Transcript Profiles & Needs of Homeless Families

Taking Charge:
Effective Oversight Structures for
Plan Implementation
Barbara Poppe
Executive Director
Community Shelter Board
www.csb.org
Presented at National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2006 Annual Conference
Ending Homelessness: Plan, Act, Succeed
July 18, 2006
Section I
CSB model
–
–
–
–
–
History
Founders
Mission
Methods
Funders
Community Shelter Board
 Created in 1986 to respond to
growing needs of homelessness in
Franklin County
 "It is unacceptable for anyone in our
community to go without food or
shelter for even one night."
Mel Schottenstein, CSB Founder
CSB’s Founders
Public/Private Partnership:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
City of Columbus
Franklin County Commissioners
United Way of Franklin County
Greater Columbus Chamber of Commerce
Metropolitan Area Church Council
ADAMH Board
The Columbus Foundation
Leo Yassenoff Foundation
Mission
 CSB, by coordinating community-
based efforts, fostering collaboration
and funding services, assists families
and individuals in Central Ohio to
resolve their housing crisis.
Organizational Methods
 collaboration with
other systems
 raise and distribute
money
 advocacy
 community
education regarding
homelessness
 assure accountability
 coordination with
partner agencies
 practice fiscal
conservancy
 continue research
and data analysis for
effective planning
Revenue
Ohio Housing Trust
Fund
4%
United Way
11%
Direct Federal Funds
2%
Franklin County
37%
Mel Contributions
10%
Other Funds
4%
FY07 Revenue = $9,140,122
City of Columbus
32%
Community Shelter Board
 4 focus areas
– Emergency Shelter
– Housing
– Prevention
– Advocacy
Spending
Contingency
Allocated to
Expense
Reserve Fund
Special Projects
5%
1%
2%
CSB Program
Costs
13%
CSB Admin and
Fundraising
5%
Direct Client
Assistance
8%
Grants to Agencies
66%
Section II
Rebuilding Lives
– Our community’s plan to address
homelessness and end chronic homelessness
Rebuilding Lives Initiative
 1997 Community “charge” to assess homeless
services for single men impacted by downtown
economic development
 “patchwork system of emergency shelters”
 Scioto Peninsula Relocation Task Force
 Data sources
–
–
–
–
Comprehensive Community Needs Assessment
Analysis of Best Practices
Analysis of CSB MIS
Review of national model programs
Typology Study
 CSB undertook analysis of shelter stays
that mirrored methodology developed by
Dennis Culhane, Univ. of Penn.
– Used CSB MIS data for 7,944 men using shelter
system from 1994-1996
– Developed 3 “clusters” that grouped men
based on cumulative length of shelter stay
and number of shelter stays
– Analyzed shelter usage for each cluster
Relationship of Length of Shelter Stay
& Use of Shelter Services
% of all persons served
100%
% of all units of service
used
80%
85%
60%
40%
44%
32%
20%
13%
24%
2%
0%
Transitional 24.5
Days
Episodic 119 Days Chronic 500 Days
Typology/Average Length of Stay
n=7,944
Source: CSB 1994-96
MIS Data
A New Strategy - 1998
 Short-term needs -- Ensure basic
emergency shelter during a crisis
 Long-term needs -- Establish
permanent housing with supportive
services
Rebuilding Lives -- Policy Shift
 Reconfigure emergency shelter
system
 Develop 800 units of supportive
housing
 Establish a Funder Collaborative
 Create Good Neighbor Policies and
Procedures
 Institute a community relations plan
Section III
Implementation structures
–
–
–
–
Rebuilding Lives Funder Collaborative
Continuum of Care Steering Committee
Citizens Advisory Council
CSB staff and board
Rebuilding Lives
Funder Collaborative
Purpose
– Created in 1999
– Individual funding agencies
pool their resources
– Work toward mutually agreed
upon goals
Role of the Funder Collaborative
 Provide funding for capital, services and
operations of supportive housing
 Strategy
 Program guidelines & standards
 Underwriting criteria
 Program evaluation, outcome
measurement & reporting requirements
Role of the Funder Collaborative
 Meet regularly to review, evaluate,
and approve funding for individual
projects
 Provide access to other community
resources
Responsibilities of Each Member
of the Funder Collaborative
 Members are institutions
 Provide funding and other resources
for supportive housing projects
 Find additional resources for
supportive housing
 Participate actively on the
Collaborative
Responsibilities of Each Member
of the Funder Collaborative
 Provide leadership to the
community in order to assure the
success of the Rebuilding Lives plan
 Assure accountability for institutional
decision follow-through
 Follow through and work to assure
that recommendations are
supported by decision-makers
Rebuilding Lives
Funder Collaborative
 Members
Affordable Housing Trust Corp.
