Judul : New York Prime Myrtle Beach
link : New York Prime Myrtle Beach
New York Prime Myrtle Beach
thank you, everybody, for the lunch thing and hopefully meeting a few people. we're going to have a series of housekeeping.
New York Prime Myrtle Beach, first, i did bring this gentleman up to raise the -- i wanted to introduce the gtr on rotation.
but some of you met him during lunch. a few of you watching on archive will now what he looks like when you put in calls to him. he has about a half dozen grantees from 2011. >> hello.
i look forward to meeting all of you, especially my grantees from '11. so if i haven't met you already, come seek m and i look forward to working with you. >> amit is going to try to join us tomorrow afternoon at the
close when we do the meet your gtr session, so you'll have a chance to meet him then. >> thank you very much. >> these housekeeping announcements are brought to you by the letter d. table over in the wings there. so if you are feeling
claustrophobic in the middle of the country, disperse to there as long as you can still see us. we also had a question about one of the groups was talking engagement and equity outreach and they were thinking could there be a digital community where we could actually talk
about these things? i said stay tuned to this afternoon because you'll learn more about that and other capacity building opportunities. someone heard a rumor that there's a dunkin donuts in the there is. it's on the third floor.
we don't know if we can loosely let you up there, but if we want to organize a posse to do a cookie run later we might be able to work something out. a quick word, a heart warming story i wanted to share with you, a in the debrief process, one of
the grantees who will remain nameless from a major metropolitan area in north carolina, who will remain nameless, they said the debrief you did with us last year was gold because we really took it the suggestions and critiques you had of the application and
we reapplied and now we're here. the reason that warms the heart of the gtr and solon can attest to this, we did what is i think a record for hud in terms of proportion of debriefs to the amount of grants that didn't get funded last year. we probably had 250 debriefs we
did in about 60 days. we were very attentive to those and really thorough with those to the best of our ability based on feedback from our reviewers. there were several of you who did come back to a second round the room is rewarding for us because it means that the
direction was somewhat helpful. so we'll certainly pass that word on. what we're going to do the next 45 minutes or show in two parts, a little more on roles and responsibilities, this is more presentational. you heard about a bit of go and
gtr. those are a couple acronyms that you'll get used to because it's a mouthful to say government technical representative or government office. so we're going to talk for minutes about those roles and some of our experience in the
first year of what's been useful and helpful and then answer questions you might have had that came up during the first part that you were scared to ask. so slo november is solon is a senior advisor, along with james.
solon comes to us from the outside world and james from the inside world. we're going to be up here. we're going to talk a little about this and then answer some questions. >> pretty cool. so we'll start with the grant
officer, because you heard a bit about that this morning. and, james, maybe beyond what we've covered in the powerpoints you could just say a bit about your experience in some of the role you've played that's been helpful for the grantees in the first year.
>> well, a lot of the roles that we perform for you guys are to protect internally ourselves from audits and other entities, but also try to help you out with your singled a its. -- audits. a lot of you that come from city entities and county entities,
it's a big problem. the first thing i get on the audit for 36 years or, oh, we've had a clean audit or, you know, oh, you know, we have reporting problems, which i've heard quite a bit of, too. so i try to do twofold. one is that obviously we try to
make sure that everything that you guys do is an activity. most of you west of the mississippi i've had conversations with and we've walked through your budgets. a lot of those questions dealt specifically with the way that
the budget line item should be record that actually goes back to audit findings. so a lot of times when i make suggestions, myself, malcolm or deb, when we make suggestions it's to protect you and to protect us at the same time.
so if you guys have problems or if a question comes up issue comes up specifically about the way that your accounting department or the way that a finance person should recognize something, you know, don't hesitate to contact us. we'll be more than happy to kind
of walk you guys through a step. a lot of times, you know, we refer to the consistency part, you know. if you guys have clean records, obviously we would expect you guys to continue because consistency is like the key to audits.
as you guys move forward, if you guys have reporting issues, if it's something specific with not having capacity or if it's a software issue, or way that you guys are demonstrating or recognizing cost, you know, that's all stuff that we can help you with and
work through, particularly some of the smaller ones. there's a lot of you that had federal budget reductions this year. there's quite a few that are going through reorgs. some are bringing new you know, we kind of help you
guys walk through all that stuff. from more of like the grant functioning, a lot of times the 424 and when it comes to the progressive reports, the 425, the par through those, if there's something specific that jumps
out, i keep reports regularly. dwayne will tell you this. i drive him nuts with like expenditure reports. if you start to have burn rates that are too high or too lot of times i'll pull the gtr aside and, you know, is there a reason why they're not spending
money? is there a reason they're spending money? you know, if you have a contract that you have out there, that obviously takes you guys to frontload it because you guys don't have the funds so all of a sudden you have like a $300,00
like dispersement, that may like completely throw your expenditure rate out of whack. so i take a look at all that you know, there's a lot of stuff on the backside that you guys will never see particularly like when it comes to risk analysis, when it comes to expenditure
rates, when it comes problems that we handle internally. you know, we have outreach that goes to the other program here, programs here at hud. so if it's like cdbg funds, cpe contacts us. if it's home voucher section 8,
they'll con like if it's one of those things if they're trying to decide to put you guys on high risk or low risk or, you know, have we had any issues, have you guy bounce good grantee, a bad grantee, is it the same department, we handle a lot of that.
other than the basics mechanisms of like the 1044, you know, we -- me personally, i'm a contract officer here as well. so if you guys have contractual issues, the way that you guys put your contracts together, i do some consortium stuff from time to time, i help
out with dwayne. you know, we really are here to kind of assist you. you know, obviously we're spread pretty thin because we have a lot of grantees with a relatively small staff. but we do try to provide as much like ta and as much support
as we have some grantees that are absolutely amazing. you guys, there's a handle of you in here. you guys have been doing this, you know, 100 years and you guys have been amazing at it. so, you know, those are the ones
that we don't touch a whole lot. you know, there's some other hand holding and we're here to help with that, too. >> you know, a couple of points like james is saying. one is i think that's one of the reasons you heard zolaka say go through your gtr first because
often there are things we may be able to answer, we have fewer gos tha may be able to resolve your question without actually approaching the g.o. the other thing i say is that -- or i was going to ask james is during the last session was
there any moment when zolaka was going over something and you were thinking to yourself i know we said this a couple times many questions about this. what are some things that jump out, what keeps coming back to us? >> the big ones, again,
obviously procurement is always a huge issue. i've probably received ten or 15 e-mails already from a variety of you guys, specifically about how to handle procurement, what have to go out with rfp do, you have to go out with rfq what do you have to do to recognize can
we do an an 8-a, can we do a sole source. i handle a lot of that stuff and regulation about it. i know we're developing policy that's going to go out to all of you. some of the grantees have already received it.
