[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 25, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50376-50386]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-24506]



[[Page 50375]]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part II





Department of Housing and Urban Development





_______________________________________________________________________



Funding Availability for the Fair Housing Services Center in East 
Texas; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 25, 1996 / 
Notices  

[[Page 50376]]



DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-4127-N-01]


Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing; 
Notice of Funding Availability for the Fair Housing Services Center in 
East Texas

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian 
Housing, HUD.

ACTION: Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for the Fair Housing 
Services Center (FHSC) in East Texas.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This NOFA announces the availability of funds and HUD's 
request for proposals to establish a Fair Housing Services Center in 
East Texas to be administered by a non-profit organization (NPO). HUD 
will award to, and enter into a grant agreement with, an NPO to 
administer the FHSC as required by the Final Judgment and Decree (Final 
Judgment) in Lucille Young v. Cisneros, CA No. P-80-8-CA, (E.D. Tex.; 
dated March 30, 1995). HUD has been ordered to provide $500,000 per 
year for a period of at least five years to fund the FHSC to be located 
in Beaumont, Texas, with branch offices within the 36 county area that 
constitutes East Texas, and one mobile office unit to provide services 
to remote locations throughout East Texas. Appendix A to this Notice is 
a copy of the Request for Proposals (RFP) and Program Guidelines as 
approved by the Court. All information relating to the RFP is included 
in the RFP.

DATES: The proposal deadline for the Fair Housing Services Center NOFA 
is October 25, 1996, 3:00 p.m., Washington, DC time.
    The above-stated proposal deadline is firm as to date and hour. In 
the interest of fairness to all competing NPOs, HUD will treat as 
ineligible for consideration any proposal that is not received before 
the proposal deadline. Applicants should take this practice into 
account and make early submission of their materials to avoid any risk 
of loss of eligibility brought about by unanticipated delays or other 
delivery-related problems. HUD will not accept, at any time during the 
NOFA competition, proposal materials sent via facsimile (FAX) 
transmission.

ADDRESSES: The original and nine complete copies of the proposal should 
be submitted by the deadline to Mr. Gerald J. Benoit, Director, 
Operations Division, Office of Rental Assistance, Department of Housing 
and Urban Development, Room 4220, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, 
DC 20410.

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerald J. Benoit, Director, Operations 
Division, Office of Rental Assistance, Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, Room 4220, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20410-
8000, telephone number (202) 708-0477 (this is not a toll-free number). 
For hearing- and speech-impaired persons, this number may be accessed 
via TTY (text telephone) by calling the Federal Information Relay 
Service at 1-800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Proposals

    All information related to the RFP is available in Appendix A to 
this Notice. Appendix A has been approved by the Court under the terms 
of the Final Judgment and Decree as identified above and therefore is 
the only document potential bidders should use to determine the 
requirements of the RFP.

Background

    The plaintiffs, African-American residents of public housing in 
East Texas, filed suit in 1980 alleging that HUD had knowingly 
maintained a system of segregated housing in a 36-county area of East 
Texas, in violation of the U.S. Constitution and various civil rights 
laws. The plaintiffs contended that there was segregation in HUD-
supported low income public housing, Section 8 Existing Housing and 
other HUD-assisted multifamily housing programs.
    In 1982, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas 
certified a class consisting of all African-American applicants for and 
residents of HUD-funded public housing, Section 8 housing and other 
assisted housing programs in the 36-county area. In 1985, the court 
issued a liability decision finding that HUD had knowingly and 
continually maintained a system of segregated housing in the 36-county 
area.
    In 1987, while an appeal was pending, HUD and the plaintiffs 
reached an agreement to limit the scope of the case and the class of 
plaintiffs. In 1988, the court appointed a special master and issued an 
interim injunction which compelled HUD to require each of the 70 
housing agencies to implement race-conscious Tenant Selection and 
Assignment Plans and to provide all class members a series of notices 
of desegregative opportunities in all HUD-assisted housing in East 
Texas. On March 30, 1995, U.S. District Judge William Wayne Justice 
issued the Final Judgment that approved the desegregation plans and the 
plan amendments and required HUD to fund the FHSC.
    The following is an outline of the activities of the FHSC (bidders 
should refer to the attached RFP for details of the activities and 
responsibilities of the FHSC):
    1. Familiarity with all relevant HUD regulations;
    2. Outreach to landlords and assistance with exception rents;
    3. Prescreening services;
    4. Counseling services and other social services support;
    5. Responsibilities to Class members who receive a desegregative 
voucher/certificate;
    6. FHSC encouragement and assistance to class members to make 
desegregative moves;
    7. Information provided to Class members;
    8. Quarterly and Annual Performance Reports; and
    9. Respond to Information Requests from HUD.
    Bidders must respond to the requirements of the RFP attached to 
this NOFA and HUD encourages bidders to refer to the RFP for all 
appropriate information concerning the Fair Housing Services Center.

Other Matters

Environmental Impact

    In accordance with 40 CFR 1508.4 of the regulations of the Council 
on Environmental Quality and 24 CFR 50.20(o)(1) of the HUD regulations, 
the policies and procedures contained in this notice relate only to the 
provision of information services whose content does not constitute a 
development decision nor affect the physical condition of project areas 
or building sites, and therefore, are categorically excluded from the 
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act.

Federalism Impact

    The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under section 6(a) 
of Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has determined that the policies 
contained in this notice will not have substantial direct effects on 
States or their political subdivisions, or the relationship between the 
Federal Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. As a result, 
the notice is not subject to review under the Order. This notice is a 
funding notice and does not substantially alter the established roles 
of the Department, the States, and local governments, including Public 
Housing Agencies.

[[Page 50377]]

Impact on the Family

    The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under Executive 
Order 12606, The Family, has determined that this notice does not have 
potential for significant impact on family formation, maintenance, and 
general well-being within the meaning of the Executive Order and, thus, 
is not subject to review under the Order. This is a funding notice and 
does not alter program requirements concerning family eligibility.

Section 102 of the HUD Reform Act: Documentation and Public Access 
Requirements

    HUD will ensure that documentation and other information regarding 
each proposal submitted pursuant to this NOFA are sufficient to 
indicate the basis upon which assistance was provided or denied. This 
material, including any letters of support, will be made available for 
public inspection for a five-year period beginning not less than 30 
calendar days after the award of the assistance. Material will be made 
available in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 
552) and HUD's implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 15. In addition, 
HUD will include the recipients of assistance pursuant to this NOFA in 
its Federal Register notice of all recipients of HUD assistance awarded 
on a competitive basis.

Section 103 of the HUD Reform Act

    Section 103 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3537a) (Reform Act) and HUD's 
implementing regulation codified as 24 CFR part 4, subpart B, applies 
to the funding competition announced today. These requirements continue 
to apply until the announcement of the selection of successful 
applicants.
    HUD employees involved in the review of applications and in the 
making of funding decisions are restrained by these requirements from 
providing advance information to any person (other than an authorized 
employee of HUD) concerning funding decisions, or from otherwise giving 
any applicant an unfair competitive advantage. Persons who apply for 
assistance in this competition should confine their inquiries to the 
subject areas permitted under these requirements.
    Applicants or employees who have ethics-related questions should 
contact the HUD Office of Ethics (202) 708-3815 (TTY/Voice) (this is 
not a toll-free number). Any HUD employee who has specific program 
questions, such as whether particular subject matter can be discussed 
with persons outside the Department, should contact the appropriate 
Field Office Counsel or Headquarters counsel for the program to which 
the question pertains.

