4.4 Creating a Homelessness Prevention System (Homeless Solutions Policy Board)


Published on

HPRP can be combined with other resources to create a set of prevention initiatives that is coordinated and strategically designed to stop high risk groups from becoming homeless. This workshop will examine how communities with a coordinated prevention strategy target resources, identify and address service gaps, avoid duplication, and measure outcomes.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • The statistics concerning people who did not make it into the program lead us to believe that these were the risk factors that showed the biggest difference for becoming homeless in our community.If a family:Had a prior shelter stayWas headed by a young parent (meaning the Head of Household was younger than 24 years old)Had children under the age of 6Was largerThis information is taken from the Ohio Department Of Development Interim Report 2, which was released in April 2009:Families who were not enrolled in the program were more likely to have:a history with child protective services a criminal history no incomecompared to families who were enrolled.  The number of prior evictions were pretty much the same between the two groups.
  • 4.4 Creating a Homelessness Prevention System (Homeless Solutions Policy Board)

    1. 1. Homeless Solutions Policy Board<br />Dayton-Montgomery County, OHJuly 2010<br />Homelessness Prevention System Evolution<br />
    2. 2. Homeless Solutions Community 10-Year Plan<br />Adopted June 2006<br />Prevention one of four key principles in Plan. Two types of Prevention recommendations:<br />Affordable Housing Assistance<br />Development of 1,800 units of affordable housing<br />Preserve existing affordable housing<br />Create county-wide rental rehab program<br />Create rental subsidy program for LIHTC projects<br />Explore affordable housing set-aside program<br />
    3. 3. Homeless Solutions Community 10-Year Plan (cont.)<br />Emergency Assistance<br />Implement eviction prevention program modeled on Louisville, KY program for public housing and Section 8 tenants<br />Consolidate existing emergency financial assistance into shared system of fund-raising, management and dispersal, with appropriate case management follow-up<br />Develop eviction early warning system<br />Identify and resolve discharge planning policies and practices that lead to homelessness<br />
    4. 4. Definition of Prevention<br />To keep something that would have happened from happening.<br />Who will it happen to? How do you reach them?<br />How likely is it to happen?<br />What intervention will prevent it from happening?<br />Not enough to show that most people who get the intervention do not become homeless – they might not have become homeless without the intervention or their homelessness may have only been delayed.<br />
    5. 5. Prevention Committee Framing Questions<br />How can emergency assistance be more efficient (targeted at those who are most at risk of homelessness)?<br />How can emergency assistance be more effective (prevent homelessness for those most at risk)?<br />Difference between preventing homelessness and creating self-sufficiency – need to be clear about goal.<br />
    6. 6. Emergency Assistance<br />Existing emergency assistance programs help low-income people with a financial emergency but often are not able to prevent homelessness:<br />Limited assistance - $500 maximum or less<br />Once a year <br />Help recover from a one-time event <br />Households must show that they will be able to pay the rent after the assistance ends<br />Households have to have the lease or utility bill in their name<br />Require eviction or utility shut-off notice<br />
    7. 7. Emergency Assistance Client Analysis<br />Sunrise Center – county agency that screens for several emergency assistance programs<br />Compared Sunrise Center client list to HMIS<br />Over two years Sunrise Center provided 2,559 households with emergency assistance<br />6% entered homeless system after receiving the financial assistance<br />Either fairly effective or clients were not at risk of homelessness<br />
    8. 8. Other Prevention Issues <br />Do not want to replace the safety net of church, family and friends with public programs<br />Some emergency assistance providers can not or will not exclusively focus on homelessness prevention<br />Concern about low income households who rely on financial assistance programs but who will never become homeless<br />
    9. 9. Ohio Family Homelessness Prevention Pilot Project<br />Case management and up to $1,000 in financial assistance<br />Focused on preventing eviction of families from subsidized housing<br />Intensive home-based case management for 3-6 months<br />All households who are referred for services are entered into HMIS<br />
    10. 10. Family Homelessness PreventionScreening Matrix<br /><ul><li>Based on existing research on family homelessness developed risk factor screening matrix:
