6.3 Prioritizing Permanent Housing: Advanced Re-Housing Strategies


Published on

The second of the 2-part presentation by Ryan Macy Hurley.

Published in: Education, Business, Real Estate
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

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

No notes for slide

6.3 Prioritizing Permanent Housing: Advanced Re-Housing Strategies

  1. 1. Practice Brief: Preparing for HEARTH Act Implementation Rapid Re-Housing for Homeless Populations: Program and Community Strategies for Recruiting Private-Market Landlords & Overcoming Housing Barriers December 2010 Beyond Shelter Partnering for Change The National Institute for Innovative Strategies to Combat Family Homelessness & Poverty
  2. 2. -2-Funding for this practice brief was generously provided by the William Randolph HearstFoundation. The primary authors were Ryan Macy-Hurley of Beyond Shelter andPartnering for Change and Joanna Hooper and Ashley Mann of HomeStart, Inc. Theauthors are grateful to Tanya Tull of Beyond Shelter and Partnering for Change, LindaWood-Boyle of HomeStart, Inc., and Sharon McDonald of the National Alliance to EndHomelessness for their insightful comments on earlier drafts of the report.This practice brief is part of a forthcoming Technical Assistance Manual andImplementation Toolkit on the same topic to be published in 2012.Beyond Shelter, Los Angeles, CA 90017HomeStart, Inc., Boston, MA 02111Partnering for Change, Los Angeles, CA 90017Suggested citation: Macy-Hurley, R., Hooper, J. and Mann, A. Rapid Re-Housing forHomeless Populations: Program and Community Strategies for Recruiting Private-Market Landlords & Overcoming Housing Barriers. Los Angeles and Boston: BeyondShelter, HomeStart, 2010.
  3. 3. -2- Rapid Re-Housing for Homeless Populations: Program and Community Strategies for RecruitingPrivate-Market Landlords & Overcoming Housing Barriers TABLE OF CONTENTSIntroduction........................................................................................................................ 1The Challenge of Low “Renter Capital”........................................................................... 2Marketing Tailored to Owner Needs ................................................................................. 3Creative Advocacy Approaches ......................................................................................... 5Enhanced Incentives & Protections for Landlords .......................................................... 8Approaches to Addressing the Affordability Problem .................................................... 12Summary of Program Strategies ..................................................................................... 18Summary of Community Strategies................................................................................. 19Maintaining Relationships & Facilitating Housing Stability ........................................ 20Building Upon Success: Expanding the Role of Partnering Landlords........................ 22Conclusion........................................................................................................................ 24Related Reading ............................................................................................................... 25About the Contributing Organizations............................................................................ 26Endnotes ........................................................................................................................... 27
  4. 4. This Page Left Intentionally Blank
  5. 5. 1 IntroductionThe emerging shift in federal a decade of experience testing andhomelessness policy to housing-based refining rapid re-housing models forsolutions, and in particular rapid re- various target populations, rapid re-housing/Housing First,1 necessitates housing is a relatively new approach forfacilitating and expanding permanent most providers and for most Continuumshousing opportunities for homeless across the country. As such, knowledgeindividuals and families. While efforts of innovative and effective practicesto increase the supply of affordable remains fairly limited.housing through new production orrehabilitation of current stock are This practice brief discusses housingnecessary, agencies and communities barriers commonly faced by homelesscannot “build their way” out of households and highlights promising andhomelessness. Rather, frontline staff, successful techniques, tools, and policiesprogram managers, and systems planners agencies and communities across themust have a laser-like focus on country are utilizing to buildincreasing access to existing rental units partnerships with landlords andfor unhoused populations, particularly in overcome these barriers. Communitiesthe private rental market. wishing to develop new, or strengthen existing, rapid re-housing initiatives canThe Homelessness Prevention and Rapid look to these strategies as models forRe-Housing Program (HPRP) and the adaption, recognizing that replication isnew Homeless Emergency Assistance not realistic nor even desirable, givenand Rapid Transition to Housing that conditions, needs, resources, and(HEARTH) Act2 prioritize the adoption opportunities vary from one communityof implementation practices and to another.operational strategies to re-househomeless households as quickly as The strategies and tools outlined in thepossible. While some service providers brief are intentionally diverse and rangeand Continuums of Care have more than from those that can be implemented by single agencies serving homeless1 Rapid re-housing refers to an approach that emphasizes persons to those requiring community-moving homeless families and individuals into permanent level commitment, resources,housing as quickly as possible, followed by the provision ofusually time-limited, home-based stabilization services to coordination, and/or policies topromote housing retention. Typically, rapid re-housing implement. As such, the brief istenancies are scattered-site, private-market rentals, fundedwith time-limited rental assistance. The term “Housing First” intended to speak to the challenges andis also used to describe this approach, both for families and opportunities of the broad array of actorsindividuals, though that term is increasingly being used moreexclusively to describe interventions for chronically and stakeholders responsible forhomeless individuals. addressing homelessness today.2 For a review of forthcoming changes to the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance programs, see the NationalAlliance to End Homelessness’ Summary of the HEARTHAct (June 2009), available athttp://www.endhomelessness.org/content/general/detail/2098
  6. 6. 2 The Challenge of Low “Renter Capital”The assets a household brings to a In addressing the housing barriers ofprospective rental situation have been homeless persons, housing specialistsdescribed as “renter capital.”i By virtue and case managers must seek, whereof their housing status, homeless possible, to increase the renter capital offamilies and individuals have low renter homeless households through suchcapital. In addition to financial barriers means as accessing financial resourcesto housing, homeless persons also face (e.g., move-in funds, temporaryother barriers, to varying degrees, subsidies, Section 8 vouchers) to makeincluding eviction histories, poor credit housing more affordable. In many cases,or no credit, criminal records, limited however, many housing barriers cannotrental histories, poor landlord references, be directly addressed or reduced per se,and various forms of discrimination such as multiple evictions or drug-based on race, family composition, related felonies. In those cases, thehousing status, and income source. approach service providers must take isThese barriers often mean that homeless to advocate with and persuade propertyhouseholds cannot pass standard tenant owners and management companies toscreening criteria, and consequently, are overlook whatever capital deficits aat a competitive disadvantage relative to particular family or individual mayother low-income tenants, particularly in possess.tight rental markets. Sometimes it is necessary to provideIt is the job of frontline, rapid re-housing property owners and managers withstaff – whether dedicated housing certain protections and/or incentivesspecialists or case managers responsible before they are willing to relax theirfor housing search and placement – to screening criteria. Some incentives andaddress the rental barriers of homeless protections, particularly those that arefamilies and individuals. While housing financial in nature, are beyond the meansrelocation services designed to address of individual service agencies but aresuch barriers are evolving into a possible with community leadership and“practice standard” in the field, prior resources.approaches did not recognize the centralimportance of these services. In the The following sections describe many ofmid-1990s, for instance, a rigorous the practices, tools, and methodsnational survey of shelter providers and currently being employed by re-housingusers found that only 20% of homeless providers and local Continuums tofamilies reported receiving help finding overcome the housing barriers ofhousing; the most common forms of homeless persons and increase theirassistance received were transportation, access to private-market housing.clothing, and public benefits advocacy.ii
