HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-13-2025 Special Agenda (2) Human Services Committee
Special Meeting
CITY of * October 13, 2025 - 4:00 PM
A1JJ1JJJJ 1 East Main Street
Annex Conference Rm 2
WASHINGTON 2nd Floor
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
A. The Special Human Services Committee Meeting scheduled for Monday, October 13th, 2025 at 4:00
p.m. will be held in person and virtually.
Virtual Participation Link:
Microsoft Teams Meeting
Meet Now
Meeting ID: 264 344 392 636 7
Passcode: pd9Me262
Dial in by phone
+1 509-530-1507..503086037# United States, Spokane
Find a local number
Phone conference ID: 503 086 037#
ROLL CALL
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
This is the place on the agenda where the public is invited to speak to the Board on any issue.
A. The public can participate in-person or submit written comments in advance.
Participants can submit written comments via mail, fax, or email. All written comments must be received
prior to 5:00 p.m. on the day before the scheduled meeting and must be 350 words or less.
Please communicate in any of the methods below:
Written comments:
City of Auburn
Attn: Jody Davison, CDBG Coordinator
25 W Main St
Auburn, WA 98001
Fax: 253.288.3132
Email:jdavison@auburnwa.gov
If an individual requires accommodation to allow for remote oral comment because of difficulty attending
a meeting of the governing body, the City requests notice of the need for accommodation by 5:00 p.m.
on the day before the scheduled meeting. Participants can request accommodation to be able to provide
a remote oral comment by contacting Human Services Department in person, by phone 253-876-1965,
or by email (jdavison@auburnwa.gov).
ACTION ITEMS
A. Discussion of the 2024 needs assessment/funding priorities and approval of the priorities
Page 1 of 41
for the 2026-2027 funding cycle.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Review the one-pager for the 2027-2028 funding cycle with Auburn Specific requirements.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Review and Approval of the September 22nd, 2025 Meeting Minutes
SCHEDULE FOR UPCOMING MEETINGS
A. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Human Services Committee is October 27th
2025 at 4:00 pm, located at One East Main, Annex conference room 2 (2nd Floor), Auburn,
Wa 98001
ADJOURNMENT
Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office and on the City website
(http://www.auburnwa.gov).
Page 2 of 41
CITY OF
J\I.JBU1R.ts4 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
WASHINGGTTON
Agenda Subject: Meeting Date:
Discussion of the 2024 needs assessment/funding priorities and approval of October 13, 2025
the priorities for the 2026-2027 funding cycle.
Department: Attachments: Budget Impact:
Human Services 2024 Needs Assessment
Administrative Recommendation:
Background for Motion:
Background Summary:
Councilmember: Staff:
Page 3 of 41
2024
CITY OF AUBURN
Needs Assessement
Contents
Needs Assessment 3
NA-05 Overview 3
NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs -91.415, 91.215 (f) 5
Housing Needs Assessment Attachment 1 8
Housing Needs Assessment 8
Housing Needs Summary Tables 13
Disproportionally Greater Needs 19
Public Housing 22
Homeless Needs Assessment 25
Page 12
Page 8 of 37
Needs Assessment
NA-05 Overview
The City of Auburn is an entitlement community within the King County Consortium. As part of the King
County Consortium,Auburn participates in an inter-jurisdictional partnership with nearly all the cities
and unincorporated areas of King County, excluding Seattle and Milton.The Consortium coordinates
investment for HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grants, and
CDBG)funds. However,Auburn, as an entitlement community, receives a separate allocation of CDBG
funds from the King County Consortium. Auburn utilizes the Consolidated Plan to explore trends specific
to the city and its CDBG allocation.
The Needs Assessment of the Consolidated Plan summarizes key housing and community development
trends impacting the City of Auburn.Through analysis of federal, state, and local datasets, as well as a
review of existing planning documents and reports, Auburn identified several major housing and human
service needs of low-and moderate-income people in the city.The needs identified in this section help
to inform the Strategic Plan, which outlines how the City of Auburn will use its CDBG funds over the next
five years.As a member of the King County Consortium, King County's 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan
outlines how the Consortium will use its HOME and Emergency Solutions Grants funds over this period.
The Consolidated Plan utilizes two primary data sources: the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community
Survey(ACS) and the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy(CHAS),which contains custom
tabulations of ACS data. Auburn analyzed the 2016-2020 five-year CHAS estimates, 2018-2022 ACS five-
year estimates, and information from other available sources such as local reports, plans, studies,
dashboards, and datasets to better understand recent trends impacting the city.
Key Themes from the Needs Assessment
Forty-seven percent of Auburn households are considered low-to moderate-income. As seen in Auburn
and throughout many cities in the United States, low-to moderate-income households have distinct
housing and non-housing community development needs. Listed below are some key findings related to
housing needs.
• Housing cost burden, defined as a household paying more than 33 percent of their income on
housing, and severe housing cost burden, defined as a household paying more than 50 percent
of their income on housing, constitute the greatest share of housing problems,with extremely
low-income households experiencing the greatest share of severe housing cost burden as
opposed to low-and moderate-income households.
• Fifty-two percent of renter households experienced at least one housing problem.
• Small families experience the greatest share of severe housing cost burden among renter
households.
• Elderly households experience the greatest share of severe housing cost burden among owner
households.
• Although the sample size is small, Pacific Islander households were disproportionately impacted
by housing cost burden and other housing problems.
• Most public housing residents and voucher recipients are considered extremely low-income.
• Adults with children comprise the greatest share of households experiencing homelessness.
Page 13
Page 6 of al
• The average time spent experiencing homelessness varies greatly depending on the family type,
but the length of homelessness in Auburn tends to be longer than that in the King County
Consortium, extending over two years for some categories.
Public Survey Process
In addition to analyzing ACS and CHAS data, the City of Auburn conducted a public survey regarding
community needs and CDBG funding priorities from July 24 to August 23, 2024. One question asked
respondents to identify Auburn's spending priorities for the CDBG Grant Funds,which included the
following suggestions for the city:
• Prioritize families with fixed incomes in funding activities.
• Support affordable housing, particularly for low-income seniors.
• Increase funding for the Clean and Sober Housing Program for those completing substance
abuse treatment.
• Help disabled senior homeowners facing increased costs to age in place.
• Assist with move-in costs and application fees for those experiencing housing instability.
• Support programs to assist with home improvement costs and permitting fees.
Needs Assessment Attachment 1 provides a greater analysis of the trends described above.
Page 14
Pliiggel 0 of al
NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs - 91.415, 91.215 ()
The City of Auburn identified the jurisdiction's non-housing community development needs by analyzing
information gathered through several methods, including:
• Public engagement efforts conducted for the Consolidated Plan from July 25 to August 23, 2024.
These efforts included stakeholder engagement and a public survey, which received 120
responses.
• Needs identified through the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan update process,which
includes a community poll, an open house, and data analysis.
• An analysis of 211 calls originating from the Auburn School District.
The needs of Auburn residents identified through the above sources are summarized below.
Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Facilities. How were these needs
determined?
