Homelessness Pulse RePoRt - HUD Exchange...participation in the Pulse project has expanded. Section...
Transcript of Homelessness Pulse RePoRt - HUD Exchange...participation in the Pulse project has expanded. Section...
Homelessness Pulse RePoRtFirst Quarter, 2011
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Community Planning and Development
The Homelessness Pulse project is designed
to help the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) gain a better
understanding of how sheltered homelessness
is changing over time. At present, the data on
sheltered homelessness reported to HUD—
whether through the Annual Homeless Assess-
ment Report (AHAR) or through the home-
less services funding process—are collected
annually. These data are comprehensive and
can inform both public policy and local plans
to end homelessness, but they do not capture
“real time” changes in sheltered homelessness.
In an effort to collect and disseminate data
more frequently, HUD has partnered with
Continuums of Care (CoCs) nationwide to
collect data on a quarterly basis and provide an
early indication—a “pulse”—of how sheltered
homelessness is changing in these communi-
ties. Appendix A provides a list of the CoCs
that participated in the current Pulse report.
The up-to-date information reported in the
Homelessness Pulse report will help HUD
respond to events that may impinge on home-
lessness trends nationwide. The Pulse report
also helps HUD monitor progress against the
2010 Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End
Homelessness.
The Q1 2011 report uses information from 23
Continuums of Care that voluntarily submit
data on sheltered homelessness in their com-
munities, representing 361 counties and 422
cities.1 Many of the original communities were
specifically selected for participation because
they had a history of successful participation in
the AHAR. In future Pulse reports, communi-
ties can volunteer to participate as long as they
have good HMIS-data quality. The number of
participating communities has increased con-
siderably from previous reports and is expected
to grow with each passing report. Nonetheless,
the report does not provide a nationally repre-
sentative picture of homelessness and thus its
contents should be taken as suggestive—not
definitive—of how homelessness may be
changing.
IntRoductIon to tHe Homelessness Pulse RePoRt
First Quarter, 2011
1
maIn FIndIngs: Q1 2011 RePoRtParticipation in the Pulse Project has increased considerably. The Q1 2011 report in-cludes estimates of sheltered homelessness from 23 Continuums of Care (CoC) nation-wide, and the number of communities participating in future reports is expected to grow. With each passing report, the nation has a more comprehensive gauge—a “pulse”—of how trends in sheltered homeless are changing.
Quarterly Point-in-time estimates
Three-monTh Trend
Sheltered homelessness increased in 75 percent (15 out of 20) of the CoCs, driven mainly by increases in individual homelessness that occurred in 85 percent of participating CoCs. These increases are consistent with seasonal fluctuations in shelter use that have been described in the AHAR.
Ten-monTh Trend
Three out of the four CoCs with data over the past five quarters experienced an increase in sheltered homelessness. Changes in homelessness among each of the four CoCs were relatively large; each CoC experienced a change of at least 5 percent and three experi-enced a change of greater than 10 percent.
Trends by GeoGraphy:
The 3-month trends suggest that overall, individual, and family sheltered homelessness is increasing in the majority of CoCs in all three geographic types, although increases are most heavily concentrated among suburban CoCs. Among the four CoCs with 10-month trend data, the urban and suburban CoCs experienced a decline in homelessness, while the rural CoC experienced an increase.
Quarterly estimates of newly sheltered homeless
Slightly more than half of CoCs (55 percent) with 3-month trend data experienced an overall decline in newly sheltered homelessness between Q4 2010 and Q1 2011. Among the four CoCs with 12-month trend data, half experienced an increase in new client homelessness.
2
3-month trend
12-month trend
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
August 2010
(n=20)
6-month trend(n=21)
10-month trend(n=4)
September 2
010
October 2
7, 2010
November 2
010
December 2
010
January
26, 2011
March 31, 2
010
July 28, 2
010
3-month trend(n=20)
6-month trend(n=21)
9-month trend(n=4)
(n=4)
Jan. 1
, 2010 -
March 31, 2
010
April 1, 2
010 -
June 30, 2
010
July 1, 2
010 -
Sept. 30, 2
010
Oct. 1, 2
010 -
Dec. 31, 2
010
Jan. 1
, 2011 -
March 31, 2
011
3-month trend
12-month trend
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
August 2010
(n=20)
6-month trend(n=21)
10-month trend(n=4)
September 2
010
October 2
7, 2010
November 2
010
December 2
010
January
26, 2011
March 31, 2
010
July 28, 2
010
3-month trend(n=20)
6-month trend(n=21)
9-month trend(n=4)
(n=4)
Jan. 1
, 2010 -
March 31, 2
010
April 1, 2
010 -
June 30, 2
010
July 1, 2
010 -
Sept. 30, 2
010
Oct. 1, 2
010 -
Dec. 31, 2
010
Jan. 1
, 2011 -
March 31, 2
011
In This Report
Section 1 presents the quarterly Point-in-Time
(PIT) counts of sheltered homelessness for the
participating communities. The PIT counts
show the total number of sheltered persons on
a single night during the quarter.
The section also compares the most recent
quarterly PIT estimate to previous estimates
to gauge whether sheltered homelessness has
changed. As described in the Q4 2010 report,
the dates associated with the quarterly PIT
estimates were changed to align with the dates
in the AHAR. As a result of this change, the
trend periods will change with each successive
report until four, 3-month intervals (or quar-
ters) are re-established in the Q4 2011 report.
The Q1 2011 report provides three trend peri-
ods: 3-, 6-, and 10-month trends.2 Exhibit 1a
shows the three trend periods and associated
dates for the PIT counts. The report focuses on
Exhibit 1a: Range of Dates for the Quarterly PIT Count of Sheltered Homeless People
Exhibit 1b: Range of Dates for the Count of Newly Sheltered Homeless People
3
the latest 3-month trend, as the 3-month trends
provide an immediate indication of whether
homelessness is increasing or decreasing since
the last quarter. Changes in 3-month trends
may reflect the seasonality of shelter use—i.e.,
increases in shelter use during the winter and
declines during the summer. The report also
describes 6- and 10-month trends as they pro-
vide a longer timeframe for assessing changes
in homelessness. The 10-month changes are
particularly useful because these estimates es-
sentially account for the seasonality in shelter
use. The number of communities reporting the
3- and 6- month trends is larger than the num-
ber of communities in earlier quarters because
participation in the Pulse project has expanded.
Section 2 presents the counts of persons who
were not previously homeless but became
“newly” sheltered at any point throughout the
quarter. The section also describes the prior
living arrangements of newly sheltered people.
The changes made to the quarterly PIT counts
of all sheltered people are not carried through
to the estimates of newly sheltered home-
less people. Exhibit 1b shows the three trend
periods and associated dates for the counts of
newly sheltered homeless people.
1. tRends In tHe QuaRteRly PIt count oF sHelteRed Homelessness
Pulse communities report Point-in-Time (PIT)
counts of persons in emergency shelters and
transitional housing separately for persons
experiencing homelessness by themselves
and as members of families.3 The count was
generated through each CoC’s HMIS and was
adjusted statistically to account for residential
service providers that do not participate in the
community’s HMIS.4 The adjustment results in
an estimate of all sheltered homeless persons in
each community on the date of the PIT count.
The Q1 2011 PIT counts—conducted on Janu-
ary 26, 2010—are compared with previous
counts to describe both the percentage of com-
munities experiencing net changes in sheltered
homelessness and the size of the change. A
net increase (or decrease) in sheltered home-
lessness indicates that the number of sheltered
homeless persons increased (or decreased)
between the two quarterly PIT counts, though
some fluctuation may have occurred in-be-
tween the two dates. (Appendix B shows the
quarterly PIT counts for each CoC, and Appen-
dix C displays the percentage change across
the multiple trend periods.)
4
Changes in Quarterly Pit estimates of
sheltered homelessness
Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 show: (1) the percentage
of CoCs that experienced net increases and
decreases in sheltered homelessness during the
3-, 6-, and 10-month time periods; and (2) the
magnitude of the change by household type. In
these exhibits, each block represents a CoC.
Three-Month Trend in Sheltered Homelessness
M Sheltered homelessness increased in 75
percent (15 of 20) of the CoCs between
the last Wednesday in October and the
last Wednesday in January. Similar to the
three month trend reported in Q4 2010,
this trend was driven mostly by the in-
crease in individual homelessness that oc-
curred in 85 percent of the CoCs. Among
persons in families, slightly more than
half (55 percent) of CoCs experienced an
increase. These increases are consistent
with seasonal fluctuations in shelter use,
whereby people living on the streets or
other unsheltered locations seek shelter
due to cold or weather.