  7. 7. 3 Marketing Tailored to Owner NeedsHomeless service providers typically assistance, and crisis interventionconsider their clients to be the • Services are often provided on-siteindividuals who are accessing their through regular home visits (oftenservices. Housing search and placement for a transitional period of time,requires a different mindset, one in e.g. 3-6 months)which property owners are also viewedas “clients” or “customers” who have • Landlords have access to supportneeds and wants that must be met “hotlines” and dedicated pointthrough the program. In many ways, re- persons responsive to theirhousing providers are tasked with concerns and needs, and can“selling a product” (i.e., the program) expect prompt intervention withand promoting prospective tenants in the tenants when requestedopen market, one in which property • Tenants – program participantsowners and managers often have many and sometimes other tenants in thedifferent choices. same buildings – have access to, or can be linked to, interventionThis business or market-oriented programs to address issues ormindset requires the use of selling points crises (e.g., rent-to-preventthat speak to landlord needs and goals, eviction assistance)address their concerns, and mitigateactual or perceived risks. In our • Landlord costs associated withexperience, the three most common advertising vacancies and findingconcerns and perceived risks of qualified tenants are reducedlandlords in leasing to homeless persons through free tenant screening andare non-payment of rent, property referralsdamage, and the burden of having to • Security deposits are paid ondeal with potential “problems” caused behalf of tenantsby the incoming tenants.Successful marketing efforts often utilize For many landlords and for manythe following selling points to explain program participants, these riskthe “win-win” for landlords in partnering mitigation services are sufficient to openwith social service programs: the doors to rental opportunities. All landlords at one time or another have • Households are provided dealt with problematic tenants, many of individualized case management whom had never been homeless, and do before and after the move, not easily forget the burden, irritation, including tenant education, and sometimes financial cost of dealing budgeting, household with those individuals. Landlords often management, employment feel reassured when they discover that
  8. 8. 4program participants receive home- Marketing materials are often left withbased support services and that there is a landlords during outreach visits orreliable, sympathetic contact to call in presentations at association meetings, orcase problems arise. During our 40 made available at trade shows oryears of collective experience, case conferences. Sometimes, materials aremanagement services and having a mailed directly to landlords anddesignated, responsive backup have management companies based on leadsconsistently been the most persuasive or initial contacts.selling points for landlord partners. On a community-wide scale, landlordGetting Your Message Across to marketing efforts have beenProperty Owners & Management strengthened in recent years through theCompanies creation of web-based housing locators. These websites are essentially one-stopThe key to engaging property owners shops for service providers and homelessand managers lies in presentation and and low-income individuals to identifyappeal. Landlords appreciate when affordable housing opportunities in theirservice providers demonstrate an communities. The sites are appealing tounderstanding of the dollars and cents of landlords due to their free advertising ofthe rental business and can communicate rentals, easy-to-use listing tools,the protocols and measures they have dedicated customer service, and steadyinstituted to mitigate owners’ financial stream of tenant referrals.risks. Targeted and professionalmarketing materials and outreach Customized locators have sprung up instrategies are essential in order to localities across the country, typicallyeffectively present these messages, and through partnerships between state orpique the interest of prospective local government agencies (e.g., housinglandlords. finance agencies, housing authorities, and community development agencies)Successful re-housing programs often that fund and manage the sites anduse a variety of materials and tactics to private developers of these sites.recruit and engage property owners and Socialserve.com is one of the leadingmanagers. Some of the most common national developers, but there are otherare agency and program brochures, one- companies, including RentLinx.page fact sheets or flyers, “DearLandlord” letters, and business cards. In addition to, or in lieu of, affordableOther materials used by some programs housing websites, communities ofteninclude client success stories that utilize other means to attract landlordhighlight how stable, affordable housing partners. One such approach is to placehas transformed their lives, program or targeted advertisements of re-housingagency media coverage including initiatives or rental assistance programsnewspaper articles, agency newsletters in local or community newspapers, or infor donors and community members, and publications of apartment owner/rentalletters of recommendation from peers housing associations.currently partnering with the program.
  9. 9. 5 Creative Advocacy ApproachesRapid re-housing providers often need to developed in the late 1990s by theemploy additional, creative strategies to Portland Housing Center.convince landlords to take risks that theymight otherwise not take. This is In King County, Washington, forparticularly the case when working with example, the local United Way certifieshomeless families or individuals with area service providers in curriculumspottier rental, credit, and/or criminal instruction. The providers then teach thehistories. curriculum to homeless clients through a 12-hour course; upon completion, clientsCertificated Tenant Education Programs receive a program certificate.One strategy to address rental barriers is The Rental Housing Association ofto develop a certificated, community Puget Sound – the largest association oftenant education program endorsed by rental housing owners in the Pacificthe local landlord association. Northwest – provides tenant background checks for Ready to Rent participantsMost, if not all, rapid re-housing and encourages its more than 3,000programs provide tenant education members to accept the programdirectly or through local partnerships, certificate from graduates with screeningand market such training as a selling barriers.iii4point to prospective landlords. Whileuseful to program participants and Character and Advocacy Letterspotentially attractive to landlords, tenanteducation of this kind tends to lack Character letters can be another usefulknown standards and may be less tool in advocating for housing access forrigorous in nature. A more formal homeless families and individuals.program recognized by a landlord Generally speaking, property ownersassociation, and developed with their like to see that a prospective renter hasinput, on the other hand, provides a taken responsibility for past indiscretionsmarketing advantage over traditional or problems.approaches. Letters from case managers and/orSeveral communities around the country respected third parties, such as religioushave established Ready to Rent3 leaders, employers, or even paroleprograms, based upon the tenant officers, describing how the head ofreadiness curriculum originally household or individual concerned has participated in specialized services3 4 For more information about the program, including Another example of a certificate program is Multnomahcurriculum content, certification and licensing requirements, County’s (Oregon) Rent Well Tenant Education Program -and cost, visit www.readytorent.org. http://www.portlandonline.com/phb/index.cfm?c=50130.
