CC – Item 4D – Staff Report – Selection of Consultant for Community Development Block Grant and Home Program Services „ E,
/O jl
v.,- st of
eport
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
FROM: FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGEI17447
DATE: JUNE 18, 1998
RE: SELECTION OF CONSULTANT FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT AND HOME PROGRAM SERVICES
As requested by the City Council at the regular meeting of June 9, 1998, staff met with
representatives from United States Escrow (U.S.E) to discuss the CDBG program cost analysis
prepared by staff. U.S.E. agreed to study the analysis and send a written response to the City with
their own estimate of the program cost. Earlier today, Gary Parsons from U.S.E called for
clarification of some aspects of the cost analysis and said that he would fax his response on Monday,
June 22nd. Staff will deliver the written response from U.S.E. to the City Council when it is
received.
Though is possible that U.S.E may seek to reduce some of the cost estimates stated in the original
cost estimate, staff recommends that the City Council select Willdan Associates as the City's
consultant for CDBG and HOME program services for two reasons. First, Willdan has proven itself
to be a responsive and competent contractor with respect to the City of Rosemead's CDBG and
HOME programs since the inception of the program; and, second, Willdan's fees for the
administration of the program are substantially less than the 20%threshold established by HUD for
such costs. Willdan's fees for administering the program will typically range from 12% to 13% of
the total cost of the program. Any cost savings, if any, that might be realized by awarding the
contract to U.S.E. at this time would be outweighed by the risks of awarding the contract to a firm
that does not have demonstrated experience running a full "turn key” CDBG program.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council select Willdan Associates as the City's consultant for
CDBG and HOME services and authorize the City Manager to execute all agreements.
COUNCIL AGENDA
«mcmozcreE,dre JUN 231998
ITEM No. Z de-AO ,
CDBG Administration
June 3, 1998
Page 2.
As indicated by staff at the May 26 City Council meeting, Willdan's proposal is based on actual
history in the City, whereas USE's proposal is a generic"warehouse" approach that underestimates
the actual time spent on the programs. In an effort to compare the programs equally, staff used
USE's quoted hourly and piece rates and plugged those numbers into the actual time, thus creating
an approximated annual cost to the City. For example, under "Administration," number 14, USE
does not include a line item cost for the preparation of environmental analyses. The City completes
approximately fifty each year. Willdan's proposal includes that part of the program in the total
quoted for "Administration." USE, however, stated that it would charge the City $300.00 per
environmental analyses. Accordingly, USE's annual services would cost$15,000 more than their
proposal states due to that single component of the program. The Council should note that there are
several similar instances that became apparent when completing the full cost breakdown, thus
accounting for the significant increase in the projected total of USE's proposal.
Please note that in the original staff report, staff estimated that USE's estimated fee to perform
services in Rosemead would run approximately$208,075 annually, based on general categories and
rates. However, upon a more detailed analysis of individual categories and using actual projected
time and costs for required for the program, USE's fees exceed that amount substantially. The
adjusted proposal price is approximately $317,165 for all programs. Willdan's cost remains
unchanged at $222,145 for the first year. For the second and third years of the proposals, staff
estimates the costs to be as follows:
FY 1999/2000 Admin. Res. Rehab. Comm. Rehab. Housing_Code Comp.
USE $129,435 $101,878 $52,982 $32,640
Willdan $129,115 $37,710 $37,440 $26,900
FY 2000/2001 Admin. Res. Rehab. Comm. Rehab. Housing Code Como.
USE $133,836 $126,440 $54,780 $33,840
Willdan $129,115 $37,710 $17,382 $26,900
Attached is a the chart reflecting the cost breakdown discussed above and a copy of the original staff
report presented to the Council on May 26.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council select Willdan Associates as the City's consultant for
CDBG and HOME program services and authorize the City Manager to execute all agreements.
ccmemo.cdbgadmfyd
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ONE YEAR COST ESTIMATE COMPARISON FOR CDBG ADMINISTRATION
... ..__ r ,14443 ,., , , ;�,. � ,ia• .
Prepare the City's 150 hours $10,035 $1,250
annual Grantee
Performance Report on-site possibly on-
or fulfill CAPERS site
requirement 150 hrs.
17 hrs. at
$75.00 per hr.
Hrs billed at
$75.00 per hr.
133 additional
hrs would be
$9,975.00 for a
total cost of
$11,225
2. Prepare the City's 200 hours $18,740 $3,400
Annual CDBG and
HOME funding plan, on-site part on-site
including project and part off-
descriptions and cost site
summaries.
200 hrs. 45 hrs. at
$75.00 per hr.
Hrs billed at
$75.00 per hr.
155 additional
hrs would be
$11,625 for a
total cost of
$15,025
3. Prepare public notices 40 hours $12,250 $3,420
for and conduct two
annual public hearings on-site notices off-
on the use of CDBG site, hearings
and HOME funds. on-site
40 hrs. 46 hrs. at
$75.00 per hr.
4. Work with Finance to 100 hours $7,400 $5,700
prepare the quarterly (working with
Cash Transactions Integrated on-site on-site
Report and maintain Disbursement
the IDIS reporting and 100 hrs. 76 hrs. at
requirements. Information $75.00 per hr.
System)
Hrs billed at
$75.00 per hr.
24 additional
hrs would be
$1,800 for a
total cost of
$7,500
�� y8 A e g uaw
S Work with Finance in 108 hours $7,790 $5,700
preparation of
drawdown on-site part on-site
requisitions for each and part off-
project and maintain site
projects and database
in IDIS. 108 hrs 76 hrs. at
$75.00 per hr.
32 additional
hrs would be
$2,400 for a
total cost of
$8,100
6. Prepare all 100 hours $8,130 $3,825
performance reports:
annual, bi-annual for on-site off-site
each project(includes
Contractor Activity
Report, Semi-Annual 100 hrs. 51 hrs. at
Labor Standards $75.00 per hr
Report, Minority
Banking Report, Hrs billed at
Section 3 Reports, $75.00 per hr.
etc.) 49 additional
hrs would be
$3,675 for a
total cost of
$7,500
‘,ENW:tbsk.vr""MMALIM. 47-4
9
7. Coordinate with HUD 142 hours $20,105 $3,400
staff regarding CDBG
and HOME Program on-site part on-site
monitoring. and part off-
site
142 hrs. 45 hrs. at
$75.00 per hr.
Hrs billed at
$75.00 per hr.
97 additional
hrs would be
$7,275 for a
total cost of
$10,675
>3. Coordinate with 113 hours $8,130 $4,500
Finance in preparation
of the City's annual on-site on-site
budget and annual
audit, in the areas of 113 hrs. 60 hrs. at
CDBG and HOME. $75.00 per hr
Hrs billed at
$75.00 per hr.
