Senate Report 110-216 - COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP TO END HOMELESSNESS ACT OF 2007

[Senate Report 110-216]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

Calendar No. 463
110th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 110-216

======================================================================

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP TO END HOMELESSNESS ACT OF 2007

_______

November 1, 2007.--Ordered to be printed

_______

Mr. Dodd, from the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs,
submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany S. 1518]

The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs,
having had under consideration the bill (S. 1518) to amend the
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act to reauthorize the Act,
and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the
bill (as amended) do pass.

INTRODUCTION

On September 19, 2007, the Senate Committee on Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs considered S. 1518, ``The Community
Partnership to End Homelessness Act of 2007,'' to amend the
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act to reauthorize the Act,
and for other purposes. The Committee voted unanimously to
report the bill (S. 1518) as amended to the Senate.

BACKGROUND

In 1986, in response to the rapid and dramatic growth of
homelessness in the United States in the 1980s, Congress passed
the Homeless Housing Act, which created the Emergency Shelter
Grants (ESG) program and the Transitional Housing Demonstration
program. The Urgent Relief for the Homeless Assistance Act was
enacted in July 1987. It was later renamed the Stewart B.
McKinney Homelessness Act and renamed again the McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act. The McKinney-Vento Act originally
contained 15 programs addressing different aspects of
homelessness, including emergency shelter, transitional
housing, permanent housing, education, job training, and
primary health needs. The Act was amended several times over
the next seven years, adding, among other things, the Shelter
Plus Care (S+C) program and the Rural Homeless Housing
Assistance Program. Today, the McKinney-Vento Homeless
Assistance Act is the primary federal program to support
communities in their efforts to address and reduce
homelessness.
The housing subtitles of McKinney-Vento were last
authorized in 1992 (P.L. 102-550) through fiscal year 1994.
Prior to 1995, Congress separately funded the housing programs
for those who were homeless. For fiscal year 1995, the
Appropriations bills consolidated the funding accounts for the
ESG program, the S+C program, the Supportive Housing Program
(SHP), and the Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation for Single
Room Occupancy Dwellings (SRO) program, and HUD encouraged
communities to submit a single application for funding. The
purpose of this single application was not only to streamline
the application process, but also to encourage providers to
coordinate their projects and on an overall strategy for the
community. This process became known as the Continuum of Care.
The Continuum of Care process enables communities to apply for
funds from one of three programs: S+C, SHP, and SRO. The amount
of funding a community receives is based on a needs-based
formula and on the quality of the application. In addition to
this award-winning competitive grant program, Emergency Shelter
Grants are provided by formula to cities, counties, and states.
In addition to the changes to the application process that
HUD initiated in 1995, research on the effectiveness of
particular strategies has led to significant policy shifts in
McKinney-Vento programs. In the 1990's, research conducted in
Philadelphia and New York City found that a small group of
homeless adults--about 20 percent of the total homeless
population stayed homeless for long periods of time or cycled
in and out of hospitals, jails, or other institutions; had high
rates of disabilities; and utilized a disproportionate share of
the homeless assistance resources. Further research in New York
City found that moving this group of chronically homeless
adults into permanent supportive housing--housing with
intensive supportive services attached--not only ended their
homelessness, but was also cost effective, as it dramatically
reduced the costs to public systems. Subsequent studies have
supported these findings, and have concluded that the net cost
of providing permanent supportive housing is even less than the
cost of allowing chronically homeless people to remain
homeless.
Based on these findings, Congress and HUD initiated efforts
to create more permanent supportive housing to end chronic
homelessness. The bipartisan Millennial Housing Commission and
the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health estimated that
approximately 150,000 new units of permanent supportive housing
were needed to achieve this goal. Beginning in fiscal year
1999, Congress steadily increased appropriations for McKinney-
Vento housing programs and targeted much of the increase
towards efforts to end chronic homelessness. These efforts were
supplemented by numerous state and locally driven initiatives.
As a result, several cities have reported significant
reductions in the number of people who are chronically homeless
and the number of people who live on the streets or in places
not meant for human habitation.
While chronic homelessness was receiving much of the
attention in the early part of this decade, several cities were
using a new approach to address family homelessness that
focused on rapid rehousing of homeless families. These
communities have programs that work with families to quickly
identify and help them move into permanent housing and provide
short-term rental assistance, assistance with other housing
costs, and follow-up services to help families achieve long
term housing stability and self-sufficiency. This strategy has
led to significant declines in homelessness among families in
several communities, most notably in Hennepin County,
Minnesota, where the average nightly census in the homeless
shelter declined by almost two-thirds.
Over the last several years, there have been a number of
other developments in serving homeless people, most notably a
focus on the importance of acquiring data. In early 2000,
Congress required HUD to work with communities to develop
homeless management information systems (HMIS) to assess the
number of homeless people, how those who are homeless interact
with the homeless system, and which programs are effective for
preventing or ending homelessness. Communities are in various
stages of implementation of HMIS--many have functional systems
while others are in still in the developmental stages. As a
result of HMIS and other data collection efforts, we now have
estimates of the number of homeless people that are based on
actual counts.
Beginning in 2001, communities began developing 10-year
plans to end homelessness. These plans, encouraged by HUD,
brought together nonprofit providers, advocates, the business
and faith-based communities, and city and local government
officials to design strategies for preventing and ending
homelessness. More than 200 plans have been completed to date,
and dozens more are in the process of being completed. The
purpose of these plans is to identify and implement the most
efficient and effective strategies for preventing and ending
homelessness in the community using the best available data.
Based on the best available statistics, the actual count of
the homeless, approximately 750,000 people are homeless at a
given point in time. 41 percent (300,000) are members of
families with children and many--about 44 percent--are
unsheltered, living on the streets, in abandoned buildings, or
in other places not meant for human habitation. Nearly 200,000
are veterans, approximately 170,000 are chronically homeless--
spending long periods of time homeless or cycling between
housing, homelessness and other institutional care, such as
psychiatric hospitals and corrections. Over the course of a
year, as many as 3.5 million people--approximately 10 percent
of people in poverty--experience homelessness.

PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION

This legislation is designed to help communities end
homelessness. It makes several improvements to the HUD homeless
assistance programs to simplify and focus them more on cost-
effectively preventing and ending homelessness. Several
separate programs are eliminated or consolidated into a single
Community Homeless Assistance Program. Different match
requirements for the formerly separate programs are unified
into a single 25 percent match requirement. Incentives are
included to promote strategies that have been proven to prevent
and end homelessness and communities are rewarded for
demonstrating progress.
The restructured Emergency Solutions Grant program would
increase the role of city and state governments in preventing
and ending homelessness and would ensure that more resources
are used for preventing homelessness.
The Committee recognizes that homeless assistance systems
in rural areas function differently than those in urban areas.
Urban areas are more likely to have systems that include
emergency shelters and other homelessness infrastructure. Rural
homeless assistance programs are more likely to be integrated
with other mainstream safety net programs. The legislation
would give rural applicants the option of applying for a
specially designed rural program that focuses much more on
prevention and is easier to integrate with existing systems.
The legislation also simplifies the application process for
rural programs.
The legislation continues the strategies that have worked
toward ending chronic homelessness while encouraging preventing
and ending homelessness for families with children. It adds
families with children to the definition of chronic
homelessness and it requires that HUD provide incentives for
rapid rehousing strategies that serve homeless families. It
provides resources to prevent homelessness for families that
are doubled up, living in hotels, or in other precarious
housing situations. It expands the definition of homelessness
to include people who are forced to move frequently between the
homes of friends and family because they do not have adequate
resources.
The legislation provides greater flexibility and includes
several features to encourage better performance. In addition
to including explicit performance-based criteria in the
application process, the legislation directs HUD to provide
incentives for permanent supportive housing for chronically
homeless individuals and families and rapid rehousing programs
for homeless families. Both of these strategies have been
proven to reduce homelessness and should be expanded. The
legislation also rewards communities that demonstrably reduce
homelessness by providing them with additional flexibility in
how they use their funds. This flexibility can continue for as
long as the community makes progress. The legislation continues
the Appropriation's Committee's longstanding support for
ensuring that at least 30 percent of funding be used for
permanent housing for people with disabilities. It also ensures
that permanent housing programs can be renewed without reducing
resources for other priorities.
The legislation includes a provision that allows a
collaborative applicant to be a unified funding agency. This
would allow HUD to provide funding for a community to one
agency which would distribute funds to local homeless
assistance providers. Unified funding agencies would take on
many of the oversight responsibilities that are now performed
by HUD. Applicants could apply to be a unified funding agency
or HUD could, under certain conditions, designate an applicant
as a unified funding agency. HUD could make this designation
only when applicants clearly have the capacity to perform the
functions required, when there is a demonstrable benefit to the
community, and when HUD and the applicant have agreed on the
amount of technical assistance that will be provided to the
applicant to help them perform their required duties.
The legislation outlines a simple application process that
will reduce the amount of time and energy communities spend on
applying for funds and increase the amount of resources they
spend perfecting strategies that prevent and end homelessness.
The process for rural applicants is even simpler and recognizes
the unique characteristics of rural homeless assistance. The
legislation also utilizes selection criteria that are based on
ten-year plans that communities are creating to end
homelessness. Communities will be able to integrate their ten-
year plans with their homeless assistance applications.