  10. 10. 6(e.g., substance abuse treatment, mental problems. It is important for re-housinghealth counseling, financial education providers to thoroughly investigate withclasses) and has made great strides in program participants the reasons for pastovercoming personal problems indicates problems. Take evictions for example.to a landlord a level of commitment, While all evictions that have gonemotivation, and ability to turn one’s life through the full legal process arearound. recorded and generally remain on one’s credit report for seven years, not allWhile certainly not all landlords or evictions are created equal.management companies are swayed bysuch letters – no matter how impressive Sometimes there are mitigating– experience has shown that some will circumstances that can be presented torespond by “bending” conventional rules prospective landlords. For instance,or making exceptions on a case-by-case some homeless persons have beenbasis, particularly in light of ongoing evicted in the past because they usedprogram support for tenants. Typically, poor judgment in withholding rentindividual owners, and “mom and pop” money as retaliation for landlordslandlords in particular, are more flexible refusing or being slow to make requestedin this regard; however, program repairs. Or, due to domestic violence,advocacy of this nature can also work some homeless mothers have prior, andwith management companies. sometimes unlawful, evictions stemming from property damage and/or disorderlyIt is important to note that relaxing rules conduct caused by a former batterer,or practices in this manner does not even though he was not on the lease andviolate fair housing laws, provided that was not a household guest at the time ofhousing determinations are not made on the incident(s) that led to the family’sthe basis of race, sex, age, disability, displacement.color, creed, or national origin, religion,or familial status.5 Some landlords In such cases, housing specialists canmisunderstand the bounds of these laws. explain the reasons for negative marksAll other things being equal, it is lawful on a client’s credit report and describefor landlords to give preference to one how tenant education, domestic violenceapplicant over another on the basis of his counseling, home visits, and otheror her participation in a case relevant services provide assurances thatmanagement program, even if the such problems will not recur.applicant has a poorer rental “resume”than other applicants. Other Advocacy ApproachesAdvocacy letters can also be helpful in At times, housing specialists have to beexplaining the circumstances very resourceful and tenacious in ordersurrounding past rental and/or credit to assist homeless families and individuals with severe housing barriers. This may require, for example, a5 NOTE: Some states afford additional or expandedprotections to certain classes, so providers should be aware of combination of character letters andapplicable state laws in addition to federal laws.
  11. 11. 7copies of children’s report cards andsports awards, or news of an adult’s newjob or recent promotion, in order to easea property owner’s initial concerns aboutrenting to a particular client. Suchcreativity and persistence is a hallmarkof successful programs.While these approaches may not workon their own, they can be very effectivewhen marketed alongside tenant andlandlord supports, including casemanagement services and landlord“hotlines.”As a general rule of thumb, the morebarriers a homeless household has, themore strategies a re-housing providermust employ in order to find housingopportunities for that individual orfamily.
  12. 12. 8 Enhanced Incentives & Protections for LandlordsFor the “hardest to house” populations, Master leasing arrangements do not haveincluding persons with felony records, to be long-term and have been usedmultiple evictions, behavioral health effectively on a time-limited basis, oftenchallenges, and long-term or chronic lasting no more than six to twelvehomelessness, some agencies and months.7 This transitional periodcommunities have developed enhanced provides sufficient time for high-riskincentives and protections for landlords. tenants to demonstrate their reliability toThese generally fall under two broad landlords, who then become willing tocategories: non-financial and financial. transfer primary control of the lease to them. One notable exception to time-Non-Financial Incentives and limited master leasing are scattered-siteProtections Housing First programs that work directly with private, for-profit landlordsGiven landlords’ and property managers’ to re-house chronically homelessconcerns over rent payments, property individuals (e.g., Pathways to Housing indamage, neighbor relations, and other New York City).potential issues, some communities havedeveloped non-financial strategies to As an alternative to master leasing, somereduce owner liability and/or share providers and communities will co-signpotential risk. leases for high barrier tenants for a limited period of time. This is a similarOne such strategy is master leasing, in risk-sharing approach that can appeal towhich a third party, usually a otherwise reluctant landlords and enablegovernment agency or non-profit service tenants to develop a payment record. Inprovider, leases a unit, or a block of addition to rental contracts, co-signing isunits, and then sub-leases to a high-risk also sometimes done for utility services.tenant(s).6 Several counties inPennsylvania, for example, are Re-housing providers should carefullycombining master leasing with rental consider whether to engage in masterassistance in order to overcome the leasing or co-leasing, even if only for ahousing barriers of justice involved limited period of time. Suchindividuals with mental illness.iv arrangements leave a provider or other third party liable for financial damages or loss, as well as potentially placing them in the awkward position of having6 Master leasing arrangements sometimes involve entirebuildings. For example, the San Francisco Department of 7Public Health’s Direct Access to Housing Program master For example, the Montgomery County Coalition for theleases SRO hotels in order to re-house chronically homeless- Homeless and the Massachusetts Department of Transitionaldisabled individuals who are living on the streets or exiting Assistance have used short-term master leases in the past tovarious institutional settings. re-house harder to serve populations.
  13. 13. 9to “evict” a problematic tenant, while at response to the housing barriers of theirthe same time still advocating for their target population and the limited supplypermanent housing needs. of rental assistance, including Section 8 subsidies, for homeless families inIn over twenty years of re-housing Lancaster County.vhomeless families, Beyond Shelter hasnever signed a family’s lease, even for Protective payee services should not bethose households with serious screening confused with representative payeebarriers. Based on this experience, services. While the latter are oftenBeyond Shelter and HomeStart targeted to individuals deemed incapablerecommend that providers first pursue of handling their own finances (e.g.,other strategies to overcome their severely disabled individuals on SSI),clients’ housing barriers in order to the former have no legal requirementsminimize program liability and to for participation. Protective payeefacilitate greater independence for programs are one strategy, among manytenants. Generally speaking, master others, to convince landlords andleasing, or co-leasing, should be targeted management companies to relaxvery selectively and used as a last resort screening criteria, while at the samewhen no other options exist. enabling program participants to build budgeting and financial managementAnother tool to protect against landlord skills.loss and to mitigate perceived (or actual)risks are protective payee programs.Such programs hold clients’ monthly Financial Incentives and Protectionsincomes in escrow accounts managed bythird parties, who are responsible for Sometimes re-housing programsmaking rent payments directly to combine non-financial incentives withlandlords on behalf of tenants. financial carrots in order to access rental housing for hard-to-house populations.Shelter to Independent Living (SIL) inLancaster, Pennsylvania, one of the Financial incentives can be providedoldest rapid re-housing programs for directly by programs or by third-partyhomeless families in the country, uses collaborators, such as governmentthis strategy on a time-limited basis – agencies (e.g., local welfare or mentalgenerally one year but determined on a health department). Incentives can rangecase-by-case basis – to address from very modest cash payments tolandlords’ concerns about the typically more significant financial commitments.very high income to rent ratios andnegative rent and credit histories of their Modest incentives sometimes includeclients. Tabor Community Services, the providing leasing bonuses to landlords,agency that operates the SIL Program, particularly during the launch phase ofhas found this strategy to be an effective large-scale re-housing initiatives, and paying broker’s fees in communities
