The Block Grant Program and Rural : A Description of Awards Granted in Nebraska during Fiscal Years 1993-2014 Report Presentation, August 2016 Christian Janousek, PhD, School of Public Administration Jerry Deichert, Director of Center for Public Affairs Research Robert Blair, PhD, School of Public Administration College of Public Affairs and Service University of Nebraska Omaha
Purpose and Methodology The purpose of this report was to provide detailed data on the types and trends of CDBG funds that were awarded to various classes of Nebraska communities over the period of 22 years from 1993 to 2014 in relation to the state s rural development policy objectives. The research team collected and compiled information on Nebraska s CDBG program for fiscal years 1993 to 2014. The primary data source was Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Reports from the Department of.
Research Questions Three central research questions Is the distribution of CDBG awards over this period consistent with the stated policy goals of rural development policy for the state of Nebraska? Do the proposed uses of CDBG funds as demonstrated through identified needs, objectives, and the distribution of awards over this period coincide with the stated policy goals of rural development policy for the state of Nebraska? What is the policy of distribution goals for CDBG awards to assist in the implementation of the stated policy goals of rural development policy for the state of Nebraska?
Total CDBG Awards Given to Nebraska Cities, Towns, and Counties: 1993 to 2003 Year Total Awards Total Awards ($) Percent of Awards (%) Housing Planning Tourism Housing Planning Tourism 1993 15,355,759 8,411,059 5,104,700 1,840,000 0 0 54.8 33.2 12.0 0.0 0.0 1994 12,788,112 5,787,588 3,424,400 3,328,500 247,624 0 45.3 26.8 26.0 1.9 0.0 1995 14,686,600 5,041,150 4,474,600 4,723,000 447,850 0 34.3 30.5 32.2 3.0 0.0 1996 10,666,831 3,006,758 3,723,600 3,542,998 393,475 0 28.2 34.9 33.2 3.7 0.0 1997 14,462,058 6,622,726 1,900,300 4,643,127 464,100 831,805 45.8 13.1 32.1 3.2 5.8 1998 11,165,913 5,142,500 1,476,600 3,923,895 450,818 172,100 46.1 13.2 35.1 4.0 1.5 1999 21,573,044 9,036,251 5,678,412 5,481,114 748,517 628,750 41.9 26.3 25.4 3.5 2.9 2000 12,494,527 2,985,000 5,110,600 3,005,982 542,945 850,000 23.9 40.9 24.1 4.3 6.8 2001 18,851,974 8,300,524 4,158,000 5,687,450 337,600 368,400 44.0 22.1 30.2 1.8 2.0 2002 16,709,668 8,542,118 4,805,400 2,778,000 434,150 150,000 51.1 28.8 16.6 2.6 0.9 2003 13,598,631 5,069,400 6,271,306 1,374,925 544,800 338,200 37.3 46.1 10.1 4.0 2.5 Total 162,353,117 67,945,074 46,127,918 40,328,991 4,611,879 3,339,255 41.2 28.7 25.2 2.9 2.0 Average 14,759,374 6,176,825 4,193,447 3,666,272 419,262 303,569 Same as previous line Note: The populations of Douglas and Lancaster counties do not include the cities of Omaha or Lincoln as they are not eligible for the small cities CDBG program.
Total CDBG Awards Given to Nebraska Cities, Towns, and Counties: 2004 to 2014 Year Total Awards Total Awards ($) Percent of Awards (%) Housing Planning Tourism Housing Planning Tourism 2004 16,377,354 7,895,047 5,617,525 2,068,202 533,580 263,000 48.2 34.3 12.6 3.3 1.6 2005 15,934,081 5,941,000 7,137,693 2,072,200 443,688 339,500 37.3 44.8 13.0 2.8 2.1 2006 8,967,060 2,611,100 5,020,560 943,100 274,300 118,000 29.1 56.0 10.5 3.1 1.3 2007 10,829,039 2,162,000 5,836,539 2,373,600 456,900 0 20.0 53.9 21.9 4.2 0.0 2008 15,283,307 3,616,481 7,166,021 3,815,000 485,805 200,000 23.7 46.9 25.0 3.2 1.3 2009 13,360,082 1,869,500 7,660,282 3,168,000 462,300 200,000 14.0 57.3 23.7 3.5 1.5 2010 16,832,460 7,954,000 6,170,910 1,659,800 252,400 795,350 47.3 36.7 9.9 1.5 4.7 2011 14,581,770 3,990,000 7,649,776 1,997,834 315,700 628,460 27.4 52.5 13.7 2.2 4.3 2012 6,837,846 150,000 3,915,782 1,959,564 212,500 600,000 2.2 57.3 28.7 3.1 8.8 2013 9,556,125 1,218,000 5,724,400 2,325,000 288,725 0 12.7 59.9 24.3 3.0 0.0 2014 8,527,824 872,955 4,900,150 2,044,535 246,784 463,400 10.2 57.5 24.0 2.9 5.4 Total 137,086,948 38,280,083 66,799,638 24,426,835 3,972,682 3,607,710 24.7 50.6 18.8 3.0 2.8 Average 12,462,450 3,480,008 6,072,694 2,220,621 361,153 327,974 Same as previous line Note: The populations of Douglas and Lancaster counties do not include the cities of Omaha or Lincoln as they are not eligible for the small cities CDBG program.
