ending family homelessness webinar: identifying effective interventions
TRANSCRIPT
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
SHIFT STUDY
• Examined outcomes of families over 2 ½ years.
• Compared emergency shelter, transitional housing, permanent supportive housing.
• Not a demonstration project: Looked at housing and services provided “as is” in the community
• Conducted in Rochester, Buffalo, Syracuse and Albany, NY from 2007 to 2010.
• Representative of mid-sized cities nationwide.
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
CHILDREN LIVING APART FROM MOTHER AT 15 MONTH AND 30 MONTH FOLLOW UP
44% 39%
19%
41% 36%
32%
50%
36%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
EmergencyShelter
TransitionalHousing
PermanentSupportive
Total Sample
Baseline to 15 Months 15 Months to 30 Months
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
CHILD OUTCOMES: TARGET CHILD
• More than 40% had peer problems.
• 65% had conduct problems or hyperactivity.
• Emotional Problems • 14% at Baseline • 39% at 15 months • 24% at 30 months
• 24% Emergency Shelter, 12% Transitional Housing, 4% Permanent Supportive Housing
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
HIGH PREVALENCE OF LIFETIME TRAUMA FOR MOTHERS
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
MOTHERS’ MENTAL HEALTH
• Major depressive symptoms reported by majority of mothers.
• Maternal depression predicted educational and emotional problems for children.
• 49% of mothers met diagnostic criteria for PTSD at Baseline (decreased to 40% at 30 months).
• Trauma symptom severity in mothers predicted major depression, unemployment, poor child outcomes, and residential instability.
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
RESIDENTIAL MOBILITY: NUMBER OF MOVES 18 MONTHS BEFORE ENROLLMENT
14% 13% 7%
85% 88% 93%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
EMERGENCY SHELTER TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
0 Moves1 Move2+ Moves
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
RESIDENTIAL INSTABILITY: 15 MONTHS AND 30 MONTHS
86%
57%
29%
63% 53% 56%
36%
49%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
EMERGENCY SHELTER
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE
TOTAL SAMPLE
15 MONTHS 30 MONTHS
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
CHANGE OVER TIME IN PREDICTORS OF RESIDENTIAL INSTABILITY
Three Significant Predictors At 15 Months:
• Lower level of education. • Unemployment. • Lower self-efficacy.
Two Significant Predictors At 30 Months:
• Severity of trauma symptoms. • Lower self-efficacy.
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
IMPACT OF TRAUMA ON BEHAVIOR
• Difficulty following through • Avoids meetings/forgetful/disorganized • Isolates/withdraws • Can’t hold a job • Can’t seem to keep house/room clean • Interpersonal conflicts/easily agitated • Emotionally out of control/reactive • Seems spacey or “out of it” • Complains of aches and pains • Harsh or neglectful parenting practices • Has difficulty trusting/feels targeted by professionals • Remains in an abusive relationship or is victimized
repeatedly • Has ongoing substance abuse problems
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
ADDRESSING FAMILY HOMELESSNESS: POLICY AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS
• We have known that an effective response to family homelessness includes:
• Affordable housing • Housing families quickly, minimizing shelter
stays • Case management to support establishing
economic self sufficiency
• We now know trauma predicts long term residential instability.
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
TRAUMA INFORMED CARE VS. TRAUMA-SPECIFIC SERVICES
The universal presence of trauma among homeless families requires a universal response: Trauma Informed Care
• Trauma Informed Care
• Changes to the practices, policies, and culture of an entire organization, so all staff in any position are aware, knowledgeable, and have skills
• Trauma Specific Services
• Interventions that are designed to directly address trauma-related responses.
• Specific treatments for mental health issues resulting from trauma exposure.
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
ADDRESSING FAMILY HOMELESSNESS: POLICY AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS
• We Must use new knowledge to shift our approach to end family homelessness: • Comprehensive Assessments of mothers and children
to include assessing for depression, trauma, and child development
• Trauma-informed care across organizations & systems • Parenting Supports and Skills training to address
maternal depression, build parental competencies, and strengthen children’s resilience
• Child-centered services and programs
A partnership between the Marie C. and Joseph C. Wilson Foundation and the National Center on Family Homelessness
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Maureen Hayes, Ph.D. [email protected] www.familyhomelessness.org
Family Connection: Building Systems to End
Family Homelessness
Lindsay Knotts, USICH
www.usich.gov
Opening Doors
2
No one should experience homelessness and no one should be without a safe, stable place to call home.