  14. 14. 10with such fees.8 More commonly, Some rapid re-housing initiatives thatmodest incentives include paying provide rental assistance will offersecurity deposits for program advance payments to landlords, such asparticipants or negotiating increases in the first 3 month’s rent upon leasedeposit amounts, sometimes of a few signing, or quarterly payments, as ahundred dollars or, when necessary, means to incentivize ownerdouble in amount. Re-housing providers participation. Other programs willoften utilize public funds, such as EFSP, guarantee a portion of the rent for aESG, HOME, and TANF EA9, to pay for certain period of time, to assuagemany of these types of incentives. landlord concerns about financial risk. Some programs will also pay housing-Recognizing the limitations of public related arrears to remove household debtdollars, some communities have as a housing barrier.established non-traditional fundingsources for rental start-up costs. For Financial guarantees of other kinds areexample, the Cambridge Housing increasingly being used in localities toAssistance Fund in Cambridge, provide insurance against landlord orMassachusetts supplements start-up management company loss. Similar tocosts for homeless individuals and how auto, life, and other forms offamilies, including security deposits, insurance operate, these guaranteesrealtor fees, first and last month’s rent, allow landlords to make claims againstmoving costs, storage, and utility bills. the policies in certain circumstances. In effect, these guarantees provide a safetyWhat is unique about the Fund is that it net for property owners and managers.was created in 1999 by the CambridgeCommunity of Realtors as a response to The Rapid Exit Program in Hennepingrowing housing costs, and is primarily County, Minnesota, and the Homelessfunded by proceeds from an charity Assistance Rental Project (HARP) inevent. The Fund has evolved into a Salt Lake County, Utah, for example,strong public-private partnership provide eviction/unlawful detainerinvolving the Cambridge banking guarantees. If a landlord has to gocommunity, local homeless service through the normally expensive evictionproviders, including HomeStart, and the process with a tenant, those programsrest estate community.10 will cover the landlord’s legal costs. HARP, which provides re-housing services for justice-involved individuals8 Many communities do not have broker’s or realtor’s fees,but in those that do, the landlord is often the person and families and those awaiting releaseresponsible for those fees, but in some localities the tenant is from mental health and substance abuseresponsible. Such fees could be as high as two month’s rent.9 All four programs are national programs under the direction treatment programs, also provides a wearof federal departments, as indicated parenthetically: EFSP is and tear guarantee to landlords. Thisthe Emergency Food and Shelter Program (HomelandSecurity). ESG is the Emergency Shelter Grants program guarantee provides insurance against(HUD). HOME is the HOME Investments Partnerships financial harm stemming from damagesProgram (HUD). TANF EA is the Temporary Assistance toNeedy Families Emergency Assistance program (HHS).10 For more information, go to http://chafund.org/
  15. 15. 11in excess of what a tenant’s security Though these programs have not beendeposit would cover.vi11 rigorously evaluated and many funds are still relatively new, experience to dateThough these types of insurance policies suggests that communities can establishmight seem prohibitively expensive, and operate such programs withouttheir design, as well as program overly burdensome financial costs. In soevaluations12 and anecdotal evidence to doing, they would have a promisingdate, suggests that implementation costs strategy to entice property owners toare fairly modest for several reasons. take on more risk than they normally would.First, the programs are often targeted tohouseholds with the greatest housingbarriers, and so most homeless personsdo not need or receive such assistance inorder to access permanent housing.Second, the financial guarantees arenormally capped (e.g., $1,000 - $2,000per household) and are time-limited,typically expiring after 6-12 months.Third, some landlord guarantee fundsrestrict eligibility to households thatgraduate from community tenanteducation programs.13 Finally, theguarantees are tied to the provision ofindividualized housing stabilizationservices, which are designed to promotestable tenancies. Collectively, thesefactors reduce the likelihood of frequentand/or large payouts from risk mitigationfunds.11 The Fresh Start Program and the Landlord Guarantee Fundin Portland/Multnomah County, Oregon and the GrandChance Program of Associated Ministries in Tacoma,Washington are other examples of risk mitigation funds forlandlords that insure against financial harm due to propertydamages and/or eviction costs.12 For example, the interim evaluation for King County’sLandlord Liaison Project found that few partnering landlordsneeded to file reimbursement claims against the RiskReduction Fund due to the success of the program (LandLordLiaison Project: 2010 Performance and Evaluation Report).http://www.kingcounty.gov/socialservices/Housing/PlansAndReports/HCD_Reports.aspx.13 For example: Landlord Guarantee Fund in MultnomahCounty, Oregon.
  16. 16. 12 Approaches to Addressing the Affordability ProblemRegardless of whatever personal more innovative strategies, withchallenges a homeless family or examples, are described below.individual may have, their primaryhousing barrier is affordability. Provide HPRP-Like Rental AssistancePresently, there is not a single county inthe nation in which a worker earning the The launch of the Federal HPRPfederal minimum wage ($7.25/hour) can Program introduced the terms short- andafford a one-bedroom apartment at Fair medium-term rental assistance into theMarket Rent.vii national homelessness lexicon. Though such terms were new at the time forFederal, state and local efforts to address many communities across the country,homelessness must focus on strategies to HPRP was designed after successfulclose the growing gap between temporary rental assistance programshousehold income and housing costs. across the country, including the State ofThe most well-designed landlord Minnesota’s Family Homelessincentive packages and outreach efforts Prevention and Assistance Programwill only go so far, if direct measures are (FHPAP).15not taken to lessen household rentburdens, whether through tenant-based One of the primary challenges toassistance, workforce development providing short- and medium-term rentalinitiatives, or both. assistance is funding. HPRP has helped to fill the void that has existed for manyStates, counties, and cities are years in Continuums of Care across theresponding to the systemic challenge of country, but HPRP funding is onlyhousing affordability through various available through September 2012.demand-side initiatives focused on While statutory changes under HEARTHexpanding access to existing housing to the Emergency Shelter Grants (ESG)16stock.14 The universe of these initiatives program demonstrate an ongoing federalis quickly evolving and fairly diverse, commitment to flexible funding toand comprehensive coverage of these 15initiatives is beyond the scope of this The program provides flexible, outcomes-based funding, including up to 24 months of rental assistance to promotebrief. However, some of the leading and rapid re-housing for homeless families with children, youth, and single adults. The success of Hennepin County’s Rapid Exit Program – often cited nationally as a best practice for rapid re-housing – is due in large part to the structure and design of the FHPAP. For more information, see Burt, M.R., Pearson, C., & Montgomery, A.E. (2005). Strategies for Preventing Homelessness. Washington, DC: Department of14 Demand-side approaches focus on expanding access to Housing and Urban Development. 16existing housing stock by increasing consumer purchasing The Emergency Shelter Grants (ESG) program is being re-power and choice, as opposed to supply-side strategies that named the Emergency Solutions Grant, to incorporate afocus on increasing the overall supply of affordable housing, broader range of eligible activities and an enhancedprimarily through subsidies to developers for new commitment to homelessness prevention and rapid re-construction or rehabilitation. housing.
