Consolidated Plan Improvement Initiative Steering Committee

Information by State  Print version   Working Groups   States   Consortia   Counties   Cities (CDBG-only)   Cities (multi-funded)   Technology   Steering Committee Related Information   Steering Committee Membership List Jump To...   November 7, 2002   August 13, 2002   July 9, 2002

Consolidated Plan Improvement Initiative Summaries of Steering Committee Meetings


Conference call Notes- November 7, 2002

Purpose: To solicit comments on Interim Report from Steering Committee members.

Highlights: General consensus that Interim Report does a good job of conveying issues raised in the Working Groups. Certain stakeholders agreed to forward additional comments to CPD regarding ideas or Pilots they felt were not adequately addressed in the report. CPD agreed to reformat the report to better reflect the Department's response to OMB's concerns of making the ConPlan less burdensome and more results-oriented.

Specific Comments

1. Sheila Crowley from NLIHC requested a copy of a concurrent PD&R study being conducted by the Urban Institute on the ConPlan, and opined that the process is being conducted in a "closed fashion". NLIHC expressed its interest in seeing that report so the CPII Steering Committee can provide "action recommendations" to the Assistant Secretary on its findings.
   
   
2. COSCDA feels the Interim Report deals mostly with process and lacks technical capacity of how CPD will assist grantees achieve OMB's goal of a less burdensome and more results-oriented ConPlan. CPD pointed out that most of the ConPlan requirements believed to be "burdensome" are statutory, including the Anti-Poverty Strategy and Non-Housing Community Plan. CPD will make recommendations to the Assistant Secretary how CPD grantees can best meet these statutory requirements. Ideas for making the ConPlan more results-oriented, which emanated from the Working Groups including alternative performance reporting systems, will be pilot-tested by grantees commencing January 2003. CPD will look for commonalities among pilot sites and a means for grantees to replicate successful practices. Regarding a lack of technical capacity in assisting grantees to produce a ConPlan and report on accomplishments, CPD acknowledged that it must change and improve the IDIS platform. CPD will report on current efforts underway to improve IDIS and provide additional guidance to assist grantees in preparing a ConPlan and reporting accomplishments against the Plan's goals.
   
   
3. Dustin Brown from OMB agreed with #2 above and suggested the report be categorized across three topics areas: reducing burden; results oriented, and more useful / meaningful. OMB also suggested CPD note the projected outcome of CPII proceedings over the past several months, including HUD guidance to clarify regulations and maintain consistency throughout the field offices; explanation of Pilots and what they will test; and while acknowledging that Pilot results will inform these, any anticipated statutory or regulatory changes that may be pursued by the Department. OMB recommended providing additional commentary on the Annual Action Plan and whether ideas for improving the overall ConPlan process can also be applied to it. OMB noted that work on developing meaningful performance measures for the four formula grant programs is long overdue, and is hopeful that ideas on long-term outcome measures and short-term goals will come from this process.
   
   
4. Kevin Neary from PD&R raised the issue of how Pilots will be evaluated, including whether through a formal or informal process, how many and what type grantees will test each Pilot, how usefulness will be measured, and how successful results will be shared. CPD acknowledged that evaluating each of the Pilots and sharing successful results was a critical component of the CPII process, and recommended meeting with PD&R to develop evaluation criteria for each Pilot.