69–010 

Calendar No. 463 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 110–216 

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP TO END HOMELESSNESS ACT 

OF 2007 

NOVEMBER 1, 2007.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. DODD, from the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban 

Affairs, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1518] 

The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, having 

had under consideration the bill (S. 1518) to amend the McKinneyVento Homeless Assistance Act to reauthorize the Act, and for 

other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably 

thereon with an amendment and recommends that the bill (as 

amended) do pass. 

INTRODUCTION

On September 19, 2007, the Senate Committee on Banking, 

Housing, and Urban Affairs considered S. 1518, ‘‘The Community 

Partnership to End Homelessness Act of 2007,’’ to amend the 

McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act to reauthorize the Act, 

and for other purposes. The Committee voted unanimously to report the bill (S. 1518) as amended to the Senate. 

BACKGROUND

In 1986, in response to the rapid and dramatic growth of homelessness in the United States in the 1980s, Congress passed the 

Homeless Housing Act, which created the Emergency Shelter 

Grants (ESG) program and the Transitional Housing Demonstration program. The Urgent Relief for the Homeless Assistance Act 

was enacted in July 1987. It was later renamed the Stewart B. 

McKinney Homelessness Act and renamed again the McKinneyVento Homeless Assistance Act. The McKinney-Vento Act originally contained 15 programs addressing different aspects of homelessness, including emergency shelter, transitional housing, permaVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:33 Nov 02, 2007 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR216.XXX SR216

bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
2 

nent housing, education, job training, and primary health needs. 

The Act was amended several times over the next seven years, adding, among other things, the Shelter Plus Care (S+C) program and 

the Rural Homeless Housing Assistance Program. Today, the 

McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act is the primary federal 

program to support communities in their efforts to address and reduce homelessness. 

The housing subtitles of McKinney-Vento were last authorized in 

1992 (P.L. 102–550) through fiscal year 1994. Prior to 1995, Congress separately funded the housing programs for those who were 

homeless. For fiscal year 1995, the Appropriations bills consolidated the funding accounts for the ESG program, the S+C program, the Supportive Housing Program (SHP), and the Section 8 

Moderate Rehabilitation for Single Room Occupancy Dwellings 

(SRO) program, and HUD encouraged communities to submit a single application for funding. The purpose of this single application 

was not only to streamline the application process, but also to encourage providers to coordinate their projects and on an overall 

strategy for the community. This process became known as the 

Continuum of Care. The Continuum of Care process enables communities to apply for funds from one of three programs: S+C, SHP, 

and SRO. The amount of funding a community receives is based on 

a needs-based formula and on the quality of the application. In addition to this award-winning competitive grant program, Emergency Shelter Grants are provided by formula to cities, counties, 

and states. 

In addition to the changes to the application process that HUD 

initiated in 1995, research on the effectiveness of particular strategies has led to significant policy shifts in McKinney-Vento programs. In the 1990’s, research conducted in Philadelphia and New 

York City found that a small group of homeless adults—about 20 

percent of the total homeless population stayed homeless for long 

periods of time or cycled in and out of hospitals, jails, or other institutions; had high rates of disabilities; and utilized a disproportionate share of the homeless assistance resources. Further research in New York City found that moving this group of chronically homeless adults into permanent supportive housing—housing 

with intensive supportive services attached—not only ended their 

homelessness, but was also cost effective, as it dramatically reduced the costs to public systems. Subsequent studies have supported these findings, and have concluded that the net cost of providing permanent supportive housing is even less than the cost of 

allowing chronically homeless people to remain homeless. 

Based on these findings, Congress and HUD initiated efforts to 

create more permanent supportive housing to end chronic homelessness. The bipartisan Millennial Housing Commission and the 

New Freedom Commission on Mental Health estimated that approximately 150,000 new units of permanent supportive housing 

were needed to achieve this goal. Beginning in fiscal year 1999, 

Congress steadily increased appropriations for McKinney-Vento 

housing programs and targeted much of the increase towards efforts to end chronic homelessness. These efforts were supplemented 

by numerous state and locally driven initiatives. As a result, several cities have reported significant reductions in the number of 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
3 

people who are chronically homeless and the number of people who 

live on the streets or in places not meant for human habitation. 

