State of Texas Plan for Disaster Recovery: Hurricane Harvey

State of Texas Plan

for Disaster Recovery:

Hurricane Harvey

PREPARED BY

THE TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & REVITALIZATION PROGRAM

Section 421 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 (Pub. L. 115-31, approved May 5, 2017)

JANUARY 18,

2018

Page 1 of 61

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 3

II. Needs Assessment .................................................................................................................................... 6

A. Cumulative Impact of Prior Disasters .................................................................................................. 6

B. Impact of Hurricane Harvey ................................................................................................................. 7

C. Resiliency Solutions and Mitigation Needs ....................................................................................... 11

D. Demographic Profile of Impacted Counties ....................................................................................... 13

E. Low to Moderate Income Analysis .................................................................................................... 15

F. Housing Impact ................................................................................................................................... 15

1. Real Estate Market .......................................................................................................................... 15

2. Homelessness .................................................................................................................................. 16

3. Social Services: 2-1-1 Texas Program ............................................................................................ 19

4. Interim Housing Assistance ............................................................................................................ 21

5. National Flood Insurance Program ................................................................................................. 22

6. Small Business Assistance (SBA) Disaster Home Loans ............................................................... 26

7. Public Housing Assistance (PHA) Data .......................................................................................... 28

8. FEMA Individual Assistance .......................................................................................................... 28

G. Infrastructure Impact .......................................................................................................................... 35

1. Governor’s Commission to Rebuild Texas ..................................................................................... 35

2. Texas Coastal Resiliency Study ...................................................................................................... 36

3. FEMA Public Assistance ................................................................................................................ 37

H. Economic Impact ............................................................................................................................... 38

1. Employment .................................................................................................................................... 38

2. Small Business Assistance (SBA) Business Disaster Loans ........................................................... 38

3. Agricultural Impacts ....................................................................................................................... 40

4. Tourism ........................................................................................................................................... 41

III. General Requirements ........................................................................................................................... 42

A. Public Housing, Affordable Housing, and Housing for Vulnerable Populations .............................. 42

B. Displacement of Persons and/or Entities ............................................................................................ 42

C. Maximum Assistance ......................................................................................................................... 43

D. Elevation Standards ............................................................................................................................ 43

E. Planning and Coordination ................................................................................................................. 43

F. Infrastructure Activities ...................................................................................................................... 44

G. Leveraging Funds ............................................................................................................................... 45

Page 2 of 61

H. Protection of People and Property...................................................................................................... 45

1. Quality Construction Standards ...................................................................................................... 45

2. Housing Contractors Standards ....................................................................................................... 45

I. Appeals Processes ................................................................................................................................ 45

K. Program Income ................................................................................................................................. 46

L. Monitoring Standards ......................................................................................................................... 46

M. Broadband Infrastructure ................................................................................................................... 47

IV. State Administered Disaster Recovery Program................................................................................... 48

A. Action Plan ...................................................................................................................................... 48

B. Program Budget .............................................................................................................................. 48

C. Use of Funds ................................................................................................................................... 49

1. Harris County Residential Buyout Program ............................................................................... 49

2. Harris County Partial Repair and Essential Power for Sheltering Program ................................ 50

3. Affordable Rental Recovery Program ......................................................................................... 50

D. Ineligible activities .......................................................................................................................... 51

E. Administrative Funds ...................................................................................................................... 51

F. Location .......................................................................................................................................... 51

G. Mitigation Measures ....................................................................................................................... 51

H. Use of Urgent Need ........................................................................................................................ 52

V. Citizen Participation ............................................................................................................................ 53

A. Public Website ................................................................................................................................ 53

B. Consultation .................................................................................................................................... 54

C. Consideration of Public Comments ................................................................................................ 56

D. Citizen Complaints .......................................................................................................................... 56

E. Substantial Amendment .................................................................................................................. 56

F. Non-substantial Amendment ........................................................................................................... 56

G. Waivers ........................................................................................................................................... 56

VI. Appendix A – CDBG-DR Eligible Counties ........................................................................................ 58

VII. Appendix B – Certifications ................................................................................................................ 59

Page 3 of 61

I. Executive Summary

The hurricane season of 2017 proved to be the most expensive in United States history, impacting

families from Puerto Rico to Florida and across the Texas coast. Hurricane Harvey made landfall

on August 25, 2017, between Port Aransas and Port O’Connor as a Category 4 hurricane with

sustained winds over 130 mph. After initial impact, Hurricane Harvey’s winds began to decrease,

but due to two high-pressure systems to the east and west, it remained fixed over the Texas coast

for the next 4 days. During this period, as much as 60 inches of rain fell over the impacted area.

The General Land Office (GLO) estimates

the cost of damages from Hurricane Harvey

at $160 billion, making it the costliest event

in U.S. history. The hurricane shut down

ports, trade, tourism, oil and gas production,

agricultural production, and general

businesses across most of the Texas coast,

including the fourth-largest city in the

nation for almost a week and, in some cases,

significantly longer. The impact of these

interruptions is difficult to quantify at this

time, but the effects of this disaster were felt

across the nation, with commodities such as

gas increasing in price by $0.33 a gallon in

the weeks following Hurricane Harvey.

Hurricane Harvey resulted in record rainfall

totals of 34 trillion gallons of water.

Combining this record rainfall together with

the fact that Hurricane Harvey made landfall twice creates a three-event narrative: the initial

landfall in Aransas County; the unprecedented rainfall in the Houston metroplex and surrounding

areas; and Hurricane Harvey’s second landfall which caused massive flooding in Southeast Texas.

Following these three events, tens of thousands of homes that had never been flooded took on

water, and evacuations continued for days after landfall.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2018. “Petroleum & Other Liquids.” Webpage accessed January 8,

2018. https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/gasdiesel/

San Antonio Express-News. September 17, 2017. “Harvey Dumped Record-Setting 34 Trillion Gallons of Rain.”

Webpage accessed January 10, 2018. http://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Harvey-dumped-record-

setting-34-trillion-gallons-12204769.php

Weather.gov - Hurricane Harvey Satellite and Radar

Landfall Image

Page 4 of 61

The GLO estimates

over 1 million homes

were impacted by

Hurricane Harvey.

The state of Texas

has already spent

over $1 billion on

response and

recovery.

As of

December 15, 2017,

the Federal

Emergency

Management

Agency (FEMA)

Public Assistance

program estimates

damage costs related

to non-housing

categories at approximately $2.4 billion. As of December 7, 2017, the FEMA Individuals and

Households program received over 889,000 applications and has disbursed over $1.4 billion in

housing assistance and other related emergency disaster assistance. As of December 14, 2017,

FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program received over 89,000 claims and disbursed more than

$3.4 billion to claimants. The Small Business Administration (SBA) has disbursed over $2.5

billion in home loans and $579 million in business loans as of December 7, 2017. This information

was provided to the GLO from FEMA and the SBA.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has allocated $57.8 million in

Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funds to the state of Texas

in response to Hurricane Harvey, FEMA-DR-4332, through the publication of the Federal

amount from $400 million appropriated under Public Law 115-31 that allocated CDBG-DR funds

to Texas for the 2015 and 2016 flood events. The state of Texas is expected to receive additional

CDBG-DR allocations for long-term recovery from Hurricane Harvey. The GLO has been

designated by the governor to administer CDBG-DR funds on behalf of the state of Texas.

This Action Plan will detail the proposed use of all funds, including criteria for eligibility and how

the use of these funds will address long-term recovery and restoration of infrastructure, housing,

and economic revitalization in the most impacted and distressed areas. The use of funds for this

allocation is limited to unmet recovery needs from Hurricane Harvey, DR- 4332.

HUD has identified Harris County as the “most impacted and distressed” area in the Federal

within the County. The remaining 20 percent will address unmet needs within the “most impacted

The Texas Tribune. 2017. “How Much has been Raised for Harvey Relief – and How’s it Being Spent.”

Webpage accessed December 2, 2017. https://www.texastribune.org/2017/11/28/how-much-money-going-hurricane-

harvey-relief-texas/

Source: www.weather.gov

Page 5 of 61

and distressed” areas determined by the GLO through the unmet needs assessment in Section II of

this Action Plan. The GLO has allocated the remaining portion of these initial funds to Aransas,

Nueces, and Refugio Counties. Section IV of this Action Plan will outline the budget, the use of

funds, and criteria for eligibility.

For the purpose of this Action Plan, the four counties (Bexar, Dallas, Tarrant, and Travis) that

received FEMA disaster declarations for emergency protective measures only (Category B),

including direct federal assistance under the Public Assistance program, are not included in the 49

CDBG-DR eligible counties identified on the map below.

Figure 1: DR-4332 49 CDBG-DR Eligible Counties

Page 6 of 61

II. Needs Assessment

The State of Texas completed the following needs assessment to identify long-term needs and

priorities for CDBG-DR funding allocated as a result of Hurricane Harvey. This assessment takes

into account a comprehensive set of data sources that cover multiple geographies and sectors and

was completed according to guidelines set forth by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

Development (HUD) in Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 247, Wednesday, December 27, 2017. The

information focuses on the statewide impacts and the impacts on the 49 CDBG-DR eligible

counties (see list in Appendix A), as well as Harris County—the most impacted and distressed

county—as identified by HUD in the Federal Register. The information for the assessment was

compiled using federal and state sources, including information from FEMA, HUD, TDEM, SBA,

Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) and other federal and state agencies. The GLO

was able to work with these agencies to gather the most up-to-date information regarding the

impacts of the hurricane, actions taken during and following the storm, and unmet need.

This needs assessment includes specific details about unmet needs within the eligible and most

impacted and distressed communities. This includes details for housing, infrastructure, and

economic revitalization. This assessment will take into consideration pre-disaster needs, in

addition to needs resulting from Hurricane Harvey. It will also discuss additional types of

assistance that may be available to affected communities and individuals, such as insurance, other

federal assistance, or any other possible funding sources. Taking the above into consideration,

mitigation and resiliency measures to protect against future hazards will also be examined. This

needs assessment is expected to be amended as additional information is available or updated.

A. Cumulative Impact of Prior Disasters

The state of Texas is vulnerable to various extreme weather events. Recently, Texas experienced

a historic drought that began in 2010. According to the Office of the State Climatologist, the driest

12-month period on record for Texas was October 2010 to September 2011, with a statewide

average of only 11.18 inches of rain. This led to catastrophic wildfires that lasted from November

15, 2010, through October 31, 2011. A total of 3.9 million acres and approximately 5,900

structures were damaged and/or destroyed during this wildfire season. Many factors contributed

to this record-breaking season, including the La Niña weather pattern that caused extreme drought

conditions, high winds from Tropical Storm Lee, and unprecedented high temperatures. These

weather conditions, combined with the availability of large amounts of dry fuels that had built up

over 5 years of drought, led to the intensity of these wildfires.

The extended drought that Texas experienced made the state susceptible not only to wildfires but

to flash flooding as well. These drought factors contributed to the inability of soils to effectively

absorb water runoff. The 2011 wildfires also removed vegetation that usually work to slow down

and absorb rainfall.

In 2015 and 2016, the state received record amounts of rain—not once but multiple times. This

resulted in six Federal disaster declarations spread over 160 of the state’s 254 counties. The critical

infrastructure damage and already saturated grounds from the 2015 floods greatly enhanced the

Page 7 of 61

devastation experienced by counties during the 2016 floods. These multiple events caused multiple

human fatalities and did severe damage across nearly half the state, or 134,000 square miles. To

date, the state of Texas still estimates $2 billion in unmet need from these events.

The below map highlights the counties that have been impacted by the last 3 years of disasters.

The majority of counties in the eligible area have been impacted by disasters in each of the last

three years. This further demonstrates the compounding impacts of recent disasters in Texas and

the impacts that these disasters are having on housing, infrastructure, and local economies along

the coast.

