Request for Information Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) Formula, 77855-77864 [2022-27548]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2022 / Notices
Dated: December 9, 2022.
Samantha L Deshommes,
Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division,
Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services, Department of
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2022–27552 Filed 12–19–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–97–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services
[OMB Control Number 1615–NEW]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; New Collection:
Outstanding Americans by Choice
Nominee Questionnaire and
Citizenship Ambassador Nominee
Questionnaire
U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of
Homeland Security.
ACTION: 30-Day notice.
AGENCY:
The Department of Homeland
Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) will be
submitting the following information
collection request to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and clearance in accordance
with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995. The purpose of this notice is to
allow an additional 30 days for public
comments.
DATES: Comments are encouraged and
will be accepted until January 19, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and/or
suggestions regarding the item(s)
contained in this notice, especially
regarding the estimated public burden
and associated response time, must be
submitted via the Federal eRulemaking
Portal website at https://
www.regulations.gov under e-Docket ID
number USCIS–2021–0001. All
submissions received must include the
OMB Control Number 1615–NEW in the
body of the letter, the agency name and
Docket ID USCIS–2021–0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy,
Regulatory Coordination Division,
Samantha Deshommes, Chief,
Telephone number (240) 721–3000
(This is not a toll-free number;
comments are not accepted via
telephone message.). Please note contact
information provided here is solely for
questions regarding this notice. It is not
for individual case status inquiries.
Applicants seeking information about
the status of their individual cases can
check Case Status Online, available at
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:41 Dec 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
the USCIS website at https://
www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS
Contact Center at (800) 375–5283; TTY
(800) 767–1833.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments
The information collection notice was
previously published in the Federal
Register on September 21, 2022, at 87
FR 57711, allowing for a 60-day public
comment period. USCIS did receive 1
comment in connection with the 60-day
notice.
You may access the information
collection instrument with instructions,
or additional information by visiting the
Federal eRulemaking Portal site at:
https://www.regulations.gov and enter
USCIS–2021–0001 in the search box.
The comments submitted to USCIS via
this method are visible to the Office of
Management and Budget and comply
with the requirements of 5 CFR
1320.12(c). All submissions will be
posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov, and will include
any personal information you provide.
Therefore, submitting this information
makes it public. You may wish to
consider limiting the amount of
personal information that you provide
in any voluntary submission you make
to DHS. DHS may withhold information
provided in comments from public
viewing that it determines may impact
the privacy of an individual or is
offensive. For additional information,
please read the Privacy Act notice that
is available via the link in the footer of
https://www.regulations.gov.
Written comments and suggestions
from the public and affected agencies
should address one or more of the
following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77855
Overview of This Information
Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection
Request: New collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Outstanding Americans by Choice
Nominee Questionnaire and Citizenship
Ambassador Nominee Questionnaire.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: NEW; USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Individuals or
households. The information collected
will be used to determine eligibility for
recognition as an Outstanding American
by Choice or a Citizenship Ambassador.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection G–1579 is approximately 200
and the estimated hour burden per
response is 30 minutes per response.
The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection G–1580 is approximately 200
and the estimated hour burden per
response is 30 minutes per response.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 200 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is $0. There is
no cost burden placed on the
respondents.
Dated: December 9, 2022.
Samantha L. Deshommes,
Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division,
Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services, Department of
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2022–27550 Filed 12–19–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–97–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–6337–N–01]
Request for Information Community
Development Block Grant Disaster
Recovery (CDBG–DR) Formula
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Policy Development and
Research (PD&R), Department of
Housing and Urban Development
(HUD).
ACTION: Request for information.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
77856
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2022 / Notices
The U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
seeks public input on the methodology
HUD uses to calculate Community
Development Block Grant-Disaster
Recovery (CDBG–DR) allocation
amounts. This Request for Information
(RFI) is to solicit feedback to inform
how the Department can improve the
allocation formula in the event Congress
appropriates funds for CDBG–DR in the
future.
DATES: Comments are requested on or
before February 21, 2023. Late-filed
comments will be considered to the
extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit comments responsive
to this Request for Information (RFI). All
submissions must refer to the docket
number and title of the RFI. Comments
may include written data, views, or
arguments. Each individual or
organization is encouraged to submit
only one response and to limit their
submissions to 10 pages in 12-point or
larger font, with a page number
provided on each page. Commenters are
encouraged to identify the number of
the specific question or questions to
which they are responding. Responses
should include the name of the
person(s) or organization(s) filing the
comment but should not include any
personally identifiable information.
There are two methods for submitting
public comments.
1. Electronic Submission of
Comments. Interested persons may
submit comments electronically through
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov.
2. Submission of Comments by Mail.
Comments may be submitted by mail to
the Regulations Division, Office of
General Council, Department of Housing
and Urban Development, 451 7th Street
SW, Room 10276, Washington, DC
20410–0500.
HUD strongly encourages commenters
to submit their feedback and
recommendations electronically.
Electronic submission of comments
allows the commenter maximum time to
prepare and submit a response, ensures
timely receipt by HUD, and enables
HUD to make comments immediately
available to the public. Comments
submitted electronically through the
https://www.regulations.gov website can
be viewed by other commenters and
interested members of the public.
Commenters should follow the
instructions provided on that site to
submit comments electronically.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
Note: To receive consideration as public
comments, comments must be submitted
through one of the two methods specified
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:47 Dec 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
above. Again, all submissions must refer to
the docket number and title of the notice.
Public Inspection of Public
Comments. All comments and
communications properly submitted to
HUD will be available for public
inspection and copying between 8 a.m.
and 5 p.m. weekdays at the above
address. Due to security measures at the
HUD Headquarters building, an advance
appointment to review the public
comments must be scheduled by calling
the Regulations Division at (202) 708–
3055 (this is not a toll-free number).
HUD welcomes and is prepared to
receive calls from individuals who are
deaf or hard of hearing, as well as
individuals with speech or
communication disabilities. To learn
more about how to make an accessible
telephone call, please visit https://
www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/
telecommunications-relay-service-trs.
Copies of all comments submitted are
available for inspection and
downloading at https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Todd Richardson, Office of Policy
Development and Research, Department
of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street SW, Room 8138,
Washington, DC 20410–0500; telephone
number (202) 402–5706 (this is not a
toll-free number). HUD welcomes and is
prepared to receive calls from
individuals who are deaf or hard of
hearing, as well as individuals with
speech or communication disabilities.
To learn more about how to make an
accessible telephone call, please visit
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/
telecommunications-relay-service-trs.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. History of CDBG–DR Formula
Allocations
Congress has periodically funded
CDBG–DR grants through emergency
appropriations acts since 1993. The
CDBG–DR program is not authorized
through standing statute, but instead
was created through these emergency
appropriations premised on the
authorized Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) program. While the
CDBG–DR grants are largely subject to
the statutes and regulations governing
the CDBG program, each appropriation
act that makes CDBG–DR funds
available imposes disaster-specific
requirements and includes broad waiver
and alternative requirement authority
that enables the Secretary to adjust
requirements to support resilient
recovery for an individual disaster or a
set of disasters.
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
One component of the overall process
for CDBG–DR is the method for
allocating the funds. With very few
exceptions, HUD has allocated funds by
formula because this method is the best
way to satisfy statutory requirements.
The language Congress uses in
appropriations acts directing HUD to
develop the formula and the formula
itself have evolved over time. This
evolution has depended on the type of
disasters, the amount of funding
available, policy priorities of different
Administrations, and the data available
immediately after a disaster to support
a speedy and equitable allocation.
After each CDBG–DR formula
allocation, HUD has published as an
Appendix to the Federal Register Notice
describing the methodology used to
make the allocations. Those Notices are
available at this website: https://
www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_
planning/cdbg-dr/regulations.
This request for information is
seeking comment on the current
methodology as a way to inform future
allocations if and when appropriations
acts make additional CDBG–DR funds
available.
II. Overview of Current Methodology
As noted above, the CDBG–DR
formula has evolved over time. To
facilitate comment, this RFI is based on
the formula used to allocate funds made
available by The Disaster Relief
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022
(Pub. L. 117–43), which was approved
September 30, 2021, and funded most
impacted and distressed areas resulting
from major disasters occurring in 2020
and 2021.
To enable assessment of comments
based on consistent language, HUD
seeks comment on the methodology and
choice of data for the most recent 2021
formula allocations.
Guiding Features of the Statutory Text
Each appropriation of CDBG–DR
funds stands alone. The key
components of the statutory language
for the most recent formula allocations
were:
• Purpose: ‘‘necessary expenses for
activities authorized under title I of the
Housing and Community Development
Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.)
related to disaster relief, long-term
recovery, restoration of infrastructure
and housing, economic revitalization,
and mitigation, in the most impacted
and distressed areas resulting from a
major disaster that occurred in 2020 or
2021 pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.):’’
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2022 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
• Eligible grantees: ‘‘Provided, That
amounts made available under this
heading in this Act shall be awarded
directly to the State, unit of general
local government, or Indian tribe (as
such term is defined in section 102 of
the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C.
5302)) at the discretion of the
Secretary:’’
• Data: ‘‘Provided further, That the
Secretary shall allocate, using the best
available data,’’
The timing of the appropriation and
statutory language permitted funding
disasters that had occurred in 2020 and
2021, as well as disasters that had not
yet occurred in 2021—essentially a ‘‘go
forward’’ basis. The language further
provided that if there were available
funds, they should be allocated for both
unmet needs and mitigation at the same
time:
• Total unmet needs. ‘‘[A]n amount
equal to the total estimate for unmet
needs for qualifying disasters under this
heading in this Act:’’
• Mitigation. ‘‘Provided further, That
any final allocation for the total estimate
for unmet need made available under
the preceding proviso shall include an
additional amount of 15 percent of such
estimate for additional mitigation:’’
The most recently used formula
applying this statutory direction was
designed with the following goals:
• Allocate the funds as quickly as
possible.
• Use best available data that is
consistently collected for eligible
disasters.
• Allocate directly to local
governments instead of states when the
disaster is concentrated in one or a
small number of communities regularly
‘‘entitled’’ under the non-disaster CDBG
program.
HUD is seeking comments on several
specific components of the formula.
This section of the Notice describes
each component and Section IV will
refer back to these components in
identifying the specific information
requested in connection with each.
Component 1. Eligible Disasters for
Funding
The statutory language directs HUD to
limit CDBG–DR allocations to those
areas that were most impacted and
distressed from a Presidentially
declared major disaster. HUD has
implemented this directive by limiting
CDBG–DR formula allocations to
grantees with major disasters that meet
these standards:
(1) FEMA’s Individual and
Households Program (IHP) designation.
HUD has limited allocations to those
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:41 Dec 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
disasters where FEMA had determined
the damage was sufficient to declare the
disaster as eligible to receive IHP
funding.
(2) Concentrated housing damage.
HUD has limited its estimate of serious
unmet housing need to counties and zip
codes with high levels of damage,
collectively referred to as ‘‘most
impacted areas.’’ For the most recent
allocation, HUD defined most impacted
areas as either most impacted
counties—counties exceeding $10
million in serious unmet housing
needs—or most impacted Zip Codes—
Zip Codes with $2 million or more of
serious unmet housing needs. The
calculation of serious unmet housing
needs is described below.
Component 2. Basic Formula for Unmet
Needs
‘‘Unmet needs’’ means that the needs
are not met by other sources of financial
assistance, including Federal assistance
and insurance. Further, grantees are
required to prevent the duplication of
benefits received from other sources
when carrying out eligible activities.
At the formula level, HUD considers
the following other recovery resources
that are directed at long-term disaster
recovery: insurance, Small Business
Administration (SBA) disaster loans,
and FEMA IHP and Public Assistance.
All of these forms of assistance are
typically available for recovery before
CDBG–DR is allocated. The CDBG–DR
formula is designed to roughly estimate
the recovery gaps not served by these
sources.
