End Result: No more paper for credit hours

This idea (1) embraces HUD’s Core Value of Efficiency and Effectiveness; (2) further extends HUD’s goal of webTA to increase the efficiency, accuracy, and accountability of the time and attendance process; and (3) provides more extensive edits at the time of record data entry by the employee (as posted at the link below under Overview).

Currently on HUD’s intranet site for webTA http://hudweb.hud.gov/po/a/dasops/webta/index.cfm under Questions and Answers it identifies the following process regarding credit hours:

(I) Q: What is the approval process for earning credit hours?
A: Employees shall notify their supervisors in advance of their intention to work longer than their regularly scheduled work hours and of the specific date(s) and time(s) they plan to perform such work. The notice must be submitted in advance and documented on form HUD-25018, Notification of Intent to Work Credit Hours. The employee must (orally) identify what work is to be accomplished during the credit hour period.

(II) How are earned credit hours recorded and certified?
A: Employees must record the actual time of all credit hours earned, using the form HUD-25020, Employee record and Certification of Extra Hours of Work, and submit the form to the supervisor for authorization. The supervisor shall provide the signed form HUD-25020 to the employee, for reconciliation with the respective Notification of Intent to Work Credit Hours, and post the authorized credit hours earned on WebTA.

To eliminate the need and cost of submitting paper HUD-25018 and HUD-25020 to the supervisor for signature, which is not even uploaded into webTA, perhaps HUD should utilize and maximize the electronic capabilities of the webTA system.

This is how it can work:
(I) To replace the HUD-25018 form/process - the employee notifies his/her supervisor of their intent of working credit hours by (1) logging into webTA (2) select Leave/Prem | Prem. Pay | New Request | Premium Pay Type = Credit Hours Earned | Input Hours, From, To on days credit hours are intended to be worked | Employees Remarks – should include current credit hour balance and statement similar to ‘This is my intent to work credit hours. I understand that my credit hour balance cannot exceed 24 hours at any given time | Save.
The employee can still identify (orally) to their supervisor what work is to be accomplished or include it in the Employee Remarks section of the request above.

The Request for Credit Hours Earned is approved by Supervisor through webTA.

(II) To replace the HUD-25020 form/process - the employee enters the actual hours worked on the on-line timecard by (1) logging into webTA (2) select T&A Data | Manually type over or delete, as appropriate, actual credit hours earned | Update or Save/Return.

At the end of the pay period the employee is validating their hours (regular hours, leave, holidays and, yes credit hours, etc.) for that pay period. While the system may give a warning about actual credit hours worked may not match the previously submitted/approved request, that warning does not prohibit the employee from validating their time and attendance. By validating the data, the employee is attesting and held accountable to the accuracy of the T&A. The supervisor then reviews and certifies the on-line timecard for it to be forwarded to NFC for processing.

The current application for FAC-COR (GTR/GTM) Certification or Recertification is five pages long and very cumbersome. It is so difficult to follow and read, OCPO just recently had to create a consolidated checklist, page 5 of the application, that the applicant has to repeat all the course information on one page (See Attached document FAC COR OLD ) in attempt to simplify OCPO's review.

While it is OCPO's aspiration for this application process to be automated through the Fedearl Acquisition Institute's FAITAS system by the end of FY13 or sometime in FY14, there is still an opportunity to make changes and improvements to the application in the interim. Attached is a 2 page version of the application capturing all of the information OCPO is seeking in an easy to ready simplified format (See Attached Document FAC COR SUGGESTED NEW).

Or, perhaps to get rid of "paper" altogether, someone in IT could create a similar form through InfoPath.

I believe that HUD PIH should institute a Document Management System (speaking specifically for the PIH program). Each PIH office keeps paper files with documents required to be submitted from each Public Housing Agency. Most of the documents just make up a file. By having a document management system, PHAs could fax in their doucments and they could be indexed by state and Field Office for processing. The documents could be assigned to the appropriate person in the office (PHRS, PM, FM, FA, etc). By implementing this system, more flexibility could be used to assign staff throughout regions and networks. Also, time for processing, misfiled documents, and lost document would be reduced. Processing of documents this way would definitely assist in moving HUD to the 21st Century! The US Department of Agriculture uses a system (called ECM) and implements it among several programs.