Figure 2: Hurricane Harvey CDBG-DR Eligible Counties Impacted by 2015 Floods, 2016 Floods

and Harvey Declarations

B. Impact of Hurricane Harvey

In 2017, communities that had not yet had a chance to fully recover from the 2015 and 2016 floods

were impacted again. Hurricane Harvey, a regenerated tropical depression, made landfall on

August 25, 2017, as a Category 4 hurricane, bringing with it extreme wind gusts and, in some

places, up to 60 inches of rain in 5 days. The hurricane caused catastrophic flooding and at least

Page 8 of 61

82 human fatalities,

due in part to the weather system stalling over the Texas coast. The

windspeeds recorded over South Texas may have been underestimated, especially near the coast

and close to the eyewall of Hurricane Harvey, as many observation stations were disabled prior to

landfall of the eye of the hurricane. However, a peak wind gust of 150 mph was reported near

Rockport.

Figure 3: Hurricane Harvey Peak Wind Gusts

Hurricane Harvey made landfall twice and is viewed by many as three separate events: the initial

landfall in Aransas County; unprecedented rainfall in the Houston metroplex and surrounding

areas; and the second landfall on August 29, 2017, in southeast Texas near the cities of Orange,

Beaumont, and Port Arthur. These events caused not only wind damage, but also widespread

flooding.

The Washington Post. “Texas officials: Hurricane Harvey death toll at 82, ‘mass casualties have absolutely not

happened.’” Webpage accessed January 10, 2018. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/texas-officials

-hurricane-harvey-death-toll-at-82-mass-casualties-have-absolutely-not-happened/2017/09/14/bff3ffea-9975-11e7

-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html?utm_term=.dfe744e2fbe8

National Weather Service. “Major Hurricane Harvey - August 25-29, 2017.” Webpage accessed January 10,

2018. http://www.weather.gov/crp/hurricane_harvey

Page 9 of 61

Figure 4: Track of Hurricane Harvey

The 49 CDBG-DR eligible counties affected by Hurricane Harvey cover 15 percent or 39,496

square miles of land area in the state and contain approximately 32 percent of the state’s

population. The land area affected is roughly the size of the state of the Kentucky.

Nearly 8.9

million Texans live in the affected counties.

As can be seen in the following map, the initial landfall caused severe wind damage

(demonstrated by the number of windstorm damage insurance claims in red). This map also

portrays the extent of National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) claims in the northern section of

the coast, where storm rains caused severe flooding in Houston and the surrounding areas. This

graphic further demonstrates the two catastrophic characteristics of Hurricane Harvey: (1)

hurricane-force winds and (2) a slow-moving storm bringing historic rainfall and flooding.

National Weather Service. “Major Hurricane Harvey - August 25-29, 2017.” Webpage accessed January 10,

2018. http://www.weather.gov/crp/hurricane_harvey

The United States Census Bureau. “QuickFacts Kentucky; UNITED STATES.” Webpage accessed January 10,

2018. https://www.census.gov

/quickfacts/fact/table/KY,US/LND110210

Page 10 of 61

Figure 5: Residential and Commercial Windstorm and Flood Damage Insurance Claims

By the time the rain stopped, Hurricane Harvey had dumped almost a year’s worth of rainfall in

just a few days. So much rain fell during the hurricane that the National Weather Service had to

update the color charts on their graphics in order to effectively map it. Two additional shades of

purple were added to represent rainfall totals for 20-30 inches and “greater than 30 inches” ranges.

Page 11 of 61

Figure 6: National Weather Service’s 5 Day Point Rainfall in Inches

C. Resiliency Solutions and Mitigation Needs

Recognizing the state’s long and well-documented history of flooding, hurricanes, wildfires, and

droughts, as well as its ongoing efforts to mitigate future disaster effects in its most vulnerable

Page 12 of 61

areas, the GLO continues its commitment to rebuilding while prioritizing resiliency. In assessing

unmet needs, it is important to consider the additional costs of safeguarding housing and

community infrastructure investments from future disasters. As such, Texas will not only assess

projects and consider state-run programs that replace or repair lost property but will also seek to

invest resources in efforts that promise to mitigate damage from a wide range future disaster types.

Although this can increase costs initially, mitigating efforts can greatly reduce the cost of future

damages. The success of this long-term recovery practice was seen firsthand during Hurricane

Harvey. Resilient-enhanced projects from previous CDBG-DR efforts suffered less damage from

Hurricane Harvey: construction projects designed to prevent future flooding, mitigate further loss,

and decrease evacuation times.

Single family home resiliency solutions are expected to add approximately 10 to 15 percent to the

total cost per home; multifamily resiliency solutions add 15 to 20 percent to the total cost per

project; and infrastructure resiliency solutions add 15 to 20 percent to the total cost per project.

Resiliency solutions are varied and dependent on the respective area’s Threat and Hazard

Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA).

Single family home resiliency solutions may include elevating the first floor of habitable area;

breakaway ground floor walls; reinforced roofs; storm shutters; use of ENERGY STAR appliances

and fixtures; and mold and mildew resistant products. Multifamily resiliency solutions include

elevation; retention basins; fire-safe landscaping; firewalls; and landscaped floodwalls.

Buyout programs support hazard mitigation, floodplain management goals, and resiliency by

removing homeowners from the floodplain, thus eliminating vulnerability to future flooding

situations. After homes are purchased, the structures are demolished or relocated. The land reverts

to a natural floodplain, converts into a retention area, or is retained as green space for recreational

purposes. The buyout option serves multiple objectives and provides a resiliency option versus

rebuilding within a floodplain. Buyouts help prevent repetitive loss and extreme risk to human

health and safety. Buyouts conducted sooner rather than later prevent homeowners from making

repairs and investing funds in properties that they then may not want to sell.

In the case of infrastructure resiliency solutions, improvements may include:

• Elevating critical systems, facilities, and roadways above base flood elevation;

• Installing backup power generators for critical systems (water, sewer, etc.);

• Avoiding an increase in impervious cover by keeping projects in their original footprint

and encouraging the use of building practices that allow for more pervious coverage, when

possible;

• Replanting with only native vegetation to preserve the natural environment;

• Installing retention basins, larger culverts and debris guards, erosion control solutions, and

back-up communication systems; and

• Supporting local community efforts to enhance building codes and regulations.

The resiliency multiplier will be a standard 15 percent for both housing and infrastructure activities

to calculate unmet need, as has previously been applied in other Texas CDBG-DR programs.

Page 13 of 61

D. Demographic Profile of Impacted Counties

The demographic profile data was generated using a wide range of data sets from the U.S. Census

Bureau, unless otherwise noted. The 49 CDBG-DR eligible counties affected by Hurricane Harvey

cover 15 percent, or 39,496 square miles of the state, and contain approximately 32 percent of the

state’s population. This equals nearly 8.9 million Texans living in the eligible counties. These

counties have seen almost a 1 million person, or 12 percent, increase from 2010 to 2016.

Of the 3.4 million housing units in the eligible counties, 62.5 percent are owner-occupied units.

Some housing and income demographics are slightly different in the eligible counties versus the

statewide averages. The 49 eligible counties have an estimated median owner-occupied housing

unit value and median household income lower than the state as a whole. The median value of

owner-occupied housing units is $105,800—almost $37,000 less than the statewide median value

of $142,700. The 49 eligible counties have a median household income of $50,145 – $4,582 less

than the statewide average of $54,727. In addition to a lower median household income, the per

capita income is also lower than the state as a whole. Approximately 14.9 percent of the population

in the 49 eligible counties is living in poverty. This is just less than the statewide average of 15.6

percent.

By percentage, the 49 eligible counties have a higher African-American population when

compared to the state as a whole. The 49 eligible counties have a 16.27 percent African-American

population—approximately 3.67 percent higher than the statewide total. The minority population

as a whole in all 49 eligible counties is approximately 62.21 percent—2.7 percent higher than the

statewide total.

In the 49 eligible counties, veterans account for 4.9 percent of the population; the elderly account

for approximately 11.73 percent; and disabled persons under the age of 65 account for 7.65 percent

of the population. These numbers are in line with state averages.

Table 1: 2016 Demographic Statistics for Texas and the 49 CDBG-DR Eligible Counties from

the U.S. Census Bureau

Texas

49 CDBG-DR Eligible

Counties

Fact Estimates Estimates

Percent of

Area

Population estimates, 2016 27,862,596 8,861,831

32% of

Texas

Population

Population, percent change - April 1, 2010,

(estimates base) to July 1, 2016

10.80% 12%

Persons under 5 years, percent, 2016 7.20% 645,145

7.28% of

Eligible

Population

Page 14 of 61

Texas

49 CDBG-DR Eligible

Counties

Fact Estimates Estimates

Percent of

Area

Persons under 18 years, percent, 2016 26.20% 2,319,282

26.17% of

Eligible

Population

Persons 65 years and over, percent, 2016 12.00% 1,039,153

11.73% of

Eligible

Population

White alone, percent, 2016

79.40%

6,593,176

74.40%

Black or African American alone, percent,

2016

12.60% 1,441,957 16.27%

American Indian and Alaska Native alone,

percent, 2016

1.00% 88,954 1.00%

Asian alone, percent, 2016

4.80%

565,728

6.38%

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander

alone, percent, 2016

0.10% 8,875 0.10%

Two or More Races, percent, 2016

1.90%

163,599

1.85%

Hispanic or Latino, percent, 2016

39.10%

3,244,050

36.61%

White alone, not Hispanic or Latino, percent,

2016

42.60% 3,558,315 40.15%

Housing units, 2016

10,753,629

3,444,036

Owner-occupied housing unit rate, 2012-

2016

61.90% 2,152,669

62.5% of

Housing

Units

Median value of owner-occupied housing

units, 2012-2016

$142,700 $105,800

Median gross rent, 2012-2016

$911

$777

With a disability, under age 65 years,

percent, 2012-2016

8.10% 678,268

7.65% of

Eligible

Population

Median household income (in 2016 dollars),

2012-2016

$54,727 $50,145

Persons in poverty, percent 15.60%

14.9% of

Eligible

Population

Land area in square miles, 2010 261,231.71 39,496

15% of

Texas

Page 15 of 61

E. Low to Moderate Income Analysis

The following map identifies census block groups that have a low- to moderate-income population

of 51 percent or more for the 49 eligible counties using HUD’s 2017 Low and Moderate Income

Summary Data (LMISD) for the state of Texas.

Figure 7: Percentage of LMI Population by Block Group

F. Housing Impact

1. Real Estate Market

The housing real estate market in Texas remains strong with a high housing demand and a tight

supply. As stated by Texas A&M’s Real Estate Center’s August 2017 report prior to Hurricane

Harvey, the months of inventory of Texas houses increased to 3.9 months for the first time

since 2014; this indicates strong housing demand and tight supply. Around 6 months of

inventory is considered a balanced housing market. Texas housing affordability continues to

HUD Exchange. “FY 2017 LMISD by State - All Block Groups, Based on 2006-2010 American Community

Survey.” Webpage accessed January 10, 2018. https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/acs-low-mod-summary-

data/acs-low-mod-summary-data-block-groups-places/

Page 16 of 61

worsen due to limited supply for homes under $300,000, along with increasing construction

costs.

In an already tight market, the loss of housing associated with Hurricane Harvey only

compounds affordability issues in the state.

The housing markets on the Gulf Coast dipped substantially in August due to Hurricane

Harvey; however, the market saw a large rebound in September. Housing sales that were

delayed because of Hurricane Harvey in August caused a 2.6 percent increase in September,

as those sales were executed post-storm. Third quarter increases in vacant, developed lots also

generated a 5.4 percent monthly increase in single family housing construction permits. This

increase was directly related to recovery efforts in places like Houston.

2. Homelessness

Based on the assessment regarding pre-disaster homeless persons and the GLO’s work with

other state agencies and organizations, the state is working to address the needs of pre-disaster

homeless persons.

In January 2017, Texas accounted for 4.25 percent of the nation’s total homeless population.