While chronic homelessness was receiving much of the attention 

in the early part of this decade, several cities were using a new approach to address family homelessness that focused on rapid rehousing of homeless families. These communities have programs 

that work with families to quickly identify and help them move 

into permanent housing and provide short-term rental assistance, 

assistance with other housing costs, and follow-up services to help 

families achieve long term housing stability and self-sufficiency. 

This strategy has led to significant declines in homelessness among 

families in several communities, most notably in Hennepin County, 

Minnesota, where the average nightly census in the homeless shelter declined by almost two-thirds. 

Over the last several years, there have been a number of other 

developments in serving homeless people, most notably a focus on 

the importance of acquiring data. In early 2000, Congress required 

HUD to work with communities to develop homeless management 

information systems (HMIS) to assess the number of homeless people, how those who are homeless interact with the homeless system, and which programs are effective for preventing or ending 

homelessness. Communities are in various stages of implementation of HMIS—many have functional systems while others are in 

still in the developmental stages. As a result of HMIS and other 

data collection efforts, we now have estimates of the number of 

homeless people that are based on actual counts. 

Beginning in 2001, communities began developing 10-year plans 

to end homelessness. These plans, encouraged by HUD, brought together nonprofit providers, advocates, the business and faith-based 

communities, and city and local government officials to design 

strategies for preventing and ending homelessness. More than 200 

plans have been completed to date, and dozens more are in the 

process of being completed. The purpose of these plans is to identify and implement the most efficient and effective strategies for 

preventing and ending homelessness in the community using the 

best available data. 

Based on the best available statistics, the actual count of the 

homeless, approximately 750,000 people are homeless at a given 

point in time. 41 percent (300,000) are members of families with 

children and many—about 44 percent—are unsheltered, living on 

the streets, in abandoned buildings, or in other places not meant 

for human habitation. Nearly 200,000 are veterans, approximately 

170,000 are chronically homeless—spending long periods of time 

homeless or cycling between housing, homelessness and other institutional care, such as psychiatric hospitals and corrections. Over 

the course of a year, as many as 3.5 million people—approximately 

10 percent of people in poverty—experience homelessness. 

PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION

This legislation is designed to help communities end homelessness. It makes several improvements to the HUD homeless assistance programs to simplify and focus them more on cost-effectively 

preventing and ending homelessness. Several separate programs 

are eliminated or consolidated into a single Community Homeless 

Assistance Program. Different match requirements for the formerly 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
4 

separate programs are unified into a single 25 percent match requirement. Incentives are included to promote strategies that have 

been proven to prevent and end homelessness and communities are 

rewarded for demonstrating progress. 

The restructured Emergency Solutions Grant program would increase the role of city and state governments in preventing and 

ending homelessness and would ensure that more resources are 

used for preventing homelessness. 

The Committee recognizes that homeless assistance systems in 

rural areas function differently than those in urban areas. Urban 

areas are more likely to have systems that include emergency shelters and other homelessness infrastructure. Rural homeless assistance programs are more likely to be integrated with other mainstream safety net programs. The legislation would give rural applicants the option of applying for a specially designed rural program 

that focuses much more on prevention and is easier to integrate 

with existing systems. The legislation also simplifies the application process for rural programs. 

The legislation continues the strategies that have worked toward 

ending chronic homelessness while encouraging preventing and 

ending homelessness for families with children. It adds families 

with children to the definition of chronic homelessness and it requires that HUD provide incentives for rapid rehousing strategies 

that serve homeless families. It provides resources to prevent 

homelessness for families that are doubled up, living in hotels, or 

in other precarious housing situations. It expands the definition of 

homelessness to include people who are forced to move frequently 

between the homes of friends and family because they do not have 

adequate resources. 