The current formula does not assume
that it is possible to measure all unmet
needs. Instead, the formula has evolved
to be a common ‘‘measuring stick.’’ By
using similar data and approach to
defining unmet needs and which areas
are ‘‘most impacted and distressed,’’ it
is possible to evaluate the funding being
provided to current major disasters
against allocations made for prior year
disasters as ‘‘apples-to-apples.’’
The formula depends on information
gleaned from the federal programs that
respond immediately after a disaster
occurs—FEMA and SBA—in order to
calculate unmet needs for the CDBG–DR
formula allocation. Unlike the other
programs that are applicant driven,
CDBG–DR is a block grant that allots
money for grantees to develop their own
plans to reflect the recovery gaps.
Fundamentally, the formula is not
intended to define the specific plan
beyond the singular goal of notifying
grantees how much funding they will
receive for recovery activities.
For disasters that meet the most
impacted threshold described in
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77857
Component 1 above, the unmet need
allocations are based on the following
factors summed together:
(1) Housing Need.
(a) Repair estimates for seriously
damaged owner-occupied units without
insurance (excluding households with
incomes above either the national
median or 120 percent of area median
income, whichever is greater, if they are
without hazard insurance or—if a
flooding event—were in the 1 percent
annual chance floodplain and did not
carry flood insurance) in most impacted
areas after FEMA and SBA repair grants
or loans; and
(b) Repair estimates for seriously
damaged rental units occupied by very
low-income or poverty renters in most
impacted areas.
(2) Economic Revitalization Need.
Repair and content loss estimates for
small businesses with serious damage
denied by SBA.
(3) Public Infrastructure Need. The
estimated local cost share for Public
Assistance Category C to G projects.
Component 3. Methods for Estimating
Serious Unmet Needs for Housing
HUD used FEMA IHP program data
on housing-unit damage as of February
10, 2022, to calculate unmet needs for
housing for 2020 and 2021 qualifying
disasters. HUD generally calculates
damage estimates for unmet needs at
least 60 to 90 days after the disaster is
declared a major disaster to allow
sufficient time for the vast majority of
FEMA and SBA housing inspections to
be completed.
The core data on housing damage for
both the unmet housing needs and
concentrated damage calculations are
based on home inspection data for
FEMA’s IHP program and SBA’s disaster
loan program. HUD calculates ‘‘unmet
housing needs’’ as the number of
housing units with unmet needs times
the estimated cost to repair those units
less repair funds already provided by
FEMA, SBA, and insurance.
Each of the FEMA inspected owneroccupied units are categorized by HUD
into one of five categories:
• Minor-Low: Less than $3,000 of
FEMA inspected real property damage.
• Minor-High: $3,000 to $7,999 of
FEMA inspected real property damage.
• Major-Low: $8,000 to $14,999 of
FEMA inspected real property damage
and/or 1 to 3.9 feet of flooding on the
first floor.
• Major-High: $15,000 to $28,800 of
FEMA inspected real property damage
and/or 4 to 5.9 feet of flooding on the
first floor.
• Severe: Greater than $28,800 of
FEMA inspected real property damage
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
77858
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2022 / Notices
or determined destroyed and/or 6 or
more feet of flooding on the first floor.
When owner-occupied properties also
have a personal property inspection or
only have a personal property
inspection, HUD reviews the personal
property damage amounts such that if
the personal property damage places the
home into a higher need category over
the real property assessment, the
personal property amount is used. The
personal property-based need categories
for owner-occupied units are defined as
follows:
• Minor-Low: Less than $2,500 of
FEMA inspected personal property
damage.
• Minor-High: $2,500 to $3,499 of
FEMA inspected personal property
damage.
• Major-Low: $3,500 to $4,999 of
FEMA inspected personal property
damage or 1 to 3.9 feet of flooding on
the first floor.
• Major-High: $5,000 to $9,000 of
FEMA inspected personal property
damage or 4 to 5.9 feet of flooding on
the first floor.
• Severe: Greater than $9,000 of
FEMA inspected personal property
damage or determined destroyed and/or
6 or more feet of flooding on the first
floor.
To meet the statutory requirement of
‘‘most impacted’’ in this legislative
language, homes were determined to
have a high level of damage if they have
damage of ‘‘major-low’’ or higher. That
is, the unit has a FEMA inspected real
property damage of $8,000 or above,
personal property damage $3,500 or
above, or flooding 1 foot or above on the
first floor. This threshold, like most
other thresholds discussed in this
formula, were established for the
Hurricane Sandy allocation and have
been used since that time.
Furthermore, a homeowner whose
flooded home was located outside the 1
percent annual chance floodplain is
determined to have unmet needs if they
reported damage and no flood insurance
to cover that damage. For homes located
inside the 1 percent annual chance
floodplain, homeowners without flood
insurance with flood damage with
incomes below the greater of national
median or 120 percent of area median
income are determined to have unmet
needs. For non-flood damage,
homeowners without hazard insurance
with incomes below the greater of the
national median or 120 percent of area
median income are included as having
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:41 Dec 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
unmet needs. The unmet need
categories for these types of
homeowners are defined as above for
real and personal property damage.
FEMA does not inspect rental units
for real property damage so personal
property damage is used as a proxy for
rental unit damage. Each of the FEMAinspected renter units are categorized by
HUD into one of five categories:
• Minor-Low: Less than $1,000 of
FEMA inspected personal property
damage.
• Minor-High: $1,000 to $1,999 of
FEMA inspected personal property
damage or determination of ‘‘Moderate’’
damage by the FEMA inspector.
• Major-Low: $2,000 to $3,499 of
FEMA inspected personal property
damage or 1 to 3.9 feet of flooding on
the first floor or determination of
‘‘Major’’ damage by the FEMA
inspector.
• Major-High: $3,500 to $7,500 of
FEMA inspected personal property
damage or 4 to 5.9 feet of flooding on
the first floor.
• Severe: Greater than $7,500 of
FEMA inspected personal property
damage or determined destroyed and/or
6 or more feet of flooding on the first
floor or determination of ‘‘Destroyed’’
by the FEMA inspector.
To meet the statutory requirement of
‘‘most impacted’’ for rental properties,
homes are determined to have a high
level of damage if they have damage of
‘‘major-low’’ or higher. That is, they
have a FEMA personal property damage
assessment of $2,000 or greater or
flooding 1 foot or above on the first
floor.
Furthermore, landlords are presumed
to have adequate insurance coverage
unless the unit is occupied by a renter
with income less than the greater of the
Federal poverty level or 50 percent of
the area median income. Units occupied
by a tenant with income less than the
greater of the poverty level or 50 percent
of the area median income are used to
calculate likely unmet needs for
affordable rental housing. HUD includes
only these low-income renter
households in its calculation for unmet
rental housing needs.
The average cost to fully repair a
housing unit to code for a specific
disaster within each of the damage
categories noted above is calculated
using the median real property damage
repair costs determined by SBA for its
disaster loan program based on a match
comparing FEMA and SBA inspections
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
by each of the FEMA damage categories
described above.
In general, FEMA inspects nearly all
of the housing units that have unmet
needs, but those inspections are not to
estimate the total cost to bring a house
back to code, but rather to determine the
level of assistance required to return the
home to safe and sanitary living
conditions. For the most severe
disasters, there is a maximum amount of
FEMA Individual Assistance of $35,500
and often that is the calculated damage
amount for destroyed housing units.
SBA, on the other hand, only inspects
the homes of survivors that apply for
SBA disaster loans and might be income
and credit eligible for such a loan. The
overlap between the SBA inspections
and FEMA inspections is what HUD
uses to calculate a multiplier of
expected unmet needs by FEMA damage
category, as described below.
If there are 20 or more non-mobile
home SBA inspections that overlap with
FEMA inspections for a specific damage
level for an individual disaster, the
median SBA inspected amount is used
as HUD’s base.
Using disaster 4611 (Hurricane Ida in
Louisiana) as an example:
• There were 1,763 homes that had
both a FEMA inspection showing the
homes had ‘‘major-low’’ damage and an
SBA inspection. We establish as a
‘‘base’’ the median estimated real estate
loss for those matches. In the case of
DR–4611, that is $50,846.
• Next, we look at the SBA data to see
how many of the uninsured
homeowners were approved for an SBA
loan and for how much. As the chart
shows, just 5 percent of the uninsured
owners with major-low damage were
approved for an SBA real estate disaster
loan, at a median amount of $34,500.
We multiply $34,500 times 5 percent to
get $1,682, which we subtract from our
base multiplier. In addition, 82 percent
of uninsured major-low damage owners
received a FEMA repair grant at a
median amount of $9,630. Thus, an
additional $7,915 (82 percent × $9,630)
is subtracted from the multiplier.
• If the calculated amount falls
within the minimum and maximum
range (see below), it is the value used
for the multiplier. In addition, a
‘‘higher’’ damage category cannot get a
smaller multiplier than a lower damage
category.
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
77859
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2022 / Notices
Major-low damage
Major-high damage
Severe damage
DR–4611
Calculated
SBA median estimated real estate loss ..
SBA median amount approved ................
% of unmet damage approved ................
FEMA Median Repair Grant ....................
% of unmet damage approved ................
ESTIMATED CDBG–DR UNMET MULTIPLIER ...................................................
N = ...........................................................
Calculated
Calculated
$50,846
$34,500
5%
$9,630
82%
$50,846
........................
¥$1,682
........................
¥$7,915
$64,121
$48,550
5%
$17,203
78%
$64,121
........................
¥$2,423
........................
¥$13,376
$82,523
$63,700
5%
$31,740
74%
$82,523
........................
¥$3,401
........................
¥$23,483
........................
1,763
$41,249
........................
........................
948
$48,322
........................
........................
382
$55,639
........................
The exception is for mobile homes
and other manufactured housing. We
have calculated a separate multiplier
that is the same for all manufactured
homes damaged in all disasters of 2020
Major-low damage
and 2021. Multipliers for manufactured
homes are below.
Major-high damage
Severe Damage
Manufactured housing
Estimate
SBA median estimated real estate loss ..
SBA median amount approved ................
% of unmet damage approved ................
FEMA Median Repair Grant ....................
% of unmet damage approved ................
ESTIMATED CDBG–DR UNMET MULTIPLIER ...................................................
N = ...........................................................
Calculation
Estimate
Calculation
Calculation
$60,143
$52,550
4%
$11,027
76%
$60,143
........................
¥$2,206
........................
¥$8,366
$79,621
$75,000
4%
$20,997
78%
$79,621
........................
¥$3,000
........................
¥$16,432
$92,843
$78,100
7%
$35,319
57%
$92,843
........................
¥$5,111
........................
¥$20,137
........................
889
$49,571
........................
........................
345
$60,189
........................
........................
468
$67,594
........................
For disasters and damage categories
that have fewer than 20 matched SBA
units, there is a ‘‘waterfall’’ review. No
damage category can get less than the
first quartile estimated amounts for all
disasters of 2020 and 2021, nor get more
than the third quartile amount for all
disasters of 2020 and 2021. The
minimums and maximums are below.
Minimum
multiplier
HUD damage categories
Major-Low ................................................................................................................................................................
Major-High ...............................................................................................................................................................
Severe ......................................................................................................................................................................
For cases not meeting the 20-unit
match threshold, the median for all
disasters of the same type in 2020 and
Estimate
Maximum
multiplier
$22,971
33,714
36,592
$57,452
82,582
134,503
2021 is used, subject to the minimum
and maximum multipliers above.
Multipliers by disaster type
Disaster type
Major-low
Dam/Levee Break ........................................................................................................................
Earthquake ...................................................................................................................................
Fire ...............................................................................................................................................
Flood ............................................................................................................................................
$33,007
27,141
22,971
47,074
Major-high
$47,078
33,714
82,582
57,856
Severe
$47,078
134,503
134,503
64,513
Multipliers by disaster type
Disaster type
Major-low
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Hurricane .....................................................................................................................................
Severe Ice Storm .........................................................................................................................
Severe Storm(s) ...........................................................................................................................