  17. 17. 13promote housing stability, housing subsidy programs, including theresources under the new ESG will be at a previously mentioned HARP program.significantly reduced funding level Some of these programs blend HOMEcompared to HPRP.17 To make inroads funds with county general funds in orderin addressing homelessness going to maximize available dollars for rentalforward, communities will need to assistance.strategize about how to utilize existingand/or create new sources of money to Other communities can follow Salt Lakeprovide temporary housing subsidies. County’s example and utilize HOME funds for time-limited rental assistance,Maximize mainstream resources. One coupled with workforce developmentmainstream resource that is under- strategies. For populations needingutilized for direct rental assistance is the long-term housing assistance, TBRAFederal HOME program: HOME funds can be used as a bridge to long-Investments Partnerships Program. term subsidy programs, includingWhile many state and local jurisdictions Section 8, Shelter Plus Care, HUDcurrently use HOME funds for rental VASH, and FUP.start-up costs, far fewer use those fundsfor tenant-based rental assistance The Federal TANF program –(TBRA). The program allows up to 24 Temporary Assistance for Needymonths of rental assistance, with Families – is another block grantrenewable terms, and provides local program that can be utilized forjurisdictions with the flexibility to temporary rental assistance. While somedesign and customize their TBRA states and counties currently use TANFprograms.18 funds for this purpose, many do not dedicate funds in this manner, evenThe Salt Lake County, Utah Housing though stable housing is a vital workAuthority and its service partners, support for homeless families onincluding The Road Home, utilize welfare, as well as those exiting theHOME funds for multiple temporary program.17 HPRP funding amounts to $500 million per year, whereas Typically, localities use their requiredESG funding has plateaued at about $160 million for the last state matching dollars, known asseveral fiscal years, and most of that funding has beendedicated to shelter activities, rather than prevention or re- maintenance-of-effort (MOE) funds, tohousing activities. Provisions in HEARTH, however, provide longer-term rental assistance,essentially double the proportion of HUD’s HomelessAssistance Programs funding that must be dedicated to the including to families not receiving cashnew ESG program. These changes will significantly increase assistance. Those funds offer greaterESG funding, assuming actual appropriations comply withthe new statute, but funding will still far fall short of HPRP flexibility to states [when administeredlevels. For more information, see FY 2011 HUD Homeless and accounted for separately] thanAssistance Funding Scenarios: Federal Policy Brief, August31, 2010, by the National Alliance to End Homelessness. federal dollars, because benefits paid18 For more information on HOME TBRA, see with the latter normally trigger lifetimehttp://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/affordablehousing/programs/home/ as well as: Council of State Community Development time limits and work participationAgencies. (December 1997). Using Home Funds to Address requirements.viiiHomelessness Within a Continuum of Care. Washington,DC: Author. Available athttp://www.coscda.org/publications/care.htm
  18. 18. 14Communities using TANF funds for otherwise would be, dedicated tohousing assistance have had some “managing” homelessness can besuccess in combating family reallocated for pilot rental assistancehomelessness. One striking example is programs.Westchester County, New York, locatedclose to New York City. Hamilton Family Center in San Francisco, for example, persuaded theIn the early 2000s, the recession and local government to allow it to close twoexpensive rental market had resulted in family shelters it had been operating andincreasing numbers of homeless families to reallocate those dollars for shallowin Westchester, as well as longer lengths subsidies. The success of the pilotof stay in county-funded shelters. program helped in part to propel the cityAmong other responses to this crisis, the to allocate general fund revenue for aWestchester Department of Social first-ever city-wide rental assistanceServices participated in the Shelter program for homeless families.Supplement Program, offered throughthe state. The program essentially The Massachusetts Department ofdoubled the housing allowance of long- Transitional Assistance, which had beenstaying (i.e., 6 months or more) welfare- battling mushrooming shelter and moteldependent families, thereby enabling costs, allocated funds for similar pilotthem to leave shelter. The success of programs. These rental assistancethis and complementary initiatives programs produced improved housingresulted in a 57% decrease in family outcomes for homeless families, therebyhomelessness from 2002 to 2006 and reducing lengths of stay in shelter asenabled the county to close some of its well as financial costs to the state. 19family shelters.ix Leverage resources from communityMore recently, some communities have stakeholders. Homelessness isused TANF funding for tenant-based expensive, and the prevailing businessassistance, in conjunction with HPRP. model in most communities of shelter-TANF funds – particularly from the based responses is not only ineffective,Emergency Contingency Fund but also inefficient, arguably inhumane.authorized by the Recovery Act (ARRA) Some communities at the vanguard of– have been used to provide non- ending and preventing homelessnessrecurrent, short-term assistance have been able to reframe homelessness(i.e., up to 4 months based on federal for certain target populations as anregulations), with HPRP funds used to affordable housing issue that impactsextend rental assistance up to 18 months other social problems (e.g., health carefor households needing more time to utilization, criminal recidivism, childachieve housing and financial stability. welfare involvement, and welfare-to- work).Reallocate existing resources.Sometimes existing resources that are, or 19 For a description of these initiatives, see One Family, Inc. (Fall 2006). Housing First: An Unprecedented Opportunity. Boston: Author. http://www.onefamilyinc.org/cgi- script/csArticles/uploads/491/PolicyPaperFINAL.pdf
  19. 19. 15Homeless and affordable housing families involving six to twelve months,advocates have been able to accomplish generally, of rental assistance. Mountainsuch reframing through the use of cost- West Bank, a local partner in thebenefit arguments and have successfully initiative, provides a dollar-for-dollarleveraged financial commitments from savings match while families arenon-traditional sources. enrolled in the program.20The Indianapolis/Marion County Create new public revenue streams.Housing Trust Fund, for example, was Given the limited supply of affordable,able to secure an annual donation of $1 market-rate housing across the countrymillion to the trust fund from the Health and the fact that only one in fourand Hospital Corporation of Marion households eligible for federal housingCounty. The Corporation made this assistance actually receives assistedsubstantial commitment because it came housing of one form or another,xi stateto view permanent supportive housing as and local communities have turned toan effective strategy to reduce health other strategies to create housingcare costs, particularly those related to resources. Taxes and fees of variousrecurrent emergency room visits and kinds are some of the most commonambulance services.x approaches.Engage faith communities. Faith In 2005, for instance, the Illinoiscommunities are also important Legislature passed legislationstakeholders in efforts to address authorizing a $10 surcharge on realhomelessness. The missions and estate recordings. This recordation feefundamental teachings of Christianity, provides tens of millions of dollarsJudaism, Islam, and other religions make annually, including over $10 million forthese communities natural allies in Chicago/Cook County. Chicago hasefforts to combat economic injustices earmarked half of these resources forlike homelessness. Not surprisingly, implementation of its Ten Year Plan,faith-based partnerships have been including for tenant-based rentalspreading in communities across the assistance.xiicountry, due in part to priorities set forthin local Ten Year Plans. Miami-Dade County, Florida imposes a 1% tax on sales at larger restaurants inOne successful example of a faith-based the community. The Food and Beveragerental assistance program is Project Tax generates millions of dollars for theCATCH in Boise, Idaho. This Housing Homeless Trust each year.First project is a collaboration betweenlocal congregations, businesses, city Communities have also developed othergovernment, and the United Way of types of taxes or fees, or agreed toTreasure Valley. Congregations and dedicate revenue from extant fees, tobusinesses fund most of the budget, address homelessness. Such revenueincluding sponsorships of homeless 20 For more information on Project CATCH, go to http://www.cityofboise.org/CATCH/index.aspx
