San Diego Regional Homeless Profile

2,572 views

Published on

The Regional Homeless Profile (RHP) is biennial (every two years), broad-based analysis of homelessness in the San Diego region. Data in the RHP includes: the AHAR (Annual Homeless Assessment Report) and the Point-In-Time Count (PITC). The RHP also includes summary counts of the 18 incorporated cities in San Diego County.

Published in: Business, Sports
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,572
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

San Diego Regional Homeless Profile

  1. 1. REGIONAL HOMELESS PROFILE An Analysis of San Diego County Homelessness - 2010It  is  simply  unacceptable  for  individuals,  children,  families  and  our   Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homelessna7on’s  Veterans  to  be  faced  with  homelessness  in  this  country. 4699  Murphy  Canyon  Road San  Diego,  CA  92123President  Barack  Obama www.RTFHSD.org
  2. 2. Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010  –  Table  of  Contents   I.   EXECUTIVE  SUMMARY  ...............................................................................................  2   About  the  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)  ...................................................................  3   Homeless  Management  Information  System  (HMIS)   .........................................................................  5   Regional  Continuum  of  Care  Council  (RCCC)  ......................................................................................  6   National  Perspective  –  A  Snapshot  ....................................................................................................  7   II.   SAN  DIEGO  COUNTY  REGIONAL  DATA  SUMMARY  -­‐  2010  ..............................................  13   The  2009  Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  (AHAR)  .................................................................  14   AHAR  –  San  Diego  Regional  Summary  -­‐  2009  ..................................................................................  14   Local  Perspective  –  A  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)  count  Snapshot  -­‐  2010  ...................................................  23   Summary  By  City  I  -­‐  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)  count  -­‐  2010  ......................................................................  24   Summary  By  City  II  -­‐  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)  count  -­‐  2010  .....................................................................  25   Demographics  –  San  Diego  Region  (Point-­‐In-­‐Time  count  -­‐  2010)  ....................................................  26   Unmet  Needs  in  the  San  Diego  Region  -­‐  2010  .................................................................................  27   The  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  count  (PIT)  &  Street  Survey  -­‐  2010  .....................................................................  28   2010  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)  ‘Unsheltered  Survey’  Executive  Summary  ...............................................  29   III.   COMMUNITY  &  REGIONAL  SUMMARIES  -­‐  2010  ...........................................................  54   Summaries  By  City  -­‐  2010   .................................................................................................................  54   City  of  San  Diego  -­‐  City  Council  Districts  -­‐  2010  ...............................................................................  75   San  Diego  County  Supervisorial  Districts  -­‐  2010  ..............................................................................  77   San  Diego  County  Congressional  Districts  -­‐  2010  .............................................................................  79   IV.   INNOVATIONS  AND  INITIATIVES  IN  THE  SAN  DIEGO  REGION  ............................................  81   Legal/Law  Enforcement  ...................................................................................................................  81   Homeless  Data  and  Information  Systems  ........................................................................................  83   Services  and  ‘One-­‐Stop  Shops’  .........................................................................................................  85   Mental  Health  and  Housing  .............................................................................................................  87   Emergency  Shelter  Innovations  .......................................................................................................  88   Policy  ................................................................................................................................................  88   Collaborative  Planning  Efforts  ..........................................................................................................  89   Targeted  Initiatives  in  2010  ..............................................................................................................  91   V.   CONCLUSION  ........................................................................................................  92   VI.   APPENDIX  ............................................................................................................  93   The  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)  Process    ......................................................................................................  93   Homelessness  Definition  ................................................................................................................  100   The  HEARTH  Act  .............................................................................................................................  101   HPRP  –  Homeless  Prevention  and  Rapid  Re-­‐Housing  Program  ......................................................  102   Registry  Week  –  Downtown  San  Diego  –  Results   ...........................................................................  103   Resources  .......................................................................................................................................  107   Regional  Service  Providers  and  other  Stakeholders   .......................................................................  108   Acknowledgements  ........................................................................................................................  110   Glossary  ..........................................................................................................................................  110    Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  1  of  114  
