurisdictions.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 188 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure - 91.415, 91.215(k)
Explain the institutional structure through which the jurisdiction will carry out its consolidated plan including private industry, non-profit organizations, and public institutions.
Responsible Entity Responsible Entity Role Geographic Area Served Type COMMUNITY PARTNERS Non-profit Non-homeless special FOR AFFORDABLE organizations needs HOUSING Rental public services BIENESTAR Non-profit Non-homeless special organizations needs Rental public services REACH Community Non-profit Rental Region Development, Inc. organizations public services Community Action Non-profit Homelessness organizations Non-homeless special needs public facilities public services Washington County PHA Homelessness Department of Housing Rental Services DOMESTIC VIOLENCE Non-profit Non-homeless special RESOURCE CENTER organizations needs public facilities St Vincent De Paul Non-profit Homelessness organizations Community Services, Inc Non-profit Non-homeless special organizations needs public facilities Family Bridge Non-profit Homelessness organizations Non-homeless special needs public services Virginia Garcia Non-profit Non-homeless special Memorial Health Center organizations needs public services
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 189 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Responsible Entity Responsible Entity Role Geographic Area Served Type Washington County Government Homelessness Department of Non-homeless special Community Corrections needs public facilities public services Washington County Government Non-homeless special Department of needs Disability, Aging and Ownership Veterans Services public services Washington County Government Non-homeless special Department of Health needs and Human Services' public services Mental Health Services Division Good Neighbor Center Non-profit Homelessness organizations Non-homeless special needs public facilities public services City of Tigard Government Non-homeless special needs neighborhood improvements public facilities City of Hillsboro Government Non-homeless special needs neighborhood improvements public facilities City of Cornelius Government Non-homeless special needs neighborhood improvements public facilities Adelante Mujeres Non-profit Economic organizations Development Non-homeless special needs public services
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 190 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Responsible Entity Responsible Entity Role Geographic Area Served Type City of Forest Grove Government Non-homeless special needs neighborhood improvements public facilities BEAVERTON Government Economic Development Homelessness Non-homeless special needs Planning neighborhood improvements public facilities public services BOYS AND GIRLS AID Non-profit Homelessness organizations Non-homeless special needs public facilities public services COURT APPOINTED Non-profit Non-homeless special SPECIAL ADVOCATES organizations needs FOR CHILDRES-WA public services COUNTY PROGRAM EDWARDS CENTER INC Non-profit Non-homeless special organizations needs Rental public facilities public services IRCO Non-profit Non-homeless special organizations needs public services LOAVES AND FISHES INC Community/Faith- Non-homeless special based organization needs public services Lutheran Community Community/Faith- Homelessness Services based organization Non-homeless special needs public services
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 191 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Responsible Entity Responsible Entity Role Geographic Area Served Type OPEN DOOR Non-profit Homelessness COUNSELING CENTER organizations Non-homeless special needs public services OREGON SOMALI Non-profit Non-homeless special FAMILY EDUCATION organizations needs CENTER public services Rebuilding Together Non-profit Ownership organizations Rental Families for Non-profit Non-homeless special Independent Living organizations needs Rental public services ST ANDREW LEGAL Community/Faith- Non-homeless special CLINIC based organization needs public services UNLIMITED CHOICES, Non-profit Ownership INC organizations Rental Jubilee Transition Community/Faith- Non-homeless special Homes based organization needs public facilities public services Home Plate Non-profit Homelessness organizations Non-homeless special needs public services Luke-Dorf Non-profit Homelessness organizations Non-homeless special needs Rental public facilities public services Table 51 - Institutional Delivery Structure
Assessment of Strengths and Gaps in the Institutional Delivery System
There are strengths in the institutional delivery system. Collaboration, coordination and communication are strong in Washington County with relationships and advocacy in groups such as the Housing and Supportive Services Network of Washington County and the Coalition of Housing Advocates. These
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 192 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
groups work to ensure there are a continuum of housing and services for low-income households, the homeless and populations with special needs. Referrals are made between agencies and oftentimes housing providers reach out to service providers for on-site resident services or recruitment of tenants. The gaps in the institutional delivery system center on the difficulty in finding units for the hard-to- house populations. There are no overnight shelter beds for single men. There are a limited number of shelter beds for women. There are no respite homes. There is a great need for permanent supportive housing for individuals with severe and persistent mental illness. There is a need for more transitional housing for offenders exiting incarceration and for patients transitioning out of the State Hospital with severe and persistent mental illness. This is particularly true for sex offenders and domestic violence offenders. 40% of released offenders do not have housing options lined up on their release from the Community Corrections Center. The siting of group homes for non-homeless special needs populations is also becoming increasingly difficult.
Availability of services targeted to homeless persons and persons with HIV and mainstream services
Homelessness Prevention Available in the Targeted to Targeted to People Services Community Homeless with HIV Homelessness Prevention Services Counseling/Advocacy X X X Legal Assistance X Mortgage Assistance X Rental Assistance X X X Utilities Assistance X X Street Outreach Services Law Enforcement X Mobile Clinics Other Street Outreach Services X X Supportive Services Alcohol & Drug Abuse X X Child Care X Education X Employment and Employment Training X Healthcare X X HIV/AIDS X X Life Skills X X Mental Health Counseling X X X Transportation X Other
Table 52 - Homeless Prevention Services Summary
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 193 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Describe how the service delivery system including, but not limited to, the services listed above meet the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth)
Within Washington County, there is a focus on connecting homeless persons to the mainstream services, such as health, mental health, and employment services, to the extent those services are used to complement services targeted to homeless persons. This is due to a countywide resource and referral network that includes 211info and the centralized assessment for homeless and at-risk households operated by Community Action. These agencies serve as entry points for homeless persons to access mainstream resources. Households seeking assistance are assessed for participation in mainstream resources, including TANF, SNAP, public health plans, employment and housing services, and referred to programs for which they may be eligible. For health, case managers and agencies routinely look to enroll uninsured clients in the Oregon Health Plan and ensure access through the Affordable Care Act. Agencies such as Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Clinic and Southwest Community Health Center look to fill the void in providing mainstream health care to homeless clients who may have chronic health conditions. For mental health, area agencies like Sequoia Mental Health Services, Luke-Dorf, and LifeWorks NW also work to enroll clients in the Oregon Health Plan and link them with access to a mental health provider who can create an individualized plan to manage their mental health challenges. The mental health providers are actively involved in the Continuum of Care and work closely with homeless services providers to provide access to mental health services. These agencies not only work with these clients to address their supportive service needs associated with their mental health conditions but work diligently to house them in their own properties or through use of Shelter Plus Care vouchers within a Housing First model that will help stabilize them. For access to employment services, agencies such as Luke-Dorf, Community Action and the Washington County Department of Housing Services partner with WorkSystems to ensure clients can begin to receive the training, education, mentoring and coaching they need to gain employment and a road to self-sufficiency. In addition, the Department of Housing services operates the Homeless to Work program, a transitional housing program that is focused specifically on supporting homeless individuals as they regain employment.
Describe the strengths and gaps of the service delivery system for special needs population and persons experiencing homelessness, including, but not limited to, the services listed above
The strengths of the service delivery system for special needs populations and persons experiencing homelessness include the countywide resource and referral network that includes 211info and the centralized assessment for homeless and at-risk households operated by Community Action. The Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) has also been a strength within the service delivery point. For special needs populations, there are several agencies that provides services that are specific to special needs populations including persons with disabilities, ex-offenders, seniors, farmworkers, persons with HIV/AIDS, domestic violence victims, and persons with addictions. A strength is that many of these agencies provide both housing and supportive services for their clients. The gaps in the service delivery system include the fact that many of the supportive services are not targeted to homeless
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 194 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
persons or those with HIV/AIDS. Funding is also erratic and inconsistent in meeting the needs within the service delivery system, especially given the needs in Washington County. There is a gap in permanent supportive housing models in Washington County that adequately integrate targeted supportive services with the permanent housing.
Provide a summary of the strategy for overcoming gaps in the institutional structure and service delivery system for carrying out a strategy to address priority needs
The strategy to overcoming gaps in the institutional structure and service delivery system to address priority needs will continue to be investment in overnight shelters and facilities to provide housing to single men, single women and homeless families with children. Washington County will research and support permanent supportive housing that integrates supportive service models with housing based on best practices. For supportive services, Washington County will continue to support the maximum amount of public services dollars under the CDBG program. Those public services targeting strategies within the Anti-Poverty Strategy and Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness will continue to be prioritizied. The Affordable Housing component of the Anti-Poverty Strategy will work to integrate support CDBG dollars towards infrastructure for affordable housing.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 195 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-45 Goals - 91.415, 91.215(a)(4)
Goals Summary Information
Sort Goal Name Start End Category Geographic Needs Funding Goal Outcome Indicator Order Year Year Area Addressed 1 Homeless 2015 2019 Homeless City of Homelessness ESG: $825,290 Public service activities Supportive Services Beaverton Competitive other than Washington McKinney-Vento Low/Moderate Income County Homeless Housing Benefit: Assistance Act: 1000 Persons Assisted $2,351,137 Tenant-based rental assistance / Rapid Rehousing: 50 Households Assisted
Homeless Person Overnight Shelter: 2800 Persons Assisted
Homelessness Prevention: 150 Persons Assisted
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 196 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Sort Goal Name Start End Category Geographic Needs Funding Goal Outcome Indicator Order Year Year Area Addressed 2 Projects That 2015 2019 Homeless Washington Homelessness CDBG: $1,624,835 Public service activities Implement 10 Year Non-Housing County HUD-VASH: other than Plan Strategies Community $382,493 Low/Moderate Income Development Housing Benefit: 12345 Persons Assisted
Homelessness Prevention: 35940 Persons Assisted 3 New Construction 2015 2019 Affordable City of Rental Housing HOME: Rental units of Affordable Rental Housing Beaverton $3,449,177 constructed: Housing Washington 352 Household Housing County Unit 4 Preservation of 2015 2019 Affordable City of Rental Housing HOME: Rental units Existing Affordable Housing Beaverton $1,659,098 rehabilitated: Rental Housing Washington 152 Household Housing County Unit 5 Assistance to 2015 2019 Affordable Washington Rental Housing CDBG: $300,551 Rental units Affordable Rental Housing County rehabilitated: Properties 275 Household Housing Unit 6 Homebuyer 2015 2019 Affordable City of Owner- HOME: $50,000 Homeowner Housing Programs Housing Beaverton Occupied Added: Washington Housing 10 Household Housing County Unit
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 197 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Sort Goal Name Start End Category Geographic Needs Funding Goal Outcome Indicator Order Year Year Area Addressed 7 Owner-Occupied 2015 2019 Affordable Washington Owner- CDBG: $1,344,284 Homeowner Housing Housing Housing County Occupied Rehabilitated: Rehabilitation/ Housing 1230 Household Assistance Housing Unit 8 Public Facility 2015 2019 Non-Housing Washington Public Facilities CDBG: $750,000 Public Facility or Investment Community County Infrastructure Activities Development other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 25000 Persons Assisted 9 Public Facility 2015 2019 Non-Homeless Washington Public Facilities CDBG: $1,945,000 Public Facility or Investment for Special Needs County Infrastructure Activities Special Needs Pop. Non-Housing other than Community Low/Moderate Income Development Housing Benefit: 25 Persons Assisted 10 Public Facility 2015 2019 Non-Homeless Washington Public Facilities CDBG: $665,000 Public Facility or Investment for Special Needs County Infrastructure Activities Seniors Non-Housing other than Community Low/Moderate Income Development Housing Benefit: 600 Persons Assisted
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 198 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Sort Goal Name Start End Category Geographic Needs Funding Goal Outcome Indicator Order Year Year Area Addressed 11 Public Infrastructure 2015 2019 Non-Housing Washington Public CDBG: $1,500,000 Public Facility or Construction Community County Infrastructure Infrastructure Activities Development other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 4436 Persons Assisted
Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities for Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 50 Households Assisted 12 Public Infrastructure 2015 2019 Non-Housing Washington Public CDBG: $1,660,000 Public Facility or Improvements Community County Infrastructure Infrastructure Activities Development other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 1121 Persons Assisted 13 Supportive Services 2015 2019 Non-Homeless Washington Public Services CDBG: $490,000 Public service activities Special Needs County other than Non-Housing Low/Moderate Income Community Housing Benefit: Development 14453 Persons Assisted 14 Microenterprise 2015 2019 Non-Housing Washington Economic CDBG: $25,000 Businesses assisted: Assistance Community County Development 10 Businesses Assisted Development Table 53 – Goals Summary
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 199 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Goal Descriptions
1 Goal Name Homeless Supportive Services Goal This goal is for the provision of supportive services for homeless persons and families utilizing Emergency Solutions Grant Description (ESG) funding. 2 Goal Name Projects That Implement 10 Year Plan Strategies Goal This goal is to support projects that implement strategies from the Washington County Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness. Description 3 Goal Name New Construction of Affordable Rental Housing Goal This goal is to focus funding on the new construction of affordable rental housing across Washington County. Projects that Description implement a 10-year Plan to End Homelessness strategy using project-based vouchers will be reflected under the respective Rental Housing Goal. 4 Goal Name Preservation of Existing Affordable Rental Housing Goal This goal is to preserve existing affordable rental housing, including acquisition, acquisition and rehabilitation and Description refinancing activities in order to preserve and continue the period of affordability for developments nearing expiration of their respective period of affordability or rental assistance contracts. Projects that implement a 10-year Plan to End Homelessness strategy using project-based vouchers will be reflected under the respective Rental Housing Goal. 5 Goal Name Assistance to Affordable Rental Properties Goal This goal is to provide assistance to affordable rental properties through weatherization, rehabilitation, and accessibility Description improvements.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 200 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
6 Goal Name Homebuyer Programs Goal This goal is to provide support for affordable homeownership opportunities through community land trust and homebuyer Description sweat equity programs. An estimate of only 50,000 in HOME funding has been allocated to this goal for Washington County. 7 Goal Name Owner-Occupied Housing Rehabilitation/ Assistance Goal This goal to provide support for rehabilitation of housing owned and occupied by low-income households including but not Description limited to rehabilitation, weatherization and accessibility improvements. 8 Goal Name Public Facility Investment Goal This goal is to acquire, construct or rehabilitate public facilities benefitting eligible populations. Description 9 Goal Name Public Facility Investment for Special Needs Pop. Goal This goal is to specifically acquire and/or rehabilitate existing public facilities to house persons with special needs. Description 10 Goal Name Public Facility Investment for Seniors Goal This goal is to improve existing public facilities designed to provide services to seniors including elderly and frail elderly Description populations. 11 Goal Name Public Infrastructure Construction Goal This goal is to construct public infrastructure in income-qualified areas to ensure the future health and safety of Description communities. 12 Goal Name Public Infrastructure Improvements Goal This goal is to increase neighborhood pride and viability through improvements to existing public infrastructure. Description
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 201 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
13 Goal Name Supportive Services Goal This goal is to provide a vast array of supportive services designed to assist low-income and vulnerable households Description overcome barriers in an effort to achieve self-sufficiency. Public service projects that implement a strategy in the 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness are reflected under the "Homeless Supportive Services" goal. 14 Goal Name Microenterprise Assistance Goal This goal is to provide microenterprise assistance to eligible microenterprises owned by low-moderate income persons. Description
Estimate the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income families to whom the jurisdiction will provide affordable housing as defined by HOME 91.315(b)(2)
Within the HOME program, Washington County is projecting 316 units of new construction of rental housing and preservation of 152 units of existing rental housing over the five-year period covered in the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan. Of these 468 units, Washington County estimates that all 368 will be comprised of low-income families while 48 will be moderate-income families. With the support of the Project-Based Section 8 vouchers, 52 families residing in these units will extremely low-income families.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 202 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement - 91.415, 91.215(c) Need to Increase the Number of Accessible Units (if Required by a Section 504 Voluntary Compliance Agreement)
The Housing Authority of Washington County is not required by a Section 504 Voluntary Compliance Agreement to Increase the Number of Accessible Units. There are currently 20 fully accessible units as part of the total 243 Public Housing units in Washington County.