However, given the size and population of the state, Texas has seen one of the largest decreases

(30.8 percent decline) in homelessness from 2012 to 2017. The point-in-time count revealed

that 23,548 persons in the state were physically counted as homeless in January 2017.

From

January 2016 to January 2017, there was a slight increase of 1.8 percent in the Texas total

homeless population.

The HUD 2017 Continuum of Care data reports 29.05 percent of the total homeless population

in the state is comprised of households with one adult and at least one child under the age of

18 years.

A Continuum of Care (CoC) is the group of representatives that takes on the coordination of

homeless services and homelessness prevention activities across a specified geographic area

and that implements community-wide, coordinated efforts for assessing and addressing the

housing and service needs of individuals and families that are homeless or at risk of

homelessness.13 The following map shows the CoCs operating in Texas.

Texas A&M Real Estate Center. “Outlook for the Texas Economy.” Webpage accessed January 10, 2018.

https://www.recenter.tamu.edu/articles/technical-report/outlook-for-the-texas-economy

Texas A&M Real Estate Center. “November 2017 Housing Reports by MSAs.” (data as of October 31, 2017)

HUD Exchange. “2007 – 2017 Point – Time Counts by CoC.” Webpage/Excel document accessed January 10,

2018. https://www.hudexchange.info/resources/documents

/2007-2017-PIT-Counts-by-CoC.xlsx

HUD Exchange. “2017 Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance Programs Homeless Populations and

Subpopulations.” Webpage accessed January 10, 2018. https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/reportmanagement

/published/CoC_PopSub_State_TX_2017.pdf

TDHCA. “Continuum of Care.” Webpage accessed January 10, 2018. https://www.tdhca.state.tx.us

/tich/coc.htm

Page 17 of 61

(a) State Homeless Support Services

Texas has a fairly widespread and robust homeless support services program. The GLO

actively coordinates and collaborates with localities and nonprofits to comprehensively

address pre-disaster homelessness separately from CDBG-DR funding.

The Texas Homeless Network is a statewide nonprofit organization funded in part by the

Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) and the Texas

Department of State Health Service (DSHS). The Texas Homeless Network provides

training and technical assistance around the state to help service providers and communities

better serve the homeless population with the end goal of preventing and ending

homelessness.

TDHCA’s Homeless Housing and Services Program (HHSP) provides funding to the eight

largest cities in support of services to homeless individuals and families. The cities

currently served through HHSP are Arlington, Austin, Corpus Christi, Dallas, El Paso, Fort

Worth, Houston, and San Antonio. For fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 2017, $15 million has

been allocated to HHSP. The allowable activities include construction, development, or

procurement of housing for homeless persons; rehabilitation of structures targeted to

serving homeless persons or persons at risk of homelessness; provision of direct services

and case management to homeless persons or persons at risk of homelessness; or other

homelessness-related activities.

The Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) program, formerly the Emergency Shelter Grants

Program, is a competitive grant that awards funds to private nonprofit organizations, cities,

and counties in the state of Texas to provide the services necessary to help persons that are

at risk of homelessness or homeless quickly regain stability in permanent housing. The

ESG program is funded by HUD and is administered by TDHCA. In 2016 and 2017,

TDHCA has awarded over $17 million to eligible subrecipients battling homelessness

across the state.

The Texas HOME Disaster Relief program is administered by TDHCA. The program is

available to local governments, nonprofit organizations, and public housing authorities

within a federal or state-declared county to serve households earning at or below 80 percent

Area Median Family Income (AMFI). Eligible activities include the HOMEowner

Rehabilitation Assistance Program, Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program, and

HOMEbuyer Assistance Program. As of December 2017, over $10 million is available in

the Texas HOME Disaster Relief Program.

Additionally, the Texas Interagency Council for the Homeless (TICH) was established in

1995 and coordinates the state’s resources and services to address homelessness. TICH

serves as an advisory committee to TDHCA. Representatives from 11 state agencies sit on

Texas Homeless Network. Webpage accessed January 10, 2018. http://www.thn.org/

TDHCA. “HOME Disaster Relief Program.” Webpage accessed January 10, 2018.

http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/home-division/disaster-relief.htm

Page 18 of 61

the council, along with members appointed by the governor, lieutenant governor, and

speaker of the house of representatives.

The council’s duties include:

• Survey current resources for services for the homeless in the state;

• Assist in coordinating and providing statewide services for all homeless individuals;

• Increase the flow of information among separate providers and appropriate authorities;

• Provide technical assistance to TDHCA in assessing the need for housing for

individuals with special needs in different localities; and

• Maintain a centralized resource and information center for homeless services.

The Department of State Health Services (DSHS) Projects for Assistance in Transition

from Homelessness (PATH) program provides outreach in the form of (1) screening,

diagnostic assessment, and treatment; (2) habitation and rehabilitation; (3) community

mental health services; (4) outpatient alcohol or drug treatment (for clients with serious

mental illness); (5) staff training and case management; (6) referrals for primary health

services, job training, educational services (including HIV prevention activities), and

relevant housing services; (7) assistance in obtaining income support services including

Social Security Income and representative payee per appropriate regulations; (8) housing

services including planning for housing; (9) technical assistance in applying for housing

assistance; and (10) improving coordination of housing and services and the costs of

matching individuals with appropriate housing and services. The service areas are

Amarillo, Austin, Beaumont, Conroe, Corpus Christi, Dallas, El Paso, Fort Worth,

Galveston, Harlingen, Houston, Laredo, Lubbock, San Antonio, and Waco.

Additionally, the Community Services Block Grant program is administered by TDHCA.

For program years 2015 to 2018, over $120 million has been awarded to eligible entities

across Texas for the delivery of services to very low-income Texas residents. The services

are designed to eliminate poverty and foster self-sufficiency.

The GLO has been in communication with the Texas Homeless Network (THN) and the

Ending Community Homelessness Coalition (ECHO) for data tied to the impacts of

Hurricane Harvey on the homeless population in Texas. THN and ECHO informed the

GLO that they are currently engaged in efforts to identify homeless persons impacted by

the hurricane. Data gathering will be completed at the end of January 2018. It will then be

assessed and provided to the GLO so that further determinations can be made on how local

communities can better assist their homeless populations.

No funds from this allocation will be set aside specifically to offset and prevent

homelessness, but the next allocation is expected to be much larger. The GLO plans to

create a more substantial homelessness prevention program from future funds.

TDHCA. “Texas Interagency Council for the Homeless” (TICH). Webpage accessed January 10, 2018.

http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/tich/

TDHCA. “Community Services Block Grant (CSBG).” Webpage accessed January 10, 2018.

http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/community-affairs/csbg/index.htm

Page 19 of 61

3. Social Services: 2-1-1 Texas Program

The Texas Health and Human Services Commission (THHSC) 2-1-1 Texas program helps

Texas citizens connect with state and local health and human services programs service by

phone or internet. THHSC works through 25 Area Information Centers (AICs) across the state.

2-1-1 Texas is a free, anonymous, social service hotline available 24-hours a day, 7 days a

week, 365 days a year. State and local health and human services programs address

housing/shelter, employment, food/nutrition, veterans, crisis/emergency, income/expenses,

legal aid/victims, criminal justice, aging/disability, health/medical, mental health, and child

care/education.

According to information received by the GLO from the Health and Human Services

Commission (HHSC), 2-1-1 staff observed a 37 percent increase in call volume beginning

Thursday, August 24, 2017. Top caller needs included calls from the public requesting general

evacuation information and evacuation transportation and calls from city and county

emergency services. On Friday, August 25, 2017, Texas Information and Referral Network

(TIRN) staff created a new menu option that routed callers with Hurricane Harvey needs to the

first available agent statewide, thus prioritizing those callers.

Between August 25 and October 31, 2017, the 2-1-1 TIRN received approximately 670,000

calls. The call summary below shows the volume of calls received pre-Harvey, during Harvey

(August 25–September 30) and post-Harvey.

The table below shows the approximate number of calls divided into time periods before,

during, and immediately following Hurricane Harvey, as well as post-Hurricane Harvey. In the

period during Hurricane Harvey and directly after, there was a large jump in State of Texas

Emergency Assistance Registry (STEAR) calls. STEAR is a free registry that provides local

emergency planners and emergency responders with additional information about the needs in

their local community. This program allows the public to add their information to the registry

if they feel they will require additional assistance during an emergency or disaster event.

Table 2: 2-1-1 Call Volume

Option 1, 4, 8

(TIRN Agents)

Option 5

(TIRN Agents)

Total

Calls Pre-Hurricane Harvey:

August 1–24, 2017

154,509 N/A 154,509

Calls during Hurricane Harvey:

August 25–September 30, 2017

282,811 170,105 452,916

Calls post-Hurricane Harvey:

October 1–31, 2017

177,800 36,577 214,377

Legend:

• Option 1: Community Resources Information and Referral Calls.

• Option 4: STEAR Registration Calls.

• Option 5: Harvey-Related Disaster Calls.

• Option 8: Mental Health and Substance Abuses Information and Referral Calls.

Page 20 of 61

The types of needs also varied during these time periods. Prior to Hurricane Harvey, the top

two needs TIRN agents addressed were calls about were electric service payment assistance

and rent payment assistance. During and directly following the hurricane, the top two needs

were disaster food stamps and electric payment assistance. Disaster food stamps were available

through Texas Health and Human Services Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance

Program (D-SNAP) to provide short-term food assistance benefits to families recovering from

a disaster.

The following chart shows top 10 needs of calls received and the volume of calls for the period

during and directly following Hurricane Harvey.

Top 10 call types from August 23–September 30, 2017

Figure 8: Top 10 call types from August 23–September 30, 2017

The latest numbers, as of December 19, 2017, show that while calls have decreased somewhat,

TIRN is still experiencing a higher call volume than prior to Hurricane Harvey. Also, the types

of calls show that the call center is still receiving calls related directly to disaster recovery from

Hurricane Harvey, as seen in the following chart.

Texas Health and Human Services. “Disaster SNAP.” Webpage accessed January 10, 2018.

https://hhs.texas.gov/services/financial/disaster-assistance/disaster-snap

Page 21 of 61

Figure 9: Top 10 call types from November 1–December 19, 2017

4. Interim Housing Assistance

On September 14, 2017, Governor Greg Abbott designated the GLO as the state lead for short-

term housing recovery programs in partnership with FEMA. These programs are intended to

provide direct housing solutions for permanent repairs and temporary solutions to applicants

deemed eligible by FEMA. The GLO will continue to administer these programs until February

25, 2019. Program descriptions include:

(a) Multi-Family Lease and Repair

This program provides repairs to existing multifamily housing, such as apartments, in order

to provide more housing for eligible applicants. By accepting repairs, property owners must

agree to lease eligible applicants for up to 18 months following the disaster declaration. This

program provides much needed housing for applicants, as well as much needed repairs to

multifamily housing units that may have been impacted during the disaster.

Page 22 of 61

(b) Direct Lease

This program allows the GLO and its subrecipients to enter into leases for properties..

Through the utilization of these properties, the program provides housing for eligible

applicants for up to 18 months following the disaster declaration.

This program places manufactured housing units, such as mobile homes and travel trailers,

on private land or commercial pads to temporarily house eligible applicants for up to 18

months following the disaster declaration.

(d) Direct Assistance for Limited Home Repair

This program provides permanent partial repairs to homes with significant damage. Repairs

cannot exceed the lesser of 50 percent of the home’s fair market value or $60,000.

(e) Partial Repair and Essential Power for Sheltering (PREPS)

This program provides temporary repairs of up to $20,000 for homes with less than $17,000

in damage. Temporary repairs may include window units, one functional bathroom, and

small cooking appliances to ensure that the home can serve as a shelter for eligible

homeowners. PREPS requires 10% cost share from the state.

5. National Flood Insurance Program

The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is a FEMA program that works to provide

affordable insurance to property owners in participating communities and works to encourage

communities to adopt and enforce floodplain management regulations. In areas at high risk of

flooding, Congress has mandated that federally regulated or insured lenders require flood

insurance on mortgaged properties.