some of the other stuff, indirects are always a big one. indirects and how to recognize that either it's indirect cost or if it's other direct cost. basic equation like ratio that i use, is that if you guys have $500,000 in salaries and $500,000 in fringe benefits to
take you up to a total staff accumulation of $1 million, you probably are getting to that point where you g really think about doing an indirect cost allocation plan, whether that's us becoming your guys' cognizant agency or whether that's you guys going
through your state d.o.t. or state highway funds, that's something you guys should really consider because at that point you guys really are accumulat you guys aren't recognizing. i'm sure the finance and accounting people are in here probably shaking their heads
like, yes, absolutely, they're killing us with this overhead, so. that's all a big question. the cost allocation plan is a completely separate discussion that we can have like a side bar extensive depending on the size of your entity and the amount of
funding that you receive. i mean it could easily be anywhere from 50,000 to $200,000 to have a accounting firm come in and actually perform it for there is some guidance that if you guys decide to and you guys have the capacity to do it internally, you could
do that as well. a lot of the smaller ones, though, if you guys stay underneath, in essence like 10 to 15 like staff that work on any given project, you can probably get away with using your other directs and then you just recognize them that way.
the territory that james and his team cover in the universe they do. but everything else in the universe pretty much falls to the g.t.r. say a little bit about what that's been like for you and share any
to share. >> good afternoon. >> are you on? >> am i on? >> you are on. >> can you hear me? >> you don't hear me. now you hear me. so i was thinking about duane's
presentation and zolaka and james thing that folks have to probably get most adjusted to, which was a point that zolaka mentioned was the substantial involvement piece of this cooperative agreement. we had a number of
i don't think were used to checking in with g.t.r.s very much during the course of the grant. we can give you a little bit of a heads-up so you can begin to plan for it as you think about this year and the upcoming year the frequency of communication
with the g.t.r. and usually we try to schedule it out, that it -- if it's not already scheduled, we'll start having check-in calls. sometimes they can go incredibly frequently. often it's, you know, beginning period to once a month
at the least, and again, the frequency can increase given the kind of complexity of the award. and a lot of that is because both we're checking in, we're checking on honestly having, and i think during the balance of our conversation today and into
tomorrow we're going to actually hopefully start talking about the substance of what you guys are taking on, the difficult questions that you are already beginning to wrestle through. and you should us hopefully you will think of us as your partner in that.
but i think lots of adjustment with that partnership relationship with the kind of substantial involvement which does have us reviewing things that may be in previous agencies you didn't have your gtrs really review very much, we do preserve that right,
reserve that right to actually, you know, review with a commitment. and if you've heard anything from james, i hope part of the takeaway you've heard from him and from others of us this morning is our desire is to be very responsive to you.
we are very committed to your success. everything you've heard today, even in zolaka's kind of hammer, dropping the hammer on you, kind of is all about y making sure that both in terms of the investment that is made, but ultimately about the
aspirations and the outcomes that you want to see happen in your region, that you're ultimately successful. so we're a partner with you. we will be as responsive as we can be and i think most folks, whether it's the debriefs that dwayne
was talking about to the list of -- if you can just think about the list of tasks that james just rattled off, and the number of kinds of questions that question end up for the last that you see listed on that, it's a lot of volume for a small staff with a huge
commitment to have customer service and responsiveness. but there's some adjustments in there undoubtedly. >> the one thing i would add is some of that frequency in the beginning is around some and that is the work plan, the consortium agreement for
reasonable grantees, the logic model, and we're going to talk about each of those shortly this afternoon. and so what you'll find is you'll be seeking us out quite a bit in those first couple of months to make sure you are moving in the right pace or
course. once that all settles down and you get into the business of work, what we've found is a decent rhythm is monthly check-many call and often we will engage folks from the field and naomil will tell you a little bit more about that to
join have contacts on the ground. some grantees actually desire more frequent communication, as you get to year two, we're finding with some of those grantees who are now in month 13, month 14, they're moving to every other month.
some of them are station at a month. but some are moving to every other month. and so what you'll find there's a lot of contact, i think most of out is actually productive. you guys are usually pretty
quick about telling us if it's not. i think with that as a context maybe we'll open the floor for some questions and see if there's anything in particular people want to ask about the roles we play. the other thing i'd
cue is mounting, if it mounts at all. is that there's a lot of inter-agency work that we do with gtr trying to make sure as many as people -- as many people as possible know about the grants, the work you are doing and trying to leverage
those o little bit about this morning from the federal partnership team. so we get queried daily, i'd say almost -- i don't think i would be exaggerating to say hourly, but we get queried several times aday even within government
about opportunities to connect the grant what is the theme? how of your grantees are working on issue x? what is the alignment here? we are also playing that piece with you helping to make those connections.
so with that, i'll see if there are any questions from the audience. right about now as all digestion starts to set in. if not, what we'll do is roll to what was going to be part two of this conversation, which is you've been hearing about us in
the building at headquarters and very much t but now we're going to actually have naomi freedman join us and actually she can take my seat. and she's going to talk a little bit about the field work in the field teams that support the work that we do.
so... and she's using our >> hello, everybody. and my only regret is that you room. i know that's challenging when you feel a little drowsy. but hopefully we'll keep you wide awake. so i'm naomi freedman.
i am the g.t.r. for several of correctly i think i have 11 of the new grantees, both challenge grants and planning grants. and i've met several of you already and i hope to meet the rest of you later today or tomorrow so -- and i will also qualify to
say, though i have been in this field for a while, i am relatively new to hud. so i am also learning a lot. so say i need to check back with someone, please understand that we're all coming up to speed together in some cases.
so today i've been asked to talk a little bit about some of the help and get from folks in the field. you heard this morning about our great partners from epa and d.o.t. and usda who are both stirring up the support -- bolstering up the support that
you grants. and obviously the team we have here from headquarters. but i wanted to just remind you of the folks that are there to help you in the field. all of the agencies have a field structure.
our field structure in some ways to that of the epa in terms of how we define our regions, the same ten regions. and actually in your binders if you had any questions of who falls into which region, under grantee summaries, there is today highlighting all of the
2011 grantees and it's divided by region, as is this table here and raise your hand if you have already regional or field office. how many of you? wow. that's a good at least a third of you.
so our goal is that every one of you soon will be raising their our structure for the field support that you will be receiving. as i explained, both hud and epa have a somewhat similar structure with the ten regional offices, and as shelly mentioned
this morning, about two-thirds of the hud employees are actually working on the regional and field level. so that's quite a lot of offices. you will see under the roles and responsibilities tab a list of what we call our sustainability
officers. so we have a pretty robust field presence when it comes to this relatively new initiative. and we call our folks sustai s.o.s for short. because we love acronyms. and you can see on that two-page
list that there are folks appointed around the country to as well as to help galvanize these issues in other communities, other than our grantees. they do all kinds of work in the field. they meet wit
counterparts from the other agencies. they might meet with state government, local government, grantee communities, not grantee communities. now, if you look at the next page, you will see a spreadsheet with colors, and on that you
will name, and it's by last name, first initial, last name. so hopefully you can figure out who's who. and you will also see all the way to the right is a column. i think it says regional rep or field rep.
