Action Plan

The Commonwealth anticipates receiving $61.2 million for CDBG, $21.5 million for HOME, $2.7 million for ESG, and $1.3 million for HOPWA.

Citizen Participation

Large Growth and Huge Losses: Three counties in western Pennsylvania had population declines between 1980 and 1990 of greater than 10 percent (Cambria, Cameron, and Lawrence), while nine counties in eastern and central Pennsylvania experienced growth of greater than 10 percent.

Racial and Ethnic Changes: While Pennsylvania's White population declined by a little over 1 percent in 10 years, the number of persons of Hispanic origin grew by over 50 percent and the number of Native Americans grew nearly as much. The state's Asian and Pacific Islander population more than doubled during the 1980s.

Elderly Population Grew, Number of School Children Shrank: The elderly population age 65 and older grew by nearly 20 percent since 1980, with those 85 years or more increasing in number by more than 32 percent. Conversely, the number of children who were school age (5 through 17) shrank by nearly 16 percent in the same period.

Poverty: The number of persons below the poverty line grew by 6 percent. In 1979, 10.5 percent of Pennsylvanians were below poverty, 11.1 percent in 1989 -- nearly 1.3 million persons below the poverty line.

Urban, Suburban, Rural, or All of the Above: Pennsylvania can be described as either urban, suburban, or rural. It can be considered rural because Pennsylvania has the largest rural population of any state in the country. Pennsylvania can be categorized as an urban state because its population density is more than four times greater than the national average. Finally, Pennsylvania can be considered suburban because suburbs have 42 percent of all residents, compared to 24 percent in central cities and 34 percent in rural areas and small towns.

Household Types: The number of traditional families (married couples with or without children) dropped by almost 4 percent, while nontraditional families (single parent) and nonfamily households grew. Persons living with single-mother families grew 16 percent and with single-father families by 36 percent. Nonfamily households grew by 25 percent.

Educational Attainment: Pennsylvanians became more educated in the 1980s. The percentage of persons age 25 and over with at least a high school degree climbed from 65 to 75 percent. Even the percentage of persons with at least a college degree increased from 14 percent to 18 percent.

Employment Trends: Although Pennsylvania lost roughly 24 percent of its employment in manufacturing positions, these firms remain as the second largest employer in the state. In contrast to these losses, growth in the construction trades (38 percent) and finance positions (37 percent) grew faster in the Commonwealth than nationally.

Conditions

Of course, homes with complete kitchens and baths may still have major structural problems such as faulty roofs, bad wiring, plumbing problems, or defective heating/cooling systems. Further, more than 2.2 million housing units in Pennsylvania, or 45 percent of all units, were built before 1940. This may be the best information about the deficient structural condition of Pennsylvania's housing stock from the 1990 Census, and it is only a proxy for identifying the true conditions or needs. Housing professionals serving on the Regional Housing Advisory Committees (RHACs) have consistently identified the poor quality of the housing stock as a significant problem for Pennsylvania.

Housing Needs

Moreover, there were three important findings revealed by the 1990 Census data:

• Lower The Income, Greater The Problems: Not surprisingly, the problems get worse as income levels fall. For example, among all middle-income households only 16 percent had housing problems, while 75 percent of all extremely low-income households had one of the three housing problems mentioned above.
• Extremely Low-Income, Large Family Renters: The category showing the highest percentage of housing problems was renters with large families (five or more persons) and with extremely low incomes (at or below 30 percent of median family income). Among these households, 87 percent had housing problems. In total, 56 percent of low- and moderate-income large family renters had housing problems, more than all other household types.
• Renters Fare Worse Than Owners: In general, renters of the same household type and income level fared worse than homeowners. Between 17 and 22 percent of the low- and moderate-income homeowners had housing problems, while the percentages of renters ranged between 36 and 56 percent.

Housing Market Conditions

Pennsylvania's housing stock is predominantly owner-occupied housing. A total of 71 percent of the occupied housing stock in 1990 was owner-occupied. Homeownership rates climbed slightly (69.9 to 70.6 percent), compared to a small decline nationally.