The Plan set forth four bold and ambitious goals:
1. Finish the job of ending chronic homelessness by 2015
2. Prevent and end homelessness among Veterans by 2015
3. Prevent and end homelessness for families, youth, and children by 2020
4. Set a path to ending all types of homelessness
2
www.usich.gov
Defining an end to family homelessness Working together with our partners at the state, local, and federal level to strengthen the local crisis response systems, we will:
Ensure that no family is living unsheltered; Shorten episodes of family homelessness by providing
resources that enable families to safely reenter permanent housing as quickly as possible;
Link families to the benefits, supports, and community-based services they need to achieve and maintain housing stability; and
Identify and implement effective prevention methods to help families avoid homelessness.
3
www.usich.gov
Family Connection: Building Systems to End Family Homelessness
A resource to help communities and stakeholders build and implement an effective housing crisis response system for families.
4
www.usich.gov
Crisis Response System
Coordinated
Assessment for
Families with a
Housing Crisis
Targeted Prevention & Diversion
Temporary Shelter
Crisis
Stabilization
& Housing Search
Support
Rapid Re-Housing
&
Links to Services
Transitional Housing with
Services
Community-Based
Permanent Housing
(includes market rate & subsidized)
Community-
Based Services & Supports
Permanent Supportive
Housing
Family retains housing or gains new housing, bypassing shelter.
Family exits shelter on own.
Family does not find housing
within short period ( e.g., 7-10 days).
Family for whom RRH and/or TH is unsuccessful and has high
needs.
Families with highest needs
www.usich.gov
Key Areas of Action Four key strategy areas for Federal, state, and local action to end family homelessness:
1. Develop a centralized or coordinated assessment system;
2. Ensure interventions and assistance are tailored to meet the needs of families;
3. Improve linkages to local mainstream systems to help families gain access to benefits, employment, and community-based services more quickly;
4. Develop and build upon evidence-based practices for serving families experiencing or at-risk of experiencing homelessness.
www.usich.gov
Coordinated Assessment
Provide prevention and diversion assistance including a combination of financial assistance, mediation, housing location and supports.
Provide temporary shelter with stabilization services. This may include school or early childhood care and learning, benefits, and health insurance.
Ensure safety for survivors of domestic violence.
7
www.usich.gov
Coordinated Assessment
Increases and streamlines access to housing for households experiencing homelessness.
Matches the appropriate level of housing and services
based on needs in a systematic and coordinated way.
Moves away from first-come-first-serve approach to one that is standardized and coordinated.
Provides the ability for families to be given access to the best options.
8
www.usich.gov
Tailored Intervention and Assistance Provide rapid re-housing assistance to the majority of
families experiencing homelessness.
Increase access to affordable housing and help target resources.
Direct more service-intensive housing interventions like permanent supportive housing and transitional housing to the highest need households.
9
www.usich.gov
Tailored Intervention and Assistance
What is Rapid Re-housing? Housing search assistance Help paying for rent Housing-based case management Service connections – particularly employment
What are the benefits of Rapid Re-housing? Better economic investment: more families served Families less likely to become homeless again Number of families experiencing homelessness
declines Number of families in their own home within a month
increases
10
www.usich.gov
Connection to Mainstream Resources Targeted homeless resources are necessary but
insufficient; leveraging mainstream resources is key.
Develop strategies to improve access to and coordination with mainstream housing, schools and early childhood education, workforce programs, and TANF and other non-cash benefits.
Engage, educate, and assist state and local partners to
create better access for people experiencing homelessness.
11
www.usich.gov
Evidence Based Practices
Evidence and data is available on practices that improve the effectiveness of interventions that support families.
Enhancing services through implementation of evidence-based practice can lead to improved outcomes for parents and children: • Trauma informed care • Nurse family partnerships • Pre-natal and infant care • Early childhood education and school partnerships
We are committed to learning more about successful prevention strategies and what works best for who
12
www.usich.gov 13
Resources for improving a local crisis response
Family Connection: Building Systems to End Family Homelessness
Core Components of Rapid Re-housing Birth to Five: Watch Me Thrive! A Housing and Shelter
Provider’s Guide to Developmental and Behavioral Health Screening
TANF IM Housing First Checklist
Supporting Homeless Children and Families
Cara Baldari Senior Policy Director, Family Economics
June 18, 2014
The Recession’s Lingering Effects
• Child poverty in the U.S. is at a 20-year high, with 16
million or 21.8 percent of children living below the
poverty line.