Housing and services demonstration project

The Committee has authorized funds for the Secretary to
conduct research on the effectiveness of varying levels of
housing and services support for homeless families. There is an
extensive homeless assistance system available to families who
experience homelessness. This system is made up of emergency
shelters, transitional housing, and a small number of permanent
supportive housing units; many of these housing models are
accompanied by services and supports aimed at helping families
exit homelessness and make improvement in their lives. Homeless
families are also eligible for mainstream housing and services
such as housing vouchers and homeless prevention assistance.
One of the biggest challenges this demonstration is designed to
address is identifying which housing and service models lead to
housing stability and are most cost-effective.

Evaluation

Research on chronic homelessness has provided a series of
robust findings that have led to policy changes that benefit
chronically homeless single adults. Additional research on
effective solutions to family homelessness is needed to fill in
gaps in knowledge and identify cost-effective solutions that
end homelessness for families.

Multi-site random control experiment

The Committee directs HUD to select and evaluate a limited
number of sites as a part of the Homeless Assistance Grants
competition. This evaluation should include a multi-site study
experimental design (randomly controlled assignment) that
compares and contrasts different housing models focusing on
shallow and short term subsidies, housing vouchers (linked with
voluntary community-based services or the family self-
sufficiency program (FSS)), and transitional housing (with
mandatory services). The evaluation should be funded for three
years and extended if funds are available. The evaluation
should be conducted by an independent contractor and awarded on
a competitive basis with points awarded for proven experience
conducting random assignment experiments for the social
sciences; knowledge of family homelessness; and capacity to
implement random assignment and track homeless families over
time. The evaluators should create a council made up of policy
experts and practitioners to provide advice on the development
of the research design and implementation of the program.

Review of assessment tools and targeting efforts

Research by Dr. Dennis Culhane of the University of
Pennsylvania indicates that homeless families have varying
levels of need for housing subsidies and services. This means
that homeless service providers must assess families and target
services based on their needs. The Committee has authorized
funds for a qualitative review of tools that assess low-income
families' level of need and use this data to target the
appropriate level of services. This study should identify
``promising tools'' and make recommendations on how to develop
more sophisticated targeting. The study should include six to
eight sites, be conducted by an independent contractor, and be
awarded on a competitive basis.

Prevention study

A critical component of ending homelessness is preventing
it from occurring in the first place. However, little is known
about what characteristics distinguish those poor, at-risk
families who become homeless, particularly those who have
repeated or long episodes of homelessness from those who do
not. The Committee has authorized funds for the Secretary to
launch a family homeless prevention study. This prospective
cohort study should include a longitudinal survey that tracks
at-risk families over five years.
On several occasions, HUD has made significant policy
changes in its implementation of the McKinney-Vento Act through
its Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) process. It is the
intent of the Committee that HUD implement both the existing
provisions of McKinney-Vento and those of this bill through
formal rulemaking procedures.

HEARINGS

The Committee heard testimony in the 110th Congress on June
21, 2007 regarding reauthorization of the McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act. Witnesses testifying were the
Honorable Adrian Fenty, Mayor of the District of Columbia, the
Honorable Shirley Franklin, Mayor of Atlanta, Georgia, the
Honorable Roy Bernardi, Deputy Secretary of the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, Ms. Linda Glassman, National
AIDS Housing Coalition, Ms. Carol Gundlach, Alabama Coalition
Against Domestic Violence, Mr. Moises Loza, Housing Assistance
Council, Mr. Lloyd Pendleton, State of Utah Division of Housing
and Community Development, and Ms. Nan Roman, National Alliance
to End Homelessness.
The Committee had previously heard testimony in the 109th
Congress on March 30, 2006 regarding reauthorization of the
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act and Consolidation of
HUD's Homeless Assistance Programs. Witnesses testifying were
the Honorable Roy Bernardi, Deputy Secretary of the Department
of Housing and Urban Development, Mr. Philip Mangano, Executive
Director of the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, Ms.
Gail Dorfman, County Commissioner, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
Mr. Steve Berg, National Alliance to End Homelessness, Mr.
Charles Gould, Volunteers of America, Mr. Anthony Love, Houston
Coalition for the Homeless, and Dr. Dennis Culhane, University
of Pennsylvania.