M The magnitude of change during the
3-month period was larger among CoCs
that experienced an increase in sheltered
homelessness than for those experiencing
a decrease. Among CoCs experiencing a
net increase, 53 percent (8 of 15) experi-
enced an increase of more than 10 per-
cent. Sixty percent of decreases in overall
homelessness were slight (2 percent or
less). However, within family homeless-
ness, almost half (44 percent) of sites with
a decrease in family homelessness experi-
enced a decline of greater than 10 percent.
Ten-Month Trend in Sheltered Homelessness
M Three of the four CoCs that participated
over the past four quarters experienced
a net increase in homelessness between
March 31, 2010 and January 26, 2011.
The change by household type varied
slightly, with three of four CoCs experi-
encing an increase in family homeless-
ness, and two of four experiencing in-
creases among individuals.
M Three of four CoCs experienced a change
of greater than 10 percent, and the remain-
ing CoC witnessed an increase between 5
and 10 percent.
Sheltered homelessness has increased in seventy-five percent of communities,
which occurred across both the three- and ten-month
trend periods.
5
Changes in Quarterly Pit estimates of sheltered homelessness by geograPhy
Communities participating in the Pulse project
are classified into three geographic types (see
Exhibit 5):
1. Principal city CoCs are communities
where the majority of the CoC’s popula-
tion lives within a principal city.
2. Suburban CoCs are communities where
fewer than 50 percent of residents live
within a principal city, but more than 70
percent of residents live within a Metro-
politan Statistical Area (MSA).
3. Rural CoCs are communities where at
least 30 percent of residents within the
CoC live outside of an MSA.
The 3-month trends suggest that overall, indi-
vidual, and family sheltered homelessness has
increased in the majority of CoCs located in
all three geographic types, although increases
are most heavily concentrated among subur-
ban CoCs. During the 10-month time period,
homelessness increased in the urban and subur-
ban CoCs, but decreased in the rural CoC.
Principal City CoCs
M Three-month trend: Four communities
with 3-month trend data were classified
as principal city CoCs. All four of these
CoCs experienced an increase in individu-
al homelessness, and three of four expe-
rienced an increase in family and overall
homelessness.
M Ten-month trend: One community with
10-month trend data was classified as a
principal city CoC. This CoC experienced
an increase in overall homelessness de-
spite a decline in individual homelessness.
Suburban CoCsM Three-month trend: Eleven communities
with 3-month trend data were catego-
rized as suburban CoCs. Most suburban
CoCs experienced an increase in sheltered
homelessness overall (82 percent) and
individual homelessness (91 percent), but
a decrease in family homelessness (55
percent).
M Ten-month trend: Two communities with
10-month trend data were categorized as
suburban CoCs. Both CoCs witnessed an
increase in homelessness among individu-
als and among families.
Rural CoCs
M Three-month trend: Five communities
with 3-month trend data were classified
as rural. Three of five rural CoCs experi-
enced an increase in individual and family
homelessness, while the remaining two
witnessed a decline in the count of both
household types.
M Ten-month trend: The one rural CoC with
10-month trend data experienced a decline
in homelessness.
6
Exhib
it 2: P
ercentag
e of P
ulse C
om
mu
nities Exp
eriencin
g N
et Ch
ang
es in To
tal Sheltered
Ho
meless P
op
ulatio
n*
*Percen
tages m
ay no
t sum
to 100 p
ercent d
ue to
rou
nd
ing
.
Distrib
utio
n o
f chan
ges in
ho
melessn
ess in select ran
ges b
y site, by p
eriod
-10.1% o
r greater
-5.1% to
-10%-2.1%
to -5%
Decreases
Increases
<0%
to -2%
0% to
2%2.1%
to 5%
5.1% to
10%10.1%
or g
reater
3-month
trend
6-month
trend
10-month
trend
Exhib
it 4 - Ind
ividu
als
20%
14%
5%15%
5%
5%
25%50%
5%5%
40%
52%14%
25%
10%
10%
-10.1% o
r greater
-5.1% to
-10%-2.1%
to -5%
Decreases
Increases
<0%
to -2%
0% to
2%2.1%
to 5%
5.1% to
10%10.1%
or g
reater
3-month
trend
6-month
trend
10-month
trend
15%
24%
5%5%5%
5%5%
25%
5%
50%
5%5%
55%
57%
25%
10%
-10.1% o
r greater
-5.1% to
-10%-2.1%
to -5%
Decreases
Increases
<0%
to -2%
0% to
2%2.1%
to 5%
5.1% to
10%10.1%
or g
reater
3-month
trend
6-month
trend
10-month
trend
15%19%
10%10%
10%
20%
5% 5%
25%50%
35%
38%24%
25%
5%5%
exhib
it 5 - family
85%15%
86%14%
50%50%
75%25%
81%19%
75%25%
55%45%
62%38%
75%25%
Decrease
Total Sh
eltered H
om
eless Po
pu
lation
Increase
3-Month
Trend
6-Month
Trend
10-Month
TrendSheltered
Ho
meless In
divid
uals
3-Month
Trend
Decrease
Increase
6-Month
Trend
10-Month
Trend
Decrease
Increase
Sheltered
Ho
meless Fam
ilies
3-Month
Trend
6-Month
Trend
10-Month
Trend
Exhib
it 3: P
ercentag
e of P
ulse C
om
mu
nities Exp
eriencin
g N
et Ch
ang
es in Sh
eltered H
om
eless Ind
ividu
als*
Exhib
it 4: P
ercentag
e of P
ulse C
om
mu
nities Exp
eriencin
g N
et Ch
ang
es in Sh
eltered H
om
eless Families
*
Distrib
utio
n o
f chan
ges in
ho
melessn
ess in select ran
ges b
y site, by p
eriod
-10.1% o
r greater
-5.1% to
-10%-2.1%
to -5%
Decreases
Increases
<0%
to -2%
0% to
2%2.1%
to 5%
5.1% to
10%10.1%
or g
reater
3-month
trend
6-month
trend
10-month
trend
Exhib
it 4 - Ind
ividu
als
20%
14%
5%15%
5%
5%
25%50%
5%5%
40%
52%14%
25%
10%
10%
-10.1% o
r greater
-5.1% to
-10%-2.1%
to -5%
Decreases
Increases
<0%
to -2%
0% to
2%2.1%
to 5%
5.1% to
10%10.1%
or g
reater
3-month
trend
6-month
trend
10-month
trend
15%
24%
5%5%5%
5%5%
25%
5%
50%
5%5%
55%
57%
25%
10%
-10.1% o
r greater
-5.1% to
-10%-2.1%
to -5%
Decreases
Increases
<0%
to -2%
0% to
2%2.1%
to 5%
5.1% to
10%10.1%
or g
reater
3-month
trend
6-month
trend
10-month
trend
15%19%
10%10%
10%
20%
5% 5%
25%50%
35%
38%24%
25%
5%5%
exhib
it 5 - family
85%15%
86%14%
50%50%
75%25%
81%19%
75%25%
55%45%
62%38%
75%25%
Decrease
Total Sh
eltered H
om
eless Po
pu
lation
Increase
3-Month
Trend
6-Month
Trend
10-Month
TrendSheltered
Ho
meless In
divid
uals
3-Month
Trend
Decrease
Increase
6-Month
Trend
10-Month
Trend
Decrease
Increase
Sheltered
Ho
meless Fam
ilies
3-Month
Trend
6-Month
Trend
10-Month
Trend
Distrib
utio
n o
f chan
ges in
ho
melessn
ess in select ran
ges b
y site, by p
eriod
-10.1% o
r greater
-5.1% to
-10%-2.1%
to -5%
Decreases
Increases
<0%
to -2%
0% to
2%2.1%
to 5%
5.1% to
10%10.1%
or g
reater
3-month
trend
6-month
trend
10-month
trend
Exhib
it 4 - Ind
ividu
als
20%
14%
5%15%
5%
5%
25%50%
5%5%
40%
52%14%
25%
10%
10%
-10.1% o
r greater
-5.1% to
-10%-2.1%
to -5%
Decreases
Increases
<0%
to -2%
0% to
2%2.1%
to 5%
5.1% to
10%10.1%
or g
reater
3-month
trend
6-month
trend
10-month
trend
15%
24%
5%5%5%
5%5%
25%
5%
50%
5%5%
55%
57%
25%
10%
-10.1% o
r greater
-5.1% to
-10%-2.1%
to -5%
Decreases
Increases
<0%
to -2%
0% to
2%2.1%
to 5%
5.1% to
10%10.1%
or g
reater
3-month
trend
6-month
trend
10-month
trend
15%19%
10%10%
10%
20%
5% 5%
25%50%
35%
38%24%
25%
5%5%
exhib
it 5 - family
85%15%
86%14%
50%50%
75%25%
81%19%
75%25%
55%45%
62%38%
75%25%
Decrease
Total Sh
eltered H
om
eless Po
pu
lation
Increase
3-Month
Trend
6-Month
Trend
10-Month
TrendSheltered
Ho
meless In
divid
uals
3-Month
Trend
Decrease