Manufactured housing, often referred to as mobile homes or trailers, surged in numbers during the 1980s. The 1990 Census showed a 44 percent increase in this form of housing from 1980. Manufactured housing has become a significant portion of the housing stock in several rural counties in Pennsylvania. In 1990, manufactured housing units composed more than one-fifth of the housing stock in two counties and between 17.5 and 20 percent in eight other counties.

Statewide data on the housing stock can be deceiving. Housing is a very local activity. Opportunities for and impediments to housing developments are very localized as well. Consequently, data on a statewide level is never adequate to identify specific opportunities or problems in developing affordable housing. Local planning documents are more suited to examine this information.

Homeless Needs

Between January 1987 and June 1994, Pennsylvania created or expanded programs to prevent homelessness, aid the homeless, and help homeless individuals and families achieve self-sufficiency. At least 38 programs administered by eight different state agencies were identified as having resources available to serve the homeless or those at risk of homelessness. As a whole, these programs represented more than $180 million in federal and state funds.

The 38 programs comprise a continuum of services available to confront homelessness and the risk of homelessness. They offer prevention, emergency services, transitional housing, supportive services, stabilization services, and permanent housing. Collectively, they address many of the causes of homelessness, such as a lack of income, lack of housing, alcohol and drug abuse, and mental illness.

The weak link in this continuum is the lack of stabilization services. Once homeless people are off the streets and have help for problems like drug and alcohol addiction or domestic violence, the homeless need opportunities to "stabilize" their lives through employment and income supports. Pennsylvania's state agencies provide a variety of employment, training, and community development programs which could address the needs to stabilize the homeless. These include programs like the New Directions program, Customized Job Training, and the Community Development Block Grant.

However, these programs serve diverse client groups, not just the homeless. There are no stabilization programs designed specifically for homeless families or individuals. While the homeless can be assisted by the existing stabilization programs, the homeless have difficulty enrolling in or benefiting from these programs.

Public and Assisted Housing Needs

Based on a survey conducted in August 1993, there are over 40,000 households on waiting lists for public housing units and nearly 63,000 households on waiting lists for the Section 8 program. Pennsylvania would need 22 percent more public housing units and more than double the current level of certificates and vouchers to meet these needs.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has 84 Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) with roughly 80,000 public housing units. PHAs are also responsible for administering HUD's Section 8 Program in Pennsylvania; a program which provides rental assistance (certificates and vouchers) to an additional 51,000 households. The following observations can be made concerning the current status of the public housing program in Pennsylvania:

• The average age of Pennsylvania public housing is at least 40 years. As a result, a significant portion of the state's existing housing resources for its low-income residents is suffering from either obsolescence or advanced deterioration, despite the best efforts of PHAs;
• Between 1980 and 1990 less than 3,000 units of new public housing were completed in the state. As a result, there is more pressure on the existing stock which cannot keep pace with growing demand; and
• The average length of tenancy in Pennsylvania public housing exceeds 13 years. Despite declining quality of housing, public housing residents are staying longer.

PHFA has identified 107 projects in Pennsylvania which could convert to private use at some point in the future. To date, 26 projects have given notice of intent to convert. Of the 26 projects, two have filed a second notice of intent. However, none of these projects have converted.

Barriers to Affordable Housing

• Regulation of Land Development
• Meeting Environmental Regulations
• Building Codes
• Prevailing Wage Requirements
• Tax Policy
• Landlord-Tenant Law
• Historic Preservation
• Coordination of Funding

Fair Housing

The Commonwealth has a strong network of state and local fair housing enforcement agencies and local advocacy agencies. These organizations are described in the Resources section of the Consolidated Plan. Additionally, the Commonwealth anticipates that the following activities will affirmatively further fair housing during the five-year period of the Consolidated Plan:

• Update Fair Housing Analyses
• Enforce Fair Housing Laws
• Encourage Collaborative Efforts to Address Community Problems
• Provide Training and Technical Assistance
• Improve Regulation of Land Development
• Support Legislation to Use State Funds as an Incentive to Promote Fair Housing

Lead-Based Paint

It should be noted that simply because a structure is older or contains lead-based paint, does not mean it poses an immediate hazard. The lead paint becomes a hazard when it is chewed, begins to peel, chip or flake or turn to dust due to abrasion or the hazardous material becomes exposed and/or airborne.