  3. 3. I. Executive  Summary   San  Diego  County’s  2010  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)  count  resulted  in  an  estimate  of  8,574  individuals  who   are  homeless  in  the  San  Diego  County  region  (both  sheltered  and  living  on  the  street).    This   represents  a  regional  increase  of  11.6%  since  the  PIT  count  in  2008.     According  to  the  2009  Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  (AHAR),  there  are  643,067  people   experiencing  homelessness  on  any  given  night  in  the  United  States1.  In  the  coming  year,  it  is   estimated  that  approximately  3½  million  people  will  experience  homelessness.     In  the  San  Diego  region,  a  total  of  10,040  persons  spent  at  least  one  night  in  a  San  Diego  emergency   shelter  or  transitional  housing  program2.  About  two-­‐thirds  (64.5%)  of  persons  in  shelters  were   individuals  and  one-­‐third  (35.5%)  were  persons  in  families.  Overall,  the  number  of  persons   experiencing  homelessness  is  increasing  due  to  many  issues,  including  the  national  recession  and   high  unemployment.    In  San  Diego  County,  the  poverty  rate  rose  to  12.6%  in  2009  up  from  11.1%  in   2007.  In  the  city  of  San  Diego  The  rate  was  14.3%3.     Homelessness  takes  different  forms.    Some  individuals  seek  out  emergency  housing  only  for  a  short   time  because  of  a  temporary  crisis  like  a  job  loss,  eviction  or  an  episode  of  violence  in  their  home.   Americans  sleep  in  shelters  or  on  the  street,  under  freeway  bridges,  in  canyons  or  fields.    Others   may  spend  years  on  the  street  for  a  variety  of  reasons,  such  as   substance  abuse,  mental  illness,  disabilities,  and  chronic   “Homelessness cannot be solved by a single agency, or a single level of health  conditions.   government. Be reminded of the   intricacies of homelessness as a policy area, and remember that preventing Since  the  mid  1980’s,  the  Regional  Task  Force  on  the   and ending homelessness takes real Homeless  (RTFH)  has  been  providing  homelessness  data   coordination, collaboration, and a collection  and  analysis  to  support  the  San  Diego  County   constant exchange of ideas.” region.    As  the  administrator  of  the  regional  HMIS  (Homeless   Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary Management  Information  System)  and  the  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)   U. S. Dept. of Health & Human Services count  for  San  Diego  County,  the  data  gathered  and  shared  by   the  RTFH  helps  provide  a  fuller,  more  descriptive  picture  of  homelessness  in  the  San  Diego  region.     The  Regional  Homeless  Profile  (RHP)  reflects  data  from  ‘Point-­‐in-­‐Time’  summary  as  well  as   annualized  data  as  reflected  in  the  Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  (AHAR).  The  data  in  the   report  is  intended  to  help  monitor  and  understand  trends  in  homelessness  in  our  region,  to  provide   context  on  the  collaborative  efforts  in  our  region,  to  understand  demographic  profiles,  to  identify   needs,  and  to  help  craft  solutions.  Thank  you  for  your  interest.    We  welcome  your  questions,   suggestions  and  comments.         Peter  Callstrom,  Executive  Director  -­‐  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless   Note, as you read the electronic version, there are various hyperlinks that will take you to the source of the reference - either within the document, or on the internet.   1   National  Alliance  to  End  Homelessness   2     AHAR  reporting  period,  of  October  1,  2008  to  September  30,  2009   3     The  Center  on  Policy  Initiatives  (2010):  http://www.onlinecpi.org/article.php?list=type&type=379  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  2  of  114  
  4. 4. About  the  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)4   • In  1984  the  City  of  San  Diego  created  the  Mayor’s  Task  Force  on  Homelessness.  From  these   early  efforts,  the  RTFH  expanded  to  serve  the  full  region  as  a   community  collaborative.  In  2004,  the  RTFH  became  an   independent  501(c)3  nonprofit.     • The  RTFH  manages  a  countywide  Homeless  Information   System  (HMIS)  that  is  used  by  dozens  of  local  service   providers  who  manage  300+  distinct  programs.   • The  RTFH  supports  and  empowers  San  Diego  County’s  homeless  service  providers  with  key   data  and  reports:  regarding  homeless  counts,  locations,  beds,  services,  unmet  needs,  etc.   • The  RTFH  publishes  plans,  special  reports,  and  analysis   “The need has never been on  a  variety  of  topics  relating  to  the  causes  and   greater for coordinated services conditions  of,  and  the  responses  to  homelessness.   in our region. However, thanks to our many agency partners, • The  RTFH  manages  the  entire  process  for  the  annual   the commitment of our elected Point-­‐In-­‐Time  count:  planning,  volunteer  coordination,   officials, and the passion of our fellow San Diegans, we are well mapping,  training,  conducting  ‘street’  surveys,  and   prepared to proactively collecting  and  analyzing  data.   respond to our shared goal of ending homelessness.” • The  RTFH  provides  technical  assistance,  help  desk,   ongoing  training,  and  critical  data  reporting  to:  service   Peter Callstrom providers,  cities  in  San  Diego  county,  the  county  of  San   RTFH Executive Director Diego,  elected  officials,  and  the  U.S.  Department  of   Housing  and  Urban  Development  (HUD).   • The  RTFH  also  collaborates  closely  with  community  groups,  local  agencies,  and  public   entities,  in  order  to  implement  plans  to  address  and  alleviate  homelessness.     Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless   4699  Murphy  Canyon  Road  •  San  Diego,  CA  92123   (858)  292-­‐7627  (phone)  •  (858)  292-­‐27989  (fax)   info@rtfhsd.org   www.rtfhsd.org   http://www.facebook.com/RTFHSD   http://twitter.com/RTFHSD     4  National  Alliance  to  End  Homelessness  -­‐  2009    Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  3  of  114  
