View
38
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
MTW Conference February 4-5, 2014. Models for Addressing Homelessness at the Local Level Presented by: Portage Metropolitan Housing Authority Home Forward Housing Authority of the County of San Mateo. Models for Addressing Homelessness at the Local Level. Presenter: Fred Zawilinski - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
MTW ConferenceFebruary 4-5, 2014
Models for Addressing Homelessness at the Local Level
Presented by:• Portage Metropolitan Housing Authority• Home Forward• Housing Authority of the County of San Mateo
Models for Addressing Homelessness at the Local Level
Portage County, Ohio
Presenter: Fred ZawilinskiPortage Metropolitan Housing Authority
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Attacking One Cause of Homelessness• Through Moving to Work, PMHA has enabled the
creation of the first residential drug and alcohol recovery program in Portage County.
– Prior to this program creation, men with addiction problems had to hope for the rare open slot in another county, attempt to address recovery as an out-patient, or hope for assistance through the criminal justice system
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Background• For 25 years, PMHA owned and maintained a group
home for persons with severe developmental disabilities as part of the conventional Public Housing Program. Named Washington Group Home and built with PH Development funds, it housed eight persons with individual bedrooms, but kitchen, bathroom and living areas were shared by all residents. 24/7 staffing provided assistance with daily living activities as needed.
Background• 2008: Discussion over 50058 submissions led to
speculation at HUD that the group home was not an allowed use under Public Housing, and that PMHA would either convert the property into more conventional rental housing, or dispose of the property.
• Approval for continued use as a group home requested for 2009 as insurance to PMHA.
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Background• 2009: The supportive services agency purchased
their own home, vacated the property.• Meanwhile, PMHA investigates permanent
supportive housing as an option for housing young adults who age out of the foster care system
• A partnership is formed, and fails.
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
A Different Approach• In 2012, discussions between PMHA and the
leadership of a non-profit reveal that, while there is a long-running recovery program for women with addictions, there is no similar program for men.
• With a history of successful collaborations between the non-profit and PMHA, discussions moved forward to explore MTW as a tool to help PMHA better utilize WGH and address community needs.
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Addressing Addiction• Through the Annual Plan process and numerous discussions
with HUD MTW and field office staff, PMHA gets permission to operate WGH as a home for men recovering from addictions.
• PMHA retains ownership and maintenance responsibilities, leases the property as a whole to the non-profit partner for their program operation. The partner, as in the previous days of the group home, provides all 24/7 staffing and care of the residents. The property is leased to the non-profit on a short-term, renewable lease between the organizations.
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Washington Group Home
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Funding• Property related funding: PMHA receives rent from the
non-profit based on a calculation assuming 8 residents with an SSI-only income, similar to what it received as a DD group home. PMHA also receives operating subsidy from HUD.
• Program funding: The county Mental Health board provides for staffing and recovery program activities. A citizens group led by a mother whose son died from an overdose holds fundraising events on behalf of the program.
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Early Results• Since June 2013, 29 admissions.• Expected population: Range of ages with addictions
to a variety of substances, including alcohol, prescription drugs, various illegal drugs
• Actual population: Primarily younger men, with almost exclusively a primary addiction to heroin.– Neighboring Cuyahoga County has seen heroin deaths
increase 400% since 2007 and deaths from heroin now outnumber homicides and automobile accidents
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Early Results• Nine of the 29 admissions have graduated from the
program as “successful”• Twelve participants left the program as
“unsuccessful,” for reasons ranging from violating house rules and voluntary premature departure to termination for smuggling in banned substances.
• Grads are returning to volunteer with program activities
• No neighborhood complaints from nearby condos, child day care, or churches.
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Other Homelessness Activities
• Homeless Shelter—Public Housing– Freedom House for homeless veterans
• Transitional Housing– Renaissance Place: 2-year term limited Public Housing– Voucher-based Transitional Housing
Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Lessons Learned• Having PMHA involved in the homelessness programs in the
county provides:– Needed Services– Credibility with non-profits, poverty advocates– Improved efficiency and effectiveness of the Continuum of Care– Improved knowledge of housing needs
Program Based Rent Assistance
What is Program Based Assistance?