Consolidated Plan Survey
The survey asked participants to rank the CDBG spending categories (housing, other real property
activities, public facilities and improvement activities, economic development activities, and other
activities)from 1-5, with 1 being the most important. Participants ranked public facilities and
improvements as a 3.04, indicating a medium priority level. Participants to provide open-ended
comments regarding what they believe would be beneficial to the City in determining its spending
priorities for CDBG grant funds. Participants commonly reported a desire for more community centers
and recreational facilities for teenagers and young adults.
Comprehensive Plan Update
The capital element of the Comprehensive Plan Update includes a list of facilities in which the level of
service is expected to decrease because of changes made under the capital facilities plan.A decreasing
level of service might lead to gaps in coverage or a need for greater services.These facilitates are:
• General municipal buildings.
• Open space.
• A senior center.
• Special use areas.
Additionally,the city held a kickoff open house for the Comprehensive Plan to collect public comments.
The comments revealed a desire to have greater recreational facilities such as sports fields, outdoor
recreation areas, and entertainment venues.
Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Improvements. How were these needs
determined?
Consolidated Plan Survey
As stated above, survey participants ranked public facilities and improvement activities at an importance
level of 3.04 (with 1 being the greatest priority). Participants spoke about the following community
needs in the open-ended comment section of the survey:
Page 15
Pliiggel8 of al
• Greater investment in public safety measures and assistance.
• Development of safe paths for both walking and cycling.
• Street beautification, including litter control and neighborhood cleanup.
• Park improvements and acquisition of more park areas. Pickleball lines on tennis courts and
outdoor basketball areas were specifically noted as desired park improvements.
Comprehensive Plan Update
The transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan update describes needs identified in the
community relating to transportation improvements.These include:
• Creating new transit routes to connect Auburn's West Hill region, which is not directly served by
any transit services,to the Federal Way Transit Center or Auburn Station.
• Providing frequent and efficient transportation transit systems between Federal Way Transit
Center and Auburn Station.
• Increasing access to transit, such as a commuter-oriented shuttle,to connect the Lee Hill region
to greater transportation options.
• Providing greater service and routes in the Lakeland Hills region.
• Creating and maintaining infrastructure for biking and pedestrians, including bike lanes.
In addition, a poll conducted by the City of Auburn regarding the 2024 Comprehensive Plan asked
participants to identify their top five priorities for Auburn in the next 20 years.The following results
indicate that public improvement is a priority based on the percentage of respondents who selected it
as a priority:
• Preserving open space and environmental stewardship (54.4 percent).
• Maintaining a safe community(45.5 percent).
• Increasing bicycle and pedestrian amenities (36.4 percent).
• Increasing access to parks and amenities (18.2 percent).
211 Data
From September 11, 2023 to September 9, 2024,4.5 percent of calls received from the Auburn School
District 211 call center requested transportation assistance. Of those, 55.8 percent of callers (234 calls)
requested assistance with ride services and local transportation such as metro buses, senior rides, and
paratransit. Of note, 41.5 percent of callers were over the age of 60.This underscores the need for
increased transportation options, particularly for seniors.
Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Services. How were these needs
determined?
Consolidated Plan Survey
Several needs regarding public service needs arose from the open-ended survey comments, including:
• Support for early childhood education programs.
• Affordable childcare for young families.
• Business and technical assistance to improve childcare services.
Page 16
Pliiggel 9 of a1
Comprehensive Plan Update
In the poll conducted by the city of Auburn, 18.2 percent of residents indicated that maintaining a high
level of public services and utilities should be a priority for Auburn over the next 20 years.
211 Data
The City of Auburn analyzed publicly available 211 data from callers in the Auburn School District.The
211 data provides insight into the nature of services needed in the community. From September 11,
2023 to September 9, 2024, 9,407 calls were made to 211 from the Auburn School District.The data
does not indicate the number of unique calls made.The data from the calls indicated:
• 34.5 percent were regarding housing and shelter service needs.
• The second most requested service category was utilities (13.9 percent).
• 61.7 percent of calls requesting utility assistance were about electric bills.
• 12.2 percent of callers requested government and legal support; 44.9 percent of those calls
were requesting housing law assistance.
• 10.4 percent of calls were regarding food assistance; 65.4 percent of those calls requested help
buying food.
Page 17
Page 10 of 41
Housing Needs Assessment Attachment 1
Housing Needs Assessment
Introduction
The Housing Needs Assessment provides an overview of demographic information regarding Auburn's
low-to moderate-income population,which serves as a base for further analysis into the needs and
characteristics of these households. Another way to evaluate housing needs is to consider the different
types of housing generally affordable to different household incomes. In 2023, a family of four is
considered low-income if they earn less than $110,950 per year.Assuming they spend 30 percent on
rent,the maximum rent they could spend is approximately$2,770.
Table 1 provides the FY 2024 income limits for the Seattle-Bellevue, WA HUD Metro fair market rent
(FMR) area.These figures are calculated annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development(HUD) and provide context as to what constitutes extremely low, low, and moderate
incomes in the region.The household area median family income (HAMFI) is comparable to the area
median income (AMI)for the below analysis.
While CHAS estimates utilize the Seattle-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Area in determining income
categories in Auburn,the income limits for Auburn align more closely with Pierce County due to it lying
on the outskirts of the Seattle-Bellevue area.Table 2 provides the FY 2024 income limits for the Tacoma,
WA HUD Metro FMR area,which is located in Pierce County.
Table 1:FY 2024 Income Limits(Seattle Bellevue, WA HUD Metro FMR Area)
Income 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Category
Extremely
low-
income $31,650 $36,200 $40,700 $45,200 $48,850 $52,450 $56,050 $59,700
(30%
HAMFI)
Very low-
income $52,700 $60,250 $67,800 $75,350 $81,400 $87,450 $93,400 $99,450
(50%
HAMFI)
Low-
income $77,700 $88,800 $99,900 $110,950 $119,850 $128,750 $137,600 $146,500
(80%
HAMFI)
Data Source:2024 Income Limits Documentation System.
Page 18
Page 14 of 41
Table 2:FY 2O24 Income Limits(Tacoma, WA HUD Metro FMR Area)
Income 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Category
Very low-
income(50% $40,550 $46,350 $52,150 $57,900 $62,550 $67,200 $71,800 $76,450
HAMFI)
Extremely
low-income $24,350 $27,800 $31,300 $34,750 $37,550 $41,960 $47,340 $52,720
(30%HAMFI)
Low-income $64,900 $74,150 $83,400 $92,650 $100,100 $107,500 $114,900 $122,300
(80%HAMFI)
Data Source:2024 Income Limits Documentation System.
An analysis of the most recent CHAS data found that 13,730 households earned less than 80 percent
HAMFI in 2020, meaning that 47 percent of the total households qualified as low-to moderate-income.
The Housing Needs Assessment uses ACS and CHAS data as a base to understand the characteristics and
needs of those low-to moderate-income households in Auburn.
Population Growth
As of April 2024, 88,950 people resided in the City of Auburn, making it the 14th largest city in
Washington State (Washington State Office of Financial Management). In the past five years, Auburn has
experienced significant growth. One factor influencing growth was the opening of two large apartment
complexes in the city, which attracted new residents.
Figure 1 depicts the annual population and growth rate in Auburn from 2012 to 2022. In that span,the
city's population grew 21.8 percent. In 2021,the city experienced the highest growth rate of 5.4
percent,which is more than double the next highest growth rate (2.4 percent in 2017). In 2022,the rate
slowed significantly to a near-stagnant growth.
