a prevention-centered homelessness assistance system: a paradigm shift?

A Prevention-Centered Homelessness Assistance System:

A Paradigm Shift?

Dennis Culhane,

Stephen Metraux and

Thomas Byrne

Typology of Single Adult Homelessness(Philadelphia)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Transitional Episodic Chronic

% of Persons % Days Used

Transitionals: 1.19 stays 20.4 days

Episodics: 3.84 stays 72.8 days

Chronics: 1.53 stays 252.4 days

Disability Rates (Single Adults in Philadelphia)

0%10%

20%30%40%50%

60%70%80%

90%

Mental Illness Physical SubstanceAbuse

Any One

Transitional Episodic Chronic

Implications

Transitionally Homeless: Prevention and Relocation Assistance

Episodically Homeless: Low Demand Residences (Safe Havens), Harm Reduction, Transitional Housing, Residential Treatment

Chronically Homeless: Permanent Supportive Housing

What has been done?: Chronic Homeless Initiative

Congress and Bush/Obama have increased funding $600 million since 2003; 45% increase

80,000 units createdHUD reported a 30% decline in CH from 05

to 09

Typology of Family Homelessness(Massachusetts)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Transitional Episodic Long-stayers% of Persons % Days Used

Transitionals: 1.0 stays 105 days

Episodics: 2.0 stays 195 days

Long-Stayers: 1.0 stays 444 days

Intensive Service Histories of Families

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Child WelfarePlacement

Inpt MH Inpt SA Any one

Transitional Episodic Long-Term

Income Sources

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Earned Income SSI

Transitional Episodic Long-Term (n=99)

The Average Cost of Shelter Stays by Type

(Massachusetts)

Transitional $11,550Episodic $21,450Long-term $48,440

Does not include McKinney-Vento funding or non-DTA public service contracts.

Conclusions Policies and programs driving long stays Characteristics of “graduates” may reflect

selection effects of policies and programs Most costly service users are not differentially

service-needy Need for reform

Volume

Cost per Case

Model Service System for Addressing Housing Emergencies

Prevention Supportive Housing

Shelter Admission

Diversion, Relocation, and Emergency Rental Assistance

Mainstream systems

Community-Based programs

Shelter

Day CareEmployment Assistance

Housing Placement

Family Supt Services

MH/SA Services

Prevailing Model Emerging Model

Housing Stabilization

Day Care

Employment Assistance

Shelter

Family Supt Services

MH/SA Services

Turning the Continuum of Care Inside – Out?

Target Population Prevention Objective

Most At – Risk Protocols for Institutional Discharges

Imminently Homeless Crisis Intervention and Tenancy Preservation (Shelter Diversion)

Homeless Emergency Shelter and Rapid Rehousing

Most At-Risk

Prisoners awaiting discharge Patients Exiting Hospital or Detoxification Youth Exiting from FC Domestic Violence Victims Formerly Homeless

Protocols Needed with Standard Screening for Risk, Tenancy Preservation, and Rehousing Plans

Imminently Homelessness(HH w/ Eviction Notice, Shelter Requestors)

For Primary Tenants – Landlord Tenant Mediation and Relocation Grant (if necessary)

For Those Leaving Family/Friends:Home visits“Options” counselingFamily mediationTransition planningFlexible emergency cash assistanceEmployment coaching

Homeless

Crisis Intervention (same as for “imminently homeless”) for newly homeless to restore prior tenancy or provide relocation grant

At some threshold (3-4 weeks): Rehousing PlanDeeper Assessment and Services ScreenService Coordination – referral until “touch” is madeRelocationEmergency Assistance - flexible cash assistance, can

provide shallow rent supports, with six month review

Shelter admission

Community-based Prevention (Diversion and Stabilization)

Rapid Exit:

Relocation

Up to 2-4 weeks shelter

Housing StabilizationService I

Relocation, Critical Time Intervention CM, Temp Rental Ass.

1 year shallow rental subsidy

Housing Stabilization Service II

More intensive services, 1 more year of Temp Rent Ass.

Shelter exit

Transition to mainstream systems

Long-Term Subsidy and Service Engagement

“Progressive Engagement” Approach

The English Experience: Prevention Oriented System

Funded in 2003 New Ethos: All Cases Can Be Prevented/Rehoused 50% Decline in Homelessness from 2003-2006 Keys to Success:

Flexible resources that could be tailored to clientStrong agency collaborations with mainstream systemsTimeliness – intervening as early and quickly as

possible

Systems Transformation From “the Continuum” to “the Network” Creating a New Field of Practice: Housing Stabilization New Service Priorities:

Tenancy SustainmentService CoordinatorsBenefits CounselorsHousing Relocation SpecialistsFamily MediationHome Visitors

Challenges

Engaging Human Services Systems: Prevention Concept has to be embraced across systems

Local Housing Authority Participation – Need for some permanent subsidies for households with long-term needs

New Data Collection and Performance Standards Needed

Issues for Philanthropy

Engaging and convening community stakeholders Supporting “systems change” and “culture

change” activities Mobilizing private sector participation into a

housing and jobs network: landlords, legal services, employers

“Home” programs – move-in assistance, house-starter kits, furniture banks, etc.

Suggested web resources

National Alliance to End Homelessness web site: HPRP Resources section, includes “guides for good practice”

Funders Together to End Homelessness:

http://funderstogether.org/