  5. 5.    Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  4  of  114  
  6. 6. Homeless  Management  Information  System  (HMIS)   • The  HMIS5  is  an  electronic  system  designed  to  record  and  store  information  on  the   characteristics  and  service  needs  of  homeless  persons.    It  implements  and  complies  with   HUD  data  specifications.  The  Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  (AHAR  -­‐  on  page  6)  uses   HMIS  data  for  the  most  recent,  one-­‐year  reporting  period  (October  -­‐  September)  and   compares  it  with  previous  HMIS-­‐based  findings.    Data  is  used  to  produce  counts  of  the   sheltered  homeless  population  over  a  full  year—that  is,  people  who  used  emergency  shelter   or  transitional  housing  programs  at  some  time  during  the  course  of  a  year.   • In  2000,  the  Regional  Continuum  of  Care  Council6  (RCCC  on  page  6)   selected  ServicePoint™  (Bowman  Systems)  as  the  primary  software   vendor  for  the  regional  HMIS  and  asked  the  RTFH  to  provide  the   implementation,  technical  and  training  support.  The  San  Diego  HMIS   allows  agencies  to  use  a  regional  web-­‐based  client  management   system  to  enter  client  information,  track  services,  referrals,  shelter  stays,  and   goals/outcomes.  Agencies  can  collaborate  with  other  providers  to  ensure  clients  are   receiving  all  available  services  and  not  obtaining  duplicate  services.  The  use  of  the  HMIS  is   mandated  by  the  U.S.  Department  of  Housing  and  Urban  Development  (HUD)  for  every   continuum  of  care  in  the  country  through  its  Supportive  Housing  Program  (SHP).   • The  San  Diego  County  HMIS  has  a  long-­‐held  reputation  with  HUD  as  being  one  of  the  top   HMIS  projects  in  the  nation.  At  a  HUD  conference  in  Denver  (September  2010)  the  RTFH  was   received  the  following  recognition:    “The  AHAR  Herculean  Effort  Award  honors  communities   that  go  above  and  beyond  data  collection  efforts  to  produce  high  quality  AHAR.    This  year  we   honor  the  RTFH  who  worked  tirelessly  to  submit  data  for  the  San  Diego  region.    The  RTFH   took  the  time  to  put  together  extra  data  to  confirm  data  quality.    This  extra  effort  led  to  a   greater  understanding  of  local  data  and  seasonal  bed  fluctuations.”   • The  RTFH  is  responsible  for  implementation  and  support  of  the  HMIS  for  45+  homelessness   service  agencies  and  300+  unique  programs,  including  the  data  warehouse.    The  RTFH   provides  technical  support,  training,  reporting  and  data  quality  assistance  to  400+  users.   • The  RTFH  has  been  very  fortunate  to  partner  with  Father  Joe’s  Villages  (FJV)  and  San  Diego   State  University’s  Institute  of  Public  Health  (IPH)  to  manage  our  regional  data  warehouse.   The  data  warehouse  is  designed  to  combine  data  from  disparate  systems  such  as   ServicePoint  and  CSTAR  (a  component  of  HMIS  created  and  customized  by  FJV)  which  allows   us  to  obtain  unduplicated  counts  of  clients  served  and  to  provide  regional  reports.   • Father  Joe’s  Villages  (FJV)  took  the  lead  to  create,  pilot,  and  fund  the  original  data  merge   and  AHAR  tools  which  has  made  participation  in  the  national  AHAR  possible.       5     http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/homeless/hmis/   6     http://www.co.san-­‐diego.ca.us/sdhcd/homeless/index_homeless.html  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  5  of  114  
  7. 7. Regional  Continuum  of  Care  Council  (RCCC)7  Since   the   early   1990s,   the   U.S.   Dept.   of   Housing   and   Urban  Development   (HUD)   has   required   communities   to   assess   homeless   “According to the latest San Diego County grand jury report, aneeds   as   part   of   the   McKinney-­‐Vento   Act   Continuum   of   Care   (CoC)   regional solution is needed tocompetitive   funding   process.     Each   CoC   is   required   to   undertake   a   reduce the number of homelesscomprehensive   public-­‐private   planning   process   that   assesses   local   on San Diego-area streets.services;   takes   inventories   of   emergency,   transitional,   and   permanent   Plans should include year-roundsupportive   housing   for   homeless   persons;   and   determines   homeless   shelters.”needs  through  counts  of  persons  in  shelters  and  on  the  street.   San Diego Union-Tribune   MAY 22, 2010The  San  Diego  region  has  developed  a  system  of  coordinated  services  to  address  the  needs  of  persons  who  are  homeless.  The  mission  of  the  RCCC  is  to  engage  organizations  in  a  community-­‐based  process  that  works  to  address  the  underlying  causes  of  homelessness  and  to  lessen  the   negative   impact   on   individuals,   families   and   communities.  The   RCCC   is   comprised   of   representatives  of  local  jurisdictions,  community-­‐based  organizations,  local  housing  authorities,  government,  academia,  health   service   agencies,   homeless   advocates,   consumers,   the   faith  community,  and  research,  policy  and  planning  groups.    This   countywide   organization   develops   and   implements   strategies,  disseminates   information,   and   provides   a   comprehensive   vision   for   entities  seeking   to   prevent   and   alleviate   homelessness.     RCCC   representatives   serve  an  immense  geographic  area  and  a  diverse  homeless  population.    To   be   effective,   the   CoC   delivery   system   must   meet   the   challenges   this  geography  and  population  pose.    To  this  end,  the  system  provides  for  the  particular  demands  of  the  City  of  San  Diego  and  the  larger  cities  with  high  concentrations  of  homeless  persons.  STRATEGIC  GOALS   • Ensure  access  for  homeless  persons  to  quality  services  and  facilities  in  all  phases  of  the   Continuum  of  Care  system  (from  street  outreach  to  permanent  housing.)   • Coordinate  services  throughout  the  region  to  ensure  that  each  special  needs  population  has   access  to  services  in  each  geographic  sub-­‐region  (evidence-­‐based  distribution  of  resources   to  ensure  care  for  all  groups.)   • Provide  a  seamless  system  of  care  for  the  homeless  to  transition  from  the  streets  to   permanent  housing  (“no  wrong  door”.)   • Support  development  of  a  strategic  plan  to  address  homelessness  in  San  Diego  County.   • Foster  the  plan  for  a  permanent  system  focused  on  solving  the  root  causes  of  homelessness     7     http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/sdhcd/homeless/supportive_housing_program.html  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  6  of  114  