Activities to Increase Resident Involvements
Public Housing residents are encouraged to participate in the Resident Advisory Board quarterly meetings as well as participate in surveys to provide feedback and increase resident involvement.
Is the public housing agency designated as troubled under 24 CFR part 902?
No
Plan to remove the ‘troubled’ designation
The public housing agency is not determined to be troubled under 24 CFR Part 902.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 203 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-55 Strategic Plan Barriers to Affordable Housing - 91.415, 91.215(h) Barriers to Affordable Housing
The following barriers adversely affect public policies for affordable housing and residential investment in Washington County. These include Tier 1 and Tier 2 barriers. Tier 1 barriers are barriers that Washington County is unable to address locally, while Tier 2 barriers are barriers that Washington County is able to affect locally. Tier 1 barriers include the following: inadequate federal funding for affordable housing, little incentive to spur homeownership, conservative investment criteria for LIHTC (low income housing tax credit) investors, lack of alternatives to the LIHTC program, the Oregon state law prohibits inclusionary zoning and federal programs that are not in alignment.
Tier 2 barriers include the following: multiple reporting requirements from the multiple funding sources, the lack of system development charges waiver programs, the vulnerability of community development corporations to financial instability, the difficulty of providing service-enriched housing, multiple jurisdictions and multiple development pathways with each jurisidiction having its own planning and permitting process, affordable housing not considered to be high enough of a priority, land costs are high, the limited incentive of density bonuses, and the need for property tax exemption to be expanded as a tool. The County’s strategies to address Tier 2 barriers appear in Chapter 6, Strategic Plan.
Strategy to Remove or Ameliorate the Barriers to Affordable Housing
Washington County will continue to include strategies within the Strategic Plan that prioritize state and local funding sources for affordable housing, advocate for alignment of federal programs, streamline reporting requirements when possible (such as the Streamlining Compliance Initiative), and encourage affordable housing tools amongst its jurisdictions including system development charge waivers and property tax abatement. To address the vulnerability of community development corporations to financial instability and the difficulty of providing service-enriched housing, Washington County intends to continue to fund CHDO operating grants for Tier 1 CHDOs, invest in Tier 1 CHDO predevelopment loans, allow for reasonable developer fees for community development corporations, make CHDO set- aside policies locally that are higher than the HUD requirement and provide CHDO resident services funding under the CDBG program for Tier 1 CHDOs. Washington County facilitates the Coordinated Planning Group in a manner seeking to streamline processes and policies for affordable housing across jurisdictions in Washington County to the extent possible. Washington County is advocating for a flexible land acquisition program under the umbrella of the Community Housing Fund to address the high cost of land. For the limited incentive of density bonuses, this will continue to be an affordable housing tool advocated to the extent it is an incentive. When it is not, it will be important for jurisidictions in Washington County to consider other planning strategies that will facilitate the construction or rehabilitaiton of affordable housing.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 204 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-60 Homelessness Strategy - 91.415, 91.215(d) Describe how the jurisdiction's strategic plan goals contribute to:
Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs
The Consolidated Plan strategic goals align with the 10-Year Plan goals to support outreach to homeless persons and assessing their individual needs by setting strategic goals to: Link people to appropriate services and removing barriers. Improve and expand Homeless Outreach and Engagement. Expand homeless service systems with the Veterans Administration and community-based agencies to increase access and utilization of federal VA resources.
The engagement of unsheltered persons is performed through a collaborative network of homeless outreach staff, a daytime walk-in center providing basic need resources, and community partners that includes severe weather shelters, meal sites, clothing closets, and emergency utility/rent assistance provided by faith-based and nonprofit organizations. Through this engagement, all at-risk and homeless persons are referred to Community Connect, the Coordinated and Centralized Assessment System that serves as Washington County’s single-point entry system that screens individuals for homeless eligibility, assesses their housing and service needs, and refers the homeless individual to programs that can provide client-specific services integrated with housing, linkage to employment and health care resources.
Addressing the emergency and transitional housing needs of homeless persons
The Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness (and, thus, this Consolidated Plan) addresses the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons by setting strategic goals to:
Develop a One Stop Resource Center that provides an efficient and effective system for service linkage and access to emergency shelter beds for homeless persons. Increase availability of Rental Assistance for transitional housing programs serving homeless youth, singles, and families with children. Create an efficient and effective system for Runaway and Homeless Youth to access short-term (emergency) shelter.
The Shelter Network in Washington County is made up of five shelters; three in a system coordinated by Community Action and two others that operate in concert with the system but with procedures that are slightly different due to the special needs populations they serve. The Shelter Network works collaboratively to find other housing options, or if none, shelter opportunities, within the network of shelters so as to prevent households from living on the street.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 205 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
The nonprofit shelter network provides emergency shelter for persons fleeing domestic violence, families with children, and runaway/homeless youth. Emergency Shelter and Transitional Housing provide homeless with safe temporary housing while more permanent housing can be located. The Transitional Housing programs provide temporary housing with linkage to education and employment through a HUD-funded Transitional Living Program serving homeless youth ages 16 to 24 years, and a Homeless To Work program funded by county General Funds. Community Development Block Grant, Emergency Solutions Grant funding, Continuum of Care funding, and Washington County Shelter Levy funding serve as the primary funding sources to help address the operating needs of emergency shelter and transitional housing in Washington County.
Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again.
The Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness (and, thus, this Consolidated Plan) addresses the need to help homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living of homeless persons by setting strategic goals to:
Increase availability of Rental Assistance for permanent supportive housing units to include the Shelter Plus Care Program, Bridges To Housing Program, HUD-VASH (Veteran Affairs Supportive Housing) Program, and implement project-based Section 8 Program serving chronically homeless individuals.
The local goal is to provide “housing first” delivered through permanent housing models to include rapid re-housing and permanent supportive housing. The vision of a single-point entry system to access an array of housing and service programs was outlined in the 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness. The system - Community Connect –seeks to divert people from entering emergency shelter, when possible, and support their rapid re-housing into permanent housing with a lease in the formerly homeless individual’s name. When this is not possible, the shelter and transitional housing programs focus on providing emergency basic needs in addition to case management services that supports the development of a housing plan, and focus on increased economic supports through earned income and access to mainstream resources. The end goal is always permanent housing.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 206 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Help low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families who are likely to become homeless after being discharged from a publicly funded institution or system of care, or who are receiving assistance from public and private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education or youth needs
The Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness (and, thus, this Consolidated Plan) addresses the need to help low-income families avoid becoming homeless by:
Supporting the Ten Year Plan implementation of a Universal Point of Referral for At-Risk Tenancies to remove barriers to accessing resources, thus preventing homelessness and providing a rapid entry system to re-housing for homeless persons. Supporting Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing and One-Month Emergency Rental Assistance programs to prevent homelessness as a result of episodic incidents coupled with underemployment, unemployment or related economic factors. Supporting prevention of homelessness for runaway and unaccompanied youth, including Family Mediation and Reunification Services.
Washington County certifies yearly that there are policies regarding discharge planning to minimize homelessness following discharge from publicly funded institutions. Through the County's application under the Continuum of Care, protocols are outlined that deal with youth exiting foster care, persons leaving the health care system, persons leaving the Oregon State Hospital and inmates being released from correctional facilities. In summary, Oregon's Department of Human Services' Child Welfare Division prepares individual discharge plans for youth leaving the foster care system. The transition plan is carried out through three different Independent Living Programs. The Oregon State Hospital defines the discharge process for clients leaving the hospital through a comprehensive treatment care plan. Discharge assessment and planning for discharge begins upon admission and continues through hospitalization. Washington County's Mental Health and the Oregon State Hospital have entered into an agreement concerning policies and procedures to be followed by the local program and the hospital when a patient is admitted and discharged. The Oregon Department of Corrections prepares a discharge plan for inmates as they near release from incarceration. The Department of Corrections forwards to Washington County's Community Corrections a copy of the individualized Transition Plan. Prison release counselors, Corrections Center residential counselors and probation/parole officers take an active role in developing transitional release plans that may include provisions for, but are not limited to, housing, employment, continuing education, supportive services, conditions and level of supervision. Local hospitals perform discharge in accordance with Standards of Practice governing health care operations. Both non-profit hospitals have internal social service departments that manage the discharge of patients through job descriptions and electronic discharge forms completed by hospital case managers. Hospitals work in partnership with community social service providers to refer homeless to appropriate programs.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 207 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Community Connect is operated by the nonprofit Community Action Organization of Washington County. Community Action is a lead agency in working to prevent and end poverty for all low-income people living in Washington County and to prevent individuals from becoming homeless. This goal will be achieved through greater access to affordable housing and support services offered through Community Connect that create opportunities for individuals and communities to thrive and prosper.
Linkage of the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Homeless Strategies with Ten Year Plan Strategies
In 2007-08, Washington County Department of Housing Services led a community-wide effort to create A Road Home: Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness, July 2008-June 2018 (Ten Year Plan). It is a robust strategy, with partners meeting monthly as the Housing and Supportive Services Network (HSSN) to coordinate its implementation. The plan is organized around the following goals:
Prevent people from becoming homeless (eight strategies) Move people into housing (seven strategies) Link people to appropriate services and remove barriers (ten strategies) Increase income support and economic opportunities (four strategies) Expand data collection (five strategies) Implement public education on homelessness (three strategies)
To avoid duplication, mitigate confusion and support a community process that had substantial momentum behind it, this Consolidated Plan recognizes the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness as the County’s official homeless strategy. The Consolidated Plan helps to implement the Homeless Plan by focusing on how to best deploy resources available through HOME, the Emergency Solutions Grant and Community Development Block Grant funds to implement the Ten Year Plan. Thus, the County has assigned a high priority to applications that help fulfill the strategies in the Ten Year Plan.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 208 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-65 Lead-based Paint Hazards - 91.415, 91.215(i) Actions to address LBP hazards and increase access to housing without LBP hazards
Currently, there are not too many cases of hazards noted in housing in Washington County based on recent data. While there are over 80,000 housing units built before 1980 in Washington County, less than one-third of the housing units have children present. Lead poisoning levels for Washington County are considerably low as well.