Increase
6-Month
Trend
10-Month
Trend
Decrease
Increase
Sheltered
Ho
meless Fam
ilies
3-Month
Trend
6-Month
Trend
10-Month
Trend
7
City CoCs
Tota
l Ho
mel
ess
Pop
ula
tio
n
Ho
mel
ess
Ind
ivid
ual
s
Ho
mel
ess
Fam
ilies
Tota
l Ho
mel
ess
Pop
ula
tio
n
Ho
mel
ess
Ind
ivid
ual
s
Ho
mel
ess
Fam
ilies
Tota
l Ho
mel
ess
Pop
ula
tio
n
Ho
mel
ess
Ind
ivid
ual
s
Ho
mel
ess
Fam
ilies
Suburban CoCs Rural CoCsPe
rcen
t wit
h in
crea
sing
hom
eles
snes
s
Perc
ent w
ith
decr
easi
ngho
mel
essn
ess
Perc
ent w
ith
incr
easi
ngho
mel
essn
ess
Perc
ent w
ith
decr
easi
ngho
mel
essn
ess
3-MonthTrend
6-MonthTrend
10-MonthTrend
Perc
ent w
ith
incr
easi
ngho
mel
essn
ess
Perc
ent w
ith
decr
easi
ngho
mel
essn
ess
82%
18%
9%
91%
9%40%
9%
45%
55%40%
20%
100%
40%
20%
100%
20%
100%
100%
80%
20%
100%
75%
25%
40%
75%
25%
60% 60%
40%
100% 100%100%100%100%
91%
55%
45%60%60% 60%
80%80% 80%91%
Geographic Area
(n=11) (n=5)(n=4)
(n=11) (n=5)(n=5)
(n=2) (n=1)(n=1)
Exhibit 5: Percentage of Pulse Communities Experiencing Changes in
Sheltered Homeless by Geography and Household Type
8
A newly sheltered homeless person is someone
who:
• �Used an emergency shelter or transitional
housing program during the quarter; and
• �Had not received any residential homeless
services in the 15 months prior to entering
shelter.5
These data provide an indication of how many
individuals and persons in families experienced
sheltered homelessness for the first time dur-
ing the quarter. Over time, this information
may suggest whether homelessness prevention
programs are effectively stemming the flow
of persons into the shelter system and divert-
ing persons at-risk of becoming homeless into
stable living situations.
Trends in newly sheltered homelessness were
not affected by the shifts in the dates associ-
ated with the quarterly PIT counts. Instead,
the trends in this section are based on changes
between the four annual quarters. This section
provides three types of trend estimates:
1. CoCs that experienced net changes in
newly sheltered homelessness over the
past four quarters, by household type;
2. Changes in the household composition of
newly sheltered homeless persons; and
3. Changes in the prior living situation of
newly sheltered homeless persons.
Changes in the Quarterly estimates of newly sheltered
homeless Persons
Exhibit 6 presents the quarterly estimates of
newly sheltered homeless persons, showing
that:
M Three-month trend: Slightly more than
half of CoCs (55 percent) with 3-month
trend data experienced an overall decline
in newly sheltered homelessness between
Q4 2010 and Q1 2011. The declines were
often seen in only one of the two house-
hold types. When broken down by family
type, only half of the 20 CoCs experi-
enced a decline among newly homeless
families and 40 percent experienced a de-
cline among newly homeless individuals.
M Twelve-month trend: Two of the four CoCs
with 12-month trend data experienced a
decline in newly sheltered homelessness
overall.
2. estImates oF newly sHelteRed Homeless PeRsons
9
household tyPe and ComPosition of newly
sheltered homeless Persons
Household type and composition are based on
the household’s status on the first day of entry
into the shelter system. Because some com-
munities participating in the Pulse project are
much larger than others and thus would heav-
ily influence the aggregated results, the data
presented in the exhibit are an average of the
percentages for each community. For example,
if individual persons represent 50, 60, 70, and
80 percent of the newly sheltered population
in four communities, the average is equal to
65 percent. This report includes information
on 23 communities for Q1 2010, 21 communi-
ties for Q4 2010, 25 communities for Q3 2010,
and 7 communities for the prior quarters. The
results are presented in Exhibits 7 and 8.
M Three-month trend: The proportion of
newly sheltered persons in families de-
creased over the past quarter by two per-
cent, to 32 percent of the newly sheltered
homeless population. In Q1 2011, indi-
viduals represented 68 percent of newly
sheltered homeless persons.
Among newly sheltered individuals in Q1
2011, slightly more than two thirds (68 per-
cent) were men, a slight decline of 1 percent-
age point from Q4 2010. Women made up 28
percent of the individual population, which is
the same as the prior quarter. The remaining
4 percent in Q1 were unaccompanied youth
(including parenting youth), an increase of
less than 1 percentage point. The composition
of newly sheltered families remained stable
during the 3-month period, with children mak-
ing up slightly under two-thirds of people in
families.
M Twelve-month trend: The proportion of
newly sheltered persons who are in fami-
lies in Q1 2011 was the same as Q1 2010;
individuals made up 68 percent and per-
sons in families made up 32 percent of the
newly homeless client population.
Percentage of Communities Experiencing Net Changes in Newly Sheltered Homelessness by Household Type
Decrease
Total Newly Sheltered Homeless Population
45%55%
48%52%
50%50%
50% 50%
Increase Decrease Increase Decrease Increase
3 MonthTrend
6 MonthTrend
9 MonthTrend
12 MonthTrend
Newly Sheltered Homeless FamiliesNewly Sheltered Homeless Individuals
60%40%
48%52%
25%75%
50%50%
50%50%
29%71%
50%
75% 25%
50%
(n=20)
(n=21)
(n=4)
(n=4)
3 MonthTrend
6 MonthTrend
9 MonthTrend
12 MonthTrend
(n=20)
(n=21)
(n=4)
(n=4)
3 MonthTrend
6 MonthTrend
9 MonthTrend
12 MonthTrend
(n=20)
(n=21)
(n=4)
(n=4)
Exhibit 6: Percentage of Communities Experiencing Net Changes in Newly Sheltered
Homelessness by Household Type
10
Q42010
Q12011
Q32010
64% Individual Persons 36% Persons in families
66% Individual Persons 34% Persons in families
68% Individual Persons 32% Persons in families
68%
Adult females Adult males
28%
Unaccompaniedyouth
4%
Composition of Individuals
69% 64%36%
Adult females Adult males Adults in families Children in families
27%
Unaccompaniedyouth
3%
Composition of Individuals Composition of Families
64%36%
Adults in families Children in families
Composition of Families
65% 63%37%
Adult females Adult males Adults in families Children in families
30%
Unaccompaniedyouth
4%
Composition of Individuals Composition of Families
Q42010
Q32010
Q12011
Q22010
72% Individual Persons 29% Persons in families
Q12010
68% Individual Persons 32% Persons in families
71% 62%38%
Adult females Adult males Adults in families Children in families
28%
Unaccompaniedyouth
1%
Composition of Individuals Composition of Families
75% 64%36%
Adult females Adult males Adults in families Children in families
23%
Unaccompaniedyouth
3%
Composition of Individuals Composition of Families
Q22010
Q12010
Exhibit 7: Household Type of Newly Sheltered Persons*
Exhibit 8: Household Composition of Newly Sheltered Persons by Household Type*
*Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.
11
Similar to the three-month trend, the composi-
tion of families remained relatively unchanged
during the 12-month period. However, among
individuals, the proportion of individual adult
men declined from 75 to 68 percent, while the
proportion of individual adult women in-
creased by 5 percentage points and the propor-
tion of unaccompanied youth increased by one
percentage point.