  20. 20. 16streams have included lodging fees, experimenting with more sophisticatedparking fees, real estate transfer fees, targeting approaches.and income taxes. New York City, for example, hadThe Community Shelter Board, the lead prioritized (until recently) homelessagency for the Continuum of Care in individuals and families on fixedColumbus and Franklin County, Ohio incomes (e.g., SSI or SSDI) due to auses revenue from a modest real estate disability and child-welfare involvedtransfer fee to address homelessness. families for Section 8 vouchers.xivCalifornia has a 1% tax on householdincome over $1 million. Revenue from Other communities are moving awaythe “millionaire’s tax,” formally known from basing eligibility for permanentas Prop 63/Mental Health Services Act, subsidies on housing status and insteadfunds permanent housing and are embracing a “progressivecomprehensive services for mentally ill engagement” approach to housingpopulations. assistance. xv Under this approach, homeless households are provided temporary rental assistance, oftenTarget Long-Term Assisted Housing combined with workforce developmentResources More Effectively strategies. Households are re-evaluated on a periodic basis (e.g., quarterly, muchThe other key strategy communities are like HPRP) to determine ongoing needemploying to overcome the rental for financial assistance, up to a definedaffordability challenge is to selectively period of time, and to ascertain whetherallocate long-term assisted housing service interventions remain appropriateresources, including Section 8 and public or need to be adjusted in some way.housing. Although many homeless Households that are not able to achievepersons, and impoverished households housing stability once the temporaryat-large, could benefit from permanent assistance ends are targeted forsubsidies, most have demonstrated that permanent subsidies.they can exit homelessness and remainhoused without such assistance. The State of Massachusetts is a good example of this approach. The MovingIn the past, and to some extent still to Economic Opportunity Programtoday, poor targeting of these resources (MEOP) is a pilot initiative providing abased largely on housing status created two to four year subsidy to homeless andperverse incentives in some communities near-homeless TANF recipients withto enter, and/or remain, in the shelter little to no work history. In addition tosystem in order to access housing housing assistance, participants receiveassistance.xiii Though targeting remains intensive work supports to help themat best an imperfect science – as no overcome their employment barriers. Ofresearch exists indicating how to match particular importance, after exitinglevel and duration of subsidy to shelter through this program,household need – some communities are participants do not lose their priority for
  21. 21. 17subsidized housing (Section 8 and public programs dedicating a portion of theirhousing).xvi Therefore, if the time- vouchers that turn over each year tolimited rental assistance proves homeless populations.inadequate for certain families, the stateplans to transition those households tolong-term assistance. The programdesign thus enables the Commonwealthto de-link shelter and housing subsidies,while targeting long-term assistance tohouseholds with demonstrable need forit.Currently, approximately one quarter ofpublic housing authorities (PHAs) acrossthe country have set-aside programsthrough which certain homelesspopulations are prioritized for Section 8Housing Choice vouchers.xvii In thosejurisdictions, homeless providers,advocates, and planners should ensurethat those tenant-based vouchers arebeing targeted to homeless householdswith the greatest housing barriers, ifsuch targeting policies are not already inplace. The Administrative Plan of eachPHA spells out the eligibility criteria andadministrative policies and proceduresfor all vouchers.In communities without set-asideprograms, providers, advocates, andplanners should engage their state andlocal PHAs in efforts to combathomelessness. HUD permits every PHAto establish “needs-based” preferencesfor their waiting lists. PHAs can beasked to adopt such preferences for high-risk, high-barrier homeless populationsin both their Public Housing AgencyPlans as well as their AdministrativePlans. To counter the commonargument about “robbing Peter to payPaul,” homeless advocates and plannerscan advocate that PHAs implement pilot
  22. 22. 18 Summary of Program Strategies to Overcome Housing Attainment BarriersDevelop Marketing Tools • Program brochures • Flyers/fact sheets • “Dear Landlord” letters • Client success stories • Program or agency media coverage • Letters of recommendation from partnering landlordsStrategically Target Outreach to the Landlord Community • Present at local apartment owner association meetings • Recruit owners at association conferences or trade shows • Host landlord orientation sessionsEmphasize Core Program Benefits • Home-based case management • Financial assistance for move-in costs • Landlord backup • Free tenant screening • Speedy tenant referrals to reduce turnover time in rental units • Reduced advertising costsUtilize Creative Advocacy Approaches • Character letters from trusted or respected third parties • Advocacy letters explaining past rental, credit, or criminal problemsOffer Individualized Landlord Incentives and Protections As Needed • Master leasing or co-leasing (time-limited and/or ongoing) • Protective payee services • Increased security deposits
  23. 23. 19 Summary of Community Strategies to Overcome Housing Attainment BarriersDevelop Marketing Tools • Web-based, affordable housing locators • Certificated tenant education programs • Targeted advertisements in local papers or apartment owner association publicationsAddress Financial Barriers Due to Rental Start-Up Costs • Utilize mainstream resources (EFSP, ESG, HOME, TANF EA) • Create alternative, non-traditional funding sources for security deposits and other move- in costsOffer Individualized Landlord Incentives and Protections As Needed • Master leasing or co-leasing (time-limited and/or ongoing) • Paid broker’s/realtor’s fees • Landlord bonuses • Advance rent payments • Quarterly payments • Rent guarantees (time-limited) • Wear and tear guarantees (time-limited) • Eviction/unlawful detainer guarantees (time-limited)Provide Temporary Rental Assistance • Maximize mainstream resources like HOME and TANF • Reallocate existing resources • Leverage resources from community stakeholders • Engage faith communities • Create new public revenue streams through new or existing taxes and feesTarget Permanent Housing Resources • Identify the highest risk, highest barrier households • De-link shelter/housing status and permanent subsidies • Adopt “progressive engagement” approaches
  24. 24. 20 Maintaining Relationships & Facilitating Housing StabilityOnce a homeless individual or family is case managers for interventionre-housed, the real work begins, not just purposes.21 These warning systems arein terms of assisting the client to not unlike the successful model ofstabilize in their new housing but also in property management and residentterms of meeting the needs of the services that often exists in permanentlandlord. The commitments made while supportive housing and other types ofoutreaching and recruiting property affordable housing for homeless andowners need to be maintained after lease low-income populations.signing and move-in. Check-in calls tolandlords and property managers, home Recognizing Landlord Contributionsvisits to clients, and other promisedservices must occur within stated time Integral to relationship maintenance withframes. When providers keep their landlords is recognizing theircommitments not just to individual contributions to the program.clients, but also to landlords, tenancies Recognition can be as simple as sendingand relationships are more likely to thank you or birthday cards from staffremain stable and positive. and clients to more elaborate measures as hosting owner appreciation breakfastsIt is important to establish two-way at which partners receive plaques orcommunication with landlords early on other types of recognition.so that trust can develop and deepenover time. Checking in with property Another way to recognize landlords is toowners during good times, and not just have a landlord spotlight in monthly orwhen issues emerge, helps to build quarterly community newsletters orrapport and reinforces the view of the emails, not unlike client “successlandlord as a customer whose needs are stories” often featured in thesebeing attended to. In addition, open, communications. Or, programs canconsistent communication makes it more identify a “landlord of the year” andlikely that landlords will call upon the acknowledge those individuals duringprovider when problems arise and before annual fundraisers, communitythey escalate to the point of jeopardizing newsletters, and/or annual reports.a client’s housing. Remember, friendly competition among peers can provide good motivation!Some rapid re-housing providers go sofar as to establish formal protocols and A little schmoozing can also go a longtools with property owners for early way towards ensuring positivewarning systems. In these systems,certain events, such as a client’s falling 21 For sample communication tools and protocols, seebehind on rent payments, trigger calls to http://www.hudhre.info/housingsearch/Landlord-Tenant- Case%20Manager%20Communication%20Agreementv2_Au g06.doc OR http://www.pahousingchoices.org/wp/wp- content/uploads/2009/12/pdf-of-Dauphin-protocol.pdf.