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title; table of contents

This section contains the table of contents and the short
title of the bill, ``Community Partnership to End Homelessness
Act of 2007.''

Section 2. Findings and purpose

This section contains the findings and purpose. These
findings include that homelessness is a crisis of people who
lack basic affordable housing and appropriate shelter; that
homeless assistance has had a positive effect, and should
continue to be evaluated based on how well it reduces
homelessness. The purposes are to create a unified,
performance-based process for funding; to encourage
collaboration and planning; to focus the public and private
sector on ending and preventing homelessness; to assist
homeless people; to consolidate programs; to allow flexibility;
and to involve other Federal agencies in ending homelessness.

Section 3. General definition of homeless individual

This section modifies the current definition of
homelessness to include people who are staying for a short time
in the housing of others or a hotel, and have moved frequently.

Section 4. United States Interagency Council on Homelessness

This section makes adjustments to the role and operation of
the Interagency Council, including changes to the mission
statement, adding new members, increasing meeting frequency,
and increasing the number of regional coordinators. The council
will be overseen by the chair and will develop a national
strategic plan to end homelessness and to encourage state and
local governments to develop 10-year plans to end homelessness.
The authorization level for the council is $3 million.

Section 5. Housing assistance general provisions

This section includes new provisions as follows. Section
401 defines terms including at-risk of homelessness, chronic
homelessness, operating cost, and other terms. Section 402
establishes collaborative applicants, which are responsible for
designing a collaborative process for applying for funding and
ensuring participation in homeless management information
systems. Collaborative applicants may also become unified
funding agencies, which would give them responsibility for
distributing funds to grantees and ensuring proper accounting
methods.
Section 404 prevents discrimination against older children
in programs serving homeless families. Section 405 authorizes
technical assistance to grantees and collaborative applicants.
Section 406 creates an appeals process. Section 408 authorizes
$2.2 billion for fiscal year 2008 and such sums as may be
necessary for fiscal years 2009 through 2012.

Section 6. Emergency Solutions Grants Program

This section modifies the existing Emergency Shelter Grants
(ESG) program and renames it the Emergency Solutions Grants
Program. This section mandates that 20 percent of homeless
assistance funding be used for the Emergency Solutions Grants
Program, with no more than 60 percent of that amount being used
for traditional shelter and street outreach activities, and at
least 40 percent being for homelessness prevention and
rehousing. It is the intent of the Committee that communities
not be forced to stop funding existing emergency shelter
programs as a result of this transition, but that this cap on
funding for shelters be met over time. New activities are added
to eligible uses, including short- or medium-term rent
assistance and new homelessness prevention and housing
relocation and stabilization activities. This section requires
recipients of Emergency Solutions Grants funds to participate
in the applicable homeless management information system.