that is the hud field or regional offices who is assigned to your so we have asked each region to appoint at least one person per and we are calling this person now, we have a grantee liaison. so the grantee liaison is the
person from the field, boots on the ground who knows the players a lot better than we do and could help relationships, open up doors, alert you to new funding. they are not your grant officer. they are not your g.t.r. so i'm going to see if this
powerpoint works. so there we have you, the grantee, the prime you're the body who is responsible for that long list of stuff that zolaka laid out this morning. you have your consortia. but we don't monitor your
the prime. that's your responsibility. you have subcontract's you monitor their work. we're monitoring you. we're supporting you directly. now, it worked. okay. so we have the grant officer.
and that's just a few bullets of some following the grant officer, we have the g.t.r. and as you know, you saw the list and each of you by now now who your grant officer is as well as your g.t.r. you now is the third layer.
and that is the grantee liaison. the field grantee liaison. now, clearly this is a lot of different people and we don't want this to i think folks did a great job this morning talking about the difference between a grant officer and the g.t.r.
so our hope with the field liaison is not to have another layer of red tape for you to go through. for your financial reporting. this person is not responsible for your deliverables. the grantee liaison is basically just an ally to you in the
and we're going to look for to involve them in your work, which could range from their participation on one of those monthly phone calls that dwayne talked about. it could be their effort in coming to your kick-off events. opening up
and just in general being there for you. and we'd like feedback from you as well. so if you are finding that your grantee liaison has not called you, that your is not all that helpful, you know, please let us know.
this program is relatively new. the sustainable officer program is barely two years old, and as grantee -- this grantee liaison position that we're formalizing now also is fairly so we'd love your feedback on how to make it better. and, well, anyway, i'm going to
stop right here and see if anyone has any particular questions on how this structure works? yeah? way in the back. [ inaudible ] >> uh-huh. uh-huh.
right. we are trying as hard as we can to fill that completely out and as you've noticed, there are a few gaps. so i will make sure we fill tha that list. so apologies if currently there are a few blank spaces.
have you heard from anyone in the field office at this point? sir, have you heard >> no. they've not. well, we'll work on trying to firm that up a little bit. >> okay. great.
any other questions? yes. >> sure. great question. sorry to skip that. first of all, these people are only spending a few hours a week on about half of these people are
from field policy and management, and about half of these people are from specific program offices, like housing or community planning and development. all of these people, these 70 or so sustainability officers on your list have other jobs.
they have stepped forward, filled out an application process, coordinated with their regional administrator and with our office, and take on some extra work. in some cases, they are taking on a lot of extra work. they're maybe spending several
days of their week doing this. in other case, they're spending a few hours a week. our hope officers are embedding the sustainability work into the everyday work that they do. we'll all know that we're successful if we don't have to
have special sustainability if everything we do with these grants are business as usual. but we know at this point it is not business as usual. so we need to create these special appointments, and these folks are working hard on extra responsibilities.
so in terms of what are they doing already, a lot of them are facilitating connections between the other agencies. you were here this morning when we had the panel of the partners. they're trying to do that in their region.
so they're improving communication, for example, with their regional and state d.o.t.s. they're trying to get usda and epa to that they can coordinate investments. so a lot of them have been
holding educational sessions, forums. one of the big responsibilities is reaching out to the grantees. that's one of several things that they have been doing pretty much over the last year and a half. dwayne, did you want to add
anything to that? >> let we're going to have a chance to talk about it over the next day and a half. but i wanted to explain one thing just as a heads-up on this slide. and this relates to your
consortia. for the regional planning -- how many regional planning grantees do we have? so during the course of the next to be numbers of times where the community challenge folks will say does that apply to me? or does that apply to me as a
regional planning grantee? there are a number of additional things that happen with regional planning grantees and requirements and kind of complexity. one is this it's not to say obviously that the community challenge folks
don't have partners. the thing i wanted to mention given the relationship with the prime is you all who are particularly regional planning grantees should realize that your processes are pretty public, if they're not public already, they will be
very public, that often whether it's the regional engagement team or any of us who visit you, we will often have a chance to interact with your your consortia will get business cards and they will contact us, so even though our primary communication often is with the
prime, it does not obviously prevent any of your consortia members from actually having conversation with us. now, it's a very interesting check and balance in because what will happen is you will often say certain things to us and your consortia members
may say, actually, that's not at all happening. or you might want to ask the grantee a question about x and i just wanted to g because there were a lot of folks in the first year who weren't quite used to the multiple -- multi-lateral ways
in which communication actually happens. and the fact that we open ourselves up to be communicated with. so it's just one thing as heads-up. >> i guess i just want to also clarify, i think the slide does
it. but all of the things we talked about this morning that you need to run by your encouraging you to have very close relationship with your field and regional folks. but they are not the same as your g.t.r.
they cannot approve work plans. they cannot releases. what they can do, though, is give you input into drafts. it might save you time if you do a little bit of back and forth with your grantee liaison and say do you think we're kind of
getting what they want? but they are not empowered to approve, disapprove, or do any of those kind of official duties that we're really responsible for. >> i just observed from year that in the places where we've been successful in incumbent
grating what we're -- integrating what we're now calling grantee liaisons, they have been really adept at understanding your context and making timely recommendations on people to connect to and how to work with the partners. that's
spot. and that's really what we're trying to strengthen by formalizing this, not necessarily increasing extra roles for them. but just giving them the ability within a bureaucracy, frankly, to do that work consistently and
aggressively with you. and if it doesn't quite feel clear at this point, my guess is no question in your mind about who to call for what, just by going through the experience. >> so any other general questions? because i wanted to introduce
someone else from hud speaking about taking advantage of other hud resources. there's someone else here who is in a minute. but any other questions about what the field folks do and what they don't do?|| please step forward.
so as dwayne said, this is a work in progress and we are fully aware that there will be some variation from region to region, depending on the peaty of the -- personality of the person you are working with and what they focus on with you. so just keep us posted.
we're going to try to circle them into our update calls and we welcome your feedback. so i want to introduce alexa rosenberg. and she is here at and she's with the neighborhood choice program. and this is an example of where
we are beginning to embed the sustainability message within other programs at hud. and this is a really, really exciting program, and we think there's great overlap and great potential for our programs to work together. thank you,
oh, alexa, i'm sorry. alexa. >> yes. hi. i'm alexa rosenberg, i'm with the choice neighborhoods program. and i think we wanted to use this as an opportunity -- you
heard earlier this morning i believe from some other agency partners. but we are also making connections internally to support the work on the ground, in the field. so choice neighborhoods is another one of hud's signature
place-based initiatives, and we are a key partner with the sustainability communities initiative. some of you may be familiar with choice neighborhoods. how many of you have heard of the program? that's pretty good.