Page 19
Page 12 of 37
Figure 1 Annual Population in Auburn (2012-2022)
Population —%Annual Change
90,000 85,623 6.0%
M
80,000 5.4%
70,297 5.0%
70,000 •
o 60,000 4.0% a
ea
ca
n 50,000 U
3.0% 73
a
To 40,000 2.2%
2 4%
Q 30,000 2.2% 2.2% 2.0%
1.5%
20,000 1.4% 1.3%
1.0% 1.0%
10,000 —
0.4%
0 0.0% 0.0%
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Data Source:ACS 5-year estimates for years 2012-2022.
Increases in population create a greater need for housing and increase housing costs. As depicted in
Table 3,the number of households in Auburn increased 15 percent in the last 10 years. As housing
becomes less available and more expensive due to the spiking interest rates and stalling development,
as described throughout the Needs Assessment and Market Analysis, low-to moderate-income
households feel the effects of decreased affordable housing stock and increased instances of housing
cost burden.
Table 3:Housing Needs Assessment Demographics
Demographics Base Year:2012 Most Recent Year:2022 %Change
Population 70,297 85,623 22%
Households 26,968 30,987 15%
Median income $54,329 $87,406 61%
Data Source:ACS 2008-2012(Base Year),ACS 2018-2022(Most Recent Year).
While median incomes per person have increased 61 percent in the last decade, many Auburn residents
earn less than the AMI. Figure 2 depicts the number of Auburn households by income category in 2020.
Forty-seven percent of Auburn households fell into the low-to moderate-income category, earning less
than 80 percent HAMFI. Among the low-to moderate-income categories,the extremely low-income (0-
30 percent HAMFI), low-income (31-50 percent HAMFI), and moderate-income (51-80 percent AMI)
were approximately equal, at 15 percent, 16 percent, and 15 percent respectively. 4,670 households
were considered extremely low-income, and 4,395 households were considered low-income. Fifty-three
Page 110
Page 16 of a1
percent of Auburn households were not considered low-to moderate-income, with 60 percent of
households earning more than 100 percent HAMFI annually.
Figure 2:Number of Households by AM!Category
0-30% HAMFI
40% • 31-50% HAMFI
51-80% HAMFI
• 81-100% HAMFI
Over 100% HAMFI
16%
Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS.
Types of Households by Income Level
Table 4 analyses the type of households in the City of Auburn by income category in 2020. As depicted in
the table, small households represented the greatest share of total households in Auburn. Forty-four
percent of all households in Auburn were considered small-family households. Small-family households
were the most represented in each income category as well.The data also indicates that in 2020,there
were 4,239 low-to moderate-income households in Auburn with at least one household member over
the age of 65.
Table 4:Households by Income Category
Household Type 0-30%HAMFI 31-50% 51-80% 81-100% Over 100%
HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI
Total Households 4,670 4,395 4,665 3,780 11,710
Small-family
households—four or 1,435 1,525 2,145 1,745 6,255
fewer people in the
household
Large-family
households—four or more 505 420 730 405 1,385
people in the household
Page 111
Page 14 of 41
Household Type 0-30%HAMFI 31-50% 51-80% 81-100% Over 100%
HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI
Household contains at
least one person aged 62 835 875 760 730 2,530
to 74 years of age
Household contains at
least one person aged 75 735 579 455 205 500
or older
Household contains one
or more children aged 6 895 855 1,155 760 2,020
years or younger
Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS.
Figure 3 provides further insight into the income levels of renter and owner households in Auburn.
Notably, 66 percent of owners and 54 percent of renters earned over$100,000 annually.The $50,000—
$74,999 income bracket was most represented in Auburn, accounting for 27 percent of total
households. However, renters were more represented in the lower-income categories, particularly in
the $35,000—$74,999 income brackets.
Figure 3:Percentage of Owners and Renters by Income
Owner Households •Renter Households Total Households
70% 66%
60% 54%
50%
40%
30% 27%
23%
1k
20% 15% 15%
0
0 8/ 9% 6/ 8/ 10% 12 0 9%
10% 5% F 4% 2/ 3%
0% 1. 1/�
Less than $10,000 to $20,000 to $35,000 to $50,000 to $75,000 to $100,000 plus
$10,000 $19,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999
Data Source:ACS Data 2018-2022.
Page 112
Page 18 of 37
Housing Needs Summary Tables
The following tables explore the number of households in Auburn experiencing specific types of housing
problems that are captured in CHAS data,which include the following.
Housing Problems
• Substandard housing: Units lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities.
• Overcrowded: Households in which there is more than one person per room (and none of the
above problems).
• Housing cost burden: Households that spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing
costs.
Severe Housing Problems
• Substandard housing: Units lacking any plumbing or kitchen facility.
• Severe overcrowding: Households in which there are more than 1.51 people per room (and
none of the above problems).
• Severe housing cost burden: Households that spend more than 50 percent of their income on
housing costs.
Table 5 outlines the number of households that experienced a housing problem by tenure in Auburn in
2020. Of the housing problems identified in the table,the most common issues for renter and owner
households were housing cost burden and severe housing cost burden. For renter households, 2,165
were housing cost burdened and 2,475 were severely housing cost burdened.Those figures for owner
households were 2,950 and 1,060, respectively. The most significant issue facing these groups is housing
affordability across each income level.Aside from housing cost burdens, owner households do not have
high instances of substandard housing issues or overcrowding, meaning owners could have better living
conditions.
Page 113
Page 16 of 37
Table 5:Housing Problems by Income Level and Tenure
Renters Owners
Income Level 0-30% 31-50% 51-80% 81-100% Over 100% 0-30% 31-50% 51-80% 81-100% Over 100%
HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI
Substandard housing 180 45 15 0 85 4 35 10 0 160
Severely overcrowded 100 160 55 10 75 0 0 4 0 45
Overcrowded 195 280 95 50 125 20 45 135 10 70
Housing cost burden greater than
50%of income(and none of the 2,055 345 30 0 40 555 315 120 40 30
above problems)
Housing cost burden greater than
30%of income(and none of the 385 1,160 475 100 40 I 390 645 1,010 575 330
above problems)
Housing cost burden not computed 110 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0
(and none of the above problems)
Has none of the above housing 425 345 1,375 1,410 235 1,020 1,330 1,585 8,675 12,845
problems
Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS.
CITY OF *AUBURN
Page 14 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 20 of al
As represented in Figure 4 and Figure 5, for both renter and owner households, extremely low-income
households experienced the greatest share of severe housing cost burden,while low-and moderate-
income households experienced the greatest share of housing cost burden. In particular, moderate-
income owners experienced a significant amount of housing cost burden. Between renters and owners,
renters were more likely to experience housing problems: 52 percent of renter households experienced
at least one housing problem as opposed to 26 percent of owner households.
Figure 4: Housing Problems by Income Category for Renter Households
2,500
2,055
2,000
Substandard Housing
1,500
•Severely Overcrowded
1,160
Overcrowded
1,000 •Housing Cost Burden
Severe Housing Cost Burden
500 385 475
195 280 3 I
1 100 45 160 95 15 55 30
0 . —m1111-
0-30% HAMFI 31-50%HAMFI 51-80%HAMFI
Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS.