  8. 8. National  Perspective  –  A  Snapshot8   • The  2009  Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  (AHAR)  (on  page  14)  reported  643,067   persons  who  were  homeless  throughout  the  United  States.   • Cities  with  populations  exceeding  500,000  people  account  for  51%  of  the  homeless   population  counted  in  urban  areas   • The  rate  of  homelessness  in  urban  areas  is  three  times  higher  than  the  rates  of   homelessness  in  rural  areas.   • The  next  several  pages,  outlines  a  national  and  local  perspective  regarding…   o Family  Homelessness  on  page  8   o Youth  Homelessness  on  page  9   o Veteran  Homelessness  on  page  10   o Chronic  Homelessness  on  page  11                           8  National  Alliance  to  End  Homelessness  -­‐  2009  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  7  of  114  
  9. 9. FAMILY  HOMELESSNESS9   • Throughout  the  United  States,  approximately  238,100  persons  in   families  are  homeless  and  75,518  households  are  homeless  on   any  given  night10.   • The  majority  of  families  experiencing  homelessness  are  able  to   bounce  back  quickly,  with  relatively  little  public  assistance.     • Often,  families  experiencing  homelessness  require  rental   assistance,  housing  placement  services,  job  assistance,  and  other   short-­‐term,  one-­‐time  services  before  being  able  to  return  to   independence.   • Families  experiencing  homelessness  are  under  considerable   stress.  They  move  frequently  and  many  are  doubled-­‐up  in  overcrowded  apartments  with   relatives  or  friends.  Others  sleep  in  cars  and  campgrounds,  or  send  their  children  to  stay   with  relatives  to  avoid  shelter  life.  Homelessness  increases  the  likelihood  that  families  will   separate  or  dissolve,  which  may  compound  the  stress  that  the  family  feels.   • Homeless  mothers  have  three  times  the  rate  of  Post  Traumatic  Stress  Disorder  (PTSD).   • They  have  ulcers  at  four  times  the  rate  of  other  women.   • In  the  San  Diego  region  (persons  in  shelters):   o 38%  are  family  members     § approximately  3  in  4  of  children  in  these   families  are  elementary  age   o 61%  are  individuals           9     The  National  Center  on  Family  Homelessness  -­‐  2009   10     Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  (AHAR)–  2009.  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  8  of  114  
  10. 10. YOUTH  HOMELESSNESS   • An  estimated  50,000  youth  experience  long-­‐term   Homeless youth engage homelessness  in  the  United  States.    The  large  majority  of   in risky behaviors, such as young  people  experience  short-­‐term  homelessness.     unprotected sex, sex with multiple partners, • Youth  presents  a  particular  challenge  for  several  reasons;   intravenous drug use and needle sharing, that there  is  little  definitive  data,  and  often  they  don’t  interact   place them at high risk with  standard  homeless  assistance  programs  or  government   for contracting HIV/AIDS. agencies.    Also,  some  services  are  often  not  applicable  to   (Wagner, L.S., 2001) minors  (e.g.,  ineligible  to  rent  an  apartment).       • The  McKinney-­‐Vento  Act  supports  the  rights  to  education  for  homeless  children  and   mandates  that  all  school  districts  identify  a  liaison  to  help  homeless  children  to  continue   their  education.  The  San  Diego  region  has  also  worked  to  ensure  that  homeless  youth  have   acccess  to  educational  programs  specific  to  their  needs.   • In  2008,  the  California  Dept.  of  Justice  reported  7,587  youth   as  runaways  in  San  Diego  County.    There  are  only  85  beds   targeted  to  homeless  youth  on  their  own  in  the  San  Diego   regional  Continuum  of  Care.  CHILD  HOMELESSNESS  IN  CALIFORNIA11   • Number  of  homeless  children  (292,624)   o California  Rank  -­‐  49TH  (1st  is  best,  50th  worst)   • 3.08%  are  homeless  -­‐  out  of  all  children   • 13%  homeless  among  children  living  in  poverty   o Under  6  years   122,902   o Grades  K-­‐8  (enrolled)   135,766   o Grades  9-­‐12  (enrolled)   33,956   o TOTAL   292,624       11     The  National  Center  on  Family  Homelessness  -­‐  http://www.homelesschildrenamerica.org/pdf/report_cards/short/ca_short.pdf  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  9  of  114  
  11. 11. VETERAN  HOMELESSNESS12   • The  Department  of  Veterans  Affairs  estimates  that  there  are   131,000  homeless  veterans  throughout  the  country,  which  accounts   for  20%  of  the  entire  homeless  population  (13%  of  whom  are   sheltered  at  any  point  in  time.)13   • 8%  of  the  overall  U.S.  population  can  claim  veteran  status.   • San  Diego’s  2010  PIT  count  estimated  22.9%  of  persons  on  the   street  were  veterans,  higher  than  the  national  average.   • Veterans  often  become  homeless  due  to  war-­‐related  disability  (e.g.,   physical  disability,  mental  anguish,  post-­‐traumatic  stress,  etc.)   • Roughly  56%  of  all  homeless  veterans  are  African  American  or  Hispanic,  despite  only   accounting  for  12.8%  and  15.4%  of  the  U.S.  population  respectively.   • About  1.5  million  other  veterans  are  considered  at  risk  of   homelessness  due  to  poverty,  lack  of  support  networks,  and   dismal  living  conditions  in  overcrowded  or  substandard   housing.   • In  addition  to  the  myriad  factors  influencing  homelessness   for  anyone,  the  crisis  related  to  the  shortage  of  affordable   housing,  livable  income  and  affordable  health  care  –  many   displaced  and  at-­‐risk  veterans  live  with  post-­‐traumatic   stress  disorder  (PTSD)  and  substance  abuse,  which  are   magnified  by  a  lack  of  family  and  social  support  networks.     • San  Diego  County  is  home  to  more  recently  separated  veterans  than  anywhere  else  in  the   country14   o San  Diego  County:  27,080  (48.3%  higher  than  L.A.  County)   o Los  Angeles  County:  14,000  (next  highest  in  the  country)   • Stand  Down  is  an  annual  week-­‐end  community-­‐ based  intervention  program  that  helps  homeless   veterans  combat  life  on  the  streets.  Started  in  San   Diego  in  1988,  it  is  now  a  national  program  that   has  been  replicated  throughout  the  country.   • A  “hand  up,  not  a  handout”  philosophy  is  carried   out  through  the  work  of  thousands  of  volunteers   throughout  the  nation.  In  2010,  Stand  Down  San  Diego  served  947  homeless  veterans,  up   from  928  served  in  2009.       12     National  Coalition  for  Homeless  Veterans   13   HUD  –  AHAR  2009   14     http://www1.va.gov/homeless/  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  10  of  114  
  12. 12. CHRONIC  HOMELESSNESS   • Chronic  homelessness  involves  either  long-­‐term  and/or   repeated  homelessness  coupled  with  a  disability   (mental  or  physical).   • There  are  approximately  110,917  chronically  homeless   individuals  nationwide  on  any  given  night15.    Persons   who  are  chronically  homeless  consume  a   disproportionate  amount  of  publically  funded  services.   • An  estimated  63%  of  people  who  experience   homelessness  at  any  given  point  in  time  are  single  adults.    Most  enter  and  exit  the  homeless   system  fairly  quickly.    The  remainder  live  in  the  homeless  assistance  system;  shelters,   hospitals,  jails,  and  prisons;  or  on  the  streets.     • An  overwhelming  majority  (80%)  of  single  adult  shelter   users  enter  the  homeless  system  only  once  or  twice,  stay   just  over  a  month,  and  do  not  return.     • Approximately  9%  enter  nearly  five  times  a  year  and  stay   nearly  two  months  each  time.  This  group  utilizes  18%  of   the  system’s  resources.   • The  remaining  10%  enter  the  system  just  over  twice  a   year  and  spend  an  average  of  nine  months  per  stay— virtually  living  in  the  system  and  utilizing  nearly  half  its   resources.    Many  of  these  individuals  are  defined  by  HUD  as  chronically  homeless.  They   often  cycle  between  homelessness,  hospitals,  jails,  and  other  institutional  care  and  often   have  a  complex  medical  problem,  a  serious  mental  illness  like  schizophrenia,  and/or  alcohol   or  drug  addiction.   • Despite  the  difficulties  in  serving  chronically  homeless  people,  many  cities  have  launched   initiatives  to  end  chronic  homelessness,  including  San  Diego.    The  San  Diego  HMIS  is  an   advanced  data  system  that  is  able  to  track  reductions  for  people  who  are  living  in  shelters.     • Many  cities  are  also  documenting  the  cost   effectiveness  of  ending  chronic  homelessness.   Portland  found  that  35  chronically  homeless   individuals  each  utilized  over  $42,000  in  public   resources  per  year.    After  entering  permanent   supportive  housing,  those  individuals  each  used  less   than  $26,000,  (including  the  cost  of  housing).   • The  successes  provide  insight  to  effective  strategies   in  ending  chronic  homelessness.  Ending  chronic  homelessness  requires  permanent  housing   with  supportive  services,  and  implementing  policies  to  prevent  high-­‐risk  people  from   becoming  chronically  homeless.   15     Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  (AHAR)–  2009  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  11  of  114  
  13. 13. • One  model  for  housing  people  who  experience   chronic  homelessness  is  permanent  supportive   housing  (PSH)  which  combines  affordable  rental   housing  with  supportive  services:  case   management,  mental  health  and  substance   abuse  services,  health  care,  and  employment.   • Another  model,  ‘Housing  First’,  provides   immediate  access  to  an  apartment  without   requiring  participation  in  psychiatric  treatment  or   treatment  for  sobriety.    After  settling  into  housing,  clients  are  offered  a  wide  range  of   supportive  services  that  focus  primarily  on  helping  them  maintain  their  housing.   • New  initiatives  focus  on  people  who  are  leaving  hospitals,  psychiatric  facilities,  substance   abuse  treatment  programs,  prisons,  and  jails  (see:  Innovations  and  Initiatives  in  The  San   Diego  Region  -­‐  on  page  81)   • In  the  San  Diego  region  (on  page  37):   o In  the  2010  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  count,  24.3%  were   “To be homeless literally means that you have no home to live in, that you considered  to  be  chronically  homeless.   are deprived of your sense of place o The  majority  were  male  94.4%   and privacy, your sense of belonging – all essential elements of identity, of self-worth.” New England Journal of Public PolicyRegional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  12  of  114  
  14. 14. II. San Diego County Regional Data Summary - 2010The  Regional  Homeless  Profile  summary  data  is  addressed  in  the  following  sections:    The  Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  (AHAR)  -­‐  on  page  14   • The  AHAR  is  an  annual  report  to  Congress  (mandated  by  McKinney-­‐Vento  -­‐  on  page  101)   about  the  number  and  characteristics  of  people  who  use  homeless  residential  services,  and   their  patterns  of  use.  The  AHAR  includes  data  on  emergency  shelters,  transitional  housing,   and  homeless  veterans  from  two  primary  sources:  the  HMIS  and  the  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT).  Summary  By  City  I  -­‐  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)  count  –  2010  -­‐  on  page  24   • Summarizes  homeless  counts  by  each  city  in  San  Diego  County.  Summary  By  City  II  -­‐  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)  count  –  2010  -­‐  on  page  25   • Summarizes  homeless  counts  by  each  city  along  with  population  and  income  levels.  