Among the 1.2 million very low- and low-income residents in pre-1980 housing at risk of having lead-based paint problems, 52 percent own the dwelling in which they reside. Renters account for 48 percent of those occupying at-risk housing. These figures show a nearly equal proportion of very low- and low-income renters and owners may need assistance. Other studies have shown that the very low- and low-income populations generally occupy a greater percentage of the older housing stock, thus placing them more at risk for lead poisoning.

Other Issues

• Need for Capacity Building
• Need for More Resources
• Lack of Quality Housing Stock
• Demand for Support Services
• Need for Consumer Education
• Rental Housing Needs
• Lack of Infrastructure
• Upfront Costs of Homeownership

• Southeast Region:
• Lack of a Continuum of Housing Options
• Need for Fair Housing
• Confronting NIMBYism
• Too Narrow Definition of Homelessness
• Need for Energy Efficiency and Affordability

• Northeast Region:
• Problems Facing Very Low-Income, Large Families
• Coping with Growth and Development

• Southcentral Region:
• Problems of Working Poor Families
• Problematic Economic Issues

• Northcentral Region:
• Needs of Very Low-Income, Single Parent, Small Families

• Southwest Region:
• Linkage with Community Development
• Inflexibility of Regulations

• Northwest Region:
• Stagnant Market
• Program Proliferation

While there are estimates of each population group, the methodologies available and duplicate counting problems limit the accuracy of those numbers. Roughly, between 675,000 and 1 million individuals were estimated to need supportive housing. These groups include the elderly, persons with severe mental illness, developmental disabilities, physical disabilities, alcohol/drug addictions, AIDS and related diseases, migrant/seasonal farmworkers, victims of domestic violence, children and youth, and community correction inmates.

One of the significant trends affecting special needs groups is the effort to provide integrated housing opportunities. Many of these groups, particularly those with disabilities, want housing options in the community which bring support services to their homes regardless of where they live. For those which do not need support services, physically accessible construction and its costs are major concerns. Also, several special needs populations need more affordable housing for persons leaving institutions, including mental hospitals, foster care/juvenile facilities, and prisons.

Community Development Needs

Using these data sources, DCA estimated that the need for nonhousing community development funds totals more than $96.9 million. The most significant community development needs, based on the proportion of funds they would consume, were sewer improvements, road/street improvements, water improvements, public facilities, and economic development. Each of the individual community development activities included under the "all other needs" category was less than 3 percent.

Coordination

State agencies cooperate on the implementation of programs outside of formal committee structures as well. State agencies have considerable experience in developing programs jointly to address housing and service needs at the local level. The Commonwealth gives substantial responsibilities to local governments, nonprofit organizations, and private sector groups to implement and coordinate housing and community development activities outlined in the Consolidated Plan.