Figure 5:Housing Problems by Income Category for Owner Households
1,200
1,010
1,000
Substandard Housing
800 •Severely Overcrowded
645
600 555 Overcrowded
1390 •Housing Cost Burden
400 315
Severe Housing Cost Burden
200 135120
4 020 3i0 � 104 ,,
0 —
0-30% HAMFI 31-50%HAMFI 51-80%HAMFI
Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS.
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 15 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 28 of al
Housing Cost Burden
Figure 6 depicts the percentage of households who experienced either form of cost burden by tenure.
Notably, owners with a mortgage and renters experienced cost burden at similar rates-22 percent and
25 percent, respectively. However, renters experienced a severe cost burden more than three times as
much as owners with a mortgage (26 percent and 7 percent respectively).
Figure 6: Cost Burden by Tenure
Owners with a mortgage •Owners without a mortgage • Renters
30%
25% 26%
25% 22%
20
II-
15%
10%
10%
im 5%
5%
0%
Cost Burdened Severely Cost Burdened
(30-50%) (50%or more)
Data Source:2018-2022 ACS.
To further explore the demographics of severe cost burden in Auburn, Figure 7 and Figure 8 depict
which types of families experienced the greatest share of severe cost burden in 2020. For renters, small
families made up the largest share of severely cost burdened households at 43 percent overall and in
most individual income categories. One notable exception is the moderate-income category, in which
elderly households represented the overwhelming majority(71 percent).This represents a large
variation from the overall representation of elderly households at 21 percent.
For owner households (Figure 8), elderly households represented the greatest share of severe housing
cost burden across income categories, aside from the moderate-income category. Small families
followed closely behind at 31 percent. Elderly households represented the greatest share of severe
housing cost burden across all income levels except for the low-income category. Finally, small-family
owner households comprised the majority of the moderate-income category.
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 16 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 29 of al
Figure 7:Severe Housing Cost Burden for Renters by Income Category and Family
Type
P Small Family ■Large Family Elderly Households ■Other Households
0-30% HAMFI 31% 9% 28% 31%
31-50%HAMFI 65% 3% 13% 20%
51-80%HAMFI
Total Under 80%AMI
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS.
Figure 8:Severe Housing Cost Burden for Owners by Income Category and Family
Type
Small Family ■ Large Family Elderly Households ■Other Households
0-30% HAMFI 29% 14% 14%
31-50%HAMFI MEEMISI 31%
51-80%HAMFI 34% 0% '0 34%
Total Under 80%AMI 30% 10% 22%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS.
Crowding
Although not as pervasive as housing cost burden, the data indicates that crowding was the most
common housing problem not related to housing cost burden in 2020.Table 6 categorizes all instances
of crowding in Auburn by income category and household type. 1,157 households in Auburn below 100
percent HAMFI experienced crowding. Across all income categories, single families comprised the
greatest share of crowding instances,with 919 single-family households experiencing crowding out of
1,157 (79 percent of total crowding instances). In terms of need by income category, both extremely
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 17 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 20 of al
low-and low-income categories comprised the greatest share of crowding instances at 314 and 480,
respectively.
Table 6:Instances of Crowding by Income Category and Family Type
0-30% 31-50% 51-80% 81-100% Total Under 100%
HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI
Single-family 280 410 174 55 919
household
Multiple,
unrelated 34 45 120 0 199
families
Non-family 0 25 0 14 39
household
Total need by
314 480 294 69 1157
income
Data Source:2018-2020 CHAS.
Lead-Based Paint Risk
Table 7 provides information on housing conditions in Auburn. In particular, the table presents data on
the age of housing structures with children younger than age six present. In 1978,the federal
government banned the use of lead-based paint in homes. Structures built prior to 1978 are at an
increased risk of having lead-based paint, which poses a health risk to occupants. Due to data
limitations,Table 7 provides information on structures built earlier than 1980. Most households (64
percent) lived in a structure built in 1980 or later,while 30 percent of households lived in a structure
built between 1940 and 1979. Of the 1,060 households with children aged six and under living in a
structure built prior to 1980, 67 percent were renters and 33 percent were owners. For renters,the
extremely low-and low-income households were more likely to live in a structure built prior to 1980 at
48 percent and 43 percent, respectively. For owners, low- and moderate-income households
experienced the greatest share of older housing stock at 44 percent and 42 percent, respectively.
Table 7:Age of Housing Structure by Income Level for Households with Small
Children
Household Type
HAMFI 31-50% 51-80% Total Under
ji
HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI 80%HAMFI
Structure built 1980 or later 565 480 800 1,845
Structure built 1940 to 1979 330 305 250 885
Structure built 1939 or earlier 0 70 105 175
Total households with children age 6 895 855 1,155 2,905
or younger present
Data Source:2018-2020 CHAS.
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 18 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 24 of al
Disproportionally Greater Needs
Introduction
HUD defines a disproportionately greater housing need when a racial or ethnic group experiences
housing problems at a rate over 10 percentage points higher than that of the corresponding income
level as a whole.The tables below summarize the percentage of each racial or ethnic group experiencing
housing problems by HAMFI levels. For this analysis, HAMFI is comparable to AMI.
Housing Problems
• Substandard housing: Units lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities.
• Overcrowded: Households in which there is more than one person per room (and none of the
above problems).
• Housing cost burden: Households that spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing
costs.
Severe Housing Problems
• Substandard housing: Units lack any plumbing or kitchen facility
• Severe overcrowding: Households in which there are more than 1.5 people per room (and none
of the above problems).
• Severe housing cost burden: Households that spend more than 50 percent of their income on
housing costs.
Table 8 lists the racial and ethnic groups that experience a disproportionately greater share of housing
problems and their corresponding income category.The data analysis discovered six unique instances of
disproportionately greater need regarding housing problems. Across income categories, Pacific Islander
households experienced the most instances of disproportionate impact. Pacific Islander households
were disproportionately impacted in two out of three income categories,while Pacific Islanders in the
0-30 percent and 31-50 percent income categories experienced disproportionate impact at the highest
rate compared to the income category(17 percent and 28 percent higher than average, respectively).
Note that the sample size in both categories was small (fewer than 100 households).
Table 8: Disproportionally Greater Need:Housing Problems
Race/Ethnicity Income Category Percent Difference from Total
Pacific Islander alone,non-Hispanic 0-30%AMI 17
Hispanic,any race 0-30%AMI 11
Asian alone,Non-Hispanic 31-50% 11
American Indian or Alaska Native
alone,non-Hispanic 31-50% 20
Pacific Islander alone,non-Hispanic 31-50% 28
AUBURN Page 19 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 22 of 47
Race/Ethnicity Income Category Percent Difference from Total
Black or African American alone,
non-Hispanic 51-80% 24
Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS.
Table 9 depicts the racial and ethnic groups that experienced severe housing problems disproportionally
to their respective income categories.The data analysis identified eight instances of disproportionate
impact. Pacific Islander households experienced two instances of disproportionate impact (in the 0-30
percent AMI and 31-50 percent AMI income categories). Notably, Pacific Islander households in the 31-
50 percent AMI income category experienced severe housing problems 66 percent more than average,
respectively.Again, it is important to note that in both categories the sample sizes were less than 100
people.