    11. 11. Prior stay in emergency shelter
    12. 12. Young parent (under 24 years old)
    13. 13. Young children (under 6)
    14. 14. Infant or pregnant
    15. 15. Extremely low-income (less than 67% of poverty)
    16. 16. Loss of benefits or employment
    17. 17. Paying over 40% of income for rent
    18. 18. Unable to secure other housing due to financial issues
    19. 19. Prior eviction, pattern to housing instability
    20. 20. No temporary housing options with family or friends
    21. 21. Significant personal barriers</li></li></ul><li>Family Homelessness PreventionEvaluation<br />Conducted analysis of families who were referred for the program but not enrolled to help with HPRP planning and development of front door assessment process<br />Analysis of families who were not enrolled in the program to see who become homeless:<br /><ul><li>365 families referred to program
    22. 22. 109 families assessed
    23. 23. 92 families enrolled</li></ul>Through May 2009<br />
    24. 24. Family Homelessness Prevention Referred But Not Enrolled<br />HMIS information was not available on all 273 families who were referred but not enrolled.<br />HMIS information was not available for all 273 families who were referred but not enrolled.<br />*Information on young children was not available for all households in this category<br />
    25. 25. Homelessness Prevention & Rapid Rehousing Program<br />City & County HPRP allocation $4 million <br />Coordinated planning and implementation<br />Local Outcomes<br />Reduce entry to homelessness through effective targeting and services<br />Reduce length of time in shelter<br />Spending financial assistance at double the original estimate – project 2 year program, have restructured contracts<br />
    26. 26. HPRP Targeting<br /><ul><li>Restricted program to households under 30% of area median income
    27. 27. Clients who have been homeless before in HMIS automatically determined to be at-risk if meet all other requirements
    28. 28. Clients must have 2 or more of the following risk factors to qualify:
    29. 29. Monthly income below 15%
    30. 30. Severely overcrowded housing
    31. 31. Severe rent cost burden (more than 50% for rent)
    32. 32. Homeless in last 12 months (in HMIS)
    33. 33. Pending foreclosure
    34. 34. Numerous previous evictions (3 or more)
    35. 35. Criminal record
    36. 36. Discharged from mental institution
    37. 37. Young adult (18-24) with past or present involvement with foster care system
    38. 38. Young adult (18-24) that have dropped out of high school or lack credits
    39. 39. Young adult (18-24) with numerous previous moves</li></li></ul><li>HPRP Households Served<br /><ul><li>1,064 households received full HPRP assessment
    40. 40. 876 (82%) determined to be eligible and received HPRP assistance
    41. 41. 188 (18%) determined to be ineligible (mostly because not at risk of homelessness)
    42. 42. 5 had shelter stays after being denied HPRP assistance
    43. 43. Of the 876 households that received assistance
    44. 44. 776 (89%) prevention – 41% singles, 59% families
    45. 45. Highest risk factors severe rent burden and income under 15% AMI
    46. 46. 223 households (29%) had entry in HMIS before HPRP assessment
    47. 47. 5 households had shelter stay after HPRP assistance
    48. 48. 100 (11%) rapid rehousing – 59% singles, 41% families
    49. 49. 3 households had shelter stay after HPRP assistance</li></ul>Through June 30, 2010<br />
    50. 50. HPRP Outcomes<br /><ul><li>Number of people in shelter very high
    51. 51. Ohio has been in recession for 3 to 4 years
    52. 52. May 2010 unemployment rate – 11.1%
    53. 53. Families in shelter or transitional housing declined from 2008 to 2009
    54. 54. In winter 2010 families entering shelter had higher needs than HPRP could serve
    55. 55. Will do January-June analysis for 2009 and 2010</li></li></ul><li>ESG Prevention Funding<br />Current Emergency Shelter Grant funding for City & County $358,000 – presently all committed to shelter<br />Emergency Solutions Grant requirement of 40% for prevention and rehousing - $143,200 under current ESG funding (21 households/month at 1 bedroom FMR) could double with HEARTH<br />
    56. 56. Possible ESG Prevention Program<br />Narrow targeting for prevention<br />Previously homeless<br />Young mothers with young children<br />Strong emphasis on rapid rehousing particularly for single adults<br />Completely different structure than HPRP<br />
    57. 57. What do we need? <br />Research on preventing homelessness<br />Screening tools with predictive value<br />Technical assistance on effective outreach programs<br />Permanent housing subsidies for low income people<br />Increased benefits for people with disabilities<br />
    58. 58. Joyce Probst MacAlpine<br />Manager Housing & Homeless Solutions<br />Montgomery County<br />937-225-4218<br />macalpinej@mcohio.org<br />