Nevertheless, Washington County is being proactive in addressing lead-based paint hazards. The Housing Rehabilitation Coordinator took the three-day training in January 2015 to become a lead inspector and will continue to contract out risk assessments for lead. He is now able to do clearance, mitigation and inspections for the Housing Rehabilitation Program and Home Access and Repair for Disabilities and Elderly Persons programs. In addition, the HOME Investment Partnerships Program rarely sees rental and owner-occupied developments constructed prior to 1978 come in for funding. In the few instances it has occurred, these applicants already have clearance for lead-based paint hazards.
How are the actions listed above related to the extent of lead poisoning and hazards?
The most recent available data on lead testing showed that from 2000 to 2007, there were 104,889 blood lead tests conducted in Oregon. Less than one percent of persons tested in Washington County had blood lead levels consistent with lead poisoning, and four of those six were children under the age of six. Thirty-one people had elevated blood levels. In general, this indicates a very low percentage of residents who tested positively for lead poisoning (approximately 0.7% of those tested). In looking at the results of lead based paint test by age, 818 tests were conducted on children aged 0–5 years. Of that amount, four tests reflected levels at 10 micrograms and over. In general, this indicates a very low percentage of residents who tested positively for lead poisoning (approximately 0.7% of those tested).
How are the actions listed above integrated into housing policies and procedures?
These actions listed above are integrated into the housing policies and procedures for the CDBG and HOME Investment Partnerships Program. While it is rare to fund activities in housing built before 1978 that does not yet have clearance, Washington County will follow the Lead Safe Housing Rule to ensure any lead-based paint hazards are abated, mitigated and cleared when present in housing assisted with federal funds.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 209 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy - 91.415, 91.215(j) Jurisdiction Goals, Programs and Policies for reducing the number of Poverty-Level Families
Washington County’s public service and rental/owner-occupied housing programs are the primary output-oriented vehicles for reducing the number of poverty-level households in Washington County. Associated goals outlined in the Consolidated Plan include provision of supportive services for homeless persons and families (ESG) as well as providing support to projects that implement strategies from the County’s Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness (CDBG). Several policies support these overarching goals. The County allocates the maximum amount allowable to support public services annually to further the anti-poverty efforts of many local area non-profits. Washington County also allocates a percentage of public service funding to support resident services at properties owned by local Tier 1 Community Housing Development Organizations. These services are critical to ensuring that persons have pathways to achieving self-sufficiency while living in affordable housing. Washington County’s support for projects that implement a Ten Year Plan Strategy is carried out by additional points in the application process thereby supporting and leveraging resources to address homeless and at-risk households.
A series of additional strategies focusing on system change (as opposed to outputs) to be addressed during the next five years are outlined in the matrices labeled 6.1 (See Anti-poverty Strategies section). Housing strategies are included in these strategies to show the foundational importance of housing to reducing poverty.
How are the Jurisdiction poverty reducing goals, programs, and policies coordinated with this affordable housing plan
County HOME and CDBG funding supports rental and owner-occupied housing. Associated goals include the construction of new affordable rental units, preserving existing affordable rental housing, and providing weatherization, rehabilitation, and accessibility improvements to affordable rental properties. It is a local policy that HOME funded units are targeted to households at or below 50% MFI which helps to ensure a reduction in cost burden for households in these units. In addition, additional points in the competitive process are awarded to projects that have more units targeted to households at 50% MFI and below. Finally, the Office of Community Development HOME Program coordinates with the Housing Authority of Washington County to encourage use of project based vouchers in HOME funded projects to meet the housing needs of those earning less than 30% MFI.
Washington County also approved a CDBG affordable housing set-aside to support projects (through related infrastructure or other CDBG-eligible activity) to help align the HOME and CDBG programs and more effectively leverage other resources. This will go into effect in the FY 16/17 funding cycle.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 210 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
The County allocates 40% of its balance of funds for projects to support the set-aside and housing rehabilitation and weatherization programs which help people to remain in their already affordable homes.
A series of additional strategies focusing on system change (as opposed to outputs) to be addressed during the next five years are outlined in the matrices labeled 6.1 (See Anti-poverty Strategies section). Housing strategies are included in these strategies to show the foundational importance of housing to reducing poverty.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 211 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 6-5 Anti-Poverty Strategies (Page 1)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 212 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 6-5 Anti-Poverty Strategies (Page 2)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 213 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 6-5 Anti-Poverty Strategies (Page 3)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 214 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 6-5 Anti-Poverty Strategies (Page 4)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 215 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-80 Monitoring - 91.230 Describe the standards and procedures that the jurisdiction will use to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and will use to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements
HOME, CDBG, and ESG recipients will sign binding contracts that enumerate program requirements. OCD will monitor its grant recipients for compliance with specific program requirements, including applicable federal requirements, such as handicapped accessibility, fair housing, lead-based paint, and Davis-Bacon. OCD will monitor in the areas of general management, performance goals, financial management, data collection and reporting, eligibility determinations, nondiscrimination, program outreach, timely reporting, coordination with other programs, and inspection of completed units. Monitoring will consist of both desk and on-site reviews. On-site reviews will consist of periodic site visits which will include an in-depth review of agency, project and client files. Desk monitoring of voucher submittals includes a review of contractual commitments, financial documentation, determination of cost eligibility, drawdown rates, and outcome/performance measurement review.
The overriding goal of monitoring is to ensure regulatory compliance, provide accountability of public funds, prevent/identify deficiencies and design corrective actions to improve or reinforce Sponsor performance. Where possible, any identified deficiencies in need of corrective action should be handled through discussion, negotiation, or technical assistance in a manner that maximizes local discretion. Monitoring also provides opportunities to identify program participant accomplishments as well as successful management, implementation, and evaluation techniques that might be replicated by other Sponsors.
Activities will be reviewed annually when the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) is prepared, and adjustments will be made in future Annual Action Plans in order to make sure activities are being carried out in furtherance of the plan. Staff will use their discretion to implement a method to calculate those projects that may be more vulnerable and require monitoring more often than others. Emergency Solutions Grant projects will be monitored each year. Because it is not always possible that OCD staff will be able to monitor all of a program participant’s activities, projects and/or functions, or even review activities in a specific area spanning a participant’s entire program year, random sampling is generally expected to form the basis for drawing conclusions about the program participant’s performance. All sponsors that expend $750,000 or more in federal funds in a year must meet the audit requirements as specified in 2 CFR Part 200 (formerly OMB Circular A-133). Sponsors must be prepared to explain how transactions were made, why, and be able to account for any funds expended. Audit compliance is reviewed on a yearly basis separate from the project monitoring outlined above. For a detailed summary of the monitoring procedure for the Washington County HOME, CDBG and ESG grant programs, Policy and procedure manuals can be found on the County’s website at: http://www.co.washington.or.us/CommunityDevelopment/policies.cfm
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 216 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Executive Summary
ES-05 Executive Summary - 91.200(c), 91.220(b) 1. Introduction
The purpose of the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan and Action Plan is to outline the intentions of the City of Beaverton (hereinafter referred as the City) of using their annual allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) money that is received from the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to fund programs and projects that will benefit Beaverton residents by addressing the community’s needs. Each year the City uses up to 20% of the CDBG allocation received from HUD for administrative costs. The City sets aside 15% for public service agencies and the remaining money is given to organizations that manage programs that benefit low-to-moderate income Beaverton residents. This includes homeowner activities, economic development, public facility rehabilitation, and infrastructure.
2. Summary of the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan
The City will continue to prioritize programs and opportunities that prevent homelessness, which is in line with Washington County’s 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness. The public service portion of the CDBG grants will continue to go to services that meet this need in Beaverton. Of special interest and consideration is to serve high school age and young adults with opportunities that will alleviate, or prevent homelessness.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 217 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Homeowner activities consists of providing down payment assistance for low income borrowers to buy a home in a neighborhood that would otherwise not be affordable, and to continue offering housing rehabilitation to low-to-moderate-income residents of Beaverton.
The City continues to see a need for the Storefront Improvement Program and plans to use this program in the Allen Boulevard area. However, the City is considering using general funds for this program, not CDBG. Yet if needed within the five (5) years of this Consolidated Plan, CDBG funds will be made available, if general funds are not.
Economic Development by way of technical assistance for low-income microenterprises continue to be an important facet of this Consolidated Plan. Technical assistance includes helping individuals with the business start-up process all the way through identifying ways to improve businesses already established. The Economic Development Technical Assistance is expected to increase the self-sufficiency of Beaverton workers and families by creating new jobs and increased income to low-to-moderate income households.
Rehabilitation of public facilities are considered when it will help to better serve clients, and to develop or improve a variety of public facilities that benefit income-qualifying neighborhoods or income qualified populations. The City will also include funding infrastructure of income-qualified areas to ensure the health and safety of communities, and to increase neighborhood pride and viability, particularly when related to other real-estate development projects.
3. Evaluation of past performance
The following evaluation of past performances are for the 2010-2014 time period (as the City is currently in the fifth year of the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan) and taken directly from each year’s Consolidated Annual Performance & Evaluation Report (CAPER).
Public services, on the whole, remained the same, with the exception of an added program or service in 2010, 2012, and 2013. Each year the goals were met, or exceeded, with the exception of year 2012. Ongoing services included providing shelter for homeless youth, one-time emergency rent assistance, after school activities for children, and families that needed long term shelter which included case management services. Additional programs in 2010, 2012, and 2013 were shelter and case management for domestic violence, case management for new parents, and child advocacy.
Beginning in 2011 the City began funding a homeownership program that increases the number of affordable homes in Beaverton by providing down payment assistance to low income qualified borrowers to purchase a home. These homes remain affordable for the next low-to-moderate income family by utilizing the Community Land Trust model. The program has been a success by adding five new homes.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 218 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
The City performed rehabilitation on homes utilizing three (3) separate programs. Hope-4-Homes, Adapt-A-Home, and Mend-A-Home.
Hope-4-Homes is a loan program that allows low-to-moderate income borrowers the chance to apply for a low interest loan up to $20,000 to complete necessary repairs that will preserve safe, decent, and affordable housing for qualified residents of Beaverton. Although the Hope-4-Home program helped a total of 18 homeowners obtain loans to do repairs on their home, the program did not meet any of its targeted goals during this time period, with the exception of 2011, where it was exactly met, but not over. The results are due to the lack of interest from Beaverton residents to take loans to cover repairs. Adapt-A-Home is a grant up to $5,000 that provides low-to-moderate-income homeowners with physical disabilities the opportunity to retain their independence by performing accessibility modifications to their homes. This includes installing wheelchair ramps, handrails, bathroom grab bars, roll-in showers, raised toilets, and widening doorways. The first two years the program was rather successful and helped more than the target of 12 homes per year. In year three the target was raised from 12 to 15, but still only served 12. In year four the target goal was reduced to the original number 12, but helped even less with a final total of 9. Mend-A-Home is another grant for homeowner rehabilitation (to include mobile homeowners) to assist in critical repairs. This program helps repair structural, plumbing, mechanical or electrical systems showing obvious signs of deterioration. This program has been the most highly used and has exceeded the annual target goals set every year.
The Downtown Storefront Improvement Program saw its biggest success in 2010 by completing nine (9) projects. There were no projects completed in 2011, and no applicants in 2012. One (1) store was assisted in 2013. The City finds it difficult to use contractors who are willing or capable to follow the Davis Bacon regulations that HUD requires for these projects.
Economic Development activities have fluctuated, but the City remains confident that these services are benefiting Beaverton citizens and businesses. Going forward the City will continue to monitor the progress of the technical assistance being provided to micro enterprises.
4. Summary of citizen participation process and consultation process
Highlights of the Citizen Participation Process and consultations include:
• Formation of a ConPlan Work Group comprised of individuals representing diverse interests, including people who have not been involved in this planning process in the past. The Con Plan Work Group advised the Washington County Office of Community Development on the process and content of the plan.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 219 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
• Conducting two sets of community workshops at strategic points in the planning process to meet with key stakeholders (local jurisdictions, agencies, non-profits and other partners) to discuss major trends likely to affect low income residents and their sense of community needs and priorities, and to review sections of the draft plan.
• Conducting focus groups with 35 low-income residents, including residents of color, to obtain their views about the challenges and barriers they face in their day-to-day lives.
• A public screening hosted to highlight the challenges and barriers faced by area residents for the general public through an award-winning documentary focused on the region. This included inviting one of the families featured in the film to relate their experiences living in Washington County, followed by a panel of social service providers who discussed identified needs in the community.