Vision for Change

Housing and Community Development Objectives and Priorities

• Maintain and Improve the Quality of Housing: The age of Pennsylvania's housing stock and the experiences of housing professionals indicate that the Commonwealth needs to address the relatively poor structural quality of housing across the state.
• Build Capacity of Local Governments and Housing Organizations: Local governments and local housing organizations often lack experience and skills needed to develop, manage, and maintain affordable housing. In certain cases, the private sector also needs to improve its capacity to work with local housing organizations and government assistance programs.
• Link Housing and Supportive Services: Housing will not remain affordable or in decent quality unless families and individuals living in assisted housing are connected with and receive appropriate supportive services. Securing affordable and decent housing is an important step for individuals and families moving from welfare dependency toward self-sufficiency. This linkage is a critical element of the Commonwealth's Anti-Poverty Strategy and action steps to improve the Institutional Structure.
• Improve Rental Housing Opportunities: The 1990 Census data showed that renters had more housing problems than homeowners. Also, nearly all regions of the state, but especially rural areas, expressed concerns about the need for more rental housing and/or the need for ongoing rental subsidies.
• Assist Families and Individuals to Become First-time Home Buyers: Increasing homeownership helps to revitalize housing conditions and create financially-sound local governments. Homeowners generally contribute more than renters to the tax base of a local government. Also, in some areas, once the down payment and closing costs are covered, homeownership can be more affordable than renting.
• Address the Economic, Social, and Health Problems of the Homeless: The driving forces behind homelessness are usually economic, social, or health problems. Subsidies and assistance for housing development programs can help. However, for homeless Pennsylvanians with little to no income, physical or mental health problems, and a variety of addiction problems, housing may often be a secondary issue.
• Minimize Regulatory Barriers to Affordable Housing: There are a variety of state and local regulatory and policy barriers which limit the availability of affordable housing. These include local land use policies, environmental regulations, prevailing wage requirements, tax policies, historic preservation, and funding procedures.
• Further Fair Housing and Address Community Opposition: Fair housing is a growing concern across most regions of the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth's housing priority provides some assistance to promote fair housing, but other actions steps are anticipated including updates of local fair housing analyses, preparation of a statewide analysis, and promoting collaborative efforts to address community opposition.
• Improve Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Efforts and Link Reduction Efforts to Health Prevention Programs: It is estimated that 1.2 million low- and moderate-income Pennsylvania households live in dwellings that may contain lead-based paint. To create an effective system to deliver hazard reduction and/or abatement services, state agencies need to coordinate their activities, including linkage to health prevention programs.

• Promote Local Community Development Strategies: The most important step to promote effective community development is to develop sound local strategies. The state can use its financial and technical resources to effectively assist in such efforts.
• Improve Coordination of Funding for Community Development: Given the extensive needs for community development in the Commonwealth and the number of state and federal programs available, the state and local agencies need to improve efforts to coordinate the use of funds to meet those needs.
• Develop Economic Opportunities: This goal contains a two-pronged approach. First, the Commonwealth should assure that workers are adequately prepared for the jobs which are available. Second, economic development efforts need to assist and attract firms which hire residents from the local low- and moderate-income community.

Housing Priorities

• promote diversity within a community, including but not limited to, diversity of race, ethnicity, income level, and disability status; or
• are an integral part of an overall community development strategy which addresses and directs resources toward community needs such as housing, transportation, employment, and infrastructure.

Community Development Priorities

Serious problems can be defined as those affecting public health, welfare, and safety. This level of seriousness is often manifested in water and sewer infrastructure problems. These problems often occur in communities that either lack a public water/sewer system or have a substantially deteriorated facility. Other projects such as flood control and stormwater projects can also demonstrate comparable seriousness.

Anti-Poverty Strategy

The Commonwealth's Anti-Poverty Strategy promotes economic self-sufficiency for low-income families and individuals as a means to reduce poverty. It is comprised of four general elements: assessment of needs and goals; creating economic opportunities; providing supportive services that create stable households; and creating safe, decent, and affordable housing opportunities. DCA will continue its efforts to encourage other departments to incorporate these elements into all relevant policies and programs.

DCA and other state agencies have several activities currently underway and will evaluate the effectiveness of these programs to reduce the number of people in poverty. These evaluations will be used to identify program and policy changes and, if necessary, to develop new programs consistent with the four elements which promote self-sufficiency. These activities include:

• Pathways to Independence
• Pennsylvania Partnership for Housing
• PHFA Demonstration Projects
• Case Management Demonstration Project
• Building Job Skills
• Family Centers

Housing and Community Development Resources

For housing programs for FFY 1995, the Commonwealth anticipates receiving $100.7 million in federal funds. The Commonwealth also anticipates that the state programs which can be used to match those funds will total $38.5 million. The Commonwealth anticipates receiving $61.2 million for community development through the CDBG program.