53 additional
hrs would be
$3,975 for a
total cost of
$8,475
vK t ° yti i+
ttia 1413k; 1..4.A';1171
'11rjI .V : m1
\t • ,`k..l�� •
P. Prepare all agreements 100 hours $7,725 $2,740
with City
subrecipients, collect on-site off-site
required information
and obtain signature, 100 hrs 37 hrs. at
set up files and $75.00 per hr.
maintain information,
including progress Firs billed at
reports $75.00 per hr.
63 additional
hrs would be
$4,725.00 for a
total cost of
$7,465
1Q. Monitor all 202 hours $14,560 $4,275
subrecipients,
including informal on-site on-site and
visit, annual site off-site
visits,preparation of
monitoring checklists, 202 hrs 57 hrs. At
letters, follow-up $75.00 per hr.
letters, on-site
technical assistance firs billed at
and closure letters $75.00 per hr.
145 additional
hrs would be
$10,875
" Hyl».. 91
1L Prepare all RFP's for 133 hours $9,550 $1,870
subrecipients,
including Fair on-site off-site
Housing Services,
includes notices, 133 hrs. 25 hrs. at
RFPs,posting mailing $75.00 per hr.
applications,
answering questions, Hrs billed at
receiving RFPs, $75.00 per hr.
ranking, analyzing, 108 additional
following up on hrs would be
missing information, $8,100 for a
preparing total cost of
recommendations $9,970
12. Answer questions 62 hours included, not included
from the public, provided on-
agencies, others site Additional
regarding programs charge of 62
and other City 62 hrs hrs. at$75.00
services per hr. is
$4,650
1I. Work with City on 40 hours included, not included
program changes, provided on-
generally one program site
per year
40 hrs Additional
charge of 40
hrs. at $75.00
per hr. is
$3,000
14, Prepare 100 hours included, not included
Environmental provided on-
Analyses, site Additional
approximately 50 per charge of
yr. $15,000 at
100 hrs $300 per
analysis and
50 analyses
3-00.4. .\� .:,,, ���T."Sf wtd..at Etta*"
15 Meet with 37 hours included, not included
representatives of provided on-
various agencies,host site
annual fair housing
seminar, arrange for Additional
space for meetings, charge of 37
meet with public hrs. at$75.00
per hr. is
$2,775
ORIGINAL 1,627 hours $124,145 $37,790
TOTALS
-
REVISED TOTALS 1427 hours $124145 $125 665
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ONE YEAR COST ESTIMATE COMPARISON FOR RESIDENTIAL
REHABILITATION
'fie ' c , i \3t i .¢ 8 ro" J0 iy ° aY
�iiyF.v'A:A,,,2-&&A,A.. y,+ .'T
Perform application Per case= 1 $50 $125
intake and approval based
on federal income avg. 30= 30 $1,500 $3,750
guidelines and program
eligibility requirements. on-site off-site
3, Order title reports avg order 70 included $35 per report
reports per yr
$2,450 per yr
off-site
3. Conduct initial property Per case=4 $250 $750
inspection for code
violations and avg. 30 = 120 $7,500 $22,500
rehabilitation work
necessary to bring the on-site on-site
property into
conformance with the
City's adopted
rehabilitation standards.
4, Prepare and submit Per case = 1 $50 $55
historical clearance
documentation. avg. 30=30 $1,500 $1,650
on-site off-site
5. Prepare and obtain proper Per case= .5 $26 $75
environmental clearances.
avg. 30 = 15 $780 $2,250
on-site off-site
� x... 4
--.,•5,4t>c‘-..,;:za,
�, Prepare work description Per case=2 $112 $150
and obtain homeowner
approval. avg. 30 = 60 $3,360 $4,500
on-site off-site
7, Prepare plans, Per case = 1.5 $70 $250
specifications and
contract documents for avg. 30=45 $2,100 $7,500
bidding purposes
on-site off-site
Set up contractor walk- Per case= 1 $50 $150
through and be present
during walk-through to avg. 30 = 30 $1,500 $4,500
ensure homeowner's
questions are answered. on-site on-site
9. Receive and review bids, Per case = I $52 $125
including checking
license of contractor and avg. 30 =30 $1,560 $3,750
ensuring s/he is not
federally debarred. on-site off-site
10. Take information to Per case= 1 $60 $75
Council for approval in
accordance with City's avg. 30=30 $1,800 $2,250
Rehabilitation
Guidelines. on-site
11. Prepare Owner Per case= 1.5 $70 $65
Participation Agreements,
Contractor Agreements avg. 30=45 $2,100 $1,950
and obtain proper
signatures on-site on and off-site
heyif`,f5;...1'',:A.:::. / jj` Lt . try :ro '4--
/ l Wr�! J
13. Prepare loan documents Per case= 1 $52 $75
and financial statements.
avg. = 30 $1,560 $2,250
on-site Minimum prep. fee
of$155 per case.
30 cases would be
$4,650
off-site
13. Prepare and execute Per case= 1.5 $70 $75
promissory note, deed of
trust,and all required avg. 30=45 $2,100 $2,250
loan documents for
processing if a loan. Minimum
Prepare covenants, processing fee of
execute and record if a $800 per case. 30
grant. cases would be
$24,000
on-site on and off-site
14Conduct progress Per case= 3 (3 $132 $200 per inspection.
inspections to ensure inspections) 3 inspections per
work is proceeding in a case = $600
timely manner and
according to plans and/or avg. 30 = 90 $3,960 30 cases = $18,000
schedule of completion.
1$. Authorize progress Per case = .5 $40 $45
payments
avg. 30= 15 $120 $1,350
on and off-site
16, Conduct final inspections, Per case = 1.5 $70 $300
prepare Notice of
Completion, acquire avg. 30=45 $2,100 $9,000
homeowner signatures for
work completed to on-site on-site
homeowner satisfaction
and in accordance with
contract specifications.
17. Execute contract Per case= I $50 $150
completion by acquiring
lien releases from avg. 30= 30 $1,500 $4,500
contractor(building
permits, etc.) and close Additional charge of
out cases by ensuring $675 per loan for
permanent file contains closing. Assuming
all documentation five loans=$3,375
required for government
audit purposes. off-site
ESTIMATED TOTAL
ORIGINAL COST :
PER CASE 23 $1,204 $2,665
PER AVC CASES 690 $36,120 $79,950
ESTIMATE TOTAL
REVISED COST:
PER CASE 23 $1,204 $3,180; $6,245 per
loan
PER AVO,CASES 690 $36,120 $107,660 (26 grants
and rebates,4 loans)
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ONE YEAR COST ESTIMATE COMPARISON FOR COMMERCIAL
REHABILITATION
\\ ev )111:‘
Yr rw.e, fair:// . wx,„1' a ' `,v4,,.