• Coordination of a county-wide community needs survey by the City of Beaverton for Washington County citizens. The City received 786 responses in electronic and paper format combined. This information helped inform the development of the Housing and Community Development strategies.
• Coordination of a county-wide community needs questionnaire from over fifty-five nonprofit agencies, citizens, cities and other applicants with 132 responses in electronic and paper format combined. This information helped inform the development of the Community Development strategies.
• Coordination with a County-sponsored housing preference study with 1,975 completed surveys from residents about preferences and attitudes regarding housing types, renting vs. owning and other trade- offs, commuting, and amenities with regards to housing.
• Solicitation of responses from a community-wide survey with 1,260 completed surveys from residents about how they receive information about housing and community development programs and what areas of interest might get them to attend public meetings and public hearings.
• Presentations by key agencies on relevant plans at ConPlan Work Group meetings. Presentations were made by key agencies such the Washington County Department of Housing Services; Community Action; Washington County Department of Community Corrections; Fair Housing Council of Oregon; Community Alliance of Tenants; Community Partners for Affordable Housing; Enterprise Community Partners; WorkSystems; Washington County Department of Disability, Aging & Veterans Services; Cascade AIDS Project; Boys and Girls Aid Society; Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Clinic; Tri-Met and others. These presentations and the follow-up that ensued formed the core of Washington County’s consultation process.
During the comment period for the draft plan (March 10 - April 9, 2015), two public hearings were held and additional comments were accepted by mail or e-mail.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 220 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
5. Summary of public comments
Four official public comments were received from the period of March 10th – April 9th, 2015 from Ron Thompson, City Councilor for the City of Forest Grove; Bridget Cooke, Executive Director of Adelante Mujeres; Kathy Armstrong, Deputy Director of Proud Ground; and Lynn Boose, Executive Director of Community Services, Inc. Each comment received was addressed in writing by providing clarification of data and/or narrative contained within the plan, adding additional language to the Plan where applicable to better reflect the identified need described in the public comment, and acknowledging the importance of the need identified by those agencies and concerned citizens that provided public comment on the Plan. Copies of comments submitted in writing are contained in the Citizen Participation comments section of this plan, as well as a summary of comments received over the phone and reflected in public hearing meeting minutes.
6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them
All comments or views received were accepted with the exception of one: Public comment received from Bridget Cooke, Executive Director of Adelante Mujeres, advocated for priorities for farmworkers, LEP and GED learners who face barriers in obtaining housing and economic stability. Through the 18 month long process of data collection and analysis, the needs of all low-income populations were recognized and it was decided by the Con Plan Workgroup that prioritizing one population over another becomes difficult as it pits groups against one another. It was explained that the current priority in the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan instead focuses on a system-wide initiative (the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness) as opposed to one specific population over another. Within that system, needs of vulnerable populations as a whole are prioritized, including the special needs groups identified in this public comment by Adelante Mujeres. Copies of response letters to each public comment received are contained in the Citizen Participation comments section of this plan.
7. Summary
Although it is impossible to determine what will happen in the next five (5) years, this 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan gives a detailed outline of the intentions that the City will pursue with its annual allocation of CDBG funds from HUD. The City has considered and utilized the results from many other plans in this Consolidated Plan. Other City plans include the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Plan; the Housing and Residential Land Needs Assessment (20-Year Housing Need); and the 2014 Allen Boulevard Corridor Plan. Washington County plans include the 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness, the 2012 Fair Housing Plan, and the process outlined in the Citizen Participation Plan that we used to solicit feedback
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 221 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
of needed services for Beaverton. To get a complete picture it is recommended that the reader consult the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan for Washington County as well.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 222 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
The Process
PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies - 91.200(b) 1. Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source
The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source.
Agency Role Name Department/Agency
CDBG Administrator Community Development Table 54– Responsible Agencies
Narrative
The City of Beaverton participates in the Washington County Consortium. The City of Beaverton is a participant, with Washington County taking the lead on the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan.
Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information
Cadence Moylan, Community Development Manager Community Development Department City of Beaverton PO Box 4755 Beaverton, OR 97076 503-526-2213 phone 503-526-2550 fax [email protected]
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 223 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
PR-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l) 1. Introduction
The City collaborates with many agencies in Washington County. Specifically outlined in this section are the methods used and which agencies participated in this 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan. A complete list of the agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the consultation process are described in more detail in Table 2 of Washington County’s portion of this Plan in addition to those listed in Table 55 of this section.
Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(I)).
City staff attend many various public meetings to coordinate activities that will benefit Beaverton residents, and the Washington County, throughout the year. In addition to regular meetings, phone calls, trainings and correspondence with these agencies, City staff are involved in the Con Plan Work Group (CPWG) that met once a month with Washington County and local stakeholders between October 2013 and April 2015. The CPWG met in smaller work groups to discuss homeless programs, affordable housing, public facilities, and public services.
Additional outreach activities included the City finding facilitators to hold focus groups with local economic development service providers to get more information from target populations. Beginning in March 2014, Washington County and the City of Beaverton issued a Request for Proposal to a variety of local agencies to conduct focus groups in order to help gather information from residents about their needs, both met and unmet, for housing and services to include public facilities and public infrastructure. The purpose of this assessment was to help prioritize federal resources for housing and community development activities within the 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan.
The City of Beaverton contracted with the Beaverton Hispanic Center for two focus groups and with Adelante Mejures for one focus group. These three focus groups were held in Beaverton and helped determine what types of services were needed.
In addition, City staff regularly attended the Housing & Supportive Services Network (HSSN) meetings to better understand the current activities and needs of the homeless population in Washington County. The HSSN is comprised of public and private representatives of the homeless subpopulations that exist within the CoC geographic region.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 224 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness
Washington County consulted with the HSSN, the Continuum of Care (CoC) body for the area, and participated in the strategic workgroup to support the creation and ongoing operation of Community Connect, the County's Coordinated and Centralized Assessment System (CCAS) for the provision of housing and homeless services in Washington County. These consultations helped to identify the current needs of homeless persons (specifically chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children and veterans) and persons at-risk of homelessness with the Consolidated Plan Work Group. The HSSN as well as Washington County Department of Housing Services staff have served an integral part of the Consolidated Planning process in providing data for the Housing Needs Assessment and Market Analysis, providing information on linking the Consolidated Plan with the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness and in developing the Homelessness Strategy. The work of the Anti-Poverty Work Group has also served in developing the Anti-Poverty Strategy for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan. For unaccompanied youth, Washington County brought in the Boys and Girls Aid Society to present to the Consolidated Plan Work Group on the needs and challenges facing homeless unaccompanied youth in Washington County. For public institutions potentially discharging individuals into homelessness, Washington County brought in the Director of the Washington County Department of Community Corrections to discuss the challenges facing offenders exiting incarceration in dire need of housing and services in Washington County. The Director was also an active member of the Consolidated Plan Work Group and provided substantial data on the needs of ex-offenders in Washington County.
Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS
Washington County annually consults with the Housing and Supportive Services Network (HSSN), the Continuum of Care (CoC) body for the area, and worked with Community Action, the prime recipient of ESG funds in Washington County, to discuss the allocation of Emergency Solutions Grant funding, the development of performance standards and outcome evaluation and the development of funding, and receive feedback on the implementation of policies and procedures for the provision of housing and homeless services in Washington County. Proposed allocations demonstrate a continued emphasis to fund ESG Admin costs, Street Outreach, Shelter Operations, Homelessness Prevention, and Rapid Re- Housing activities. Community Action, reports that many of the clients trying to access services under the ESG Program are those who are living in doubled up living situations, or who are “couch surfing.” Persons who are living in these doubled-up situations or who are couch surfing do not meet HUD’s definition of “Literally homeless,” which means that they are ineligible for ESG assistance under the Rapid Re-Housing component of the program, and eligible for assistance only under the
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 225 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Homelessness Prevention category of funding. While HUD has emphasized that a majority of funds should go to Rapid Re-Housing, to ensure that those who are “literally homeless” are receiving priority and a majority of assistance, the past few years of operating the ESG program have indicated that there is a greater need in Washington County for assistance under the Homelessness Prevention activity.
2. Describe Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdictions consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities
(See Table on following page)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 226 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 55– Agencies, groups, organizations who participated 1 Agency/Group/Organization Washington County Department of Housing Services Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing Other government - County What section of the Plan was addressed Public Housing Needs by Consultation? How was the Agency/Group/Organization The City of Beaverton worked closely with Washington consulted and what are the anticipated County and was a participating member of the outcomes of the consultation or areas for Consolidated Plan Work Group. For more details about improved coordination? the City of Beaverton consultation please see the 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan. 2 Agency/Group/Organization Housing and Supportive Service Network Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-homeless What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Need Assessment by Consultation? Public Housing Needs Homelessness Strategy Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children Homelessness Needs - Veterans Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth How was the Agency/Group/Organization Prior to the February 4, 2015 Housing and Supportive consulted and what are the anticipated Service Network (HSSN) meeting at the City of outcomes of the consultation or areas for Beaverton in the Council Chambers, a rough draft of improved coordination? the 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan was emailed out to people and agencies via the HSSN list serve. It was hoped that early comments would be received at the February 4 HSSN meeting from those who reviewed the plan. No comments were received at that time, but a short presentation provided by Washington County and City of Beaverton staff revealed more information on how to navigate the document. It was announced that the Final Draft of the plan would be available March 10 with the public comment period lasting through April 10, and that there would be a public hearing on April 1 in the Council Chambers to help receive public comments. 3 Agency/Group/Organization HISPANIC METROPOLITAN CHAMBER Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Employment
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 227 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
What section of the Plan was addressed Economic Development by Consultation? How was the Agency/Group/Organization The Hispanic Metropolitan Chamber was consulted on consulted and what are the anticipated November 19, 2014 to discuss what has been working outcomes of the consultation or areas for and what hasn't in regards to Beaverton resident improved coordination? owners of micro-enterprises, and small businesses that would like to do business in Beaverton. The Hispanic Metropolitan Chamber also held focus groups to help provide the City with more information about prioritizing economic development programs, such as coaching and assistance with business plans and budgeting.
Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting
The City of Beaverton is not aware of other agency types that should have been consulted, but were not.
Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan
Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan? Continuum of Care Washington County Higher priorities for services using CDBG have been Department of Housing announced to agencies when they address the 10- Services Year Plan to End Homelessness. Diversity, Equity, and City of Beaverton By focusing on the identified needs of this plan and Inclusion Plan how the CDBG can help the goals outlined in the plan to become a reality. Table 56– Other local / regional / federal planning efforts
Describe cooperation and coordination with other public entities, including the State and any adjacent units of general local government, in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan (91.215(l))
Tri-Met staff participated in the Consolidated Plan Work Group. Please see Washington County's Consolidated Plan for more details.
Narrative
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 228 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
PR-15 Citizen Participation - 91.401, 91.105, 91.200(c) 1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting
The citizen participation process focused on activities and opportunities for stakeholder, beneficiary and public involvement in the planning process. The substantive information that resulted from undertaking these activities appears as workshop summaries and other reports in Volume 2 of this plan. The feedback received from these activities helped form the basis for the Strategic Plan and its associated goals. The following include the efforts made as part of this citizen participation process: Workshop 1: Kickoff Meeting October 16, 2013, Workshop 2A: What’s Working Workshop: Housing November 12, 2013, Workshop 2B: What’s Working Workshop: Community Development November 18, 2013, Stakeholder Survey on Community Development Needs November 2013 – May 2014, Community Survey on Public Engagement on Housing and Community Development Programs February 2014, American Winter Screening February 2014, Community Needs Survey February – July 2014, Housing Preference Survey March – September 2014, Focus Groups with Washington County Residents with Low Incomes April – June 2014, Formal Comment Period on Consolidated Plan March 10, 2015 – April 9, 2015, Public Hearings 1 & 2: Draft Consolidated Plan, Formal Adoption of Plan by Board of County Commissioners May 5, 2015, Monthly Work Group Meetings and Electronic Notices December 2013 – January 2015, Draft Plan Chapters Available Online June 2014 – May 2015 As they became available, draft sections of the Consolidated Plan were posted on the County website. The website contained information about how to submit comments (in addition to those submitted during the formal comment period). The City of Beaverton’s Citizen Participation Outreach effort was conducted along with Washington County and is further described in Table 4 of Washington County’s portion of the Consolidated Plan on page 24 of this document.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 229 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Citizen Participation Outreach – See Table on page 24 for Washington County
Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Summary of Summary of Summary of comments URL (If response/attendance comments received not accepted applicable) and reasons
Table 57– Citizen Participation Outreach
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 230 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Needs Assessment
NA-05 Overview Needs Assessment Overview
Within the Washington County Consortium, the majority of information will be in the Washington County Consolidated Plan. The data Washington County provided is from Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), the American Community Survey (ACS) and in the HUD data through the Public and Indian Housing (PIH) Information Center. Also included is the 2014 Point-in-Time Shelter Count from the Washington County Continuum of Care and additional local determined information as part of the housing needs assessment and market analysis to provide further detail and depth to the needs of Washington County residents for rental and owner-occupied housing.