Totals of Block Grant Awards Given to Nebraska Cities, Towns, and Counties: 1993 to 2014 Year Total Awards Total Awards ($) Percent of Awards (%) Housing Planning Tourism Housing Planning Tourism 1993-2014 299,440,065 106,225,157 112,927,556 64,755,826 8,584,561 6,946,965 32.9 39.7 22.0 3.0 2.4 Average 13,610,912 4,828,416 5,133,071 2,943,447 390,207 315,771 Same as previous line Year Total Number of Awards Number of Awards Percent of Total Number of Awards (%) Housing Planning Tourism Housing Planning Tourism 1993-2014 1,692 356 552 272 460 52 20.1 34.3 16.0 26.6 3.0 Average 77 16 25 12 21 2 Same as previous line Year All Categories Average Size of Awards ($) Housing Planning Tourism 1993-2014 177,307 300,949 204,702 238,987 19,142 152,188 Note: The populations of Douglas and Lancaster counties do not include the cities of Omaha or Lincoln as they are not eligible for the small cities CDBG program.
Per Capita CDBG Awards Given to Nebraska Cities, Towns, and Counties Aggregated By County By Class of County: 1993 to 2014 Metropolitan (Douglas, Sarpy, Lancaster) 25.20 Metropolitan (Dakota, Hall) 233.31 Metropolitan (2,500-9,999) 299.12 Metropolitan (<2,500) 344.93 Micropolitan (10,000+) 268.36 Micropolitan (2,500-9,999) 402.08 Micropolitan (<2,500) 333.93 County with largest town 2,500-9,999 370.04 County with largest town <2,500 506.65 Totals 258.36 $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 Note: The populations of Douglas and Lancaster counties do not include the cities of Omaha or Lincoln as they are not eligible for the small cities CDBG program.
Per Capita CDBG Awards Given to Nebraska Cities and Towns By City Size Category: 1993 to 2014 10,000 or more persons 205.55 5,000-9,999 persons 343.80 2,500-4,999 persons 435.85 800-2,499 persons 564.61 500-799 persons 788.02 250-499 persons 1,242.42 Under 250 persons 1,884.06 Total of all cities/towns 409.70 $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 $1,600 $1,800 $2,000 Note: The populations of Douglas and Lancaster counties do not include the cities of Omaha or Lincoln as they are not eligible for the small cities CDBG program.
Yearly Trends of Total CDBG Awards Given to Nebraska Cities, Towns, and Counties Aggregated By County By Class of County: 1993 to 2014 $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $0 Note: The populations of Douglas and Lancaster counties do not include the cities of Omaha or Lincoln as they are not eligible for the small cities CDBG program.
$4,000,000 Yearly Trends of Total CDBG Awards Given to Nebraska Cities and Towns By City Size Category: 1993 to 2014 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Note: The population of the 10,000 or more persons category does not include the cities of Omaha or Lincoln as they are not eligible for the small cities CDBG program
Conclusions During the period of 1993-2014, while the largest micropolitan counties received the largest individual share of CDBG funds (27 percent), the two smallest county classifications received a combined 50 percent of total CDBG awards. The 80 nonmetropolitan counties received approximately 80 percent of total CDBG awards over the 22-year period, with approximately 65 percent of those funds going to the more rural counties. development and community development represent the largest categories of awards, a combined 75 percent of total awards and over 50 percent of the total number of awards granted. A substantial shift occurred in the categorical distribution of awards from 1993-2003 to 2004-2014, with an increase in the number and amount of awards for the community development category, corresponding with a decrease in the categories of economic development and housing over the same period. A trend toward increasingly larger amounts of CDBG awards being granted to higher population nonmetropolitan areas, particularly micropolitan counties and cities, with a concurrent decline in awards for the smallest county and city classes.
Policy Options The Iowa Authority utilizes a proposed allocation of CDBG funds, which identifies anticipated percentages of available funds to be directed toward specific priority CDBG categories. The Kansas Department of Commerce employs a ratings system of criteria corresponding with identified priorities and needs of related CDBG projects and categories, thus designating an advisory rating on each proposed project in relation to the assessment of state policy objectives. The South Dakota Office of separates their annual CDBG allocation into three separate accounts, assessing eligible projects within each account based on the consistency of proposed projects with at least one of the state s identified program objectives. The North Dakota Department of Services contracts with the state s Regional Planning and Councils in the distribution of CDBG funds, dividing the state s CDBG allocation among the eight Councils with procedures to review and rank project applications. The Wyoming Business Council offers general policy goals and objectives for each CDBG category in conjunction with state legislative priorities, serving as a guideline for eligible projects and activities.