Demographics  –  San  Diego  County  -­‐  on  page  26   • Approximate  aggregate  summaries  of  primary  demographic  data  (e.g.,  age,  ethnicity,  etc.)   by  different  populations:  unsheltered,  emergency  shelter,  transitional  housing.    Unmet  Needs  in  the  San  Diego  Region  -­‐  on  page  27   • Summary  data  regarding  shelter  bed  usage,  capacity,  overlow.    Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)  ‘Unsheltered  Survey’  Executive  Summary  -­‐  on  page  29   • The  Unsheltered  Survey  (on  page  97)  detail  is  summarized.  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)  Survey  Results  -­‐  on  page  30   • On  January  29,  2010,  the  RTFH  coordinated  the  work  of  hundreds  of  volunteers  in  order  to   conduct  our  annual  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  count  (PIT).   • In  February,  2010,  the  RTFH  and  volunteers  completed  an  ‘Unsheltered  Street  Characteristic   Survey  (on  page  97).  Results  from  that  survey  begin  on  page  31.    Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  13  of  114  
  15. 15. The  2009  Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  (AHAR)16   • The  AHAR  is  an  annual  report  to  Congress  about  the  number  and   characteristics  of  people  who  use  homeless  residential  services,   and  their  patterns  of  use.    Congress  mandated  this  report  in   legislation  for  McKinney-­‐Vento  funding.   • The  AHAR  includes  data  on  emergency  shelters,  transitional   housing  programs,  and  homeless  veterans  from  two  primary   sources:  the  HMIS  and  the  Point-­‐In-­‐Time  (PIT)  counts  for  the   reporting  period,  October  1  –  September  30.   • Data  to  be  included  AHAR  is  specified  by  HUD’s  “universal  data  elements”  (e.g.,   demographics,  veteran  status,  disability  status,  previous  housing,  length  of  stay,  etc.)   • One  goal  of  the  AHAR  is  to  produce  an  “unduplicated”17  count  of  all  homeless  persons  in  the   United  States  and,  on  the  basis  of  that  information,  develop  a  descriptive  profile  of  the   homeless  population  that  uses  these  types  of  services  throughout  the  nation.     • The  AHAR  provides  counts  of  homelessness  nationwide—including  counts  of  individuals,   families,  and  demographics  such  as  veterans  and  those  who  are  chronically  homeless.     • The  report  also  covers  the  types  of  locations  where  people  use  emergency  shelters  and   transitional  housing;  prior  living  conditions  just  before  they  entered  a  residential  program;   how  much  time  they  spent  in  shelters  over  the  course  of  a  year;  and  the  size  and  use  of  the   U.S  inventory  of  residential  programs  for  homeless  people.  DATA  FROM  THE  2009  AHAR   • While  overall  homelessness  has  increased  in  the  past  year,  the  national  January  2009  Point-­‐ In-­‐Time  (PIT)  estimate  of  chronic  homelessness  is  110,917,  more  than  a  10%  drop  from  the   PIT  count  of  124,135  chronically  homeless  people  in  2008.     • All  of  the  decrease  occurred  among  unsheltered  chronically  homeless  people.    While   measuring  the  scope  remains  challenging,  a  majority  of  Continuums  of  Care  (53%)  reported   a  decrease  in  chronic  homelessness  between  2008  and  2009.   • Homelessness  is  heavily  concentrated  in  large  coastal  states,  with  California,  New  York,  and   Florida  accounting  for  39%  of  the  PIT  count  in  2009.   • On  a  single  night  in  January  2009,  the  states  with  the  highest  concentrations  of  homeless   people  were  Nevada,  where  .85%  of  the  total  population  was  homeless,  followed  by   Oregon,  Hawaii,  California,  and  Washington.     • Kansas,  South  Dakota,  and  West  Virginia  had  the  lowest  concentrations  of  homelessness.  AHAR  –  San  Diego  Regional  Summary  -­‐  200918   16     HUD  –  AHAR  2009   17     Individuals  are  only  counted  once  regardless  of  the  number  of  programs  they  enter.  Records  in  the  HMIS  are  unduplicated  by  using  an  algorithm   (provided  by  HUD)  to  compare  the  First  Name,  Last  Name,  SSN,  DOB,  and  Gender.  Clients  with  matching  identifiers  are  assumed  to  be  the  same  client.  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  14  of  114  
  16. 16. The  San  Diego  Regional  Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  (SD-­‐AHAR)   provides  information  about  the  sheltered  homeless  population  based   on  data  collected  in  the  HMIS.    The  main  objective  of  the  SD-­‐AHAR  is  to   report  the  number  and  demographic  characteristics  of  people  who  use   homeless  residential  services  in  the  San  Diego  County  Region  using   methodology  consistent  with  the  Continuum  of  Care-­‐specific  AHAR   reports  submitted  to  HUD.  The  San  Diego  Region  includes  both  the  San  Diego  City  Continuum  of   Care  and  the  San  Diego  County  Continuum  of  Care.  DATA  INCLUDED  IN  THIS  AHAR   The  2009  SD-­‐AHAR  includes  data  from  October  1,  2008  through  September  30,  2009.    All  homeless   shelter  providers  with  good  quality  HMIS  data  from  this  time  period  were  included  (“participating”   providers).    Data  in  the  AHAR  includes  HUD  Universal  Data  Elements  (UDE)  from  ServicePoint  HMIS   (Bowman  Systems)  merged  with  CSTAR  HMIS  (Father  Joe’s  Villages).    This  merge  allows  for   unduplicated  counts  of  persons  entered  into  HMIS  within  the  entire  San  Diego  Region.  WHO  IS  COUNTED  IN  THE  AHAR   Included:  data  describing  persons  who  were  sheltered  in  “participating”  emergency  shelters  or   transitional  housing  in  the  San  Diego  Region  during  the  reporting  period  are  in  the  AHAR.   Not  included:  Data  obtained  from  stays  in  permanent  supportive  housing,  safe  havens,  youth  and   domestic  violence  programs,  shelters  not  using  HMIS  or  shelters  with  poor  quality  HMIS  data19.  REPORTING  CATEGORIES   Data  is  presented  according  to  four  AHAR  reporting  categories  organized  by  shelter  type  and   whether  or  not  shelter  was  obtained  as  part  of  a  family.     • Persons  in  Families  in  Emergency  Shelters  (ES-­‐FAM)   • Persons  in  Families  in  Transitional  Housing  (TH-­‐FAM)   • Individuals  in  Emergency  Shelters  (ES-­‐IND)   • Individuals  in  Transitional  Housing  (TH-­‐IND)     For  AHAR  purposes,  HUD  defines  persons  in  families  as  persons  in  households  with  at  least  one   child,  aged  17  or  younger,  and  at  least  one  adult,  aged  18  or  older.    All  persons  not  in  a  family  are   considered  individuals  –  this  includes  single  adults,  unaccompanied  youth,  persons  in  multi-­‐adult   households  and  persons  in  multi-­‐child  households.    Persons  are  counted  only  once  in  each  category,   but  may  be  represented  in  two  or  more  categories  if  they  changed  family  status  or  were  present  in   both  shelter  types.  Demographic  data  and  data  collected  at  program  entry  is  presented  by  category   and  cannot  be  summed  into  regional  totals  without  double-­‐  or  triple-­‐counting  persons  present  in   more  than  one  category.   18   The  SD-­‐AHAR  section  was  prepared  by  SDSU’s  Institute  for  Public  Health  -­‐  http://iph.sdsu.edu/   19     Data  from  very  few  HMIS  “participating”  shelters  was  excluded  –  reasons  for  inadequate  data  included  programs  undergoing  site  closure  (one  ES-­‐IND   program  and  one  TH-­‐FAM  program),  misunderstanding  of  family/household  data  entry  (one  ES  serving  both  FAM  and  IND)  and  a  seasonal  program  (ES)   with  prior  years’  end-­‐date  issues  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  15  of  114  
  17. 17. DATA  LIMITATIONS   Not  all  programs  serving  homeless  in  San  Diego  are  included  in  the  2009  SD-­‐AHAR,  and  not  all   persons  accessing  homeless  services  in  San  Diego  are  counted  in  the  AHAR.    Therefore,  the  numbers   reflected  here  are  representative  of  the  majority  of  persons  sheltered  during  the  time  period,  but   may  not  be  applicable  to  persons  in  populations  sheltered  by  programs  not  included  in  the  report.    SELECT  HIGHLIGHTS  FROM  THE  2009  SD  REGIONAL  AHAR   A  total  of  10,040  persons  spent  at  least  one  night  in  a  “participating”  San  Diego  emergency  shelter   (ES)  or  transitional  housing  (TH)  program  during  the  AHAR  reporting  period,  of  October  1,  2008  to   September  30,  2009.  It  is  estimated  that  92%  of  the  region’s  year-­‐round-­‐equivalent  beds20  were   available  at  AHAR  “participating”  providers.  About  two-­‐thirds  (64.5%)  of  sheltered  persons  were   individuals  and  one-­‐third  (35.5%)  were  persons  in  families.  This  proportion  matches  that  reported   for  the  nation  in  the  2009  Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  to  Congress21     Persons  Sheltered  at  AHAR  Participating  Providers  During  a  One-­‐Year-­‐Period  in  the  San  Diego  Region   (October  1,  2008  to  September  30,  2009;  HMIS  data)     Persons  in     Persons  in     Individuals  in     Individuals  in     Families  in   Families  in   Emergency     Transitional   Total   Emergency     Transitional   Shelters   Housing   Shelters   Housing   22 23 Total  Unduplicated  Counts   1172   2288   3704   4411   10040   Persons  on  an  Average  Night   85   959   329   1569   2942    Age24   • Children  represented  61%  of  persons  sheltered  as  part  of  a  family  in  both  Emergency  Shelters  and   Transitional  Housings   o 705  (61%)  in  ES-­‐FAM  were  children,  aged  17  or  less   o 1389  (61%)  in  TH-­‐FAM  were  children,  aged  17  or  less     • A  large  proportion  of  children  sheltered  as  part  of  a  family  were  under  the  age  of  6.     o 322  (46%)  of  children  in  families  at  ES  were  under  age  6   o 692  (50%)  of  children  in  families  at  TH  were  under  age  6   • Less  than  one-­‐tenth  of  adults  sheltered  as  part  of  a  family  were  over  the  age  of  50  while  nearly  one-­‐third   of  persons  sheltered  as  individuals  were  over  50  years  old.     o 30  (7%)  of  adults  in  families  at  ES  were  aged  51  or  greater   o 36  (4%)  of  adults  in  families  at  TH  were  aged  51  or  greater   o 1233  (34%)  of  adult  individuals  at  ES  were  aged  51  or  greater   o 1355  (31%)  of  adult  individuals  at  TH  were  aged  51  or  greater   • Nearly  all  sheltered  individuals  were  adults  (98%  in  ES-­‐IND;  99%  in  TH-­‐IND).  Individuals  under  18  include   unaccompanied  youth  or  multi-­‐child  households  –  siblings  or  juvenile  parents  with  children.     2020     Year-­‐round-­‐equivalent  beds  are  calculated  based  on  the  amount  of  time  a  bed  is  available  for  use  during  the  year.  Hotel-­‐Motel  Voucher  program   “beds”  are  calculated  based  the  number  of  beds  required,  assuming  a  person  used  their  voucher  for  the  all  dates  issued.   21     The  2009  Annual  Homeless  Assessment  Report  to  Congress,  HUD,  Office  of  Community  Planning  and  Development,  June  2010   22     A  subset  of  persons  are  represented  in  more  than  one  reporting  category.  Category  totals  cannot  be  summed  together  to  arrive  at  a  grand  total.   23     Total  unduplicated  count  of  persons  sheltered  at  one  or  both  of  the  program  types,  as  an  Individual,  a  member  of  a  Family  or  Both.   24     Age  is  calculated  at  First  Program  Entry  or  October  1,  2008  First  Program  Entry  was  prior  to  that  date  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  16  of  114  
  18. 18. Select  Highlights  from  the  2009  SD  Regional  AHAR,  continued…  Gender   • A  large  majority  of  adults  sheltered  as  part  of  a  family  were  female     o 362  (81%)  in  ES-­‐FAM  were  female   o 707  (79%)  in  TH-­‐FAM  were  female   • The  majority  of  adults  sheltered  as  individuals  were  male   o 2444  (67%)  in  ES-­‐IND  were  male   o 3347  (77%)  in  TH-­‐IND  were  male   • The  gender  of  children  in  families  was  close  to  a  50-­‐50  male-­‐female  split  for  both  shelter  types  Race   • Over  half  (54%)  of  persons  in  families  at  Emergency  Shelters  were  identified  as  “White,”  while  two-­‐thirds   (64-­‐67%)  of  persons  in  each  of  the  other  reporting  categories  were  identified  as  “White”   • No  more  than  5%  of  persons  in  each  reporting  category  were  identified  as  either  “Asian”,  or  “American   Indian  or  Alaska  Native”,  or  “Native  Hawaiian  or  other  Pacific  Islander”  Veteran  Status   • Very  few  adults  sheltered  as  part  of  a  family  were  identified  in  HMIS  as  military  veterans,  while  over  one-­‐ fifth  of  adults  accessing  Emergency  Shelters  as  individuals  and  nearly  one-­‐third  of  adults  accessing   Transitional  Housing  as  individuals  were  identified  as  military  veterans   o 13  (3%)  of  adults  in  families  in  ES  were  veterans   o 40  (4%)  of  adults  in  families  in  TH  were  veterans   o 791  (22%)  of  adults  not  in  families  in  ES  were  veterans   o 1334  (31%)  of  adults  not  in  families  in  TH  were  veterans   o 26%  of  total  sheltered  adults  not  in  families  were  veterans   o 22%  of  total  adults  were  veterans  Disabling  Condition25   • Over  three-­‐quarters  of  adults  accessing  Transitional  Housing  as  individuals  were  identified  as  having  a   disabling  condition.   