Coordination of Strategic Plan

However, the institutional structure cannot meet all housing and supportive service needs because the needs are great and resources are limited. Also, the complexity of programs and state government's structure can sometimes inhibit solutions for these needs. Although Pennsylvania established formal institutions for coordination and intergovernmental cooperation (PHAC, Housing and Supportive Services Task Force, DPW Homeless Advisory Committee, and Interagency Council on the Homeless), the work of these groups needs to continue.

Pennsylvania has roughly 2,600 municipal governments which range from those who are very experienced with housing issues and programs to those who lack both the capacity and interest in Promoting self-sufficiency by incorporating the four elements of this Anti-Poverty Strategy into policies and programs will contribute to reducing poverty. Building partnerships among state agencies, local housing organizations, and supportive service providers is key to the success of this strategy.

The Commonwealth has identified several action steps to overcome gaps in its institutional structure and improve coordination. These action steps include:

• Training and Technical Assistance
• Coordinate Training
• Training for Rural Areas
• CHDO Technical Assistance
• Private Sector Training
• Continue and Clarify ECC Housing Capacity
• Improve Communication
• Continue the Housing and Supportive Services Task Force
• Continue the PHAC and RHACs
• Analyze PHFA Demonstration Efforts
• Allocate HOME and State Funds for Multifamily Housing to PHFA
• Technical Assistance for Rental Projects

Additionally, the transfer of HOME and state funds for rental housing to PHFA will facilitate coordination of the tax credit with other programs. Virtually all the state's rental housing resources will be administered by PHFA.

Description of Key Projects

HOME Program: DCA will administer the HOME Program but will transfer 30 percent of the funds to the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency (PHFA) as a subrecipient. PHFA's funds will be dedicated to rental housing construction and development. An additional $1 million will be reserved for PHFA to support a home buyer program in conjunction with the state's mortgage revenue bond program. The balance of the funds will be administered through a competitive application process. No more than 10 percent of the funds may be used for administrative costs. DCA will retain 4 percent for state administration and allow a maximum of 6 percent for local administrative costs. DCA estimates that after excluding administration 48 percent will be used for single-family rehabilitation, 31 percent for rental construction and rehabilitation, 1 percent for rental assistance, 16 percent for home buyer assistance, and 4 percent for Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) operating and other costs.

ESG Program: DCA will administer the ESG Program through a competitive applications process. DCA estimates at least 50 percent of the funds will be used for rehabilitation costs, about 18 percent for essential services, approximately 23 percent for operating costs, and about 7 percent for homeless prevention. DCA anticipates that only 3 percent will be used for administration. While up to 5 percent can be used for administrative costs, no more 2.5 percent will be retained by DCA and a similar limit will be imposed on local grantees.

HOPWA Program: The Department of Health, Bureau of HIV/AIDS, will administer the HOPWA Program by allocating these funds on a formula basis to six of the seven regional HIV Planning Coalitions. (The Philadelphia region receives a separate allocation directly from HUD.) The formula to allocate these funds will be based on the number of persons living with AIDS in each region. Although a detailed program plan will be submitted to HUD outlining specific uses of 1996 funds by May 1996, the department estimates that funds will be spent as follows (based on the use of grant funds in prior years): 49 percent will be spent on rental assistance; 25 percent on support services; and 26 percent on operating and other costs.

Locations

Lead Agencies

Housing Goals

Single-Family Rehabilitation                     1,474 Households
Rental Housing                                   1,928 Households
Home Buyer Assistance                              155 Households
Housing for Homeless                     2,584 Households/Persons
Housing for Special Needs Groups                   133 Households

     Total                                       6,274 Households

Of the 6,274 total households, 3,554 will meet Section 215 goals for affordability. (Section 215 goals are described in Appendix J.) Only the following federal programs were covered by these goals: CDBG; HOME; ESG; HOPWA; the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit; and Projects for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness (PATH).