Tornado ........................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:41 Dec 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
$36,800
33,528
22,971
52,961
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
Major-high
$45,952
33,714
37,299
82,582
Severe
$45,952
36,592
37,299
134,503
77860
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2022 / Notices
estimates for the categories above by the
number of small businesses denied an
SBA loan, including those denied a loan
prior to inspection due to inadequate
credit or income (or a loan application
decision had not yet been made), under
the assumption that damage among
those denied at pre-inspection have the
same distribution of damage as those
denied after inspection.
Using DR–4611 (Hurricane Ida) as an
example:
• Column (B) below shows that 1,834
businesses applied for an SBA disaster
loan, were inspected, and had combined
real estate and content loss of $30,000
or more (i.e., Major-Low damage or
higher). Column (C) shows the median
combined inspected loss estimate for
each category.
• Of the 1,834 inspected with
damage, column D shows 1,031 were
denied an SBA disaster loan or did not
yet have a decision based on the best
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Component 4. Methods for Estimating
Serious Unmet Economic Revitalization
Needs
Based on SBA disaster loans to
businesses using data for 2021 disasters
from as of date February 22, 2022, HUD
calculated the median real estate and
content loss by the following damage
categories for each state:
• Minor-Low: real estate + content
loss = below $12,000.
• Minor-High: real estate + content
loss = $12,000–$29,999.
• Major-Low: real estate + content
loss = $30,000–$64,999.
• Major-High: real estate + content
loss = $65,000–$149,999.
• Severe: real estate + content loss =
$150,000 and above.
For properties with real estate and
content loss of $30,000 or more, HUD
calculates the estimated amount of
unmet needs for small businesses by
multiplying the median damage
available data at the time of the
allocation.
• However, not all of the businesses
applying for a disaster loan receive an
inspection. An inspection will not be
initiated if a business does not meet
some basic SBA requirements, such as
credit score. Among all business
applicants for a disaster loan in DR–
4611, the count of the denied notinspected divided by the count of all
denied loans equals 2.14. Thus,
assuming the distribution of need of
those not inspected is the same as for
those inspected, we estimate the total
number of businesses likely needing
assistance is 2.14 (column E) times the
denied inspected loans (column D).
• The calculated unmet need are the
total businesses HUD estimated were
denied by SBA (column F) times the
SBA median real estate and content
damage of those inspected (column C).
HUD damage category
Number
inspected
Median real
estate and
content
damage
Inspected and
denied
(or no
decision)
Weighting to
capture denied
prior
to inspection
Total businesses
denied
(or no decision)
Estimated total
unmet need
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
(E)
(F = E * D)
(G = C * F)
Major-Low ....................................
Major-High ....................................
Severe ..........................................
906
582
346
$42,606
90,697
236,949
496
326
209
2.14
2.14
2.14
1,059
696
446
$45,125,639
63,136,289
105,747,953
Total: .....................................
1,834
........................
1,031
........................
2,202
$214,009,881
Component 5. Methods for Estimating
Unmet Infrastructure Needs
Unmet infrastructure data depends on
the estimating skills of FEMA Public
Assistance staff. FEMA’s Public
Assistance program has several
categories of assistance. For each of
these categories, FEMA staff develop
estimates to support budgeting of
Disaster Relief Fund resources. These
estimates are intended to reflect the cost
to repair to pre-disaster conditions. Over
time these estimates will change as
FEMA and local governments agree on
what is to be covered and not covered.
• Category A: Debris removal
• Category B: Emergency protective
measures
• Category C: Roads and bridges
• Category D: Water control facilities
• Category E: Public buildings and
contents
• Category F: Public utilities
• Category G: Parks, recreational, and
other facilities
Categories A and B are the short-term
emergency expenses, while Categories C
to G are the long-term permanent work.
Because CDBG–DR can only be used for
unmet needs and many needs for shortterm emergency expenses are met before
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:47 Dec 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
CDBG–DR funds are allocated, the
unmet need calculation only uses
Categories C to G.
For each of these categories, the
Stafford Act expects that the impacted
communities contribute a local share.
For most disasters this local share is 25
percent of the cost to repair back to predisaster conditions; however, based on
a determination by the FEMA
Administrator that a lower cost share is
needed, the local cost share might be
less. Whether this adjusted cost share is
factored into the CDBG–DR formula
depends on timing of FEMA’s decision
regarding a particular adjustment
request and the timing of the allocation
calculation.
HUD’s estimate of infrastructure
unmet need is simply the estimated cost
share for Categories C to G using the
best available data from FEMA at the
time of the allocation.
To calculate 2021 unmet needs for
infrastructure projects, HUD obtained
FEMA cost estimates as of February 10,
2022, of the expected local cost share to
repair the permanent public
infrastructure (Categories C to G) to their
pre-storm condition.
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Component 6. Allocation Calculation
For the formula allocation, HUD
calculates total unmet recovery needs
for eligible disasters as the aggregate of:
• Serious unmet housing needs or
owners and renters in most impacted
counties (including those made eligible
through zip code most impacted status);
• Serious unmet economic
revitalization needs; and
• Unmet infrastructure need.
Component 7. Mitigation
Since Hurricane Sandy, CDBG–DR
allocations have often included a
specific component or separate
allocation for mitigation or resilience
activities. This calculation has also
evolved over time. For disasters
occurring between 2011 to 2013,
mitigation/resilience was funded
through a variety of means—(i) the basic
formula estimating additional
mitigation/resilience need was equal to
30 percent of the total estimated unmet
needs; (ii) the Rebuild by Design
competition, which provided additional
formula allocations to support winning
projects; and (iii) the National Disaster
Resilience competition, which awarded
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2022 / Notices
funding through a Notice of Funding
Opportunity.
After Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and
Maria in 2017, Congress indicated that
HUD should fund mitigation for all
disasters of 2015 to 2017 with the funds
remaining after allocating for 100
percent of unmet needs, proportional to
the unmet needs. This same approach
was used for 2018 disasters, per
Congressional direction; 2019 disasters
received no mitigation specific funding.
New for the 2020 and 2021 allocations
was to make mitigation allocations
simultaneously to unmet needs
allocations at 15 percent of the unmet
need calculation, per Congressional
direction.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Component 8. When Appropriations Are
Less Than Calculated Unmet Needs
CDBG–DR funds are usually tied to
either a set of disasters or a time period.
The amount appropriated can be more
or less than what HUD calculates for
unmet needs for areas above the
threshold (as defined in Component 1).
When funds are less than the calculated
unmet needs, they are allocated in
proportion to the unmet needs across
the eligible disasters, which means the
amount of unmet needs HUD funds
through CDBG–DR has varied
throughout the last 29 years.
Congress appropriated funds for the
2020 and 2021 disasters in September
2021 with specific instructions that the
allocations for 2020 disasters be made as
total unmet needs along with mitigation,
within 30 days of appropriation. This
direction resulted in a scenario where
100 percent of the 2020 disaster needs
plus mitigation were met, but not
enough resources were available to do
the same for 2021 disasters. HUD
managed this by allocating the
remaining funds proportional to the
combined unmet and mitigation needs
for 2021 disasters, which resulted in
each 2021 grantee receiving 60.4 percent
of their total calculated unmet needs
and mitigation.
Component 9. Local Allocations
Congress provides the Secretary with
authority to decide whether allocations
should be made directly to states, local
governments, or Indian tribes. In 2020,
the grants were made only to the states,
while for 2021 grants were made to a
combination of states and local
governments. The approach for making
the 2021 local allocations took place
after calculating the disaster level
allocation amounts at the state level.
HUD calculated the share of serious
unmet housing needs for entitlement
areas (i.e., those metropolitan cities and
urban counties that receive regular
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:41 Dec 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
CDBG grants) and proportionally
allocated among the entitlement areas
and the impacted areas in the state
outside of entitlement areas (state
balance) proportional to each area’s
share of serious unmet housing need in
its most impacted areas. If entitlement
areas represent 70 percent or more of
the serious unmet housing need in a
state from a particular disaster and the
calculated award amount does not
exceed their regular CDBG grant by 20
times or more, then local allocations
were made to qualifying entitlement
areas instead of the state.
Component 10. Minimum Amount To
Be Spent in Most Impacted and
Distressed Areas
Congress has called for CDBG–DR
funds to be targeted to the most
impacted and distressed areas. As noted
above, the housing funds are allocated
based strictly on only those counties
($10 million) or zip codes ($2 million)
with enough homes with serious
damage to meet the minimum dollar
thresholds. The business estimates and
infrastructure estimates are for the full
disaster area of the state or entitlement
area.
With each formula allocation, HUD
specifies the areas that it has
determined to be most impacted and
distressed (e.g., counties, zip codes) for
each grantee and requires that a
minimum of 80 percent of the amount
allocated benefit the recovery in
counties containing these areas.
Component 11. Data Provided to CDBG–
DR Grantees for Developing Action
Plans
Under a current Computer Matching
Agreement between HUD and FEMA,
HUD may enter a data sharing
agreement with grantees to provide to
grantees the FEMA Individual
Assistance data it used to develop the
formula allocations. Note that HUD
provides raw FEMA data to CDBG–DR
grantees and not the final data resulting
from HUD’s allocation calculations.
HUD does not have a Computer
Matching Agreement with SBA, so
grantees must work directly with SBA to
obtain its data. HUD does not currently
have the authority to make this data
publicly available.
III. Purpose of This Request for
Information
Congress has been considering
various legislation that would formally
authorize CDBG–DR as a program. In the
event Congress authorizes the program,
this Request for Information would
inform that rule development.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77861
If the program is not formally
authorized, HUD anticipates that
Congress will likely continue to make
supplemental appropriations for
disasters and that they would expect
HUD to continue to allocate funds by
formula. This Request for Information
could inform improvements to the
allocation formula in the event Congress
appropriates funds for CDBG–DR in the
future.
IV. Specific Information Requested
General Questions
Question 1. Given the policy objective
of quickly allocating funds so that state
and local officials can speedily develop
programs to address their most serious
unmet needs for disaster recovery, are
there other ways HUD might allocate
CDBG–DR funds beyond the
methodology described above?
Discussion. HUD has long relied on
the data from FEMA and SBA to make
formula calculations. With advances in
technology and other public and private
data sources, there may be other
approaches HUD could consider.
Question 2. If Congress appropriates
funds in advance of disasters occurring
in a specified time period, should
disasters be funded as soon as
practicable after they occur, or should
HUD hold back funding until all
disasters in a year are known so each
receives an equal share of the remaining
funding relative to their needs?
Discussion. For the 2020 and 2021
disasters, at the direction of Congress,
HUD fully funded the disasters of 2020
and then partially funded all of the
eligible 2021 disasters due to limited
funding.
The remaining questions refer back to
the current formula components
discussed in Section II of this request
for information.
Component 1. Specific Questions.
Eligible Disasters for Assistance
Question 3. How should HUD
determine the disasters that are eligible
for CDBG–DR assistance and the areas
that are most impacted and distressed
from a Presidentially declared major
disaster? Is HUD’s approach effective or
including rural and Tribal areas that are
most impacted and distressed? Given
the complexity of program
implementation, should a grantee not
only meet most impacted and distressed
standard but also have an aggregate
amount of unmet need above a
minimum grant threshold?
Discussion. We are seeking comments
on if the current methodology is overly
targeted or not targeted enough in terms
of disasters that should receive these
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
77862
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2022 / Notices
funds. In general, the motivating
disasters that Congress appropriates
funding for tend to be very large
disasters that communities are
otherwise financially unable to address.
The current methodology has grown
more inclusive over time such that
many disasters that might be considered
smaller disasters are now receiving
funding in addition to larger disasters.
CDBG–DR funds often require a great
deal of local investment in new
management and financial capacity for
the funds to be used effectively. HUD
experience has been that communities
with relatively small disasters face
significant challenges in establishing
new recovery programs.