The legislation provides greater flexibility and includes several 

features to encourage better performance. In addition to including 

explicit performance-based criteria in the application process, the 

legislation directs HUD to provide incentives for permanent supportive housing for chronically homeless individuals and families 

and rapid rehousing programs for homeless families. Both of these 

strategies have been proven to reduce homelessness and should be 

expanded. The legislation also rewards communities that demonstrably reduce homelessness by providing them with additional 

flexibility in how they use their funds. This flexibility can continue 

for as long as the community makes progress. The legislation continues the Appropriation’s Committee’s longstanding support for 

ensuring that at least 30 percent of funding be used for permanent 

housing for people with disabilities. It also ensures that permanent 

housing programs can be renewed without reducing resources for 

other priorities. 

The legislation includes a provision that allows a collaborative 

applicant to be a unified funding agency. This would allow HUD 

to provide funding for a community to one agency which would distribute funds to local homeless assistance providers. Unified funding agencies would take on many of the oversight responsibilities 

that are now performed by HUD. Applicants could apply to be a 

unified funding agency or HUD could, under certain conditions, 

designate an applicant as a unified funding agency. HUD could 

make this designation only when applicants clearly have the capacity to perform the functions required, when there is a demonstrable 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
5 

benefit to the community, and when HUD and the applicant have 

agreed on the amount of technical assistance that will be provided 

to the applicant to help them perform their required duties. 

The legislation outlines a simple application process that will reduce the amount of time and energy communities spend on applying for funds and increase the amount of resources they spend perfecting strategies that prevent and end homelessness. The process 

for rural applicants is even simpler and recognizes the unique characteristics of rural homeless assistance. The legislation also utilizes 

selection criteria that are based on ten-year plans that communities are creating to end homelessness. Communities will be able 

to integrate their ten-year plans with their homeless assistance applications. 

Housing and services demonstration project 

The Committee has authorized funds for the Secretary to conduct 

research on the effectiveness of varying levels of housing and services support for homeless families. There is an extensive homeless 

assistance system available to families who experience homelessness. This system is made up of emergency shelters, transitional 

housing, and a small number of permanent supportive housing 

units; many of these housing models are accompanied by services 

and supports aimed at helping families exit homelessness and 

make improvement in their lives. Homeless families are also eligible for mainstream housing and services such as housing vouchers 

and homeless prevention assistance. One of the biggest challenges 

this demonstration is designed to address is identifying which 

housing and service models lead to housing stability and are most 

cost-effective. 

Evaluation 

Research on chronic homelessness has provided a series of robust 

findings that have led to policy changes that benefit chronically 

homeless single adults. Additional research on effective solutions to 

family homelessness is needed to fill in gaps in knowledge and 

identify cost-effective solutions that end homelessness for families. 

Multi-site random control experiment 

The Committee directs HUD to select and evaluate a limited 

number of sites as a part of the Homeless Assistance Grants competition. This evaluation should include a multi-site study experimental design (randomly controlled assignment) that compares and 

contrasts different housing models focusing on shallow and short 

term subsidies, housing vouchers (linked with voluntary community-based services or the family self-sufficiency program (FSS)), 

and transitional housing (with mandatory services). The evaluation 

should be funded for three years and extended if funds are available. The evaluation should be conducted by an independent contractor and awarded on a competitive basis with points awarded for 

proven experience conducting random assignment experiments for 

the social sciences; knowledge of family homelessness; and capacity 

to implement random assignment and track homeless families over 

time. The evaluators should create a council made up of policy experts and practitioners to provide advice on the development of the 

research design and implementation of the program. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
6 

Review of assessment tools and targeting efforts 

Research by Dr. Dennis Culhane of the University of Pennsylvania indicates that homeless families have varying levels of need 

for housing subsidies and services. This means that homeless service providers must assess families and target services based on 

their needs. The Committee has authorized funds for a qualitative 

review of tools that assess low-income families’ level of need and 

use this data to target the appropriate level of services. This study 

should identify ‘‘promising tools’’ and make recommendations on 

how to develop more sophisticated targeting. The study should include six to eight sites, be conducted by an independent contractor, 

and be awarded on a competitive basis. 