Prohibition Against Lobbying Activities

    The use of funds awarded under this NOFA is subject to the 
disclosure requirements and prohibitions of section 319 of the 
Department of Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for 
Fiscal Year 1990 (31 U.S.C. 1352) (the ``Byrd Amendment'') and the 
implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 87. These authorities prohibit 
recipients of Federal contracts, grants, or loans from using 
appropriated funds for lobbying the Executive or Legislative Branches 
of the Federal Government in connection with specific contract, grant, 
or loan. The prohibition also covers the awarding of contracts, grants, 
cooperative agreements, or loans unless the recipient has made an 
acceptable certification regarding lobbying. Under 24 CFR part 87, 
applicants, recipients, and subrecipients of assistance exceeding 
$100,000 must certify that no Federal funds have been or will be spent 
on lobbying activities in connection with the assistance. IHAs 
established by an Indian tribe as a result of the exercise of the 
tribe's sovereign power are excluded from coverage of the Byrd 
Amendment, but IHAs established under State law are not excluded from 
the statute's coverage.

    Dated: September 18, 1996.
Kevin Emanuel Marchman,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing.

Appendix A--Request for Proposals (RFP) and Program Guidelines for 
Establishing a Fair Housing Services Center (FHSC) in East Texas

    This is a request for proposals to establish a FHSC in East Texas 
to be administered by a nonprofit organization (``NPO'') as required by 
the Final Judgment and Decree in (``Final Judgment'') Lucille Young v. 
Cisneros, CA No. P-80-8-CA, (E.D. Tex.; dated March 30, 1995). HUD has 
been ordered to provide $500,000 per year for a period of at least five 
years to fund a FHSC for East Texas to be located in Beaumont, Texas, 
with several branch offices within the 36-county area that constitutes 
East Texas, and one mobile office unit to provide services to remote 
locations throughout East Texas. The funding will provide for a variety 
of services designed to facilitate desegregative moves of class member 
applicants for and residents of public housing throughout the seventy 
(70) Public Housing Authorities (``PHAs'') located in the 36-county 
jurisdiction of the Young Final Judgment. The specific responsibilities 
of the FHSC are enumerated in the Scope of Work below, in the Final 
Judgment (copy attached), and the original desegregation plans and the 
plan amendments approved by the Court. The Final Judgment is the 
document that controls the activities of the FHSC. The FHSC is bound by 
the terms of the Final Judgment and final desegregation plans (as 
determined by the Court).
    The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (``HUD'') will 
award to and enter into a contract with an NPO. HUD's Beaumont Staff 
Office will monitor performance. The term of the contract shall be for 
one year, renewable in one year increments for at least five years. The 
renewal of the contract is contingent upon the FHSC's ability in 
meeting the conditions set forth in Section B, ``Scope of Work'' below, 
and in complying with the Final Judgment. HUD shall provide $500,000 
for the activities of the FHSC for each year of operation, and a total 
of 1,000 Section 8 rental assistance vouchers and/or certificates 
(excluding incremental and turnovers) to be used toward HUD's 
obligation to provide 5,134 desegregative housing opportunities to 
Young class members.
    The housing opportunity counseling funds will be provided to the 
FHSC through HUD's contract administrator. HUD will award the 1,000 
desegregation vouchers/certificates to PHAs that have jurisdiction in 
the areas where the Young class members move. The PHAs that are awarded 
these vouchers/certificates are herein called ``receiving PHA(s)''.

DATES: Deadline for proposals: Proposals must be received by 3 P.M., 
Washington DC time, on October 25, 1996. Proposals received after this 
deadline will not be eligible for consideration. Faxed documents will 
not be accepted, nor will documents be accepted that are postmarked 
after October 25, 1996. It is the responsibility of all applicants to 
ensure that their proposal is received by the above deadline.

ADDRESSES: The original and nine complete copies of the proposal should 
be submitted by the deadline to Mr. Gerald J. Benoit, Director, 
Operations Division, Office of Rental Assistance, Department of Housing 
and Urban Development, Room 4220, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 
DC 20410.


[[Page 50378]]


CONTACTS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: For general information, interested 
nonprofit organizations should contact--Gerald J. Benoit, Director, 
Operations Division, Office of Rental Assistance, Department of Housing 
and Urban Development, Room 4220, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 
DC 20410-8000, telephone number (202) 708-0477 (this is not a toll-free 
number). For hearing- and speech-impaired persons, this number may be 
accessed via TTY (text telephone) by calling the Federal Information 
Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
    The following sections of this RFP are:

I. Scope of Work
    A. Background and Objectives
    B. Activities of the FHSC
    C. Administrative Requirements
    D. Monitoring
II. Contents of Proposal
    A. Eligible Applicant
    B. Description of Activities and Costs
    C. Deficient Applications for FHSC
III. Factors for Award
    A. Evaluating Rating Factors
    B. Certification
    C. Cost Factor
    D. Contract Award

I. Scope of Work

A. Background and Objectives

    The plaintiffs in Young, African-American residents of public 
housing in East Texas, filed this action in 1980, alleging that HUD had 
knowingly maintained a system of segregated housing in a 36-county area 
of East Texas, in violation of the U.S. Constitution and various civil 
rights laws. The plaintiffs contended that there was segregation in 
HUD-supported low income Public Housing, Section 8 Existing Housing 
Program, and other HUD-assisted multifamily programs (including HUD-
insured housing). While there are presently 70 individual public 
housing authorities (``PHAs'') in the 36-county area, none of the PHAs 
are included in the lawsuit as parties.
    In 1982, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas 
(``Court'') certified a class consisting of all African-American 
applicants for and residents of HUD-funded public housing, Section 8 
housing and other assisted housing programs in the 36-county area.
    In 1985, the court issued a liability decision, finding that HUD 
had knowingly and continually maintained a system of segregated housing 
in the 36-county area. In 1987, while an appeal was pending, HUD and 
the plaintiffs reached an agreement to limit the scope of the case and 
class of plaintiffs to public housing in the 36-county area. The Young 
class thus consists of all African-American residents of, or applicants 
for, public housing in the 36-county area.
    In 1988, the court appointed a special master and issued an interim 
injunction, which, among other things, compelled HUD to require each of 
the 70 PHAs to implement race-conscious Tenant Selection and Assignment 
Plans and to provide all class members a series of notices of 
desegregative opportunities in all HUD-assisted housing in East Texas.
    After settlement discussions between HUD and the plaintiffs proved 
unsuccessful in 1990, the court issued an Order for Further Relief, 
dated September 9, 1990, which required, among other things, that HUD 
develop desegregation plans or assertions of unitary status for each of 
the 70 PHAs. The court ordered HUD, in developing each plan, to provide 
for the equalization of conditions between predominantly African-
American projects and the conditions in the projects and neighborhoods 
where the majority of white HUD-assisted housing recipients resided.
    By June 1991, HUD had submitted desegregation plans or unitary 
status assertions for all 70 PHAs to the court for approval. Although 
the court did not rule as to the adequacy of the plans and unitary 
status assertions at that point, HUD began to implement the 
desegregation plans. In October 1993, after further analysis, HUD 
withdrew its submission of the plans and assertions after having 
determined that they did not fully or adequately address the 
requirements of the September 1990 Order.
    HUD filed revised plans on February 8, 1994, along with the East 
Texas Comprehensive Desegregation Plan (Comprehensive Plan). The 
Comprehensive Plan reinstituted the original plans filed in 1990-91, 
but amended them to provide for further actions, and replaced all 
unitary status assertions with new desegregation plans (asserting that 
none of the 70 PHAs had, as of yet, attained unitary status).
    The Comprehensive Plan filed in February 1994 called for the 
creation of 1,000 desegregative housing opportunities for class members 
over a five-year period. In May 1994, after further analysis, HUD 
agreed to provide for the creation of 5,134 desegregative opportunities 
within seven years. On March 30, 1995, U.S. District Judge William 
Wayne Justice issued the Final Judgment, that approved the original 
desegregation plans and the plan amendments and required HUD to fund 
the FHSC.