In addition, HUD’s current definition
for concentrated housing damage is a
measure of damage to homes occupied
by very low-income renters and
uninsured homeowners. For some
disasters, this approach is consistent
with lower income areas, while for other
disasters like flooding and earthquake
events, this approach targets large
numbers of likely higher income
households without insurance for those
specific disasters. As such, the CDBG–
DR requirement for serving 70 percent
low-and-moderate income (LMI)
households can become difficult for
grantees if they have largely been
funded based on serious damage of
higher income homeowners that are
eligible for, but did not receive, SBA
disaster loans.
Items of specific interest:
• Should there be additional
thresholds that capture concentration of
damage? Examples of such thresholds
might include a minimum percentage of
impacted homeowners or renters in a
Census Tract, a minimum percentage of
LMI population impacted by the event,
or a minimum percentage of LMI
households residing in the impacted
area prior to the event.
• Should the damage threshold for
‘‘most impacted’’ serious housing
damage be raised so that it excludes
‘‘major-low’’?
• Are serious unmet housing needs
for counties at $10 million or zip codes
at $2 million the appropriate thresholds
for ‘‘most impacted and distressed’’? Do
disaster thresholds based on monetary
damages disadvantage certain
households and might there be a
different way to determine most
impacted and distressed areas?
Particularly as it relates to rural and
Tribal areas.
• Should the income of the area(s)
impacted be factored into determining
eligibility? For example, HUD could
include only data on damage in low-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:41 Dec 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
and-moderate income areas when
calculating most impacted eligibility.
Component 2. Specific Questions. Basic
Formula for Unmet Needs
Question 4. Are there are other unmet
needs that HUD should be factoring into
the formula calculation beyond housing,
economic revitalization, and
infrastructure?
Discussion. Questions under later
components speak to the specific data
and approach for calculating housing,
economic revitalization, and
infrastructure unmet needs, which
relate to the CDBG–DR purposes of
‘‘restoration of infrastructure and
housing’’ and ‘‘economic
revitalization.’’ This question is more
basic and could reflect the other
purposes of CDBG–DR grants, including
the more general purposes of ‘‘disaster
relief’’ and ‘‘long-term recovery’’. We
note that CDBG–DR appropriations acts
typically dictate how HUD will
calculate the additional allocation
amount for the ‘‘mitigation’’ purpose,
but respondents may also include
comments related to calculating
mitigation allocations. HUD notes that
any portion of the CDBG–DR grant can
be used for mitigation/resilience
purposes, beyond the amount calculated
as the mitigation plus up. In answering
this question, respondents should
indicate what data HUD might consider.
Note that the data generally needs to be
consistently available for all areas and
disasters.
Question 5. Should HUD establish a
minimum number of days to have
passed after a Presidential Disaster
declaration, or some other metric, before
calculating unmet needs?
Discussion. The current formula uses
administrative data from FEMA and
SBA that takes time for both agencies to
collect as they implement their
programs. Key elements of their data
include home inspections and eligibility
determinations. As a rule of thumb,
HUD has generally held off allocations
for 60 to 90 days after a disaster before
calculating unmet needs. Is there some
other metric HUD should use before
making allocations?
Component 3. Specific Questions.
Housing Unmet Needs
Question 6. Should HUD continue to
exclude certain homeowners with
incomes above 120 percent of area
median income from consideration of
unmet needs?
Discussion. The current formula is
built around the idea that homeowners
with higher income should carry hazard
insurance in all cases and flood
insurance if in a floodplain.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Question 7. For homeowner occupied
units, in addition to uninsured
households, should HUD consider the
unmet need of insured applicants
denied SBA loans? Is there another data
source or characteristic HUD should
consider to measure the unmet needs of
insured applicants?
Discussion. Increasingly we are
informed that insurance is inadequate
for recovery and mitigation and limiting
the allocation to just the uninsured
homeowners is leaving a large recovery
gap in assistance for lower income
households. FEMA Individual
Assistance data are limited in some
disasters because inspections are not
completed for insured properties. A
potential additional source of data are
households that are denied SBA loans,
similar to the approach used for
economic revitalization unmet needs in
component 4.
Question 8. For homeowner occupied
units, are the FEMA Verified Loss
breaks the correct breaks for assessing
disaster severity? Should these be
modified to reflect FEMA program
updates?
Question 9. Is there an alternative to
personal property damage that HUD
might consider for measuring damage to
rental housing? For renter occupied
units, are the FEMA personal property
breaks currently used the right breaks
for assessing disaster severity? Should
these be modified to reflect FEMA
program changes?
Discussion. HUD uses personal
property damage as a proxy for likely
housing unit damage. FEMA benefit
calculations have changed over time
and its methodology for both
determining amount of FEMA Verified
Loss for homeowners and personal
property loss has varied from disaster to
disaster. The thresholds HUD uses were
developed over a decade ago.
Question 10. For renter occupied
units, is it a reasonable assumption that
damage to housing occupied by renters
less than the greater of poverty or 50
percent of AMI reflects a likely loss of
affordable housing?
Discussion. The data HUD gets for the
formula allocation has no information
on insurance coverage for landlords, so
HUD has established a series of proxies
for likely loss of affordable housing.
CDBG–DR is generally intended to target
households below 70 percent of AMI.
The first proxy is measuring rental
damage (discussed above) using
personal property damage as a proxy for
unit damage; and the second proxy is
the unit being occupied by a renter less
than the greater of poverty or 50 percent
of AMI with the assumption that if
housing either will not be replaced, or
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2022 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
if it is replaced it will no longer be
affordable after repair, and thus there is
a need for replacement affordable
housing.
Question 11. Is there a simpler
approach for calculating the multipliers
used for unmet needs?
Discussion. HUD’s matching to SBA
data is generally only effective for very
large disasters; most other disasters are
subject to the disaster specific
multipliers. HUD could indicate on its
website each year a multiplier schedule
by disaster type. A downside to this
approach is that it does not capture
local variation in cost that the current
approach does capture for large
disasters. The upside is more
transparency and a simpler formula.
Question 12. Are there other
options—beyond using the homeowner
multiplier—for how the multiplier for
rental units could be calculated when
determining unmet housing needs?
Discussion. HUD currently uses the
same multiplier for rental units as
owner-occupied units in the same
damage category. The goal for allocating
the funds for owners and renters,
however, are very different. The goal for
homeowners is to help them repair their
home so they can return to that home
or cover some of the cost for buyouts if
needed. For renters, there is a
presumption that damaged very lowincome renter housing either will not be
repaired, or, if it is, it will no longer be
as affordable as pre-disaster. As such,
the formula reflects an assumption that
the most likely use of funds to support
recovery of rental housing markets is to
support creation of housing affordable
for renters with income less than 50
percent of AMI.
Component 4. Specific Questions.
Methods for Estimating Serious Unmet
Economic Revitalization Needs
Question 13. Are there other factors
and/or data sources HUD might
consider beyond SBA business loan
denials when determining unmet
economic revitalization needs?
Discussion. Examples for
consideration include taking into
account a community’s pre-disaster
economic distress or the nature of the
disaster (e.g., existing economic distress
can lead to significant displacement
during a disaster that may delay
economic recovery) or data from other
federal agencies such as the Economic
Development Administration at the
Department of Commerce.
Question 14. Should HUD establish a
higher or lower standard for inclusion of
businesses with serious unmet need?
Discussion. HUD has not changed the
damage thresholds in over a decade.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:41 Dec 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
Question 15. How can HUD better
target the calculation of unmet
economic revitalization needs for lower
income households and other
vulnerable populations in the most
impacted and distressed areas?
Discussion. The current method is
targeting funds to businesses not
meeting income or credit requirements
of SBA. It does not take into account the
location of the business, such as if it is
located in a low-mod area.
Component 5. Specific Questions.
Methods for Estimating Unmet
Infrastructure Needs
Question 16. Are there other data or
factors HUD might consider for
measuring unmet infrastructure needs?
Should HUD establish a minimum
amount of time (e.g. not less than 60
days) after a disaster to calculate CDBG–
DR allocations so they are based on
consistent, accurate FEMA PA damage
estimates?
Discussion. HUD may be unaware of
other sources of data on public
infrastructure needs besides FEMA
Public Assistance. Further, the current
approach tends to provide more for
places that had more infrastructure predisaster, which may disadvantage
communities with inadequate
infrastructure pre-disaster due to the
low incomes or historical disinvestment
in the community pre-disaster.
Question 17. How can HUD better
target the calculation of unmet
infrastructure needs for lower income
households and other vulnerable
populations in the most impacted and
distressed areas? Should HUD pro-rate
the estimate of infrastructure needs
based on the fraction of damaged homes
with unmet needs located in LMI areas?
Discussion. The current methodology
for determining infrastructure need does
not factor in the income or other
demographics of the impacted area.
CDBG–DR must be predominantly used
for activities that benefit low- and
moderate-income persons. For
infrastructure investments to satisfy the
low-mod area benefit national objective
criteria, usually the investment needs to
be in a primarily residential area where
at least 51 percent of the residents are
low- and moderate-income persons.
Some grantees in the past have had
difficulty meeting the low-mod benefit
requirements for their infrastructure
funds.
Component 6. Specific Questions.
Allocation Calculation
Question 18. How can CDBG–DR
allocation methodology be modified to
allocate resources equitably and
adequately address disaster-related
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77863
needs, including the needs of the most
impacted, vulnerable populations, and
underserved communities?
Component 7. Specific Questions.
Mitigation
Question 19. How should HUD factor
mitigation into the CDBG–DR formula?
Should the mitigation multiplier be
different by type of disaster?
Discussion. Congress has tried several
different methods; feedback on grantee
and subgrantee experiences with HUD’s
different ways of implementing those
methods would be beneficial. The cost
to mitigate against future risk needed in
a fire zone is very different than
mitigation needed in flood zone. Using
a single multiplier such as 15 percent
does not take this into consideration.
Question 20. Should there be a
separate calculation of mitigation needs
that is independent of the unmet need
calculation? If so, what should that
calculation be?
Discussion. Depending on the
disaster, mitigation and potential
resilience costs may be significantly
more or less than a simple proportional
allocation relative to unmet needs.
Component 8. Specific Questions.
Amount of Funding
Question 21. If resources are limited,
should a certain type or types of unmet
need be prioritized over others in
determining an allocation? For example,
housing only.
Discussion. The current policy of
insufficient funding is to allocate
proportional to the unmet needs of
eligible grantees or to fully fund
disasters as they occur until funding
runs out leaving later disasters with no
funding. This question seeks comments
on how to allocate funding when less is
appropriated than calculated unmet
needs.
Component 9. Specific Questions.
Allocations to Local Governments and
Indian Tribes
Question 22. What criteria should
HUD use when determining if an
allocation should be made directly to
local governments and Indian tribes (as
that term is defined under section 102(a)
of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1974) versus the
full allocation to a state government?
Should HUD take into account grantee
capacity when deciding on either
providing a direct grant and/or amount
of the grant?
Discussion. The research on this topic
is inconclusive 1. Local and tribal
1 Martin, Carlos, et al. ‘‘Housing Recovery and
CDBG–DR: A Review of the Timing and Factors
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
Continued
20DEN1
77864
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2022 / Notices
government leaders often petition HUD
for direct allocations while state leaders
argue there is greater efficiency,
management capacity, and more
program consistency when it is a single
allocation to the state.
Question 23. Are there revisions to
HUD’s allocation methodology that
should be considered to capture tribal
recovery needs more effectively? Please
see the RFI requesting information on
the CDBG–DR program published
elsewhere in today’s Federal Register.
Component 10. Specific Questions.
Minimum Amount To Be Spent in Most
Impacted Areas
Question 24. Currently at least, 80
percent of CDBG–DR funds must be
spent to benefit the most impacted and
distressed area designated by HUD, and
up to 20 percent may be spent in area
designed by the grantee as most
impacted and distressed areas; is this
the right amount?