The most common housing problems has been identified as the challenges faced by renters (especially those with poor credit or high barriers) seeking affordable rental housing due to this limited supply and low vacancy, and the increasing unattainability of owner-occupied housing due to a scarcity of housing programs for first-time homebuyers, strenuous conventional underwriting and skyrocketing sales prices. Those at the lowest income levels face the most significant obstacles in obtaining affordable housing and most cannot afford owner-occupied housing without multiple subsidies, especially in Beaverton where housing prices are higher than other areas in Washington County.
Beaverton does not have a homeless shelter, and requires the homeless to travel to Tigard, Portland, Hillsboro or other nearby areas to obtain shelter services. Students from Beaverton High School brought a project to the City in January 2015 to gain support in an outreach effort to work on getting a local shelter provider here in Beaverton. Of special note is the high homeless student population in Beaverton. Another identified need in Washington County besides the homeless is housing for released offenders. The lack of single occupancy units in Beaverton and Washington County is too low to meet the need of the single residents, which may therefore rent units that would otherwise be available for other low-income families.
For non-housing community development needs, the information on needs is derived from the community itself. Washington County and the City of Beaverton launched an online Needs Assessment Questionnaire in November 2013 to gauge the non-housing community development needs of residents, cities, nonprofit organizations and interested parties on public services, public facilities, public infrastructure and economic opportunity to assess the community development needs that would form the basis for the Community Development Plan and community development strategies within the Strategic Plan.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 231 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs - 91.415, 91.215 (f) Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Facilities:
Keeping in line with Washington County’s 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness, the City of Beaverton is aware that there is currently not a homeless shelter provider in Beaverton. Students from the Beaverton High School came to the City to hold a presentation with City staff and community members outlining their perceived need, identifying current zoning that prohibits the outright construction or management of a homeless shelter, and resources already available in Beaverton. Going forward, the City expects to work more closely with homeless shelter providers to incorporate homeless shelter services within Beaverton.
The top five building spaces or activities identified by 215 responses to a public survey is:
Abused/Neglected Children Center Homeless Shelter Youth Center Health Care Center Mental Health Center
Other comments on community buildings and spaces that were provided were the need for:
Dog Park Low Income Legal Center Community Gardens New Police Building Art Center for all ages, affordable lessons, activities, performance venue
How were these needs determined?
With the intent of increasing citizen participation and input during the 2015 – 2020 Consolidated Plan drafting process, the Consolidated Plan Workgroup authorized staff to conduct a community-wide survey. The goal of this survey was to gather input from community members across Washington County to gain insight on their views regarding the current levels of support for various programs and where they see the greatest need for those programs that are eligible to receive funding from the HUD grant programs that Washington County and the City of Beaverton administer.
The survey was provided in both English and Spanish, and was available to the public from February 2014 and until April 11th, 2014. Municipalities throughout Washington County were able to provide assistance in distributing the survey. The Cities of Banks, Beaverton, Hillsboro, Tigard, in addition to the Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 232 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Beaverton Public Libraries and Washington County Cooperative Library Services, helped with distribution.
Written media was sent to libraries across the county through the Washington County Cooperative Library Services. This included hardcopies of the survey, as well as flyers and signage to post near computers to encourage library patrons to take the survey while they were at the library. Promotional bookmarks and a QR (Quick Response) code was created, for both English and Spanish, to allow people to use their smart phones to take the survey.
Many other agencies were included in this outreach effort, and in January, staff from Washington County and the City of Beaverton attended Project Homeless Connect in Hillsboro in order to hear directly from residents who are most in need. Washington County hosted a screening of the documentary American Winter in February. The film is about families in Portland, Oregon struggling to meet their basic needs during the recent economic crisis. Survey materials were handed out at the screening along with a flyer with the QR.
Articles were published in the Beaverton Resource Guide, Beaverton Valley Times, The Oregonian, and in the City of Beaverton’s Your City Newsletter. City of Beaverton staff in charge of the weekly Neighborhood Association Committee (NAC) email list, and liaisons for all City of Beaverton boards and commissions had also been contacted to help distribute the survey. A utility bill insert promoting the survey was also sent out in 19,000 water bills for the City of Beaverton in February.
Hard copies with drop boxes were placed at both Beaverton Libraries and the Hillsboro Shute Aquatic Center in early April as part of a last push for survey results. As part of that same effort 30+ churches and faith based organizations in Beaverton and Hillsboro were contacted by email and phone, asking for their help in reaching out to community members for their input. There was a boost in responses at this point, although it is hard to say for certain if it was a direct result of this outreach.
597 responses were received. All responses were analyzed as a whole for the County, and then broken down by zip code to provide insight into individual communities. Information in this section is from the results of this extensive outreach effort.
Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Improvements:
The City of Beaverton public improvement needs in order of perceived importance: (1) Sidewalks, (2) Sewer Lines, (3) Water Lines, (4) Bike Paths, (5) Storm Water/Drainage, (6) Street Lighting, and (7) Road Repair or Expansion.
The City of Beaverton public improvement perceived priorities, however, are: (1) Sidewalks, (2) Road Repair or Expansion, (3) and Bike Paths.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 233 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Other comments provided by participants to the Community Needs Survey are:
Since the City of Beaverton has required us to have trees in our parking strips and the trees have now been there long enough that sidewalks are being lifted and in disrepair. Many homeowners cannot afford to repair sidewalks by themselves. The lifted sidewalks are an extreme danger to the people who use them. I myself have tripped on a raised sidewalk and have had to see a doctor because of the fall. The fall happened at dusk - many raised sidewalks are hard to see. I would like to see more benches and covered wind/weather protection shelters built at every bus stop, to provide greater comfort and safety from the elements, when using public transportation. In addition, benches along sidewalks assist the elderly and disabled to be able to rest while exercising outdoors. Sidewalks make safe, stable locations for individuals with unstable legs to ambulate on. However, there are not typically any places for exercising/walking/biking individuals to stop and rest or to use a restroom, while walking along most sidewalks in our county. If we want to encourage fitness activities, as well as, higher use of public transportation, we need to put necessities like benches and restrooms in convenient locales to make these activities more realistic to achieve. Review age of current water and sewer lines, offer assistance to home owners. Dark sky friendly streetlights would be nice. If you want a walkable, bikeable city, you need consistent sidewalks and bike lanes. (Specifically: Scholls Ferry Road, from Hall to Allen.)
How were these needs determined?
The priority identified was from page 25 when participants answered the question: “Mark your top 3 Infrastructure Improvements that you believe are most needed in our community.”
Following that, the comments above were taken from page 25-27 of the Community Survey Report.
From the Washington County Community Needs Survey Report, page 24. The question, “Does your neighborhood need any of these improvements? Give each item a ranking from 1 to 5, 1 being the least needed to 5 being most needed.” 212 responses were counted from Beaverton residents and helped identify the priority of needs for infrastructure.
Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Services:
Prioritizing Washington County’s 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness, the City of Beaverton creates more emphasis on helping agencies that provide homeless services or prevention with CDBG funds. A comment provided by a survey participant stated, “There are some good services in Washington County which focus on underserved populations. I'm convinced that more often than not, people who are
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 234 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
homeless often have untreated mental health issues, such as PTSD, and by finding a way to get these people treatment, we could make a big start in getting them off the street.”
Other public services that were identified as having less support than others that are already provided are Lead Based Paint Screenings and Tenant/Landlord Counseling.
How were these needs determined?
2014 Washington County Community Needs Survey Report, page 17.
Based on the needs analysis above, describe the State's needs in Colonias
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 235 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Housing Market Analysis
MA-05 Overview Housing Market Analysis Overview:
Beaverton is a City of over 92,500 people located in the greater Portland metropolitan area, and has grown by an estimated 16,500 people between 2000 and 2014, or 22%. This growth percentage was slightly less than that experienced by Washington County as a whole (24%), but far exceeded the state growth (15%) over that period (US Census and PSU Population Research Center). Beaverton has tended to trail the countywide growth rate slightly. Beaverton reports an additional 1,300 permitted units since 2010, indicating total growth of roughly 8,300 units since 2000, or growth of 26%. This number of new units is within 5% of the estimated number of new households during the same period, indicating that housing growth was well matched to new need. As of 2014, the city has an estimated housing stock of roughly 40,800 units for its 38,700 estimated households. This translates to an estimated vacancy rate of 5%. The only cohorts to grow in share were over 55 years of age. Nevertheless, 78% of the population still fall under 55 years of age, and a full 20% of the population consists of children under the age of 15. The greatest growth was in the 55 to 64 age range, coinciding with the vanguard of the Baby Boom cohort.
Beaverton is becoming more racially and ethnically diverse over time, in keeping with regional and national trends. In 2000, Beaverton was over 78% white, declining to 73% white by 2010. All other racial groups have grown in representation, but those identify as Asian and Latino have grown by over 26% since 2000. The 2012 American Community Survey estimates 20.5% of Beaverton’s population is foreign-born (45% born in Asia, and 35% born in Latin America).
Beaverton has an estimated 630 subsidized affordable housing units, ranging from single-family homes to large apartment complexes. 185 of the units are owned by the Housing Authority of Washington County, with most of the remainder operated by non-profit housing agencies. Occupied housing units in Beaverton are essentially evenly divided between owner and renter households. In the 2010 Census 49.7% of occupied units were owner occupied, and 50.3% renter occupied, essentially a 50/50 split.
A Point-in-Time count of homeless individuals in Washington County conducted in January of 2014 found 537 homeless individuals in shelters or on the streets, making up 342 households. Roughly 27% of those counted were children under the age of 18.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 236 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
The general trends that Beaverton can expect to see over the next 20 years include:
Plan for more attached forms of housing and greater density. Beaverton has a large foreign-born population at 21%, double the statewide percentage. Immigrants will continue to make up an increasing share of households and the results show a need for over 12,377 new housing units by 2035.
Of the new units, 61% are projected to be ownership, and 39% are projected to be rental units. 47% of the new units are projected to be single family detached homes, while the remainder of units (52%) is projected to be attached housing. Under 1% are projected to be mobile homes.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 237 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets - 91.410, 91.210(f) Introduction
The City of Beaverton has an industrious labor industry and a substantial workforce pool to meet the needs of both employers and employees. However, there is always room for growth and development, even in programs already in place, as times change. This section provides an overview of the numbers from 2007-2011 American Community Survey (ACS) Data, in addition to other census data supplied as attachments. Following these data sections, narrative is provided that was taken directly from city plans, such as the 2011 Economic Development Strategy.
The top four employment sectors in Beaverton, based upon the Business Activity table above, are: (1) Education and Health Care Services, (2) Manufacturing, (3) Retail Trade, and (4) Professional, Scientific, Management Services.
At this time CDBG funds are not expected to be used for infrastructure projects to increase city economies, yet Beaverton has a bustling economy with good jobs and a bright future. We are part of “The Silicon Forest” due to our strong technology base. We also enjoy a diverse economic base consisting of other large employment sectors, including electronic manufacturing, medical instrumentation, software development, food processing and apparel.
Beaverton’s estimated median household income was just less than $58,000 in 2014. This is 1% lower than the Metro area median. There are an estimated 62,300 jobs in Beaverton, and an estimated 51,000 Beaverton residents in the labor force. This represents 1.6 jobs per household and more than one job per working adult. Considering the proximity of other major employers in the immediate area, there seems to be ample employment for Beaverton’s population.