so it is a program designed to transform neighborhoods of concentrated poverty that have severely distressed either assisted multi-family housing into viable mixed income communities with high quality services and assets. and so in many cases, the scale
may be different from the sustainable communities initiative programs, but some of the the program has three key pillars. housing, people and neighborhood. so on the housing side, looking
to transform the distressed housing into mixed income, energy efficient, physically and financially viable over the term. and with one for one replacement of units. on the people side, kind of improving access to quality
services in the realms of education, health, public safety, employment, and then with right of return for original residents. and then on the neighborhood income, improved community, assets both physical, commercial, recreational and
then transit and retail as well. so it's really a program that supports kind of comprehensive community planning at the neighborhood investment in partnerships with schools, hospitals, local service providers, proximity to jobs, services, and
transportation and, you know, some of the similar goals of walkable communities, green and healthy homes, etc. like the partnership for the sustainable communiti neighborhoods is also part of another white house inter-agency initiative called the
neighborhood revitalization working group, or n.r.i., some of you have heard of. this is a partnership between hud, the department of justice, the department of education, the services, and treasury. so another set of agencies working together to kind of
align programs and resources. we have both planning and implementation grants, and we are running both of these competitions in some of you may already have partners who have this one or another of these grants. some of you may be interested in
partnering with someone who can apply or you yourselves may apply. so the implementation nofa actually is on the street the planning grant nofa will be coming out shortly. and naomi asked me to remind folks that you do not have to
have had a planning grant in order to apply for an implementation grant. so that's important for some people. so just overlap, of the 13 planning grantees for choice neighborhoods that were just
awarded in january, 11 of them got two bonus points for preferred sustainability status. so that's a lot. 11 out and i think of the sci grantees in the room, many communities also have choice neighborhoods when i looked at the list just
briefly, i think little rock has a 2011 choice neighborhoods sacramento has a 2011 planning opalocka has a 2011 training boston has a 2010-11 implementation plan. buffalo, new york, has a 2010 planning. providence has
memphis has a 2010 planning and seattle also has an so there are a lot of you who are already i think working with some of our grantees and we hope that that opportunity grows in the future. so if people are exploring this overlap in more
detail, i'm available tomorrow. i'm not sure, we may want to, you know, gather those folks who have this overlap together. but i am available. i can also anyone has any. >> great. thank you so much, alexa.
i sure. >> so, dwayne. are you ready to move on? >> dwayne, as dwayne comes up, just so, and again, lots of us are going to be right after lunch, glazing over, not sufficiently caffeinated, knowing that -- knowing that one
of the significant things about was lost on folks is that choice neighborhoods, both on the planning and implementation is a preferred sustainability status so when shelly was talking about it this morning in terms of those two bonus points, when often it's a fraction of a point
that separates win and loss, it will t popular people who are very interested in either the choice neighborhoods program or any of the other preferred sustainability status programs. so any of those suite of programs, and we'll talk a
little bit later on about where pss is goi important things to kind of keep in mind about how do you go to the next stage of implementation. >> yeah. and in competitions here at hud at least, often the division
between winners and almost winners is usuallyless than a point. so i'm going to have ask a going to get them all on stage before it's over here, to come up and join us. most notably rachael kirby, will be leading our conversation
around the program and policy guidance. partner due soon. we've decided as an office we're going to grant rachael an additional rotation, maternity rotation shortly. so shows as your gtr will get to meet
some of the rest of us for a few months also. and i'm not sure why solon got off stage because i think he's still supposed to be up there. yes you are. sit down. >> so in this session, we're going to walk through all of the
program policy guidance documents that we've posted on our website. i think we have a powerpoint. i d so these are the documents that lolaka talked about earlier. they're formal documents. they look very
that answer questions that we've had a lot. some of these are formalizing guidance that dwayne developed for our 2010 grantees, and we just put them into this sort of memo form. some of changes to guidance like the
food guidance that we'll talk about. later. so you can find them, you can either type in this website or go to our website and if you go down und thing under resources says policy guidance for existing
and if you click on that link, you get to a page with all these documents. they link the you have all of them in your binders. and we will walk through them now. we won't go through them quite
in order. so if we skip one, that's why. al they're labeled by the office, the year we issued them and the order we issued them in. so 2011-03 preferred sustainability status, you don't have in your binder because it
was replaced updated that guidance with the information for 2012. and also there's reporting for a combination hud d.o.t. grant's. but we did not have the pleasure of doing that again this year. so that's not relevance for any
so it's not in your binder. so i think dwayne, maybe john is going to talk about your work plans. >> me again. so in short order, and you heard this referred to by zolaka and james and our colleagues from the grant officer division about
building a complete work plan. you see the slide in front of period that starts upon your execution date of about a 60-day turn-around. you see the guidance, and again, this is all listed in the program guidance you actually have here about how we need you
to kind of think about the work seriousness of the task of the work plan, we encourage again, and i was mentioning to a fellow grantee earlier today, early engagement with the gtr around your work if last year's any indication, and i'll invite dwayne to
clarify or correct what i'm about to say, the way we usually did the construction of the work plan is for you to build that 60 days in 30-day kind of increments. meaning in the first 20 days set a kind of informal deadline to yourself that i'd like to get a
draft work plan given the guidance that's been given to the gtr, short order begin to share to naomi's point earlier that draft work plan with your regional engagement team. so those field grant liaison, other folks in the agencies who
important set of interactions in that 60-day window because it begins to reveal all the ways in which your work plan actually align with other investments and other efforts that are happening in the region of which you may or may not so that as we go into that next
20 days of interaction with regional engagement team, by the time you hit that last third, 40 to 60 days, you actually have both feedback from your gtr and our office. you now have from your regional engagement team, and as you head into the
last third, you actually can finalize your work plan knowing full well that on behalf of the partnership in our office you actually have all the kind of feedback you need. you see the constituent elements there, the written work plan that
explains bobject is, major activities, specific steps, tasks and responsibilities and anticipated outcomes, a worksheet that maps out the elements in kind of a work plan summary form. and then i think all of you, when you got
one of your many, many e-mails that you will yet to receive from dwayne marsh -- >> several. that we sent you samples of work plans from last year to give you ways in which grantees responded to that program guidance. now, dwayne, clarifications or
corrections? >> you made it sound almost strategic the way you explained it on television. >> thank you. >> that was really good. he's right. we sent out the sample.
we tried to include some that were smaller, some larger, some challenge, some regional. we would have possibly been having conversations in the window between then and now except we were preparing for this meeting. so what i'd say is that really
coming off are preparing that first version your gtr to make the highest priority to have a conversation with your initial draft. so we're not going to lose time that we may have lost this last week or so getting ready for the convening with you waiting for
your gtr to get back. if you want to try to s submit something a couple days before, we're making ourselves available for that. the field staff i think are also prepared. they recognize that they need to get us their input quickly so
that we can factor that in as we have the conversation with you. but the dialogue is between the gtr and the gra elements that we want to see there. we added the gant chart, or tomline because we found that was actually a helpful way not
just fur us to understand, but also for your partners or consortium members to track that there were pretty clear about what makes for a solid gant chart. so if you haven't started a vfertion with your gtr, don't fret about that.
but do prioritize getting those times set with your gtr to get those conversations going. >> i've also found it helpful even if you have -- even if you don't have a full draft, but you have, you know, a draft of one of the tasks, if you want to send that to your gtr, it can be
really helpful to get feedback on that task or first section before you go an and finish it. so then you can incorporate that feedback the first time you write the draft instead of the second time. all right.
