Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
21 <br /> 1 $4,500 cap on assistance because additional months are only paid if they can be paid in full since <br /> 2 a landlord could begin eviction proceedings based on a partial payment. <br /> 3 <br /> 4 The percentage of applications denied has increased from 53% to 66%. As seen in the chart <br /> 5 below, denials are predominantly due to the household being over 30% AMI or living outside of <br /> 6 Orange County. Insufficient documentation of an LCE contributed to 22 denials. <br /> 7 <br /> 8 <br /> Denied Applications (127) <br /> 40 34 33 <br /> 35 <br /> Z5 22 18 <br /> 20 10 <br /> 15 5 <br /> 10 3 Z <br /> 5 <br /> 0 <br /> .�0 P Ota <br /> ���� Qto� case Fta e �e <br /> C Oo�t� e O <br /> 9 <br /> 10 <br /> 11 Life-Changing-Event Qualification <br /> 12 <br /> 13 The main change to the policy from a non-financial standpoint is the ability to qualify for EHA <br /> 14 through an LCE. LCEs allowed some households to qualify for assistance before the eviction <br /> 15 process, but limited the ability to provide financial assistance once a case reached court. <br /> 16 <br /> 17 The option to qualify through LCEs allowed 21 households to apply for assistance earlier than if <br /> 18 they had to wait for a court case to be filed. While twelve (12) of those households avoided an <br /> 19 eviction filing completely, nine (9) still had a court case filed against them as the eviction was <br /> 20 initiated after the application was submitted, but before it was evaluated and approved by staff. A <br /> 21 total of fifteen (15) households were approved for EHA assistance based solely on a court <br /> 22 summons. <br /> 23 <br /> 24 There was not a significant difference in average processing time between applications with an <br /> 25 LCE (24 days) as opposed to a court summons (22 days). The primary reasons for the gap were <br /> 26 time spent waiting on responses from households and property owners and the quantity of <br /> 27 applications.Applications that relied solely on an LCE required more follow-up questions and time <br /> 28 from EHA staff as the documentation provided in the original application was often insufficient or <br /> 29 unclear. <br /> 30 <br /> 31 Repeat Evictions for Eviction Diversion Program Clients <br /> 32 <br /> 33 Finally, the Board previously requested data on repeat evictions. The data presented in the table <br /> 34 below covers the six-month timeframe from April 1, 2024 through September 30, 2024: <br /> 35 <br /> 36 <br /> 37 <br /> 38 <br />