Conduct initial meeting Per case= 3 $204 $125
with applicant. Review
application and approve avg 6 cases = 18 $1,224 $756
program participation
on-site on-site
2. Review proposed Per case = 8 $564 $75
improvements at property
location to qualify eligible avg 6 cases=48 $3,384 $450
improvements.
Mrs billed at$75.00 per
hour. 7 additional hrs
would be$525 for a total
cost of$600 per case
on-site off-site
Title Reports included $35 per report
6 reports= $210
3. Inspect property for code Per case =4 $282 $200
violations and to ensure
conformance with City's avg 6 cases=24 $1,692 $1200
adopted codes.
on-site on-site
Q Prepare work write-up Per case=9 $636 $750
and/or itemized cost
estimate. Review work avg 6 cases = 54 $3,816 $4,500
write-ups and/or cost
estimates of architects. on-site off-site
.>,,.. • • Vi . ." ',C:LC Ve''
5. Prepare loan documents Per case=2 $160 $150
and/or approve estimated
rebate. avg 6 cases= 12 $960 $900
Initial fee of$800 per
loan
on-site off-site
& Approve proposed work Per case=2 $160 $55
by Planning and Building
& Safety Depts. avg 6 cases= 12 $960 $330
Additional hrs billed at
$75 per hr.
on-site on-site
7. Conduct bid process Per case= 12 $816 $125
procedures, review bids,
select contractor,and avg 6 cases = 72 $4,896 $750
award bid.
Additional hrs billed at
$75 per hr. 10 additional
hrs per case would be
$750 for a total charge of
$875 per case
on-site on and off-site
8. Conduct pre-construction Per case=6.5 $444 $150
meeting with contractor,
property owner and avg 6 cases= 39 $2,664 $900
commercial rehabilitation
staff. Additional hrs billed at
$75 per hr. 4.5 additional
hrs would be $337.5 for a
total cost of$487.50 per
case
on-site on-site
• cia
9. Conduct progress Per case=35 $2,397 $200 per inspection, avg
inspections and approve of 10 inspection= $2,000
work done in conjunction avg 6 cases= per case
with approved schedule. 210
$14,382 $12,000
on-site on-site
IO. Davis-Bacon labor Per case= 18 included $2,750 per project (mm)
compliance monitoring
avg 6 cases= 6 projects= $16,500
108
10. Conduct final inspection, Per case= 5 $337 $300
obtain all lien releases
from contractor, approve avg 6 cases=30 $2,022 $1,800
final payments and/or
approve rebate, file Notice Loan final processing fee
of Completion. of$675 for closing cost
of$975 per loan
on-site off-site
ESTIMATED TOTAL
ORIGINAL COST:
PER CASE 104.5 $6,000 $2,130
PER AVO CASES 627 $36,000 $12,780
ESTIMATED TOTAL
REVISED COST:
PER CASE 104.5 $6,000 $8,327.50 rebate;
$9,802.50 loan
PER AVG CASES
627 $36,000 $41,637.50 rebate;
$51,440 loan
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ONE YEAR COST ESTIMATE FOR HOUSING CODE COMPLIANCE
Using City's complaint Per case= 1 $79 $75
form, document source of
complaint regarding avg cases=20 $1,580 $1,500
substandard housing hrs
conditions. on-site on-site
2. Conduct initial site Per case=5 $297 $150
inspection from public
right of way, within 15 avg cases = 100 $5,940 $3,000
days of receipt of request. hrs
If necessary,obtain
permission to enter on-site on-site
premises from person in
control of premises. Note
and photograph
substandard conditions.
Prepare plot plan of
property as required.
3. If permission to enter is Per case= I $79 $75
required, but denied,refer
case to City Attorney to avg cases= 20 $1,580 $1,500
obtain a search warrant. hrs
Refer life/safety hazardous on-site on-site
conditions to Building
Official, if required, for
possible summary
abatement.
Q Review building permit Per case= 2 $116 $150
job file, zoning files and
assessors records to avg cases=40 $2,320 $3,000
determine permit status of hrs
the property and owner of on-site on-site
record.
S. Send Notice of Violation Per case= 1 $52 $125
signed by Building
Official via certified mail avg cases=20 $1,040 $2,500
within five(5) days of the hrs
inspection along with on-site off-site
information on, and an
application for, City's
Housing Rehabilitation
program, if applicable.
6. Reinspect property fifteen Per case = 1 $79 $150
(15) days after notice to
see if substandard avg cases =20 $1,580 $3,000
conditions have been hrs
corrected. Close and on-site on-site
document case if
conditions are corrected.
7. If conditions are not Per case = 1 $52 $125
corrected, but progress has
been made, arrange single avg cases =20 $1,040 $2,500
extension of time and hrs
schedule reinspection. on-site off-site
8. If voluntary compliance Per case = 1 $52 $200+$35 for
efforts fail, order a title cost of title
search. Issue a Notice and avg cases=20 $1,040 report
Order by the Building hrs
Inspector within five (5) $4,000 +$700
days of the second
inspection and notify all on-site off-site
interested parties. Post
Notice and Order on
property. Maintain and
update mailing list on
receipt of certified receipt
or returned letters.
�' E 3
es
mar
t ,
9. During the thirty (30) day Per case = 1 $52 $45
posting period, make every
effort to contact the owner avg cases= 20 $1,040 $900
personally or by telephone hrs
to obtain compliance. on-site on and off-site
10. If all efforts for Per case= 1 $79 $125
compliance fail, schedule
case for an Administrative avg cases =20 $1,580 $2,500
Hearing. Prepare and send hrs
Notice of Hearing via on-site off-site
certified mail to the vested
owner and allow receipt at
least ten(10) days prior to
hearing. Post notice for at
least ten(10) days prior to
hearing.
11. Conduct hearing before Per case= 2 $149 $140
the Building Official.
Building Official will avg cases =40 $2,980 $2,800
issue a decision regarding hrs
the existence of on-site on and off-site
substandard conditions,
and issue a citation with
deadline for abatement if
substandard conditions
exist. Deadline for
abatement shall not exceed
sixty (60)days.
12. If owner is instead found Per case = 1 $52 $45
in compliance, close and
document caseavg cases= 20 $1,040 $900
hrs
on-site off-site
q5 l
&" I tl' 9'. Y /fit
13. If owner is not found in Per case= 1 $52 $45
compliance, notify owner
of the time and place of avg case hrs= $1,040 $900
the hearing before the 20
Rehabilitation Appeals on-site off-site
Board(City Council)
which shall be held within
thirty(30)days.