consortium agreements. >> so this is the part where challenge grantees can sigh reliefs and regional grantees can listen a little more closely. we actuallyment materials we sent in that communication awhile ago sent
considerations in building the consortium agreement. i want to put a little backdrop on that. for us, this is in some ways the most important document we review during the course of the grant because it is the rules of doing business for your
collectives. and it has to not only shine in those moments where whipping along at top speed, but when the moments of greatest tension that are going to naturally emerge during your planning process, the document has to hold up.
so you might find us at certain points really challenging you on things like the struck thursday you put in or how your governance is set up or how decisions will certain way. but it's born on experience from working with the ten grantees on
important elements to have clear and clearly laid out in the agreement you have. once you've gone through the trouble, frankly, of getting all your partners to agree and buy into an agreement structure and to sign on to that, you don't want to reopen that c
and have to renegotiate the agreement. so to that end, we found ten or so principles we think are really essential to building an i'm going to go through those really quickly. note, you have 120 days to work this
we, in the phases that solon described priestly, think of this as in thirds as well. because really this conversation you are having with your consortia to come to agreement on what you want to submit, this as you want to send us to make sure we get it where we
want it, by we i mean all of us. the middle 40 days is really where we're hammering out those last details. but we leave some window for that. then we really want to leave more than a month for signing as much time as possible,
some partners are going to need to have meetings, you know, council meetings or other boards to meet. and so we want to make sure you don't get left in a place where you've only got 25 days left to immediate the deadline and there's not another meeting of
your council for 32 days. we try to get through these as possible. so the ten things, i'd say one is really clearly stating the goals of the consortium. you should lay out the high level goals and milestones, as well as the notion that this
for the regional plans, this is a driving document that will guide future planning in the region. products that are going to be created as a process or consequence of the process you want to lay those out as well. we want to articulate the
specific roles to be executed by the different entities. so the lead applicants should clearly be spelled out the. the function of each kin participating organization spelled out. the tears of part -- piers of participation and ways people
can participate should be laid out as well. they should be able to clearly know where they can plug in and make a difference. we also want to hear about, we hear engagement of communities and who will bring their
perspectives to the governance structures. that really is leaving the model behind of we had a lot of people who aren't in the plan process come to the meeting and we felt good about that. this is about translating that into the governa
leadership and actual work by those communities. so these structures that you describe are one of the ways to do that. you want to specify the accountability mechanisms. you want to make sure people will be held for their
responsibility and what the consequences are if they don't meet those. believe me, if you don't do that you'll wish you had done based on our experience thus far. be clear on which parties are bringing staff and which ones
are bringing other kinds of expertise. be sure your terms of membership are clear in the consortium. and the measures you use to track the progress and participation of those commitments. you want to make sure you
clarify your decision make be certain that certain steps are identified that show how day to day decisions are made so people who are new to the process or someone outside of the process can understand that and not accuse you of being in the black box on how this is
moving forward. you want to make sure you detail recommendations from the working groups that y think virtually ever regional planning grant created working groups and how those actually are integrate islamabad the deliberations -- it graded --
are integrated. those working group resolutions carry supremacy in the plan unless the leadership or executive group can bring cause why they didn't go with those recommendations. there are different tools and we can share those with you that
people can use. definitely spell out the governance structure. articulate major aspects will go forward. structures for subcommittee, working interrelationship of these bodies and how agreements will
be reached and implemented. talk about how resident input can be incorporated into decision making. and again, how you clearly lay out the traditionally under-represented populations connect both opportunities to provide perspective and also to
decisions and outcomes. if there's an existing structure that works, explain how it's being modified to incorporate. if you are creating a one you should specify that. this is all written down, by the way. so if you are not taking notes,
don't feel bad. joinability. say special term. if you like to facilitate it. it's really about the fact that if you are doing your work well you are going to discover someone in your region who is not part of your process in day
one. no matter how much outreach you did to your propoet l and some of you got high marks on, that there's still some people you haven't reached yet. be incorporated into the process in a meaningful way. also be sure to build their
capacity to join the process later along the way without -necessarily to go back to square one because you have new members. so think about those, how you integrate those perspectives. where it's appropria compensation involved for a
partner being involved, make sure you create the right individual instruments for that. we've talked about that earlier. you want to document the benefits and expected contributions from people. you are expecting from your partners and
they're getting something back from you. they're getting connection to other federal agencies. we found that groups that document those benefits very clearly tend to have an easier time with their recruitment. you want to detail special
conditions where they are appropriate. they can take numerous forms. specifically around if there's changes in representation from a member. if there are changes in the consortium structure or agreement, in the duration of
representation are -- you are already thinking beyond the three-year grant about how to make this longer standing in terms of participation those kind of things spell out. you also want to be clear with provision that was mentioned earlier, that roll down to your
subgrantees. and there's some optional considerations if you have any breathing room left whatsoever at that point to build into your agreement that aren't spelled out. so as i mentioned, we'll review these with you and
we'll try to bring all the experience that we have from last year. we recognize that your place is completely different and unique than every other place and we couldn't possibly understand it not having been from there. that said we have a range of
experience we're going to bring to bear and hope that it's useful as you develop those so with that i'll hand it back for other thoughts. >> so my colleagues may have a quick word about facility our nice expression. if you are not already sensing
it, i would encourage you to live it, which is this kind of tension you are going to feel pa planning grantees where this is and applicable. is the tension between what parts of your structure are fixed and what parts of your
structure are actually joinable. and one of the things that i think any number of our gtrs can give given the kind of public nature of your work, where people have an expectation in the public arena that they should easily be able to interface and interact
with the structure. and they will hear from hud and to encourage the level of kind of robust engagement. but as you construct your structure and your consortia there will definitely be this kind of notion of where is it that voting and non-voting and
fixed and other structures are joinable. so i just wanted to flag that for you because our desire with you is going to be as open and transparent as you can be in your work and to encourage people to feel like they have a that's the disposition we will
bring. that will be the way in which we will interact with you as we're checking in, particularly during this kind of consortium agreement drafting process. and part of what you will have to i think your burden will be is to say we are open, we are
we want there to be joinability. there may be other structures that where we have that that we can be that much clearer about. but that was one i think, there are others. but that was one i know from year one where we had -- we've had some tension.
should we take questions as we go along? or -- yeah. high don't you come up to the mic, if that's -- >> hi. i wanted to clarify the difference between a subgrantee agreement and a consortium
agreement, particularly in terms of the provisions. if we have consortium members who are not going to be receiving hud funds, we have some of those who are not going to be receiving hud funds, but who have indicated that they
will provide in kind we have other consortium members who will not be receiving hud funds and also have not already designated in kind match. and the question is, do -- provisions apply? >> the consortium agreement sets the table for the entire
partnership. so let's just say you have 75 consortium members and 10 of them are getting money from the your consortium agreements that document you theoretically have version even if in the roles spelled out and you say in it we often have a phrase we put in.