• Although the poverty rate for all groups has increased in
recent years, the poverty rate for children remains
significantly higher.
Poverty – Seniors and Children
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Homeless Children & Families
• We have also seen record number of homeless children
and families since the start of the recession.
• In the 2011-2012 school year, the Department of
Education identified over 1.1 million homeless students.
• This is a 10% percent increase since the previous school
year, and a 72% increase since the start of the recession.
Causes for Rise in Child and Family Homelessness
Foreclosure
• More than 8 million children are directly affected by the ongoing foreclosure crisis.1
• Studies show that children who live in areas with high rates of
foreclosure experience decreased health and well-being.2
• Many low-income families are renters, and find themselves homeless when their rental property goes into foreclosure.
• Currently about 43 million households are renters, and 40 percent of
1 Isaacs, Julia B., Brookings Institution and First Focus, The Ongoing Impact of Foreclosures on Children, 2012, available at: http://www.firstfocus.net/sites/default/files/Foreclosures%202012_0.pdf. 2 Pollack C, Lynch J. Health status of people undergoing foreclosure in the Philadelphia region. American Journal of Public Health, 2009; 38:387-407. 3 Joint Center for Housing Studies. America’s Rental Housing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University 1 (2013), available at
http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/jchs.harvard.edu/files/jchs_americas_rental_housing_2013_1_0.pdf.
Causes for Rise in Child and Family Homelessness
Lack of Affordable Housing • Approximately 46 percent of households with children (both homeowners and
renters) report that they struggle to afford housing, or their housing is physically inadequate or overcrowded.4 HUD defines housing as “affordable” when any rent or mortgage payments comprise 30 percent or less of monthly household income.5
• For every 100 extremely low income renter household, there are just 31 affordable and available units.6
• 11.3 million renter households pay more than half of their incomes on housing7
4 U.S. Census Bureau and Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Housing Survey (2012). Tabulated by Department of Housing and Urban Development, available at: http://childstats.gov/pdf/ac2013/ac_13.pdf.
5 U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development, “Affordable Housing,” available at http://www .hud.gov/offices/cpd/affordablehousing/. 6 Extremely low income renter households are those with incomes at or below 30% of the Area Median Income (AMI). National Low Income Housing Coalition, Out of Reach 2014, 1, available at: http://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/oor/OOR2014_Introduction.pdf. 7 Joint Center for Housing Studies. America’s Rental Housing: Evolving Markets and Needs. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University 6 (2013), available at
http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/jchs.harvard.edu/files/jchs_americas_rental_housing_2013_1_0.pdf.
• Streamline the federal definition of homelessness so that all
homeless children and families, including the many living in doubled-up situations, can access the services from all agencies they need to transition to stable housing.
• Congress and the Administration should take measures to align the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development definition of “homeless” children with the definition used by the U.S. Department of Education.
• Previously legislation has been introduced to amend HUD’s definition of homelessness by including children and youth who have been verified as homeless by personnel in programs such as Head Start and IDEA, Part C.
Policy Solutions to Improve Outcomes for Homeless Children and Families
• Urge our members of congress to take a homelessness challenge and visit a homeless shelter in their district so they can see firsthand the struggle of homeless children and families.
• Increase the availability of affordable housing through efforts such as
funding the National Housing Trust Fund.
• The National Housing Trust Fund was created in 2008 but never funded.
• Capitalizing the fund would address the current severe shortage of affordable rental homes by creating new affordable housing units, as well as preserving existing rental units and making additional units available.
Policy Solutions to Improve Outcomes for Homeless Children and Families
Policy Solutions to Improve Outcomes for Homeless Children and Families
• Encourage Congress to pass the Permanently Protecting Tenants at
Foreclosure Act (H.R. 3543/S. 1761), introduced by Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) and Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT).
• It would make the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act (PTFA) permanent, and would add a private right of action to help ensure that the law is enforceable. If Congress fails to act, the law will expire on December 31, 2014.
• Finally, preserve current investments children and families in the FY15
appropriations process. Spending levels for the next year for homeless assistance programs, affordable housing programs, and human services programs are currently being determined.
• While many of these programs saw some funds restored from the sequester in 2014, spending levels are not back to where they were pre-sequester and they remain underfunded.