B. Activities of the FHSC

    1. The FHSC must become familiar with all relevant HUD regulations 
(e.g., those governing Section 8 assistance, public housing, assisted 
housing, and Fair Housing), the Final Judgment and applicable 
individual desegregation plans. The FHSC shall order and/or approve all 
issuances by the receiving PHA of Section 8 vouchers or certificates to 
class members or others pursuant to the Final Judgment Decree, Sec. II.
    2. Outreach to landlords and assistance with exception rents. The 
FHSC shall encourage and assist in the development of desegregative 
housing opportunities, including outreach to private landlords in non-
minority areas for the purpose of encouraging them to participate in 
the Section 8 existing program, as well as counseling and referral 
services to Section 8 existing housing tenants and applicants who wish 
to utilize their Section 8 certificates or housing vouchers in a manner 
furthering desegregation pursuant to para. IV.5.d. of the Final 
Judgment.
    The FHSC, along with the PHAs, shall monitor rents in desegregative 
housing opportunity areas every six months to determine whether such 
rents are adversely affecting housing opportunities. If so, the FHSC 
shall take such steps as are necessary to overcome this adverse affect, 
including by requesting that HUD consider granting exception rents for 
certificates or payment standards for vouchers, pursuant to the Court's 
1990 Order for Further Relief, if such exception rents or payment 
standards would increase the availability of desegregative housing 
opportunities for class members.
    3. Prescreening services. The FHSC shall prescreen all clients of 
the FHSC who have not already been screened by the receiving PHA, to 
document each client's ability and willingness to comply with an 
acceptable lease and HUD program requirements pursuant to para. IV.5.a. 
of the Final Judgment.
    4. Counseling services and other social services support. Pursuant 
to para. IV.5.b. of the Final Judgment, the FHSC shall provide 
counseling services designed to provide information and counseling with 
respect to class members including the following: inform applicants of 
desegregative housing opportunities; provide offers and/or referral to 
such housing opportunities; assist applicants in taking advantage of 
those opportunities; and help them overcome obstacles inherent in 
desegregative moves. In addition, the FHSC will: provide escort 
assistance to

[[Page 50379]]

available units; provide post-move support services; provide 
information about educational and economic opportunities; arrange home 
visits; and communicate information about the positive features of 
neighborhoods where there is housing that represents desegregative 
housing opportunities as defined in the Final Judgment.
    5. Class members who receive a desegregative voucher/certificate. 
Under the Final Judgment and Decree, HUD will provide to class members 
5,134 desegregative housing opportunities, over a seven-year period. 
The actual placement of a total of 40 class members in Alba (1), 
Corrigan (2), Fruitvale (2), Kirbyville (8), Mount Pleasant (22), Talco 
(2), and Trinidad (3) is also required under the Final Judgment. Two 
hundred desegregative vouchers/certificates will be provided in the 
first year of the FHSC's operation, and 200 per year thereafter for the 
following five years. The class members who receive one of the 
desegregative vouchers/certificates will be required to use their 
vouchers/certificates in rental housing that constitutes a 
desegregative opportunity as defined in the Final Judgment. The FHSC 
will provide to the class members who receive a desegregative voucher/
certificate counseling services and other forms of assistance, as 
necessary, to aid them in locating desegregative housing.
    Pursuant to para. IV.5.g. of the Final Judgment and Decree, FHSC 
will give each class member written notice, every six months, in a form 
and distribution method to be approved by HUD, of all HUD-assisted and/
or HUD-subsidized low-income housing developments in the housing 
markets where the class member resides that offer the class members a 
desegregative housing opportunity, provide notice of the full address, 
telephone number, and name of the person responsible for accepting 
applications for the development, a short description of the type of 
housing offered by the development, and the general eligibility 
requirements or the development. The FHSC will include in the Notice to 
class members, information about the mobility program, and the 
opportunities available through it.
    a. PHA Responsibilities. The receiving PHAs will be awarded 1,000 
desegregation certificates and vouchers to be used toward HUD's 
obligation to provide 5,134 desegregative housing opportunities to 
Young class members; conduct the intake and initial eligibility 
determination of applicants; and conduct any required Housing Quality 
Standards (``HQS'') inspections of units. The 1,000 desegregative 
vouchers/certificates are for the exclusive use of class members. 
Certificates or vouchers obtained by receiving PHAs from other East 
Texas Sec. 8 programs through turnover, recapture, or otherwise, may be 
provided to non-class members when required by HUD under subparagraph c 
below.
    b. Award and Turn-in of Desegregative certificates. Class members 
who initially receive a desegregative voucher/certificate will have 120 
days within which to enter into a lease for a unit of desegregative 
housing as defined, or, if the FHSC has failed to offer a unit within 
that time, until a desegregative offer is in fact received. At the 
expiration of 120 days, if an offer and if a lease has not been 
entered, the applicant has the option of continuing to search for 
housing with no restrictions as to locations for an additional sixty 
days. However, should the class member locate in a minority 
neighborhood, this will not count toward HUD'S obligation to create 
5,134 desegregative housing opportunities. At the end of the sixty-day 
period, the certificate would revert to the receiving PHA unless it 
grants an extension.
    c. Special procedures for Affirmative Action Waiting List 
Initiatives. HUD shall provide to the FHSC the name and address of 
every class member applicant who is to be offered a certificate and 
counseling as an alternative to public housing when a PHA uses an 
affirmative action waiting list procedure that has been approved by the 
Court to offer the unit that would otherwise have been offered to the 
class member, to a white applicant whose name is listed lower on the 
waiting list. Paragraph III of the Final Judgment is to be followed 
when implementing the Affirmative Action Waiting List initiatives. When 
a class member is offered a certificate or voucher under these 
circumstances:
    (1) The class member is to be made an offer of alternative housing 
within 60 days of the date on which the public housing unit that is to 
be offered to a white applicant available for assignment.
    (2) The class member must be provided the Sec. 8 voucher or 
certificate and an offer of a unit must be made within 120 days from 
issuance of the certificate to the class member that meets the 
requirements of VII.7 of the Final Judgment and must notify HUD within 
one day if the applicant accepts the offer;
    (3) If the class member rejects the offer of alternative housing, 
the FHSC must notify HUD within one day of the rejection, state the 
reason(s) for the rejection, and provide information as to the location 
of the rejected unit and evidence of its availability.
    (4) If, after 120 days, an alternative housing opportunity has not 
been found for the class member, the class member may opt to hold the 
certificate for up to sixty additional days and to search for housing 
on her or his own without restriction as to location.
    HUD will provide the FHSC with the name and address of every non-
class member who is to receive a Sec. 8 voucher/certificate as a result 
of the implementation of the Affirmative Action Waiting List. The FHSC 
must instruct the receiving PHA to issue a Sec. 8 existing housing 
voucher/certificate to the non-class member applicant who held the 
highest position on the waiting list and who would otherwise have been 
offered an available public housing unit but for the advancement of a 
class member to the head of the waiting list for that unit under the 
Affirmative Action Waiting List.
    d. Priority of Offers. The FHSC will offer the desegregative 
certificates to class members according to the following priority: (1) 
To class members residing in predominantly African American low-rent 
public housing projects; (2) to class members who are on a waiting list 
for low-rent public housing as of March 30, 1995; (3) to class members 
who apply for low-rent public housing subsequent to the date of March 
30, 1995.
    6. The FHSC shall encourage and assist class members to make 
desegregative moves within the low income housing program and to 
privately owned assisted housing programs pursuant to para. IV.5.e. of 
the Final Judgment. The FHSC shall develop and implement a plan to 
refer class members, with or without the use of Sec. 8 certificates or 
vouchers, to privately owned, HUD-assisted, or FmHA housing located in 
areas which provide a desegregative housing opportunity. FHSC shall 
conduct outreach to the landlords and/or owners of all such HUD-
assisted, or FmHA private housing providers located in areas which 
provide a desegregative opportunity and other Sec. 8 existing agencies, 
to encourage participation in the FHSC-developed referral plan. FHSC 
shall monitor the performance of other Sec. 8 existing agencies in the 
36-county area in this regard, and shall also develop a system to 
record all offers of an/or placements of class members in desegregative 
housing by other Sec. 8 agencies in East Texas.
    7. Information. The FHSC shall designate specific personnel to 
respond to requests for information and requests for assistance from 
class members