Table 9:Disproportionally Greater Needs:Severe Housing Problems
Race/Ethnicity Income Category Percent Difference from Total
Black or African American alone,non-
Hispanic 0-30%AMI 11
Pacific Islander alone,non-Hispanic 0-30%AMI 33
Hispanic,any race 0-30%AMI 12
Asian alone,non-Hispanic 31-50%AMI 10
American Indian or Alaska Native alone, 31-50%AMI 26
non-Hispanic
Pacific Islander alone,non-Hispanic 31-50%AMI 66
Black or African American alone,non 51-80%AMI 11
Hispanic
American Indian or Alaska Native alone, 51-80%AMI 18
non-Hispanic
Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS.
Table 10 displays the percentage of each racial and ethnic group who experienced no housing cost
burden (share less than 30 percent), housing cost burden (share 30-50 percent), and severe housing
cost burden (share greater than 50 percent).The first row shows the percentages for total households,
which represents the baseline for determining disproportionate need.The data analysis finds no
instance of disproportionally greater need regarding no housing cost burden. However, Black or African
American and American Indian or Alaska Native households have a housing cost burden at 11 percent
and 15 percent, respectively. Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and Asian households were the most
overrepresented for severe housing cost burdens.There is no specific ethnic group that is
disproportionately affected by a severe housing burden.
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 20 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 26 of al
Table 10:Disproportionate Share of Housing Cost Burden
Shar ing Cost Burden
Race/Ethnicity
Share Less Than 30% 0-50% Share Greater Than 50%
Total Households 68% 19% 13%
White alone,non-Hispanic 69% 18% 12%
Black or African American
alone,non-Hispanic 63% 20% 16%
Asian alone,non-Hispanic 74% 15% 10%
American Indian or Alaska
Native alone,non-Hispanic 58% 34% 10%
Pacific Islander alone,non- 75% 13% 12%
Hispanic
Hispanic,any race 65% 17% 18%
Other 47% 29% 23%
Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS.
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 21 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 24 of 41
Public Housing
The King County Housing Authority(KCHA) serves low-income residents living in Auburn with housing
assistance. KCHA aims to provide decent, safe, and sanitary housing to low-income people in the
community.The following section outlines the number of public housing units and vouchers in use for
Auburn and data on the characteristics of current public housing residents and 2023 voucher recipients.
As illustrated in Table 11, KCHA manages 315 units of public housing in Auburn and awards 1,471
project-and tenant-based rental vouchers. 1,316 vouchers (89 percent) are tenant-based Section 8
vouchers. KCHA also administers 336 special purpose vouchers in addition to project-and tenant-based
vouchers. Approximately 60 percent of special purpose vouchers are dedicated to people living with a
disability.These include non-elderly disabled, mainstream one-year, mainstream five-year, and nursing
home transition vouchers. In addition, 73 Auburn residents received a Veterans Affairs Supportive
Housing voucher, and 62 Auburn residents received a Family Unification Program voucher.
Table 12 depicts selected characteristics of Auburn residents residing in public housing or utilizing
vouchers. Across programs, the average annual income of residents ranges from approximately$17,000
to $23,000. Residents utilizing project-based vouchers report the lowest average annual income
($17,304.79),while residents utilizing tenant-based vouchers report an average annual income that is
almost$5,000 higher($22,216.32). With the average household size being approximately 2.5 across
programs, this indicates that, on average, Auburn residents living in public housing or utilizing vouchers
are considered extremely low-income.
In addition,Table 12 includes the average length of stay in public housing or utilizing vouchers.Across all
programs, the average length of stay in Auburn is higher than the King County Consortium. Of note,the
average length of stay in public housing in the King County Consortium is 8.5 years.The average length
of stay in Auburn is 9.8 years.Those figures are 8.8 and 10.2 years, respectively,for residents utilizing
tenant-based vouchers.
Finally,Table 12 indicates that 400 housing vouchers are awarded to elderly residents and 756 are
awarded to disabled families.The table also notes that in Auburn,there are no residents receiving
vouchers identifying them as victims of domestic violence, HIV/AIDS program participants, or homeless
at admission.
Tables 13 and 14 present race and ethnicity data for the head of household living in public housing or
utilizing vouchers. Overall,44 percent of voucher recipients identify as White and 43 percent of voucher
recipients identify as Black or African American.These figures align with trends observed in the King
County Consortium, in which 45 percent of voucher recipients identify as White and 41 percent identify
as Black or African American. Additionally, 68 percent of Auburn public housing residents identify as
White,which is 14 percentage points higher than the King County Consortium. Nineteen percent of King
County Consortium public housing residents identify as Asian, while just 6 percent of Auburn public
housing residents identify as Asian. Finally, 5 percent of voucher recipients and 6 percent of public
housing residents identify as Hispanic, which aligns with trends observed across the King County
Consortium.
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 22 of 31
WASH I N GTON
Page 28 of 47
Table 11: Public Housing by Program Type
Vouchers
Public Housing Project- Tenant- Special Purpose Vouchers
4111 Based Based Veterans Affairs Family Unification
*
Supportive Housing Program Disabled
#of units/vouchers 315 1471 155 1316 73 62 201
in use
Data Source:2023 PHA data.
*Includes non-elderly disabled, mainstream one-year, mainstream five-year, and nursing home transition vouchers.
Table 12: Characteristics of Public Housing Residents by Program Type
Vouchers M.
Public 'ecial Purpose Vouchers
Housing Total Project- Tenant- Veterans Affairs 1 Family
Based Based Supportive Unification
Housing Program
Average annual income $21,698.79 $19760.55 $17,304.79 $22,216.32 $21,869.40 $22,802.58
Average length of stay in years 9.8 8.35 6.5 10.2 4.2 9
Average household size 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.6 1.4 3.2
#Homeless at admission 0 0 0 0 0 0
0#of elderly program participants(age 62+) 400 400 35 365 36 6
#of disabled families 756 756 70 686 53 23
#of families requesting accessibility features 0 0 0 0 0 0
#of HIV/AIDS program participants 0 0 0 0 0 0
Data Source:2023 PHA data.
CITY OF r
AUBURN Page 23 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 28 of a1
Table 13: Race of PHA Residents by Program Type
Vouchers
e rs
Race Category of the Head of Household Public Housing Project- Tenant- Veterans Family
Total Affairs
Based Based Unification Disabled
Supportive
Housing Program
White 215 654 69 585 46 25 126
Black/African American 58 621 54 567 22 22 50
Asian 19 42 9 33 0 3 4
American Indian,Alaska Native 5 39 5 34 0 4 5
Pacific Islander 5 44 3 41 2 3 6
Other 13 71 15 56 3 5 10
Data Source:2023 PHA data.
Table 14:Ethnicity of PHA Residents by Program Type
Vouchers
Special Purpose Vouchers
Ethnicity of the Head of Household Public Housing troject Tenant- Veterans amI
Total Affairs y
Based Based
Supportive Unification isabled
Housing Program
Hispanic 19 74 6 68 4 5 9
Non-Hispanic 296 1397 149 1248 69 57 192
Data Source:2023 PHA data.