Re. HUD Transformation, I suggest the combination of the Office of CPD and the Office of PH. They both monitor the same or similar programs (i.e. grant monitoring, Sec. 8, etc.). PH has PHA Plans which tie into the State Consolidated Plan. Disaster's both Offices are involved with disasters, Technical Reviews, both offices have very similar checklists, etc. Low-Income housing, AID's, Lead Based Paint, Environmentals, etc. The staffs could combine under one roof and have a complete understanding of all aspects of city, county, state & Federal Government relationship and involvement. Please look into this consolidation to see if it would be a viable alternative. Thank You.

I haved served in six HUD FOs. PIH currently uses a checklist to review Consolidated Plans submitted by grantees that is totally useless and wastes valuable staff time. The checklist questions bear no relationship to the data CPD requires grantees to include in the Plan. As a result, PIH staff simply sign the checklist and route it back to CPD with no value added. This "review" process is a total time waster for all involved. PIH should either revise the checklist to complement the Plan or revise the Plan submission requirements to complement the checklist. This minor adjustment will (1) better utilize staff time in both PIH and CPD and (2) ensure HUD receives data that is useful to PIH.

When a lender closes a loan and sets up a repair escrow. We give the lender the sole responsibility to update FHA connection with the completion and close out of that escrow account. Borrowers who try to refinance their current FHA loan often can’t because the original lender never completed the close out in FHA connection. In many cases the loan has been sold to a new investor or is currently being serviced by another mortgage company. The borrower is unable to move forward until the initial originating company is contacted and harassed enough to update our system. I’m sure there are hundreds if not thousands of lenders who are non-compliant. With no repercussion in place many lenders just simply opt out of this portion of the process. Something as simple as a $25 fine for the system not being updated after 6 months or $50 at the 1 year mark, which is ample time to accommodate for most of the repairs we allow in escrow. Would generate immense revenue for the department. This nominal fee would definitely generate an initial windfall from lenders already in the pipeline. Just a thought!

Announce grant awards more in conjunction with the actual approval. We've had a grant which expired in February 2013 but still hasn't even received a conditional award letter. We're in Tier 1 so we know it's getting funded but we're spending three months worth of rent out of our own pockets! Two other grants are in the same boat, having expired at the end of April. Another is expiring at the end of May and will result in rents not getting paid at all in June.

The award letters seem to come out later and later each year. Is there a way to notify us beforehand how long we'll have to be spending our own funds to operate a HUD grant?

During the pre-marketing and marketing stages of getting the property ready for listing and the offer stage, the brokers are tasked to perform multiple home inspections. The inspection form is almost standardized between all of the large servicers used by HUD. The brokers use different technologies to perform the inspections and will have to login to the servicer platform and upload the photos, a photo addendum, and inspection form. I would like to propose that the servicers open their platform to allow the back-office technologies used by the brokers to link to the servicer and send that information automatically. The brokers perform thousands of these inspections every week and this could be a savings of thousands of hours that could be fully automated at this time. HUD would be an example for the rest of the large owners who are in a very similar situation and where technology could be linked together. Please, we need these platforms to have open doors to other technologies for automation and savings of huge amounts of unproductive work that can be fully automated.

With cuts to authorized travel due to the effects of Sequestration, HUD needs a cost-effective method for staff to still participate in offsite conferences, meetings, and other events. This can be done "vitually".
Rather than sending several people to an event, HUD can leverage its enterprise videoconferencing capability by sending one person to an event to set up a virtual connection.
For example, at this year's Western Lenders Conference, 10 HUD staff from 6 different field offices and HQ are scheduled to be speakers and/or panelists. If HUD sends just one person to the event who is technically proficient and properly equipped, that person can connect to a HUD-scheduled videoconference via VPN using Jabbar (HUD's desktop VTC client). Everyone who is scheduled as an actual participant can thus be connected to the event from any HUD office.
In addition to the significan cost savings with travel expenses, the time saved by each individual would also be greatl.
HUD can start out with one fulltime person to travel and setup videoconferences with several others designated as backup or secondary in order to cover overlapping events or unavailability of the primary.