we can share with you about individuals who are receiving financial contribution will receive a separate instrument. then you do an instrument for those getting the money. and those you spell out the roll-down provisions. following the procedures and
behaviors of the grant that you expect from all your partners. >> but the roll-downs go where the money goes and the agreement spells out the joint behavior and approach that you want to see from your partners. >> kind of following up on her question, if we have
subrecipients that are incurring costs or spending personnel time now prior to their contract or things reimbursable? even though they're prior to us having a contract with them? >> if they are doing work that is after the effective date of the grant and you are -- and it
pertains to the what you've actually contracted with them but if they're doing work prior to the effective date, that work is not -- we -- that's why we push to get you guys on board even to come to this meeting. we can't reimburse for money for activities that happen before
the effective date. >> but the prime grantee, we're under contract. we have our agreement with signed. my subrecipients, if they're incurring costs, is that reimbursable? or do they have to wait to be
under contract with -- >> what kind of work are they doing at this point? >> well, like let's say legal review of that contract. or let's say developing the plan for their work items. >> my recommendation would be you have them handle the legal
review and submit that, submit the actual agreement and get that signed before they start diving into other aspects. there's some limited set-up costs that can actually be dealt with for them. you want them to get signed on before they start doing too much
additional work. >> but your subgrantee agreement isn't -- it isn't your >> right. >> just whatever your normal, you know, you're giving some other organization money agreement i mean it probably should refer
to this grant, but it's not -- not your consortium agreement. so you don't have to get that signed before you can do a subgrantee agreement. and there's a certain amount of cost of doing business when you are moving into partnership with the cost of that.
that's just -- we expect everybody does this work. you do some work that leads to more work that you get paid for that's why you want to have them signing on as quickly as possible and have them able to be reimburse it more as much of that work as you can.
thank you. >> are there all of the partners that we identified in the grant application don't sign the consortium agreement within the first 120 days? and kind of a related question, does a partner have to sign the
consortium agreement in order for any resources they dedicate to be counted as matching resources? ed is behind the curtain. he's producing the whole show. this is where you can cue the thunder and lightning for failure to get everyone to sign
within 120 days. no, here's how i answer that question. we should make every effort to get complete days. because that's what the nofa states. that said you heard earlier that
we're not here to keep you from being successful. if you get to day 118 and you are chasing that last couple applications i would not jump out of a window, because you are afraid you are not going to get those. but i also
pursuing them heavily. we have a grantee who had 145 partners and a lot of those are jurisdictions, municipalities. they really tried to get them all by day 120. they did pretty good. but so just work with your gtr. that would be me.
and i'm sure you won't get situation that's unfavorable. then in terms of them signing on to be able to access the dollars, i would highly recommend that as your strategy. as opposed to letting them spend the money before they sign on the consortium agreement.
>> wichita, kansas. my question is, you talked a little bit about the accountability measures. but when you have like an instance where you had 145 partners, i mean they're not all going to come to the table at
everything that you would require them to be at. and so i guess what are some examples of accountability that you'll be looking for in the consortium agreement? >> and it speaks to the roles you have laid out. so that's a good agreement says,
you know, if you are a member of the working committee on a subject matter issue that we're going to cover within a two-year period we're going to have 12 meetings make at least nine of those or have representatives. so you kind of spell out those
kinds of actions. and then, you know, if you fail to do that you may be asked to, you know, be replaced. it's those kind of terms. but we don't say everybody who is a part of your consortium has the same bar of participation and same
you want your account about to be commensurate with the responsibility you want. and i think that's in some of the models we shared. that's also what your gtr will work with you. if you have a specific example they'll try to find a good match
for that. >> one quick amend not is -- amendment to that, and this may be assumed by you and others, is you applied and were awarded partially because of the partners you brought to the table. it was a -- it could have been
disqualifying element if there are certain partners who quite frankly disappear, right. so part of what we've got to preserve is you applied, we gave you guidance about the nature of partners that need to be brought to the table and the range of types, right.
so sudde all jurisdictions, no non-profit partners, technically you are in violation of the nofa, right. and so i would go back to the way in which you applied. you may have had lots of letters of support, some that you expected would actually be in
with others that may come kind of episodically through process, but preserve the ening theority of what you apply to because that's the reason why you were awarded. >> is that grant example i used the 145 members, there's a
reason they're still chasing down every member. we don't -- you do want to bring who you brought to the table where p >> i appreciate that comments about joinability. we've already been approached by a couple of groups that were not
part of the consortium and they would like to be. but what about parts of the consortium that might not want to be for financial or other reasons if they were -- if committed to match funding funding let's say and now they're not in a position to do so.
have you had experience with that in the first year of -- >> cue thunder and lightning again. so these are planning grants. and they're three year memphis we all kno future do not come out exactly the way we anticipate.
that said, there are certain thresholds you make and points you scored based on the match you had. part of the work your gtr does is works with you. so let's say you had a million dollar grant with 40% leverage. even let's say
first question is why did you promise 80% leverage. let's just say a partner is going to cost you 5,000 of that $800,000 you had. we're probably going to be able to work that out. if a partner comes out who is half your leverage we
issue. so that's our role as gtrs to navigate you to meet as much of the aspiration you put forward in the grant as possible. but you'll hear us use that term a lot aspiration because we recognize that if this work were that simple we wouldn't have
this grant program. >> my question work plans. somebody referenced earlier -- well, none of you got 100. i assume you were referring to the work plan that was submitted as part of the original grant am i -- is that correct?
so that is the basis from which we will now make improvements and work -- okay. so we take that first -- >> just keep nodding. >> get in touch with our points were, and then tweak those? we're not developing a work plan
all over again, but rather using that one as a springboard to getting to this next level where, you kno buy-in from everybody and we can get to a plan that's acceptable? >> you got a four-part nod from solon, which is hard to do, so that's good.
but what i'd say is that you -- we gave you models or templates to use. if your word version is in different format than our word version it's not like it's the end of the world. if you had such a sensational version and your application you
want to build off of that, just touch base with your gtr before you go too far down that road. make sure the format is going to work and what you are covering is there. i see what you are saying. i don't rem examples.
but maybe that's another one of those e-mail things that just didn't get read. so -- >> if no one from your team -- check with your team today. if no one from your team got the e-mail that said welcome as the first word in the
had a bunch of stuff attached -- >> well, i remember welcome. >> ah. scroll down to those attachments. they're there. but if nobody got one, come see us, give us your card, make sure we have your contact
information. it would be great to walk away from this meeting with everybody on tha quite lengthy, but they're lengthy for a reason. and it's very helpful you read them. in general.