Section 7. Homeless Assistance Program

This section consolidates several existing programs into
the Community Homeless Assistance Program.
Section 421 identifies the purpose of the program as
promoting commitment to ending homelessness, rehousing homeless
people, minimizing the trauma of homelessness, helping people
access mainstream services, and optimizing self-sufficiency.
Section 422 requires that the notice of funding availability be
released within three months of enactment, that awards be
announced within five months of when applications are due
(within six months for the first two years after enactment),
and that project sponsors meet the applicable requirements for
obligation within nine months of an award or for projects
involving development, within 24 months of an award.
Section 422 also describes procedures for when there are
multiple applicants from a geographic area. Section 422 adjusts
renewal funding for permanent housing projects for increases in
housing costs. Also, providers whose primary mission is to
serve victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual
assault, or stalking would not provide personally identifying
information to a homeless management information system.
Section 423 lists the eligible activities of the Community
Homeless Assistance Program, including acquisition,
construction, rehabilitation, leasing, rental assistance,
operating costs, supportive services, rehousing services,
homeless management information systems, and administrative
costs. Projects receiving funding for construction, acquisition
or rehabilitation must be used for their intended purpose for
at least 15 years. If a project is no longer needed for that
purpose, it can be converted to directly benefit low-income
people. If a project is needed and is not used to serve
homeless people for 15 years, then, except under certain
conditions, the grantee will be required to repay all or a
portion of the grant.
Section 424 creates a flexibility incentive for high-
performing communities. If a community successfully reduces
homelessness, they can be granted additional flexibility with
their funding, and would be required to share best practices
with HUD and other communities.
Section 426 would require grantees to gain site control
within 12 months of notification of an award, ensure that
homeless people are involved in projects, maintain
confidentiality of records, maintain confidentiality of the
location of family violence shelters, ensure that grantees do
no restrict the educational rights of homeless children,
provide required data to HUD, and ensure that projects serving
people with disabilities do not concentrate and isolate people
with disabilities.
Section 427 sets the selection criteria for the Community
Homeless Assistance Program. Criteria include past success at
preventing and reducing homelessness and increasing jobs and
income growth, plans to reduce homelessness for all
subpopulations of homeless people, whether the opinions of all
relevant parties are considered, leveraging, and coordination.
In addition to those factors, Section 427 establishes a need
formula for each geographic area, which would be determined by
HUD for the first two years after enactment, and then would be
established by HUD based on the number of homeless people,
shortages of affordable housing, severe housing problems among
extremely low-income households, and the poverty rate. Section
427 also requires HUD to adjust a community's pro-rata need to
ensure enough funding to provide 1 year of renewal funding for
all expiring contracts.
Section 428 sets allocation amounts and incentives for
specific eligible activities. At least 30 percent of funding is
for new permanent housing for people with disabilities. The
calculation for this 30 percent applies nationally, not to each
individual community. The 30 percent figure is reduced
proportionately for communities that have developed enough
permanent housing for all of the chronically homeless people in
their geographic area and is waived if there is not enough
funding to cover one year of renewals for existing projects.
The 30 percent requirement is terminate when HUD determines
that 150,000 new units of permanent housing for homeless people
with disabilities has been funded since 2001. Section 428
requires that at least 10 percent of funding must be used to
permanently house families with children. Section 428 requires
HUD to fund interventions that are proven to be effective,
including permanent supportive housing for chronically homeless
individuals and families and rapid rehousing programs for
homeless families. Any community that fully implements a proven
strategy could use their bonus for any eligible activity,
including homelessness prevention.
Section 429 funds renewals of permanent rental assistance
or permanent housing operating costs to be funded for one year
at a time out of the funding account for Section 8 housing,
provided that there is a demonstrated need and the project
complies with appropriate standards.
Section 430 establishes a uniform 25 percent match that can
be met with cash or, when documented by a memorandum of
understanding, in-kind services. Projects that previously had
no match requirement could continue to be renewed without a
match requirement. The match requirement applies community-
wide, not necessarily project by project.

Section 8. Rural Housing Stability Assistance Program

This section modifies Section 491 of the McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act, the Rural Homeless Assistance Program,
and changes the title to the Rural Housing Stability Assistance
Program. This section modifies section 491(a) by making the
purpose of the program to rehouse or find housing for people
who are homeless or in the worst housing situations, stabilize
people in imminent danger of losing their housing, and improve
the ability of the lowest income residents to afford stable
housing. This program is to be carried out separately from the
overall Community Homeless Assistance Program competition.
Section 491(b) is modified by adding to the list of
eligible activities construction, acquisition, rehabilitation,
leasing, rental assistance, and operating costs for
transitional or permanent housing for homeless people.
Section 491(d) is modified by adding to the application
requirements a description of consultations to determine the
most important uses of funding and a description of the nature
of homelessness and the worst housing situations in the area.
Section 491(f) is modified so that there is a uniform 25
percent match requirement for all activities except that
projects that previously had no match requirement could
continue to be renewed without a match requirement. The match
can be met with cash or, when documented by a memorandum of
understanding, in-kind services.
The selection criteria in Section 491(g) are replaced by
participation of potential beneficiaries, the degree to which
the project addresses the most harmful housing conditions,
collaboration, performance in improving housing situations,
past performance, need, and other HUD- determined criteria.
Section 491(j) defines a rural area as any place outside of
a metropolitan statistical area or any census tract within a
metropolitan statistical area that is at least 75 percent
rural. Any state that has fewer than 30 people per square mile
and of which more than 1.25 percent of land is under the
control of the federal government is considered rural in its
entirety except if the applicant consists solely of a
metropolitan city.
Section 491(k) describes the funding process for the rural
program. A rural applicant could choose to apply under the
Community Homeless Assistance Program or the Rural Housing
Stability Program. Funding is based on the selection criteria
and on pro-rata need.
Section 491(l) requires that if more than one entity from a
rural area applies for funding, HUD must first seek agreement
from the applicants about how to proceed and if there is no
agreement, HUD must fund the application that would result in
the most funding for the geographic area.