[[Page 50380]]

desiring to obtain a desegregative housing opportunity as defined in 
the Final Judgment. The assistance to be provided shall include 
referrals of interested class members to public housing developments, 
and to programs other than low income public housing, that offer 
desegregative housing opportunities in East Texas.
    8. Quarterly Status and Annual Performance Report. The FHSC shall 
provide quarterly status reports on significant activities taken under 
the requirements of the Final Judgment and Decree. HUD will file each 
report with the court and serve it on plaintiffs' counsel within thirty 
days of the end of the quarter covered in the report.
    The FHSC shall submit an annual report on their performance of 
their obligations under the Final Judgment and Decree to the 
plaintiffs, with a copy to go to the court by April 30th of each year.
    9. HUD's Right to Request Information. The FHSC will collect and 
maintain the data necessary to monitor the program toward providing 
desegregative opportunities. This would include: (a) The number of 
class members seeking desegregated housing opportunities; (b) the 
number of class members actually leasing units in non-impacted 
neighborhoods; (c) the number and name of housing providers recruited 
into the program; and (d) the number of class members assisted and 
number of hours staff members devoted to assisting families, and 
similar data as HUD may require. The FHSC will comply with any 
informational requests from HUD that HUD, in its discretion, makes from 
time to time during the course of the program.

C. Administrative Requirements

    The FHSC shall be required to adhere to the following three 
administrative requirements in performing work under this award:
    1. Submission of quarterly progress reports detailing progress made 
in fulfilling the tasks and sub-tasks in the approved Project 
Management Plan;
    2. Distribution of an Evaluation Questionnaire to all persons, 
organizations, agencies, or other entitles receiving services, 
participating, or otherwise involved in this project and submission of 
a ``Customer Satisfaction Report'' semi-annually;
    3. Preparation of a final report in a format suitable for 
information transfer, exchange and dissemination to other PHA's 
communities, or other entities interested in providing such services. 
The final report should detail the case study of East Texas 
Desegregation Counseling Project and provide insights and 
recommendations for others who may wish to develop similar programs.

D. Monitoring

    The FHSC shall monitor the compliance of the providers of low-
income housing in the class action area (low-income public housing and 
assisted housing) with the fair housing laws and the requirements 
placed upon the providers under the comprehensive plan and the 
individual desegregation plans pursuant to para. IV.5.c. of the Final 
Judgment.

II. Contents of Proposal

A. Eligible Applicant

    The proposal must be submitted by an NPO and must include all 
information requested in this section. Any proposal submitted after the 
due date or that does not contain the required information may be 
rejected. The NPO must submit documentation as a part of the proposal 
that verifies the ``501(c)3'' and/or ``501(c)4'' (IRS Code) status, of 
the NPO and its legal authority to operate throughout East Texas area.
    Corporate documents. The NPO shall provide a copy of its Articles 
of Incorporation.

B. Description of Activities and Costs

    It is to an NPO's advantage if it describes its experiences, if 
any, as requested in this section. In the case of a newly formed NPO, 
the NPO may substitute a description of experience and knowledge of its 
principal officers and employees where a description of its own 
experience is requested below.
    1. Description of experience. The NPO must submit a narrative 
description of its experience in assisting lower-income families and/or 
African-Americans or other minorities in the search for housing. The 
NPO should describe its working knowledge of HUD's Section 8 programs, 
as well as its Public Housing and Assisted Housing programs. The NPO 
should include a list of its projects over the last two years that are 
relevant to this procurement action. HUD reserves the right to request 
information from any source so named.
    2. Knowledge of fair housing and mobility experience. The NPO must 
submit a narrative description of its knowledge of, and experience in 
assisting African-Americans with fair housing as well as monitoring 
providers for violations of the fair housing laws. The narrative should 
specifically address the NPO's knowledge of the rental market in 
racially non-impacted areas and the barriers that limit access to that 
housing by lower-income minority persons. The NPO shall also describe 
its experience with mobility activities.
    3. Description of organizational capacity. The NPO must submit a 
narrative description of its capability and capacity to handle a 
project of this scope. The narrative is to include a list of current 
federally funded activities. The NPO should provide an organizational 
chart of key personnel to be involved in each activity under the 
agreement, and the percentage of time that they will devote to each 
activity. The NPO should include resumes, references, or other 
documents that show that key personnel have experience in the tasks 
described in the ``Scope of Work'', the Final Judgment and Decree, and 
applicable individual desegregation plans. If the NPO plans to utilize 
subcontractors, consultants or other agents, it should provide the same 
information with respect to them.
    4. Management plan. A summary of a management plan as described 
below, particularly as the Plan pertains to the evaluation factors set 
out in Section III. A. of this RFP, shall be submitted as part of each 
organization's proposal. A detailed narrative of a management plan to 
carry out the programs as outlined in the Final Judgment and Decree and 
this RFP. This plan will be delivered to the HUD Beaumont Staff Office 
within 15 days after the agreement is awarded. The Plan will include a 
description of: (1) Each task and sub-task; (2) the methodology to be 
used in accomplishing each task and sub-task; (3) internal financial 
management and oversight procedures and policies; (4) when each task, 
sub-task and establishment of financial oversight procedures will be 
accomplished; (5) staff and organization (including an organizational 
flow-chart), including the staff-loading for each task and sub-task; 
(6) projected costs for each task and sub-task by calendar quarter; (7) 
the support that is expected to be required from HUD and its contract 
administrator; and (8) projected site and cost of office space and 
mobile unit, if applicable. The final management plan will then be 
submitted by HUD to the Court for approval.

C. Deficient Applications for FHSC

    A proposal will be deemed technically ineligible if:
    1. It does not fully adhere to the guidelines established herein, 
including budgetary requirements;
    2. The complete proposal is not received by the deadline;
    3. A comprehensive line item budget is not included;

[[Page 50381]]

    4. The project budget for costs charged against funds exceeds 
$500,000; or
    5. Unsigned proposal or certification forms are submitted.

III. Factors for Award

A. Evaluating Rating Factors

    HUD will use the following criteria to evaluate proposals received 
in response to this RFP. In all cases, the number of points stated 
represents the maximum. In the actual scoring, any given application 
may receive less than the maximum for each category, based on an 
evaluation of competing applications.
    1. Familiarity with housing mobility counseling and HUD housing 
programs (30 points).
    a. Demonstrated work experience with fair housing mobility 
counseling of lower income and minority families. (10)
    b. Demonstrated work experience with HUD's Section 8 Public Housing 
or privately owned assisted housing programs. (10)
    c. Demonstrated work experience in coordinating resources and 
activities provided by a variety of government, private sector 
agencies, and organizations for providing housing and/or fair housing 
law enforcement support. (10)
    2. Knowledge of fair housing and mobility experience (25).
    a. Demonstrated record of participation in fair housing activities, 
particularly with respect to low income families and racial or ethnic 
minorities and monitoring providers of low-income housing for 
violations of the fair housing laws. (10)
    b. Demonstrated knowledge of and experience in mobility services 
for African-American tenants. (10)
    c. Experience in rental markets in the racially non-impacted areas. 
(5)
    3. Organizational capacity (20 points).
    a. Demonstrated capability and capacity of the non-profit 
organization to effectively manage a grant of this scope. (10)
    b. Demonstrated capability of the non-profit's key personnel, 
including officers, employees, partners, subcontractors, consultants 
and other agents to accomplish the work responsibilities of the FHSC. 
(10)
    4. Quality of Proposal (25 points).
    a. Extent to which the proposal demonstrates an understanding of 
the Final Judgment and Decree, the applicable individual desegregation 
plans, and this RFP, and proposes a realistic approach to all the work 
requirements that most nearly meet the conditions of the Final Judgment 
and Decree. (15)
    b. Degree of clarity and acceptability of the overall proposal and 
specific methods, procedures and steps as outlined in the Management 
Plan. (10)