The NFIP offers two types of flood insurance coverage

for homeowners: building property coverage up to $250,000; and personal property coverage

(contents) up to $100,000.

The following information shows the major increase in NFIP claims in the state of Texas as a

direct result of Hurricane Harvey. More than 89,000 claims were filed. With the data broken

down daily during that time, a large jump in claims began on August 25, the day Hurricane

Harvey made landfall.

FEMA. “The National Flood Insurance Program.” Webpage accessed January 10, 2018.

https://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program

FEMA. “NFIP Summary of Coverage.” Webpage/PDF accessed January 10, 2018. https://www.fema.gov

/media-library-data /20130726-1620-20490-4648/f_679_summaryofcoverage_11_2012.pdf

Page 23 of 61

Figure 10: NFIP Claims in Texas June to October, 2017

Figure 11: NFIP Claims Filed in Texas By Date of Loss

As the claims are broken down into geographic areas, it is even more evident that the claims

are Hurricane Harvey-related, as the biggest number of claims are coming from areas that are

included in the 49 eligible counties, with the largest number of claims coming from the

Houston area.

128

88,286

1,920

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

NFIP Claims Filed in Texas (June-Oct, 2017)

By Date of Loss

Total

144

281

8,884

20,085

27,812

13,044

10,637

5,549

1,458

704

314

148

100

135

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

23-Aug

24-Aug

25-Aug

26-Aug

27-Aug

28-Aug

29-Aug

30-Aug

31-Aug

1-Sep

2-Sep

3-Sep

4-Sep

5-Sep

Aug Sep

NFIP Claims Filed in Texas (Aug 23-Sept 5, 2017)

By Date of Loss

Total

Page 24 of 61

Figure 12: NFIP Claims Filed in 2017 by City

The NFIP data identifies insurance claims that fall into the Repetitive Loss (RL) category. An

RL property is any insurable building for which two or more claims of more than $1,000 were

paid. There are over 120,000 RL properties nationwide, with Texas having more than 27,000.

These RL structures strain the NFIP fund, and currently are the biggest draw on the fund. They

not only increase the NFIP’s annual losses (increasing the need for borrowing), but drain fund

reserves needed to address future catastrophic events.

Hurricane Harvey resulted in approximately 4,500 NFIP claims that were designated as

Repetitive Loss. The vast majority of these claims—3,073 or 68 percent—were made in Harris

County. The following graph highlights the counties with the largest numbers of RL properties

that were reported during this period.

FEMA. “Repetitive Loss FAQ.” Webpage/Text accessed January 10, 2018.

https://www.fema.gov/txt/rebuild/repetitive_loss_faqs.txt

2,066

578

33,730

2,656

3,078

2,228

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

NFIP Claims Filed (2017)

Total

Page 25 of 61

Figure 13: NFIP Repetitive Loss Homes by Select Counties

Additionally, the following map shows the concentration of RL properties with Hurricane

Harvey claims by zip code. While there may be a correlation between zip codes and those RL

properties along rivers such as the Guadalupe River, there is a high concentration of RL

properties located throughout Harris County.

Page 26 of 61

Figure 14: NFIP Repetitive Loss Claims by ZIP Code (August 23 – September 5, 2017)

6. Small Business Assistance (SBA) Disaster Home Loans

Another resource for homeowners that sustained damage from Hurricane Harvey is the Small

Business Administration’s (SBA) disaster loans. These loans are the basic form of federal

disaster assistance for homeowners whose private property sustained damage that is not fully

covered by insurance. Homeowners and renters whose property was damaged by a declared

disaster can apply for an SBA low-interest loan. Interest rates on these loans are determined

by law and are assigned on a case by case basis.

Specific to Hurricane Harvey assistance, interest rates are 1.75 percent if the applicant does

not have credit available elsewhere and 3.5 percent if credit is available elsewhere. The home

loans are limited to $200,000 for the repair or replacement of real estate and $40,000 maximum

to repair or replace personal property.

U.S. Small Business Administration Fact Sheet. November 7, 2017. “Disaster Loans, Texas Declaration #15274

and #15275.”

Page 27 of 61

As of December 7, 2017, over $2.5 billion in home loans have been approved by the SBA. A

breakdown of the approved loans is categorized by county and Councils of Governments

(COG) in the table below.

Table 3. Total Home Loans Approved by SBA

County

COG

Total Home

Loans

KARNES

AACOG

$ 244,500

Total AACOG

$ 244,500

GRIMES

BVCOG

$ 66,400

Total BVCOG

$ 66,400

BASTROP

CAPCOG

$ 1,037,700

CALDWELL

CAPCOG

$ 482,600

FAYETTE

CAPCOG

$ 3,853,300

LEE

CAPCOG

$ 135,500

Total CAPCOG

$ 5,509,100

ARANSAS

CBCOG

$ 58,387,400

BEE

CBCOG

$ 1,359,200

KLEBERG

CBCOG

$ 117,300

NUECES

CBCOG

$ 50,410,000

REFUGIO

CBCOG

$ 8,184,000

SAN PATRICIO

CBCOG

$ 29,469,000

Total CBCOG

$ 147,926,900

JASPER

DETCOG

$ 3,268,300

NEWTON

DETCOG

$ 5,591,900

POLK

DETCOG

$ 1,509,000

SABINE

DETCOG

$ 16,800

SAN JACINTO

DETCOG

$ 2,385,800

TYLER

DETCOG

$ 1,485,300

Total DETCOG

$ 14,257,100

CALHOUN

GCRPC

$ 8,089,500

DEWITT

GCRPC

$ 1,290,800

GOLIAD

GCRPC

$ 1,769,300

GONZALES

GCRPC

$ 316,400

JACKSON

GCRPC

$ 1,114,400

LAVACA

GCRPC

$ 653,600

VICTORIA

GCRPC

$ 19,325,500

Total GCRPC

$ 32,559,500

AUSTIN

H-GAC

$ 901,800

BRAZORIA

H-GAC

$ 110,839,900

CHAMBERS

H-GAC

$ 46,932,500

COLORADO

H-GAC

$ 857,800

FORT BEND

H-GAC

$ 262,415,100

Page 28 of 61

County

COG

Total Home

Loans

GALVESTON

H-GAC

$ 206,936,400

HARRIS

H-GAC

$ 1,088,729,500

LIBERTY

H-GAC

$ 23,513,800

MATAGORDA

H-GAC

$ 5,435,500

MONTGOMERY

H-GAC

$ 50,882,400

WALKER

H-GAC

$ 765,700

WALLER

H-GAC

$ 4,655,200

WHARTON

H-GAC

$ 15,949,200

Total H-GAC

$ 1,818,814,800

HARDIN

SETRPC

$ 93,195,600

JEFFERSON

SETRPC

$ 223,166,700

ORANGE

SETRPC

$ 230,145,700

Total SETRPC

$ 546,508,000

GRAND

TOTAL

$ 2,565,886,300

7. Public Housing Assistance (PHA) Data

The GLO is currently working with its partners to gather information on the impact of

Hurricane Harvey on public housing. Although the GLO can reasonably assume that there was

a negative impact on this population, complete data is not currently available. Once data

gathering is complete, the information will be assessed and determinations of unmet need,

based on this data, will be included in future iterations of this Action Plan.

8. FEMA Individual Assistance

The Individual Assistance (IA) data received from FEMA on December 7, 2017, was used to

quantify all housing applicants impacted by Hurricane Harvey. This information was then used

to calculate the unmet need by county and COG and divided into renter and owner subsets.

More than 889,000 applications were received according to FEMA. Of that number, FEMA

verified that over 278,000 applicants had a FEMA Verified Loss (FVL) over $0.

The total number of owner-occupied applicants in the eligible counties with over $8,000 in

real property damage is 91,561. The greatest number of these owner-occupied applicants are

in Harris County, with a total over 45,800.

The total number of renter applicants in the eligible counties with over $2,000 in personal

property damage is 36,838. The greatest number of these renter-occupied applicants are, again,

in Harris County, with a total of 22,800.

Page 29 of 61

Using the above thresholds to calculate unmet need, 91,561 (71 percent) of the 128,399

applicants are owner-occupied homes, while 36,838 (29 percent) are renters.

Table 4: Total IA Applications as of December 7, 2017

Occupancy Type

Total Applications

FEMA Verified Loss

(FVL) Over $0

Applicants with

Unmet Need

Owner

442,097

200,618

91,561

Renter

443,198

77,997

36,838

Not Specified

4,089

103

Totals

889,384

278,718

128,399

a. Total Unmet Needs

The GLO has compiled information from FEMA for individual assistance in order to

document estimated repair costs and unmet housing needs by eligible county. The

population structure used includes owner-occupied households and renter households. For

the purpose of this analysis, the GLO is utilizing certain components of HUD’s

methodology for unmet need for both types of households.

Owner-occupied Homes

To calculate the level of real property damage for owner-occupied homes, the following

criteria was used:

• Major-Low: $8,000 to $14,999 of FEMA verified loss.

• Major-High: $15,000 to $28,800 of FEMA verified loss.

• Severe: Greater than $28,800 of FEMA verified loss.

Renter-occupied Homes

To calculate the level of personal property damage for renters, the following criteria was

used:

• Major-Low: $2,000 to $3,499 of FEMA verified loss.

• Major-High: $3,500 to $7,499 of FEMA verified loss.

• Severe: Greater than $7,500 of FEMA verified loss.

To calculate estimated unmet need, the GLO used multipliers provided by HUD. These

multipliers are based on the SBA median repair cost for the specific disaster category less

the weighted average of expected SBA and FEMA repair costs. Based on FEMA individual

assistance data provided to the GLO, the estimated weighted average of expected SBA and

FEMA total repair costs for each category is represented in the following table.

Page 30 of 61

Table 5: Unmet Need Multiplier by Damage Category

Category

Count

Unmet Need

% of Count

% of Unmet

Need

0-30%

13,714

$984,162,584

37%

31-50%

5,216

$370,991,451

14%

51-80%

6,064

$437,961,749

17%

Not LMI

7,265

$524,178,540

20%

Not Reported

4,579

$324,459,334

12%

Total

36,838

$2,641,753,658

100%

Page 35 of 61

G. Infrastructure Impact

Texas infrastructure all along the Gulf Coast was affected by Hurricane Harvey. This event

caused damage to roadways, bridges, sections of the coastline, and many other infrastructure

systems still being determined.

1. Governor’s Commission to Rebuild Texas

Governor Greg Abbott established the Governor’s Commission to Rebuild Texas (the

Commission) in the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Harvey for the swift and effective

restoration of damaged public infrastructure

throughout disaster impacted areas. As

stated in the Governor’s Proclamation on

September 7, 2017, for the establishment of

the Commission, the effective restoration of

damaged public infrastructure throughout

the disaster area is of paramount importance

to the Texas economy and to the people of

Texas who live and work in the communities

affected by Hurricane Harvey. The

Commission will assist local governmental

entities and nonprofit organizations to assess

and identify rebuilding needs and to

navigate state and federal resources

available for the rebuilding effort. The

Commission will advocate for the interests

of state and local governments on matters

related to disaster response and provide

expertise and assistance to local

governmental entities and nonprofit organizations throughout the rebuilding process.

The “October 31, 2017, Request for Federal Assistance Critical Infrastructure Projects"

reported $61 billion in projects identified at state and local levels. This amount does not include

current FEMA expenditures or CDBG-DR housing allocations. The $61 billion was compiled

based on information available in September and October from impacted communities that

identified and prioritized their needs. This amount is expected to increase as more information

becomes available.