Flexible MTW funds that serve targeted populations in partnership
with one or more local service providers
• Partner agencies identify participating families and determine amount and duration of assistance
• Partner agencies provide services• Funds are contracted to partners or administered by
Home Forward on behalf of partners
Target Populations
Program Based Assistance targets families for whom:1) success on the Housing Choice Voucher program would
be unlikely (ineligible or unlikely to find and retain housing on their own)
2) the delay in accessing rent assistance due to the Section 8 waitlist would most likely have devastating results (recidivism, relapse, death, homelessness, etc); or
3) the need for rental subsidy is short term while the client is receiving the support needed to achieve self-sufficiency or other permanent housing.
Program Model
Basic common guidelines across all contracted programs, with customization by partnering agency• Selection• Eligibility• Habitability Inspections• Subsidy Determination
• Use of Funds• Service Requirements• Outcomes
MTW Goals
Program Based Assistance meets MTW goals by:1) Achieving greater cost-effectiveness by reducing
administrative burden of administering rent assistance 2) Supporting families with children where the head of
household is engaged in a program to help the family become economically self-sufficient
3) Increasing housing choice for low-income families via a non-traditional model which supports families who might otherwise not be eligible for Public Housing or Section 8
4) Increasing the number of households a PHA can serve via a local non-traditional model that may cost less per family than a traditional Section 8 voucher
Examples of Program Based Assistance Partnerships
Short Term Rent Assistance (STRA)
Local jurisdictions, through a community process, developed a model for a comprehensive system of administering, accessing, and delivering short-term housing assistance.• Jointly funded by Multnomah County, Cities of Portland
and Gresham, and Home Forward• System administered by Home Forward• Assistance delivered by 19 contracted agencies that
provide services to families• Serves households that are homeless or at-risk of
homelessness• Outcome goal: long term housing stability, measured by
housing retention after end of assistance
Benefits of a Shared System
Prior to creation of STRA• Staffing at all four jurisdictions• Different eligibility requirements and funded activities• Varied data collection and reporting requirements• Different outcome measures
Strengths of the unified system• Focus on shared outcomes• Improved system support and accountability• Increased flexibility for providers• Administrative efficiency for funders and ease for
providers• Ability to use STRA infrastructure to deploy new
resources for housing assistance rapidly
Funding
Funds Administered through STRA System Infrastructure 2012-13
Total $4.67 million
Multnomah County $945,000
City of Portland $1.73 million
Home Forward MTW Funds $1.98 million
City of GreshamAlso Contributes HOME funds via City of Portland, as those funds come into the region via a consortium
$7,000
• General Funds• Emergency Housing Account• Emergency Solutions Grant
• Housing Stabilization Program (TANF Block Grant)
• State Low Income Rental Housing Fund
• General Funds• Emergency Solutions Grant
• HOME TBRA Funds
• Flexible MTW Funds• Payment in Lieu of Taxes
(PILOT)
• Emergency Food & Shelter Program funds (via Department of Homeland Security)
Outputs
People and Households ServedYear People Households
2008-09 Fiscal Year 3,911 1,7152009-10 Fiscal Year 5,605 2,2992010-11 Fiscal Year 5,728 2,3652011-12 Fiscal Year 5,787 2,4162012-13 Fiscal Year 6,663 2,655
Average Assistance Provided
Average assistance for households receiving eviction prevention or homeless placement assistance
$1,530
Average length of rent assistance provided 3 months
Housing Retention
Short Term Rent Assistance Program Post-Assistance Housing Retention Outcomes
Permanent Placement Eviction Prevention3
months
6 month
s
12 month
s
3 month
s
6 month
s
12 months
2012-13 90% 86% 74% 87% 86% 77%
Action for Prosperity
Partnership between Home Forward, Workforce Investment Board, County network of non-profits, and Department of Human Services• County’s network of non-profits provide intensive,
employment-focused case management• Workforce Investment Board provides set-aside of
training and employment resources• DHS provides some coordinated case-planning for TANF
families, including access to childcare• Home Forward provides rent assistance (contracted to
non-profits)
Programs for Former Foster Youth
Extensions for FUP Vouchers• For youth with expiring FUP vouchers • Case managers at DHS or partnering agency can
recommend youth for one year of rent assistance• Can be renewed for up to three years