Prevention study 

A critical component of ending homelessness is preventing it 

from occurring in the first place. However, little is known about 

what characteristics distinguish those poor, at-risk families who become homeless, particularly those who have repeated or long episodes of homelessness from those who do not. The Committee has 

authorized funds for the Secretary to launch a family homeless prevention study. This prospective cohort study should include a longitudinal survey that tracks at-risk families over five years. 

On several occasions, HUD has made significant policy changes 

in its implementation of the McKinney-Vento Act through its Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) process. It is the intent of the 

Committee that HUD implement both the existing provisions of 

McKinney-Vento and those of this bill through formal rulemaking 

procedures. 

HEARINGS

The Committee heard testimony in the 110th Congress on June 

21, 2007 regarding reauthorization of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act. Witnesses testifying were the Honorable Adrian Fenty, Mayor of the District of Columbia, the Honorable Shirley 

Franklin, Mayor of Atlanta, Georgia, the Honorable Roy Bernardi, 

Deputy Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Ms. Linda Glassman, National AIDS Housing Coalition, 

Ms. Carol Gundlach, Alabama Coalition Against Domestic Violence, 

Mr. Moises Loza, Housing Assistance Council, Mr. Lloyd Pendleton, 

State of Utah Division of Housing and Community Development, 

and Ms. Nan Roman, National Alliance to End Homelessness. 

The Committee had previously heard testimony in the 109th 

Congress on March 30, 2006 regarding reauthorization of the 

McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act and Consolidation of 

HUD’s Homeless Assistance Programs. Witnesses testifying were 

the Honorable Roy Bernardi, Deputy Secretary of the Department 

of Housing and Urban Development, Mr. Philip Mangano, Executive Director of the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, Ms. 

Gail Dorfman, County Commissioner, Hennepin County, Minnesota, Mr. Steve Berg, National Alliance to End Homelessness, 

Mr. Charles Gould, Volunteers of America, Mr. Anthony Love, 

Houston Coalition for the Homeless, and Dr. Dennis Culhane, University of Pennsylvania. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
7 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title; table of contents 

This section contains the table of contents and the short title of 

the bill, ‘‘Community Partnership to End Homelessness Act of 

2007.’’

Section 2. Findings and purpose 

This section contains the findings and purpose. These findings 

include that homelessness is a crisis of people who lack basic affordable housing and appropriate shelter; that homeless assistance 

has had a positive effect, and should continue to be evaluated 

based on how well it reduces homelessness. The purposes are to 

create a unified, performance-based process for funding; to encourage collaboration and planning; to focus the public and private sector on ending and preventing homelessness; to assist homeless people; to consolidate programs; to allow flexibility; and to involve 

other Federal agencies in ending homelessness. 

Section 3. General definition of homeless individual 

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

Section 4. United States Interagency Council on Homelessness 

This section makes adjustments to the role and operation of the 

Interagency Council, including changes to the mission statement, 

adding new members, increasing meeting frequency, and increasing 

the number of regional coordinators. The council will be overseen 

by the chair and will develop a national strategic plan to end homelessness and to encourage state and local governments to develop 

10-year plans to end homelessness. The authorization level for the 

council is $3 million. 

Section 5. Housing assistance general provisions 

This section includes new provisions as follows. Section 401 defines terms including at-risk of homelessness, chronic homelessness, operating cost, and other terms. Section 402 establishes collaborative applicants, which are responsible for designing a collaborative process for applying for funding and ensuring participation 

in homeless management information systems. Collaborative applicants may also become unified funding agencies, which would give 

them responsibility for distributing funds to grantees and ensuring 

proper accounting methods. 

Section 404 prevents discrimination against older children in 

programs serving homeless families. Section 405 authorizes technical assistance to grantees and collaborative applicants. Section 

406 creates an appeals process. Section 408 authorizes $2.2 billion 

for fiscal year 2008 and such sums as may be necessary for fiscal 

years 2009 through 2012. 

Section 6. Emergency Solutions Grants Program 

This section modifies the existing Emergency Shelter Grants 

(ESG) program and renames it the Emergency Solutions Grants 

Program. This section mandates that 20 percent of homeless assistVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:33 Nov 02, 2007 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR216.XXX SR216

bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
8 

ance funding be used for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program, 

with no more than 60 percent of that amount being used for traditional shelter and street outreach activities, and at least 40 percent 

being for homelessness prevention and rehousing. It is the intent 

of the Committee that communities not be forced to stop funding 

existing emergency shelter programs as a result of this transition, 

but that this cap on funding for shelters be met over time. New activities are added to eligible uses, including short- or medium-term 

rent assistance and new homelessness prevention and housing relocation and stabilization activities. This section requires recipients 

of Emergency Solutions Grants funds to participate in the applicable homeless management information system. 

Section 7. Homeless Assistance Program 

This section consolidates several existing programs into the Community Homeless Assistance Program. 

Section 421 identifies the purpose of the program as promoting 

commitment to ending homelessness, rehousing homeless people, 

minimizing the trauma of homelessness, helping people access 

mainstream services, and optimizing self-sufficiency. Section 422 

requires that the notice of funding availability be released within 

three months of enactment, that awards be announced within five 

months of when applications are due (within six months for the 

first two years after enactment), and that project sponsors meet the 

applicable requirements for obligation within nine months of an 

award or for projects involving development, within 24 months of 

an award. 

Section 422 also describes procedures for when there are multiple 

applicants from a geographic area. Section 422 adjusts renewal 

funding for permanent housing projects for increases in housing 

costs. Also, providers whose primary mission is to serve victims of 

domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking 

would not provide personally identifying information to a homeless 

management information system. 

Section 423 lists the eligible activities of the Community Homeless Assistance Program, including acquisition, construction, rehabilitation, leasing, rental assistance, operating costs, supportive 

services, rehousing services, homeless management information 

systems, and administrative costs. Projects receiving funding for 

construction, acquisition or rehabilitation must be used for their intended purpose for at least 15 years. If a project is no longer needed for that purpose, it can be converted to directly benefit low-income people. If a project is needed and is not used to serve homeless people for 15 years, then, except under certain conditions, the 

grantee will be required to repay all or a portion of the grant. 

Section 424 creates a flexibility incentive for high-performing 

communities. If a community successfully reduces homelessness, 

they can be granted additional flexibility with their funding, and 

would be required to share best practices with HUD and other communities. 

Section 426 would require grantees to gain site control within 12 

months of notification of an award, ensure that homeless people 

are involved in projects, maintain confidentiality of records, maintain confidentiality of the location of family violence shelters, ensure that grantees do no restrict the educational rights of homeless 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
9 

children, provide required data to HUD, and ensure that projects 

serving people with disabilities do not concentrate and isolate people with disabilities. 

Section 427 sets the selection criteria for the Community Homeless Assistance Program. Criteria include past success at preventing and reducing homelessness and increasing jobs and income 

growth, plans to reduce homelessness for all subpopulations of 

homeless people, whether the opinions of all relevant parties are 

considered, leveraging, and coordination. In addition to those factors, Section 427 establishes a need formula for each geographic 

area, which would be determined by HUD for the first two years 

after enactment, and then would be established by HUD based on 

the number of homeless people, shortages of affordable housing, severe housing problems among extremely low-income households, 

and the poverty rate. Section 427 also requires HUD to adjust a 

community’s pro-rata need to ensure enough funding to provide 1 

year of renewal funding for all expiring contracts. 