Prior living situation of newly sheltered homeless Persons
Communities participating in the Pulse project
reported on the living situation of persons just
prior to entering the shelter system (Exhibit
9). The various housing situations are grouped
into four categories:
1. “Housing”—This category accounts for
people who were in an owned housing
unit, a rental unit, or staying with family
or friends. It also includes a very small
proportion of people in permanent sup-
portive housing.
2. Institutional Settings—This category in-
cludes people who were in several differ-
ent types of institutional facilities: psychi-
atric facilities, substance abuse centers,
hospitals, jails, prisons, juvenile detention
centers, and foster care.
3. Place not meant for human habitation—
This category includes people who were
living on the streets, in cars, in abandoned
buildings, or other locations not intended
for habitation. People in this category
are counted as newly sheltered homeless
because they have not used the shelter
system in the 15 months prior to program
entry.
4. Other—This category captures people
who were in a hotel, motel, or other type
of living arrangement.
Prior Living Situation of Newly Sheltered Homeless Persons by Household Type
Self-reported living situation prior to homelessness
2%
Owned housing
41%
Family or friends
11%
Rental housing
14%
Institutional settings
11%
Other situations
10%
Other situations
21%
Place not meant forhuman habitation
Place not meant forhuman habitation
All housing (54%)
1%
Owned housing Family or friends
13%
Rental housing
13%
Institutional settings
22%
All housing (54%)
Q42010
1%
Owned housing
43%
Family or friends
11%
Rental housing
16%
Institutional settings
9%
Other situations
20%
Place not meant forhuman habitation
All housing (55%)
Q12011
Q32010
40%
Exhibit 9: Prior Living Situation of Newly Sheltered Homeless Persons by
Household Type*
*Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.
12
1. Cities are defined as places with 10,000 or more people.2. The estimate from Q2 2010, which was conducted on June 30, 2010, was omitted from this report because there was only one
month between the Q2 end-of-the-quarter PIT count to the Q3 seasonal midpoint PIT count.3. In the Pulse project, a family is a household composed of at least one adult (age 18 or older) and one child (age 17 or younger).
This definition is consistent with the AHAR. An unaccompanied person under the age of 18 is an individual. Parenting youth and their children are counted as individuals, not as a family, because an adult is not present.
4. The Pulse project uses the AHAR methodology for adjusting the PIT estimates to account for service providers that do not partici-pate in the respective community’s HMIS. See Appendix B in the 2009 AHAR for a detailed explanation of the methodology.
5. Although the majority of service providers participate in HMIS nationwide, some providers (especially faith-based providers) may not participate in their community’s HMIS. As a result, it is possible for a person to be considered “new” even though he or she received residential services within the past 15 months if the person used a service provider that does not participate in HMIS or was served in shelter outside of the CoC. In the Q1 2011 report, 10 percent of newly homeless clients self-reported that their prior living arrangement was an emergency shelter or transitional housing program even though the community’s HMIS did not have a record for them. The report removes these from the counts of newly sheltered homeless persons.
Slightly more than half of newly sheltered
homeless persons (54 percent) came from a
housed situation. Of these, 76 percent came
from staying with family or friends. Few
newly homeless persons came directly from an
apartment or house that they owned (2 per-
cent). One in 7 newly homeless clients (14 per-
cent) came from institutional settings, and the
remaining 32 percent came from other types of
situations, mostly from a place not meant for
human habitation. The prior living situation
of newly homeless people remained relatively
stable between Q3 and Q4; all changes were
within 2 percentage points.
13
AZ-500
AZ-502
CA-500
CA-505
CA-609
CT-510
DC-500
GA-506
GA-507
IA-501
IA-502
ID-501
IL-511
KY-500
LA-502
MD-600
MD-601
MI-501
MI-504
MI-508
MI-519
NY-600
OH-500
OH-502
VA-500
WI-500
WI-501
WI-502
WI-503
West
West
West
West
West
Northeast
South
South
South
Midwest
Midwest
West
Midwest
South
South
South
South
Midwest
Midwest
Midwest
Midwest
Northeast
Midwest
Midwest
South
Midwest
Midwest
Midwest
Midwest
Rural
Principal City
Principal City
Suburban
Suburban
Suburban
Principal City
Suburban
Principal City
Rural
Principal City
Rural
Suburban
Rural
Suburban
Suburban
Suburban
Principal City
Suburban
Principal City
Suburban
Principal City
Suburban
Suburban
Suburban
Rural
Principal City
Suburban
Suburban
Arizona Balance of State CoC
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County Regional CoC
San Jose/Santa Clara City & County CoC
Richmond/Contra Costa County CoC
San Bernardino City & County CoC
Bristol CoC
District of Columbia CoC
Marietta/Cobb County CoC
Savannah/Chatham County CoC
Iowa Balance of State CoC
Des Moines/Polk County CoC
Idaho Balance of State CoC
Cook County CoC
Kentucky Balance of State CoC
Shreveport/Bossier/Northwest CoC
Prince George's County CoC
Montgomery County CoC
Detroit CoC
Pontiac/Royal Oak/Oakland County CoC
Lansing/East Lansing/Ingham County CoC
Holland/Ottawa County CoC
New York City CoC
Cincinnati/Hamilton County CoC
Cleveland/Cuyahoga County CoC
Richmond/Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover Counties CoC
Wisconsin Balance of State CoC
Milwaukee City & County CoC
Racine City & County CoC
Madison/Dane County CoC
CoC Full NameCoC
CoCs Participating in the Q1 2011 Pulse Report
Geography Category Usa
ble
data
for Q
1, 2
010
Usa
ble
data
for Q
2, 2
010
Usa
ble
data
for Q
3, 2
010
Usa
ble
data
for Q
4, 2
010
Usa
ble
data
for Q
1, 2
011
U.S. Census Region
Appendix A
14
Change inindividual homelessness
Change infamily homelessness
Change intotal homelessness
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County District of Columbia
Bridgeport/Stratford/Fairfield Kentucky Balance of State
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,002
3,791
3,324 3,293 3,336
1,622
1,7021,533 1,541 1,561
1,381
2,0891,791 1,753 1,775
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
413437
540
447 450
246
312
371
306 310
168
125
168142 139
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
53955646
60725845
5638
31913398
3606 37063466
2205 22482466
2139 2172
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
2043 2043
17741616 1639
634 634
855745 790
1409 1409
920 871 849
Appendix B: Quarterly PIT Counts by CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
752801 801
271 290 295
480511 506
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Arizona Balance of State CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,293 3,3363,089
2,938
1,753 1,775 1,653 1,573
1,541 1,561 1,436 1,365
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County CoC
0
188
375
563
750
938
1,125
1,313
1,5001,487
736
751
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Jose/Santa Clare City and County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
827 856 839
354 344308
473512 530
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Contra Costa County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
491
562
657
345 351398
146
211259
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Bernardino City & County CoC
0
8
15
23
30
38
45
53
60
56
22
34
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Bristol CoC
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
5,845 5,638 5,733 5,8806,278
2,139 2,172 2,135 2,2842,675
3,7063,466 3,597 3,597 3,604
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
District of Columbia CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
290 281295
149 146
143142 136
153
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Marietta/Cobb County CoC
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,4411,513 1,507
832899
844
608 613 663
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Iowa Balance of State CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
769 759
860
221 219262
548 540599
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Des Moines/Polk County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
624660
724
390 404 429
234 257294
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Idaho Balance of State CoC
0
250
500
750
1,000
1,250
1,500
1,750
2,000
1,616 1,639 1,665 1,719
1,288871 849 912 900
676
745 790 753 820
613
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Kentucky Balance of State CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
572543
208172
364 371
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Shreveport/Bossier/Northwest CoC
0
63
125
188
250
313
375
438
500
400 406
460
336 340 333
64 66
127
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Prince George's County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
576 569
765
338 336 322
238 233
443
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Montgomery County CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,086
2,738
622 505
2,4642,233
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Detroit CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
370
160
210
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Pontiac/Royal Oak/Oakland County CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
371 369 367
137 131
74
234 238
293
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Lansing/East Lansing/Ingham County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
253
219 222
148 143121
105
76101
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Holland/Ottawa County CoC
0
6,250
12,500
18,750
25,000
31,250
37,500
43,750
50,000
47,863 46,712
31,644 30,326
16,219 16,386
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
New York City CoC
0
138
275
413
550
688
825
963
1,100
9261001
1,092
364432
471562 569
621
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cincinnati/Hamilton County CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,373 1,456
1,906
2,4152,282
448 392 439 505 469
9261,064
1,466
1,910 1,813
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cleveland/Cuyahoga County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
796720
767803
896
192156
204 208 218
604564 563
596
677
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover Counties CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,975 2,021
2,383
1,107 1,024
1,333
867996 1,049
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Wisconsin Balance of State CoC
0
163
325
488
650
813
975
1,138
1,300
1,024 1,057
1,231
463 442547
561615
683
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Milwaukee City & County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
213 211225
64 57 67
149 154 158
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Racine City & County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
390
512
601
190239
282200
273319
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Madison/Dane County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
843
392
451
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cook County CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
507
191
316
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Savannah/Chatham CoC
15
Change inindividual homelessness
Change infamily homelessness
Change intotal homelessness
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County District of Columbia
Bridgeport/Stratford/Fairfield Kentucky Balance of State
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,002
3,791
3,324 3,293 3,336
1,622
1,7021,533 1,541 1,561
1,381
2,0891,791 1,753 1,775
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
413437
540
447 450
246
312
371
306 310
168
125
168142 139
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
53955646
60725845
5638
31913398
3606 37063466
2205 22482466
2139 2172
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
2043 2043
17741616 1639
634 634
855745 790
1409 1409
920 871 849
Appendix B: Quarterly PIT Counts by CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
752801 801
271 290 295
480511 506
