Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Edge of Amazing: Breakout Session A - The Road Home: Affordable Housing in Snohomish County

224 views

Published on

.

Published in: Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Edge of Amazing: Breakout Session A - The Road Home: Affordable Housing in Snohomish County

  1. 1. THE ROAD HOME: CHANGING GENERATIONS EDGE OF AMAZING OCTOBER 10 & 11, 2018
  2. 2. Snohomish County has: • 1,128 students living in motels, in shelters, or on the street • 33,281 low income households paying more than 50% of their income for housing • 28.4% rental increase from 2013-2016 • 2.9% wage decrease from 2013-2016
  3. 3. Affordable Housing Inventory 0-30% AMI 31-50% AMI Total 7,022 4,864 11,886 Affordable Housing Need Category 0-30% AMI ($0-$31,020) 31-50% AMI ($31,021-$51,700) Total Total Low-Income Households 35,893 33,969 69,862 Cost-burdened 5,172 13,873 19,045 Severely cost-burdened 22,738 10,543 33,281 Total cost-burdened, % of bracket 78% 72% 75% Snohomish County
  4. 4. Housing is the Foundation Housing Hope’s Monroe Family Village – 1 shelter, 9 homeless and 37 low-income homes, all for families. A stable, affordable home is the foundation for a better life. Having a home gives residents the opportunity to: • Employment outcomes are better • Educational outcomes are better for both children and adults • Health outcomes are better The whole community benefits when everyone lives in safe, stable and affordable housing!
  5. 5. What do we do?
  6. 6. Laying the Foundation • Apply site and population appropriate parking standards • Use public land for affordable homes • Reduce or waive fees
  7. 7. The Story of Pleasant Valley Located in beautiful Snohomish County, Pleasant Valley is a multi-family development consisting of 50 very low-income homes. Thanks to the courage and foresight of the local council and planning agency, Pleasant Valley saved: • $525,000 through site-appropriate parking standards • $437,080 through impact and utility fee reductions • $1,250,000 through acquisition of public land In total, Pleasant Valley saved $2,212,080. They put this money into their next project and were able to build more homes than they had initially budgeted for. Note: For more details on policies, see pages 12-18 of Housing Snohomish County Report
  8. 8. Local Funding for Local Solutions • 10¢ Housing Levy: $11.8 million/year* • 650-750 new affordable homes • Housing options for 400-500 homeless students • Cost to homeowner: $34 per year • 0.1% increase of mental health and chemical dependency sales tax • $9 million annually for affordable homes with services • Serves highly vulnerable people and households *The median assessed home value in Snohomish County in 2017 was $336,000. Note: For more details on funding recommendations, see pages 20-25 of Housing Snohomish County Report
  9. 9. Real Change for Real People “Most of these families are very capable - they just need that foot in the door... If they could get into something that they could afford on their own, it’s gonna change generations.” ~ Amy Perusse, McKinney-Vento (KIT Program) Facilitator, Categorical Programs
  10. 10. What Can You Do? • Re-frame the conversation: We are all better off when everyone lives in a safe, stable and affordable home! • Advocate for our most vulnerable citizens. • Embrace housing and homelessness as community issues which require community solutions. • Join the Housing Consortium’s Action Team! Please invite us to participate with any of the above. We are here to help.
  11. 11. THE ROAD HOME: AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY OCTOBER 11, 2018
  12. 12. Housing Hope’s History  Founded in 1987 with the mission to promote and provide affordable housing and tailored services to reduce homelessness and poverty for residents of Snohomish County and Camano Island  Housing Hope currently owns and operates 479 residential units at 22 sites
  13. 13. 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Affordable Housing Growth
  14. 14. Arlington Triplex
  15. 15. Lincoln Hill Village
  16. 16. Monroe Family Village
  17. 17. Twin Lakes Landing
  18. 18. HopeWorks Station Phase II
  19. 19. Homelessness in Washington State
  20. 20. Employment in Washington State
  21. 21. Educational Attainment in Washington State
  22. 22. Substance Abuse
  23. 23. Family Composition
  24. 24. Domestic Violence
  25. 25. Rents & Incomes
  26. 26. Income required to rent Wage Change 2018 $36.12 $6.43 2017 $29.69 $0.40 2016 $29.29 $2.08 2015 $27.21 $5.61 2014 $21.60 $0.37 2013 $21.23 $0.11 2012 $21.12 ($1.50) 2011 $22.62 $2.31 2010 $20.31 $1.33