>> ? in general she says. >> one more question to clarify consortium b because last year when we received preferred sustainability status, we were told that preferred sustainability status was open
to anyone in our region, whether or -- or or planning grant area, whether or not they were a consortium is way that it works? >> we're going to actually go over that in some detail when we get to 2012.1, preferred sustainability status.
so hold that thought. >> your >> he's got his binder out with the budget showing. i'm getting nervous. i have like the 424 that we have for our program. and we have a list of and i don't mean to point.
your name tag but he mentioned that if we don't -- i take that as our partners, correct. >> so therefore what about the dollar amount allocated under the 424 for the subgrantees, meaning what if we don't use all those funds?
i could have -- at an earlier discussion advised that we have flexibility to move funds around and that's not that big of an issue? >> let me say a little bit about so you have a partner you wrote into your grant for 50 grand to do study of transportation
corridors. they come back at 42,000 and they've finished the that $8,000 can be used for some other purpose. now, there are a couple ways it works. you could have $8,000 still in that subgrantee or consulting
line for other purposes. you talk with your gtr, they say that makes sense you go forward. it could be you decide we need to put that to purnell because this is these meetings hud makes us go to is taking too much time. that's fine too.
as dollars move from category to category, and i mean like 10 major categories on your budget, we track that. when you get to 10% of your hud budget moving between categories we have to do amendment. so you might say that 10,000 --
or 8,000 was half of your allotment. we'll say this is approved, please note you've moved 5% across the lines. when we get to 10% we're going to do an amendment and it goes from there. so i'm going to push this
fo consortium agreement question and get to 2011.4 i guess since 3 was -- yes, there we go. >> hello? i'm thaddeus winseck, the grant officers for a few of you. i'm going to go over the oshc guidance, documentation
reimbursement or requests. unlike consortium agreements this will be for everyone for regional and challenge grantees. there's basically four key pieces of items you need to reimbursement on cost you've occurred. first is the hud 27053.
next is your hud oshc grant reimbursement request tomorrow. that's part three. both of these you certainly the 27053 was included in your award letter. if you don't have your grants reimbursement request tomorrow part three we can send it out to
you accordingly. next, this is important. you need supporting documentation depending on what type so, you know, personnel, you want your payroll sheet. payroll report. contractors, consultants and
others, invoices is your best bet. finally for other direct costs we'll just need copies of your receipts for those. just some sort of documentation or record of costs incurred. finally, and this is more
important for more larger costs is a short narrative detailing the reimbursement requests and, again, it can only be -- it could be a few sentences something very small. it could be a paragraph or two or even a conversation on top of if it's a much longer, larger
cost. so you can always work with us as your gtr and we'll always guide you through it. but those are the four pieces that we always need for a cost reimbursement. >> let me say a little something here by the way.
we love all of you. those of you who are new to us we are beginning to love you, but by month three or four it's true. we love those of you who submit good reimbursement requests a little bit more because when you are racing to beat the federal
close at 8:00 and you've been hammering at it, we need this money, please reimburse us and we go into the transmission and the pdf is faded and we can't read the numbers on the checks and the stuff is not in order and there's something missing or it's got letter code we can't
track or, or, o things that drive you a little bit mad. so this is the basics of what we need. but we're actually going to based on our experience put out some unofficial guidance on ten things to make your gtr happy
as they're quickly processing and it's true, the clearer they are the faster we can turn t around. jared is actually here. he is a dual grantee. he did the stand-up. i think he was embarrassed they came in a 10 and 11.
but he can speak to the fact that those that come in cleanly go out quickly. so i don't know -- he's nodding in agreement. you check with him later about the ones that wer >> i'm only a stickler because i enjoy life outside of jail.
it's a beautiful place. [ laughter ] the other thing i'd say, too, is that you can -- pay stubs. it's by system. some people's accounting, financial systems are actually easier for them to generate pay
stubs to show that people have been paid than it is to have a ledger that actually works as a documentation. we'll work with you to figure out what the best system is. and i'll say between the grants i have and those for gtr on rotation inow seen
about 48 grantees. and about 45 accounting systems. so remember your gtr when you are submitting these things because there's a little bit of sanity at stake when they do an approval. >> also, just please e-mail these to us.
it will take us a month or more to get it. >> and often when we get it the pages are all stuck together and yellow and like you get the ink on the other side of the page piles of paper. please e-mail them. >> absolutely.
>> finally, just add one thing. in the interest of keeping things simple for the gtr, it makes it a lot easier for us when you are for consultants services, for example, supplies, materials, what we do, we really just look at the invoices and we add them
up and we see if figure. >> both that and part three form. that category part three form, that's what she was saying we're working toward getting online for you to make it easier. until it does, tha
critical for us to match those up. >>> we are environmental clearance until the end, because it's so fun. there's a guidance in here about indirect admission procedures. if you don't have a rec incorrect and want one, this is
how you get one, talk to your grant officer. >> the next one is semiannual requirements. >> we have already talked about this one at some length. what i will say is for the 10 grantees we gave them additional guidance for their year-end
submission based on learned from the semiannuals, and we will share that with you guys a little bit closer to the time. it's like complementary guidance, and we will share that soon, so you can keep that in mind as you are moving forward.
think about writing it up, so it's useful for us as grant officers, and as i mentioned people are constantly asking us for leverage opportunities to your grants, and how well you tell your story. so stay tuned for that. >> and you might want to just
listed in this guidance are required twice a year, and some are only required once a year. you only submit every year, not every six any questions about those documents? next. #.
>> when shelly and partnership team talked about the status, i was sitting right back in the corner and looking at lots of nods of heads and saying it's a secretary donovan at the beginning of our program was deeply committed to preferred sustainability status and trying
to appoint the the machinery of the agency to be aligned to the visibility principles and the work you are doing. for preferred sustainability status there is program guidance about how this needs to operate, and it actually applies to your
regional and challe so all of you here in the room, it applies to you, and you would have submitted as part of your application package, but if there are any errors in your maps of what the a geography is of your grant we need to make sure we get the
maps online because as you can imagine there was a question earlier what is the project area of the grants and what would be included for the faiferl psf status and that is from the maps online. make sure to let us know whether the maps you submitted are
correct, the relevant geography again is within the regional geography of the grant, for the community challenge grantees within the project neighborhood based scale or sometimes at the level of the city. the entity that can certify
applicants for pss bonus points is the designated point of cont exception. the exception is if you were applying for psf status, you have to get your regional administrator to certify the pss status
of lessons of folks who tell us like they can self in a napoleonic kind of way with all the points known to mankind that's not exactly how it works. >> i can say. there are a lot of forms in hud, and this is the simplest form there are three questions, the
name of the contact or the regional administrator who should sign this. we have people in the last competition who self medicated and signed their own forms, and because we saw very clearly how to get the status, we could not this is very important to note,
you have to have the conversation. you have to show the alignment and commit to working together, and that's all it takes, but the right person needs to sign the >> i'm sorry. i'm trying to figure out what level i'm at here
supervisor, you mean the hud regional supervisor or director by region, or do you mean the grant region? >> here is how it works. which grant are you again? >> regional. >> what's your grant? who are you?
