BoS CoC Committees

The governance committee is responsible for analyzing and addressing any governance-related challenges brought to them by the BoS CoC Governing Board. Any recommended changes to the governance charter, governance structure, other duties as assigned by the Governing Board, etc. must be approved by a ⅔ majority vote of the Governing Board.

Purpose and Responsibilities:

1. Review and update the CO Balance of State CoC Governance Charter at least annually, before the in-person annual meeting, or as needed.
2. Identify gaps in services, support, funding, representation, etc. in different geographic areas included in the BoS CoC and present them to the Governing Board for consideration in how they should/can be included
3. Identify when the Governing Board membership is not diverse enough (i.e. when there is not diverse composition, per HUDs guidelines in the “Establishing and Operating a Continuum of Care, 2012”)
4. Develop a code of conduct for the Governing Board (see separate code of conduct/conflict of interest policy)
5. Ensures the CO BoS Governing Board is aware of all new HUD requirements

The Continuum of Care Interim Rule states “Centralized or coordinated assessment system is defined to mean a centralized or coordinated process designed to coordinate program participant intake, assessment, and provision of referrals. A centralized or coordinated assessment system covers the geographic area, is easily accessed by individuals and families seeking housing or services, is well advertised, and includes a comprehensive and standardized assessment tool. This definition establishes basic minimum requirements for the Continuum‘s centralized or coordinated assessment system.”

Purpose and Responsibilities:

1. Draft overarching policies and procedures that all agencies who are participating in Coordinated Entry within the Balance of State must abide by
2. Create structure for agencies in the BoS to participate in, per HUD’s guidelines and benchmarks
3. Provide support and advice for regions as they implement coordinated entry
4. Review any regional policies and procedures that subregions are required to submit. After review, the CE Committee will make a recommendation to the Governing Board whether or not to approve regional policies
5. Ensures the CO BoS Governing Board is aware of all new Coordinated Entry-related HUD requirements

The Data and Performance Committee is responsible for managing/monitoring aspects of the BoS CoC work related to data and performance. This may include, but is not limited to monitoring system performance measures, APR reports, HMIS data quality, HIC/PIT data, ESG data, and data related to project ranking.

Purpose and Responsibilities:

1. The committee works with staff/agencies within the BoS CoC, the HMIS Lead Agency, software vendor, and stakeholders to begin discussing and implement data sharing, centralized intake and assessment, and to review data quality for the entire CoC
2. Provide guidance on the Statement of Work with the HMIS Lead Agency and participates in statewide HMIS activities
3. Provide feedback on the annual HIC, AHAR and HDX submissions and works to recruit additional non-HUD funded programs/housing to become HMIS users
4. Identification of possible BoS CoC members to serve on the statewide HMIS Governance Committee
5. Complete a Gaps Analysis annually
6. Complete an ESG recipient evaluation annually
7. Create/update Data Quality Framework and other HMIS documents (HMIS Agency partnership agreements, Privacy/Security plan, etc.) in collaboration with the HMIS Lead
8. Ensures the CO BoS Governing Board is aware of all new data related HUD requirements (System Performance Measures, HMIS, APR, HIC/PIT, etc.)

The funding strategies committee is responsible for long-term planning of financial strategies for the CoC. Project ranking, as described below, is a key activity of this committee. In addition to project ranking, it is responsible for researching and suggesting ways to diversify funding streams, and secure additional funding which will allow the BoS CoC Governing Board and regional coalitions to expand their capacity.
Purpose and Responsibilities:

1. Research new grant opportunities for the BoS CoC to apply for, that is related to, but not limited to HMIS, staff support, grants that would supplement/support planning grant dollars, etc.
2. In collaboration with the Data and Performance Committee, and taking BoS CoC priorities into account, review fund distribution in every subregion, related to homeless population size
3. Annually, complete project ranking, as described below:
   • Project Ranking Sub-Committee
     • The Project Ranking Committee is responsible for developing and presenting Ranking Criteria to the CoC Governing Board for review and approval each year. The criteria are designed to utilize a non-biased process based on HUD and CoC priorities and applicant quality. This process will be both for new projects and renewal projects.
       • Purpose and Responsibilities:
         1. The Committee will be composed of 4 CoC-funded providers and 4 non CoC-funded members who are familiar with the CoC projects and process and are community stakeholders.
         2. In order to best serve our community members through provision of effective projects and capturing the maximum funds available, the ranking committee will present to the BoS Governing Board what perceived or official changes to HUD priorities are.
         3. After the BoS Governing Board determines the priorities for the project ranking, the project ranking committee is responsible for developing a timeline they will follow. This timeline will be approved by the Governing Board by a ⅔ vote.
         4. The Project Ranking Committee will develop a tool to score new and renewal projects, which will be approved by the Governing Board by a ⅔ vote.
            • This tool MUST include a fair and equitable way of ranking new projects, renewal projects and have an appeals process.
         5. Once this tool is approved, applicants will submit all relevant data and documents by the time period indicated on the ranking timeline that is approved by the board.
         6. The Project Ranking Committee will then score projects, and submit a list with scores to ALL project applicants for review. A project applicant that disagrees with their ranking has the opportunity to refute their score and go through an appeals process. At that time, the project ranking committee will provide the applicant with the scoring tool used, and allow them to score their own project. If the applicant finds that their scoring was incorrect, they may submit to the entire Governing Board to review.
         7. After all applicants review their scores, the Governing Board will approve project ranking, by a ⅔ majority vote. After a project ranking passes, the Collaborative Applicant is responsible for submitting this ranking to HUD.