ADAMH Board
City of Columbus, Administration
Columbus City Council
The Columbus Foundation
Columbus Health Department
Columbus Mayor’s Office
Columbus Medical Assoc. Found.
Columbus Metro. Housing Authority
Community Shelter Board
Corporation for Supportive Housing
Franklin County Administration
Franklin County Children Services
Franklin Co. Dept. Job & Family Services
Franklin Co. Office on Aging
Franklin County MR/DD
Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission
Ohio Capital Corporation for Housing
Osteopathic Heritage Foundation
United Way of Central Ohio
Veterans Service Commission
Continuum of Care
Steering Committee
Purpose
– Annually prioritizes over $6,000,000 in
funding from U.S. Department of HUD
– Designs and coordinates HUD
Continuum of Care grant application
process for Columbus and Franklin
County
Continuum of Care
Steering Committee
 Members
– Local funders, government
representatives, service providers, and
consumers
– Four seats represent local providers
– Four seats reserved for homeless service
consumers
– Members represent a variety of
organizations and interests
Continuum of Care
Steering Committee
 Members
ADAMH Board
City of Columbus
Citizens Advisory Council
Columbus City Council
Columbus Metro. Housing Authority
Columbus Coalition for the Homeless
The Columbus Foundation
Columbus Health Department
Community Connection for Ohio
Offenders
Community Shelter Board
Corporation for Supportive Housing
Franklin County Board of Commissioners
Franklin Co. Dept. Job & Family Services
Legal Aid Society of Columbus
Ohio Capital Corporation for Housing
United Way of Central Ohio
Veterans Administration
Veterans Service Commission
Citizens Advisory Council
 Comprised of people who have
experienced homelessness
 Council acts in advisory role to
improve services for the homeless
Role of Citizens Advisory Council
 Reviews plans and recommendations,
including the annual submission to HUD
 Offers advice about how to make
programs and services more effective
from perspective of the consumer
 Discusses different topic at each meeting
to build knowledge about homeless
programs and build leadership skills, in
order to be more effective advocates
Community Shelter Board
 Leadership to implement the
Rebuilding Lives plan
 Convene the Funder Collaborative
 Chair the Continuum of Care
Steering Committee
 Community relations
 Advocacy
Community Shelter Board
 4 key products & services:
– Resource development and investment
– Service delivery, coordination and
planning
– Program accountability
– Systems change and public policy
reform
Community Shelter Board
 Board of 20
– 4 seats: City of Columbus
– 4 seats: Franklin County
– 2 seats: Greater Cols. Chamber of Commerce
– 2 seats: United Way of Franklin County
– 1 seat: The Columbus Foundation
– 1 seat: ADAMH Board
– 1 seat: Metropolitan Area Church Council
– 5 seats: at large
Community Shelter Board
 Staff of 16
July 2006
Board of
Trustees
Executive
Director
Administrative
Director
Front Office
Assistant
Director of
Finance &
Grants
Finance
Administrator
Grants
Administrator
Director of
Data &
Evaluation
Data Analyst
HMIS
Administrator
Director of
Programs &
Planning
Director of
Development &
Communications
Development &
Communications
Assistant
Program
Relations
Manager
RLPTI
Project
Coordinator
Direct Client
Assistance
Manager
Program
Assistant
Section IV
Sustaining Public Will
Moving Forward Together
 Success due to tremendous
partnership between funders,
providers, and neighbors
 Community has mobilized
 Community generated political will to support
investment
 Creativity and flexibility applied by funders,
providers, and neighbors to overcome barriers
to housing development.
What impact has occurred?
 New investment from key stakeholders
- City, County, ADAMH, CMHA, United
Way
 Pressure for public policy action and
investment
 Broad range of implementing
agencies (board and staff) are
informed and on board
 High level of media attention and
focus
What impact has occurred?
 3 new emergency facilities
 695 units of permanent supportive
housing operational for men and
women who have experienced
long-term homelessness
 Homeless men and women
“rebuilding their lives”
 Homeless families with children to
be served by Commons at Chantry
to open late summer 2006
Development Challenges
 Real estate availability
 NIMBY
 Provider skepticism/criticism
 Stable funding for substantial
services and operations
Keys to Project Success
 Project Development:
–
–
–
–
Good Neighbor Agreements
Diverse locations
Strong political and business community support
Strong developers and providers
 Funding
– Board, system and funder support and consistent
leadership
– Availability of local and federal funding
– Creativity in securing funding sources
 Housing First Program Model
– Low-demand housing and voluntary services
Section V
Monitoring progress
–Outcomes
–Evaluation
–Certification
–Quarterly indicator reports
Program Outcomes
Benchmarks set by Board of
Trustees
Included in annual agency
contracts
Quarterly monitoring
Program Outcomes
Emergency Shelter
Measure
Households Served - #
Average Length of Stay per Household
Semi-Annual
Goal
600
30 days
Successful Housing Outcomes #
75
Successful Housing Outcomes %
15%
Recidivism - %
<10%
Access to resources to avoid shelter admission and stabilize
housing
Pass certification
Basic needs met in secure, decent environment
Pass certification
Ongoing engagement with the neighborhood
Pass certification
Efficient use of a pool of community resources
CSB costs per household
consistent with CSB budget
Program Outcomes
 Permanent Supportive Housing
Measure
Clients Served - #
Housing Stability - months
Turnover Rate - % [1]
Semi-Annual
Goal
55
12 months
10%
Successful Permanent Housing Outcomes - # of total served
50
Successful Permanent Housing Outcomes - % of total served
90%
Program Occupancy Rate - %
95%
Basic needs met in a non-congregate environment
Pass certification
Ongoing engagement with the neighborhood
Pass certification
Efficient use of a pool of community resources
CSB costs per household
consistent with CSB budget
[1]
Turnover is monitored but not evaluated.
Evaluation
 Program outcomes are compared to
planned outcomes for the year (vary by
system)
 Data is mostly derived from HMIS
 Programs are scored as:
– High: no less than one not achieved
– Medium: half or more achieved
– Low: less than half achieved
• Long-standing, unresolved issues could also lower
rating
Certification
 Expert review team conducts on-site
visits
– Full reviews every 3 years
– Annual targeted reviews system-wide
priority standards and agency/program
specific standards
Certification
 Standards cover:
– Organizational structure
& management
– Data collection & HMIS
– Compliance with
Federal, State & Local
laws
– Consumer involvement
– Personnel standards
– Facility standards
– Fiscal administration
– Safety standards
– Program operations
– Security planning
– Evaluation
– Good neighbor
agreements
Quarterly Indicator Reports
Key outcome variables
Issued to Board & Continuum of
Care Steering Committee
Posted to www.csb.org
Section VI
Now what?
– Rebuilding Lives Updated Strategy
Key components
 Comprehensively review current shelter &
supportive housing systems for adults and families
 Identify successes and challenges in Rebuilding
Lives initiative
 Consider impact of homelessness on other
systems, e.g. children & youth services, emerging
populations, etc.
 Compose a plan based on the current situation,
data driven solutions, community input, and result
affective programs
Charge
 To plan for the our community’s future it is
important to revisit and reassess Rebuilding
Lives as well as plan and execute strategies
for the family system
 The City of Columbus, Franklin County
Commissioners, and the United Way of Central
Ohio formally charge the Community Shelter
Board to lead Rebuilding Lives: An Updated
Strategy to House Homeless Families and
Adults
RLUS Steering Committee
 Purpose
– Consider research findings
– Develop and approve strategies
– Assure community input
– Issue a final report and
recommendations
Taking Charge:
Effective Oversight Structures for
Plan Implementation
Barbara Poppe
Executive Director
Community Shelter Board
www.csb.org
Presented at National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2006 Annual Conference
Ending Homelessness: Plan, Act, Succeed
July 18, 2006