Section 428 sets allocation amounts and incentives for specific eligible activities. At least 30 percent of funding is for new permanent housing for people with disabilities. The calculation for this 30 

percent applies nationally, not to each individual community. The 

30 percent figure is reduced proportionately for communities that 

have developed enough permanent housing for all of the chronically 

homeless people in their geographic area and is waived if there is 

not enough funding to cover one year of renewals for existing 

projects. The 30 percent requirement is terminate when HUD determines that 150,000 new units of permanent housing for homeless people with disabilities has been funded since 2001. Section 

428 requires that at least 10 percent of funding must be used to 

permanently house families with children. Section 428 requires 

HUD to fund interventions that are proven to be effective, including permanent supportive housing for chronically homeless individuals and families and rapid rehousing programs for homeless families. Any community that fully implements a proven strategy could 

use their bonus for any eligible activity, including homelessness 

prevention. 

Section 429 funds renewals of permanent rental assistance or 

permanent housing operating costs to be funded for one year at a 

time out of the funding account for Section 8 housing, provided 

that there is a demonstrated need and the project complies with 

appropriate standards. 

Section 430 establishes a uniform 25 percent match that can be 

met with cash or, when documented by a memorandum of understanding, in-kind services. Projects that previously had no match 

requirement could continue to be renewed without a match requirement. The match requirement applies community-wide, not necessarily project by project. 

Section 8. Rural Housing Stability Assistance Program 

This section modifies Section 491 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, the Rural Homeless Assistance Program, and 

changes the title to the Rural Housing Stability Assistance Program. This section modifies section 491(a) by making the purpose 

of the program to rehouse or find housing for people who are homeless or in the worst housing situations, stabilize people in immiVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:33 Nov 02, 2007 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR216.XXX SR216

bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
10 

nent danger of losing their housing, and improve the ability of the 

lowest income residents to afford stable housing. This program is 

to be carried out separately from the overall Community Homeless 

Assistance Program competition. 

Section 491(b) is modified by adding to the list of eligible activities construction, acquisition, rehabilitation, leasing, rental assistance, and operating costs for transitional or permanent housing for 

homeless people. 

Section 491(d) is modified by adding to the application requirements a description of consultations to determine the most important uses of funding and a description of the nature of homelessness and the worst housing situations in the area. 

Section 491(f) is modified so that there is a uniform 25 percent 

match requirement for all activities except that projects that previously had no match requirement could continue to be renewed 

without a match requirement. The match can be met with cash or, 

when documented by a memorandum of understanding, in-kind 

services. 

The selection criteria in Section 491(g) are replaced by participation of potential beneficiaries, the degree to which the project addresses the most harmful housing conditions, collaboration, performance in improving housing situations, past performance, need, 

and other HUD- determined criteria. 

Section 491(j) defines a rural area as any place outside of a metropolitan statistical area or any census tract within a metropolitan 

statistical area that is at least 75 percent rural. Any state that has 

fewer than 30 people per square mile and of which more than 1.25 

percent of land is under the control of the federal government is 

considered rural in its entirety except if the applicant consists solely of a metropolitan city. 

Section 491(k) describes the funding process for the rural program. A rural applicant could choose to apply under the Community Homeless Assistance Program or the Rural Housing Stability 

Program. Funding is based on the selection criteria and on pro-rata 

need. 

Section 491(l) requires that if more than one entity from a rural 

area applies for funding, HUD must first seek agreement from the 

applicants about how to proceed and if there is no agreement, HUD 

must fund the application that would result in the most funding for 

the geographic area. 

Section 9. Research 

For fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011, $8,000,000 is authorized 

to research the efficacy of interventions for homeless families to 

study three different sites over three years to evaluate the effectiveness of those programs. 