B. Certification

    Each application must contain an original and nine copies of the 
certifications identified below. Each certification must be signed by 
the Chief Executive Officer of the applicant organization unless 
otherwise noted.
    1. Drug-free Workplace Certification. The non-profit must certify 
that it will provide a drug-free workplace and comply with the drug-
free workplace requirements at 24 CFR Part 24, Subpart F. See attached 
certification for drug-free workplace.
    2. Certification regarding Lobbying pursuant to Section 319 of the 
Department of the Interior Appropriation Act of 1989, generally 
prohibiting use of appropriated funds for lobbying.
    3. Certification of no outstanding violations of: Title VI of the 
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d) and regulations pursuant 
thereto (24 CFR part 1); the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601-19); 
Executive Order 11063, as amended by Executive Order 12892 and HUD 
regulations (24 CFR part 107); Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 
1973 (29 U.S.C. 794) and regulations issued pursuant thereto (24 CFR 
part 8); Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (and 
applicable regulations at 28 CFR Part 36); the Age Discrimination Act 
of 1975 (42 U.S.C. 6101-07) and regulations issued pursuant thereto (24 
CFR part 146); Executive Order 11246 and all regulations issued 
pursuant thereto (41 CFR Chapter 60-1); Section 3 of the Housing and 
Urban Development Act of 1968 (12 U.S.C. 1701U) and regulations 
pursuant thereto (24 CFR part 135).
    4. Conflicts of Interest. The nonprofit shall provide a statement 
which describes all relevant facts concerning any past, present or 
currently planned interest (financial, contractual, organizational, or 
otherwise) relating to the work to be performed which could present a 
possible conflict of interest with respect to: (a) being able to render 
impartial, technically sound, and objective assistance or advice; or 
(b) being given an unfair competitive advantage. The nonprofit shall 
describe its current and past relationship with HUD as it relates to a 
possible conflict of interest in carrying out the counseling program.
    Such conflict could arise when any employee, officer or agent of 
the PHA, HUD or plaintiffs' counsel; any member of his or her immediate 
family, his or her partner, or organization which employs or is about 
to employ any of the above has a financial or other interest in the NPO 
that is selected.

C. Cost Factor

    Cost will become relevant in the case of a tie score in the 
technical part of the evaluation, as stated under ``Contract Award'' 
below. It is the goal of the Final Judgment to provide high quality 
services that will contribute substantially to the desegregation of all 
federally assisted housing in East Texas. It is expected that the costs 
of each task and sub-task will be addressed in the proposal, including 
the costs for sub-contractors, etc. HUD reserves the right to reject 
any proposal that does not adequately analyze costs.

D. Contract Award

    Negotiations will be conducted with those NPOs whose proposals fall 
within a competitive range from a technical perspective. Award will be 
made to the most responsive NPO whose proposal is considered to be the 
most advantageous. In the event two or more offerors are considered 
technically equivalent, cost efficiency--i.e., the extent to which the 
non-profit that has a plan that will accomplish the most desegregative 
placements of all kinds within the established financial parameters--
will be considered of primary importance.

E. Approval by HUD and Court Review

    Notwithstanding the foregoing, a contract shall not be entered into 
for the FHSC without the express written approval by HUD of the entity 
and proposal selected, and of the contract with such entity. The 
initial and any subsequent HUD decisions to select an entity to 
contract with the NPO and the initial and any subsequent HUD approvals 
of the entity and proposal selected and of the contract with the NPO 
are subject to judicial review by motion of the plaintiffs under para. 
IV.6. of the Final Judgment and Decree.

Certification Regarding Drug-Free Workplace Requirements (From 24 CFR 
24, Appendix C)

Instructions for Certification

    1. By signing and/or submitting this application or grant 
agreement, the grantee is providing the certification set out below.
    2. The certification set out below is a material representation of 
fact upon which reliance was placed when the agency determined to award 
the grant. If it is later determined that the grantee knowingly 
rendered a false certification,

[[Page 50382]]

or otherwise violates the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act, 
the agency, in addition to any other remedies available to the Federal 
Government, may take action authorized under the Drug-Free Workplace 
Act.
    3. For grantees other than individuals, Alternate I applies.
    4. For grantees who are individuals, Alternate II applies.
Certification Regarding Drug-Free Workplace Requirements
 Alternate I
    A. The grantee certifies that it will provide a drug-free workplace 
by:
    (a) Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful 
manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession or use of a 
controlled substance is prohibited in the grantee's workplace and 
specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for 
violation of such prohibition;
    (b) Establishing a drug-free awareness program to inform employees 
about--
    (1) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;
    (2) The grantee's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace;
    (3) Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee 
assistance programs; and
    (4) The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse 
violations occurring in the workplace;
    (c) Making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the 
performance of the grant be given a copy of the statement required by 
paragraph (a);
    (d) Notifying the employee in the statement required by paragraph 
(a) that, as a condition of employment under the grant, the employee 
will--
    (1) Abide by the terms of the statement; and
    (2) Notify the employer of any criminal drug statute conviction for 
a violation occurring in the workplace no later than five days after 
such conviction;
    (e) Notifying the agency within ten days after receiving notice 
under subparagraph (d)(2) from an employee or otherwise receiving 
actual notice of such conviction;
    (f) Taking one of the following actions, within 30 days of 
receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2), with respect to any 
employee who is so convicted--
    (1) Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, 
up to and including termination; or
    (2) Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug 
abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes 
by a Federal, State, or local health, law enforcement, or other 
appropriate agency;
    (g) Making a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug-free 
workplace through implementation of paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) 
and (f).
    B. The grantee shall insert in the space provided below the site(s) 
for the performance of work done in connection with the specific grant: 
Place of Performance (Street address, city, county, state, zip code)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternate II
    The grantee certifies that, as a condition of the grant, he or she 
will not engage in the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, 
possession or use of a controlled substance in conducting any activity 
with the grant.

In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas 
Paris Division

    Lucille Young, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Henry G. Cisneros, et al., 
Defendants. [P-80-8-CA, Final Judgment]