  27. 27.  Housing is increasingly unaffordable because prices and rents are rising faster than wages… Missing Millions of Homes, New Democratic Coalition, 2018
  28. 28.  Housing is increasingly unaffordable because prices and rents are rising faster than wages…  because construction is not keeping up with demand… Missing Millions of Homes, New Democratic Coalition, 2018
  29. 29.  Housing is increasingly unaffordable because prices and rents are rising faster than wages…  because construction is not keeping up with demand…  because in part:  Zoning and land-use regulations are slowing and restricting building of housing Missing Millions of Homes, New Democratic Coalition, 2018
  30. 30.  Housing is increasingly unaffordable because prices and rents are rising faster than wages…  because construction is not keeping up with demand…  because in part:  Zoning and land-use regulations are slowing and restricting building of housing  Demand has shifted to walkable transit-served urban areas, which are in short supply Missing Millions of Homes, New Democratic Coalition, 2018
  31. 31.  Housing is increasingly unaffordable because prices and rents are rising faster than wages…  because construction is not keeping up with demand…  because in part:  Zoning and land-use regulations are slowing and restricting building of housing  Demand has shifted to walkable transit-served urban areas, which are in short supply  Construction funding is less available in the aftermath of the financial crisis Missing Millions of Homes, New Democratic Coalition, 2018
  32. 32.  Housing is increasingly unaffordable because prices and rents are rising faster than wages…  because construction is not keeping up with demand…  because in part:  Zoning and land-use regulations are slowing and restricting building of housing  Demand has shifted to walkable transit-served urban areas, which are in short supply  Construction funding is less available in the aftermath of the financial crisis  Construction labor is not getting more productive and the labor pool is not increasing Missing Millions of Homes, New Democratic Coalition, 2018
  33. 33.  No longer first come first serve;  Now, those with greatest vulnerabilities are served first;  This results in a dramatic change in who we serve; Coordinated Entry System
  34. 34.  59% experience mental illness; Who We Serve
  35. 35.  59% experience mental illness;  42% have drug and/or alcohol addictions; Who We Serve
  36. 36.  59% experience mental illness;  42% have drug and/or alcohol addictions;  47% have at least one chronic health condition Who We Serve
  37. 37.  59% experience mental illness;  42% have drug and/or alcohol addictions;  47% have at least one chronic health condition  23% have a development disability Who We Serve
  38. 38.  59% experience mental illness;  42% have drug and/or alcohol addictions;  47% have at least one chronic health condition  23% have a development disability  26% have a physical disability Who We Serve
  39. 39.  59% experience mental illness;  42% have drug and/or alcohol addictions;  47% have at least one chronic health condition  23% have a development disability  26% have a physical disability  Only 19% have none of these conditions, compared to 50% just two years ago; Who We Serve
  40. 40.  59% experience mental illness;  42% have drug and/or alcohol addictions;  47% have at least one chronic health condition  23% have a development disability  26% have a physical disability  Only 19% have none of these conditions, compared to 50% just two years ago;  29% have three or more of these conditions, compared to 9% just two years ago. Who We Serve
  41. 41. Effect on Children
  42. 42.  55% vs 26% have social/emotional development delays; Effect on Children
  43. 43.  55% vs 26% have social/emotional development delays;  40% vs 18% have language development delays; Effect on Children
  44. 44.  55% vs 26% have social/emotional development delays;  40% vs 18% have language development delays;  53% vs 24% have cognitive development delays. Effect on Children
  45. 45.  Without intervention, only 34.6% of children living in poverty will enter kindergarten without these delays and “ready to learn” Effect on Children
  46. 46.  Without intervention, only 34.6% of children living in poverty will enter kindergarten without these delays and “ready to learn”  With our intervention at Tomorrow’s Hope Child Development Center - 100% of children we have for at least six month’s enter Kindergarten without any of these delays and are “ready to learn” Effect on Children
