Technology Working Group

Information by State  Print version   Working Groups   States   Consortia   Counties   Cities (CDBG-only)   Cities (multi-funded)   Technology   Steering Committee Want More Information?   Technology Working Group Membership List Jump To...   October 15, 2002   August 28, 2002   August 26, 2002   August 20, 2002   July 23, 2002   July 12, 2002   June 28, 2002

Summaries of the ConPlan Improvement Initiative Technology Working Group Meetings

Objectives of today's meeting:

	Confirm our intentions for Data Elements Spreadsheet
	Determine recommendations for fast track pilot

Discussion on Data Elements Spreadsheet -
It was agreed we should send to Steering Committee. A cover letter will include points made in the August 20 meeting. Anita Crosby and Dee Ann Ducote and Jim Smith to work Tuesday or Wednesday of next week to verify/proofread.

Recommendations for Fast Track Pilot -
Dee Ann presented the Gantt Chart for Consolidated Planning/Performance Tools as a tool to organize the various CAPER tools we've been looking at.

Clete and Marsha discussed the PowerPoint slides they created to illustrate the elements of an automated tool for submissions.
Concerns/comments:

	Slide 9-10, necessary to restrict grantee access after due date.
	Slides 11-15, do the eligible activities need to be revised?
	Slide 16, may need a comments section under each specific need instead of one overall comment section?
	The public will be given access to reports generated from the system, not to these screens that show the input (by Grantee) and evaluation (by HUD).
	Slide 22, outputs/outcomes should also be under annual action plan instead of just the 5-year plan?
	This system will capture data down to Project level. It will not go to Activity level.
	Ideally, system would integrate with IDIS so data could be downloaded to IDIS.
	Can we add a module for Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Areas? Yes, that can be done.
	Will need to add certifications module too.

Questions raised about feasibility of creating a system at HUD or for HUD in time to perform a pilot given the contract restrictions, Federal requirements and other constraints. The fact that it is a pilot and is in Access opens some doors for regarding contractual issues and funding options. The thinking is that a voluntary pilot could be accomplished without all the barriers that are faced in creating other systems. LA County may be in a position to donate systems development labor (to be confirmed.)

We could get ready with a paper version before an automated system. Could possibly get some January 1, 2003 grantees on board with paper version.

Helpful to get input from other working groups before moving forward with a pilot. Dee Ann and Hickory to divide the list of other chairs and call to walk them through the tool. Objective is to see if it is in line with their thinking.

The group resolved to forward Marsha and Clete's system as our sole Pilot recommendation.

Action Items/Next Steps -

	Dee Ann to do touch ups to white paper to add results of this meeting.
	Marsha and Clete to edit PowerPoint file per discussion during this call and write up narrative explanation to accompany the PowerPoint.
	Data Elements Spreadsheet will be reviewed by Dee Ann and Anita. Schedule call for next Tuesday or Wednesday morning.
	All are invited to provide lessons learned from PHA Template to Jim Smith by Wednesday of next week. These will be compiled and forwarded to Dee Ann and Hickory and may be reflected in the text of the white paper.
	Dee Ann and Hickory to divide up list of co-chairs of other groups and contact them to get their reaction to our pilot. Dee Ann to take States, CDBG-only and County (John Perry). Hickory to take CDBG-Plus, Consortia, County (Norma Drummond).
	Dee Ann and Hickory to submit White Paper and Data Elements Spreadsheet to Steering Committee in advance of their September 10th meeting.