Final Judgment and Decree

    In 1985, defendants in the above-entitled and numbered civil action 
were found liable for knowingly and continually maintaining a system of 
segregated housing in a thirty-six county area of East Texas in 
violation of the constitutional and civil rights of a class of African-
Americans. Young v. Pierce, 628 F. Supp. 1037 (E.D. Tex. 1985). An 
interim injunction issued in this action in 1988. Young v. Pierce, 685 
F. Supp. 986 (E.D. Tex. 1985). Such interim injunction was amended by 
order of this court in 1990. Order for Further Relief, September 10, 
1990. After extensive briefing by the parties and a hearing on the 
plaintiffs' motion for final remedy, it is
    Ordered, Adjudged, and Decreed that the Honorable Henry G. 
Cisneros, as Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development (``HUD''), his officers, agents, servants, employees, 
successors, and all persons in active concert or participation with 
them shall be, and are hereby, Permanently Enjoined, either directly, 
or through contractual or other arrangements, to take the actions 
necessary to effectuate the relief decreed by the provisions of this 
Final Judgment and Decree, as follows:
    1. The individual desegregation plans and the individual 
desegregation plan amendments for each Public Housing Authority 
(``PHA'') submitted by the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
(``HUD'') are hereby approved, subject to the modifications contained 
in this judgment and decree. As used herein, ``individual desegregation 
plan''or ``desegregation plan'' includes both the original, individual 
desegregation plan filed by HUD for a particular PHA and the individual 
plan amendment filed by HUD for that PHA. Within ninety days from the 
issuance of this judgment and decree HUD shall re-file the individual 
desegregation plans, which shall fully incorporate the amendments to 
such plans, in order that a fully integrated plan for each PHA will be 
on file.
    2. The desegregation plans shall be implemented and interpreted in 
a manner consistent with the applicable provisions of HUD's East Texas 
Comprehensive Desegregation Plan (``Comprehensive Plan'') and with the 
provisions of this judgment and decree. HUD shall discharge all duties 
imposed upon HUD by the terms of the Comprehensive Plan and by the 
provisions of this judgment and decree. In the event of any 
inconsistency or conflict between the provisions of this judgment and 
decree and the provisions of either the Comprehensive Plan or the 
desegregation plans, the provisions of this judgment and decree shall 
be controlling.
    3. All orders, including the interim injunction previously issued 
in this action, shall be in full force until HUD attains unitary 
status, as defined in this judgment and decree, and judicial 
supervision ends in accordance with this judgment and decree. All 
previous orders entered in this action shall be interpreted in a manner 
consistent with this judgment and decree. In the event of any 
inconsistency or conflict between the provisions of this judgment and 
decree and the provisions of any earlier order, the provisions of this 
judgment and decree shall be controlling.
    4. All provisions of this judgment and decree shall require, or be 
construed as requiring, compliance with federal statutes as they now 
exist, or as they may be amended or enacted.

I. Physical Improvement to Projects and Neighborhoods

    1. Financial assistance for physical improvements specified in the 
desegregation plans shall be provided by HUD or, in the case of 
neighborhood improvements receiving financial assistance under the 
Community Development Block Grant Small Cities Program (``CDBG Small 
Cities Program''), by the State of Texas, within seven years of the 
date of this judgment

[[Page 50383]]

and decree. The review and approval process for applications for 
financial assistance shall be conducted in accordance with all 
applicable laws and regulations, including the rules governing 
competitive programs, where appropriate.
    2. Each such physical improvement shall be completed as soon as is 
feasible and practicable after approval and funding and, in no event, 
shall the time period for the completion of any such physical 
improvement exceed a period of three years from the date upon which the 
application is approved and funded. With respect to neighborhood 
improvements being carried out by a municipal government with financial 
assistance under the Community Development Block Grant Program (``CDBG 
program''), it shall be the responsibility of HUD to take all 
appropriate actions within HUD's control to obtain completion of those 
neighborhood improvements within the time periods specified herein.
    3. If any municipal government fails to take an action necessary to 
complete the neighborhood improvements specified in the PHA's 
desegregation plan, HUD shall take appropriate action in accordance 
with the regulations governing the CDBG program. These actions may 
include (i) enforcement mechanisms available to HUD under its 
obligation affirmatively to further fair housing and (ii) causing the 
PHA to institute against the municipal government enforcement based on 
the municipality's violation of the cooperation agreement between the 
PHA and the municipality.
    4. If any PHA fails to take an action necessary to complete the 
physical improvements specified in the PHA's desegregation plan, HUD 
shall take appropriate enforcement action against the PHA. These 
actions may include one or more of the actions described in the 
Comprehensive Plan at p. 20 for dealing with the failure of a PHA to 
follow its desegregation plan.
    5. Where HUD has required improvement of neighborhood conditions as 
part of the desegregation remedy for a PHA, HUD shall cause that PHA 
and the responsible municipality to enter into a memorandum of 
understanding under which the municipality agrees to carry out the 
required neighborhood improvements. Each such memorandum of 
understanding shall identify the neighborhood conditions to be 
corrected or upgraded and describe the work to be done in carrying out 
such correction or upgrading. If such work requires funding under the 
CDBG Program, the memorandum of understanding shall also contain a 
preliminary cost estimate for the required work. All such memoranda of 
understanding shall be entered into by the PHAs and their respective 
municipalities no later than July 1, 1995. All such memoranda of 
understanding shall be submitted for the approval of the court. Upon 
approval by the court, the memorandum of understanding between a PHA 
and a municipality shall define the full extent of the obligation to 
correct or upgrade neighborhood conditions in that PHA and in that 
municipality.
    6. In approving applications for the funding of physical 
improvements, or the provision of amenities, to low-rent public housing 
projects in the class action area, HUD shall, to the extent consistent 
with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, give priority to 
the funding of applications for making such improvements, or providing 
such improvements, to racially identifiable African-American projects, 
i.e., low-rent public housing projects in which seventy-five percent 
(75%) or more of the residents are African-Americans.
    7. The amended individual desegregation plans require, and the 
comprehensive plan contemplates, certain physical improvements which 
include, inter alia, the provision of air conditioning equipment, 
laundry facilities, community centers, and playgrounds. Plaintiffs 
additionally seek the provision of carpeting, dishwashers, a utility 
allowance to account for the reasonable use of air conditioning, and 
garbage disposals in predominately and historically African-American 
projects. Moreover, plaintiffs identify other conditions present at 
predominately and historically African-American projects that are not 
present at the historically and predominantly white projects, including 
inadequate security and maintenance.
    HUD shall satisfy the obligations of the individual desegregation 
plans as they pertain to amenities and services. In addition to those 
amenities and services required by the individual desegregation plans, 
HUD shall provide the amenities and services available in any of the 
historically and predominantly white projects at the historically and 
predominately African-American projects of like or similar kind within 
the PHA. The amenities and services required at the non-elderly family 
units at historically and predominately African-American projects in a 
given PHA are to be determined by evaluating the historically and 
predominately white non-elderly family units within the same PHA. For 
example, HUD must ensure that the historically and predominately 
African-American non-elderly family units include carpeting if a 
historically and predominately white non-elderly family unit includes 
carpeting. Moreover, both projects shall be staffed with maintenance 
personnel in equal numbers or such numbers as necessary to maintain the 
premises in substantially similar condition.

II. Creation of Desegregated Housing Opportunities

    1. Within seven years from the date of this judgment and decree, 
HUD shall create a total of 5,134 desegregated housing opportunities 
for elderly and non-elderly class members in non-minority census blocks 
in the class action area. Desegregated housing opportunities shall be 
offered, first, to class members residing in predominately African-
American low-rent public housing projects, second, to class members who 
are on a waiting list for low-rent public housing as of the date of 
this judgment and decree, and, third, to class members who apply for 
low-rent public housing subsequent to the date of this judgment and 
decree.
    2. a. The term ``non-minority census block'' is defined in 
accordance with the ``\1/4\ mile radius'' methodology described in the 
report of the East Texas Demographic and Mapping Analysis conducted by 
George Galster of the Urban Institute under a contract with HUD 
(Defendants' Exhibit 116). A given census block shall be regarded as a 
non-minority census block, if the area consisting of the given census 
block, plus all census blocks within the PHA jurisdiction whose 
centroids lie within a \1/4\ mile radius of the centroid of the given 
census block (i) has a percentage of white population of more than 
eighty percent (80%), or (ii) has a percentage of white population 
greater than 100%, minus the PHA jurisdiction's overall percentage of 
African-American population.
    b. Notwithstanding subsection II.2.a., a census block will not be 
regarded as a non-minority census block, if (i) more than fifty percent 
(50%) of the African-Americans living in the area described by the \1/
4\ mile radius methodology are concentrated in individual census blocks 
with more than eighty percent (80%) African-American population, or 
(ii) the population of the area described by the \1/4\ mile methodology 
is more than forty percent (40%) African-American or (iii) geographic, 
demographic, or social factors, including proximity to racially 
impacted areas or isolation from population centers or community 
services, indicate that the census block