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Arizona Balance of State CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,293 3,3363,089
2,938
1,753 1,775 1,653 1,573
1,541 1,561 1,436 1,365
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County CoC
0
188
375
563
750
938
1,125
1,313
1,5001,487
736
751
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Jose/Santa Clare City and County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
827 856 839
354 344308
473512 530
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Contra Costa County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
491
562
657
345 351398
146
211259
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Bernardino City & County CoC
0
8
15
23
30
38
45
53
60
56
22
34
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Bristol CoC
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
5,845 5,638 5,733 5,8806,278
2,139 2,172 2,135 2,2842,675
3,7063,466 3,597 3,597 3,604
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
District of Columbia CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
290 281295
149 146
143142 136
153
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Marietta/Cobb County CoC
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,4411,513 1,507
832899
844
608 613 663
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Iowa Balance of State CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
769 759
860
221 219262
548 540599
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Des Moines/Polk County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
624660
724
390 404 429
234 257294
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Idaho Balance of State CoC
0
250
500
750
1,000
1,250
1,500
1,750
2,000
1,616 1,639 1,665 1,719
1,288871 849 912 900
676
745 790 753 820
613
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Kentucky Balance of State CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
572543
208172
364 371
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Shreveport/Bossier/Northwest CoC
0
63
125
188
250
313
375
438
500
400 406
460
336 340 333
64 66
127
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Prince George's County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
576 569
765
338 336 322
238 233
443
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Montgomery County CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,086
2,738
622 505
2,4642,233
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Detroit CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
370
160
210
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Pontiac/Royal Oak/Oakland County CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
371 369 367
137 131
74
234 238
293
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Lansing/East Lansing/Ingham County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
253
219 222
148 143121
105
76101
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Holland/Ottawa County CoC
0
6,250
12,500
18,750
25,000
31,250
37,500
43,750
50,000
47,863 46,712
31,644 30,326
16,219 16,386
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
New York City CoC
0
138
275
413
550
688
825
963
1,100
9261001
1,092
364432
471562 569
621
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cincinnati/Hamilton County CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,373 1,456
1,906
2,4152,282
448 392 439 505 469
9261,064
1,466
1,910 1,813
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cleveland/Cuyahoga County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
796720
767803
896
192156
204 208 218
604564 563
596
677
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover Counties CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,975 2,021
2,383
1,107 1,024
1,333
867996 1,049
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Wisconsin Balance of State CoC
0
163
325
488
650
813
975
1,138
1,300
1,024 1,057
1,231
463 442547
561615
683
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Milwaukee City & County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
213 211225
64 57 67
149 154 158
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Racine City & County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
390
512
601
190239
282200
273319
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Madison/Dane County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
843
392
451
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cook County CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
507
191
316
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Savannah/Chatham CoC
16
Change inindividual homelessness
Change infamily homelessness
Change intotal homelessness
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County District of Columbia
Bridgeport/Stratford/Fairfield Kentucky Balance of State
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,002
3,791
3,324 3,293 3,336
1,622
1,7021,533 1,541 1,561
1,381
2,0891,791 1,753 1,775
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
413437
540
447 450
246
312
371
306 310
168
125
168142 139
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
53955646
60725845
5638
31913398
3606 37063466
2205 22482466
2139 2172
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
2043 2043
17741616 1639
634 634
855745 790
1409 1409
920 871 849
Appendix B: Quarterly PIT Counts by CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
752801 801
271 290 295
480511 506
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Arizona Balance of State CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,293 3,3363,089
2,938
1,753 1,775 1,653 1,573
1,541 1,561 1,436 1,365
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County CoC
0
188
375
563
750
938
1,125
1,313
1,5001,487
736
751
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Jose/Santa Clare City and County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
827 856 839
354 344308
473512 530
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Contra Costa County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
491
562
657
345 351398
146
211259
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Bernardino City & County CoC
0
8
15
23
30
38
45
53
60
56
22
34
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Bristol CoC
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
5,845 5,638 5,733 5,8806,278
2,139 2,172 2,135 2,2842,675
3,7063,466 3,597 3,597 3,604
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
District of Columbia CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
290 281295
149 146
143142 136
153
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Marietta/Cobb County CoC
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,4411,513 1,507
832899
844
608 613 663
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Iowa Balance of State CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
769 759
860
221 219262
548 540599
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Des Moines/Polk County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
624660
724
390 404 429
234 257294
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Idaho Balance of State CoC
0
250
500
750
1,000
1,250
1,500
1,750
2,000
1,616 1,639 1,665 1,719
1,288871 849 912 900
676
745 790 753 820
613
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Kentucky Balance of State CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
572543
208172
364 371
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Shreveport/Bossier/Northwest CoC
0
63
125
188
250
313
375
438
500
400 406
460
336 340 333
64 66
127
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Prince George's County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
576 569
765
338 336 322
238 233
443
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Montgomery County CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,086
2,738
622 505
2,4642,233
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Detroit CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
370
160
210
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Pontiac/Royal Oak/Oakland County CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
371 369 367
137 131
74
234 238
293
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Lansing/East Lansing/Ingham County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
253
219 222
148 143121
105
76101
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Holland/Ottawa County CoC
0
6,250
12,500
18,750
25,000
31,250
37,500
43,750
50,000
47,863 46,712
31,644 30,326
16,219 16,386
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
New York City CoC
0
138
275
413
550
688
825
963
1,100
9261001
1,092
364432
471562 569
621
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cincinnati/Hamilton County CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,373 1,456
1,906
2,4152,282
448 392 439 505 469
9261,064
1,466
1,910 1,813
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cleveland/Cuyahoga County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
796720
767803
896
192156
204 208 218
604564 563
596
677
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover Counties CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,975 2,021
2,383
1,107 1,024
1,333
867996 1,049
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Wisconsin Balance of State CoC
0
163
325
488
650
813
975
1,138
1,300
1,024 1,057
1,231
463 442547
561615
683
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Milwaukee City & County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
213 211225
64 57 67
149 154 158
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Racine City & County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
390
512
601
190239
282200
273319
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Madison/Dane County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
843
392
451
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cook County CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
507
191
316
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Savannah/Chatham CoC
17
Change inindividual homelessness
Change infamily homelessness
Change intotal homelessness
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County District of Columbia
Bridgeport/Stratford/Fairfield Kentucky Balance of State
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,002
3,791
3,324 3,293 3,336
1,622
1,7021,533 1,541 1,561
1,381
2,0891,791 1,753 1,775
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
413437
540
447 450
246
312
371
306 310
168
125
168142 139
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
53955646
60725845
5638
31913398
3606 37063466
2205 22482466
2139 2172
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
2043 2043
17741616 1639
634 634
855745 790
1409 1409
920 871 849
Appendix B: Quarterly PIT Counts by CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
752801 801
271 290 295
480511 506
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Arizona Balance of State CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,293 3,3363,089
2,938
1,753 1,775 1,653 1,573
1,541 1,561 1,436 1,365
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County CoC
0
188
375
563
750
938
1,125
1,313
1,5001,487
736
751
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Jose/Santa Clare City and County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
827 856 839
354 344308
473512 530
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Contra Costa County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
491
562
657
345 351398
146
211259
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Bernardino City & County CoC
0
8
15
23
30
38
45
53
60
56
22
34
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Bristol CoC
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
5,845 5,638 5,733 5,8806,278
2,139 2,172 2,135 2,2842,675
3,7063,466 3,597 3,597 3,604
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
District of Columbia CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
290 281295
149 146
143142 136
153
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Marietta/Cobb County CoC
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,4411,513 1,507
832899
844
608 613 663
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Iowa Balance of State CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
769 759
860
221 219262
548 540599