The types of identified projects include restoration and mitigation projects for roads, bridges,

schools, government buildings, public facilities, as well as projects to protect coastal

RebuildTexas: The Governor’s Commission to Rebuild Texas. “Proclamation.” Webpage assessed January 10,

2018. https://www.rebuildtexas.today/proclamation/

Source: HOU District Twitter feed – Aug 28, 2017

(https://twitter.com/TxDOTHoustonPIO)

Page 36 of 61

infrastructure, homes, businesses, critical facilities, and national assets such as petrochemical

complexes. Over 60 percent of the projects identified were for flood control projects.

2. Texas Coastal Resiliency Study

With previous CDBG-DR funds, the GLO commissioned a Texas Coastal Resiliency Study to

identify critical infrastructure within a coastal multi-county project study area that would be

most vulnerable to future storm events. During this study, sites considered to be at risk were

identified and new projects were proposed to mitigate potential damage to vulnerable

infrastructure. As expected, many of these sites were impacted by Hurricane Harvey, but to

what degree is still being determined. The improvements identified in this study should provide

practical solutions that communities can quickly utilize for repairs and mitigation. This study

identified 2,256 projects in the coastal region.

Figure 18: Texas Coastal Resiliency Study Area

Ibid. “Request for Federal Assistance Critical Infrastructure Projects.” Webpage/PDF accessed January 10,

2018. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4164748-Rebuild-Texas-REQUEST-FOR-FEDERAL-

ASSISTANCE.html

The Texas General Land Office. “Texas Coastal Resiliency Study, Final Report.” Webpage/PDF accessed

January 10, 2018. http://www.glo.texas.gov/coastal-grants/_documents/grant-project/texas-coastal

-resiliency-

study.pdf

Page 37 of 61

3. FEMA Public Assistance

Due to the vast size of the impact area and different types of recovery that will be necessary,

Public Assistance is not the ideal data set to determine infrastructure need but it does serve as

a statewide metric to begin the discussion. Public Assistance values are very preliminary, with

mostly emergency protective measures being calculated to date. Estimates for permanent work

will continue to be forthcoming over the next several months. For this Action Plan, given the

limited amount available in this first allocation and the availability of data, housing unmet

needs have been prioritized.

Due to the 90 percent federal cost share tied to the approximate cost amount, the total PA

infrastructure unmet need for these localities will be calculated from the remaining 10 percent

of the projected cost amount plus 15 percent of the approximate cost as a resiliency multiplier.

Though impossible to determine at this time, future property valuations and the overall impact

of Hurricane Harvey on property values should be taken into consideration for the long‐term

struggle that communities will face as they continue to recover using their own resources.

While unmet housing needs will be addressed, there still remains significant unmet need in

infrastructure and other non‐housing sectors, including future tax revenue loss due to Hurricane

Harvey. Projects affiliated with economic revitalization or infrastructure activities will

contribute to the long‐term recovery and restoration of housing in the most impacted and

distressed areas as well as ensure the ongoing viability of the impacted areas and beyond.

Page 38 of 61

H. Economic Impact

1. Employment

a. Statewide Statistics

As of August 2017, jobs had grown in the state from 12,035,300 to 12,328,400, according to

figures published by the Texas Workforce Commission. That is a 2.4 percent year-over-year

increase from August of 2016, a net increase of 293,100 new jobs. In addition, the statewide

unemployment rate for August decreased to 4.5 percent from 4.9 percent in 2016. In a growing

economy like Texas, long-term job growth and unemployment increases were impacted by

Hurricane Harvey, but to what extent is impossible to determine at this time. The October 2017

figures show an unemployment rate of 3.5 percent and an increase in employment numbers

from 12,328,400 in August to 12,922,084 in October 2017.

b. County Level

Of the 49 eligible counties, almost all follow the statewide trend. There are, however, two

counties that have higher unemployment rates following Hurricane Harvey according to the

statistics provided on the Texas Workforce Commission website. The unemployment rate in

Aransas County went up from 5.5 percent in August 2017 to 8 percent in October 2017, and

Refugio County’s unemployment rate increased from 5.7 percent to 6.2 percent. Although the

unemployment rates increased, the employment numbers in both counties slightly increased.

Aransas County increased from 9,568 to 9,645 (0.8 percent) and Refugio County increased

from 2,809 to 2,837 (0.9 percent).

c. Disaster Unemployment Assistance

The Disaster Unemployment Assistance program, administered by FEMA and the Texas

Workforce Commission, provides unemployment benefits for individuals who lost their jobs

or are no longer working as a direct result of Hurricane Harvey. The application deadline for

applications was November 13, 2017. Through this program, a total of 24,758 claims were

received, and 12,997 people were approved for assistance totaling $11,201,909.

2. Small Business Assistance (SBA) Business Disaster Loans

The SBA provides Business Physical Disaster Loans and Economic Injury Disaster Loans

(EIDL) to businesses to repair or replace disaster-damaged property owned by the business,

including real estate, inventories, supplies, machinery, equipment, and working capital until

normal operations resume. Businesses of all sizes are eligible. Private, non-profit organizations

such as charities, churches, and private universities are also eligible. The law limits these

business loans to $2,000,000, and the amount cannot exceed the verified uninsured disaster

loss.

U.S. Small Business Administration Fact Sheet. November 7, 2017. “Disaster Loans, Texas Declaration #15274

and #15275.”

Page 39 of 61

The SBA has already approved over $579 million in business loans as of December 7, 2017.

The breakdown by county and COG can be seen in the following table.

Table 10: Total Business Loans Approved by the SBA

County

COG

Business/EIDL

Loans

BURLESON

BVCOG

$ 50,000

Total BVCOG

$ 50,000

BASTROP

CAPCOG

$ 40,000

FAYETTE

CAPCOG

$ 547,900

Total CAPCOG

$ 587,900

ARANSAS

CBCOG

$ 58,461,900

BEE

CBCOG

$ 4,801,000

KLEBERG

CBCOG

$ 43,300

NUECES

CBCOG

$ 20,309,300

REFUGIO

CBCOG

$ 1,710,900

SAN PATRICIO

CBCOG

$ 14,822,900

Total CBCOG

$ 100,149,300

NEWTON

DETCOG

$ 50,000

POLK

DETCOG

$ 631,600

SAN JACINTO

DETCOG

$ 266,400

Total DETCOG

$ 948,000

CALHOUN

GCRPC

$ 2,806,400

GOLIAD

GCRPC

$ 99,100

GONZALES

GCRPC

$ 75,000

JACKSON

GCRPC

$ 2,506,100

LAVACA

GCRPC

$ 18,800

VICTORIA

GCRPC

$ 13,550,100

Total GCRPC

$ 19,055,500

AUSTIN

H-GAC

$ 248,900

BRAZORIA

H-GAC

$ 7,625,900

CHAMBERS

H-GAC

$ 13,355,600

COLORADO

H-GAC

$ 1,183,600

FORT BEND

H-GAC

$ 22,460,200

GALVESTON

H-GAC

$ 32,364,700

HARRIS

H-GAC

$ 288,656,700

LIBERTY

H-GAC

$ 3,049,600

MATAGORDA

H-GAC

$ 1,530,100

MONTGOMERY

H-GAC

$ 10,625,200

WALKER

H-GAC

$ 120,600

WALLER

H-GAC

$ 428,100

WHARTON

H-GAC

$ 3,205,600

Total H-GAC

$ 384,854,800

Page 40 of 61

County

COG

Business/EIDL

Loans

HARDIN

SETRPC

$ 7,975,300

JEFFERSON

SETRPC

$ 31,350,100

ORANGE

SETRPC

$ 34,368,900

Total SETRPC

$ 73,694,300

GRAND TOTAL

$ 579,389,800

The following table provides details from SBA as of January 1, 2018, on the application status

for the 11,701 business applications that have been received. The application period for

physical damages was scheduled to close on November 30, 2017, but SBA is accepting

applications postmarked (or submitted electronically) within 60 days of the November 30

deadline without a justification requirement of the applicant. The deadline for small businesses

and most nonprofits to apply for economic injury (working capital) is May 25, 2018.

Table 11: SBA Applicant Breakdown

Application Type

Amount

Percent

Total Business Applications

11,701

100.00%

Processed Applications

10,502

89.75%

In-Process Applications

1,199

10.25%

Declined Applications

5,030

47.90%

Withdrawn Applications

2,670

25.42%

Approved Applications

2,802

26.68%

3. Agricultural Impacts

Texas has a varied

agricultural industry across

the state. Agriculture

provides jobs, food

sources, trade, and port

facilities used in the

distribution of goods. This

industry experienced

serious loss from the rains

and winds of Hurricane

Harvey.

As of November 1, 2017,

Hurricane Harvey caused

more than $200 million in

crop and livestock losses,

according to Texas A&M

AgriLife Extension

Source: AgriLife Extension Twitter Feed; https://twitter.com/txextension

Page 41 of 61

Service economists.

Estimated losses by commodity include $93 million in livestock loss;

$100 million loss in cotton crops; and $8 million in loss to the rice and soybean industry. While

the livestock numbers do include industry infrastructure such as fencing that must be repaired

or replaced and approximately 200,000 bales of hay lost,

it does not include an estimated

number of dead livestock. These numbers are estimated to be in the tens of thousands. The

reports also do not include losses to the fishing industry, including decreased fishing activity

and storm-related damage to vessels and equipment. This estimate will not be available until

after oyster season ends in late spring 2018.

These forthcoming numbers will cause the losses

in the agriculture industry to continue to increase.

4. Tourism

The Texas coast has many communities that rely on employment and income from tourism.

According to the governor’s 2017 report, The Economic Impact of Travel in Texas, the total

for direct travel spending in the state was $69.1 billion in 2016.

Among the impacted counties along the coast are some of the long-established and most-visited

tourist destinations. 11.6 percent of the employment in Aransas County and 6.7 percent in

Galveston County is directly connected to travel and tourism.

Retail, hospitality, and

entertainment are venues that contribute to the local community as well as overall state

employment and business tax revenue. In 2016, the Gulf Coast region of Texas provided jobs

to over 3.4 million people.

Although current figures are not available at this time, it is expected that the tourism industry

will lose revenue as a direct result of Hurricane Harvey. Due to the timing of Hurricane Harvey,

areas that rely on tourism have already seen a decline in revenue over Labor Day 2017. It is

expected that the areas will also see losses during Spring Break 2018 and Summer 2018 due

to the ongoing recovery process. The impacts will continue to be seen until tourists choose to

return to the Texas coast they once frequented. The impact could be prolonged if tourists have

a misconception of the actual amount of damage. Even areas with little to no disaster damage

will likely see a decline in tourism based on public perception.

Texas A&M Agrilife Extension. “Texas agricultural losses from Hurricane Harvey estimated at more than $200

million.” Webpage accessed January 10, 2018. https://today.agrilife.org/2017/10/27/texas-agricultural-losses-

hurricane-harvey-estimated-200-million/

Texas Farm Bureau. “Hurricane Harvey ag losses top $200 million.” Webpage accessed January 10, 2018.

http://texasfarmbureau.org/hurricane-harvey-ag-losses-top-200-million/

The Texas Observer. “New Estimate Puts Harvey Agriculture Losses at $200 Million, One-Tenth of Irma.”

Webpage accessed January 10, 2018.

https://www.texasobserver.org/agriculture-losses-estimated

-200-million-harvey/

Texas Tourism, Office of the Governor, Texas Economic Development & Tourism. The Economic Impact of

Travel in Texas.” July 2017. Webpage/PDF accessed January 10, 2018. https://travel.texas.gov/tti/media/PDFs

/TXImp16p_1.pdf

Ibid.

Page 42 of 61

III. General Requirements

A. Public Housing, Affordable Housing, and Housing for Vulnerable Populations

The GLO will identify and address the rehabilitation, reconstruction, and replacement of the

following types of housing affected by the disasters: public housing (including administrative

offices), HUD-assisted housing, affordable housing, McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act-

funded shelters and housing for the homeless, including emergency shelters and transitional and

permanent housing for the homeless; and private market units receiving project-based assistance,

or with tenants that participate in the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program.