14. If Board does not find Per case = 1 $52 $45
substandard conditions at
the rehearing, close and avg cases=20 $1,040 $900
document case. hrs
on-site on-site
15. If Board confirms Per case= 1 $52 $90
substandard conditions,
and citation stands, avg cases=20 $1,040 $1,800
transmit citation to the hrs
District Attorney for on-site on and off-site
prosecution. Give notice
to the State Franchise Tax
Board that the rental
housing unit has been
determined to be
"substandard."
TOTAL ESTIMATED
COST:
PER CASE 21 $1,294 $1,620
PER AVG CASES 420 $25,880 $32,400
TOTAL REVISED COST COMPARISONS FOR FY 1998-1999
ADMIN. RES. REHAB. COM. REHAB. CODE
WILLDAN: $124,145 $36,120 $36,000 $25,880
USE: $125,665 $107,660 $51,440 $32,400
E M e
�u:,n Kstaffs
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
FROM: FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAG,ELZ.F.
DATE: MAY 19, 1998
RE: SELECTION OF CONSULTANT FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) AND HOME PROGRAM SERVICES
As required by guidelines of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the City
of Rosemead issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for CDBG and HOME program services. In
response,the City received proposals from USE Community Services and from Willdan Associates.
As indicated in the REP, the responses were evaluated by using the following criteria:
• Thoroughness in response to RFP 20%
• Technical approach/scope of work 20%
• Experience of proposed personnel 20%
• Firm's overall experience 10%
• Cost 30%
Staff has attached a summary evaluation of each proposal. What follows is a discussion of each
proposal in relationship to the evaluation criteria:
Thou
orhness
Both proposals appeared to be thorough in their responses.
COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 2 61998
�
ITEM No.-11--- cI
K J
Selection of Consultant- CDBG
May 19, 1998
Page 2.
Technical Approach
USE COMMUNITY SERVICES
USE Community Services lists eleven individuals in the initial proposal with primary responsibility
for program services. It was unclear in the proposal, however, how these individuals would be
employed in the City of Rosemead since one is located in Florida, another is Western Regional
Manager and another is the South West Regional Manager. A]] personnel listed appeared to be
management personnel. In a subsequent questionnaire, USE clarified that seven individuals would
act as the project team. Six of these individuals appeared in the original proposal. There was one
new name not mentioned in the proposal.
In the initial proposal,it was unclear where services would be located. It appeared that most services
would be offered through USE's corporate offices in Downey. In the follow up questionnaire, USE
clarified that some services would be offered onsite, while others would be managed from USE's
corporate offices. It appears that the seven individuals who comprise the proposed project team are
management positions and that the majority of daily work will be done by 45 employees of USE
located in corporate offices, with site visits to the City as needed. USE proposes that project
management will be on-site an average of two days per week. The president of USE is proposed as
one member of the project team. It is unclear how the president of a corporation with four national
offices will be on-site at the City of Rosemead two days per week providing administrative services
in CDBG and HOME. A follow-up conversation with USE resulted in a statement that the firm
would provide two (2) full-time positions to be placed in City Hall. It is not clear who the firm
would choose to fill the positions.
USE proposes that Commercial and Residential Rehabilitation will be handled by seven different
individuals with oversight for different portions of the program. Of those seven individuals, only
two program administration positions are proposed to be on-site at the City. One of the proposed
members of the Commercial and Residential Rehabilitation team is not mentioned in either the
original proposal nor detailed as one of the revised project team in the follow up questionnaire.
WILLDAN ASSOCIATES
Willdan listed seven individuals in the initial proposal with primary responsibility for program
services. In the follow up questionnaire, Willdan listed the same seven individuals for program
operation and administration. hi the follow up questionnaire, Willdan states that all services would
be offered on-site. Willdan also states that project management will be on-site two days per week.
Willdan proposes that three individuals will be primarily responsible for Commercial and Residential
Rehabilitation, including labor compliance. Willdan proposes that the two principal staff members
Selection of Consultant- CDBG
May 19, 1998
Page 3.
will be on-site at the City from 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday and that all
commercial and residential services will be available at City Hall. Housing Code Compliance staff
are also proposed to be on-site and/or in the field during regular City Hall hours.
Experience of Overall Personnel
USE COMMUNITY SERVICES
Overall, staff at USE appears to be competent, but staff overall appear to lack experience in several
aspects of CDBG and HOME administrative and program services. The fine's references show that
they are currently providing consulting services for residential rehabilitation and construction
management. They appear to have experience in loan underwriting, loan servicing, loan packaging,
document preparation and title searches. They do not appear to have experience in CDBG and
HOME administration, housing code compliance, Community 2020 requirements. USE did not
demonstrate experience in the preparation of Consolidated and Annual Funding Plans and were
unresponsive in the follow up questionnaire. USE appears to have some experience in HOME cash
management on the federal government's computerized Integrated Disbursement and Information
System (IDIS), but does not show any experience working with the system for CDBG. It is unclear
from USE's response whether or not they have done project set-up and funding with the system and
whether they have used draw down procedures for any cities.
WILLDAN
Willdan Associates has provided CDBG administration to 28 cities. In addition,they have provided
residential rehabilitation services in 34 cities and commercial rehabilitation and economic
development services to 21 cities. Willdan's proposed project team has prior experience in CDBG,
HOME administration and in residential and commercial rehabilitation. The proposed Willdan
project team has used IDIS in all phases (set-up, funding, drawdown), has prepared three
Consolidated Plans and four Annual Funding Plans. They have used Community 2020, including
mapping in submitting most recent Annual Funding Plan.
Cost
There appears to be a substantial difference in price between the two firms. The amount shown for
administrative services is for a full year. In estimating the cost of utilizing each finn for the
residential, commercial and code compliance portions of the programs, staff used the average
number of rehabilitation and enforcement cases expected to be completed in the upcoming fiscal
year. The following is a summary of proposed costs:
Selection of Consultant- CDBG
May 19, 1998
Page 4.
FY 1998-1999
USE WILLDAN
CDBG/HOME Administration $37,790 $124,145
Residential Rehabilitation (30 cases) $79,950 $36,120
Commercial Rehabilitation (6 cases) $12,780 $36,000
Housing Code Compliance(20 cases) $31,700 $25,880
TOTAL $162,220 $222,145
FY 1999-2000
CDBG/HOME Administration $38,911 $129,115
Residential Rehabilitation (30 cases) $82,260 $37,710
Commercial Rehabilitation (6 cases) $13,152 $37.440
Housing Code Compliance (20 cases) $32,640 $26,900
TOTAL $166,963 $231,165
FY 2000-2001
CDBG/HOME Administration $40,269 $129,115
Residential Rehabilitation (30 cases) $83,730 $37,710
Commercial Rehabilitation (6 cases) $13,608 $17,382
Housing Code Compliance (20 cases) $33,840 $26,900
TOTAL $171,447 $211,107
PROPOSED COST OVER THREE YEARS $500,630 $664,417
Initial analysis of costs makes it appear that there is a 25% overall difference between the two
proposals for the three year period. Because of the large discrepancy in amounts allocated for
administrative services, a follow up questionnaire was prepared for each respondent.
