effectively allocating homeless assistance resources to end homelessness
DESCRIPTION
Effectively Allocating Homeless Assistance Resources to End Homelessness. NAEH Conference, Washington DC July 17, 2012 Katharine Gale Consulting Berkeley, CA (510) 710-9176 [email protected] www.focusstrategies.net. 1. Overview. How do we know what we're buying? - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Effectively Allocating Homeless Assistance Resources to End
Homelessness
NAEH Conference, Washington DCJuly 17, 2012
Katharine Gale ConsultingBerkeley, CA
(510) [email protected]
www.focusstrategies.net
1
Overview
• How do we know what we're buying?• Thinking about the need• Allocating resources across program
types• Shifting resources within and between
programs
What are we buying now?• Outcomes by program type, household type, and
programs
• Exits to permanent housing
• Lengths of stay
• Returns to homelessness
•Source: HMIS• Cost for outcomes achieved
•Source: outcome data + grants and budgets
Average Rate of Exits to Permanent Housing - Families
Source: Data from 14 Continuums in seven states that prepared Evaluators for NAEH Performance Improvement Clinics in 2011-2012
Average Rate of Exits to Permanent Housing - Singles
Source: Data from 14 Continuums in seven states that prepared Evaluators for NAEH Performance Improvement Clinics in 2011- 2012
Average lengths of stay by outcome - system wide and by program type
Source: Montana HMIS, 2010 data, Chart prepared by Focus Strategies
Rates of Return within 12 months after gaining permanent housing
Source: Data averaged from seven Continuums in four states that prepared Homeless System Evaluators for NAEH Performance Improvement Clinics in 2011-2012
Averages are only part of the story -
Outcome vary across programs.
Where's the money going
now?
Sample- Investments by Program TypeSingles
Source: CA county, Data from provider budgets (only partial participation)
Sample - Investments by Program TypeFamilies
Source: CA county, Data from provider budgets (only partial participation)
Average Cost Per Exit and Per PH Exit
Source: Data from 14 Continuums in seven states that prepared Homeless System Evaluators for NAEH Performance Improvement Clinics in 2011-2012
Average Cost Per Exit and Per PH Exit
Source: Data from 14 Continuums in seven states that prepared Evaluators for NAEH Performance Improvement Clinics in 2011-2012
Caveat: costs, like outcomes,
vary across programs
Do the current programs and outcomes fit the need?
9
Information to think about need
• Population data
•Source: HMIS, Point in Time count
• Utilization data
•Source: HMIS, turn away data, other systems of care
Point in Time Count
10
Source: Sacramento PIT 2011
Point in Time Count
11Source: Sacramento PIT 2011
14
Single vs. Multiple Program users - families
Source: Sacramento HMIS, analyzed by Focus Strategies
15
Single vs. Multiple Program users - singles
Source: Sacramento HMIS, analyzed by Focus Strategies
Re-Allocator Demonstration
Reallocation practicalities
19
The Building(s) The Budget
•
The Staff
The Clients
•Facility(ies) –what is their layout? quality? What are they most suited for? What about cash?? (Should you sell? Can you?)
•Funding – will the current resources still be available if the program changes? Are there replacement sources?
•Who are current staff? What specialities do they have, and what will you need?
•Who are current clients? Will they continued to be served in this program/intervention? If not, where will they go?
• *(consider regular permanent affordable housing- especially if some service funds could go to rapid rehousing…)
22
Reallocation practicalities
The Memphis Decision
• 81 units family TH becoming permanent housing with Project-based Section 8 from PHA
• At least 25 units will be PSH, pay for the services from a small SHP grant
• Taking the $850,000 SHP + match that operated the 81 TH units and using that for rapid rehousing = 400 families every year
• 25 PSH units + 56 permanent affordable units + 400 rapid rehousing slots every year – 88 transitional housing slots = lots more housing!
20
The Oakland Process
• 53 unit SRO used as transitional housing for families. Annual SHP grant > $1M.
• Possible options: – Interim housing (shorter stays) for families plus
rapid rehousing support from same grant– Permanent supportive housing for singles with new
resources; spin off most of SHP grant for rapid rehousing for families
• Process to determine next steps includes City, PHA, Public Health, Behavioral Health and providers
21
How will we know if it’s worked?
•Are lengths of stay for households shorter?•Are housing outcomes the same or better?•Are we serving more households in need?•Do people we help become homeless
again at same or lower rate?• (all measured under HEARTH!)•Are clients (our customers) satisfied with
the change?
27
Summary • Need to know what we're buying = key outcomes
AND the cost to get them• Improving outcomes/shortening stays increases
system capacity with no new money!• Reallocating to meet unmet need may mean
moving dollars across programs and populations.• Evidence to date shows rapid rehousing is very
cost-effective. It may not work for everyone but so far it does very well at a fraction of the price.
• The proof is in the results; measure them!