Various target populations are eligible to be served, including homeless and special needs

populations. CDBG-DR funds received by the state will be used in the recovery efforts from

Hurricane Harvey for specific disaster-related purposes. Due to the limited amount of funds for

this allocation, the GLO is not setting aside funds for these target populations. The GLO will re-

evaluate setting aside funds for these target populations with subsequent Hurricane Harvey CDBG-

DR fund allocations.

All proposed projects will undergo Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) review by the

GLO before approval. Such review will include assessments of (1) a proposed project’s area

demography, (2) socioeconomic characteristics, (3) housing configuration and needs, (4)

educational, transportation, and health care opportunities, (5) environmental hazards or concerns,

and (6) all other factors material to the AFFH determination. Applications should show that

projects are likely to lessen area racial, ethnic, and low-income concentrations, and/or promote

affordable housing in low-poverty, nonminority areas in response to natural hazard-related

impacts. All subrecipients will certify that they will satisfy the AFFH rule in their grant agreements

and will receive GLO training and technical assistance in meeting their AFFH obligations.

B. Displacement of Persons and/or Entities

To minimize the displacement of persons and/or entities that may be affected by the activities

outlined in this Action Plan, the GLO will coordinate with other state agencies, local governments,

and local non-profit organizations to ensure minimal displacement. However, should any proposed

projects cause the displacement of people, the GLO will ensure that subrecipients follow the

requirements set forth under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition

Policies Act, as waived.

The relocation assistance requirements at section 104(d)(2)(A) of the Housing and Community

Development Act and 24 CFR 42.350 are waived to the extent that they differ from the

requirements of the URA and implementing regulations at 49 CFR part 24, as modified by the

notice, for activities related to disaster recovery. Without this waiver, disparities exist in relocation

assistance associated with activities typically funded by HUD and FEMA (e.g., buyouts and

relocation). Both FEMA and CDBG funds are subject to the requirements of the URA; however,

CDBG funds are subject to Section 104(d), while FEMA funds are not. The URA provides that a

displaced person is eligible to receive a rental assistance payment that covers a period of 42

months. By contrast, Section 104(d) allows a lower-income displaced person to choose between

Page 43 of 61

the URA rental assistance payment and a rental assistance payment calculated over a period of 60

months. This waiver of the Section 104(d) requirements assures uniform and equitable treatment

by setting the URA and its implementing regulations as the sole standard for relocation assistance

under the federal register notice.

C. Maximum Assistance

The maximum amount of assistance available to subrecipients under the GLO’s disaster recovery

program will be the maximum allocated to the HUD most impacted and distressed areas. For all

housing and buyout programs, the GLO’s housing guidelines establish housing assistance

maximums. Each subrecipient will set the maximum amount of assistance available to a

beneficiary under its program to be equal to or less than the GLO’s housing assistance maximums.

A waiver request must be submitted to the GLO if a subrecipient’s housing assistance maximums

exceed the GLO amounts. The GLO will evaluate each housing assistance waiver request for cost

effectiveness.

D. Elevation Standards

The GLO will apply the following elevation standards to new construction, repair of substantial

damage, or substantial improvement of structures located in an area delineated as a flood hazard

area or equivalent in FEMA’s data source identified in 24 CFR 55.2(b)(1). All structures, as

defined under 44 CFR 59.1, designed principally for residential use and located in the annual (or

100-year) floodplain that receive assistance for new construction, repair of substantial damage, or

substantial improvement, as defined under 24 CFR 55.2(b) (10), must be elevated with the lowest

floor, including the basement, at least 2 feet above the annual floodplain elevation. Residential

structures with no dwelling units and no residents below the annual floodplain must be elevated or

floodproofed in accordance with FEMA floodproofing standards under 44 CFR 60.3(c)(3)(ii) or

successor standard, up to at least 2 feet above the annual floodplain. Applicable state, local, and

tribal codes and standards for floodplain management that exceed these requirements, including

elevation, setbacks, and cumulative substantial damage requirements, will be followed.

E. Planning and Coordination

The GLO’s recovery projects will be developed in a manner that considers an integrated approach

to address long-term recovery and restoration of infrastructure, housing, and economic

revitalization in the most impacted and distressed areas.

The GLO will continue to work with state and local jurisdictions to provide guidance on promoting

a sound short- and long-term recovery plans in the affected areas by coordinating available

resources to help in the restoration and recovery of damaged communities. Disaster recovery

presents affected communities with unique opportunities to examine a wide range of issues such

as housing quality and availability, road and rail networks, environmental issues, and the adequacy

of existing infrastructure. The GLO will support long-term plans put in place by local and regional

communities that promote sound, sustainable, long-term recovery planning informed by a post-

disaster evaluation of hazard risk, especially land-use decisions that reflect responsible floodplain

management and take into account continued sea level rise, if applicable. This information should

Page 44 of 61

be based on the history of FEMA flood mitigation efforts and take into account projected increases

in sea level (if applicable), as well as frequency and intensity of precipitation events that are not

considered in current FEMA maps and National Flood Insurance Program premiums.

The GLO will coordinate as much as possible with local and regional planning efforts to ensure

consistency, to promote community-level and/or regional (e.g., multiple local jurisdictions) post-

disaster recovery and mitigation, and to leverage those efforts.

Due to the limited amount of funds for this allocation, the GLO is not setting aside funds for

planning. The GLO anticipates setting aside funds for planning with subsequent Hurricane Harvey

CDBG-DR fund allocations.

F. Infrastructure Activities

The GLO will encourage subrecipients to integrate mitigation measures into rebuilding activities

and the extent to which infrastructure activities funded through this grant will achieve objectives

outlined in regionally or locally established plans and policies that are designed to reduce future

risk to the jurisdiction.

The GLO will encourage subrecipients to consider the costs and benefits of the project when

selecting CDBG-DR eligible projects.

The GLO will seek to ensure that infrastructure activities will avoid disproportionate impact on

vulnerable communities and will create, to the extent practicable, opportunities to address

economic inequities facing local communities. All project applications will undergo an AFFH

review by the GLO before approval. AFFH application reviews will include assessments of a

proposed project’s (1) area demography, (2) socioeconomic characteristics, (3) housing

configuration and needs, (4) educational, transportation, and health care opportunities, (5)

environmental hazards or concerns, and (6) all other factors material to the AFFH determination.

Applications should show that projects are likely to lessen area racial, ethnic, and low-income

concentrations and/or promote affordable housing in low-poverty, nonminority areas in response

to natural hazard-related impacts. All subrecipients will certify that they will satisfy the AFFH rule

in their grant agreements and will receive GLO training and technical assistance in meeting their

AFFH obligations.

The GLO will coordinate with federal, state, local, private, and nonprofit sources to assistant

subrecipients to align investments with other planned state or local capital improvements and

infrastructure development efforts. The GLO will also work with subrecipients to foster the

potential for additional infrastructure funding from multiple sources, including existing state and

local capital improvement projects in planning and the potential for private investment.

The GLO will rely on professional engineers procured by subrecipients to employ adaptable and

reliable technologies to guard against premature obsolescence of infrastructure.

Page 45 of 61

G. Leveraging Funds

The GLO will encourage subrecipients to leverage CDBG-DR funds with funding provided by

other federal, state, local, private, and nonprofit sources to utilize the limited CDBG-DR funds to

the fullest possible extent. The GLO will report on leverage funds in the DRGR system.

H. Protection of People and Property

1. Quality Construction Standards

The GLO will require both quality inspections and code compliance inspections on all

projects. Site inspections will be required on all projects to ensure quality and compliance

with building codes. The GLO will encourage and support subrecipients’ efforts to update

and strengthen local compliance codes to mitigate hazard risks due to sea level rise, high

winds, storm surge, and flooding where applicable. In the project application, subrecipients

will submit an explanation of both current and future planned codes to mitigate hazard

risks. The GLO will provide technical guidance on hazard mitigation code examples.

For reconstruction or new construction of residential buildings, the GLO will follow the

ENERGY STAR program for Green Building Standards. For rehabilitation of non-

substantially damaged residential buildings, the GLO will follow the guidelines to the

extent applicable as specified in the HUD CPD Green Building Retrofit Checklist. For

infrastructure projects, the GLO will encourage, to the extent practicable, implementation

of green building practices.

2. Housing Contractors Standards

The GLO will establish standards in the request for qualifications (RFQ) for housing

contractors and encourage subrecipients to do the same. The standards will include, but are

not limited to, information on the company’s (1) organizational structure and capabilities,

(2) ability to perform, (3) recent construction projects completed or underway over the past

5 years, (4) performance and payment bond capacity, (5) financial statements for the past

two years, (6) evidence of insurance coverage, and (7) business registrations, certifications,

and licenses.

To ensure full and open competition, subrecipients are required to follow federal

procurement and contract requirements outlined in 2 CFR 200.318 – 200.326. The GLO

will monitor subrecipient procurement. The GLO will require a warranty period post-

construction for housing; all work performed by the contractor will be guaranteed for a

period of 1 year.

I. Appeals Processes

The GLO responds to complaints and appeals in a timely and professional manner to maintain a

quality level of operations. The GLO’s appeals processes apply to appeals received from

homeowners, contractors, cities, counties, housing authorities, and other entities. The GLO will

Page 46 of 61

respond to homeowners by coordinating with the applicable subrecipient and/or housing contractor

to resolve issues.

A record of each complaint or appeal that the GLO receives is kept in an information file. When a

complaint or appeal is received, the GLO will respond to the complainant or appellant within 15

business days where practicable. For expediency, the GLO will utilize telephone communication

as the primary method of contact; email and postmarked letters will be used as necessary to

document conversations and transmit documentation.

Information about the complainant’s rights and how to file a complaint shall be printed on all

program applications, guidelines, the GLO public website, and subrecipients’ websites in all local

languages, as appropriate and reasonable. Procedures for appealing a GLO decision on a complaint

shall be provided to complainants in writing as part of the complaint response.

J. Dam and Levee Requirements

As stated in the Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 224, Monday, November 21, 2016, CDBG-DR

funds are prohibited from being used to enlarge a dam or levee beyond the original footprint of the

structure that existed prior to the disaster event. The GLO will ensure that if subrecipients use

CDBG-DR funds for levees and dams, the subrecipients will (1) register and maintain entries

regarding such structures with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers National Levee Database or

National Inventory of Dams, (2) ensure that the structure is admitted in the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers PL 84–99 Program (Levee Rehabilitation and Improvement Program), and (3) ensure

the structure is accredited under the FEMA National Flood Insurance Program. The GLO will

upload into the DRGR system the exact location of the structure and the area served and protected

by the structure and maintain file documentation demonstrating that the grantee has conducted a

risk assessment prior to funding the flood control structure and that the investment includes risk

reduction measures.

K. Program Income

Any program income earned as a result of activities funded under this grant will be subject to

alternate requirements of 24 CFR 570.489(e), which defines program income. Program income

generated under individual contracts with the subrecipients will be returned to the GLO. At the

GLO’s discretion, program income could be allowed to remain with a community to continue

recovery efforts.

L. Monitoring Standards

The GLO provides program-wide oversight and monitoring activities for all applicable CDBG and

related federal requirements in its administration of the CDBG-DR Program. The GLO will

provide technical assistance to recipients from the application stage through the completion of the

projects to ensure that funds are appropriately used for the CDBG-DR activities, as well as meeting

one of the three national objectives.

Page 47 of 61

The GLO will monitor all contract expenditures for quality assurance and to prevent, detect, and

eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse as mandated by Executive Order (EO) RP 36, signed July 12,

2004, by the Governor of Texas. The GLO will particularly emphasize mitigation of fraud, abuse,

and mismanagement related to accounting, procurement, and accountability which may also be

investigated by the State Auditor’s Office (SAO). In addition, the GLO and the grantees are subject

to Uniform Guidance Standards of 2 CFR 200, which encompasses the review of compliance with

program requirements and the proper expenditure of funds by an independent Certified Public

Accountant (CPA) or by the SAO. Reports from the SAO’s office will be sent to the Office of the

Governor, the Legislative Committee, and the GLO.