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Des Moines/Polk County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
624660
724
390 404 429
234 257294
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Idaho Balance of State CoC
0
250
500
750
1,000
1,250
1,500
1,750
2,000
1,616 1,639 1,665 1,719
1,288871 849 912 900
676
745 790 753 820
613
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Kentucky Balance of State CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
572543
208172
364 371
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Shreveport/Bossier/Northwest CoC
0
63
125
188
250
313
375
438
500
400 406
460
336 340 333
64 66
127
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Prince George's County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
576 569
765
338 336 322
238 233
443
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Montgomery County CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,086
2,738
622 505
2,4642,233
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Detroit CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
370
160
210
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Pontiac/Royal Oak/Oakland County CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
371 369 367
137 131
74
234 238
293
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Lansing/East Lansing/Ingham County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
253
219 222
148 143121
105
76101
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Holland/Ottawa County CoC
0
6,250
12,500
18,750
25,000
31,250
37,500
43,750
50,000
47,863 46,712
31,644 30,326
16,219 16,386
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
New York City CoC
0
138
275
413
550
688
825
963
1,100
9261001
1,092
364432
471562 569
621
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cincinnati/Hamilton County CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,373 1,456
1,906
2,4152,282
448 392 439 505 469
9261,064
1,466
1,910 1,813
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cleveland/Cuyahoga County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
796720
767803
896
192156
204 208 218
604564 563
596
677
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover Counties CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,975 2,021
2,383
1,107 1,024
1,333
867996 1,049
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Wisconsin Balance of State CoC
0
163
325
488
650
813
975
1,138
1,300
1,024 1,057
1,231
463 442547
561615
683
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Milwaukee City & County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
213 211225
64 57 67
149 154 158
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Racine City & County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
390
512
601
190239
282200
273319
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Madison/Dane County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
843
392
451
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cook County CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
507
191
316
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Savannah/Chatham CoC
18
Change inindividual homelessness
Change infamily homelessness
Change intotal homelessness
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County District of Columbia
Bridgeport/Stratford/Fairfield Kentucky Balance of State
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,002
3,791
3,324 3,293 3,336
1,622
1,7021,533 1,541 1,561
1,381
2,0891,791 1,753 1,775
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
413437
540
447 450
246
312
371
306 310
168
125
168142 139
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
53955646
60725845
5638
31913398
3606 37063466
2205 22482466
2139 2172
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
2043 2043
17741616 1639
634 634
855745 790
1409 1409
920 871 849
Appendix B: Quarterly PIT Counts by CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
752801 801
271 290 295
480511 506
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Arizona Balance of State CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,293 3,3363,089
2,938
1,753 1,775 1,653 1,573
1,541 1,561 1,436 1,365
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County CoC
0
188
375
563
750
938
1,125
1,313
1,5001,487
736
751
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Jose/Santa Clare City and County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
827 856 839
354 344308
473512 530
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Contra Costa County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
491
562
657
345 351398
146
211259
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Bernardino City & County CoC
0
8
15
23
30
38
45
53
60
56
22
34
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Bristol CoC
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
5,845 5,638 5,733 5,8806,278
2,139 2,172 2,135 2,2842,675
3,7063,466 3,597 3,597 3,604
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
District of Columbia CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
290 281295
149 146
143142 136
153
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Marietta/Cobb County CoC
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,4411,513 1,507
832899
844
608 613 663
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Iowa Balance of State CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
769 759
860
221 219262
548 540599
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Des Moines/Polk County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
624660
724
390 404 429
234 257294
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Idaho Balance of State CoC
0
250
500
750
1,000
1,250
1,500
1,750
2,000
1,616 1,639 1,665 1,719
1,288871 849 912 900
676
745 790 753 820
613
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Kentucky Balance of State CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
572543
208172
364 371
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Shreveport/Bossier/Northwest CoC
0
63
125
188
250
313
375
438
500
400 406
460
336 340 333
64 66
127
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Prince George's County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
576 569
765
338 336 322
238 233
443
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Montgomery County CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,086
2,738
622 505
2,4642,233
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Detroit CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
370
160
210
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Pontiac/Royal Oak/Oakland County CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
371 369 367
137 131
74
234 238
293
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Lansing/East Lansing/Ingham County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
253
219 222
148 143121
105
76101
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Holland/Ottawa County CoC
0
6,250
12,500
18,750
25,000
31,250
37,500
43,750
50,000
47,863 46,712
31,644 30,326
16,219 16,386
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
New York City CoC
0
138
275
413
550
688
825
963
1,100
9261001
1,092
364432
471562 569
621
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cincinnati/Hamilton County CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,373 1,456
1,906
2,4152,282
448 392 439 505 469
9261,064
1,466
1,910 1,813
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cleveland/Cuyahoga County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
796720
767803
896
192156
204 208 218
604564 563
596
677
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover Counties CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,975 2,021
2,383
1,107 1,024
1,333
867996 1,049
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Wisconsin Balance of State CoC
0
163
325
488
650
813
975
1,138
1,300
1,024 1,057
1,231
463 442547
561615
683
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Milwaukee City & County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
213 211225
64 57 67
149 154 158
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Racine City & County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
390
512
601
190239
282200
273319
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Madison/Dane County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
843
392
451
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cook County CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
507
191
316
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Savannah/Chatham CoC
19
Change inindividual homelessness
Change infamily homelessness
Change intotal homelessness
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County District of Columbia
Bridgeport/Stratford/Fairfield Kentucky Balance of State
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,002
3,791
3,324 3,293 3,336
1,622
1,7021,533 1,541 1,561
1,381
2,0891,791 1,753 1,775
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
413437
540
447 450
246
312
371
306 310
168
125
168142 139
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
53955646
60725845
5638
31913398
3606 37063466
2205 22482466
2139 2172
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
2043 2043
17741616 1639
634 634
855745 790
1409 1409
920 871 849
Appendix B: Quarterly PIT Counts by CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
752801 801
271 290 295
480511 506
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Arizona Balance of State CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,293 3,3363,089
2,938
1,753 1,775 1,653 1,573
1,541 1,561 1,436 1,365
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County CoC
0
188
375
563
750
938
1,125
1,313
1,5001,487
736
751
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Jose/Santa Clare City and County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
827 856 839
354 344308
473512 530
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Contra Costa County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
491
562
657
345 351398
146
211259
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Bernardino City & County CoC
0
8
15
23
30
38
45
53
60
56
22
34
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Bristol CoC
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
5,845 5,638 5,733 5,8806,278
2,139 2,172 2,135 2,2842,675
3,7063,466 3,597 3,597 3,604
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
District of Columbia CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
290 281295
149 146
143142 136
153
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Marietta/Cobb County CoC
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,4411,513 1,507
832899
844
608 613 663
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Iowa Balance of State CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
769 759
860
221 219262
548 540599
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Des Moines/Polk County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
624660
724
390 404 429
234 257294
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Idaho Balance of State CoC
0
250
500
750
1,000
1,250
1,500
1,750
2,000
1,616 1,639 1,665 1,719
1,288871 849 912 900
676
745 790 753 820
613
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Kentucky Balance of State CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
572543
208172
364 371
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Shreveport/Bossier/Northwest CoC
0
63
125
188
250
313
375
438
500
400 406
460
336 340 333
64 66
127
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Prince George's County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
576 569
765
338 336 322
238 233
443
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Montgomery County CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,086
2,738
622 505
2,4642,233
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Detroit CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
370
160
210
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Pontiac/Royal Oak/Oakland County CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
371 369 367
137 131
74
234 238
293
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Lansing/East Lansing/Ingham County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
253
219 222
148 143121
105
76101
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Holland/Ottawa County CoC
0
6,250
12,500
18,750
25,000
31,250
37,500
43,750
50,000
47,863 46,712
31,644 30,326
16,219 16,386
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
New York City CoC
0
138
275
413
550
688
825
963
1,100
9261001
1,092
364432
471562 569
621
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cincinnati/Hamilton County CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,373 1,456
1,906
2,4152,282
448 392 439 505 469
9261,064
1,466
1,910 1,813
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cleveland/Cuyahoga County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
796720
767803
896
192156
204 208 218
604564 563
596
677
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover Counties CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,975 2,021
2,383
1,107 1,024
1,333
867996 1,049
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Wisconsin Balance of State CoC
0
163
325
488
650
813
975
1,138
1,300
1,024 1,057
1,231
463 442547
561615
683
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Milwaukee City & County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
213 211225
64 57 67
149 154 158
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Racine City & County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
390
512
601
190239
282200
273319
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Madison/Dane County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
843
392
451
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cook County CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
507
191
316
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Savannah/Chatham CoC
20
Change inindividual homelessness
Change infamily homelessness
Change intotal homelessness
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County District of Columbia
Bridgeport/Stratford/Fairfield Kentucky Balance of State
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,002
3,791
3,324 3,293 3,336
1,622
1,7021,533 1,541 1,561
1,381
2,0891,791 1,753 1,775
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
413437
540
447 450
246
312
371
306 310
168
125
168142 139
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
53955646
60725845
5638
31913398
3606 37063466
2205 22482466
2139 2172
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
2043 2043
17741616 1639
634 634
855745 790
1409 1409
920 871 849
Appendix B: Quarterly PIT Counts by CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
752801 801
271 290 295
480511 506
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Arizona Balance of State CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,293 3,3363,089
2,938
1,753 1,775 1,653 1,573
1,541 1,561 1,436 1,365
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County CoC
0
188
375
563
750
938
1,125
1,313
1,5001,487
736
751
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Jose/Santa Clare City and County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
827 856 839
354 344308
473512 530
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Contra Costa County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
491
562
657
345 351398
146
211259
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Bernardino City & County CoC
0
8
15
23
30
38
45
53
60
56
22
34
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Bristol CoC
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
5,845 5,638 5,733 5,8806,278
2,139 2,172 2,135 2,2842,675
3,7063,466 3,597 3,597 3,604
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
District of Columbia CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
290 281295
149 146
143142 136
153
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Marietta/Cobb County CoC
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,4411,513 1,507
832899
844
608 613 663
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Iowa Balance of State CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
769 759
860
221 219262
548 540599
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Des Moines/Polk County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
624660
724
390 404 429
234 257294
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Idaho Balance of State CoC
0
250
500
750
1,000
1,250
1,500
1,750
2,000
1,616 1,639 1,665 1,719
1,288871 849 912 900
676
745 790 753 820
613
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Kentucky Balance of State CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
572543
208172
364 371
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Shreveport/Bossier/Northwest CoC
0
63
125
188
250
313
375
438
500
400 406
460
336 340 333
64 66
127
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Prince George's County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
576 569
765
338 336 322
238 233
443
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Montgomery County CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,086
2,738
622 505
2,4642,233
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Detroit CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
370
160
210
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Pontiac/Royal Oak/Oakland County CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
371 369 367
137 131
74
234 238
293
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Lansing/East Lansing/Ingham County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
253
219 222
148 143121
105
76101
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Holland/Ottawa County CoC
0
6,250
12,500
18,750
25,000
31,250
37,500
43,750
50,000
47,863 46,712
31,644 30,326
16,219 16,386
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
New York City CoC
0
138
275
413
550
688
825
963
1,100
9261001
1,092
364432
471562 569
621
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cincinnati/Hamilton County CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,373 1,456
1,906
2,4152,282
448 392 439 505 469
9261,064
1,466
1,910 1,813
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cleveland/Cuyahoga County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
796720
767803
896
192156
204 208 218
604564 563
596
677
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover Counties CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,975 2,021
2,383
1,107 1,024
1,333
867996 1,049
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Wisconsin Balance of State CoC
0
163
325
488
650
813
975
1,138
1,300
1,024 1,057
1,231
463 442547
561615
683
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Milwaukee City & County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
213 211225
64 57 67
149 154 158
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Racine City & County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
390
512
601
190239
282200
273319
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Madison/Dane County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
843
392
451
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cook County CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
507
191
316
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Savannah/Chatham CoC
21
Change inindividual homelessness
Change infamily homelessness
Change intotal homelessness
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County District of Columbia
Bridgeport/Stratford/Fairfield Kentucky Balance of State
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
June 2010
June 2009
March 2010
Dec. 200
9
Sep. 200
9
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,002
3,791
3,324 3,293 3,336
1,622
1,7021,533 1,541 1,561
1,381
2,0891,791 1,753 1,775
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
413437
540
447 450
246
312
371
306 310
168
125
168142 139
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
53955646
60725845
5638
31913398
3606 37063466
2205 22482466
2139 2172
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
2043 2043
17741616 1639
634 634
855745 790
1409 1409
920 871 849
Appendix B: Quarterly PIT Counts by CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
752801 801
271 290 295
480511 506
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Arizona Balance of State CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,293 3,3363,089
2,938
1,753 1,775 1,653 1,573
1,541 1,561 1,436 1,365
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Phoenix/Mesa/Maricopa County CoC
0
188
375
563
750
938
1,125
1,313
1,5001,487
736
751
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Jose/Santa Clare City and County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
827 856 839
354 344308
473512 530
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Contra Costa County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
491
562
657
345 351398
146
211259
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
San Bernardino City & County CoC
0
8
15
23
30
38
45
53
60
56
22
34
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Bristol CoC
0
875
1,750
2,625
3,500
4,375
5,250
6,125
7,000
5,845 5,638 5,733 5,8806,278
2,139 2,172 2,135 2,2842,675
3,7063,466 3,597 3,597 3,604
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
District of Columbia CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
290 281295
149 146
143142 136
153
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Marietta/Cobb County CoC
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,4411,513 1,507
832899
844
608 613 663
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Iowa Balance of State CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
769 759
860
221 219262
548 540599
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Des Moines/Polk County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
624660
724
390 404 429
234 257294
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Idaho Balance of State CoC
0
250
500
750
1,000
1,250
1,500
1,750
2,000
1,616 1,639 1,665 1,719
1,288871 849 912 900
676
745 790 753 820
613
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Kentucky Balance of State CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
572543
208172
364 371
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Shreveport/Bossier/Northwest CoC
0
63
125
188
250
313
375
438
500
400 406
460
336 340 333
64 66
127
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Prince George's County CoC
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
576 569
765
338 336 322
238 233
443
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Montgomery County CoC
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
3,086
2,738
622 505
2,4642,233
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Detroit CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
370
160
210
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Pontiac/Royal Oak/Oakland County CoC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
371 369 367
137 131
74
234 238
293
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Lansing/East Lansing/Ingham County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
253
219 222
148 143121
105
76101
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Holland/Ottawa County CoC
0
6,250
12,500
18,750
25,000
31,250
37,500
43,750
50,000
47,863 46,712
31,644 30,326
16,219 16,386
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
New York City CoC
0
138
275
413
550
688
825
963
1,100
9261001
1,092
364432
471562 569
621
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cincinnati/Hamilton County CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,373 1,456
1,906
2,4152,282
448 392 439 505 469
9261,064
1,466
1,910 1,813
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cleveland/Cuyahoga County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
796720
767803
896
192156
204 208 218
604564 563
596
677
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Richmond/Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover Counties CoC
0
375
750
1,125
1,500
1,875
2,250
2,625
3,000
1,975 2,021
2,383
1,107 1,024
1,333
867996 1,049
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Wisconsin Balance of State CoC
0
163
325
488
650
813
975
1,138
1,300
1,024 1,057
1,231
463 442547
561615
683
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Milwaukee City & County CoC
0
38
75
113
150
188
225
263
300
213 211225
64 57 67
149 154 158
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Racine City & County CoC
