Northern Kentucky Scholar House

Background  Project first started development in  Largest urban area in Kentucky without a Scholar House Program.  Collaboration between State and Local efforts.

Background – Partners Local:  Neighborhood Foundations  Brighton Center  Model Group  Hub + Weber Architects  Campbell County Fiscal Court  City of Newport  BB&T Bank (Kentucky Bank) State and Federal  Kentucky DLG – CDBG  Kentucky Housing Corporation (KHC)  National Parks Service  Federal Home Loan Bank – Cincinnati

Background – Design and Site Location  Visited the nine (9) other Scholar House Programs in Kentucky.  Scholar House Campus was designed by Hub + Weber Architects after consultations and visits to other campuses.  Suggested design model from KHC.  Site location already owned by the City and in close proximity to other multi-family housing properties, public parks, and local City public schools.  Close to several higher education programs: Gateway Community and Technical College, NKU, Cincinnati State University

Background – Budget Project Budget and Sources  $6,230,000 – LIHTC – KHC  $1,100,000 – Deferred Dev. Fee  $210,000 – Neighborhood Foundations Grant  $492,401 – Catalytic Fund  $500,000 – CDBG Funds  $618,599 – Local Donations $9,151,000 – TOTAL

Background – Budget and Size Limitations  Project was limited in design by the size of the property site (former location of a City owned park and community center).  Implementation delays caused by 12+ months to gather funding sources, over 25 sources and partners.  Scholar House campus had firm deadline to be live by August 2015 to accommodate the beginning of the new school semesters.

Construction  Construction started in May 2015 took 14 months to complete. All units leased up November  The CDBG funded child care center facility took 11 months to complete.

Construction – Challenges Challenges to Construction  Surface conditions of the site  Inclement weather  Availability of materials and subcontractors  Tracking all sources of funding and eligibility of expenditures

Outcomes - Marketing  Marketing efforts began 8 months prior to opening the facility.  Partnered with the Local Housing Authorities in Northern Kentucky to raise awareness.  Spoke with students at the local universities.  Ran newspaper ads, posted on social media sites, and distributed flyers at community events.

Outcomes – Scholar House  Constructed 48 new units.  42 two-bedroom units  6 three bedroom units  Complete 100% occupancy by November 2015  Currently 20 person waiting list  40 students attend the child care services, another 20 will be added come August 2016

Outcomes – Complex Structure City of Newport – City Commission Neighborhood Foundations Board of Directors Brighton Center – Management of Center Northern Kentucky Scholar House Northern Kentucky Scholar House Advisory Board Neighborhood Foundations Brighton Center Model Group NKU Gateway Community and Technical College Cincinnati State University Haile Foundation Newport City Residents US Bank Southbank Partners Newport Independent Schools

Outcomes – Operational Costs Sources:  Section 8 Voucher Program for Residential Units  State Childcare Assistance Program  State Food Assistance Program  United Way Funds funneled through Brighton Center  Local private donations  Kentucky Housing Corporation fills any remaining gap

Outcomes – Economic Development and Volunteering  Scholar House added 15 full time equivalent jobs  Currently has over 10 regular volunteers on staff  Stabilizing the local neighborhood and businesses  Creation of a new City park

Outcomes – Long-Term Projections 20 Year Goals  60% (29 of 48) individuals complete post-secondary training/obtain a degree.  90% (43 of 48) individuals exit to stabile housing.  75% (36 of 48) individuals exit to stable employment – establish a career.  50% (24 of 48) individuals adhere to their financial budget and fiscal responsibilities.

Outcome – Community Support and Lessons Learned Community Support  Local Boy Scouts completed the natural playground  Community residents “adopted” units  Added school bus stop by Newport Independent Schools Lessons Learned  Better access from units to daycare center  Lack of expansion  School enrollment timing

Contact Information Travis Weber Branch Manager – Housing and Community Projects Kentucky Department for Local Government Telephone: