Southeastern Virginia Homeless Coalition

May 2017

Suzanne Wagner, Pr inc ipal , Hous ing Innovat ions LLC

Emai l : swagner@housinginnovat ions .us

1

Established in 2009

Team: Suzanne Wagner, Howard Burchman, Andrea White, Lauren Pareti, Liz Isaacs, Myles Wensek

Prior work at CUCS (formerly Columbia University Community Services) and Burchman Terrio Consulting for 20+ years

Extensive experience in:◦ Systems Evaluation, Planning and Needs Assessments◦ Homeless System and CoC Support and Transformation◦ Creating Coordinated Entry/Access Systems◦ Developing, Operating and Evaluating Housing and Service Programs◦ Implementing Evidence-Based and Promising Practices:

Housing First, Permanent Supportive Housing, Critical Time Intervention (CTI), Housing Stabilization and Eviction Prevention, Continuous Quality Improvement

◦ Staff Training

2

SVHC Study QuestionsSTRATEGIC RESOURCE ALLOCATION◦ Are resources (ALL) invested in programs that produce the desired outcomes? Is the

program mix meeting the most critical needs in the most cost effective manner? What are the gaps and needs? Is SVHC aligned with federal priorities and requirements?

COC GOVERNANCE AND COMMITTEE STRUCTURE◦ Does the CoC structure support efficient decisions and lead to necessary changes?

SERVICE DELIVERY AND CAPACITY◦ Is the SVHC implementing best practices? What do agencies need to build capacity? What

policies and procedures are needed by programs?

DATA AND HMIS◦ Is the SVHC using data as effectively as possible? What is needed to be able to meet the

HUD Performance Measures?

3

Consultation Process

Assessment of CoC

(10/2015)

Delivery of findings &

recommendations

(7/2016)

SVHC creates Action Plan to

address recommenda

tions(Fall 2016)

Review post Action Plan

to assess progress (4/2017)

Identification of Priority Next Steps

4

The local “Homeless Assistance System” including all programs

and funding sources; not just CoC funding

◦ A community plan to organize and deliver housing and services to meet the needs of people who are homeless as they move to stable housing and maximize self-sufficiency. Includes action steps to end homelessness and prevent a return to homelessness.

◦ US HUD Homeless Assistance Funding Program with annual competition authorized under the HEARTH Act

What is a Continuum of Care?

Partners/Complementary Processes

PartnersState/County/City/Local government

Service and Housing Provider Organizations

Mainstream & Faith-Based ServicesPublic Housing Authorities (PHA’s), Housing Developers/Owners

Intermediary Organizations

Advocates/ ConsumersFoundations/Private Funders

Public School System, Academia

Business, Landlords, Legal Services

Complementary ProcessesTen Year Plan

Con Plan

Funding that may be used for Homeless Services:

ESG

TANF

HOMECDBG

State/local homeless and housing

Private

6

Federal Goal

7

No person or family ishomeless more than

30 days

HEARTH/HUD Policy Priorities (Source: 2016 CoC NOFA)

1. Create a Systemic Response to Homelessness by looking at performance for the system

2. Strategically Allocate Resources by reviewing project quality, performance and cost effectiveness and maximizing use of mainstream and other community-based resources

8

HUD/HEARTH Performance MeasuresReduce length of time persons remain homeless – avg and

median length of stay (LOS)Reduce extent to which persons who exit to permanent

housing return to homelessnessReduce the number of homeless persons

(Point in Time (PIT) and Annual Counts) Increase income growth for homeless persons

Reduce # of people who become homeless for the first time

Increase number of successful housing placements

9

HEARTH/HUD Policy Priorities (2) (Source: 2016 CoC NOFA)

End: Chronic HomelessnessFamily Homelessness Youth HomelessnessVeteran Homelessness

Use a Housing First Approach

10

www.usich.gov

Diagram of Coordinated Crisis Response System

Crisis Response System

Effective Crisis Response System that Ends Homelessness

An effective Crisis Response System provides immediate and easy access to safe and decent shelter to anyone that needs it and aims to re-house people as

quickly as possible.“Homelessness is rare, brief and

non-recurring”

National Alliance to End Homelessness 12

Features of a good Crisis Response System Homelessness is “rare, brief, and non-recurring”. All interventions quickly end the episode of homelessness and move

people to permanent housing. Efforts at diversion should be the first system intervention Housing First approach used by all programs in the system Begin conversations about re-housing as soon as a household

becomes homeless. It is easily understood and navigated by persons experiencing

homelessness.

13National Alliance to End Homelessness

Features of a good Crisis Response System (2) Use practices informed by data and research

Evidence-Based Practices (EBPs). Target services effectively to those with highest barriers, use progressive

engagement. Right mix of interventions to match needs – system is “right sized” Conduct annual gaps analysis to determine funding priorities Allocate resources to most effective and cost-efficient strategies. Transform programs that are not effective and/or efficient. Not all households will receive a housing resources from the system –

need “light touch” – connections to resources, landlords

14National Alliance to End Homelessness

Homelessness Diversion• Prevents homelessness for people seeking shelter by identifying immediate

alternate housing arrangements and, if necessary, linking to services and financial assistance to help retain or return to housing.