The GLO has an internal audit staff that performs independent internal audits of programs and can

perform such audits on these programs and grantees. The GLO will utilize a monitoring plan to

specifically ensure that the recovery allocation is carried out in accordance with state and federal

laws, rules, and regulations, as well as the requirements set forth in the Federal Register Notices.

The monitoring plan will also include duplication of benefits review to ensure compliance with

the Stafford Act.

M. Broadband Infrastructure

As required by the Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 224, Monday, November 21, 2016, any new

construction or substantial rehabilitation, as defined by 24 CFR 5.100, of a building with more

than four rental units will include installation of broadband infrastructure, as defined in 24 CFR

5.100, except where the grantee documents that: (i) the location of the new construction or

substantial rehabilitation makes installation of broadband infrastructure infeasible; (ii) the cost of

installing broadband infrastructure would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of its

program or activity or in an undue financial burden; or (iii) the structure of the housing to be

substantially rehabilitated makes installation of broadband infrastructure infeasible.

Page 48 of 61

IV. State Administered Disaster Recovery Program

A. Action Plan

As required by the Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 247, Wednesday, December 27, 2017, this Action

Plan must describe uses and activities for all funds that: (1) Are authorized under Title I of the

Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (HCDA) or allowed by a waiver or alternative

requirement; and (2) respond to disaster-related impact to infrastructure, housing, and economic

revitalization in the most impacted and distressed areas.

The needs assessment, Section II, of this action plan was conducted for the development and

prioritization of recovery activities. In addition, the GLO consulted with affected citizens,

stakeholders, local governments, and public housing authorities to assess needs.

This Action Pan will outline the eligible affected areas and subrecipients, the methodology used

to distribute funds to those subrecipients, activities for which funding may be used, and outline

program requirements, including non-duplication of benefits.

B. Program Budget

Funds will be used solely for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term recovery,

restoration of housing, infrastructure, and economic revitalization in the impacted and distressed

Texas counties as declared in DR-4332.

As required by the Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 247, Wednesday, December 27, 2017, the GLO

will allocate 80 percent of the allocation to address unmet needs within Harris County, the HUD-

identified ‘most impacted and distressed’ area.

The GLO will ensure, as is required and identified in the Federal Register, that at least 70 percent

of the aggregate of CDBG-DR program funds will be used to support activities that benefit low-

and moderate-income persons.

To determine the allocation amounts for Harris County and the other most impacted and distressed

areas, 1 percent of state project delivery costs and 5 percent of state administration costs were

subtracted from the 80 percent for Harris County and the remaining 20 percent.

Table 12: Allocation Budget

HUD’s Most Impacted and Distressed

Area (Harris County) $43,465,600.00

Other Most Impacted and Distressed

Areas $10,866,400.00

State Project Delivery (1%)

$578,000.00

State Administration (5%)

$2,890,000.00

Total Allocation

$57,800,000.00

Page 49 of 61

C. Use of Funds

HUD has identified Harris County as the “most impacted and distressed” areas impacted by

Hurricane Harvey and has required that at least 80 percent of the allocation must address unmet

needs within the County. The remaining 20 percent will address unmet needs within “most

impacted and distressed” areas determined by the GLO through the unmet needs assessment in

Section II of this Action Plan. Due to the limited amount of funds available with this first allocation

and the tremendous amount of unmet needs in the impacted areas, the GLO has identified Aransas,

Nueces, and Refugio Counties as the next “most impacted and distressed” counties. The State of

Texas is expected to receive additional CDBG-DR allocations for the long-term recovery from

Hurricane Harvey.

Based on the analysis of the unmet needs assessment in Section II of this Action Plan and after

consultation with Harris County officials, this first allocation of funds for Harris County will be

used for residential buyouts to prevent as many homes as possible from rebuilding in harm’s way.

According to the National Flood Insurance Program data, Harris County had the highest number

of properties, over 3,000, that were flooded during Hurricane Harvey and had been flooded at least

one prior time.

Aransas, Nueces, and Refugio Counties experienced widespread devastation from Hurricane

Harvey and the category 4 winds, storm surge, and flooding associated with the hurricane’s

landfall, as evidenced by the increased unemployment rates following Hurricane Harvey.

Hurricane Harvey destroyed hundreds of affordable rental units making the availability of

workforce housing all but nonexistent. Because of the unique economy and workforce needs in

the region, Aransas, Nueces and Refugio Counties have been identified as “most impacted and

distressed” for the purposes of this allocation. To begin resolving this issue the state will administer

an affordable rental set aside in these counties.

1. Harris County Residential Buyout Program

The Harris County Residential Buyout Program will be administered in Harris County.

Residential Buyout Program guidelines will be developed in accordance with CDBG-DR

requirements and regulations to set maximum assistance amounts, target area locations, and

additional eligibility requirements. At a minimum, the Residential Buyout program guidelines

will include the following criteria:

a. Allocation for Activity: $35,465,600 to benefit approximately 175 households.

b. Eligible Applicants: Homeowners whose primary residences sustained flooding

damage from Hurricane Harvey.

c. Eligibility Criteria:

i. Home must have been owner-occupied at the time of the storm

ii. Home must have served as primary residence

iii. Home must be owned by LMI household

iv. Home must be located in Harris County

d. National Objective: Low and moderate income

Page 50 of 61

Eligible Activities: Acquisition buyout of residential property, clearance and demolition,

and relocation payment and assistance.

The proposed program start date is 30 days after HUD’s approval of this Action Plan. The

proposed end date is two years from the start date of the program.

2. Harris County Partial Repair and Essential Power for Sheltering Program

The Harris County Partial Repair and Essential Power for Sheltering Program is currently

being administered by the GLO under FEMA Public Assistance (PA). The program provides

immediate, temporary repairs to homes that sustained less than $17,000 in FEMA Verified

Loss. As a PA program, FEMA will cover 90% of the expenses, and the GLO will use up to

$8,000,000 of this allocation to cover repairs conducted on homes within Harris County.

a. Allocation for Activity: $8,000,000

b. Eligible Applicants: GLO Project Worksheet

c. Eligible Activity: Urgent Need

3. Affordable Rental Recovery Program

a. Allocation for Activity: $10,866,400

b. Multifamily projects including multifamily repair and rehabilitation;

c. Eligible Activity: Rehabilitation and reconstruction of affordable multi-family

housing projects

d. Eligibility Criteria:

i. Development must meet CDBG-DR eligibility requirements.

ii. Development must be located in Aransas, Nueces, and Refugio Counties.

iii. A minimum of 51% of the units must be restricted for ten or more years to

low to moderate income (LMI) individuals earning 80% or less of the Area

Median Family Income (AMFI) at affordable rents. The rents must comply

with High HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) Rents and other existing

Land Use Restriction Agreement (LURA) restrictions, if applicable.

iv. Property Types: Multifamily Rental Development is eight or more rental

units under common ownership.

v. The Affordable Rental Program Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)

will clearly establish the application process and acceptance period,

threshold criteria (including applicable building codes), selection criteria,

and the award process.

vi. Project construction must be completed within 18 months of the effective

date of the contract, unless otherwise extended.

e. National Objective: Low and moderate income

The proposed program start date is 30 days after HUD’s approval of this Action Plan. The

proposed end date is three years from the start date of the program.

Page 51 of 61

D. Ineligible activities

Ineligible activities identified in the Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 224, Monday, November 21,

2016, are the use of CDBG‐DR for forced mortgage payoff, construction of dam/levee beyond

original footprint, incentive payments to households that move to disaster‐impacted floodplains,

assistance to privately owned utilities, not prioritizing assistance to businesses that meet the

definition of a small business, or assistance for second homes and activities identified in 24 CFR

570.207. All activities and uses authorized under Title I of the Housing and Community

Development Act of 1974, allowed by waiver, or published in the Federal Register, Vol. 81, No.

224, Monday, November 21, 2016, are eligible. The GLO will not limit any eligible activities

beyond what is specifically excluded by HUD to allow communities as much flexibility as

possible.

E. Administrative Funds

State administrative costs will not exceed five percent. Planning and administrative costs combined

will not exceed 20 percent. The provisions outlined under 42 U.S.C. 5306(d) and 24 CFR

§570.489(a)(1)(i) and (iii) will not apply to the extent that they cap state administration

expenditures and require a dollar-for-dollar match of state funds for administrative costs exceeding

$100,000. Pursuant to 24 CFR §58.34(a)(3), except for applicable requirements of 24 CFR §58.6,

administrative and management activities are exempt activities under this Action Plan. Once

contracted, the GLO will allow the drawdown of pre-agreement costs associated with eligible

disaster recovery activities dating back to the date of the disaster for subrecipients and the GLO

with appropriate documentation.

No disaster recovery assistance will be considered with respect to any part of a disaster loss that is

reimbursable by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Army Corps of

Engineers (USACE), insurance, or another source due in part to the restrictions against duplication

of benefits outlined in this Action Plan. An activity underway prior to the Presidential Disaster

Declaration will not qualify unless the disaster directly impacted said project.

F. Location

All CDBG-DR funded activities under this Action Plan will occur within the disaster-declared

counties of FEMA DR-4332. For the purpose of this Action Plan, counties that received FEMA

disaster declarations for emergency protective measures only (Category B) including direct federal

assistance, under the Public Assistance program are not included in the 49 CDBG-DR eligible

counties.

G. Mitigation Measures

The GLO will encourage subrecipients to incorporate preparedness and mitigation measures into

rebuilding activities. This helps to ensure that post-recovery communities are safer and stronger

than prior to the disaster. Incorporation of these measures also reduces costs in recovering from

future disasters. Mitigation measures that are not incorporated into those rebuilding activities must

Page 52 of 61

be a necessary expense related to disaster relief, long-term recovery, and restoration of

infrastructure, housing, or economic revitalization that responds to declared disaster FEMA DR-

4332.

H. Use of Urgent Need

Each subrecipient receiving Hurricane Harvey CDBG-DR funds will document how all activities

or projects funded under the urgent need national objective respond to a disaster-related impact

identified by the subrecipients. The CDBG certification requirements for documentation of urgent

need, located at 24 CFR 570.208(c) and 24 CFR 570.483(d), are waived for the grants under this

notice until 24 months after HUD first obligates funds to the grantee.

It is anticipated that the use of the urgent need national objective will be limited. At least 70 percent

of the aggregate of CDBG-DR program funds will be used to support activities that benefit low-

and moderate-income persons.

Page 53 of 61

V. Citizen Participation

The citizen participation plan for the Hurricane Harvey allocation as required by the Federal

a reasonable

opportunity of at least fourteen

(14) days

for citizen comment and ongoing citizen access

to information about the use of grant funds.

Before the GLO adopts the Action Plan for this grant or any substantial amendment to this

grant, the GLO will publish the proposed plan or amendment on

http://www.glo.texas.gov/recovery/reporting/action-plans/index.html, the GLO’s main

website and will cross-reference with additional agency websites: TexasRebuilds.org and

TexasRebuilds.com.

The GLO and/or subrecipients will notify affected citizens through electronic mailings, press

releases, statements by public officials, media advertisements, public service

announcements, newsletters, contacts with neighborhood organizations, and/or through

social media.

The GLO will ensure that all citizens have equal access to information about the programs,

including persons with disabilities (vision and hearing impaired) and limited English

proficiency (LEP). A Spanish version of the Action Plan will be available. The GLO

consulted the “

Final Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI,

Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient

Persons,” published on January 22, 2007, in the Federal Register (72 FR 2732), in order to

comply with citizen participation requirements.

Upon subsequent publication of the Action Plan or substantial amendments, the GLO will

provide a reasonable opportunity of at least fourteen (14) days and have a method for receiving

comments.