Section 10. Repeals and conforming amendments 

This section repeals Subtitles D (Safe Havens for Homeless Individuals Demonstration Program), E (Miscellaneous Program), and 

F (Shelter Plus Care), of the McKinney Vento Homeless Assistance 

Act. These programs are replaced by the programs described in 

Section 7. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
11 

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

A new Special Assistant for Veterans Affairs is established within HUD. The Special Assistant would be appointed based solely on 

merit and would ensure that veterans have access to HUD housing 

and homeless assistance, coordinate all activities related to veterans, and serve as a liaison with the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

Section 12. Effective date 

This section makes this Act effective 6 months after enactment. 

COST OF LEGISLATION

U.S. CONGRESS, 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, 

Washington, DC, October 9, 2007. 

Hon. CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, 

Chairman, Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1518, the Community Partnership to End Homelessness Act of 2007. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Chad Chirico. 

Sincerely, 

PETER R. ORSZAG. 

Community Parternship to End Homelessness Act of 2007 

S. 1518 would reauthorize the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act for five years and consolidate the act’s separate competitive grant programs for assistance to the homeless into a single 

program. CBO estimates that implementing this legislation would 

cost about $7.7 billion over the next five years, assuming the appropriation of the necessary amounts. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimates that enacting S. 1518 would reduce revenues 

by $7 million over the 2008–2012 period and by $22 million over 

the next 10 years. 

S. 1518 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA); 

any costs to state, local, or tribal governments would be incurred 

voluntarily. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of S. 1518 is shown in Table 1. The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 600 (income security). 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 1518 

will be enacted near the beginning of fiscal year 2008, that the 

amounts authorized will be appropriated, and that outlays will follow historical patterns. Components of the estimated costs are described below. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
12 

TABLE 1. ESTIMATED BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF S. 1518 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

CHANGES IN REVENUES 

Changes to Low Income Housing Credits 

Estimated Revenues 1 .......................................................... 0 * ¥1 ¥1 ¥2 ¥2 

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Spending Under Current Law: 

Budget Authority 2 ............................................................... 1,444 0 0 0 0 0 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................... 1,428 1,444 1,201 632 380 145 

Proposed Changes: 

Homeless Assistance Grants: 

Estimated Authorization Level .................................... 0 2,200 2,288 2,330 2,372 2,416 

Estimated Outlays ...................................................... 0 22 375 1,269 1,708 2,077 

Contract Renewals: 

Estimated Authorization Level .................................... 0 429 466 474 540 548 

Estimated Outlays ...................................................... 0 258 451 471 514 545 

Research on Interventions for Homeless Families: 

Authorization Level ..................................................... 0 0 8 8 8 0 

Estimated Outlays ...................................................... 0 0 3 5 8 5 

Interagency Council on Homelessness: 

Estimated Authorization Level .................................... 0 3 3 3 3 3 

Estimated Outlays ...................................................... 0 3 3 3 3 3 

Total Proposed Changes: 

Estimated Authorization Level ........................... 0 2,632 2,765 2,815 2,923 2,967 

Estimated Outlays ............................................. 0 283 832 1,748 2,233 2,630 

Spending Under S. 1518: 

Estimated Authorization Level 2 .......................................... 1,444 2,632 2,765 2,815 2,923 2,967 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................... 1,428 1,727 2,033 2,380 2,613 2,775 

1 Estimate provided by the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT). In addition to the effects shown through 2012, JCT estimates that enacting 

S. 1518 would reduce revenues by an additional $15 million over the 2013–2017 period. 2 The 2007 level is the amount appropriated in that year for Homeless Assistance Grants and the U.S. Interagency Council on Homeless- ness. Note.—* = revenue loss of less than $500,000. 

Revenues 

Section 7 of the bill would exclude grant funding authorized by 

the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act when determining 

the eligible basis of a building receiving Low Income Housing Credits under section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The JCT 

estimates that consequent reductions in revenue would total $7 

million over the 2008–2012 period and $22 million over the next 10 

years, as shown in Table 2. 