o 3337  (77%)  of  adults  not  in  families  in  TH-­‐IND  had  a  disabling  condition   • Over  half  of  adults  accessing  Emergency  Shelters  as  individuals  were  identified  as  having  a  disabling   condition     o 2071  (57%)  of  adults  not  in  families  in  ES-­‐IND  had  a  disabling  condition   • Less  than  one-­‐third  of  adults  in  families  accessing  Emergency  Shelters  were  identified  as  having  a   disabling  condition  in  HMIS  while  for  adults  in  families  accessing  Transitional  Housing  nearly  half  were   identified  as  having  a  disabling  condition  in  HMIS   o 135  (30%)  of  adults  in  families  in  ES-­‐FAM  had  a  disabling  condition   o 430  (48%)  of  adults  in  families  in  TH-­‐FAM  had  a  disabling  condition           25     Disabling  Condition  is  a  specific  disability  of  long  term  duration  which  significantly  impedes  a  person’s  ability  to  live  independently;  Persons  were   counted  as  having  a  disabling  condition  if  the  HMIS  response  value  “Yes”  was  recorded  at  any  program  stay  within  the  reporting  year.  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  17  of  114  
  19. 19. Select  Highlights  from  the  2009  SD  Regional  AHAR,  continued…  Previous  Living  Situation  for  adults  the  night  before  shelter  program  entry26   • One  half  of  adult  individuals  spent  the  night  before  program  entry  in  a  place  not  meant  for  human   habitation  (on  the  street,  in  a  car,  etc)   o Adult  individuals  the  night  before  entry  into  an  Emergency  Shelter     § Place  not  meant  for  human  habitation  –  1854  (50%)   o Adult  individuals  the  night  before  entry  into  a  Transitional  Housing  program     § Place  not  meant  for  human  habitation  –  2267  (51%)     • Adults  in  families  spent  night  before  program  entry  in  a  variety  of  places:   o Adults  the  night  before  entry  into  an  Emergency  Shelter  as  part  of  a  family   § Emergency  Shelter  –    67  (15%)     § Staying  with  Family  –  58  (13%)   § Rented  Housing  –  57  (13%)   § Staying  with  Friends  –  51  (11%)   § Place  not  meant  for  human  habitation  –  48  (11%)       o Adults  the  night  before  entry  into  a  Transitional  Housing  program  as  part  of  a  family   § Emergency  Shelter  –  199  (22%)     § Staying  with  Family  –  133  (15%)   § Place  not  meant  for  human  habitation  –  137  (15%)     § Transitional  Housing  –  123  (14%)     26     If  a  person  had  more  than  one  program  entry  during  the  reporting  year,  the  value  reported  represents  data  collected  at  the  first  program  entry  Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  18  of  114  
  20. 20. Select  Highlights  from  the  2009  SD  Regional  AHAR,  continued…  Program  Use   • Point-­‐in-­‐Time  counts  of  HMIS  data  in  October  2008,  January,  April  and  July  2009  showed  stable  levels  of   sheltered  persons  in  Transitional  Housing  (TH),  while  Emergency  Shelters  (ES)  were  accessed  at  a  greater   number  in  January  compared  to  the  other  PIT  dates.   o Persons  in  families  in  ES   § 1.3  to  1.7  times  as  many  sheltered  on  a  single  night  in  January  compared  to  a  single   night  in  October,  April  or  July   o Individuals  in  ES   § 3  to  4  times  as  many  sheltered  on  a  single  night  in  January  compared  to  a  single  night  in   October,  April  or  July   • Of  the  10,040  persons  counted  during  the  year,  a  large  percentage  (85%)  was  counted  within  single   reporting  categories.  Nonetheless,  a  significant  number  of  persons  were  served  by  both  Emergency   Shelters  (ES)  and  Transitional  Housing  (TH)  programs  at  some  point  in  the  year.   o 8543  (85%)  were  counted  in  only  one  reporting  category   o 1462  (15%)  were  counted  in  two  reporting  categories,  e.g.:   § 343  persons  were  counted  in  both  ES-­‐FAM  and  TH-­‐FAM  only   § 1010  persons  were  counted  in  both  ES-­‐IND  and  TH-­‐IND  only   o 35  (<1%)  were  counted  in  three  or  four  reporting  categories,  e.g.:   § 21  persons  were  counted  in  ES-­‐FAM,  TH-­‐FAM  and  ES-­‐IND   • Persons  Sheltered  as  part  of  a  Family  vs.  Persons  Sheltered  as  Individuals   o Individuals:    6949  (69%  of  10,040)  of  persons  served  were  sheltered  as  an  individual  only  –  never   part  of  a  family   § Of  the  6949  persons  served  as  individuals  never  in  a  family,   • 1010  (15%)  of  spent  time  in  BOTH  Emergency  Shelters  and  Transitional  Housing   at  some  time  during  the  reporting  year   • 2608  (38%)  stayed  in  Emergency  Shelter  only   • 3331  (48%)  stayed  in  Transitional  Housing  only   o Persons  in  Families:  2947  (29%  of  10,040)  of  persons  served  were  sheltered  as  a  member  of  a   family  only  –  never  an  individual   § Of  the  2947  persons  served  only  as  part  of  a  family,     • 343  (12%)  of  spent  time  in  BOTH  Emergency  Shelters  and  Transitional  Housing   at  some  time  during  the  reporting  year   • 778  (26%)  stayed  in  Emergency  Shelter  only   • 1826  (62%)  stayed  in  Transitional  Housing  only   o Both:    only  144  (1%  of  10,040)  of  those  sheltered  during  the  year  were  identified  as  both  a   member  of  a  sheltered  family  and  a  person  sheltered  as  an  individual          Regional  Task  Force  on  the  Homeless  (RTFH)   Regional  Homeless  Profile  2010   Page  19  of  114  

×