Section 9. Research

For fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011, $8,000,000 is
authorized to research the efficacy of interventions for
homeless families to study three different sites over three
years to evaluate the effectiveness of those programs.

Section 10. Repeals and conforming amendments

This section repeals Subtitles D (Safe Havens for Homeless
Individuals Demonstration Program), E (Miscellaneous Program),
and F (Shelter Plus Care), of the McKinney Vento Homeless
Assistance Act. These programs are replaced by the programs
described in Section 7.

Section 11. Special Assistant for Veterans Affairs in Office of
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development

A new Special Assistant for Veterans Affairs is established
within HUD. The Special Assistant would be appointed based
solely on merit and would ensure that veterans have access to
HUD housing and homeless assistance, coordinate all activities
related to veterans, and serve as a liaison with the Department
of Veterans Affairs.

Section 12. Effective date

This section makes this Act effective 6 months after
enactment.

COST OF LEGISLATION

U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, October 9, 2007.
Hon. Christopher J. Dodd,
Chairman, Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S.
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1518, the Community
Partnership to End Homelessness Act of 2007.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Chad Chirico.
Sincerely,
Peter R. Orszag.

Community Parternship to End Homelessness Act of 2007

S. 1518 would reauthorize the McKinney-Vento Homeless
Assistance Act for five years and consolidate the act's
separate competitive grant programs for assistance to the
homeless into a single program. CBO estimates that implementing
this legislation would cost about $7.7 billion over the next
five years, assuming the appropriation of the necessary
amounts. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimates that
enacting S. 1518 would reduce revenues by $7 million over the
2008-2012 period and by $22 million over the next 10 years.
S. 1518 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA);
any costs to state, local, or tribal governments would be
incurred voluntarily.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of S. 1518 is shown in Table 1. The costs of
this legislation fall within budget function 600 (income
security).
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that S.
1518 will be enacted near the beginning of fiscal year 2008,
that the amounts authorized will be appropriated, and that
outlays will follow historical patterns. Components of the
estimated costs are described below.

TABLE 1. ESTIMATED BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF S. 1518
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------------
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN REVENUES

Changes to Low Income Housing Credits
Estimated Revenues\1\................................. 0 * -1 -1 -2 -2

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Spending Under Current Law:
Budget Authority\2\................................... 1,444 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays..................................... 1,428 1,444 1,201 632 380 145
Proposed Changes:
Homeless Assistance Grants:
Estimated Authorization Level..................... 0 2,200 2,288 2,330 2,372 2,416
Estimated Outlays................................. 0 22 375 1,269 1,708 2,077
Contract Renewals:
Estimated Authorization Level..................... 0 429 466 474 540 548
Estimated Outlays................................. 0 258 451 471 514 545
Research on Interventions for Homeless Families:
Authorization Level............................... 0 0 8 8 8 0
Estimated Outlays................................. 0 0 3 5 8 5
Interagency Council on Homelessness:
Estimated Authorization Level..................... 0 3 3 3 3 3
Estimated Outlays................................. 0 3 3 3 3 3
Total Proposed Changes:
Estimated Authorization Level................. 0 2,632 2,765 2,815 2,923 2,967
Estimated Outlays............................. 0 283 832 1,748 2,233 2,630
Spending Under S. 1518:
Estimated Authorization Level\2\...................... 1,444 2,632 2,765 2,815 2,923 2,967
Estimated Outlays..................................... 1,428 1,727 2,033 2,380 2,613 2,775
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Estimate provided by the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT). In addition to the effects shown through 2012,
JCT estimates that enacting S. 1518 would reduce revenues by an additional $15 million over the 2013-2017
period.
\2\The 2007 level is the amount appropriated in that year for Homeless Assistance Grants and the U.S.
Interagency Council on Homelessness.
Note.--* = revenue loss of less than $500,000.