TABLE 2.—CHANGES IN REVENUES UNDER S. 1518 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2008– 

2012 

2008– 

2017 

Estimated Revenues .............. * ¥1 ¥1 ¥2 ¥2 ¥2 ¥3 ¥3 ¥3 ¥4 ¥7 ¥22 

Note.—* = revenue loss of less than $500,000. 

Spending subject to appropriation 

In total, CBO estimates that S. 1518 would authorize the appropriation of $2.6 billion in 2008 and $14 billion over the 2008–2012 

period. Appropriation of those amounts would result in estimated 

outlays of $7.7 billion over the next five years. 

Homeless Assistance Grants. S. 1518 would consolidate the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD’s) separate 

competitive grant programs for assistance to the homeless (includVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:33 Nov 02, 2007 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR216.XXX SR216

bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
13 

ing the Supportive Housing Program, the Shelter Plus Care program, and the Single-Room Occupancy Dwellings program) into a 

single program (the Homeless Assistance Program) and reauthorize 

grants for the emergency shelter needs of the homeless. Section 5 

of the bill would authorize the appropriation of $2.2 billion in 2008 

and such sums as necessary from 2009 through 2012 for these programs. Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts and adjusting for inflation, CBO estimates that implementing this section 

would cost $22 million in 2008 and about $5.5 billion over the 

2008–2012 period. 

Contract Renewals. Section 7 of the bill would authorize the 

HUD to use such sums as necessary from amounts appropriated for 

Section 8 housing assistance to renew expiring contracts for the 

leasing, rental assistance, or operating costs of permanent housing 

for the homeless. Such renewals are currently funded through the 

Shelter Plus Care and Supportive Housing programs. In 2006, 

HUD awarded about $360 million in renewal funding covering 

about 67,000 permanent housing beds. Based on data provided by 

HUD, CBO estimates that renewing expiring contracts would require the appropriation of $429 million in 2008 and $2.5 billion 

over the 2008–2012 period. Appropriation of those amounts would 

result in outlays totaling an estimated $2.2 billion over the next 

five years. 

Other Provisions. Additionally, section 4 would authorize the appropriation of $3 million in 2008 and such sums as necessary from 

2009 through 2012 for the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, and section 10 would authorize the appropriation of $8 million for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011 for research into the 

efficacy of interventions for homeless families. In total, assuming 

appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that implementing these provisions would cost $3 million in 2008 and $36 

million over the 2008–2012 period. 

Intergovernmental and Private-Sector Impact: S. 1518 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA. Funds authorized by the bill would benefit state, local, and 

tribal governments that receive grants to provide housing and 

emergency shelter. Any costs those governments incur, including 

matching funds, to comply with program requirements would be incurred voluntarily. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Spending: Chad Chirico; Federal 

Revenues: Thomas Holtmann, Joint Committee on Taxation; Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Lisa RamirezBranum; Impact on the Private Sector: Nabeel Alsalam. 

Estimate approved by: Keith Fontenot, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Health and Human Resources, Budget Analysis Division. 

REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

In accordance with paragraph 11(b), rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following statement 

concerning the regulatory impact of the bill. 

This bill reauthorizes and improves programs that are now in operation through grants by the Department of Housing and Urban 

Development. The bill requires HUD to issue new regulations, but 

only to formalize policies that HUD now enforces in a less formal 

manner. This bill would have no discernable impact on the number 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
14 

of people or businesses regulated under the existing program, or in 

the economic impact of regulation. It also has no discernable impact on personal privacy compared to the existing program. Finally, 

the bill will not create additional paperwork. It is likely that the 

bill will reduce paperwork, because the bill consolidates programs. 

This is particularly the case for rural areas because the changes in 

procedures for recipients in rural areas would result in a simpler 

application process. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW (CORDON RULE)

On September 19, 2007, the Committee unanimously approved a 

motion by Senator Dodd to waive the Cordon rule. Thus, in the 

opinion of the Committee, it is necessary to dispense with section 

12 of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate in order to expedite the business of the Senate. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS