September 7, 2016 South Seattle Community Collegeallhomekc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/9.7.16... · 9/9/2015 · • Racial Equity and Social Justice Workgroup • 2016 Continuum

Coordinating Board Agenda September 7, 2016 South Seattle Community College Georgetown Campus

2:00 – 5:00

Coordinating Board Meeting Facilitator/Presenter Materials

2:00 Welcome & Introductions

Result: Members feel welcomed & are ready to begin the meeting

Lainey

2:10 Public Comment Paul 2:20 Updates Adrienne/Catherine 2:30 Equity Impact Statement

Result: Members affirm the Equity Impact Statement.

Lainey

1. Equity Impact Statement2:40 HMIS Committee Charter

Result: Members affirm the HMIS Committee Charter

Paul

2. Updated HMIS Charter2:45 Quarterly Dashboard

Result: Board reviews 2016 data through quarter 2.

Lainey/Amanda Thompkins

3. Q1 and Q2 Dashboards3:00 System Wide Analytics and Projection (SWAP) Report

Result: Board reviews the findings from the SWAP report.

Paul/Focus Strategies

4. SWAP Report (to behanded out)

5. Implementation Plan6. Conflict of Interest

Agreement7. King County/City of

Seattle/United Way KCMOU (to be handed out)

4:45 Announcements and Updates • Racial Equity and Social Justice Workgroup• 2016 Continuum of Care NOFA• 120-day Review of Coordinated Entry for All• 2016 Conference on Ending Homelessness and Capitol Hill visits• Faith Community Survey• Year 2 Action Steps

Result: Members hear announcements and are updated on important events and initiatives.

Lainey

8. Written UpdateSummary

5:00 Adjourn

Racial Equity Impact Statement

The All Home Strategic Plan commits to reducing racial disparities of those experiencing

homelessness. Nearly two thirds of people experiencing homelessness are people and families of

color. Institutional and systematic racism attributes to the oppression of people of color, creating

inequity, poverty and in some cases, homelessness. Success in reducing racial disparities and

creating an effective and dignified emergency response system will require bold action and

shared accountability. This commitment will include the proactive reinforcement of policies,

practices, attitudes and actions to produce equitable power, access, opportunities, treatment,

impacts and outcomes for all.

HMIS Steering Committee Charter Purpose Statement The HMIS Steering Committee is designed to oversee and support the implementation by the host organization of King County, All Home’s Homeless Management Information system (HMIS), to ensure that BitFocus is a functional Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) that meets local needs for data collection and reporting as well as U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) HMIS standards, and specifically to:

• Inform the vision for HMIS and set priorities. • Approve budget, communications plan, and work plan. • Assure the HMIS meets the database needs for Coordinated Entry for All. • Review and monitor the daily operations and strategic initiatives for HMIS, including update on status

of support requests and customer satisfaction. • Develop and approve policies for our local HMIS, including the MOU and data sharing agreements. • Assure appropriate data privacy mechanisms are in place, and inform the process to manage data

breeches as needed. • Direct legislative agenda as needed. • Provide a forum to resolve provider concerns or issues as necessary.

The authority of the HMIS Steering Committee shall be to:

• Approve policy changes and accountability for the success of the HMIS system. • Approve budget, communications, and work plan for the HMIS system. • Establish and ensure guidelines are met around functionality of the HMIS system.

Date Updated: August 2016 HMIS Steering Committee Charter

Percent Returning after Exiting to Permanent Housing

2013 2014 2015

5.4% 6.0% 5.4%

2016 Q1 2016 Q2

4.7%2.3%2016 Target = 4.9%

2013

2014

2015

106

123

113

Length of Time in Emergency Shelter and Transitional Housing (Days)

2016 Q1

2016 Q2 130

126

2016 Target = 102 days

2013 2014 2015

13661696 1665

2016 Q1 2016 Q2

18721743

432 303

Quarterly Target = 2175

Homeless Households Housed Against Goal Select Sub-populationAdults

Return Window6 month

King County Homeless HousingSystem Performance

Adults


2013 2014 2015

3.3%

1.3%

3.5%

2016 Q1 2016 Q2

2.8%

0.0%

2016 Target = 3.2%


2013

2014

2015

290

277

312

2016 Q1

2016 Q2

219


2013 2014 2015

738877

750

2016 Q1 2016 Q2

184280

116212


Homeless Households Housed Against Goal Select Sub-populationFamilies with Children



Families with Children


AmericanIndian orAlaska Native

Asian Black or AfricanAmerican

Multiracial NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander

Unknown White

3.2% 3.4% 4.0%4.9%

3.5%

1.2%

4.3%


American Indian or Alaska Native

Asian

Black or African American

Multiracial

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

Unknown

White

134

156

108

159

129

141

84

AmericanIndian orAlaska Native

Asian Black or AfricanAmerican

Multiracial NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander

Unknown White

19%27%

31%27% 30% 28%

21%

Percent of Households Exiting to Permanent Housing Select Sub-populationHeads of Householdby Race



Heads of Household by Race


2013 2014 2015

10.7%8.4% 8.0%

2016 Q1 2016 Q2

7.7% 6.5%2016 Target = 7.2%


2013

2014

2015 127

112

95

2016 Q1

2016 Q2

144


2013 2014 2015

386342

433

2016 Q1 2016 Q2

189232

4790


Homeless Households Housed Against Goal Select Sub-populationYouth and YoungAdults



Youth and Young Adults


2013 2014 2015

4.8% 4.7% 4.8%

2016 Q1 2016 Q2

4.1%

1.5%

2016 Target = 4.3%


2013

2014

2015 127

136

119

2016 Q1

2016 Q2

134


2013 2014 2015

2556 25982221

2016 Q1 2016 Q2

2118 2355

732 495


Homeless Households Housed Against Goal Select Sub-populationAll HomelessHouseholds



All Homeless Households

The Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act programs administered by HUD that award funds competitively require the development of a Continuum of Care system in the community where assistance is being sought. A continuum of care system is designed to address the critical problem of homelessness through a coordinated community-based process of identifying needs and building a system to address those needs. All Home is the designated Continuum of Care (CoC) for Seattle/King County. Membership of the All Home Coordinating Board includes individuals from the Seattle/King County area, some of whom represent nonprofit organizations which provide services to persons and families who are homeless or at-risk of becoming homeless. Some of these organizations will also, from time-to-time, be applicants for funds and/or contracts which may be awarded directly by All Home, or at the recommendation of All Home. To prevent an appearance of and address situations of conflict of interest, the following policy has been established to give guidance to currently serving members of the Coordinating Board, inform All Home’s constituency, and promote transparency of the continuum’s operations and business decisions. Code of Conduct Each and every member of the Coordinating Board shall, to the maximum extent possible, serve in a manner so as to avoid the appearance, or actual occurrence of a conflict of interest, any favoritism or any special treatment toward any person, applicant, organization or vendor, having business, or dealings of any kind, with All Home. No member of the Coordinating Board shall use or cause or allow to be used, his or her position to secure any personal privilege for himself, herself, their organization, or others, or to influence, actions, of All Home for private, professional or humanitarian reasons. No Board member shall use his or her position, or the knowledge gained therefrom, in such a manner that conflict with the interests of All Home. In his or her capacity, each Board member has the duty to place All Home’s interests first in any dealings with All Home, and has the ongoing responsibility to comply with the requirements of this policy. Board members serve without compensation. Board members may not obtain for themselves, their relatives, their organization, their business associates, or any other related party a material gain of any kind from their association with All Home. All Home expects that a Board member’s organization or another related party may, from time to time, apply for grants or seek contracts from All Home; it is the Board member’s direct participation in decisions about such transactions that constitutes conflict of interest, not the organization’s application itself. If a Board member, or an individual or organization with which she or he is associated, has an interest in a current or proposed transaction, project or grant application, he or she must disclose that interest at the earliest opportunity, prior to any discussion or negotiation of that transaction. Disclosure requirements apply to transactions specifically involving the Board member’s individual organization, but not to transactions involving the association’s general membership; it is understood and appropriate that Board members have an interest in transactions affecting the membership as a whole. Any Board or Committee member who is aware of a potential conflict of interest involving any matter under consideration by the Board or Committee, shall not be present for any discussion of the matter and shall not be permitted to vote on any matter in which he/she has an interest. When All Home’s staff is aware of a potential conflict of interest affecting a Board or Committee member, that Board or Committee member shall not receive related

documents in advance of the discussion, under no circumstances shall a Board or Committee member be present for discussion of or vote on matters directly affecting their own interests, or attempt to advocate in their own behalf through private contact, communication, or discussion. Such matters of self-interest include but are not limited to grant or contractual arrangements with Board member’s own organization or a related party. Procedure A Board or Committee member with a conflict of interest is expected to:

a) Immediately, by written communication, inform Executive Director, and the members of the Board or committee of the Board charged with approving the transaction on behalf of All Home of such person’s interest or position;

b) Disclose any material facts within such person’s knowledge that bear on the advisability of such transaction from the standpoint of All Home, any contacts with other Coordinating Board members;

c) Shall recuse themselves from any discussion of the matter; and, d) Not be entitled to vote on the decision to enter into such transaction.

The minutes of the Board or Committee meeting shall reflect that:

• any interested persons fully disclosed potential conflicts of interest; • the Board or Committee discussed and determined whether an actual conflict of interest exists; • the interested person(s) abstained from discussion and voting; and, • the outcome of the Board vote.

The All Home Coordinating Board shall investigate all allegations of impropriety, oral or written, made openly to any Board Member, Executive Director, or All Home staff. The Board must thoroughly discuss the matter with the person(s) bringing the complaint, the Board member involved, and any other parties associated with the complaint. If a Board member is found to have violated the letter or intention of this conflict of interest policy, the Board may levy any of the following penalties, as it deems appropriate:

• A statement of reprimand or censure recorded in the minutes of the Coordinating Board meeting; • Expulsion from the Coordinating Board; or • Legal action, including but not limited to civil and/or criminal prosecution.

Annual statements Each member shall annually complete a questionnaire regarding any potential conflicts and stating they:

• received a copy of the conflict of interest policy; • read and understand the policy; and, • agreed to comply with the policy.

Background: Each and every member of the Coordinating Board shall, to the maximum extent possible, serve in a manner so as to avoid the appearance, or actual occurrence of a conflict of interest, any favoritism or any special treatment toward any person, applicant, organization or vendor, having business, or dealings of any kind, with All Home. No member of the Coordinating Board shall use or cause or allow to be used, his or her position to secure any personal privilege for himself, herself, their organization, or others, or to influence, actions, of All Home for private, professional or humanitarian reasons. Board Members – Direct Relationships:

1. Have you received any payments (other than expense reimbursements) from the Organization? Yes_____ No_____

2. Are you employed by a company that does business with the Organization? Yes_____ No_____

3. Are you employed by an agency/business that does business with the Organization? Yes_____ No_____

4. Are you serving in an advisory capacity to an agency that does business with the Organization? Yes_____ No_____

If the answer is yes to any of the above questions please explain in the following space: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Board Members – Family Relationships:

5. Are you related to any individuals who are employed by the Organization? Yes_____ No_____

6. Are you related to any individuals that do business with the Organization, either directly or as employees and/or Advisory Committee/Board members? Yes_____ No_____

If the answer is yes to any of the above questions please explain in the following space: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

AFFIRMATION: I hereby affirm that I have read and understand the above policy regarding Conflict of Interest, and I have completed the Board Member Questionnaire to the best of my knowledge:

_________________________________________ Printed _________________________________________ __________________________ Signature Date

Update Summary

Racial Equity and Social Justice Workgroup

Led by All Home Coordinating Board Member and Chief Seattle Executive Director, Colleen Echohawk, and All Home staff, two forums about racial equity have taken place over the last few months. Key community members, including some Coordinating Board members, who frequently engage in conversation around race, racism and homelessness were asked to participate.

The goals of holding these forums were to identify the scope of the problem and to create actions steps and strategies around racial equity, looking at both racial disparities of those experiencing homelessness and the responsiveness of the homeless system to people of color. Moving forward, work groups, action steps and accountability to continue the work of reducing racial disparities will be developed under the All Home Strategic Plan.

2016 Continuum of Care NOFA

Each year the Seattle/King County Continuum of Care (CoC) submits an application to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for McKinney Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance Grant funds. The FY2016 NOFA reflects HUD’s continued prioritization of permanent housing, as well as housing first, low barrier housing, performance, and strategic use of resources. As part of the NOFA, HUD requires our local CoC to conduct a local process to determine a priority order of projects.

The final priority order is the result of a very thoughtful process conducted by Continuum of Care staff, under the advisement of providers and local funders, and final decisions are approved by the All Home Funder Alignment Committee. Following the Local McKinney Application Values established by the former IAC (now Coordinating Board), this reflects an effort to maintain as much McKinney funding in our CoC as possible, promote our goal to make homelessness rare, brief and one time in King County, address issues of disproportionality, and prioritize projects that further these goals while aligning with HUD strategic goals and priorities. The application deadline is September 14, 2016.

2016 NOFA Highlights:

• $1.9 billion available nationally in FY2016 funding • HUD continues the 2-Tiered ranking approach that requires 93% of the total renewal amount to be placed

in Tier 1, and 7% in Tier 2. This is compared to Tier 2 proportions of 15% in 2015, and 2% in 2014. Additionally, CoCs are eligible to apply for CoC planning dollars equal to 3% of their renewal amount.

• HUD will apply its own selection priorities to the tiered ranking. The 2016 priorities continue to prioritize permanent housing, as well as low barrier housing serving literally homeless households, performance, and strategic use of resources.

• New projects proposed by the CoC can be created through re-allocation. Eligible new project types include: PSH for chronically homeless households (families and singles), Rapid Re-Housing for any/all populations, HMIS (Homeless Management Information Systems), and Coordinated Assessment.

• Continua can also apply for bonus funds in the amount of 5% of their annual renewal amount. The amount may be applied for a single or for multiple projects. Eligible bonus project types are PSH for chronically homeless households (families and singles), and Rapid Re-Housing for any/all populations.

120-day Review of Coordinated Entry for All

The first quarterly review of CEA will be led by the King County Performance Measurement and Evaluation (PME) Unit, with guidance from the All Home Data and Evaluation Sub-Committee. The evaluation framework includes metrics for rare, brief, and one-time with data disaggregated by population group, race, and ethnicity, among other characteristics. Data from the review will be presented to the Executive Committee. All Home will work in a collaborative partnership with King County to explore and recommend changes to CEA and guide system improvement work.

2016 Conference on Ending Homelessness and Capitol Hill visits

Nine members of the All Home Coordinating Board joined All Home staff in Washington D.C. to attend the National Alliance to End Homelessness (NAEH) Conference. In addition to attending conference workshops, Board members participated in a meeting with federal partners from the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the U.S. Department of State. Coordinating Board members also attended meetings throughout the week with key staff from Senators Murray and Cantwell’s offices; and staff from Representatives DelBene, Reichert, Smith, Heck, Kilmer, Herrera-Beutler, and Larson’s offices to discuss All Home’s federal priorities. Members of the All Home Coordinating Board and staff highlighted the need for solutions rooted in racial equity for people of color who disproportionately experience homelessness and housing instability in our community and across the nation.

Faith Community Survey

Faith communities have been at the forefront of developing innovative and creative services to meet the changing needs of vulnerable people. And yet, because faith communities function largely outside the human services system, we do not have a comprehensive or quantifiable measure of their impact on the people they serve or of the nature and scope of their contribution to the larger system of government and non-profit service providers. To address this need, the Church Council of Greater Seattle and Seattle University School of Theology and Ministry have partnered with All Home to work with key stakeholder organizations and community groups in King County to conduct a survey of faith communities that will a) document the range and impact of congregation-based human services and advocacy, identify, and b) summarize barriers to service provision and advocacy, as well as opportunities for expansion, partnership, the supports needed to better serve the community and c) describe the perceptions held by faith leaders about the role of their communities in addressing social justice and human suffering.

We are seeking responses from faith leaders (i.e pastors, imams, rabbis, priests, etc.), individuals serving on staff at faith communities, and lay people who are well-informed about the services and community resources provided by their faith community/congregation. Responses will be analyzed and summarized in a community report that will provide a geography of faith community service provision by city/neighborhood in King County, and identifies overlap and gaps in services and potential for capacity-building and partnership, as well as trends in faith leadership perceptions about the role of their faith community in making homelessness rare, brief and one-time.

Year 2 Action Steps

The year two action steps for the All Home Strategic Plan have been adapted from the work of the Coordinating Board meeting held in June. The updated action steps will be presented at the next Executive Committee meeting in October.

Documents

September 7, 2016 South Seattle Community Collegeallhomekc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/9.7.16... · 9/9/2015 · • Racial Equity and Social Justice Workgroup • 2016 Continuum