New Doors• Oxford House-style housing for homeless former foster
youth who are working or in school• Rent assistance contracted to service provider• Local community college can refer in and also offers
scholarships to interested residents
Alder School
Alder Elementary School is the first school to be adopted by I Have a Dream Foundation
• Many providers offering services on site, but mobility was high
• Rent assistance to families at risk of moving out of catchment area
• Case management offered by local non-profit who can connect families to employment programs
Lessons Learned
• Short term assistance isn’t for everyone, but can work for many if paired with case management
• This model allows PHAs to serve more individual families over the long-term
• Housing stability vs. housing affordability • Offering partners a toolbox of flexible funds (such as
PILOT dollars) helps them tailor assistance to clients’ needs
• Contracting funds requires significant streamlining of paperwork/rules
• Balancing front-end verification by PHA with program auditing
• Partnerships like this can create strong relationships that can be built upon and leveraged
For additional information, contact:
Rachel DevlinStrategic Initiatives Program Director(503) 802-8597Rachel.Devlin@homeforward.org
Models for Addressing Homelessness at the Local Level
Housing Authority of the County of San MateoHousing Readiness Program (HRP)
MTW Conference, February 4-5, 2014
Developed in response to the needs of the homeless in San Mateo County (SMC)
Originally designed in partnership with the SMC Center on Homelessness and other homeless service providers
Strategically positioned to be a part of the SMC HOPE Plan, the Counties 10-year plan to end homelessness
Housing Readiness Program (HRP)
HRP responds to the MTW goal of increased self-sufficiency by providing housing assistance in concert with supportive services
HRP increases the housing choice for individuals and families who would otherwise have little ability to receive housing assistance and for whom stable housing is often far out of reach
HRP leverages supportive services that ultimately result in overall cost savings for the community
HRP and the MTW Goals
Follows the “Housing First” strategy
HACSM allocates up to 100 vouchers
Establishes contracts with homeless services providers◦ Direct referrals to a
committee for review◦ Case management required
HRP – Program Design
HRP is voucher based Referrals follow all eligibility and
MTW program rules HRP has a three-year voucher
term Housing subsidy is based on
family income and HACSM rent reform program – the Tiered Subsidy Table
Case management services are provided by the referral agency
HRP – Program Design
HRP – Success Story
Delaware PacificNew Construction Housing
To date, HACSM has assisted 111 families, consisting of 186 family members
29 individuals were elderly and/or disabled
75 individuals were under 21 years of age
HRP – The Results
Over 50% of the current families have increased their income while on the program
On average in CY13, HRP families have increased their savings by over $1,700
On average, program participants have maintained stable housing for 669 days (or approx. two years)
HRP – The Results
To date, 52 families have exited the program
16 hardship extensions have been granted
No informal hearings have been requested
No terminations have been processed due to non-compliance with case management
HRP – The Results
Establish and maintain clear roles and responsibilities between the Housing Authority and the contract partners
Intensive case management non-negotiable, as it is vital to the success of the families
Clear and easy to use reporting system for partners
Exit plan for each participant at program entry
HRP – Lessons Learned
Variety of supportive services Short Term, Transitional, and Permanent
Housing – ensuring that partner organizations have the same definitions and are focused in the same direction
Strong Continuum of Care
HRP – Lessons Learned
HRP – Lessons Learned
The Pros The Cons
Ability to meet housing need in a timely manner
Leverage support and services across agencies
Motivated families Ability to reach more
families in need
Partners who are not able to provide long-term case management services
Conflicting priorities, at times, across agencies
Greater needs than assistance available
Time-limited vouchers to stabilize housing
Avenues for increased self-sufficiency
Freedom from the need for long- term government assistance
Strong and Engaged Community
The Housing Readiness Program
For additional information, contact:
Jennifer Rainwater, Planning and Program Innovation Manager(650) 802-5045jrainwater@smchousing.org
Cindy Chan, Rental Program Manager(650) 802-3322cchan@smchousing.org
Recommended