0
88
175
263
350
438
525
613
700
390
512
601
190239
282200
273319
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Madison/Dane County CoC
0
113
225
338
450
563
675
788
900
843
392
451
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Cook County CoC
0
75
150
225
300
375
450
525
600
507
191
316
Oct. 201
0
Jan. 201
1
July 20
10
June 2010
March 2010
Savannah/Chatham CoC
22
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
3 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
Positive p
ercentag
e chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness
Neg
ative percen
tage ch
ang
e into
tal ho
melessn
ess
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
Detro
it Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
6 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
9 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
12
mo
nth
chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness b
y site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
Ap
pen
dix C
: Percen
tage C
han
ge in
the Q
uarterly P
IT Co
un
ts by C
oC
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
3 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
Positive p
ercentag
e chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness
Neg
ative percen
tage ch
ang
e into
tal ho
melessn
ess
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
Detro
it Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
6 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
9 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
12
mo
nth
chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness b
y site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-10
%1
0%
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%
50
%6
0%
50
%6
0%
-20
%-3
0%
-40
%
-50
%-6
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Arizo
na B
alance
of State
Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
De
s Mo
ine
s/Po
lk Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance
of State
Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e C
ou
nty C
oC
Marie
tta/Co
bb
Co
un
ty Co
C
Milw
auke
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery C
ou
nty C
oC
Prin
ce G
eo
rge
's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racin
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/Co
ntra C
osta C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
San B
ern
ardin
o C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
3 m
on
th ch
an
ge
in to
tal h
om
ele
ssne
ss by
site
Po
sitive p
erce
ntag
e ch
ang
e in
total h
om
ele
ssne
ss
Ne
gative
pe
rcen
tage
chan
ge
into
tal ho
me
lessn
ess
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-10
%1
0%
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%
50
%6
0%
50
%6
0%
-20
%-3
0%
-40
%
-50
%-6
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Arizo
na B
alance
of State
Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
De
s Mo
ine
s/Po
lk Co
un
ty Co
C
De
troit C
oC
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance
of State
Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e C
ou
nty C
oC
Marie
tta/Co
bb
Co
un
ty Co
C
Milw
auke
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery C
ou
nty C
oC
Prin
ce G
eo
rge
's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racin
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/Co
ntra C
osta C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
San B
ern
ardin
o C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
6 m
on
th ch
an
ge
in to
tal h
om
ele
ssne
ss by
site
9 m
on
th ch
an
ge
in to
tal h
om
ele
ssne
ss by
site
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
12
mo
nth
cha
ng
e in
tota
l ho
me
lessn
ess b
y site
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
23
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
3 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
Positive p
ercentag
e chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness
Neg
ative percen
tage ch
ang
e into
tal ho
melessn
ess
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
Detro
it Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
6 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
9 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
12
mo
nth
chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness b
y site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
Ap
pen
dix C
: Percen
tage C
han
ge in
the Q
uarterly P
IT Co
un
ts by C
oC
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
3 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
Positive p
ercentag
e chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness
Neg
ative percen
tage ch
ang
e into
tal ho
melessn
ess
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
Detro
it Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
6 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
9 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
12
mo
nth
chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness b
y site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-10
%1
0%
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%
50
%6
0%
50
%6
0%
-20
%-3
0%
-40
%
-50
%-6
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Arizo
na B
alance
of State
Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
De
s Mo
ine
s/Po
lk Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance
of State
Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e C
ou
nty C
oC
Marie
tta/Co
bb
Co
un
ty Co
C
Milw
auke
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery C
ou
nty C
oC
Prin
ce G
eo
rge
's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racin
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/Co
ntra C
osta C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
San B
ern
ardin
o C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
3 m
on
th ch
an
ge
in to
tal h
om
ele
ssne
ss by
site
Po
sitive p
erce
ntag
e ch
ang
e in
total h
om
ele
ssne
ss
Ne
gative
pe
rcen
tage
chan
ge
into
tal ho
me
lessn
ess
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-10
%1
0%
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%
50
%6
0%
50
%6
0%
-20
%-3
0%
-40
%
-50
%-6
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Arizo
na B
alance
of State
Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
De
s Mo
ine
s/Po
lk Co
un
ty Co
C
De
troit C
oC
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance
of State
Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e C
ou
nty C
oC
Marie
tta/Co
bb
Co
un
ty Co
C
Milw
auke
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery C
ou
nty C
oC
Prin
ce G
eo
rge
's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racin
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/Co
ntra C
osta C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
San B
ern
ardin
o C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
6 m
on
th ch
an
ge
in to
tal h
om
ele
ssne
ss by
site
9 m
on
th ch
an
ge
in to
tal h
om
ele
ssne
ss by
site
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
12
mo
nth
cha
ng
e in
tota
l ho
me
lessn
ess b
y site
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
24
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
3 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
Positive p
ercentag
e chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness
Neg
ative percen
tage ch
ang
e into
tal ho
melessn
ess
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
Detro
it Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
6 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
9 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
12
mo
nth
chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness b
y site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
Ap
pen
dix C
: Percen
tage C
han
ge in
the Q
uarterly P
IT Co
un
ts by C
oC
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
3 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
Positive p
ercentag
e chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness
Neg
ative percen
tage ch
ang
e into
tal ho
melessn
ess
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
Detro
it Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
6 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
9 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
12
mo
nth
chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness b
y site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-10
%1
0%
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%
50
%6
0%
50
%6
0%
-20
%-3
0%
-40
%
-50
%-6
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Arizo
na B
alance
of State
Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
De
s Mo
ine
s/Po
lk Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance
of State
Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e C
ou
nty C
oC
Marie
tta/Co
bb
Co
un
ty Co
C
Milw
auke
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery C
ou
nty C
oC
Prin
ce G
eo
rge
's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racin
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/Co
ntra C
osta C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
San B
ern
ardin
o C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
3 m
on
th ch
an
ge
in to
tal h
om
ele
ssne
ss by
site
Po
sitive p
erce
ntag
e ch
ang
e in
total h
om
ele
ssne
ss
Ne
gative
pe
rcen
tage
chan
ge
into
tal ho
me
lessn
ess
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-10
%1
0%
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%
50
%6
0%
50
%6
0%
-20
%-3
0%
-40
%
-50
%-6
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Arizo
na B
alance
of State
Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
De
s Mo
ine
s/Po
lk Co
un
ty Co
C
De
troit C
oC
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance
of State
Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e C
ou
nty C
oC
Marie
tta/Co
bb
Co
un
ty Co
C
Milw
auke
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery C
ou
nty C
oC
Prin
ce G
eo
rge
's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racin
e C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/Co
ntra C
osta C
ou
nty C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
San B
ern
ardin
o C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
6 m
on
th ch
an
ge
in to
tal h
om
ele
ssne
ss by
site
9 m
on
th ch
an
ge
in to
tal h
om
ele
ssne
ss by
site
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
12
mo
nth
cha
ng
e in
tota
l ho
me
lessn
ess b
y site
0%
20
%3
0%
40
%5
0%
60
%-2
0%
-30
%-4
0%
-50
%-6
0%
-10
%1
0%
Cle
velan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ke
ntu
cky Balan
ce o
f State C
oC
Rich
mo
nd
/He
nrico
, Ch
este
rfield
, Han
ove
r Co
un
ties C
oC
All Site
Ave
rage
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
3 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
Positive p
ercentag
e chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness
Neg
ative percen
tage ch
ang
e into
tal ho
melessn
ess
0%20%
30%40%
-20%-30%
-40%-10%
10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%
-50%-60%
-50%-60%
-10%10%
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Arizo
na B
alance o
f State Co
C
Cin
cinn
ati/Ham
ilton
Co
un
ty Co
C
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Des M
oin
es/Polk C
ou
nty C
oC
Detro
it Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ho
lland
/Ottaw
a Co
un
ty Co
C
Idah
o B
alance o
f State Co
C
Iow
a Balan
ce of State C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Lansin
g/East Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Co
un
ty Co
C
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
un
ty Co
C
Marietta/C
ob
b C
ou
nty C
oC
Milw
aukee C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Mo
ntg
om
ery Co
un
ty Co
C
Prince G
eorg
e's Co
un
ty Co
C
Racine C
ity & C
ou
nty C
oC
Richm
on
d/C
on
tra Co
sta Co
un
ty Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
San B
ernard
ino
City &
Co
un
ty Co
C
Wisco
nsin
Balan
ce of State C
oC
All Site A
verage
6 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
9 m
on
th ch
ang
e in to
tal ho
melessn
ess by site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
12
mo
nth
chan
ge in
total h
om
elessness b
y site
0%20%
30%40%
50%60%
-20%-30%
-40%-50%
-60%-10%
10%
Clevelan
d/C
uyah
og
a Co
un
ty Co
C
District o
f Co
lum
bia C
oC
Ken
tucky B
alance o
f State Co
C
Richm
on
d/H
enrico
, Ch
esterfield, H
ano
ver Co
un
ties Co
C
All Site A
verage
25