Revenues

Section 7 of the bill would exclude grant funding
authorized by the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act when
determining the eligible basis of a building receiving Low
Income Housing Credits under section 42 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986. The JCT estimates that consequent reductions in
revenue would total $7 million over the 2008-2012 period and
$22 million over the next 10 years, as shown in Table 2.

TABLE 2.--CHANGES IN REVENUES UNDER S. 1518
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2008-2012 2008-2017
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Revenues.......................................... * -1 -1 -2 -2 -2 -3 -3 -3 -4 -7 -22
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--* = revenue loss of less than $500,000.

Spending subject to appropriation

In total, CBO estimates that S. 1518 would authorize the
appropriation of $2.6 billion in 2008 and $14 billion over the
2008-2012 period. Appropriation of those amounts would result
in estimated outlays of $7.7 billion over the next five years.
Homeless Assistance Grants. S. 1518 would consolidate the
Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD's) separate
competitive grant programs for assistance to the homeless
(including the Supportive Housing Program, the Shelter Plus
Care program, and the Single-Room Occupancy Dwellings program)
into a single program (the Homeless Assistance Program) and
reauthorize grants for the emergency shelter needs of the
homeless. Section 5 of the bill would authorize the
appropriation of $2.2 billion in 2008 and such sums as
necessary from 2009 through 2012 for these programs. Assuming
appropriation of the authorized amounts and adjusting for
inflation, CBO estimates that implementing this section would
cost $22 million in 2008 and about $5.5 billion over the 2008-
2012 period.
Contract Renewals. Section 7 of the bill would authorize
the HUD to use such sums as necessary from amounts appropriated
for Section 8 housing assistance to renew expiring contracts
for the leasing, rental assistance, or operating costs of
permanent housing for the homeless. Such renewals are currently
funded through the Shelter Plus Care and Supportive Housing
programs. In 2006, HUD awarded about $360 million in renewal
funding covering about 67,000 permanent housing beds. Based on
data provided by HUD, CBO estimates that renewing expiring
contracts would require the appropriation of $429 million in
2008 and $2.5 billion over the 2008-2012 period. Appropriation
of those amounts would result in outlays totaling an estimated
$2.2 billion over the next five years.
Other Provisions. Additionally, section 4 would authorize
the appropriation of $3 million in 2008 and such sums as
necessary from 2009 through 2012 for the U.S. Interagency
Council on Homelessness, and section 10 would authorize the
appropriation of $8 million for each of fiscal years 2009
through 2011 for research into the efficacy of interventions
for homeless families. In total, assuming appropriation of the
authorized amounts, CBO estimates that implementing these
provisions would cost $3 million in 2008 and $36 million over
the 2008-2012 period.
Intergovernmental and Private-Sector Impact: S. 1518
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA. Funds authorized by the bill would benefit
state, local, and tribal governments that receive grants to
provide housing and emergency shelter. Any costs those
governments incur, including matching funds, to comply with
program requirements would be incurred voluntarily.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Spending: Chad Chirico;
Federal Revenues: Thomas Holtmann, Joint Committee on Taxation;
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Lisa Ramirez-
Branum; Impact on the Private Sector: Nabeel Alsalam.
Estimate approved by: Keith Fontenot, Deputy Assistant
Director for Health and Human Resources, Budget Analysis
Division.

REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

In accordance with paragraph 11(b), rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following
statement concerning the regulatory impact of the bill.
This bill reauthorizes and improves programs that are now
in operation through grants by the Department of Housing and
Urban Development. The bill requires HUD to issue new
regulations, but only to formalize policies that HUD now
enforces in a less formal manner. This bill would have no
discernable impact on the number of people or businesses
regulated under the existing program, or in the economic impact
of regulation. It also has no discernable impact on personal
privacy compared to the existing program. Finally, the bill
will not create additional paperwork. It is likely that the
bill will reduce paperwork, because the bill consolidates
programs. This is particularly the case for rural areas because
the changes in procedures for recipients in rural areas would
result in a simpler application process.

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW (CORDON RULE)

On September 19, 2007, the Committee unanimously approved a
motion by Senator Dodd to waive the Cordon rule. Thus, in the
opinion of the Committee, it is necessary to dispense with
section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate in
order to expedite the business of the Senate.