  47. 47.  Without intervention, only 34.6% of children living in poverty will enter kindergarten without these delays and “ready to learn”  With our intervention at Tomorrow’s Hope Child Development Center - 100% of children we have for at least six month’s enter Kindergarten without any of these delays and are “ready to learn”  Our best avenue for homeless prevention is with children Effect on Children
  48. 48. Housing Hope’s Approach  Housing First Model  Meeting people where they are  Non-judgmental  Housing is important but not sufficient  Foundation upon which core issues can be addressed
  49. 49.  Solving Poverty vs Solving Homelessness  Homelessness is a result of extreme poverty  Poverty is the result of employment barriers  These barriers often include:  Mental Illness;  Substance Addictions;  Chronic Health Conditions;  Insufficient Education;  Issues arising from their Neglect or Abuse; Housing Hope’s Approach
  50. 50.  Restoring Hope  Self-Efficacy - a belief about one's ability to successfully perform a behavior depends upon:  Outcome Expectancy - a belief about the likelihood of the behavior leading to a specific outcome Housing Hope’s Approach
  51. 51.  Abstinence vs. Harm Reduction  WRAPS  Treatment Service Referrals Housing Hope’s Approach
  52. 52.  Resident Engagement  Facilitated Meetings  Children Supports  Resident Councils  Identity Groups  Community Engagement Housing Hope’s Approach
  53. 53.  Voluntary Services Program  Led by Family Support Coach with a 1:15 case load  Weekly in-home visits  Building on Strengths  College of Hope  Housing Expertise (8 courses)  Family Life (17 courses)  Economic Well-being (7 courses)  Health and Wellness (6 courses)  Complete High School Education Housing Hope’s Approach
  54. 54.  Education, Employment and Training Program  EduPloyment  iCATCH  Internships  Work Experience  HopeWorks Social Enterprises  GroundWorks Landscaping  ReNewWorks Home & Décor  CafeWorks  Post Secondary Training Housing Hope’s Approach
  55. 55. Employable adults at Housing Hope who participated in advanced education, certification programs, job training, internships, or paid employment
  56. 56.  Housing Hope as a disruptor to current norms  Long-term supports vs ‘rapid re-housing’;  Voluntary services vs conditional housing;  Solving poverty vs homelessness  Employment as therapy Housing Hope’s Approach
  57. 57. + Housing First in Permanent Supportive Housing
  58. 58. + Housing First Housing First is a homeless assistance approach that prioritizes providing permanent housing to people experiencing homelessness, thus ending their homelessness and serving as a platform from which they can pursue personal goals and improve their quality of life. This approach is guided by the belief that people need basic necessities like food and a place to live before attending to anything less critical, such as getting a job, budgeting properly, or attending to substance use issues. Additionally, Housing First is based on the theory that client choice is valuable in housing selection and supportive service participation, and that exercising that choice is likely to make a client more successful in remaining housed and improving their life.
  59. 59. + Housing First Principles  Homelessness is first and foremost a housing problem and should be treated as such  Housing is a right to which all are entitled  People who are homeless or on the verge of homelessness should be returned to or stabilized in permanent housing as quickly as possible and connected to resources necessary to sustain that housing  Issues that may have contributed to a household’s homelessness can best be addressed once they are housed
  60. 60. + Catholic Community Services Housing First Programs  Catholic Community Services operates two permanent supportive housing buildings in the Northwest region (Sebastian’s Place and Francis Place)  CCS is developing a new permanent supportive housing building on Berkshire Dr.  In addition to brick and mortar buildings, CCS operates a spectrum of Housing First programs including rapid rehousing, scattered site housing, pregnant and parenting housing, and housing for people with HIV/ AIDS.
  61. 61. + Berkshire Drive  Currently under construction  65 units of permanent supportive housing for most vulnerable in Snohomish County  Expected completion May 2019
  62. 62. + Sebastian’s Place Lynnwood, WA  Opened August 2016  20 units for most vulnerable chronically homeless vets  85% stability rate  Improved health and community connections
  63. 63. + Francis Place Bellingham, WA  Opened in 2015  42 units for chronically homeless, prioritized by vulnerability score  Residents were previously high utilizers of emergency services  In the first year of operation, residents had a 73% reduction in EMS calls  Overall reduction in 911 calls, nights in jail, and emergency room visits
  64. 64. + Questions?

×