USE COMMUNITY SERVICES
In the follow-up questionnaire, USE states that Environmental Analyses, which are an allowable
administrative cost, were not included in the overall price. USE states that it will charge $300.00
per Environmental Analysis. The City currently conducts approximately 50 Environmental Analyses
per year. This would add approximately $15,000 to the overall cost of administrative services per
year.
Selection of Consultant- CDBG
May 19, 1998
Page 5.
While standard rewrites are included as part of the overall project costs, major rewrites arc not. The
City averages 1 -2 major rewrites per year. USE bills major rewrites at $75.00 per hour. Assuming
40 hours per major rewrite,this would add approximately$3,000 to the overall cost of administrative
services per year.
Davis-Bacon monitoring was also not included as part of the overall project cost. USE charges a
cost of$2,750 minimum or 3/4 of 1%of the total project cost for larger projects. The City currently
handles approximately four Davis-Bacon compliance projects per year. This would add an
additional $11,000 per year to project costs. As part of labor compliance monitoring,USE proposes
one inspection per month. Additional inspections are billed at $200.00 each and additional work at
$65.00 per hour. The City currently does two inspections per month,plus additional site inspections
1 time per week.
Regarding rehabilitation and economic development projects,USE charges $800 per loan for initial
work and $675 for final loan processing. Assuming five loans per year, this adds $7,375 per year
to the cost of residential rehabilitation (not including additional inspection charges at $65.00 per
hour). USE charges a loan processing fee of$750 to $1,450 per loan for economic development
loans. Assuming one loan per year, this adds $750 - $1,450 to the annual cost for commercial
rehabilitation and economic development.
For residential and commercial programs,USE charges document preparations fee of$155.00. At
approximately 36 cases per year, this could add as much as $5,580 per year to the cost of the
program. USE also charges $35.00 per title report ordered,plus the pass-through cost of the report.
The City currently orders approximately 70 title reports per year. This could add as much as $2,450
to the total cost of service for one year. In addition, USE charges administrative services at $75.00
per hour. The City currently uses approximately 1,000 hours per year of administrative services, or
19 hours per week. USE is proposing 2 days per week(assuming 16 hours)at$75.00 per hour. This
would cost $62,400 per year, not the $37,990 presented in the proposal. It also represents a net
reduction of approximately 168 hours of service per year. If USE adheres to the $37,990 at $75.00
per hour, it represents 506 hours or a reduction of 494 hours of administrative service per year.
WILLDAN
In its supplemental questionnaire, Willdan states that its proposal is inclusive and there are no
additional charges for services. Willdan proposes to have staff on site for a minimum of 108 hours
per week, or a total of 5,616 hours per year for the proposal price.
CONCLUSION--COST
USE's total supplemental charges add approximately $45,855.00 per year to the proposal price
(excluding any additional inspection and services charges). For FY 1998-1999,this would result in
Selection of Consultant- CDBG
May 19, 1998
Page 6.
an adjusted proposal price of$208,075. The USE proposal represents a substantial reduction in the
amount of service hours available to the public. There is a difference of approximately 6%between
the adjusted USE proposal and the Willdan proposal.
The number of hours on which Willdan has based its proposal is approximately the same as what
it currently takes to operate the program. Assuming it will continue to take 108 hours per week to
operate existing programs, staff has concluded that USE either would not have a sufficient time
commitment to operate programs in the City of Rosemead, or that it would have to charge
supplemental charges at $75.00 per hour for additional services.
Summary
USE proposes to perform the majority of program functions from its offices in the city of Downey.
In addition, USE lacks experience in CDBG and HOME administration and in Housing Code
Compliance operations. USE has little experience in working with federal systems, such as IDIS and
Community 2020. It is difficult with the USE proposal to calculate the overall cost of the program
andior the effectiveness of its approach. The USE proposal would charge supplemental fees for
basic service and additional charges for any work not outside of basic administration and
rehabilitation.
The Willdan proposal is comprehensive and contains no additional charges. It provides the most
hours of client service and proposes to conduct operations within the City of Rosemead. Willdan
has demonstrated experience in the subject areas. The firm has worked with Rosemead in the past
and is familiar with City programs and operations.
Staff recommends that Council select Willdan Associates as the City's contractor for CDBG and
HOME program services. Attached is the copy of the proposals from both firms, the supplemental
questionnaires and the scoring summary prepared by staff.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council select Willdan Associates as the City's consultant for CDBG
and HOME program services and authorize the City Manager to execute all agreements.
ccmemo cdbFadm.fgt
CDBG AND HOME PROGRAM SERVICES
SCORING SHEET
USE Wil'dan
Thoroughness 20% 20%
Technical Approach 10% 20%
Experience of Personnel 5% 20%
Firm's Overall Experience 5% 10%
Cost 30% 20%
Total 70% 90%
•
•
•
11:7 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES ❑ ENGI\EERS & PLANNERS
Professional Consulting Services Since 1964
May 8, 1998
Mr. Jeffrey L. Stewart
Director of Administrative Services
City of Rosemead
8838 East Valley Boulevard
Rosemead, CA 91770
Subject: Supplemental Questionnaire
Selection Process for Housing and
Community Development Consultant
Dear Jeff:
Please find attached our responses to the subject questionnaire. If you need any
additiorial information, please contact me at (562) 908-6209.
Respectfully submitted,
WILLDAN ASSOCIATES
a.JL.wf V. W M
Albert V. Warot
Manager of Planning
and Community Development Services
Enclosure
AVWswk'.Im
956108\6690\p&113
»nnn r`oncconanc RAPVmmV Clll IT-I• CI IITF 9M• INfll ICTRV CGI IF(1RNIA o174n3499•(SR21 90R-F200•FAX 15521 59S-2120
1. Please outline your experience in the administration and planning of projects in the
following areas. Please be specific,
a. HOME Administration
b. HOME funded projects
c. CDBG Administration
d. Housing Code Compliance
Willdan Associates has extensive experience in providing community development
services to agencies across California. Our experience has provided our staff with
considerable expertise in CDBG and HOME Program management and in implementing
many types of CDBG funded activities in communities with unique and different needs. As
indicated in our previously submitted proposal, we have provided the specific services
requested by the City of Rosemead to over 50 cities and 3 counties in California over the
past 10 years. The cities to which Wlldan is currently providing such services include:
Agoura Hills, Bell Gardens, La Puente, Oroville, Paramount, San Gabriel, San Joaquin,
Santa Monica, South Lake Tahoe, Susanville and Waterford.