Discussion. The 80 percent standard
was based on analysis of how funds
were allocated for allocations to 2011
disasters prior to Hurricane Sandy
funding. The standard has not changed
since that time. Note that 100 percent of
CDBG–DR grants must be expended in
a most impacted and distressed area,
with a minimum of 80 percent in HUD
defined most impacted areas and up to
20 percent in areas identified by
grantees. Please see the RFI requesting
information on the CDBG–DR program
published elsewhere in today’s Federal
Register that solicits public comment on
this topic.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Component 11. Specific Questions. Data
Provided to CDBG–DR Grantees for
Developing Action Plans
Question 25. In addition to the raw
data provided by FEMA to HUD for the
formula calculation, should HUD
provide to CDBG–DR grantees and the
public a set of pre-scripted tables and
maps to assist with development of
Action Plans? What other information
would be helpful for developing Action
Plans?
Discussion. A significant amount of
analysis goes into developing the
formula allocations. HUD could prepare
some basic tables and maps to inform
the public and grantees on who was
impacted, where they were impacted,
and what the nature of the damage is.
Associated with Housing Activities in HUD’s
Community Development Block Grant for Disaster
Recovery Program.’’ HUD User. April 2019. https://
www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/
HousingRecovery-CDBG-DR.html.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:41 Dec 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
V. Response Guidance
For comments submitted by mail
responses should not exceed 50 pages.
Please provide the following
information at the start of your response
to this RFI: Company/institution name
(if applicable); contact information,
including address, phone number, and
email address. Do not submit
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
in your response to this RFI. Responses
identified as containing CBI will not be
reviewed and will be discarded.
Please identify each answer by
responding to a specific question or
topic if applicable. You may answer as
many or as few questions as you wish.
To help you prepare your comments,
please see the How Do I Prepare
Effective Comments segment of the
Commenting on HUD Rules web page,
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/
general_counsel/Commenting-On-HUDRules#1. While that web page is written
for commenting on regulatory proposals,
these tips are generally applicable to
this RFI.
Solomon J. Greene,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Policy Development and Research.
[FR Doc. 2022–27548 Filed 12–19–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–6336–N–01]
Request for Information for HUD’s
Community Development Block Grant
Disaster Recovery (CDBG–DR) Rules,
Waivers, and Alternative Requirements
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Community Planning and
Development, HUD.
ACTION: Request for information.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
seeks public input to strengthen and
improve requirements for entities
receiving and implementing Community
Development Block Grant Disaster
Recovery (CDBG–DR) funding. This
Request for Information (RFI) is to
solicit feedback to inform how the
Department can modify, expand,
streamline, or remove CDBG–DR rules
and requirements with the goals of
expediting long-term resilient recovery,
reducing, or eliminating barriers for
impacted beneficiaries, ensuring
equitable community recovery, and
simplifying compliance for CDBG–DR
grantees within its statutory authority.
Additionally, HUD seeks information
and recommendations to reduce the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
administrative burden for those
receiving and implementing CDBG–DR
funding after a disaster to accelerate the
availability of assistance to disaster
survivors and affected communities.
DATES: Comments are requested on or
before February 21, 2023. Late-filed
comments will be considered to the
extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit comments responsive
to this Request for Information (RFI). All
submissions must refer to the docket
number and title of the RFI. Comments
may include written data, views, or
arguments. Each individual or
organization is encouraged to submit
only one response and to limit its
submission to 10 pages in 12-point or
larger font, with a page number
provided on each page. Commenters are
encouraged to identify the number of
the specific question or questions to
which they are responding. Responses
should include the name of the
person(s) or organization(s) filing the
comment but should not include any
personally identifiable information.
There are two methods for submitting
public comments.
1. Electronic Submission of
Comments. Interested persons may
submit comments electronically through
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov.
2. Submission of Comments by Mail.
Comments may be submitted by mail to
the Regulations Division, Office of
General Counsel, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 451
7th Street SW, Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410–0500.
HUD strongly encourages commenters
to submit their feedback and
recommendations electronically.
Electronic submission of comments
allows the commenter maximum time to
prepare and submit a response, ensures
timely receipt by HUD, and enables
HUD to make comments immediately
available to the public. Comments
submitted electronically through the
https://www.regulations.gov website can
be viewed by other commenters and
interested members of the public.
Commenters should follow the
instructions provided on that site to
submit comments electronically.
Note: To receive consideration as public
comments, comments must be submitted
through one of the two methods specified
above. Again, all submissions must refer to
the docket number and title of the notice.
Public Inspection of Public
Comments. All comments and
communications properly submitted to
HUD will be available for public
inspection and copying between 8 a.m.
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77855-77864]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27548]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-6337-N-01]
Request for Information Community Development Block Grant
Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) Formula
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and
Research (PD&R), Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 77856]]
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
seeks public input on the methodology HUD uses to calculate Community
Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) allocation amounts.
This Request for Information (RFI) is to solicit feedback to inform how
the Department can improve the allocation formula in the event Congress
appropriates funds for CDBG-DR in the future.
DATES: Comments are requested on or before February 21, 2023. Late-
filed comments will be considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments responsive
to this Request for Information (RFI). All submissions must refer to
the docket number and title of the RFI. Comments may include written
data, views, or arguments. Each individual or organization is
encouraged to submit only one response and to limit their submissions
to 10 pages in 12-point or larger font, with a page number provided on
each page. Commenters are encouraged to identify the number of the
specific question or questions to which they are responding. Responses
should include the name of the person(s) or organization(s) filing the
comment but should not include any personally identifiable information.
There are two methods for submitting public comments.
1. Electronic Submission of Comments. Interested persons may submit
comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov.
2. Submission of Comments by Mail. Comments may be submitted by
mail to the Regulations Division, Office of General Council, Department
of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410-0500.
HUD strongly encourages commenters to submit their feedback and
recommendations electronically. Electronic submission of comments
allows the commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a response,
ensures timely receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to make comments
immediately available to the public. Comments submitted electronically
through the https://www.regulations.gov website can be viewed by other
commenters and interested members of the public. Commenters should
follow the instructions provided on that site to submit comments
electronically.
Note: To receive consideration as public comments, comments
must be submitted through one of the two methods specified above.
Again, all submissions must refer to the docket number and title of
the notice.
Public Inspection of Public Comments. All comments and
communications properly submitted to HUD will be available for public
inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays at the above
address. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, an
advance appointment to review the public comments must be scheduled by
calling the Regulations Division at (202) 708-3055 (this is not a toll-
free number). HUD welcomes and is prepared to receive calls from
individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, as well as individuals
with speech or communication disabilities. To learn more about how to
make an accessible telephone call, please visit https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs. Copies of all
comments submitted are available for inspection and downloading at
https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Richardson, Office of Policy
Development and Research, Department of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street SW, Room 8138, Washington, DC 20410-0500; telephone
number (202) 402-5706 (this is not a toll-free number). HUD welcomes
and is prepared to receive calls from individuals who are deaf or hard
of hearing, as well as individuals with speech or communication
disabilities. To learn more about how to make an accessible telephone
call, please visit https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. History of CDBG-DR Formula Allocations
Congress has periodically funded CDBG-DR grants through emergency
appropriations acts since 1993. The CDBG-DR program is not authorized
through standing statute, but instead was created through these
emergency appropriations premised on the authorized Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. While the CDBG-DR grants are
largely subject to the statutes and regulations governing the CDBG
program, each appropriation act that makes CDBG-DR funds available
imposes disaster-specific requirements and includes broad waiver and
alternative requirement authority that enables the Secretary to adjust
requirements to support resilient recovery for an individual disaster
or a set of disasters.
One component of the overall process for CDBG-DR is the method for
allocating the funds. With very few exceptions, HUD has allocated funds
by formula because this method is the best way to satisfy statutory
requirements. The language Congress uses in appropriations acts
directing HUD to develop the formula and the formula itself have
evolved over time. This evolution has depended on the type of
disasters, the amount of funding available, policy priorities of
different Administrations, and the data available immediately after a
disaster to support a speedy and equitable allocation.
After each CDBG-DR formula allocation, HUD has published as an
Appendix to the Federal Register Notice describing the methodology used
to make the allocations. Those Notices are available at this website:
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/cdbg-dr/regulations.
This request for information is seeking comment on the current
methodology as a way to inform future allocations if and when
appropriations acts make additional CDBG-DR funds available.
II. Overview of Current Methodology
As noted above, the CDBG-DR formula has evolved over time. To
facilitate comment, this RFI is based on the formula used to allocate
funds made available by The Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriations
Act, 2022 (Pub. L. 117-43), which was approved September 30, 2021, and
funded most impacted and distressed areas resulting from major
disasters occurring in 2020 and 2021.
To enable assessment of comments based on consistent language, HUD
seeks comment on the methodology and choice of data for the most recent
2021 formula allocations.
Guiding Features of the Statutory Text
Each appropriation of CDBG-DR funds stands alone. The key
components of the statutory language for the most recent formula
allocations were:
Purpose: ``necessary expenses for activities authorized
under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42
U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) related to disaster relief, long-term recovery,
restoration of infrastructure and housing, economic revitalization, and
mitigation, in the most impacted and distressed areas resulting from a
major disaster that occurred in 2020 or 2021 pursuant to the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121
et seq.):''
[[Page 77857]]
Eligible grantees: ``Provided, That amounts made available
under this heading in this Act shall be awarded directly to the State,
unit of general local government, or Indian tribe (as such term is
defined in section 102 of the Housing and Community Development Act of
1974 (42 U.S.C. 5302)) at the discretion of the Secretary:''
Data: ``Provided further, That the Secretary shall
allocate, using the best available data,''
The timing of the appropriation and statutory language permitted
funding disasters that had occurred in 2020 and 2021, as well as
disasters that had not yet occurred in 2021--essentially a ``go
forward'' basis. The language further provided that if there were
available funds, they should be allocated for both unmet needs and
mitigation at the same time:
Total unmet needs. ``[A]n amount equal to the total
estimate for unmet needs for qualifying disasters under this heading in
this Act:''
Mitigation. ``Provided further, That any final allocation
for the total estimate for unmet need made available under the
preceding proviso shall include an additional amount of 15 percent of
such estimate for additional mitigation:''
The most recently used formula applying this statutory direction
was designed with the following goals:
Allocate the funds as quickly as possible.
Use best available data that is consistently collected for
eligible disasters.
Allocate directly to local governments instead of states
when the disaster is concentrated in one or a small number of
communities regularly ``entitled'' under the non-disaster CDBG program.
HUD is seeking comments on several specific components of the
formula. This section of the Notice describes each component and
Section IV will refer back to these components in identifying the
specific information requested in connection with each.
Component 1. Eligible Disasters for Funding
The statutory language directs HUD to limit CDBG-DR allocations to
those areas that were most impacted and distressed from a
Presidentially declared major disaster. HUD has implemented this
directive by limiting CDBG-DR formula allocations to grantees with
major disasters that meet these standards:
(1) FEMA's Individual and Households Program (IHP) designation. HUD
has limited allocations to those disasters where FEMA had determined
the damage was sufficient to declare the disaster as eligible to
receive IHP funding.
(2) Concentrated housing damage. HUD has limited its estimate of
serious unmet housing need to counties and zip codes with high levels
of damage, collectively referred to as ``most impacted areas.'' For the
most recent allocation, HUD defined most impacted areas as either most
impacted counties--counties exceeding $10 million in serious unmet
housing needs--or most impacted Zip Codes--Zip Codes with $2 million or
more of serious unmet housing needs. The calculation of serious unmet
housing needs is described below.
Component 2. Basic Formula for Unmet Needs
``Unmet needs'' means that the needs are not met by other sources
of financial assistance, including Federal assistance and insurance.
Further, grantees are required to prevent the duplication of benefits
received from other sources when carrying out eligible activities.
At the formula level, HUD considers the following other recovery
resources that are directed at long-term disaster recovery: insurance,
Small Business Administration (SBA) disaster loans, and FEMA IHP and
Public Assistance. All of these forms of assistance are typically
available for recovery before CDBG-DR is allocated. The CDBG-DR formula
is designed to roughly estimate the recovery gaps not served by these
sources.