  25. 25. 21relationships. Beyond Shelter’s and recognize the invaluable contributions ofHomeStart’s housing specialists have community partners to the program.been known on occasion to take theirfavorite landlords to lunch!One final piece of relationshipmaintenance involves eliciting feedbackfrom community partners for qualityassurance purposes. Just as many retailand other for-profit businesses conductcustomer service surveys, it is importantfor re-housing providers to seekfeedback from landlords on theirexperiences with the program.On a semi-annual or annual basis,service providers and/or lead agenciesfor Continuums can survey landlords viamail, telephone, or email questionnaire,or in-person focus groups, to find outwhat is working and what could beimproved. More established re-housingprograms may only need to conduct suchsurveys every two years or so.This feedback loop not only providesvaluable information for programrefinement purposes, but it also signalsto landlord partners the value theprogram places on ensuring their needsare being heard and met.As one veteran housing specialist atBeyond Shelter once said, landlords arelike elephants. They never forget thegood or the bad. Since memories do notfade and word travels fast, it isincumbent upon re-housing providers tocontinually provide a personal touch atall times, whether following up after aclient moves in to their new home,intervening to address concerns raisedby landlords, or searching for ways to
  26. 26. 22 Building Upon Success: Expanding the Role of Partnering LandlordsWhile continuing to recruit new are considering expanding their serviceslandlords, successful rapid re-housing to households with greater housingproviders always seek to expand the role barriers. Landlords who are influentialof property owners and management or prominent community members cancompanies already partnering with the also be approached about serving onprogram. agency boards.At a minimum, these partners should be In addition, landlord partners can serveapproached about providing additional as a valuable referral source to thehousing opportunities to clients. Many program. Property owners always knowlandlords own multiple properties and other owners, whether throughare often open to making additional units membership in local associations oravailable to the program. Management other means. Housing specialists shouldcompanies, by definition, also have notify these partners that the program iscontrol over numerous properties. continually looking for new landlord referrals and rental opportunities. Just asIt is important to keep in mind that many jobs are found through word ofproperty owners and managers who have mouth, the same is true for housinghad positive experiences with the opportunities.program are often amenable to renting tohouseholds with greater barriers. Be There are other, more formal ways toaware, however, that over-concentrating involve landlord partners in recruitmentclients in individual buildings generally efforts, including as follows:leads to various problems and should beavoided. 1) They can be involved in supporting orientations forLandlords who have demonstrated a fellow owners at the program’ssignificant investment in or support of offices (perhaps over breakfastthe program can be approached about or lunch). For starters, partnerscontributing in other ways. For can be asked to help turn outexample, they could sit on program prospects for these events.advisory boards to provide input on new During the events, they can playinitiatives, such as the development of a an active role, including bycertificated tenant education program. offering first-hand testimonyOr they could help to organize, and about the benefits of the programparticipate in, landlord focus groups. for owners and their positiveBoth information-gathering strategies experiences. Peer testimonialscan be particularly helpful during the can be a very powerful “sales”early stages of program development tool, particularly when comingand implementation, or when programs
  27. 27. 23 from landlords who had at first been skeptical of the program. 2) They can write a “Dear Colleague” letter to prospective owners and/or serve as a listed reference in a “Dear Landlord” letter from the re-housing provider. Both letters can then be used for marketing and outreach efforts in general as well as for those targeted specifically to partnering landlords’ personal networks. 3) Landlord partners can also host house parties. Rather than raising funds for a cause, the purpose of this type of house party is to inform fellow property owners about the program, and enlist their participation. 4) To the extent that local landlord associations are not aware of, or are not actively involved in, supporting the re-housing program, partner landlords, particularly those who are association members, can help to spread the word. This could include co-presenting with program representatives at association meetings.Since landlord recruitment is ultimatelyabout relationship building, re-housingproviders should always viewparticipating landlords as a valuableresource for facilitating and expandingnetworking and outreach opportunities.
  28. 28. 24 ConclusionRecent reforms to federal homelessness policy through the HEARTH Act representfundamental changes in how individual service providers and entire Continuums of Carewill be expected to serve homeless populations. Rapid re-housing – one of the mostsignificant of these changes – will require providers to more quickly assist homelesshouseholds to access rental housing, primarily in the private market.The agencies and communities at the vanguard of systems change over the last 10-15years have developed and refined tools, practices, and policies aimed squarely ataddressing the housing barriers of homeless individuals and families and facilitatingpartnerships with private-market landlords and management companies. Providers andlocalities new to rapid re-housing can consider incorporating and adapting the approachesoutlined in this brief as they refocus and redesign their efforts to end and preventhomelessness.
  29. 29. 25 RELATED READINGBeyond Shelter. (May 1999). The Housing First Program for Homeless Families:Methodology Manual. Los Angeles: Author.Cortes, K. and Rogers, S. (2010). Reentry Housing Options: The Policymakers’ Guide.New York: Council of State Governments Justice Center.Diana T. Meyers and Associates, Inc. (n.d.). Ten Ways to Boost Housing OpportunitiesWorking with Private Housing Providers. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Association for AreaAgencies on Aging.Diana T. Meyers and Associates, Inc. (March 2010). Housing and the SequentialIntercept Model: A How-To Guide for Planning for the Housing Needs of Individualswith Justice Involvement and Mental Illness. Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Departmentof Public Welfare Office of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services.Kelleher, T. (December 2006). Landlord Incentives and Protections: EncouragingLandlords to Rent to Recovering Substance Abusers. Olympia: Washington StateDepartment of Community, Trade and Economic Development (Department ofCommerce).Marr, M.D. Mitigating Apprehension about Section 8 Vouchers: The Positive Role ofHousing Specialists in Search and Placement. Housing Policy Debate, 16(1), 2005.National Alliance to End Homelessness. (March 2004). Housing First for Families:Research to Support the Development of a Housing First for Families TrainingCurriculum. Washington, DC: Author.National Alliance to End Homelessness. (July 2009). Rapid Re-Housing: CreatingPrograms That Work. Washington, DC: Author.One Family, Inc. (Fall 2006). Housing First: An Unprecedented Opportunity. Boston:Author.Culhane, D. & Bryne, T. (2010). Ending Family Homelessness in Massachusetts: A NewApproach for the Emergency Assistance Program. Boston: Paul and Phyllis FiremanCharitable Foundation.