Most importantly, Willdan is currently administering all aspects of CDBG and HOME
Programs for the City of Rosemead.
2. Who makes up the actual project team? Who will be the project manager?
The following project team is comprised of highly qualified individuals Willdan
believes will bring maximum efficiency and effectiveness to the delivery of the
services being requested by the City.
Al Warot— Project Director
Lisa Baker— Project Manager
Damien Delany— CDBG/HOME Specialist
Steve Bailey — Residential Inspection Specialist
Michael Neal — Property Rehabilitation Specialist
Dean Sharer— Environmental Review Specialist
Junior Vita — Labor Compliance Officer
3. How many hours will the project manager be on-site at the City?
Ms. Lisa Baker will serve as project manager for this assignment. Ms. Baker will be
present at City Hall for approximately 12 hours per week. Ms. Baker will also attend
all necessary meetings including any City Council meetings.
4. Who will prepare Environmental Analyses for projects? Was this an included item
in your proposal? If not, what would be the cost of completing these?
Page 1
Mr. Dean Sherer will be preparing all necessary environmental clearances for the
City's projects. Mr. Sherer will coordinate with all other governmental agencies in
providing environmental clearance for CDBG and HOME funded projects. The cost
for this service was included in Willdan's proposal.
5. Please list your prior experience in preparing Environmental Analyses for other
communities. Please state the project, the community and the staff member
involved. Would these staff members be involved in Environmental Analyses for the
City of Rosemead?
Mr. Dean Sherer has extensive experience in preparing and processing
environmental documents pursuant to CEQA, NEPA and HUD's implementing
guidelines for NEPA. During the past year, Mr. Sherer has prepared all
environmental clearances for CDBG and HOME funded projects in the Cities of
Rosemead and Paramount. Also during this past year, Mr. Sherer completed
environmental clearances for major street and highway improvements for Lancaster,
Westlake Village and Thousand Oaks,a major park project in Westlake Village and
extensive sewer improvements in La Canada-Flintridge.
6. If guidelines or procedures must be changed, updated, etc., is this included in the
prices given, or is this an additional hourly charge? If additional charge, what is the
hourly rate?
The cost for preparing and processing possible amendments or revisions to
program guidelines and procedures was included in the fees quoted in our proposal.
7. Who will prepare City Council agendas and attachments? Who will present them
to the City Council and answer questions? Is this included in your proposal, or is
there an additional hourly charge? If there is an additional hourly charge, what is
the hourly rate?
Vvilidan Associates expects to prepare all necessary staff reports. Ms. Lisa Baker
will coordinate with the appropriate City staff member to have the agenda item
completed and ready for review by the City Council. Ms. Baker will be available at
City Council meetings to answer any pertinent questions as needed. The cost for
this service was included in Willdan's proposal.
8. Who will be the staff for the Commercial and Residential Rehabilitation Programs?
Will they be on-site or located at your office?
Mr. Damien Delany will be the administrator of the City's residential and commercial
property improvement programs.
Page 2
Mr. Micheal Neal will assist with the administration of the City's residential and
commercial property improvement programs.
Mr. Junior Vita will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act
(commercial projects) and other federal labor standards as applicable.
Wlldan's staffing plan provides coverage by up to two persons from 7:00 a.m. —
5:00 p.m. on days City Hall is open.
9. Who will be the Housing Code Compliance staff? Will they be on-site or located at
your offices?
Mr. Steve Bailey will coordinate and direct the residential inspections for code
enforcement cases, and supervise the completion of the tasks identified under
Housing Code Compliance. All services will be provided on-site at City Hall.
10. Regarding questions 7 & 8 above, if they will be located at your offices, how often
will they be located in the City?
This question is not applicable since Willdan staff will perform all required duties at
Rosemead City Hall.
11. Are there additional charges for being on-site?
Willdan does not have additional charges for being on-site.
12. How many Consolidated Plans has your organization prepared? Please list the
Consolidated Plan and the community for which it was prepared, along with the staff
members responsible for completing them. Please state if this staff will be involved
in Plan preparation for the City of Rosemead.
Willdan has prepared a total of three (3) Consolidated Plans for the Cities of
Rosemead, Fountain Valley and Paramount. Ms. Lisa Baker and Mr. Damien
Delany jointly prepared all three plans. Both persons are included in Wildan's
staffing plan for the City of Rosemead.
13. How many Annual Funding Plans has your organization prepared? Please list the
Annual Funding Plans and the communities for which they were prepared, along
with the staff members responsible for their completion. Please state if this staff will
be involved in Plan preparation for the City of Rosemead.
Willdan Associates has prepared a total of five (5) Annual Funding Plans for the
Cities of Rancho Cucamonga, Paramount and Rosemead. The Willdan staff
Page 3
•
members who will prepare Rosemead's Annual Funding Plan are Ms. Lisa Baker
and Mr. Damien Delany, who are the same individuals that prepared the above
mentioned Plans.
14. What is your experience with IDIS? Please list all training and work you have done
directly on IDIS, along with the City/Community and the person who did the IDIS
work. Please state if this staff will be involved in IDIS for the City of Rosemead.
Mr. Delany has extensive experience with the IDIS system. Mr. Delany attended
a week long training in Washington D.C. and has attended every HUD training
session since then. Mr. Delany has set-up the IDIS system for Rosemead,
Paramount, Corona and Rancho Cucamonga. He has provided technical
assistance in IDIS for Ventura County, San Bernardino County, and the Cities of
Hemet, Oxnard, Rancho Cucamonga and Riverside. Mr. Delany is currently
working with Ms. Baker in the City of Rosemead and will continue to attend IDIS
training to keep abreast of potential changes.
15. What is your experience with Community 2020? Please list all training and work
you have done with 2020 and the staff member who was involved. Please state if
this staff will be involved in 2020 for the City of Rosemead.
Ms. Baker, Mr. Delany and Mr. Neal (who are included in the team to be assigned
to the City) have attended the training sessions regarding this new HUD software.