The current formula does not assume that it is possible to measure
all unmet needs. Instead, the formula has evolved to be a common
``measuring stick.'' By using similar data and approach to defining
unmet needs and which areas are ``most impacted and distressed,'' it is
possible to evaluate the funding being provided to current major
disasters against allocations made for prior year disasters as
``apples-to-apples.''
The formula depends on information gleaned from the federal
programs that respond immediately after a disaster occurs--FEMA and
SBA--in order to calculate unmet needs for the CDBG-DR formula
allocation. Unlike the other programs that are applicant driven, CDBG-
DR is a block grant that allots money for grantees to develop their own
plans to reflect the recovery gaps. Fundamentally, the formula is not
intended to define the specific plan beyond the singular goal of
notifying grantees how much funding they will receive for recovery
activities.
For disasters that meet the most impacted threshold described in
Component 1 above, the unmet need allocations are based on the
following factors summed together:
(1) Housing Need.
(a) Repair estimates for seriously damaged owner-occupied units
without insurance (excluding households with incomes above either the
national median or 120 percent of area median income, whichever is
greater, if they are without hazard insurance or--if a flooding event--
were in the 1 percent annual chance floodplain and did not carry flood
insurance) in most impacted areas after FEMA and SBA repair grants or
loans; and
(b) Repair estimates for seriously damaged rental units occupied by
very low-income or poverty renters in most impacted areas.
(2) Economic Revitalization Need. Repair and content loss estimates
for small businesses with serious damage denied by SBA.
(3) Public Infrastructure Need. The estimated local cost share for
Public Assistance Category C to G projects.
Component 3. Methods for Estimating Serious Unmet Needs for Housing
HUD used FEMA IHP program data on housing-unit damage as of
February 10, 2022, to calculate unmet needs for housing for 2020 and
2021 qualifying disasters. HUD generally calculates damage estimates
for unmet needs at least 60 to 90 days after the disaster is declared a
major disaster to allow sufficient time for the vast majority of FEMA
and SBA housing inspections to be completed.
The core data on housing damage for both the unmet housing needs
and concentrated damage calculations are based on home inspection data
for FEMA's IHP program and SBA's disaster loan program. HUD calculates
``unmet housing needs'' as the number of housing units with unmet needs
times the estimated cost to repair those units less repair funds
already provided by FEMA, SBA, and insurance.
Each of the FEMA inspected owner-occupied units are categorized by
HUD into one of five categories:
Minor-Low: Less than $3,000 of FEMA inspected real
property damage.
Minor-High: $3,000 to $7,999 of FEMA inspected real
property damage.
Major-Low: $8,000 to $14,999 of FEMA inspected real
property damage and/or 1 to 3.9 feet of flooding on the first floor.
Major-High: $15,000 to $28,800 of FEMA inspected real
property damage and/or 4 to 5.9 feet of flooding on the first floor.
Severe: Greater than $28,800 of FEMA inspected real
property damage
[[Page 77858]]
or determined destroyed and/or 6 or more feet of flooding on the first
floor.
When owner-occupied properties also have a personal property
inspection or only have a personal property inspection, HUD reviews the
personal property damage amounts such that if the personal property
damage places the home into a higher need category over the real
property assessment, the personal property amount is used. The personal
property-based need categories for owner-occupied units are defined as
follows:
Minor-Low: Less than $2,500 of FEMA inspected personal
property damage.
Minor-High: $2,500 to $3,499 of FEMA inspected personal
property damage.
Major-Low: $3,500 to $4,999 of FEMA inspected personal
property damage or 1 to 3.9 feet of flooding on the first floor.
Major-High: $5,000 to $9,000 of FEMA inspected personal
property damage or 4 to 5.9 feet of flooding on the first floor.
Severe: Greater than $9,000 of FEMA inspected personal
property damage or determined destroyed and/or 6 or more feet of
flooding on the first floor.
To meet the statutory requirement of ``most impacted'' in this
legislative language, homes were determined to have a high level of
damage if they have damage of ``major-low'' or higher. That is, the
unit has a FEMA inspected real property damage of $8,000 or above,
personal property damage $3,500 or above, or flooding 1 foot or above
on the first floor. This threshold, like most other thresholds
discussed in this formula, were established for the Hurricane Sandy
allocation and have been used since that time.
Furthermore, a homeowner whose flooded home was located outside the
1 percent annual chance floodplain is determined to have unmet needs if
they reported damage and no flood insurance to cover that damage. For
homes located inside the 1 percent annual chance floodplain, homeowners
without flood insurance with flood damage with incomes below the
greater of national median or 120 percent of area median income are
determined to have unmet needs. For non-flood damage, homeowners
without hazard insurance with incomes below the greater of the national
median or 120 percent of area median income are included as having
unmet needs. The unmet need categories for these types of homeowners
are defined as above for real and personal property damage.
FEMA does not inspect rental units for real property damage so
personal property damage is used as a proxy for rental unit damage.
Each of the FEMA-inspected renter units are categorized by HUD into one
of five categories:
Minor-Low: Less than $1,000 of FEMA inspected personal
property damage.
Minor-High: $1,000 to $1,999 of FEMA inspected personal
property damage or determination of ``Moderate'' damage by the FEMA
inspector.
Major-Low: $2,000 to $3,499 of FEMA inspected personal
property damage or 1 to 3.9 feet of flooding on the first floor or
determination of ``Major'' damage by the FEMA inspector.
Major-High: $3,500 to $7,500 of FEMA inspected personal
property damage or 4 to 5.9 feet of flooding on the first floor.
Severe: Greater than $7,500 of FEMA inspected personal
property damage or determined destroyed and/or 6 or more feet of
flooding on the first floor or determination of ``Destroyed'' by the
FEMA inspector.
To meet the statutory requirement of ``most impacted'' for rental
properties, homes are determined to have a high level of damage if they
have damage of ``major-low'' or higher. That is, they have a FEMA
personal property damage assessment of $2,000 or greater or flooding 1
foot or above on the first floor.
Furthermore, landlords are presumed to have adequate insurance
coverage unless the unit is occupied by a renter with income less than
the greater of the Federal poverty level or 50 percent of the area
median income. Units occupied by a tenant with income less than the
greater of the poverty level or 50 percent of the area median income
are used to calculate likely unmet needs for affordable rental housing.
HUD includes only these low-income renter households in its calculation
for unmet rental housing needs.
The average cost to fully repair a housing unit to code for a
specific disaster within each of the damage categories noted above is
calculated using the median real property damage repair costs
determined by SBA for its disaster loan program based on a match
comparing FEMA and SBA inspections by each of the FEMA damage
categories described above.
In general, FEMA inspects nearly all of the housing units that have
unmet needs, but those inspections are not to estimate the total cost
to bring a house back to code, but rather to determine the level of
assistance required to return the home to safe and sanitary living
conditions. For the most severe disasters, there is a maximum amount of
FEMA Individual Assistance of $35,500 and often that is the calculated
damage amount for destroyed housing units. SBA, on the other hand, only
inspects the homes of survivors that apply for SBA disaster loans and
might be income and credit eligible for such a loan. The overlap
between the SBA inspections and FEMA inspections is what HUD uses to
calculate a multiplier of expected unmet needs by FEMA damage category,
as described below.
If there are 20 or more non-mobile home SBA inspections that
overlap with FEMA inspections for a specific damage level for an
individual disaster, the median SBA inspected amount is used as HUD's
base.
Using disaster 4611 (Hurricane Ida in Louisiana) as an example:
There were 1,763 homes that had both a FEMA inspection
showing the homes had ``major-low'' damage and an SBA inspection. We
establish as a ``base'' the median estimated real estate loss for those
matches. In the case of DR-4611, that is $50,846.
Next, we look at the SBA data to see how many of the
uninsured homeowners were approved for an SBA loan and for how much. As
the chart shows, just 5 percent of the uninsured owners with major-low
damage were approved for an SBA real estate disaster loan, at a median
amount of $34,500. We multiply $34,500 times 5 percent to get $1,682,
which we subtract from our base multiplier. In addition, 82 percent of
uninsured major-low damage owners received a FEMA repair grant at a
median amount of $9,630. Thus, an additional $7,915 (82 percent x
$9,630) is subtracted from the multiplier.
If the calculated amount falls within the minimum and
maximum range (see below), it is the value used for the multiplier. In
addition, a ``higher'' damage category cannot get a smaller multiplier
than a lower damage category.
[[Page 77859]]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Major-low damage Major-high damage Severe damage
DR-4611 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calculated Calculated Calculated
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SBA median estimated real estate loss................... $50,846 $50,846 $64,121 $64,121 $82,523 $82,523
SBA median amount approved.............................. $34,500 .............. $48,550 .............. $63,700 ..............
% of unmet damage approved.............................. 5% -$1,682 5% -$2,423 5% -$3,401
FEMA Median Repair Grant................................ $9,630 .............. $17,203 .............. $31,740 ..............
% of unmet damage approved.............................. 82% -$7,915 78% -$13,376 74% -$23,483
ESTIMATED CDBG-DR UNMET MULTIPLIER...................... .............. $41,249 .............. $48,322 .............. $55,639
N =..................................................... 1,763 .............. 948 .............. 382 ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The exception is for mobile homes and other manufactured housing.
We have calculated a separate multiplier that is the same for all
manufactured homes damaged in all disasters of 2020 and 2021.
Multipliers for manufactured homes are below.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Major-low damage Major-high damage Severe Damage
Manufactured housing -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimate Calculation Estimate Calculation Estimate Calculation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SBA median estimated real estate loss................... $60,143 $60,143 $79,621 $79,621 $92,843 $92,843
SBA median amount approved.............................. $52,550 .............. $75,000 .............. $78,100 ..............
% of unmet damage approved.............................. 4% -$2,206 4% -$3,000 7% -$5,111
FEMA Median Repair Grant................................ $11,027 .............. $20,997 .............. $35,319 ..............
% of unmet damage approved.............................. 76% -$8,366 78% -$16,432 57% -$20,137
ESTIMATED CDBG-DR UNMET MULTIPLIER...................... .............. $49,571 .............. $60,189 .............. $67,594
N =..................................................... 889 .............. 345 .............. 468 ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For disasters and damage categories that have fewer than 20 matched
SBA units, there is a ``waterfall'' review. No damage category can get
less than the first quartile estimated amounts for all disasters of
2020 and 2021, nor get more than the third quartile amount for all
disasters of 2020 and 2021. The minimums and maximums are below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum Maximum
HUD damage categories multiplier multiplier
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Major-Low............................... $22,971 $57,452
Major-High.............................. 33,714 82,582
Severe.................................. 36,592 134,503
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For cases not meeting the 20-unit match threshold, the median for
all disasters of the same type in 2020 and 2021 is used, subject to the
minimum and maximum multipliers above.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multipliers by disaster type
Disaster type -----------------------------------------------
Major-low Major-high Severe
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dam/Levee Break................................................. $33,007 $47,078 $47,078
Earthquake...................................................... 27,141 33,714 134,503
Fire............................................................ 22,971 82,582 134,503
Flood........................................................... 47,074 57,856 64,513
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multipliers by disaster type
Disaster type -----------------------------------------------
Major-low Major-high Severe
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hurricane....................................................... $36,800 $45,952 $45,952
Severe Ice Storm................................................ 33,528 33,714 36,592
Severe Storm(s)................................................. 22,971 37,299 37,299
Tornado......................................................... 52,961 82,582 134,503
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 77860]]
Component 4. Methods for Estimating Serious Unmet Economic
Revitalization Needs
Based on SBA disaster loans to businesses using data for 2021
disasters from as of date February 22, 2022, HUD calculated the median
real estate and content loss by the following damage categories for
each state:
Minor-Low: real estate + content loss = below $12,000.
Minor-High: real estate + content loss = $12,000-$29,999.
Major-Low: real estate + content loss = $30,000-$64,999.
Major-High: real estate + content loss = $65,000-$149,999.
