National Alliance to End Homelessness

Advocacy Resource | February 20, 2012

Files: PDF | 302 KB | 1 page

Federal investment has made a difference. Due largely to the $1.5 billion federal investment in the form of the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP), homelessness fell slightly between 2009 and 2011. Describe the success and importance of local HPRP initiatives. Use data if possible. Share the average cost of an HPRP intervention.

• If recent data shows an increase in homelessness, discuss the progress that had been made prior to the recession, and how homelessness would have increased even more without HPRP.
• If homelessness has declined or remained flat in recent years, describe the role McKinney- and HPRP-funded programs played in that success.

Need. With HPRP about to expire and the economy still struggling, we have seen more people at risk of homelessness. Discuss local changes in homelessness.

• Discuss the need your community is seeing for increased federal homelessness resources due to the lingering effects of the recession and cuts in state and local budgets. Explain that the expiration of HPRP will leave a gap insufficient to address the need.
• Describe your community’s experience with indicators of homelessness (such as the number of people living doubled up or facing severe housing cost burden). Explain that the high number of people with risk factors may mean increased homelessness on the horizon.

Increased resources are needed just to maintain existing activities. Because Congress provided full funding upfront for many multi-year Continuum of Care contracts when they were first signed several years ago, Congress hasn’t had to provide any new funding in the subsequent years, though money has been spent under those contracts each year. But as these initial contracts expire and their funding runs out, Congress must appropriate new funds in order for HUD to maintain the existing level of spending and ensure that these programs continue serving people experiencing homelessness.

• Although the House’s FY 2013 funding bill would provide an increase in the overall appropriation level, it is approximately $100 million short of the level needed to maintain the existing level of assistance to people experiencing homelessness, resulting in more than 25,000 additional people being homeless instead of housed. Mention any multi-year Continuum of Care contracts your community has that expire at the end of FY 2012.

These Programs Work. HUD’s McKinney-Vento programs have a long history of strong, bipartisan support because they are repeatedly proven effective at preventing and ending homelessness for families, veterans, individuals, youth, and children. Explain the success of a local McKinney-funded program. Share program outcomes and the impact it has had on homelessness in your community.

• Permanent Supportive Housing. Discuss the role of McKinney-funded permanent supportive housing (PSH) in reducing chronic homelessness in your community. Explain the cost-effectiveness of PSH.
• Rapid Re-Housing and Prevention. The HEARTH Act builds on communities’ experience through HPRP with the low-cost, efficient models of rapid re-housing and homelessness prevention by funding these models through the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG). Describe how your community’s experience with HPRP, including how you used it to retool your homeless assistance system to maximize effectiveness and efficiency, and how the improved system will help you maximize the effectiveness of the new ESG program.

I hope you will work with your colleagues on the Appropriations Committee to provide the Administration’s requested funding level of at least $2.231 billion for HUD’s McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Grants in the final FY 2013 appropriations bill.

Click here to return to the FY 2013 McKinney-Vento Campaign.