Page 4
•
�h CaN
U. S. E. COMMUNITY SERVICES
CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
8121 E.FLORENCE AVENUE • DOWNEY CALIFORNIA 90240 • (562)927-6686/FAX(562)927-3578
May 05, 1998
Mr. Jeffrey Stewart
Director of Administrative Services
8838 East Valley Blvd.
Rosemead, CA 91770
RE: Response to your Letter Dated April 28th
Dear Mr. Stewart,
The following are the responses to the questions presented in your letter dated April 28th:
1. Please Outline your experience in administration, planning, projects in the
following areas. Please be specific:
a. HOME Administration
b. HOME-funded projects
c. CDBG Administration
d. Housing Code Compliance
Answer: HOME Administration - Have worked with various public - quasi-
public/private agencies over the past 12 years in the development of
projects, planning and administration of those programs and projects
funded through HOME. Those projects include the development of
housing programs to enhance the housing quality and affordability of
residential and multi-family housing within the various states, county and
local regions in California and Texas. Many of the programs designed
have included:
1. Homebuyer Assistance Programs
2. Homeownership Loan Programs
3. Housing Rehabilitation Loan Programs
4. Emergency Repair Grant/Loan Programs
5. Multi-Family Housing Programs
6. Inspections Code Compliance Programs
With the HOME program funds, have provided administrative support to
public agencies in providing strategies in the preservation and/or
revitalization of various State, County, and local low and moderate income
neighborhood by: helping to expand the supply of safe, sanitary and
affordable housing; developing programs and projects that will improve
the infrastructure; designing programs that will provide financial
inducement for economic development activities; maintaining, suggesting,
or developing community activities as needed ; providing supportive
services to reinforce the vitality of targeted residential areas; and providing
administrative support in designing and developing programs that
encourages the development and capacity building of community housing
development organizations (CHDO's) to create and manage affordable
housing. The list below provides several organizations Bernard Johnson,
Staff Consultant,participated in establishing:
1. Ocean Beach Community Development Corporation (OBCDC),
San Diego, CA.
2. HOPE CDC, San Diego, CA.
3. Community Housing Services (CHS), Pasadena, CA.
4. Greater Urban League, San Diego, CA.
Coupled with other federal grant sources, have worked with various
agencies to seek and obtain funding from the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) for primary and secondary funding
sources for other programs funded through the Department's programs
such as:
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) - designed ,
developed, and administered programs to receive funding for localities to
improve the physical, social, and economic conditions of their low and
moderate-income communities.
The Emergency Shelter Grants (ESO) - designed, developed, and
administered programs to receive funding for supportive services for
homeless individuals and operating assistance for shelters for the
homeless.
The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) - designed,
developed, and administered programs to receive funding for programs for
housing for low income persons affected by HIV/AIDS and their families.
The Economic Development Initiative Grant (EDI) - designed, developed,
and administered programs which used in combination with the Section
108 Loan Guarantee Programs to bring economic revitalization efforts to
City and County government organizations designated Enhanced
•
Enhanced Enterprise Communities. Many of these areas of the Cities and
Counties are areas in the central locations that have a high concentration of
poverty, unemployment, and neighborhood stagnation. Many of these
programs were developed as part of many of the City and County
government Strategic Plans for the creation of expanded business, such as:
1. Micro-Enterprise Loan Programs
2. Small Business Revolving Loan Programs
3. Special Development Loan Program
4. Home Improvement Loan Program
5. Multi-Family Loan Program
6. Acquisition and Construction Program
2. Who makes up the actual project team? Who will be the project manager?
Answer: The project team will be made up of the following individuals:
Gary Parsons- Contract Administrator
.Bernard Johnson- Project Manager
.Dari Appelroth- Project Support/Client Services
Jerry Cannon - Loan and Grant Underwriting
. Michael Tones-Construction Management
,Richard Bucklew- Construction Specialist
Brenda Gordon - Asset Management/ Low Income Housing
Compliance
Mr. Parsons and Mr. Johnson will have the overall project
responsibility.
3. How many hours will the project manager be on-site at the City?
Answer: It is our current believe that either Mr. Johnson or Mr. Parsons will
be at the City on an average of 2 days per week. FIowever, we
would make available the necessary personnel and staff time to
meet the City's needs.
4. Who will prepare Environmental Analyses for projects? Was this an included
item in your proposal? If not, what would be the cost for completing these?
Answer: It is currently planned that Mr. Bernard Johnson, will handle the
preparation of the Environmental Analyses. No. This was not
included in the service fee quoted. The additional cost per
Environmental completed will be $300.00.
5. Please list your prior experience in preparing Environmental Analyses for other
communities. Please state the project, the community and the staff member
involved. Would these staff members be involved in Environmental Analyses for
the City of Rosemead?
Answer: Mr. Johnson has prepared Environmental Anaylses for the City's
of Houston and San Diego.
6. If guidelines or procedures must be changed, updated, etc., it this included in the
prices given, or is this an additional hourly charge? If additional charge, what is
the hourly rate?
Answer: Yes, for normal updates. However, if major rewrites are required ,
an hourly rate of$75.00 would be requested with a prior estimate
of hours involved, and with the City's approval.
7. Who will prepare Council agendas and attachments? Who will present them to
the City Council and answer questions? Is this included in your proposal, or is
there an additional hourly charge? If there is an additional hourly charge, what is
the hourly rate?
Answer: Mr. Parsons and Mr. Johnson will handle all Council Document
preparation and meetings. These services are included within the
fees we have already quoted. No additional cost are requested.
8. Who will be the staff for the Commercial and Residential Rehabilitation
programs? Will they be on-site, or located at your office?
Answer: Commercial and Residential Rehabilitation Loan Program will be
handled both at the City offices and U.S.E. office. The following
represents the location and people involved:
a. Staff person: Bernard Johnson and Gary Parsons. Program
Design and Approval. Location, City and U.S.E.
b. Staff person: Bernard Johnson and Gary Parsons. City
Commercial Program Approval Location: City
c. Staff person: Gary Parsons, Jari Appelroth, and Bernard
Johnson. Program Literature Guidelines and Document
Preparation. Location: U.S.E.
d. Staff person. Jan Appelroth. Marketing. Location: U.S.E.
and City.
e. Staff person. Gary Parsons, Jan Appelroth and Joyce
Collier. Application intake. Location: City
f. Staff person: Jan Appelroth and Joyce Collier. Loan/Grant
Processing and Underwriting, Document Preparation.
Location: U.S.E.
g. Staff person: Mike Tones and Richard Bucklew.
Construction Management/Borrower. Location: U.S.E.
h. Staff person: Brenda Gordon. Loan Servicing and
Compliance. Location: U.S.E.
9. Who will be the Housing Code Compliance Staff? Will they be on-site or located
at your office?
Answer: Currently we plan to use Bernard Johnson , Richard Bucklew and
Mike Torres. City and U.S.E. Pending on need.
10. Regarding questions 7 and 8 above, if they will be located at your offices, how
often will they be in the City?
Answer: Our plans currently call for at least 2 days a week. However, we
can be available more depending on need.
11. Are there additional charges for being on-site?
Answer: No, there are no additional charges.