Severe: real estate + content loss = $150,000 and above.
For properties with real estate and content loss of $30,000 or
more, HUD calculates the estimated amount of unmet needs for small
businesses by multiplying the median damage estimates for the
categories above by the number of small businesses denied an SBA loan,
including those denied a loan prior to inspection due to inadequate
credit or income (or a loan application decision had not yet been
made), under the assumption that damage among those denied at pre-
inspection have the same distribution of damage as those denied after
inspection.
Using DR-4611 (Hurricane Ida) as an example:
Column (B) below shows that 1,834 businesses applied for
an SBA disaster loan, were inspected, and had combined real estate and
content loss of $30,000 or more (i.e., Major-Low damage or higher).
Column (C) shows the median combined inspected loss estimate for each
category.
Of the 1,834 inspected with damage, column D shows 1,031
were denied an SBA disaster loan or did not yet have a decision based
on the best available data at the time of the allocation.
However, not all of the businesses applying for a disaster
loan receive an inspection. An inspection will not be initiated if a
business does not meet some basic SBA requirements, such as credit
score. Among all business applicants for a disaster loan in DR-4611,
the count of the denied not-inspected divided by the count of all
denied loans equals 2.14. Thus, assuming the distribution of need of
those not inspected is the same as for those inspected, we estimate the
total number of businesses likely needing assistance is 2.14 (column E)
times the denied inspected loans (column D).
The calculated unmet need are the total businesses HUD
estimated were denied by SBA (column F) times the SBA median real
estate and content damage of those inspected (column C).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighting to
Number Median real Inspected and capture denied Total businesses Estimated total
HUD damage category inspected estate and denied (or no prior to denied (or no unmet need
content damage decision) inspection decision)
(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F = E * D) (G = C * F)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Major-Low......................................... 906 $42,606 496 2.14 1,059 $45,125,639
Major-High........................................ 582 90,697 326 2.14 696 63,136,289
Severe............................................ 346 236,949 209 2.14 446 105,747,953
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total:........................................ 1,834 .............. 1,031 .............. 2,202 $214,009,881
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component 5. Methods for Estimating Unmet Infrastructure Needs
Unmet infrastructure data depends on the estimating skills of FEMA
Public Assistance staff. FEMA's Public Assistance program has several
categories of assistance. For each of these categories, FEMA staff
develop estimates to support budgeting of Disaster Relief Fund
resources. These estimates are intended to reflect the cost to repair
to pre-disaster conditions. Over time these estimates will change as
FEMA and local governments agree on what is to be covered and not
covered.
Category A: Debris removal
Category B: Emergency protective measures
Category C: Roads and bridges
Category D: Water control facilities
Category E: Public buildings and contents
Category F: Public utilities
Category G: Parks, recreational, and other facilities
Categories A and B are the short-term emergency expenses, while
Categories C to G are the long-term permanent work. Because CDBG-DR can
only be used for unmet needs and many needs for short-term emergency
expenses are met before CDBG-DR funds are allocated, the unmet need
calculation only uses Categories C to G.
For each of these categories, the Stafford Act expects that the
impacted communities contribute a local share. For most disasters this
local share is 25 percent of the cost to repair back to pre-disaster
conditions; however, based on a determination by the FEMA Administrator
that a lower cost share is needed, the local cost share might be less.
Whether this adjusted cost share is factored into the CDBG-DR formula
depends on timing of FEMA's decision regarding a particular adjustment
request and the timing of the allocation calculation.
HUD's estimate of infrastructure unmet need is simply the estimated
cost share for Categories C to G using the best available data from
FEMA at the time of the allocation.
To calculate 2021 unmet needs for infrastructure projects, HUD
obtained FEMA cost estimates as of February 10, 2022, of the expected
local cost share to repair the permanent public infrastructure
(Categories C to G) to their pre-storm condition.
Component 6. Allocation Calculation
For the formula allocation, HUD calculates total unmet recovery
needs for eligible disasters as the aggregate of:
Serious unmet housing needs or owners and renters in most
impacted counties (including those made eligible through zip code most
impacted status);
Serious unmet economic revitalization needs; and
Unmet infrastructure need.
Component 7. Mitigation
Since Hurricane Sandy, CDBG-DR allocations have often included a
specific component or separate allocation for mitigation or resilience
activities. This calculation has also evolved over time. For disasters
occurring between 2011 to 2013, mitigation/resilience was funded
through a variety of means--(i) the basic formula estimating additional
mitigation/resilience need was equal to 30 percent of the total
estimated unmet needs; (ii) the Rebuild by Design competition, which
provided additional formula allocations to support winning projects;
and (iii) the National Disaster Resilience competition, which awarded
[[Page 77861]]
funding through a Notice of Funding Opportunity.
After Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria in 2017, Congress
indicated that HUD should fund mitigation for all disasters of 2015 to
2017 with the funds remaining after allocating for 100 percent of unmet
needs, proportional to the unmet needs. This same approach was used for
2018 disasters, per Congressional direction; 2019 disasters received no
mitigation specific funding.
New for the 2020 and 2021 allocations was to make mitigation
allocations simultaneously to unmet needs allocations at 15 percent of
the unmet need calculation, per Congressional direction.
Component 8. When Appropriations Are Less Than Calculated Unmet Needs
CDBG-DR funds are usually tied to either a set of disasters or a
time period. The amount appropriated can be more or less than what HUD
calculates for unmet needs for areas above the threshold (as defined in
Component 1). When funds are less than the calculated unmet needs, they
are allocated in proportion to the unmet needs across the eligible
disasters, which means the amount of unmet needs HUD funds through
CDBG-DR has varied throughout the last 29 years.
Congress appropriated funds for the 2020 and 2021 disasters in
September 2021 with specific instructions that the allocations for 2020
disasters be made as total unmet needs along with mitigation, within 30
days of appropriation. This direction resulted in a scenario where 100
percent of the 2020 disaster needs plus mitigation were met, but not
enough resources were available to do the same for 2021 disasters. HUD
managed this by allocating the remaining funds proportional to the
combined unmet and mitigation needs for 2021 disasters, which resulted
in each 2021 grantee receiving 60.4 percent of their total calculated
unmet needs and mitigation.
Component 9. Local Allocations
Congress provides the Secretary with authority to decide whether
allocations should be made directly to states, local governments, or
Indian tribes. In 2020, the grants were made only to the states, while
for 2021 grants were made to a combination of states and local
governments. The approach for making the 2021 local allocations took
place after calculating the disaster level allocation amounts at the
state level. HUD calculated the share of serious unmet housing needs
for entitlement areas (i.e., those metropolitan cities and urban
counties that receive regular CDBG grants) and proportionally allocated
among the entitlement areas and the impacted areas in the state outside
of entitlement areas (state balance) proportional to each area's share
of serious unmet housing need in its most impacted areas. If
entitlement areas represent 70 percent or more of the serious unmet
housing need in a state from a particular disaster and the calculated
award amount does not exceed their regular CDBG grant by 20 times or
more, then local allocations were made to qualifying entitlement areas
instead of the state.
Component 10. Minimum Amount To Be Spent in Most Impacted and
Distressed Areas
Congress has called for CDBG-DR funds to be targeted to the most
impacted and distressed areas. As noted above, the housing funds are
allocated based strictly on only those counties ($10 million) or zip
codes ($2 million) with enough homes with serious damage to meet the
minimum dollar thresholds. The business estimates and infrastructure
estimates are for the full disaster area of the state or entitlement
area.
With each formula allocation, HUD specifies the areas that it has
determined to be most impacted and distressed (e.g., counties, zip
codes) for each grantee and requires that a minimum of 80 percent of
the amount allocated benefit the recovery in counties containing these
areas.
Component 11. Data Provided to CDBG-DR Grantees for Developing Action
Plans
Under a current Computer Matching Agreement between HUD and FEMA,
HUD may enter a data sharing agreement with grantees to provide to
grantees the FEMA Individual Assistance data it used to develop the
formula allocations. Note that HUD provides raw FEMA data to CDBG-DR
grantees and not the final data resulting from HUD's allocation
calculations.
HUD does not have a Computer Matching Agreement with SBA, so
grantees must work directly with SBA to obtain its data. HUD does not
currently have the authority to make this data publicly available.
III. Purpose of This Request for Information
Congress has been considering various legislation that would
formally authorize CDBG-DR as a program. In the event Congress
authorizes the program, this Request for Information would inform that
rule development.
If the program is not formally authorized, HUD anticipates that
Congress will likely continue to make supplemental appropriations for
disasters and that they would expect HUD to continue to allocate funds
by formula. This Request for Information could inform improvements to
the allocation formula in the event Congress appropriates funds for
CDBG-DR in the future.
IV. Specific Information Requested
General Questions
Question 1. Given the policy objective of quickly allocating funds
so that state and local officials can speedily develop programs to
address their most serious unmet needs for disaster recovery, are there
other ways HUD might allocate CDBG-DR funds beyond the methodology
described above?
Discussion. HUD has long relied on the data from FEMA and SBA to
make formula calculations. With advances in technology and other public
and private data sources, there may be other approaches HUD could
consider.
Question 2. If Congress appropriates funds in advance of disasters
occurring in a specified time period, should disasters be funded as
soon as practicable after they occur, or should HUD hold back funding
until all disasters in a year are known so each receives an equal share
of the remaining funding relative to their needs?
Discussion. For the 2020 and 2021 disasters, at the direction of
Congress, HUD fully funded the disasters of 2020 and then partially
funded all of the eligible 2021 disasters due to limited funding.
The remaining questions refer back to the current formula
components discussed in Section II of this request for information.
Component 1. Specific Questions. Eligible Disasters for Assistance
Question 3. How should HUD determine the disasters that are
eligible for CDBG-DR assistance and the areas that are most impacted
and distressed from a Presidentially declared major disaster? Is HUD's
approach effective or including rural and Tribal areas that are most
impacted and distressed? Given the complexity of program
implementation, should a grantee not only meet most impacted and
distressed standard but also have an aggregate amount of unmet need
above a minimum grant threshold?
Discussion. We are seeking comments on if the current methodology
is overly targeted or not targeted enough in terms of disasters that
should receive these
[[Page 77862]]
funds. In general, the motivating disasters that Congress appropriates
funding for tend to be very large disasters that communities are
otherwise financially unable to address. The current methodology has
grown more inclusive over time such that many disasters that might be
considered smaller disasters are now receiving funding in addition to
larger disasters. CDBG-DR funds often require a great deal of local
investment in new management and financial capacity for the funds to be
used effectively. HUD experience has been that communities with
relatively small disasters face significant challenges in establishing
new recovery programs.
In addition, HUD's current definition for concentrated housing
damage is a measure of damage to homes occupied by very low-income
renters and uninsured homeowners. For some disasters, this approach is
consistent with lower income areas, while for other disasters like
flooding and earthquake events, this approach targets large numbers of
likely higher income households without insurance for those specific
disasters. As such, the CDBG-DR requirement for serving 70 percent low-
and-moderate income (LMI) households can become difficult for grantees
if they have largely been funded based on serious damage of higher
income homeowners that are eligible for, but did not receive, SBA
disaster loans.
Items of specific interest:
Should there be additional thresholds that capture
concentration of damage? Examples of such thresholds might include a
minimum percentage of impacted homeowners or renters in a Census Tract,
a minimum percentage of LMI population impacted by the event, or a
minimum percentage of LMI households residing in the impacted area
prior to the event.
Should the damage threshold for ``most impacted'' serious
housing damage be raised so that it excludes ``major-low''?
Are serious unmet housing needs for counties at $10
million or zip codes at $2 million the appropriate thresholds for
``most impacted and distressed''? Do disaster thresholds based on
monetary damages disadvantage certain households and might there be a
different way to determine most impacted and distressed areas?
Particularly as it relates to rural and Tribal areas.
Should the income of the area(s) impacted be factored into
determining eligibility? For example, HUD could include only data on
damage in low-and-moderate income areas when calculating most impacted
eligibility.