CITY OF *AUBURN
Page 24 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 20 of a1
Homeless Needs Assessment
The Homeless Needs Assessment reviews data from various sources to describe the nature of
homelessness in Auburn, including demographic information, challenges, and needs of those
experiencing homelessness in Auburn.This section utilizes data acquired from the Seattle/King County
CoC,the City of Auburn, the Consolidated Plan "Mini Poll," and 211.
Point-in-Time Count and Homeless Management Information System Data from the
Seattle/King County CoC
The Seattle/King County CoC (WA-500) is the regional planning body that coordinates housing, shelter,
and supportive services for people experiencing homelessness in Auburn.The CoC is led by the King
County Regional Homelessness Authority(KCRHA), whose mission is to significantly decrease
homelessness throughout the county while centering the principles of equity and social justice and
incorporating the voices of people with lived experience into the homelessness response system. KCRHA
publishes various dashboards, reports, and plans on its website that provide the public with detailed
information on the people and households served and the performance of the homelessness response
system.
The Homeless Needs Assessment includes data provided by KCRHA.This data includes the official 2024
Point-in-Time (PIT) count and an unofficial Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) report for
the 2023 calendar year. Due to the nature of homelessness and system limitations, challenges exist in
collecting Auburn-specific data. As noted by the CoC, people experiencing homelessness in King County
frequently move between small cities, such as Auburn,for shelter services.This pattern of movement is
not captured in the static PIT and HMIS data reports, indicating that the data provided by the CoC likely
undercounts the true number of persons experiencing homelessness in Auburn.
Definition of Homelessness
CoCs use a specific definition of"homeless,"which determines whether someone is eligible to receive
CoC-funded housing, shelter, and services.An individual or family is considered homeless if they fall into
at least one of the following categories:
1. Homeless:The individual or family lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence. For
example,they live in a place not meant for human habitation such as a car, park, or public place.
2. At imminent risk of homelessness:The individual or family will imminently lose their primary
nighttime residence, does not have another residence identified, and does not have the
resources or support networks to find permanent housing.
3. Is fleeing or attempting to flee domestic violence:The individual or family is fleeing or
attempting to flee or experiencing trauma or a lack of safety related to domestic violence, dating
violence, sexual assault, stalking, or other dangerous, traumatic, or life-threatening conditions
related to the violence against the individual or a family member in the individual's or family's
current housing situation, including where the health and safety of children are jeopardized.
The CoC definition of homelessness does not include people living in other unstable housing situations,
such as people doubling up with another household,that could generally be considered as homeless
living arrangements, likely underrepresenting the true nature and extent of homelessness in Auburn.
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 25 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 28 of 47
PIT and HMIS Data
2024 PIT and 2023 HMIS data, summarized below, provide insight into the characteristics and
demographics of people experiencing homelessness in Auburn. 694 households were entered into HMIS,
meaning they experienced homelessness at some point throughout the year. Most households who
experienced homelessness (85 percent)were comprised of adults and children.Just 105 households (15
percent)were comprised of adult-only households.This differs from trends observed in the King County
Consortium,wherein 54 percent of all people experiencing homelessness belonged to adult-only
households. Overall,the City of Auburn experiences a greater percentage of homelessness among
households consisting of both adults and children.
Additionally,the 2023 HMIS report indicates that 66 percent of people who experienced homelessness
in Auburn experienced chronic homelessness. Again,this figure is higher in Auburn than in the King
County Consortium,where 20 percent of all people experiencing homelessness were experiencing
chronic homelessness. Forty-one families also experienced unsheltered homelessness in 2023.Table 15
also indicates that 85 veterans and 281 unaccompanied youth experienced homelessness in 2023.
Finally,Table 15 estimates the number of days people experience homelessness according to HMIS data.
For populations for which data is available, days spent homeless vary greatly depending on the
population. However,the length of homelessness for all categories spans greater than one year.
Individuals experiencing chronic homelessness experienced, on average, 527 days homeless, which
equates to approximately one year and five months. Persons in households with an adult and children
present—which comprise the greatest share of Auburn's population experiencing homelessness—
experience homelessness for approximately two years and five months. Finally, chronically homeless
families experience homelessness for the greatest length of time on average, equating to four years and
nine months. In all categories except chronically homeless individuals, residents of Auburn experience
homelessness for longer periods of time than those in the King County Consortium as a whole.
Table 15: Homeless Needs Assessment
Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the#
of Persons Experiencing Becoming Exiting of Days Persons
Population Experiencing Homelessness Homeless Homelessness Experience
Sheltered Each Year Each Year Each Year Homelessness
Homelessness (HMIS) (HMIS) (HMIS) (HMIS)
(PIT)
Persons in
households with 29 589 552 188 884.6
adult(s)and
child(ren)
Persons in
households with 0 NA 6 3 0
only children
Persons in
households with 6 105 213 253 622.38
only adults
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 26 of 31
WASH I N GTON
Page 29 of 47
Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the#
of Persons Experiencing Becoming Exiting of Days Persons
Population Experiencing Homelessness Homeless Homelessness Experience
Sheltered Each Year Each Year Each Year Homelessness
Homelessness (HMIS) (HMIS) (HMIS) (HMIS)
(PIT)
Chronically homeless 3 461 219 256 527
individuals
Chronically homeless 3 41 161 90 1745
families
Veterans 0 85 15 32 0
Unaccompanied 6 281 69 81 821.13
youth
Data Source:2023 HMIS Data and 2024 PIT Count Data.
Table 16 outlines the racial and ethnic makeup of the 35 people experiencing sheltered homelessness
recorded in the 2024 PIT count. Forty percent of people experiencing homelessness on a given night in
Auburn identified as White, 34 percent of people identified as Black or African American, and 17 percent
of people identified as multiracial. No persons in the PIT count identified as Hispanic.
Table 16:People Experiencing Homelessness on a Given Night by Race and
Ethnicity
Race #People Sheltered
White 14
Black or African American 12
Asian 0
American Indian or Alaska Native 0
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 1
Multiracial 6
Client prefers not to answer 2
Hispanic 0
Total 35
Data Source:2024 PIT Data.
HMIS data for 2023 also provides information on specific subpopulations experiencing homelessness in
Auburn. Table 17 indicates that eight people who identify as severely mentally ill, eight people who
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 27 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 30 of 31
identify with chronic substance abuse, and two people who identify with domestic violence experienced
sheltered homelessness in 2023.
Table 17:Subpopulations Experiencing Homelessness in Auburn
A Subpopulation #of People Sheltered
Chronic homelessness 0
Domestic violence 2
Severely mentally ill 8
Chronic substance abuse 8
Survivors of domestic abuse 0
Unaccompanied youth 0
Parenting youth 0
Chronic homelessness 0
Data Source:2023 HMIS Data.
City of Auburn Homeless Outreach Data
The City of Auburn employs three dedicated outreach staff who provide housing navigation services to
people experiencing homelessness throughout the city and who work in encampments each day to
provide assistance. Outreach staff maintain a client intake log, which collects demographic and outcome
information on clients experiencing homelessness.The data tables below summarize key information
from the 2024 Auburn Homeless Outreach Data log(from January to September 2024).