12. How many Consolidated Plans has your organization prepared? Please list the
Consolidated Plan and the community for which it was prepared, along with the
staff members responsible for completing them. Please state if this staff will be
involved in Plan preparation for the City of Rosemead.
Answer: Use Bernard Johnson refer to answer 42.
13. How many Annual Funding Plans has your organization prepared? Please the
Annual Funding Plans and the community for which it was prepared, along with
the staff members responsible for their completion. Please state if this staff will
be involved in Plan preparation for the City of Rosemead.
Answer: Use Bernard Johnson refer to answer#3.
14. What is your experience with IDIS? Please list all training and work you have
done directly on IDIS, along with the City/Community and the person who did the
IDIS work. Please state if this staff will be involved in IDIS for the City of
Rosemead.
Answer: U.S.E. has been involved with HUD's IDIS System since its
conception. U.S.E. currently provides HOME cash management
for the City of Ontario and the State of Louisiana and has worked
with the City of New Orleans. Mike Tones will be the staff
member involved. U.S.E. has attended HUD's IDIS both in D.C.
and locally.
15. What is your experience with Community 2020? Please list all training and work
you have done directly with 2020 and the staff member who is involved. Please
state if this staff will be involved in 2020 for the City of Rosemead.
Answer: U.S.E. currently has no experience with Community 2020. It is
planned that Mr. Johnson and Mr. Parsons will be responsible for
this area. U.S.E. does, however, have its own computer support
personnel that can support the efforts of Mr. Parsons and Mr.
Johnson in the use of HUD's Community 2020 software.
In closing, I would like to point out that U.S.E. has several highly experienced
individuals that are capable of providing the services you have requested.
Unlike small consulting firms which depend on one or two individuals to provide all of
the services you requested, U.S.E. operates on a department basis utilizing the talent of
the entire firm,therefore, personnel can be added easily during peak periods. This can be
most easily seen in commerciallsingle rehab and first time homebuyer programs where
several specialized staff are involved . This makes your City less dependent on any one
or two individuals. This approach prevents potential mid-year problems if key staff leave
or are no longer available.
I hope this letter answers all of the questions presented in your letter.
Thank you for your interest. We will be very happy to provide you with any other
infirma ion or answer any further questions you may have.
11111,
• ..4‘
Gary Parsons
President
•
U. S. E. COMMUNITY SERVICES
CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
8121 E.FLORENCE AVENUE • DOWNEY,CALIFORNIA 90240 • (562)927-6686/FAX(562)927-3578
May 11, 1998
Mr. Jeffrey Stewart
Director of Administrative Services
8838 East Valley Blvd.
Rosemead, CA 91770
RE: Additional Information to letter of May 5, 1998
Dear Mr. Stewart,
Enclosed you will find additional information, referencing question number 12, of letter
dated April 28, 1998.
Hose this will be of some help to you.
Gary Parsons
President
enclosures
GP/rh
�N
U S. E COMMUNITY SERVICES
CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
8121 E. FLORENCE AVENUE • DOWNEY,CAUFORNIA 90240• (562)927-6686!FAX(562)927-3578
USE CONSOLIDATED PLAN PROCESS
WORK PLAN
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has established
minimum statutory requirements for the Consolidated Plan. However, individual
jurisdictions are required to work with their local HUD representative to develop a
"customized" approach based on individual circumstances and needs. Accordingly, USE
will work with the City staff to develop a work plan for the Consolidated Plan that meets
all of the statutory requirements and reflects the unique characteristics of the local
community.
The work plan will set forth a detailed table of contents and plan for the preparation of
the Consolidated Plan. It will include the establishment of a system to reference and
incorporate existing planning documents and other data into the Consolidated Plan. The
completed work plan will be submitted to the local HUD representative and, upon their
concurrence, shall serve as the basis of the completion of a Consolidated Plan that meets
all federal requirements.
PRE-SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
As requested, USE may assist with the required consultation of appropriate public and
private agencies including other public jurisdictions, social service agencies, and State
and local health and child welfare agencies.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
USE shall work with City staff to develop a citizen participation plan that meets all
statutory requirements and actively solicits the input of all segments of the community.
'Ihe citizen participation process will be ongoing throughout all phases of the preparation
of the Consolidated Plan. USE shall prepare public notices, conduct outreach efforts, and
conduct sessions in conjunction with City Staff to actively solicit and involve all
segments of the community throughout the Consolidated Plan preparation process.
... r...A..,r ,r.rcAnn AuvKmn . TAIIAOt
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROFILE
USE shall prepare the Housing and Community Development Profile to provide
statistical and analytical information on the needs for decent housing, a suitable living
environment and the expansion of economic opportunities. The profile shall consist of
four major section as follows:
1. Community Characteristics--this section shall describe the existing condition of
the community's infrastructure, demographic and housing characteristics,
economic characteristics, and physical design Data in this section shall be based
upon the 1990 Census and recent local studies and surveys, as appropriate.
2. Market conditions--this section shall identify market conditions, issues, trends,
and barriers to affordable housing assistance and community development.
3. Needs--this section will quantify the community's needs, based on the preceding
identification, in the following areas: infrastructure, fair housing, lead-based paint
testing and abatement,the environment, affordable housing, civic design,
economic development, homelessness,job creation, moving families from
homelessness to permanent housing,jobs/housing balance and public
improvements, facilities, and services.
4. Resources--this section will contain an assessment of all Federal and non-Federal
public and private agencies, physical features,human services, and funding
sources/programs available to address housing and community development
needs.
Each section will include tables, maps and supporting documentation as appropriate.
VISION PLAN
The characteristics and needs identified in the preceding section shall serve as the basis of
the development of a long-term vision plan. The vision plan will set forth the
community's long term goals and objectives for the next 10 years.
INVESTMENT STRATEGY
This section will match up the community's long term goals and objectives with the
available resources identified in the profile. This will include funding sources and
programs currently being utilized as well identifying additional funding to be pursued and
programs to be implemented (or phased out) in the next three to five years.
•
ANTI-POVERTY STRATEGY
As required by statute, residents with incomes at 30% or less of the median are
considered by HUD as a proxy for poverty income persons.
ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY STRATEGY
CONTINUUM OF CARE STRATEGY FOR THE HOMELESS
FAIR HOUSING IMPEDIMENTS ANALYSIS
PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS
The final section will present the City's one year plan and projected use of funds. It will
include anticipated funding sources and amounts and the specific items to be
accomplished. Where applicable,the plans will identify the number of households to be
assisted by or benefit from the projected use of funds.
GENERAL CONTRACTOR
If necessary, act as General Contractor to subcontractors that shall provide special
surveys as requested regarding lead paint, homelessness, and other required Consolidated
Plan topics.