[[Page 50384]]

should be regarded to be in a racially impacted area.
    3. To the maximum extent feasible and practicable, HUD shall, 
through the use of tenant-based housing assistance, create within each 
PHA jurisdiction, the number and type (elderly and non-elderly) of 
desegregated housing opportunities which HUD has determined to be 
needed within each particular PHA jurisdiction, as indicated in 
Defendants' Hearing Exhibit No. 119, Table 1.
    4. If the number of desegregated housing opportunities needed 
within a particular PHA cannot be created through the use of tenant-
based housing assistance, that PHA's unmet need shall be satisfied by 
offering class members residing within that particular PHA a 
desegregative housing opportunity located in an adjacent jurisdiction. 
Such adjacent jurisdiction can be no more than thirty-five miles from 
the PHA and must be accessible from the PHA by adequate and feasible 
highway links and public transportation.
    5. If the number of desegregated housing opportunities needed 
within a particular PHA cannot be created through the use of tenant-
based housing assistance, either within the PHA jurisdiction or an 
adjacent jurisdiction, the HUD shall, to the maximum extent feasible 
and practicable, and consistent with all statutory and regulatory 
requirements, satisfy that PHAs unmet need for desegregated housing 
opportunities through the use of project-based Section 8 existing 
housing certificates and vouchers.
    6. If the number of desegregated housing opportunities needed 
within a particular PHA cannot be created through the use of either 
tenant-based or project-based Section 8 housing assistance, then that 
PHA's unmet need shall be satisfied through the creation of 
desegregative housing opportunities anywhere within the class action 
area.
    7. HUD shall be given credit for the creation of a desegregated 
housing opportunity if:
    a. A class member has been provided by HUD with a desegregative 
housing voucher or housing certificate. A desegregative housing voucher 
or housing certificate is a Section 8 existing housing certificate or 
housing voucher, limited for the first 120 days to use in non-minority 
census blocks.
    b. The class member is offered mobility counseling to assist the 
class member to locate an appropriate housing unit.
    c. The class member has been referred by the mobility counseling 
service to a landlord who is willing to accept the class member's 
certificate or voucher for the rental of a housing unit.
    d. The housing unit offered by the willing landlord is located in a 
non-minority census block.
    e. The unit offered by the willing landlord meets the applicable 
Section 8 existing housing quality standards in 24 CFR Sec. 882.109, 
and contains an appropriate number of bedrooms for the particular 
applicant's family size and composition.
    f. The unit offered by the willing landlord is located outside an 
area where a reasonable African-American would perceive significant 
racial hostility.
    g. There must be no legitimate basis for the class member to refuse 
the offered unit. Legitimate reasons to refuse an offer are limited to 
remoteness to jobs or day care and lack of adequate and feasible 
transportation. The burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that the 
proffered reason is legitimate. The special master, or some designated 
representative of the special master, shall make the initial 
determination as to whether the applicant has carried his or her burden 
in this regard.
    8. HUD shall also receive credit for the creation of a desegregated 
housing opportunity, whenever a class member who has been provided with 
a desegregative housing certificate or housing voucher accepts an offer 
of a housing unit located in any non-minority census block in the class 
action area, or in any other non-minority area, but the unit was not 
obtained through a referral from the housing mobility service.
    9. HUD shall receive credit for the creation of a desegregated 
housing opportunity, if a class member is referred by the mobility 
counseling service to a landlord willing to rent the class member, with 
or without the use of a Section 8 housing certificate or voucher, a 
suitable housing unit in a privately owned, HUD-assisted and/or HUD-
subsidized housing development, or in a housing development assisted or 
subsidized by the Farmers Home Administration, provided that the 
offered housing unit meets the location requirements set forth in 
Paragraph II.7.d., above, and provided that the African-American 
occupancy of the project in which the unit is located does not exceed 
fifty percent (50%).
    10. HUD shall also receive credit for the creation of a 
desegregated housing opportunity whenever a class member, with or 
without the use of Section 8 housing certificate or voucher, accepts an 
offer of a housing unit in a privately owned, HUD-assisted and/or HUD-
subsidized housing development, or in a housing development assisted or 
subsidized by the Farmers Home Administration, where (i) the housing 
unit is located in any non-minority census block in the class action 
area, or in any other non-minority area, (ii) the African-American 
occupancy of the project in which the unit is located does not exceed 
fifty percent (50%) and (iii) the unit was not obtained through a 
referral from the housing mobility service.
    11. The mobility services referred to above shall be provided by 
the Fair Housing Services Center, a private, non-profit organization to 
be established and funded by HUD for a five-year period, as set forth 
below.
    12. The Fair Housing Services Center shall administer the 
desegregative Section 8 housing vouchers and certificates under 
contract with one or more PHAs.

III. Elimination or Reduction of Racially Identifiable Low-Rent Public 
Housing Projects

    1. If the individual desegregation plan for a particular PHA does 
not require the use of any of the Waiting List Initiatives, that 
specific PHA shall continue to use a race-conscious tenant selection 
assignment plan in conformity with the requirements of Paragraph 2 of 
the Interim Injunction entered in this action on March 3, 1988.
    2. Any particular Waiting List Initiative specified in an 
individual desegregation plan shall be fully implemented by the PHA 
within six months of the date of this judgment and decree. Any PHA that 
is required to implement a Waiting List Initiative shall also continue 
to use a race-conscious tenant selection assignment plan in conformity 
with the requirements of Paragraph 2 of the Interim Injunction entered 
in this action on March 3, 1988. HUD shall provide any and all 
assistance to the PHA necessary to implement the Waiting List 
Initiative, such as the drafting of detailed instructions to guide the 
PHA in the implementation of the Waiting List Initiative, and the 
preparation of interagency agreements required for the Cross-Listing 
Initiative, the Merged Waiting List Initiative, the Area-Wide Waiting 
List Initiative and the Housing Opportunities Waiting List Initiative.
    3. If any Waiting List Initiative, such as the Affirmative Action 
Waiting List Initiative, employs race-conscious practices for the 
selection of tenants for assignment to a low-rent public housing 
project, an offer of alternative housing shall be made to any class 
member who would otherwise have been offered a unit in the project but 
for the need to

[[Page 50385]]