>> regional planning. >> tricounty is going to plea for choice neighborhood as the lead applicant, and they want the points. you would go to the regional administrator of the hud region five administrator has appointed
someone else to review your thing and sign it and in this case it would be brian gillan, and he would be the one to certify and go from there. >> and takes you down a different lansing housing code would be one to apply for, and they go to
me? >> they go to you. >> ding, ding, ding, ding, ding. >> so the process to certify an application bonus points, and again it's the hud 2995 form. you will become intimately familiar with this. remember there are a set of hud
grants, and competitive grants, and the applicant is engaged in the activities, and you are essentially checking for alignment. here is something you should think about. as we initiated pr
sustainability status, there were several grantees, and i won't count how many, but several grantees, realizing that it can actually be a powerful thing you are doing, and you are endorsing an application, and we told you before it's often a separates win and loss, and
that's pretty powerful. some have actually created structures in their consortia to field applications and actually be as an aside an ad hoc committee, and you will hear lots of today and tomorrow about the rules of the road and what we encourage you to do, and
there's a lot of flexibility in how you do your certification, and we just need to make sure the baseline rules that you see listed on the slide are actually followed. but if you want process, create a number of members of your consortium who
are fielding the applications, open it up, and again, out of a rule of openness and transparency, and given the power and authority you have, we would encourage you to do that if that makes sense. the criteria, complete the hud form 2995 form.
it's like three pages, and you will remember three answers, but i think it's like a back and forth. it's like two pages. the applicant is including the form 2995 when they submit the application for argument sake for the choice
neighborhoods program. we do reserve the right, hud, that is, reserve the right to actually check whether you points were -- there is a fail safe there, and we did have a number of grantees we could talk a little bit later on who were a little worried about this power.
quite frankly a little worried about saying knowing that they may actually encounter a level of volume. again, we could talk a little bit more about the practical lessons learned. >> actually i want to pose the question to you.
we have a number of situations wherein effect we have grants so for example just among the grants i'm managing, we have the city of warren here today, and it is within the jurisdiction of the northeast ohio sustainable community consortium, and we type of governments.
it was a physical 10 grantee, and we will be doing that sort of situation. >> four points. four points. >> the city would have the option of appro if the grant program suited that, and i think it's a
strategic call on their part to submit that or they could go to the regional administrator if it makes more sense for them to declare and be they have the option. >> and can an applicant double dip? it only has two points, and
really strong and clear two points. >> in other words, there's only two points if possible, and you can't double up and get four points or something like that. >> you probably confuse the person reviewing the application and make it more
challenging, so you probably should just go for the one. >> all right. so we can just summarize the so there's four sides on this >> there's a list of programs. >> yep. >> you see part of your agenda called the secret and part of it
is the current and sustainability status, and these are important to make note of and we will tell you a little bit more later on where pss might be headed. we recently on february put out a new guidance piece 2012-02 on the use of grant
funds to purchase food and beverages. prior to the issuance of this notice, hud took the position or office took the position that grant funds could not be used to purchase food or beverages under any circumstances. but we realize, we understand
that the providing food public meetings is a convenience to the public. it's an enticement to people to participate. frequently meetings are in the evening, and people have to go straight from work to the meeting, and they made th
dinner, and it's just a major convenience to be able to have a little bite to eat at the meeting, and so we had a conversation with the officer of the general council ogc it's the opm circulars that were pertinent to this issue, and other rules and regs, hud's
rules and regs, and we were to develop this guidance piece, which does in fact permit the use of grant funds to be used to purchase food and beverages under certain circumstances, and in a nutshell, you always need to check with your using grant funds to purchase
food and beverages for a meeting. the technical language we use in the guidance piece let me review the program language here, because we got it straight from ogc. we wanted to modify it to make it a little more useful, and
unfortunately they didn't permit us to do that. the food and beverages with grant funds will be provided at a meeting where the primary purpose is to disseminate technical information as approved by the grantee's gtr.
what does that mean, disseminate technical it could mean just about anything. in a planning exercise, naturally one of the things that you will all be doing at some point is gathering data and if you are
grantee, obviously you are going to be putting together a lot of data information that you will use to develop your plan, and you will provide it to the public, and it wil consortia meetings, and various committee meetings, compared to how your initiative is
structured but certainly at public meetings, and if you are a category 2 regional grantee, you already have place. well, certainly you are going to be discussing that existing plan with the public at your meetings.
if you are a challenged grantee, very much the same but the rule of thumb is to check with the gtr. we have a couple other requirements here and the meeting in question has to be opened to the general public, and that doesn't necessarily
mean it has to meeting for the purpose of getting input on a plan. it could be a consortia meeting. if you have a committee structure it could be a committee m be open to the public, and if the meeting is -- i don't know
if any of you would have a situation where you would have a meeting that would not be open to the public, that would be open to consortia members or staff or something like that. it would not be permissible to use grant funds to purchase food for that type of meeting.
let's see. what other requirements we have here. well, we do that over the length of the grant you cannot use more than 2.5% of your total budget for food and beverages. we do require that
agenda with the gtr as part of the approval process. you will need to show your gtr that the meeting is open to the information is going to be disseminated and then really, finally, just use your -- just use good judgment as to the types of food and beverages that
you purchase. certainly alcohol permissible to use grant funds to purchase alcohol. >> or matching funds. >> everything i say about grant funds applies we have quite a bit of language in here about avoid expenses
that would be considered lavish,, wasteful or unnecessary. we will leave it at that. we probably don't want to have servings of fillet mignon or caviar, that type of thing. when i was a planner i remember going to a
>> that is good we have this >> just a couple of things, it wasn't like we woke up 11 months in and said people have arrangem have access. the political moment we were in, and some of the things that were happening and being exposed
around spending on food. we were waiting for a moment to bring the guidance to bear, which we have now, and the 2.5% may seem but if you think about a $3 million grant, 2.5%, or 100,000, but as we have a couple grants, if you went to 5% as an
example, a large number, tens of thousands being spent on food, and as james like to say, that's the washington post test. we don't want to end up there for a reasonable expense of 2.5% is where we landed. the other thing i would say is you can get
series of meetings. they are all the same meeting in different places you can boast the gtr and not have to come back and get that every time. >> that's the secret sauce. >> we are going to table this. this particular conversation is going to be incorporated in the
secret sauce part of the agenda. equity dimensions to the nofa. if there's something among other things that undergirths all of you being in the room, and in some cases some who didn't make it, it's this to equity and opportunity.
we have a regional requirement that y surgt secret sauce presentation that has exciting things to kind of talk through, but guidance that you see in your program guide issued around that, and we will field questions a little bit later o
that means for the regional planning grantees. >> and this is the point where you are at your absolute lowest energy level during the day, so we are going to have everyone in region 6 and 7, the basket. if you don't remember, 6 and 7,
stand up. you guys are the winner of the dunkin donut contest, and we would like you to introduce yourselves before we go to break, and after you introduce yo that you are back at 3:10 and introduce the last of the
grantees, and roll into our much awaited conversation about the logic model. go ahead. >> [inaudible] (a break was taken.)
Demikianlah Artikel New York Prime Myrtle Beach
Anda sekarang membaca artikel New York Prime Myrtle Beach dengan alamat link https://tropicalresortbeachdestination.blogspot.com/2017/06/new-york-prime-myrtle-beach.html
0 Response to "New York Prime Myrtle Beach"
Post a Comment