• Diversion is NOT a separate “program” but rather part of the entire system –problem solving and solution focused.

• Diversion should always be safe and appropriate for the client.

• Communities have been able to divert about 20-25% of people presenting for shelter

• National data show half of households who enter shelter from family and friends return to the same place they resided prior to becoming homeless

National Alliance to End Homelessness 15

The Three C’s of DiversionCommitment◦ Mainstream and homeless service providers must

believe households are better served outside of homelessness system

Conversation◦ Diversion is a problem solving, strength based

conversation, not an assessment tool with a list of questions

Creativity◦ Help clients think of creative solutions and explore

every option

16National Alliance to End Homelessness

Keys to Successful Diversion Coordinated entry process and shelter

front door

Resourceful staff trained in mediation

Strength based and problem solving

Recognizes client choice and safety

Linkages to mainstream services and natural supports

Flexible dollars

17National Alliance to End Homelessness

Right-Size Your System1. Assessment of inventory and strategies

• What do we need to increase; what is underutilized, what does underutilization cost the system? Who is underserved? What interventions need expansion/reduction?

2. Data on cost per intervention per permanent housing exit• Where do we get the biggest bang for our buck?

3. A resource allocation plan• Community strategy and process to begin right sizing the system with a timeline• Target resources to gaps and needs• Drives all funding decisions • Look at all funding sources – public and private; federal state and local;

mainstream resources

Right-Sizing Investments Efficient Use of Resources (from HUD Debrief)◦ “Serve as many people per dollar as possible”◦ “2016 awards serving 15% more households per dollar than

2014 grants”

Ensure Costs per Household are Reasonable ◦ Some communities have standards

Evaluate Cost Per Permanent Housing ExitoCost per permanent housing exit = annual budget divided by

number of PH exits in 12-month period

Continue to reduce/reallocate funds recaptured/underspentDevelop “Moving On” options from PSH

19

Example: Cost Per Permanent Housing Exit

20

Total Project Budget including Match

Number of Exits to PH in last

year% of Exits to PH Cost Per PH Exit

$296,680 11 79% $ 26,971 $250,031 23 77% $ 10,871 $111,599 24 89% $ 4,650 $64,495 15 100% $ 4,300

$244,979 45 94% $ 5,444 $262,509 14 93% $ 18,751 $318,749 19 50% $ 16,776 $355,360 50 65% $ 7,107

Recommendations (7/2016)STRATEGIC RESOURCE ALLOCATION◦ Are resources (ALL) invested in programs that produce the desired outcomes? Is the

program mix meeting the most critical needs in the most cost effective manner? What are the gaps and needs? Is SVHC aligned with federal priorities and requirements?

COC GOVERNANCE AND COMMITTEE STRUCTURE◦ Does the CoC structure support efficient decisions and lead to necessary changes?

SERVICE DELIVERY AND CAPACITY◦ Is the SVHC implementing best practices? What do agencies need to build capacity? What

policies and procedures are needed by programs?

DATA AND HMIS◦ Is the SVHC using data as effectively as possible? What is needed to be able to meet the

HUD Performance Measures?

21

Accomplishments and Progress Made - 1

Developed a plan to collect data from the Union Rescue Mission and the winter shelter

Adopted the HUD Notice on Prioritization of Chronically Homeless People (14-012) and documented it in CoC P&P

Executed agreement with NHRA for a set aside of units and Housing Choice Vouchers for households referred from SVHC and using this to move people on from permanent housing

Created more SRO housing that includes units for non-disabled single adults

Expanded the supply of RRH for both singe adults and families

Drafted a gaps analysis document to determine system and program needs

Continuing to evolve the program evaluation process to include spending rates

Using performance to make funding decisions

Continuing to re-tool TH programs and target to higher need people

22

Accomplishments and Progress Made - More

Streamlined the membership process for the CoCRe-structured some committees of the SVHC and recruited new leaders for the Executive Committee

Expanded the charge to the Program Monitoring Committee to consider programs funded by other sources than the HUD Continuum of Care and address Prevention Services as well as supporting programs in implementing Housing First.

Amended the by-laws to adopt the HUD Conflict of Interest policy for SVHC members

Developed a Youth Committee to address homelessness among youth and young adults.

Drafted a plan and process to review eligibility for Transitional Housing and target populations for HH w/ children.

Developed a plan to build the capacity of Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) providers

Produced reports on HUD Systems Performance Measures and sharing this data regularly with the community

23

SVHC CoC Table of Organization (As of March 2017)

SVHC Executive Committee

Program Monitoring

Service Coordination HMIS & Data

Ad Hoc: Ranking and System

Design

Planning Council

CoC Membership CoC Membership

CoC Membership

Focus on the expansion of diversion/prevention services and increasing permanent housing options Finalize analysis of gaps and needs in the homeless system and update annually Continued allocation of resources according to gaps, needs as well as cost effective

and efficient services and housing programs Continued training and capacity-building for programs in the system to standardize

practice across organizations, support staff and ensure the effective implementation of these practices Continued evolution of the structure of the SVHC to ensure broad and meaningful

participation and increase engagement of key community partners in leadership roles Analyze System Performance Measures once Union Mission data has been entered

for a period of time to better understand the dynamics of homelessness in the community and inform future plenning

25

26

Discussion