From January to September 2024,the City of Auburn logged 983.4 total outreach contacts and 364
unduplicated clients.Table 18 depicts the number of total contacts by month. For five out of the first
nine months of the year, Auburn staff interacted with over one hundred contacts (in February, March,
April, May, and July).Auburn staff recorded the highest number of contacts in April (172) and February
(145).
Figure 18: Total Number of Contacts by Month (2024)
Month (2024) Number of Contacts
January 87
February 145
March 128
April 172
May 114.5
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 28 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 34 of 37
Month(2024) Number of Contacts
June 96
July 127
August 70
September 44
Total 983.5
Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(provided by the City of Auburn).
Tables 19-21 provide insight into the demographic information of the 364 unduplicated clients for
which information was recorded and available.Table 19 describes the gender identity of those
experiencing homelessness in Auburn. Of unduplicated contacts for which gender information was
available, 61 percent identified as male and 39 percent identified as female.
Table 19: Gender of Unduplicated Contacts Experiencing Homelessness
Gender #of Unduplicated Contacts
Male 220
Female 142
Transgender 0
Unknown 0
Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(provided by the City of Auburn).
Table 20 depicts the age of outreach clients. Out of the clients for which age was available (315), most
contacts (48 percent) belonged to the 35-54 age category. Of note, 30 percent belonged to the 55-74
age category,which encompasses those considered to be elderly. Finally, 10 contacts (3 percent),
belonged to the youngest age bracket (18-24).
Table 20:Age of Unduplicated Contacts Experiencing Homelessness
Mategory #of Unduplicated Contacts
18-24 10
25-34 56
35-54 151
55-74 94
85+ 0
Unknown 4
Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(provided by the City of Auburn).
CEJYOF
AUBURLV AT
Page 29 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 32 of 31
Table 21 depicts the race and ethnicity of unduplicated contacts.The majority of unduplicated contacts
identified as White (57 percent), while approximately 21 percent of contacted identified as Black.
Finally, approximately 7 percent of unduplicated contacts identified as Latino.
Table 21:Race/Ethnicity of Unduplicated Contacts Experiencing Homelessness
Race/Ethnicity Category #of Unduplicated Contacts
American Indian or Alaskan Native 6
Black 76
Native Hawaiian 16
Latino 24
White 207
Mult-Racial 19
Unknown 3
Other 6
Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(Provided by the City of Auburn).
Table 22 provides information on the length of homelessness reported by unduplicated contacts. In 355
instances,the length of homelessness was collected by outreach workers. Of those instances, 70
percent of contacts reported experiencing homelessness for one year or longer.This represents the
majority of unduplicated clients. The second highest length of homelessness reported was "90 days or
more, but less than a year," which accounted for 14 percent of responses.
Table 22:Length of Homelessness of Unduplicated Clients
Time Frame #of Undu•licated Contacts
One year or longer 249
One week or more,but less than one month 11
One night or less 1
One month or more,but less than 90 days 19
Not homeless 14
Data not collected 9
Client does not know 1
90 days or more,but less than a year 51
Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(Provided by the City of Auburn).
Finally,Table 23 provides information on the outcomes of unduplicated clients.The City of Auburn
defines outcomes using a scale of three levels, which are defined below. In 2024, most clients
(approximately 50 percent) reached a level 2 outcome, which means they are actively engaged with
CITY Of AUBURN
Page 30 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 36 of 31
outreach workers to resolve their situation. Thirty-two percent of contacts reached level 3, meaning
their situation was resolved or they otherwise achieved the goals of the outreach.Just one contact
declined assistance in 2024.
Table 23: Outcomes for Unduplicated Contacts
evel Reached #of Unduplicated
Contacts
Level 1: Initial interactions,identify needs and offering support.Client may not yet 54
be actively engaged.
Level 2:Client is actively engaged and working with outreach to set individual goals
(needs/barriers/resources)that may resolve their individual situation.Client willing 178
to accept referral services such as help with documentation,transportation,shelter,
etc.
Level 3:Client situation is resolved or individual goal(s)achieved 115
Client declined assistance 1
Unknown 16
Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(Provided by the City of Auburn).
Consolidated Plan Survey
The City of Auburn conducted a public survey that accepted responses between July 25 and August 23,
2024.The survey, which garnered 120 responses, asked respondents to provide any information that
they believed would be beneficial to the City in determining its spending priorities for the CDBG Grant
Funds. Listed below are themes that emerged regarding homelessness:
• Provide more transitional housing solutions.
• Provide additional shelters to help people experiencing homelessness.
• Offer more affordable housing and solutions, particularly for seniors,fixed-income families, and
people living with a disability,to prevent loss of housing and homelessness.
• Help people experiencing homelessness obtain and maintain ID cards, which are crucial to
accessing services.
211 Data
211 data indicate that from September 12, 2023 to September 10, 2024, housing and shelter comprised
the greatest number of inquiries to the directory (34.4 percent of calls). Of them, 10.4 percent, or 337
calls, directly requested shelter assistance. In 2023,417 calls requested shelter assistance. Of those calls,
61.6 percent of callers identified as female and 44.1 percent identified as being aged 30-39.
CITY OF
AUBURN Page 31 of 31
WASHINGTON
Page 34 of 31
CITY OF
J\I.JBU1R.ts4 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
WASHINGGTTON
Agenda Subject: Meeting Date:
Review the one-pager for the 2027-2028 funding cycle with Auburn Specific October 13, 2025
requirements.
Department: Attachments: Budget Impact:
Human Services Auburn City Specific
Information25-26
Administrative Recommendation:
Background for Motion:
Background Summary:
Councilmember: Staff:
Page 35 of 41
* City of Auburn
CITY OF * * Community Services Division
AUBURN 25 W. Main St
Auburn, WA 98001
WASHINGTON Kent Hay, Director of Human Services
(253) 294 6429 or khav(a_auburnwa.gov
Jody Davison, CDBG/Human Svs.
(253) 263 0252 or idavison(a_auburnwa.gov
YEARS COVERED BY THIS APPLICATION PROCESS
Calendar years 20275 and 20268.
APPROXIMATE FUNDING AVAILABLE
The City of Auburn anticipates allocating $680,000/year of General Fund dollars for the
20275-20286 funding cycle. These funding amounts are approximate and may change prior to final
awards made in the 4th quarter of 20264.
APPLICATION ASSISTANCE
City of Auburn staff is available to help with questions related to the City's process and/or
answer questions you may have about the content of the application. Staff will be available at
four sessions during the application cycle for Technical Assistance related to application
content. Drop in sessions in the first two weeks of the application cycle will be tailored to the
City's Priority Areas and special funding sources. Agencies are strongly encouraged to attend
the session focused on their program's priority area.
Session Date Session Topic
Monday, March 494 2:00 —4:00pm Priority Area: Homelessness Interventions and
Housing Stability
Monday, March 166 2:00 —4:00pm Priority Area: Basic Needs, Job Training and
Education
Monday, March 3025 2:00 —4:00pm General Application Questions and Support
Monday, April 64 2:00 —4:00pm General Application Questions and Support
All sessions will be held remotely.
March 9th and 1 6th 2026:
To join the meeting from your computer,tablet or smartphone Join Zoom MeetingTeams Meeting
Join the meeting
now eb.zooimu = 3hl 101c)(11YR)(n)ilJx0.1
Meeting ID: 865 8979 6'63238 205 963 732 3
Passcode: 863605 GZ6iR2mE
Page 36 of 41
You can also dial in using your phone.