The GLO will take comments via USPS mail, fax, email, or through the GLO’s website:

Texas General Land Office

Community Development and Revitalization

P.O. Box 12873

Austin, TX 78711-2873

Fax: 512-475-5150

Email: [email protected]

Online Form:

http://www.glo.texas.gov/recovery/reporting/action-

plans/index.html

A. Public Website

The GLO will make the following items available on

www.glo.texas.gov/recovery

: (1) the

Action Plan (including all amendments); each Quarterly Performance Report (QPR) as created

using the Disaster Recovery Grant Reporting System (DRGR) system; (2) procurement,

Page 54 of 61

policies and procedures; (3) executed CDBG-DR contracts; and (4) status of services or goods

currently being procured by the GLO (e.g., phase of the procurement, requirements for

proposals, etc.).

B. Consultation

The GLO consulted and conducted outreach for the 49 impacted counties. The GLO

consultation and outreached included the following:

The GLO participated in all impacted counties roundtable meetings coordinated

through the Governor’s Commission to Rebuild Texas.

Roundtable meetings allowed all impacted cities and counties to identify needs

following Hurricane Harvey.

Elected Officials Meetings held included the following:

09/12/2017

Meeting in Harris County with state legislative delegation, Harris County officials,

and city of Houston officials.

09/18/2017

Meeting in Jefferson County with state and federal legislators, county officials, and

city officials.

09/18/2017

Meeting in Orange County with state and federal legislators, county officials, and

city officials.

09/28/2017

Meeting in Liberty County with state elected officials, county officials, and city

officials.

09/28/2017 Meeting in Sour Lake with local officials.

09/28/2017 Meeting in Hardin County with state legislators, county officials, and city officials.

10/04/2017 Meeting in Baytown with city staff.

10/10/2017

Meeting in Wharton County with local officials, Matagorda County, and Brazoria

County officials.

11/16/2017 Meeting in Victoria County with local officials.

11/21/2017 Meeting in Chambers County with city and county officials and staff.

11/21/2017 Meeting in Newton County with county and state officials.

11/28/2017 Meeting in Fort Bend County with federal, state, county, and city officials.

Page 55 of 61

The GLO provided additional outreach through updates provided as part of legislative

testimony for standing state legislative committees. The GLO held conference calls to

include members of the legislature, county judges and mayors providing updates on

Hurricane Harvey efforts.

Stakeholder/Partner Meetings – Outreach

• Local officials weekly conference calls

• State elected officials weekly conference calls

• Councils of Governments (COGs) bi-weekly call meetings

• Texas Association of Regional Councils (TARC) briefings

• Unified Federal Review (UFR) State Agencies meetings

• University of Texas meetings

• Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC)

• Coastal Bend Council of Governments (CBCOG)

• South East Texas Regional Planning Commission (SETRPC)

• Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG)

• Deep East Texas Councils of Governments (DETCOG)

• Golden Crescent Regional Planning Commission (GCRPC)

• Appleseed

• Texas Homeless Network

• Robinhood Foundation

• OneStar Foundation

• Texas Association of Builders

• American Planning Association of Texas

• Texas Apartment Association

• Clayton Homes

• Habitat for Humanity Texas

• Kasita

• Housing Strike Teams

• CHRISTUS Health

• American Red Cross

• Various state and federal agencies

Websites

September 20, 2017: Created www.TexasRebuilds.com website for information

related to Hurricane Harvey for individuals and local governments related to short

term and long-term housing.

Additional information is posted on TexasRebuilds.org and main GLO website.

Newsletters / Emails / Press Releases / Conference Calls

Prior to Hurricane Harvey’s landfall, GLO emailed a recovery checklist to all

Page 56 of 61

entities in the projected impact area.

Following landfall, the GLO has provided informative disaster recovery emails,

hosted conference calls and provided weekly newsletters to eligible cities,

counties, and councils of government located in the disaster-declared counties.

This included Texas state representatives, Texas state senators, and congressional

representatives.

C. Consideration of Public Comments

The GLO will consider all written comments regarding the Action Plan or any substantial

amendment. A summary of the comments and the GLO's response to each located in

Appendix C must be submitted to HUD with the Action Plan or substantial amendment.

D. Citizen Complaints

The GLO will provide a timely written response to every citizen complaint. The response will be

provided within fifteen (15) working days of the receipt of the complaint, if practicable.

E. Substantial Amendment

As additional information and funding becomes available through the grant administration process,

amendments to this Action Plan are expected. Prior to adopting any substantial amendment to this

Action Plan, the GLO will publish the proposed plan or amendment on the GLO’s official website

and will afford citizens, affected local governments, and other interested parties a reasonable

opportunity to examine the plan or amendment’s contents. At a minimum, the following

modifications will constitute a substantial amendment:

• A change in program benefit or eligibility criteria;

• The allocation or reallocation of more than $1 million; or

• The addition or deletion of an activity.

F. Non-substantial Amendment

The GLO will notify HUD when it makes any plan amendment that is not substantial. HUD will

be notified at least five business days before the amendment becomes effective. HUD will

acknowledge receipt of the notification of non-substantial amendments via email within five (5)

business days.

G. Waivers

The Appropriations Act authorizes the Secretary of HUD to waive or specify alternative

requirements for any provision of any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers in

connection with the obligation by the Secretary, or use by the recipient, of these funds and

guarantees, except for requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards,

Page 57 of 61

and the environment (including requirements concerning lead-based paint), upon: (1) A request by

the grantee explaining why such a waiver is required to facilitate the use of such funds or

guarantees; and (2) a finding by the Secretary that such a waiver would not be inconsistent with

the overall purpose of the Housing and Community Development (HCD) Act. Regulatory waiver

authority is also provided by 24 CFR 5.110, 91.600, and 570.5.

Page 58 of 61

VI. Appendix A – CDBG-DR Eligible Counties

Aransas

Grimes

Newton

Austin

Guadalupe

Nueces

Bastrop

Hardin

Orange

Bee

Harris

Polk

Brazoria

Jackson

Refugio

Burleson

Jasper

Sabine

Caldwell

Jefferson

San Augustine

Calhoun

Jim Wells

San Jacinto

Chambers

Karnes

San Patricio

Colorado

Kleberg

Tyler

Comal

Lavaca

Victoria

DeWitt

Lee

Walker

Fayette

Liberty

Waller

Fort Bend

Madison

Washington

Galveston

Matagorda

Wharton

Goliad

Milam

Gonzales

Montgomery

Page 59 of 61

VII. Appendix B – Certifications

24 CFR 91.325 is waived. Each State receiving a direct allocation under this notice must make the

following certifications with its Action Plan:

a. The grantee certifies that it has in effect and is following a residential anti‐displacement and

relocation assistance plan in connection with any activity assisted with funding under the CDBG

program.

b. The grantee certifies its compliance with restrictions on lobbying required by 24 CFR part 87,

together with disclosure forms, if required by part 87.

c. The grantee certifies that the action plan for Disaster Recovery is authorized under state and

local law (as applicable) and that the grantee, and any entity or entities designated by the grantee,

and any contractor, subrecipient, or designated public agency carrying out an activity with CDBG‐

DR funds, possess(es) the legal authority to carry out the program for which it is seeking to fund,

in accordance with applicable HUD regulations and this notice. The grantee certifies that activities

to be undertaken with funds under this notice are consistent with its action plan.

d. The grantee certifies that it will comply with the acquisition and relocation requirements of the

URA, as amended, and implementing regulations at 49 CFR part 24, except where waivers or

alternative requirements are provided for in this notice.

e. The grantee certifies that it will comply with section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development

Act of 1968 (12 U.S.C. 1701u), and implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 135.

f. The grantee certifies that it is following a detailed citizen participation plan that satisfies the

requirements of 24 CFR 91.105 or 91.115, as applicable (except as provided for in notices

providing waivers and alternative requirements for this grant). Also, each UGLG receiving

assistance from a state grantee must follow a detailed citizen participation plan that satisfies the

requirements of 24 CFR 570.486 (except as provided for in notices providing waivers and

alternative requirements for this grant).

g. Each state receiving a direct award under this notice certifies that it has consulted with affected

UGLGs in counties designated in covered major disaster declarations in the non‐entitlement,

entitlement, and tribal areas of the state in determining the uses of funds, including the method of

distribution of funding, or activities carried out directly by the state.

h. The grantee certifies that it is complying with each of the following criteria:

1. Funds will be used solely for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long‐ term

recovery, restoration of infrastructure and housing and economic revitalization in the most

impacted and distressed areas for which the President declared a major disaster in 2017

pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1974

(42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) but prior to September 29, 2016.

Page 60 of 61

2. With respect to activities expected to be assisted with CDBG‐DR funds, the Action Plan

has been developed so as to give the maximum feasible priority to activities that will benefit

low‐ and moderate‐income families.

3. The aggregate use of CDBG‐DR funds shall principally benefit low‐ and moderate‐

income families in a manner that ensures that at least 70 percent (or another percentage

permitted by HUD in a waiver published in an applicable Federal Register notice) of the

grant amount is expended for activities that benefit such persons.

4. The grantee will not attempt to recover any capital costs of public improvements assisted

with CDBG‐DR grant funds, by assessing any amount against properties owned and

occupied by persons of low‐ and moderate‐income, including any fee charged or

assessment made as a condition of obtaining access to such public improvements, unless:

(a) Disaster recovery grant funds are used to pay the proportion of such fee or

assessment that relates to the capital costs of such public improvements that are

financed from revenue sources other than under this title; or

(b) For purposes of assessing any amount against properties owned and occupied

by persons of moderate income, the grantee certifies to the Secretary that it lacks

sufficient CDBG funds (in any form) to comply with the requirements of clause (a).

i. The grantee certifies that the grant will be conducted and administered in conformity with Title

VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d) and the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601–

3619) and implementing regulations, and that it will affirmatively further fair housing.

j. The grantee certifies that it has adopted and is enforcing the following policies, and, in addition,

states receiving a direct award must certify that they will require UGLGs that receive grant funds

to certify that they have adopted and are enforcing:

1. A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its

jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in non‐violent civil rights demonstrations; and

2. A policy of enforcing applicable state and local laws against physically barring entrance

to or exit from a facility or location that is the subject of such nonviolent civil rights

demonstrations within its jurisdiction.

k. The grantee certifies that it has adopted and is enforcing the following policies, and, in addition,

states receiving a direct award must certify that they will require UGLGs that receive grant funds

to certify that they have adopted and are enforcing:

1. A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its

jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in nonviolent civil rights demonstrations; and

2. A policy of enforcing applicable state and local laws against physically barring entrance

to or exit from a facility or location that is the subject of such nonviolent civil rights

demonstrations within its jurisdiction.

Page 61 of 61

l. The grantee certifies that it (and any subrecipient or administering entity) currently has or will

develop and maintain the capacity to carry out disaster recovery activities in a timely manner and

that the grantee has reviewed the requirements of this notice and requirements of the

Appropriations Act applicable to funds allocated by this notice, and certifies to the accuracy of its

certification documentation referenced at A.1.a. under section VI and its risk analysis document

referenced at A.1.b. under section VI.

m. The grantee certifies that it will not use CDBG‐DR funds for any activity in an area identified

as flood prone for land use or hazard mitigation planning purposes by the state, local, or tribal

government or delineated as a Special Flood Hazard Area in FEMA’s most current flood advisory

maps, unless it also ensures that the action is designed or modified to minimize harm to or within

the floodplain, in accordance with Executive Order 11988 and 24 CFR part 55. The relevant data

source for this provision is the state, local, and tribal government land use regulations and hazard

mitigation plans and the latest issued FEMA data or guidance, which includes advisory data (such

as Advisory Base Flood Elevations) or preliminary and final Flood Insurance Rate Maps.

n. The grantee certifies that its activities concerning lead‐based paint will comply with the

requirements of 24 CFR part 35, subparts A, B, J, K, and R.

o. The grantee certifies that it will comply with environmental requirements at 24 CFR part 58.

p. The grantee certifies that it will comply with applicable laws.