The city partners with WorkSource Oregon, Worksystems Inc., and Oregon Bioscience Association to assist employers and employees with job creation, retention, and education. Internally, the city provides the Workforce Training Assistance Program and uses CDBG funding for micro- enterprise technical assistance. CDBG may partner to implement initiatives in the 2011 Strategic Plan. It would also benefit the city and low-to- moderate income workers by creating and implementing a Section 3 plan within the next five years.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 238 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Economic Development Market Analysis
Business Activity
Business by Sector Number of Number of Jobs Share of Workers Share of Jobs Jobs less workers Workers % % % Agriculture, Mining, Oil & Gas Extraction 217 17 1 0 -1 Arts, Entertainment, Accommodations 3,781 5,510 12 11 -1 Construction 1,286 1,466 4 3 -1 Education and Health Care Services 5,395 6,523 17 13 -4 Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 2,687 4,727 9 10 1 Information 1,309 3,061 4 6 2 Manufacturing 4,083 5,173 13 10 -3 Other Services 1,482 1,708 5 3 -2 Professional, Scientific, Management Services 3,942 5,239 13 11 -2 Public Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Retail Trade 3,956 7,591 13 15 2 Transportation and Warehousing 746 700 2 1 -1 Wholesale Trade 2,428 7,882 8 16 8 Total 31,312 49,597 ------Table 58 - Business Activity Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS (Workers), 2011 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (Jobs)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 239 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Race by Occupation
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 240 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Labor Force
Total Population in the Civilian Labor Force 50,196 Civilian Employed Population 16 years and over 45,816 Unemployment Rate 8.73 Unemployment Rate for Ages 16-24 24.73 Unemployment Rate for Ages 25-65 5.93 Table 59 - Labor Force Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Occupations by Sector Number of People
Management, business and financial 14,070 Farming, fisheries and forestry occupations 1,999 Service 4,838 Sales and office 12,572 Construction, extraction, maintenance and repair 2,682 Production, transportation and material moving 1,597 Table 60 – Occupations by Sector Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Travel Time
Travel Time Number Percentage < 30 Minutes 28,378 66% 30-59 Minutes 12,597 29% 60 or More Minutes 2,118 5% Total 43,093 100% Table 61 - Travel Time Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 241 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Commuter Map
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 242 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Means of Transportation to Work
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 243 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Education:
Educational Attainment by Employment Status (Population 16 and Older)
Educational Attainment In Labor Force Civilian Employed Unemployed Not in Labor Force Less than high school graduate 2,402 418 1,219 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 5,795 560 1,598 Some college or Associate's degree 12,164 1,074 3,081 Bachelor's degree or higher 18,495 972 3,210 Table 62 - Educational Attainment by Employment Status Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 244 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Employment Status Page 1
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 245 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Employment Status Page 2
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 246 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Employment Status Page 3
Educational Attainment by Age
Age 18–24 yrs 25–34 yrs 35–44 yrs 45–65 yrs 65+ yrs Less than 9th grade 141 433 616 635 447 9th to 12th grade, no diploma 1,009 1,015 598 742 585 High school graduate, GED, or alternative 2,619 2,115 2,340 3,498 2,418 Some college, no degree 3,667 3,579 3,144 5,198 1,885 Associate's degree 341 1,208 1,087 2,146 436 Bachelor's degree 698 4,614 4,352 6,067 1,764 Graduate or professional degree 47 2,130 2,025 3,489 1,145 Table 63 - Educational Attainment by Age Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 247 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Education Attainment Page 1
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 248 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Education Attainment Page 2
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 249 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Education Attainment Page 3
Educational Attainment – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months
Educational Attainment Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Less than high school graduate 18,231 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 23,250 Some college or Associate's degree 31,635 Bachelor's degree 49,922 Graduate or professional degree 65,310 Table 64 – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Data Source: 2007-2011 ACS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 250 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Median Earnings in Past 12 Months
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 251 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Education Attainment by Race
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 252 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Earnings by Race Page 1
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 253 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Earnings by Race Page 2
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 254 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Earnings by Race Page 3
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 255 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Earnings by Race Page 4
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 256 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Earnings by Race Page 5
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 257 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Earnings by Race Page 6
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 258 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Based on the Business Activity table above, what are the major employment sectors within your jurisdiction?
The top four employment sectors in Beaverton, based upon the Business Activity table above, are: (1) Education and Health Care Services, (2) Manufacturing, (3) Retail Trade, and (4) Professional, Scientific, Management Services.
Describe the workforce and infrastructure needs of the business community:
At this time CDBG funds are not expected to be used for infrastructure projects. However, in the past, the city has used CDBG funds for the Downtown Storefront Improvement Program that is due to end June 2015. The city expects to use General Funds for Allen Boulevard storefront improvement projects. If needed, the city has set aside CDBG funds as a placeholder in later years of this Consolidated Plan, but the City plans to use General Funds for this area.
Describe any major changes that may have an economic impact, such as planned local or regional public or private sector investments or initiatives that have affected or may affect job and business growth opportunities during the planning period. Describe any needs for workforce development, business support or infrastructure these changes may create.
If CDBG funds are used for the Allen Boulevard area, the Economic Development Department expects that it will help the low-to-moderate- income business owners of this area.
Beaverton has a bustling economy with good jobs and a bright future. We are part of “The Silicon Forest” due to our strong technology base. We also enjoy a diverse economic base consisting of other large employment sectors, including electronic manufacturing, medical instrumentation, software development, food processing and apparel.
Beaverton is collaboratively working to retain and recruit local businesses and add value to our region’s economy. We have established a number of programs to assist our business community. Our Business Assistance Program helps existing businesses grow by providing assistance in business planning, finance, market research, site selection, and other business education opportunities. The Workforce Development program uses a partnership model to provide workforce training. Since its inception the program has leveraged nearly $1 million toward the retention of more than 700 employees and the creation of 500 jobs in Beaverton.
ENTERPRISE ZONE EXPANDS
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 259 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Our new Enterprise Zone helps create jobs. It is a State of Oregon economic development program that allows for 100 percent property tax exemptions for up to five years. In March 2013, the city’s application to expand the zone by 2.93 square miles was approved by the state. The most recent expansion includes all eligible industrial and commercially zoned land within the city limits including a 0.64 square mile area in unincorporated Washington County. Vernier Technology and Vanguard EMS are the first two companies to take advantage of this program, which represents a total investment of $4.7 million.
How do the skills and education of the current workforce correspond to employment opportunities in the jurisdiction?
Beaverton’s estimated median household income was just less than $58,000 in 2014. This is 1% lower than the Metro area median. However, the local median income is roughly 9% lower than the Washington County median of $63,500. Median income has grown an estimated 21% between 2000 and 2014, in real dollars. Inflation was an estimated 38% over this period, so is the case nationwide, the local median income has not kept pace with inflation. However, once adjusted for inflation, wages have remained little changed since 2000, in keeping with the national trend. Beaverton features a healthy jobs-to-households ratio. There are an estimated 62,300 jobs in Beaverton, and an estimated 51,000 Beaverton residents in the labor force. This represents 1.6 jobs per household and more than one job per working adult. Considering the proximity of other major employers in the immediate area, there seems to be ample employment for Beaverton’s population.
The largest single income cohort is those households earning between $50k and $75k, at 19% of households. 46% of households earn less than this, while 35% of households earn $75k or more per year. As one would expect due to wage increases over time, the income distribution has shifted towards higher income cohorts (in non-adjusted dollars), with the largest gains in those households earning above $100,000 per year. 20% of households earn $25k or less, unchanged since 2000. Although the lowest-earning cohorts, those earning $15,000 or less per year, actually grew in share, from 9% to 11% of households.
Regional Workforce Beaverton is located in the heart of Oregon’s “Silicon Forest”, home to many of the world’s top companies such as Nike, IBM and Tektronix, and now an emerging array of Bio Science firms including, Welch Allyn, Micro Power Electronics, Inovise and Blacktoe Medical.
We have access to the most skilled workforce in the US, with an ability to offer product innovation and design, complex manufacturing and quality control all in one area. As an added bonus, Beaverton’s water, power and infrastructure costs are some of the lowest on the West Coast. We are committed to providing a variety of innovative programs and tools for our business community, such as workforce training funding assistance, site selection, competitive intelligence & market research, planning and permitting assistance, partner connections, industry
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 260 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
networking and a nationally recognized business incubator.
Beaverton Workforce Beaverton's labor force is approximately 42,015 workers. Beaverton and Washington County offer a large number of highly knowledgeable, trained and skilled workers.
Over the past several decades, Beaverton has become a very desirable market for employers seeking skilled labor. In 2009, over 92%* of Beaverton residents above 25 years of age had high school diplomas. In addition, 43%* of this population had a college or advanced degree.
Describe any current workforce training initiatives, including those supported by Workforce Investment Boards, community colleges and other organizations. Describe how these efforts will support the jurisdiction's Consolidated Plan.
The city is actively involved in developing or partnering with local programs that assist in workforce development. More than a few are provided in detail here.
WorkSource Oregon has On-the-Job Training (OJT) and is a great way to cut costs and train new employees. WorkSource can reimburse businesses up to 50% of a new hire’s wages for employer provided training. OJT contracts can help local businesses train and retain skilled, productive workers. Companies can also use OJTs to train promising job candidates who don’t have all the skills a position requires, and to fill positions that require unique skill sets. For qualifying positions, an OJT contract provides employers in Multnomah and Washington Counties a cost effective-way to develop talent.
Worksystems Inc. (WSI) – is a 501(c) 3 non-profit organization that pursues and invests resources to improve the quality of the workforce in the City of Portland, Multnomah and Washington Counties. WSI is our region’s workforce board and their goal is to design and coordinate workforce development programs and services delivered through a network of local partners to help people get the skills, training and education they need to go to work or to advance in their careers. Their partners include employers, labor groups, government, community colleges, high schools, community-based and economic development organizations.
Oregon Bioscience Association (Oregon Bio) - Oregon Bio recently received state funding to retrain up to 400 Oregon workers for the Bioscience and advanced manufacturing industries. Additionally, Oregon Bio offers a BioPro Training program which has a goal of raising the knowledge and efficiency of our local and regional bioscience workforce, thereby improving the competitiveness of the industry. Both Oregon Bio member and
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 261 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
non-member companies are eligible to participate in the training. Many classes are four hours in length, enabling employees to work a half day. The training curriculum is based on standardized, industry-accepted curriculum and FDA requirements related to the medical device and pharmaceutical industries. Classes result in an Oregon Bio certification.
The City of Beaverton is committed to assisting its companies with their efforts to grow and expand within the city. Businesses located in or interested in relocating to Beaverton are eligible to apply for the city’s Workforce Training Assistance Program (WTA). Applicants may receive between $500 and $2,500 per new hire, up to a maximum of $20,000 per year to assist with the costs associated with training those new employees (restrictions apply; funding is set annually and is not guaranteed). The purpose of the WTA program is to promote the growth of skilled, family wage jobs in Beaverton and focuses on companies related to key target market sectors, such as electrical equipment, scientific and medical instruments, software and information services, sporting equipment and apparel, and food processing.
Although the city expects to continue using CDBG funds to provide technical assistance to micro-enterprises in Beaverton, the Community Development Department at the city has been attempting to work across divisions to help implement city wide programs for all. This includes better communication and understanding of programs offered at the city, and how CDBG may play a part in those activities.
Does your jurisdiction participate in a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)?
Yes
If so, what economic development initiatives are you undertaking that may be coordinated with the Consolidated Plan? If not, describe other local/regional plans or initiatives that impact economic growth.
The 2011 Strategic Plan focuses on how to get there over the next 1-5 years and beyond by prioritizing strategies that fit the City's competitive advantages without overextending limited financial and staff resources. CDBG may partner to implement the following few initiatives outlined in the Strategic Plan. It would benefit the city and low-to-moderate income workers by creating and implementing a Section 3 plan within the next five years.
Initiative 2: Enhance Business Outreach and Communication. While specific, tailored outreach approaches have been outlined for target industries, it is also important to continually improve overall business communication and connections. As noted in the Target Industries Report, existing businesses account for the vast majority of local jobs by remaining and growing in place. Cities that create a supportive business
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 262 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
environment can help businesses reduce operating costs and actually expedite employment growth. While Beaverton has established a reputation as a successful employment center and a first-rate location to live and work, it has an opportunity to enhance its standing as the "place of choice to do business." It is equally critical to use other means to communicate what services and benefits are available, and how Beaverton businesses can easily access and benefit from them.
Initiative 3: Support Small Business Development. Small businesses are an essential part of any community, and despite their individual size, collectively account for the majority of local employment. While this broad diversity of small businesses adds diversity to the economy and expands choices for local consumers, it can also create challenges for assistance providers. It can take the same amount of time to help a business with one employee as another with 100. Strategic initiatives focus on more systemic improvements with an emphasis on assisting micro- and emerging businesses within targeted areas.
Initiative 7: Team with Workforce Partners to Meet Employer Needs. Workforce training is undergoing fundamental change due to a combination of forces. Statewide, the Oregon Workforce Partnership is advocating for a "true skill development agenda, firmly grounded in the needs of businesses." Recommendations include "targeting critical industries with high growth potential and/or large numbers of replacement jobs" together with better alignment of workforce and education programs. A related priority is to focus workforce investments toward what are termed "middle skill jobs" that require more than a high school diploma, but less than a 4-year degree.
Initiative 8: Provide Resources to Leverage Economic Opportunities. For one firm, the critical need may be for utility and street improvements, for others is might be workforce, gap financing or all of the above. Consequently, the challenge for City staff is to establish working relationships, ascertain what types of incentives will make a difference and then secure appropriate resources. As with funded capital infrastructure investments, the decision of whether and how to apply financial and other incentive tools should be linked to explicitly-stated return on investment (ROt) criteria, as measured by added jobs and payroll and in the net present value (NPV) of added tax revenues.
Discussion
The city continues to work on economic development goals, and CDBG program implementation with these goals and initiatives as outlined above.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 263 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion Are there areas where households with multiple housing problems are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration")
The city has not identified a concentrated area where multiple housing problems are concentrated.
Are there any areas in the jurisdiction where racial or ethnic minorities or low-income families are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration")
The maps provided in this section show the 2010 Census Tract percentage for Asians, Hispanics, and all of the Beaverton population. In addition, two maps show concentrations of households at or below 50% of the area median income (AMI) with another map identifying Census Tracts with a concentration over the county average.
What are the characteristics of the market in these areas/neighborhoods?
The maps provided in this section show property value trending indicators by neighborhood, an average annual change in market value by neighborhood, and homes that entered foreclosure (within a 12 month period) in 2010.
Are there any community assets in these areas/neighborhoods?
The maps show many different kinds of community assets in Beaverton.
Are there other strategic opportunities in any of these areas?
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 264 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
2010 Ethnicity by Tract
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 265 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
2010 Hispanic Population
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 266 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
2010 Asian Population
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 267 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
2010 Poverty by Census Tract
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 268 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
2000-2011 Poverty Change by Census Tract
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 269 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
LMI Block Groups
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 270 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Households At or Below 50% AMI
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 271 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Households At or Below 50% AMI with Tracts Above 20% County Average
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 272 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Strategic Plan
SP-05 Overview Strategic Plan Overview
The heart of the Consolidated Plan consists of the Strategic Plan, which describes how federal funds and other resources will be deployed and what other actions will be taken to address community development and affordable housing needs over the next five years.
The actions describe the steps that a number of different entities (public agencies, non-profit organizations and others) will take to help advance the overall strategy during the next five years. A lead contact is designated for each action. The lead contact has agreed to report to the Office of Community Development annually on the progress made on the action so that updates can be included in the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER). Additionally, the lead contact may choose go one step further by taking the lead on implementing that action alone or in concert with other partners. The City of Beaverton is its own lead in reporting accomplishments to HUD for CDBG funds, but Washington County is the lead for Beaverton in reporting HOME fund activities.
The production targets represent a projection of the estimated output resulting from the expenditure of CDBG, ESG and HOME funds, together with other funds, to advance the strategy. They are derived from considering several things: the targets set in the current Consolidated Plan, the actual outputs reported in the CAPER, and knowledge of proposed projects in the pipeline. They include the numerical benchmarks against which the city and county report progress to HUD and the community each year in the CAPER.
The years that this Strategic Plan outlines is for 2015-2020. The years are as follows:
Year 1: 2015-16
Year 2: 2016-17
Year 3: 2017-18
Year 4: 2018-19
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 273 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Year 5: 2019-20
The strategies were developed through extensive consultation with stakeholders and community partners and through public participation activities.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 274 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-10 Geographic Priorities - 91.415, 91.215(a)(1) Geographic Area
Table 65 - Geographic Priority Areas 1 Area Name: City of Beaverton Area Type: Local Target area Other Target Area Description: HUD Approval Date: % of Low/ Mod: Revital Type: Other Other Revital Description: CDBG Funding Geographic Area Identify the neighborhood boundaries for this target area. Include specific housing and commercial characteristics of this target area. How did your consultation and citizen participation process help you to identify this neighborhood as a target area? Identify the needs in this target area. What are the opportunities for improvement in this target area? Are there barriers to improvement in this target area?
General Allocation Priorities
Describe the basis for allocating investments geographically within the state The city has not designated any particular geographic area as a priority. However, the map provided shows Beaverton City Limits. The services we provide using CDBG funds must benefit low-to-moderate-income persons that reside within the city limits of Beaverton.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 275 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
As you can see from the attached map, sometimes it may be confusing when determining whether or not an applicant is eligible for CDBG funds. It is important that sub-recipients who are awarded CDBG funds double check addresses given to them by clients. In the past sub-recipients would use local mapping tools, but it was found to be insufficient when determining Beaverton city boundaries. Some software programs would state the applicant as residing in Beaverton, thereby the sub-recipient would assume they were eligible to utilize Beaverton CDBG funds, whereas they were really residing in Washington County and ineligible for Beaverton CDBG funds. Sub-recipients have been required to submit addresses to CDBG staff to research addresses using an internal mapping tool to verify eligible applicants that are stated on quarterly reports.
In October of 2014 CDBG staff requested GIS staff to create a searchable address map that would be available to the public to show, and state, whether or not the address was actually within city boundaries. This will eliminate time served researching addresses after a client may have already received services due to using a non-Beaverton GIS mapping tools. This will also save time for sub-recipients and CDBG staff from having to correct quarterly monitoring reports that are submitted to the city for review, and accomplishment reporting to HUD, in addition to saving time for sub-recipient accounting corrections, and on-site monitoring of files to determine eligible applicants by addresses. The mapping tool is expected to be available to the public by June 2015.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 276 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Basic City Boundary Map Overview
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 277 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.415, 91.215(a)(2) Priority Needs
Table 66 – Priority Needs Summary 1 Priority Need Homelessness Name Priority Level High Population Extremely Low Large Families Families with Children Elderly Rural Chronic Homelessness Individuals Families with Children Mentally Ill Chronic Substance Abuse veterans Persons with HIV/AIDS Victims of Domestic Violence Unaccompanied Youth Other Geographic City of Beaverton Areas Affected Associated Projects of 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness Goals Supportive Services
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 278 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Description The City will continue to prioritize programs and opportunities that prevent homelessness, which is in line with Washington County’s 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness. The public service portion of the CDBG grants will continue to go to services that meet this need in Beaverton. Of special interest and consideration is to serve high school age and young adults with opportunities that will alleviate, or prevent homelessness.
Basis for This priority need is to implement strategies addressing the Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness. The populatiosn included Relative in this priority need include extremely low-income households, very low income households, persons with disabilities and Priority persons experiencing or at-risk of homelessness. 2 Priority Need Owner-Occupied Housing Name Priority Level High Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Large Families Families with Children Geographic City of Beaverton Areas Affected Associated Homebuyer Programs Goals Description The City began funding a homeownership program in 2011 that increases the number of affordable homes in Beaverton by providing down payment assistance to low income qualified borrowers to purchase a home. These homes remain affordable for the next low-to-moderate income family by utilizing the Community Land Trust model. Basis for The owner-occupied housing priority need is high due to the large estimated gap of affordable owner-occupied housing in Relative Washington County. Priority
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 279 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
3 Priority Need Owner-Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Name Priority Level High Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Large Families Families with Children Elderly Geographic City of Beaverton Areas Affected Associated Owner-Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Goals Description Housing rehabilitation grants for low-to-moderate income Beaverton residents that own their home. This includes accessability, health and safety modifications, and repair. Basis for In November 2010, housing condition was assessed through a survey. Respondents reported that foundation, exterior, Relative roof, windows and doors were mostly in satisfactory condition. However, there was variation among the type of structure Priority that was surveyed, as single-family and multi-family homes were found to be in better condition than mobile homes. The survey also evaluated the condition of stairs, rails and porches. These particular features are important when considering the safety of building occupants. Safety concerns were greatest in the Central Beaverton area, and the city continues to receive a steady stream of calls asking about this service. 4 Priority Need Micro Enterprise Technical Assistance Name Priority Level High
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 280 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Non-housing Community Development Geographic City of Beaverton Areas Affected Associated Micro Enterprise Technical Assistance Goals Description Technical assistance includes helping individuals with the business start-up process all the way through identifying ways to improve businesses already established. The Economic Development Technical Assistance is expected to increase the self- sufficiency of Beaverton workers and families by creating new jobs and increased income to low-to-moderate income households.
Basis for Through survey and focus groups it has been determined that economic development is a high need activity in Beaverton. Relative Priority 5 Priority Need Public Facility & Infrastructure Name Priority Level Low
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 281 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Middle Large Families Families with Children Elderly Public Housing Residents Rural Chronic Homelessness Individuals Families with Children Mentally Ill Chronic Substance Abuse veterans Persons with HIV/AIDS Victims of Domestic Violence Unaccompanied Youth Elderly Frail Elderly Persons with Mental Disabilities Persons with Physical Disabilities Persons with Developmental Disabilities Persons with Alcohol or Other Addictions Persons with HIV/AIDS and their Families Victims of Domestic Violence Non-housing Community Development Geographic City of Beaverton Areas Affected
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 282 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Associated Public Facility & Investment Goals Public Infrastructure Description Rehabilitation of public facilities and infrastructure projects are considered when it will help to better serve clients, and to develop or improve a variety of public facilities that benefit income-qualifying neighborhoods or income qualified populations. Basis for The City will consider funding infrastructure projects of income-qualified areas to ensure the health and safety of Relative communities, and to increase neighborhood pride and viability, particularly when related to other real-estate Priority development projects.
SP-35 Anticipated Resources - 91.420(b), 91.215(a)(4), 91.220(c)(1,2)
Introduction
The City of Beaverton receives CDBG funds directly from HUD, and other resources expected to leverage CDBG funds will come directly from city general funds. The city is part of the Washington County Consortium. For more details about other anticipated resources, please see the Washington County Strategic Plan SP-35.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 283 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Anticipated Resources
Program Source Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Narrative Description of Funds Annual Program Prior Year Total: Amount Allocation: Income: Resources: $ Available $ $ $ Reminder of ConPlan $ CDBG public - Acquisition CDBG Annual Allocation 2015-16 is federal Admin and $583,652. Estimated annual allocation Planning remains $583,652 for the remaining four Economic years of consolidatedplan. 583,652 x 4 = Development $2,334,608.00 for a totalestimate of Housing $2,918,260 for 2015-2020. Public Improvements Public Services 583,652 0 0 583,652 2,334,608 Table 67 - Anticipated Resources
Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied
The city is not planning to utilize other federal funds to match with CDBG at the time of this writing. However, should federal grants become available that will supplement strategic priorities then they will be considered, and if applicable, applied for to leverage CDBG funds. The only other way that the city determines if other funds are used to leverage our CDBG funds is when sub-recipients apply for city CDBG funds. In the application is a request for a budget that outlines where all other sources of funding comes from that the sub-recipient will use to carry out their program.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 284 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
If appropriate, describe publically owned land or property located within the state that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan
The city purchased the Longhorn Childcare Center in 2004 using the HUD Section 108 Loan, and plans to continue leasing it to Community Action through 2020. The city also purchased property on 1st & Main in 2006 that now sits vacant and may be used for CDBG eligible activities or sold back to the city at the market value (which in 2014 was $170,000) to supplement CDBG funds as program income. The city also has five affordable homes in its inventory that was added by partnering with Proud Ground. These homes will continue to remain affordable for the next homeowner (should the current homeowners choose to sell). The city expects to add two more homes to the inventory by June 2015 for a total of seven affordable homes located in Beaverton under the land trust model.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 285 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure - 91.415, 91.215(k)
Explain the institutional structure through which the jurisdiction will carry out its consolidated plan including private industry, non-profit organizations, and public institutions.
Responsible Entity Responsible Entity Role Geographic Area Served Type Good Neighbor Center Subrecipient Homelessness LIFEWORKS NW Subrecipient Non-homeless special needs public services Boys and Girls Aid Subrecipient Homelessness Community Partners for Subrecipient public services Affordable Housing COMMUNITY ACTION Subrecipient Homelessness ORGANIZATION OF WASHINGTON COUNTY Proud Ground Subrecipient Ownership Rebuilding Together Subrecipient Ownership WILLAMETTE WEST Subrecipient Ownership HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, INC. HISPANIC Subrecipient Economic METROPOLITAN Development CHAMBER Micro Enterprise Subrecipient Economic Services of Oregon Development Table 68 - Institutional Delivery Structure Assess of Strengths and Gaps in the Institutional Delivery System
The strengths in the institutional delivery system are through collaboration, coordination and communication within Washington County. With relationships and advocacy in groups such as the Housing and Supportive Services Network of Washington County (HSSN), Coalition of Housing Advocates (CHA), and the Consolidated Plan Work Group (CPWG), these groups work to ensure there are a continuum of housing and services for low-income households, the homeless, special needs populations, and other needed services in the area, such as microenterprise technical assistance.
The gaps in the institutional delivery system are based on the difficulty of finding units for the hard-to- house populations, and/or enough funding to actively support local resources. In Beaverton, there is not a homeless shelter to provide services for men, women or children. Currently there is activation in the pursuit of changing this, but it is not known if a shelter will be established in Beaverton within the five years of this plan.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 286 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Washington County’s SP-40 states, “There are limited overnight shelter beds for single men and women. There are no respite homes. There is a great need for permanent supportive housing for individuals with severe and persistent mental illness. There is a need for more transitional housing for offenders exiting incarceration and for patients transitioning out of the State Hospital with severe and persistent mental illness. This is particularly true for sex offenders and domestic violence offenders. Of all released offenders, close to half (40%) do not have housing options lined up on their release from the Community Corrections Center. The siting of group homes for non-homeless special needs populations is also becoming increasingly difficult.”
There will always be gaps in any plan, but we have identified the needs of Beaverton, and are working towards improving our internal systems to close these gaps. Going forward the city will continue to partner with other agencies and identify solutions to meet the needs of the community of Beaverton.
Availability of services targeted to homeless persons and persons with HIV and mainstream services
Homelessness Prevention Available in the Targeted to Targeted to People Services Community Homeless with HIV Homelessness Prevention Services Counseling/Advocacy X Legal Assistance X Mortgage Assistance X Rental Assistance X Utilities Assistance X Street Outreach Services Law Enforcement X Mobile Clinics X Other Street Outreach Services X Supportive Services Alcohol & Drug Abuse X Child Care X Education X Employment and Employment Training X Healthcare X HIV/AIDS X Life Skills X Mental Health Counseling X Transportation X Other
Table 69 - Homeless Prevention Services Summary
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 287 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Describe how the service delivery system including, but not limited to, the services listed above meet the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth)
Within Washington County, there is a focus on connecting homeless persons to the mainstream services, such as health, mental health, and employment services, to the extent those services are used to complement services targeted to homeless persons. This is due to a countywide resource and referral network that includes 211info and the centralized assessment for homeless and at-risk households operated by Community Action. These agencies serve as entry points for homeless persons to access mainstream resources. Households seeking assistance are assessed for participation in mainstream resources, including TANF, SNAP, public health plans, employment and housing services, and referred to programs for which they may be eligible.
For health, case managers and agencies routinely look to enroll uninsured clients in the Oregon Health Plan and ensure access through the Affordable Care Act. Agencies such as Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Clinic and Southwest Community Health Center look to fill the void in providing mainstream health care to homeless clients who may have chronic health conditions.
For mental health, area agencies like Sequoia Mental Health Services, Luke-Dorf, and LifeWorks NW also work to enroll clients in the Oregon Health Plan and link them with access to a mental health provider who can create an individualized plan to manage their mental health challenges. The mental health providers are actively involved in the Continuum of Care and work closely with homeless services providers to provide access to mental health services. These agencies not only work with these clients to address their supportive service needs associated with their mental health conditions but work diligently to house them in their own properties or through use of Shelter Plus Care vouchers within a Housing First model that will help stabilize them.
For access to employment services, agencies such as Luke-Dorf, Community Action and the Washington County Department of Housing Services partner with WorkSystems to ensure clients can begin to receive the training, education, mentoring and coaching they need to gain employment and a road to self-sufficiency. In addition, the Department of Housing services operates the Homeless to Work program, a transitional housing program that is focused specifically on supporting homeless individuals as they regain employment.
Describe the strengths and gaps of the service delivery system for special needs population and persons experiencing homelessness, including, but not limited to, the services listed above
The strengths of the service delivery system for special needs populations and persons experiencing homelessness include the countywide resource and referral network that includes 211info and the centralized assessment for homeless and at-risk households operated by Community Action. The Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) has also been a strength within the service delivery Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 288 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
point. For special needs populations, there are several agencies that provides services that are specific to special needs populations including persons with disabilities, ex-offenders, seniors, farmworkers, persons with HIV/AIDS, domestic violence victims, and persons with addictions. A strength is that many of these agencies provide both housing and supportive services for their clients.
The gaps in the service delivery system include the fact that many of the supportive services are not targeted to homeless persons or those with HIV/AIDS. Funding is also erratic and inconsistent in meeting the needs within the service delivery system, especially given the needs in Washington County. There is a gap in permanent supportive housing models in Washington County that adequately integrate targeted supportive services with the permanent housing.
Provide a summary of the strategy for overcoming gaps in the institutional structure and service delivery system for carrying out a strategy to address priority needs
The strategy to overcoming gaps in the institutional structure and service delivery system to address priority needs will continue to be investment in overnight shelters and facilities to provide housing to single men, single women and homeless families with children. Washington County will research and support permanent supportive housing that integrates supportive service models with housing based on best practices. For supportive services, Washington County will continue to support the maximum amount of public services dollars under the CDBG program. Those public services targeting strategies within the Anti-Poverty Strategy and Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness will continue to be prioritized. The Affordable Housing component of the Anti-Poverty Strategy will work to integrate support CDBG dollars towards infrastructure for affordable housing.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 289 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-45 Goals - 91.415, 91.215(a)(4)
Goals Summary Information
Sort Goal Name Start End Category Geographic Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator Order Year Year Area 1 Projects of 10-Year 2015 2020 Homeless City of Homelessness CDBG: Homeless Person Overnight Plan to End Beaverton $300,000 Shelter: Homelessness 190 Persons Assisted
Homelessness Prevention: 500 Persons Assisted 2 Homebuyer 2015 2020 Affordable Housing City of Owner-Occupied CDBG: Direct Financial Assistance to Programs Beaverton Housing $930,000 Homebuyers: 10 Households Assisted 3 Owner-Occupied 2015 2020 Affordable Housing City of Owner-Occupied CDBG: Homeowner Housing Housing Beaverton Housing $175,000 Rehabilitated: Rehabilitation Rehabilitation 160 Household Housing Unit 4 Supportive Services 2015 2020 Non-Homeless City of Homelessness CDBG: Public service activities for Special Needs Beaverton $137,500 Low/Moderate Income Non-Housing Housing Benefit: Community 435 Households Assisted Development 5 Micro Enterprise 2015 2020 Non-Housing City of Micro Enterprise CDBG: Businesses assisted: Technical Assistance Community Beaverton Technical $572,110 275 Businesses Assisted Development Assistance
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 290 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Sort Goal Name Start End Category Geographic Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator Order Year Year Area 6 Public Facility & 2015 2020 Affordable Housing City of Public Facility & CDBG: $0 Other: Investment Public Housing Beaverton Infrastructure 1 Other Homeless Non-Homeless Special Needs Non-Housing Community Development Public Services 7 Public Infrastructure 2015 2020 Non-Housing City of Public Facility & CDBG: $0 Public Facility or Infrastructure Community Beaverton Infrastructure Activities for Low/Moderate Development Income Housing Benefit: 1 Households Assisted Table 70 – Goals Summary
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 291 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Goal Descriptions
1 Goal Name Projects of 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness Goal This goal is to support projects that implement strategies from the Washington County 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness. Description 2 Goal Name Homebuyer Programs Goal The goal is to provide support for affordable homeownership opportunities through the community land trust model. Description 3 Goal Name Owner-Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Goal Goal is to provide support for rehabilitation of housing that is owned and occupied by low-income households (includes Description mobile homes) to include, but not limited to, rehabilitation, weatherization and accessibility improvements. 4 Goal Name Supportive Services Goal This goal is to provide a vast array of supportive services designed to assist low-to-moderate income persons to help Description overcome barriers in an effort to achieve self-sufficiency. 5 Goal Name Micro Enterprise Technical Assistance Goal The goal is to provide technical assistance to low-to-moderate income owners of micro enterprise businesses in an effort to Description increase economic viability in Beaverton. 6 Goal Name Public Facility & Investment Goal The goal is to specifically acquire, construct or rehabilitate public facilities benefiting eligible populations. There are no plans Description at the time of this writing for project, but it is important to have this goal as a placeholder because it is an eligible consideration of the city. If a project is deemed appropriate for the needs of city residents, and it is an eligible activity to utilize CDBG funds, then the city will consider using CDBG funds within the timeframe of this Consolidated Plan.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 292 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
7 Goal Name Public Infrastructure Goal This goal is to construct public infrastructure in income-qualified areas to ensure the future health and safety of communities Description and to increase neighborhood pride and viability through improvements to existing public infrastructure, especially when it benefits a large scale housing projects already being undertaken by the city.
Estimate the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income families to whom the jurisdiction will provide affordable housing as defined by HOME 91.315(b)(2)
Washington County manages city HOME. Stated below is what Washington County expects to do with HOME funds.
Within the HOME program, Washington County is projecting 316 units of new construction of rental housing and preservation of 152 units of existing rental housing over the five-year period covered in the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan. Of these 468 units, Washington County estimates that all 368 will be comprised of low-income families while 48 will be moderate-income families. With the support of the Project-Based Section 8 vouchers, 52 families residing in these units will extremely low-income families.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 293 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-65 Lead-based Paint Hazards - 91.415, 91.215(i) Actions to address LBP hazards and increase access to housing without LBP hazards
In prior years, the city had sub-recipients perform this work. The city expects to continue working with sub-recipients that perform rehabilitation on owner-occupied housing, but may be implementing new procedures that are consistent with Washington County practices. The next two paragraphs were taken directly from the Washington County Strategic Plan SP-65 Lead Based Paint Hazards.
Currently, there are not too many cases of hazards noted in housing in Washington County based on recent data. While there are over 80,000 housing units built before 1980 in Washington County, less than one-third of the housing units have children present. Lead poisoning levels for Washington County are considerably low as well.
Nevertheless, Washington County is being proactive in addressing lead-based paint hazards. The Housing Rehabilitation Coordinator took the three-day training in January 2015 to become a lead inspector and will continue to contract out risk assessments for lead. He is now able to do clearance, mitigation and inspections for the Housing Rehabilitation Program and Home Access and Repair for Disabilities and Elderly Persons programs. In addition, the HOME Investment Partnerships Program rarely sees rental and owner-occupied developments constructed prior to 1978 come in for funding. In the few instances it has occurred, these applicants already have clearance for lead-based paint hazards.
How are the actions listed above integrated into housing policies and procedures?
The city has a policy that was created in the City of Beaverton CDBG Handbook draft in 2014. This handbook will be updated in the fall of 2015, although this section is expected to remain the same. For current purposes the pages have been saved as an allowable JPEG and attached to this section for review in answering this question.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 294 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Lead Based Paint Policy Page 1
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 295 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Lead Based Paint Policy Page 2
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 296 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy - 91.415, 91.215(j) Jurisdiction Goals, Programs and Policies for reducing the number of Poverty-Level Families
The city is in alignment with Washington County goals, programs and policies for reducing the number of poverty-level families. Please see the Washington County Anti-Poverty Strategy.
How are the Jurisdiction poverty reducing goals, programs, and policies coordinated with this affordable housing plan
Please see the Washington County Anti-Poverty Strategy.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 297 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
SP-80 Monitoring - 91.230 Describe the standards and procedures that the jurisdiction will use to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and will use to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements
Just like Washington County, the city also has 4 primary goals associated with its approach to monitoring programs and projects. They are listed in more detail here:
1. Ensure accomplishment of service or production. Assist sub-recipients in any way feasible to help accomplish program goals. 2. Ensure accountability of public funds. The city requires back-up documentation for all invoices submitted for reimbursement. This may include, but is not limited to, client physical addresses (to determine inside Beaverton city limits), receipts, timesheets, scope of work (for environmental review work), and accounting reports. Information is verified prior to approval of payment. 3. Ensure compliance with federal requirements. Review federal regulations for all aspects of program activities to ensure city, and sub-recipients, remain in compliance with rules and regulations as outlined. If unsure, city staff will contact HUD Representative for clarifications. 4. Evaluate project performance during a specific time period. Each quarter sub-recipients are required to submit quarterly reports with specific information that HUD requires for monitoring accomplishments. At this time city staff will also perform #2 to ensure public funds are being spent in accordance with HUD regulations. On-site monitoring reviews will be done when needed on an annual basis to ensure activities of 1-4 are being met.
Desk monitoring of sub-recipients occur with each invoice and/or quarterly report submitted. On-site monitoring is conducted annually, or when needed, using a standard monitoring form which is documented in the sub-recipient file. Sub-recipients are required to correct instances of findings, which may include concerns identified at on-site monitoring, within 30 days. Sub-recipients are required to provide the city with copies of supporting documents that show corrective action taken.
CDBG staff objectives for monitoring are to determine if grantees are: 1) Carrying out their CDBG-funded activities as described in their contracts, 2) Carrying out the program or project in a timely manner, 3) Charging eligible costs to the program or project, 4) Complying with other applicable laws, regulations and terms, 5) Minimizing the opportunity for fraud, waste and mismanagement.
The areas monitored may include, but are not limited to: 1) Overall management system, record keeping and progress in activities, 2) National Objectives, 3) Client file review, 4) Environmental Review, 5) Financial management, 6) Procurement, 7) Efforts to use small, minority- and women-owned businesses, 8) Labor Standards, 9) Section 3, 10) Non-construction contracts between sub-recipients and consultants, 11) Acquisition/relocation compliance with Uniform Relocation Act.
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 298 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Consolidated Plan WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF BEAVERTON 299 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Washington County Office of Community Development 328 West Main Street, Suite 100, MS7 Hillsboro, OR 97123 Phone (503) 846-8814 Fax (503) 846-2882 Internet: http://www.co.washington.or.us/CommunityDevelopment/index.cfm
To help ensure equal access to Washington County Office of Community Development programs, services and activities, we will provide translation, reasonably modify policies or procedures and provide auxiliary aids/services/alternative formats to persons with disabilities. For accommodations, translations, complaints, and additional information, contact 503-846-8814, or for voice to TTY relay dial 711 or 1-800-735-1232. Para traducción en español marque 1-800-735-3896.