United States: 888 476 1 100
509 530 1507 Meetina ID 805 758 159#
March 30th and April 1st, 2026
To ioin the meeting from your computer, tablet or smart phone ioin Join the meeting now
Meeting ID: 265 141 529 925 4
Passcode: KV9Ms6do
You can also dial in using your phone. United States: 509 530 1507 Meeting ID 580 403 528#
Any questions asked during a TA session will be publicly posted, along with staff response, on
the City of Auburn's Human Services webpaae. If you are unable to attend a scheduled drop in
session, you may contact staff directly. Email is preferred. Technical assistance will not be
available after 4pm on April 6, 2026.
Applications must be submitted online via the Sharel app website at www.sharel app.orq.
Late applications will not be accepted.
FUNDING PRIORITIES
The City of Auburn adopted revised funding priorities for the 2026-2027 cycle. Proposed
programs must align with one of the funding priorities listed below.
1. Homelessness Interventions and Housing Stability
a. Programs that provide housing solutions or supportive services for individuals and
families experiencing homelessness. Programs can include rapid re-housing,
transitional housing for individuals exiting homelessness, diversion, shelter
(including domestic violence shelter), rapid exit from shelter, storage, laundry,
hygiene, physical or behavioral health services for individuals experiencing
homelessness, outreach, and other interventions serving community members
experiencing homelessness.
b. Programs that work to prevent homelessness. These can include eviction
prevention and fair housing supports, utility assistance, legal assistance, behavioral
health services with a housing focus, and other homelessness prevention supports.
2. Basic Needs and Job Training and Education
a. Programs that meet a diverse array of non-housing related basic needs, including
food access, youth programming, domestic violence advocacy, physical and
behavioral health, childcare resources, immigration supports, legal assistance, etc.
b. Programs that provide education,job training and placement, or apprenticeship
opportunities with the aim of increasing economic opportunities for participants.
MINIMUM FUNDING LEVEL
The City of Auburn has implemented a minimum annual funding level of $10,000 for the 2026-
2027 cycle. Applications seeking less than $10,000 annually will not be considered for funding.
APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS
The City of Auburn's Human Services Committee, a 9-member volunteer board appointed by the
Mayor and approved by the City Council, will evaluate and rate the proposals within each priority
Page 37 of 41
area on the following criteria, weighted as indicated (see application for questions within each
section):
1. Program Description (25%): Illustrates community needs and program capacity
2. Program Impact (35%): Demonstrates ability to measure program success
3. Program Accessibility (30%): Accessible to all eligible program participants
4. Budget (10%): Complete, accurate, and reasonable financial budget
A Tier review system will be used to prioritize applications.
Tier 3 = Incomplete applications
Tier 2 = Applications that provide critical services but do not focus on Auburn Residents but meet
the minimum threshold.
Tier 1 = Applications that are complete, meet the minimum funding threshold and focus on auburn
Residents.
Funding recommendations will be made based upon the results of these Committee scores, funding
availability, and the approval of the Auburn City Council. The Committee reserves the right to recommend
awards based on a combination of score, priority area distribution, and diversity of populations served. The
award amount for individual programs may differ from the amount requested in the application. The City of
Auburn also reserves the right not to award all funds included in this application process.
City of Auburn staff will notify agencies of final allocations following City Council approval, which
is expected by late November. Awarded funds will be available January 1, 2027, which is the
start of the fiscal and program year.
OTHER REQUIREMENTS TO APPLY FOR FUNDS
In order to be considered for funding, agencies must:
1. Meet one or more of the funding priorities listed above.
2. Have 501(c)(3) status or have a 501(c)(3) fiscal sponsor in place by the time the
application period closes. For-profit organizations will be considered if they meet all
of the other requirements listed.
3. Have nondiscrimination policies in place related to both hiring practices and client
services. Please upload a copy of your agency's current nondiscrimination
policy(ies) to SharelApp in the "agency uploads" section of your application.
4. Meet minimum insurance requirements:
a. general liability insurance with a minimum limit of$2,000,000 combined single limit per
occurrence by bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, and for those policies with
aggregate limits, a $2,000,000 aggregate limit.
b. provide professional liability insurance at the minimum amount of$2,000,000 per claim
and in the aggregate.
5. Be willing and able to accept reimbursement for funds based on service unit completion.
6. Regularly track and submit required reports regarding services and demographics.
Page 38 of 41
CITY OF
J\I.JBU1R.ts4 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
WASHINGGTTON
Agenda Subject: Meeting Date:
Review and Approval of the September 22nd, 2025 Meeting Minutes October 13, 2025
Department: Attachments: Budget Impact:
Human Services DRAFT 2025.09 - Meeting
Minutes
Administrative Recommendation:
Background for Motion:
Background Summary:
Councilmember: Staff:
Page 39 of 41
Human Services Committee
Regular Meeting
CITY OF * September 22, 2025 - 4:00 PM
AUBURN
1 East Main Street
Annex Conference Rm 1
WASHINGTON 2nd Floor
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Sue Miller called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm and welcomed attendees.
ROLL CALL
Present: Acting Chair, Sue Miller
Committee Members:Amber Lott, Heather Wise, Ashley Samuel
Excused Absence: Chair, Carmen Goers; Vice Chair, David Wright
Unexcused Absence; Committee Member, Erica Tomas
City Staff. Human Services Director, Kent Hay; Human Services/CDBG Program
Coordinator, Jody Davison
Guests: Sherry E. Williams; Sundeep Malhi, Health Point
Gary Sampson, Family Law CASA of King County
AGENDA MODIFICATIONS
Staff noted that the next regularly scheduled meeting was incorrectly listed as
September 22nd, 2025. The next regularly scheduled meeting is October 26th, 2025.
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
Gary Sampson of Family Law Casa of King County spoke for 3 minutes about the
services given to Auburn residents who are facing family legal challenges. He noted
that out of 120 families served in the last 12 months, 20 of the families have been from
the City of Auburn.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, REPORTS, AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation by Health Point
Presentation to the committee by Sherry Williams and Sundeep Malhi from Health
Point. Health Point partners with Auburn in addressing the needs of it's most
vulnerable and currently receives funding through the City grant program.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Discussion and Approval of the August 25th Meeting Minutes
It was moved by Committee Member Ashley Samuel and, seconded by Committee
Member Amber Lott, that the Committee approve the minutes for August 25th 2025.
Motion carried.
Page 40 of 41
DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Potential Program(s) in the next funding cycle to address the needs of the
most vulnerable in the community
Committee Members discussed Auburn's homeless and at risk populations and ways to
prevent re-occuring homelessness through programs and funding.
B. 2024 Needs Assessment Review
Committee members reviewed the 2024 needs assessment and will the priorities in
order of importance, and submit them prior to the next regularly scheduled meeting for
review by the committee.
NEW BUSINESS
SCHEDULE FOR UPCOMING MEETINGS
A. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Human Services Committee will
be held on October 26th 2025 at 4:00 pm.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Human Services Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 5:09 pm.
APPROVED this day of October 2025.
Carmen Goers, Committee Chair
Kent Hay, Human Services Director
Page 41 of 41