achieve a desired racial balance in the project within sixty days of 
the date on which the public housing unit in question became available 
for assignment.
    a. Such an offer of alternative housing shall be made to a class 
member if (i) the class member has applied for low-rent public housing 
with the PHA operating the project; (ii) the class member meets all 
applicable eligibility and screening requirements for admission to 
public housing operated by the PHA; and (iii) and the class member 
would otherwise have been offered an available unit in the project but 
for the advancement of a non-class member applicant to the head of the 
waiting list for that unit under the terms of the Waiting List 
Initiative, i.e., the class member held the highest position on the 
waiting list above the non-class member applicant whose position on the 
waiting list was advanced under the terms of the Waiting List 
Initiative. A non-class member applicant may not be advanced on a 
waiting list, unless it has been verified that the non-class member 
applicant meets all eligibility requirements and tenant selection 
criteria applicable to the low-rent public housing project.
    b. In order to satisfy the requirements for an offer of alternative 
housing (i) the class member must be provided with a desegregative 
Section 8 housing voucher or housing certificate and (ii) all other 
requirements for the creation of a desegregated housing opportunity 
specified in Paragraph II.7., above, must be satisfied.
    c. The public housing unit that otherwise would have been offered 
to the class member shall remain vacant pending receipt by the class 
member of an offer of alternative housing.
    d. If the class member who would otherwise have been offered the 
public housing unit rejects an offer of alternative housing HUD shall, 
within seven days of such rejection, provide plaintiffs with a written 
notice stating the name of the applicant and stating the basis for 
HUD's determination that the applicant rejected the offer of a dwelling 
unit meeting the requirements for an offer of alternative housing.
    e. The plaintiffs shall have seven days from the date of notice 
under the preceding subparagraph to submit to HUD, in writing, any 
objections plaintiffs may have to HUD's determination. If timely 
objections are submitted by the plaintiffs, the public housing unit 
shall remain vacant pending a decision by the special master. Except as 
provided in Paragraph III.3.b. (referring to Paragraph II.7.g.), above, 
in any such proceeding, HUD shall bear the burden of proving that the 
applicant has rejected an offer of alternative housing. If no objection 
is made, or, upon objection, the special master determines that an 
offer of alternative housing was received by the class member who would 
otherwise have been offered the public housing unit, the class member 
shall be placed on the waiting list in the position occupied by the 
non-class member advanced in accordance with the Waiting List 
Initiative, and the non-class member applicant advanced under the 
Waiting List Initiative shall be assigned to the public housing unit. 
Either party dissatisfied with the decision of the special master may 
seek review of that decision by this court within seven days of the 
special master's decision.
    f. If a class member rejects an offer of alternative housing after 
previously receiving an offer of alternative housing and rejecting such 
offer, the special master shall determine whether the applicant will 
again be placed on the waiting list in the position occupied by the 
advanced non-class member applicant or will receive different 
consideration in light of the unusual circumstances. Either party 
dissatisfied with the decision of the special master may seek review of 
that decision by this court, within seven days of the special master's 
decision.
    g. If no offer of alternative housing is made within sixty days, 
HUD shall notify the special master, within seven days, of the 
circumstances preventing an offer of alternative housing. The special 
master shall investigate the conditions already causing HUD's failure 
to make an offer of alternative housing. If the special master 
determines that HUD is acting in good faith, the class member shall be 
provided a desegregative housing certificate or voucher which may be 
used without the geographic restriction described in Paragraph II.7.a., 
above, within the time period described in 24 C.F.R. Sec. 882.209(d). A 
finding that HUD acted in bad faith shall be evidence to be considered 
in relation to any motion to hold HUD in contempt.
    4. HUD shall provide a section 8 existing housing voucher to the 
non-class member applicant who would otherwise have been offered an 
available public housing unit but for the advancement of a class member 
to the head of the waiting list for that unit under the terms of a 
Waiting List Initiative, i.e., the non-class member applicant who held 
the highest position on the waiting list above the class member 
applicant whose position on the waiting list was advanced under the 
terms of the Waiting List Initiative.
    5. In determining whether to require a PHA to use the Affirmative 
Action Waiting List Initiative, or any other race conscious tenant 
selection and assignment plan, for a particular low-rent public housing 
project, HUD shall not consider the impact of the integration of the 
project on the racial composition of the neighborhood surrounding that 
project.

IV. Fair Housing Services Center

    1. HUD shall establish a Fair Housing Services Center (``FHSC''), 
the functions of which must include providing assistance to class 
members in locating and obtaining affordable desegregated housing in 
areas where they choose and, additionally, providing class members with 
fair housing counseling services.
    2. The FHSC shall be operated by a private, non-profit 
organization. HUD shall provide funding to the FHSC in an amount no 
less than $500,000 per year for a period of five years.
    3. Within sixty days of the date of the entry of this judgment and 
decree, HUD shall serve upon the plaintiffs, and submit for approval of 
the court, a proposed Request for Proposals (``RFP''), inviting 
private, non-profit organizations to apply for a contract with HUD to 
operate the FHSC. The plaintiffs shall have ten days from the date of 
service within which to file objections to the proposed RFP. If such 
objections are filed, the court shall conduct such proceedings as are 
required to resolve the objections.
    4. Upon approval of the RFP by the court, HUD shall publish the RFP 
in the Commerce Business Daily. Within 120 days of the date of 
publication of the RFP, HUD shall make its selection of the 
organization to operate the FHSC.
    5. The FHSC shall provide the following services:
    a. pre-screen all clients of the FHSC who have not already been 
screened by a PHA, to document each client's ability and willingness to 
comply with an acceptable lease and HUD program requirements;
    b. provide information and counseling with respect to housing 
opportunities to class members;
    c. monitor the compliance of the providers of low-income housing in 
the class action area (low-income public housing and assisted housing) 
with the fair housing laws and the requirements placed upon the 
providers under the Comprehensive Plan and the individual desegregation 
plans;
    d. encourage and assist in the development of desegregative housing 
opportunities, including outreach to private landlords in non-minority 
areas, as well as counseling and referral

[[Page 50386]]

services to Section 8 existing housing tenants and applicants who wish 
to utilize their Section 8 certificates or housing vouchers in a manner 
furthering desegregation;
    e. encourage and assist class members to make desegregative moves 
within the low-income housing program and to privately owned assisted 
housing programs;
    f. administer the desegregative housing certificates and vouchers 
to be provided by HUD under contract with one or more PHSs;
    g. give each class member written notice, every six months, in a 
form and distribution method to be approved by HUD, of all HUD-assisted 
and/or HUD-subsidized low-income housing developments in the housing 
markets where the class member resides that offer the class members a 
desegregative housing opportunity, provide notice of the full address, 
telephone number, and name of the person responsible for accepting 
applications for the development, a short description of the type of 
housing offered by the development, and the general eligibility 
requirements for the development.
    6. The plaintiffs may seek review, in this court, of HUD's final 
selection of the organization to operate the FHSC. Such review shall be 
in accordance with the standards and procedures for judicial review set 
forth in the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. Secs. 701, et seq.

V. Racially Hostile Sites

    1. HUD shall utilize its statutory and regulatory authority to 
proceed against any resident who acts to deprive any other resident of 
his or her civil rights under the United States Constitution or 
applicable civil rights statutes.
    2. HUD shall assist municipal leaders, including, but not limited 
to, the city's mayor and its city counsel, in undertaking actions to 
address hostility including, but not limited to, supplying trained 
security officers to protect the physical safety of African-American 
residents when necessary.
    3. Within sixty days of issuance of this judgment and decree, HUD 
shall determine in which localities class participation is limited 
because of racial hostility such that it is unlikely class members will 
actually use the existing public housing.
    4. HUD shall develop a supplemental desegregation plan for each 
site deemed by HUD to be racially hostile. The supplemental plan shall 
examine all avenues available to HUD effectively to counterbalance 
racial hostility, thereby facilitating class participation and the 
implementation of the individual desegregation plans and this judgment 
and decree. Such supplemental plan shall be submitted to the special 
master for his approval within six months of the designation of a site 
as racially hostile.

VI. Unitary Status

    1. When HUD and each PHA have satisfied the requirements as 
provided for in this judgment and decree and no racially identifiable 
low-rent public housing projects exist within the class action 
counties, HUD may apply to the court for a declaration of unitary 
status because of the elimination of all vestiges of discrimination 
attributable to HUD. See Hills v. Gautreaux, 425 U.S. 284, 297 (1976). 
A project shall be regarded as non-racially identifiable if less than 
seventy-five percent (75%) of the occupants of the project are members 
of the same race.
    2. Upon issuance by the court of a declaration of unitary status, 
judicial supervision pursuant to this judgment and decree, or any other 
order entered in this case, of HUD's activities shall terminate.
    3. Ten years after the date of this judgment and decree, if the 
court's jurisdiction has not been sooner terminated, the court shall 
determine whether its jurisdiction over HUD's actions should be 
continued or terminated. The court shall extend its jurisdiction over 
HUD if it determines that any of the specific obligations to be 
performed under this judgment and decree have not been accomplished 
within that time period. If the court extends its jurisdiction for this 
reason, its jurisdiction shall end upon fulfillment of those specific 
obligations.

[FR Doc. 96-24506 Filed 9-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-33-P