This is to achieve Goal 5:Transform The Way HUD Does Business, Sub-Goal C: Create flexible, modern rules and systems that promote responsiveness, openness, and transparency and HUD's 2nd Core Value: Efficient and Effective ways

Specifically, HIAMS Requestor (GTR) Training is an 1 ½ day IN-PERSON training course that OCPO usually only offers once a month (if that) and it is usually in HQ. This required training has become an obstacle for GTR Appointments.

HUD GTRs change frequently due to work load balance, new personnel, retirements, etc. GTRs that do not complete HIAMS Requestor Training are not provided HIAMS role of GTR. These certified GTRs without HIAMS Requestor Training cannot be appointed as GTRs via modification in HIAMS. This has a direct impact and hinders management’s ability and flexibility to manage its staff and carrying out HUD’s mission.

We needs to work smarter in our current environment of lack of travel funds, budget cuts and sequestration.

For example In February 2013, HQ paid for two DHOC employees to fly to DC at a cost of $2534 ($1,267 each) to attend classroom HIAMS Requestor (GTR) training. However, in April 2013 an urgent need arose that another staff needed the training. The travel estimate for this trip is $1655 which is a 25% increase from the February rate of $1267. This increase is most likely due to the Cherry Blossom season in DC, which runs from April through June. Due to lack of travel funds and the trip being unplanned the staff member was not able to go and to date has still not received the training and is unable to be a GTR by OCPO standards.

The Requester training uses primarily examples from the Requisition (new) side of HIAMS and Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) product. However, 90% of the GTR work in HIAMS is specific to HUD modifications to the COTS product, and very rarely requisitions for new contracts. As a result, field staff has developed and provided supplemental guidance and training for GTRs and GTMs to cover the Request for Modification (old) side of HIAMS and to address HUD specific requirements.

There are several efficient and effective ways the training can be delivered. Some possibilities are: Live Meeting, Webcast, shared desktop, Train-the-Trainer, OCPO staff from offices around the country can deliver onsite training in the field, or some combination of the above.

I am writing this comment strictly as a desire for feedback. I list this idea as a small change but it would be a significant change if adopted and would require Congressional or perhaps state level approval in order to be implemented. This concept applies to disasters as it relates to housing although it could be applied to other areas.

What is the probability of a disaster like Sandy occurring again? What is the probability of a Katrina occurring or a Joplin tornado outbreak or 7.0 earthquake striking the heart of San Francisco?

Statisticians can assign a certain probability to those events. Many will debate what that probability should be but we can arrive at that number.

Now what is the probability that if a Category 2 struck the Atlantic coast from Newark on in to Maine that there would be a billion dollars in damage? That the damage from such a storm would be far greater?
That would likely be a much larger probability.

With that background, what I am suggesting is that we obtain authorization to permit local areas such as New York or New Orleans or San Francisco to place a hold back on taxes collected in that area and place the funds in a reserve account. Those funds would build up over time and be used from time to time for projects that would reduce the probability of disastrous damage down to a lower level probability. There has been much discussion of building a seawall to protect New York City from another superstorm. This type of fund could be used to accumulate the resources necesary to accomplish that objective.

The decision to allow the local area to hold back these designated tax resources would have to depend on a comparison of the probability of a certain level of damage from a disaster to the probability that the disaster will occur. Whenever that comparison reaches a high integer, then placing funds in a reserve account meant for improvements that would disaster proof an area would be justified.

Any comments or thoughts on this concept would be appreciated.
.

HUD Staff spend alot of time doing research and designing tools to do their jobs. The NSP Team (at HQ) designed a resource exchange that has evolved into a larger one. It's a good example of how employees doing similar activities across the country came together to help each other. While the NSP was in full force, the team had weekly/monthly forums and knew each other by name.

By necessity, a group of Financial Analysts in the Southeast created a quarterly conference call to discuss like roles, duties and protocols. This has evolved into a group that has grown by word of mouth to 32 and now occurs monthly.

If we had access to the list of all Financial Analysts in CPD, we could make this forum more effective. A contact list like this for every type of position, either formally or informally would reduce the amount of time and research necessary.

Our discussions lead to efficiencies; consistency across field offices on how to respond to audit inquiries, how to complete quarterly SF425s and what to do with them, how to read IDIS reports and what should be reviewed, etc...

This process/design and contact information could be duplicated across all program areas, whether CPD Representatives, Program Assistants, FHEO, etc... to update each other and secure best practices.