Component 2. Specific Questions. Basic Formula for Unmet Needs
Question 4. Are there are other unmet needs that HUD should be
factoring into the formula calculation beyond housing, economic
revitalization, and infrastructure?
Discussion. Questions under later components speak to the specific
data and approach for calculating housing, economic revitalization, and
infrastructure unmet needs, which relate to the CDBG-DR purposes of
``restoration of infrastructure and housing'' and ``economic
revitalization.'' This question is more basic and could reflect the
other purposes of CDBG-DR grants, including the more general purposes
of ``disaster relief'' and ``long-term recovery''. We note that CDBG-DR
appropriations acts typically dictate how HUD will calculate the
additional allocation amount for the ``mitigation'' purpose, but
respondents may also include comments related to calculating mitigation
allocations. HUD notes that any portion of the CDBG-DR grant can be
used for mitigation/resilience purposes, beyond the amount calculated
as the mitigation plus up. In answering this question, respondents
should indicate what data HUD might consider. Note that the data
generally needs to be consistently available for all areas and
disasters.
Question 5. Should HUD establish a minimum number of days to have
passed after a Presidential Disaster declaration, or some other metric,
before calculating unmet needs?
Discussion. The current formula uses administrative data from FEMA
and SBA that takes time for both agencies to collect as they implement
their programs. Key elements of their data include home inspections and
eligibility determinations. As a rule of thumb, HUD has generally held
off allocations for 60 to 90 days after a disaster before calculating
unmet needs. Is there some other metric HUD should use before making
allocations?
Component 3. Specific Questions. Housing Unmet Needs
Question 6. Should HUD continue to exclude certain homeowners with
incomes above 120 percent of area median income from consideration of
unmet needs?
Discussion. The current formula is built around the idea that
homeowners with higher income should carry hazard insurance in all
cases and flood insurance if in a floodplain.
Question 7. For homeowner occupied units, in addition to uninsured
households, should HUD consider the unmet need of insured applicants
denied SBA loans? Is there another data source or characteristic HUD
should consider to measure the unmet needs of insured applicants?
Discussion. Increasingly we are informed that insurance is
inadequate for recovery and mitigation and limiting the allocation to
just the uninsured homeowners is leaving a large recovery gap in
assistance for lower income households. FEMA Individual Assistance data
are limited in some disasters because inspections are not completed for
insured properties. A potential additional source of data are
households that are denied SBA loans, similar to the approach used for
economic revitalization unmet needs in component 4.
Question 8. For homeowner occupied units, are the FEMA Verified
Loss breaks the correct breaks for assessing disaster severity? Should
these be modified to reflect FEMA program updates?
Question 9. Is there an alternative to personal property damage
that HUD might consider for measuring damage to rental housing? For
renter occupied units, are the FEMA personal property breaks currently
used the right breaks for assessing disaster severity? Should these be
modified to reflect FEMA program changes?
Discussion. HUD uses personal property damage as a proxy for likely
housing unit damage. FEMA benefit calculations have changed over time
and its methodology for both determining amount of FEMA Verified Loss
for homeowners and personal property loss has varied from disaster to
disaster. The thresholds HUD uses were developed over a decade ago.
Question 10. For renter occupied units, is it a reasonable
assumption that damage to housing occupied by renters less than the
greater of poverty or 50 percent of AMI reflects a likely loss of
affordable housing?
Discussion. The data HUD gets for the formula allocation has no
information on insurance coverage for landlords, so HUD has established
a series of proxies for likely loss of affordable housing. CDBG-DR is
generally intended to target households below 70 percent of AMI. The
first proxy is measuring rental damage (discussed above) using personal
property damage as a proxy for unit damage; and the second proxy is the
unit being occupied by a renter less than the greater of poverty or 50
percent of AMI with the assumption that if housing either will not be
replaced, or
[[Page 77863]]
if it is replaced it will no longer be affordable after repair, and
thus there is a need for replacement affordable housing.
Question 11. Is there a simpler approach for calculating the
multipliers used for unmet needs?
Discussion. HUD's matching to SBA data is generally only effective
for very large disasters; most other disasters are subject to the
disaster specific multipliers. HUD could indicate on its website each
year a multiplier schedule by disaster type. A downside to this
approach is that it does not capture local variation in cost that the
current approach does capture for large disasters. The upside is more
transparency and a simpler formula.
Question 12. Are there other options--beyond using the homeowner
multiplier--for how the multiplier for rental units could be calculated
when determining unmet housing needs?
Discussion. HUD currently uses the same multiplier for rental units
as owner-occupied units in the same damage category. The goal for
allocating the funds for owners and renters, however, are very
different. The goal for homeowners is to help them repair their home so
they can return to that home or cover some of the cost for buyouts if
needed. For renters, there is a presumption that damaged very low-
income renter housing either will not be repaired, or, if it is, it
will no longer be as affordable as pre-disaster. As such, the formula
reflects an assumption that the most likely use of funds to support
recovery of rental housing markets is to support creation of housing
affordable for renters with income less than 50 percent of AMI.
Component 4. Specific Questions. Methods for Estimating Serious Unmet
Economic Revitalization Needs
Question 13. Are there other factors and/or data sources HUD might
consider beyond SBA business loan denials when determining unmet
economic revitalization needs?
Discussion. Examples for consideration include taking into account
a community's pre-disaster economic distress or the nature of the
disaster (e.g., existing economic distress can lead to significant
displacement during a disaster that may delay economic recovery) or
data from other federal agencies such as the Economic Development
Administration at the Department of Commerce.
Question 14. Should HUD establish a higher or lower standard for
inclusion of businesses with serious unmet need?
Discussion. HUD has not changed the damage thresholds in over a
decade.
Question 15. How can HUD better target the calculation of unmet
economic revitalization needs for lower income households and other
vulnerable populations in the most impacted and distressed areas?
Discussion. The current method is targeting funds to businesses not
meeting income or credit requirements of SBA. It does not take into
account the location of the business, such as if it is located in a
low-mod area.
Component 5. Specific Questions. Methods for Estimating Unmet
Infrastructure Needs
Question 16. Are there other data or factors HUD might consider for
measuring unmet infrastructure needs?
Should HUD establish a minimum amount of time (e.g. not less than
60 days) after a disaster to calculate CDBG-DR allocations so they are
based on consistent, accurate FEMA PA damage estimates?
Discussion. HUD may be unaware of other sources of data on public
infrastructure needs besides FEMA Public Assistance. Further, the
current approach tends to provide more for places that had more
infrastructure pre-disaster, which may disadvantage communities with
inadequate infrastructure pre-disaster due to the low incomes or
historical disinvestment in the community pre-disaster.
Question 17. How can HUD better target the calculation of unmet
infrastructure needs for lower income households and other vulnerable
populations in the most impacted and distressed areas? Should HUD pro-
rate the estimate of infrastructure needs based on the fraction of
damaged homes with unmet needs located in LMI areas?
Discussion. The current methodology for determining infrastructure
need does not factor in the income or other demographics of the
impacted area. CDBG-DR must be predominantly used for activities that
benefit low- and moderate-income persons. For infrastructure
investments to satisfy the low-mod area benefit national objective
criteria, usually the investment needs to be in a primarily residential
area where at least 51 percent of the residents are low- and moderate-
income persons. Some grantees in the past have had difficulty meeting
the low-mod benefit requirements for their infrastructure funds.
Component 6. Specific Questions. Allocation Calculation
Question 18. How can CDBG-DR allocation methodology be modified to
allocate resources equitably and adequately address disaster-related
needs, including the needs of the most impacted, vulnerable
populations, and underserved communities?
Component 7. Specific Questions. Mitigation
Question 19. How should HUD factor mitigation into the CDBG-DR
formula? Should the mitigation multiplier be different by type of
disaster?
Discussion. Congress has tried several different methods; feedback
on grantee and subgrantee experiences with HUD's different ways of
implementing those methods would be beneficial. The cost to mitigate
against future risk needed in a fire zone is very different than
mitigation needed in flood zone. Using a single multiplier such as 15
percent does not take this into consideration.
Question 20. Should there be a separate calculation of mitigation
needs that is independent of the unmet need calculation? If so, what
should that calculation be?
Discussion. Depending on the disaster, mitigation and potential
resilience costs may be significantly more or less than a simple
proportional allocation relative to unmet needs.
Component 8. Specific Questions. Amount of Funding
Question 21. If resources are limited, should a certain type or
types of unmet need be prioritized over others in determining an
allocation? For example, housing only.
Discussion. The current policy of insufficient funding is to
allocate proportional to the unmet needs of eligible grantees or to
fully fund disasters as they occur until funding runs out leaving later
disasters with no funding. This question seeks comments on how to
allocate funding when less is appropriated than calculated unmet needs.
Component 9. Specific Questions. Allocations to Local Governments and
Indian Tribes
Question 22. What criteria should HUD use when determining if an
allocation should be made directly to local governments and Indian
tribes (as that term is defined under section 102(a) of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974) versus the full allocation to a
state government? Should HUD take into account grantee capacity when
deciding on either providing a direct grant and/or amount of the grant?
Discussion. The research on this topic is inconclusive \1\. Local
and tribal
[[Page 77864]]
government leaders often petition HUD for direct allocations while
state leaders argue there is greater efficiency, management capacity,
and more program consistency when it is a single allocation to the
state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Martin, Carlos, et al. ``Housing Recovery and CDBG-DR: A
Review of the Timing and Factors Associated with Housing Activities
in HUD's Community Development Block Grant for Disaster Recovery
Program.'' HUD User. April 2019. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/HousingRecovery-CDBG-DR.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 23. Are there revisions to HUD's allocation methodology
that should be considered to capture tribal recovery needs more
effectively? Please see the RFI requesting information on the CDBG-DR
program published elsewhere in today's Federal Register.
Component 10. Specific Questions. Minimum Amount To Be Spent in Most
Impacted Areas
Question 24. Currently at least, 80 percent of CDBG-DR funds must
be spent to benefit the most impacted and distressed area designated by
HUD, and up to 20 percent may be spent in area designed by the grantee
as most impacted and distressed areas; is this the right amount?
Discussion. The 80 percent standard was based on analysis of how
funds were allocated for allocations to 2011 disasters prior to
Hurricane Sandy funding. The standard has not changed since that time.
Note that 100 percent of CDBG-DR grants must be expended in a most
impacted and distressed area, with a minimum of 80 percent in HUD
defined most impacted areas and up to 20 percent in areas identified by
grantees. Please see the RFI requesting information on the CDBG-DR
program published elsewhere in today's Federal Register that solicits
public comment on this topic.
Component 11. Specific Questions. Data Provided to CDBG-DR Grantees for
Developing Action Plans
Question 25. In addition to the raw data provided by FEMA to HUD
for the formula calculation, should HUD provide to CDBG-DR grantees and
the public a set of pre-scripted tables and maps to assist with
development of Action Plans? What other information would be helpful
for developing Action Plans?
Discussion. A significant amount of analysis goes into developing
the formula allocations. HUD could prepare some basic tables and maps
to inform the public and grantees on who was impacted, where they were
impacted, and what the nature of the damage is.
V. Response Guidance
For comments submitted by mail responses should not exceed 50
pages. Please provide the following information at the start of your
response to this RFI: Company/institution name (if applicable); contact
information, including address, phone number, and email address. Do not
submit Confidential Business Information (CBI) in your response to this
RFI. Responses identified as containing CBI will not be reviewed and
will be discarded.
Please identify each answer by responding to a specific question or
topic if applicable. You may answer as many or as few questions as you
wish. To help you prepare your comments, please see the How Do I
Prepare Effective Comments segment of the Commenting on HUD Rules web
page, https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/general_counsel/Commenting-On-HUD-Rules#1. While that web page is written for commenting on
regulatory proposals, these tips are generally applicable to this RFI.
Solomon J. Greene,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and
Research.
[FR Doc. 2022-27548 Filed 12-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P