  30. 30. 26 ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTING ORGANIZATIONS Beyond Shelter – Founded in 1988, the mission of Beyond Shelter is to develop systemic approaches to combat poverty and homelessness among families with children and enhance family economic security and well-being. Beyond Shelter pioneered the Housing First approach for homeless families as a response to rising family homelessness in the late 1980s and the inherent limitation of shelter-based approaches to address the fundamental need of homeless families for affordable, permanent housing. Since 1998, the agency’s Housing First Program has re-housed more than 5,000 homeless families, with an estimated 85% housing retention rate. The agency’s programs in Southern California serve as a “laboratory” for demonstration, research and evaluation, with information disseminated through the Institute for Research, Training and Technical Assistance. Partnering for Change: The National Institute for Innovative Strategies to Combat Family Homelessness & Poverty – Founded in 2010, the mission of Partnering for Change is to collaborate with practitioners and researchers to develop and test innovative program models in order to improve the social and economic well- being of vulnerable families, and promote the dissemination of evidence-based approaches through education, training, advocacy and consulting to nonprofit organizations, public agencies, and grant makers. The organization provides a formal mechanism to bring research and practice together in order to test and refine new or existing program models and systems change approaches, fill knowledge gaps, and arm service providers, systems planners, grant makers, and policy makers with the tools and know-how to more effectively address family homelessness and poverty. HomeStart, Inc. – Founded in 1994, the mission of HomeStart is to end and prevent homelessness in Greater Boston by assisting individuals in obtaining permanent housing and settling into the community, and by developing strategies to address systemic barriers to housing placement. The agency began in 1994 as a pilot project to provide housing search and placement assistance for homeless individuals staying in Boston area shelters; then it added follow-up services to assist people to retain housing; and next it initiated housing services to prevent homelessness. Along the way, the agency has taken on the challenge of securing and managing an array of housing tools from flexible rental funds to long-term housing subsidies that facilitate ending and preventing homelessness. One of the early pioneers of Housing First for homeless single adults, the agency has expanded its services over time to include other populations, including families with children and chronically homeless- disabled persons who have lived on the streets for years. Since 1994, HomeStart’s Housing First services have assisted more than 4,000 homeless people to move to their own homes, with over 95% of participants remaining stably housed one year after placement. Contact InformationBeyond Shelter HomeStart, Inc Partnering for Change1200 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 600 105 Chauncy Street, Suite 502 1200 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 600Los Angeles, CA 90017 Boston, MA 02111 Los Angeles, CA 90017institute@beyondshelter.org woodboyle@homestart.org ttull@partnering-for-change.org213-252-0772 617-542-0338 213-596-4001www.beyondshelter.org www.homestartinc.org www.partnering-for-change.org
  31. 31. 27ENDNOTESi Marr, M.D. (2005). Mitigating Apprehension about Section 8 Vouchers: The Positive Role of HousingSpecialists in Search and Placement. Housing Policy Debate, 16(1), p.92.ii Burt, M. R., Aron, L.Y., Douglas, T., Valente, J., Lee, E., & Iwen, B. (December 1999). Homelessness:Programs and the People They Serve. Findings of the National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providersand Clients. Washington, DC: Interagency Council on the Homeless.iii Kelleher, T. (December 2006). Landlord Incentives and Protections: Encouraging Landlords to Rent toRecovering Substance Abusers. Olympia: Washington State Department of Community, Trade andEconomic Development (Department of Commerce).iv Diana T. Meyers and Associates, Inc. (March 2010). Housing and the Sequential Intercept Model: AHow-To Guide for Planning for the Housing Needs of Individuals with Justice Involvement and MentalIllness, p. 36, 69. Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare Office of Mental Health andSubstance Abuse Services.v E-mail communication to Ryan Macy-Hurley from Kay Moshier McDivitt, Director of HousingCounseling Programs, Tabor Community Services, November 2, 2006.vi Cortes, K. and Rogers, S. Reentry Housing Options: The Policymakers’ Guide. New York: Council ofState Governments Justice Center, 2010.vii DeCrappeo, M., Pelletiere, D., Crowley, S., & Teater, E. (April 2010). Out of Reach 2010. Washington,DC: National Low Income Housing Coalition. Available at www.nlihc.org.viii Sard, B. & Harrison, T. (February 2002). The Increasing Use of TANF and State Matching Funds toProvide Housing Assistance to Families Moving from Welfare to Work — 2001 Supplement. Washington,DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Schott, L. (July 13, 2010). Using TANF Emergency Funds toHelp Prevent and Address Family Homelessness. Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.ix E-mail communication to Ryan Macy-Hurley from Diane Stern, Associate Commissioner, Housing andHomeless Services, Westchester County Department of Social Services, August 14, 2008.x Center for Community Change. (Fall 2007). Housing Trust Fund Project Newsletter. Washington, DC:Author. http://www.communitychange.org/our-projects/htf/newsletters/Fall%202007%20HTFund%20newsletter.pdfxi Turner, M. A. & Kingsley, G.T. (2008). Federal Programs for Addressing Low-Income Housing Needs:A Policy Primer. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.xii Betsy Benito, Chicago Department of Housing. July 27, 2006 Presentation at the NAEH 2006 AnnualConference on Ending Homelessness. http://www.endhomelessness.org/content/article/detail/1251xiii Culhane, D., Metraux, S., Park, J.M., Schretzman, M., & Valente, J. (2007). Testing a typology offamily homelessness based on patterns of public shelter utilization in four U.S. jurisdictions: Implicationsfor policy and program planning. Housing Policy Debate, 18(1), 1-28, p. 5.xiv National Alliance to End Homelessness. (July 2010). Ending Family Homelessness: Lessons FromCommunities. Washington, DC: Author, p.5.xv Culhane, D., Metraux, S., & Bryne, T. (June 2010). A Prevention-Centered Approach to HomelessnessAssistance: A Paradigm Shift? Supplemental Document to the Federal Strategic Plan to End and PreventHomelessness. Washington, DC: US Interagency Council on Homelessness, p. 20. Available athttp://www.usich.gov/PDF/OpeningDoors/DennisCulhane_PrevCentApproHomelessnessAssist.pdfxvi Stephanie Brown, Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance. February 12, 2009 Presentationat the NAEH 2009 Annual Conference on Ending Family Homelessness.xvii U.S. Government Accountability Office. (June 2010). Homelessness: A Common Vocabulary CouldHelp Agencies to Collaborate and Collect More Consistent Data. Washington, DC: Author, p. 28.