The outline of my capstone presentation (prior to graduation) in June 2010 (Portland State University).

1. A New Approach to Homelessness: The Advantages of Co-Production Joann Zimmer, candidate Executive Master of Public Administration Executive Leadership Institute Mark O. Hatfield School of Government Portland State University June 12, 2010

3. Purpose of Project

4. Research – process, documentation

5. Literature Review

6. Co-Production – the centerpiece of a new model

7. Findings – interview, survey, personal experience

8. Project Conclusions

9. Leadership Lessons Learned

11. Only one in seven homeless people are able to find a bed in crisis; more than 350 people a day are turned away from homelessness services because of a lack of capacity (mostly women and children).

12. Despite 2009 federal appropriations of nearly $4.2 billion** for homeless services, there are nearly 1 million people nightly who go to sleep without safe and stable shelter. * Oregon Housing and Community Services’ One-Night Homeless Count, January 2010; http://www.ehac.oregon.gov/OHCS/CRD/CSS/docs/onsc_reports/2010/state_report/10_State_Wide_Count.pdf and 2008 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress ** According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness (www.endhomelessness.org), the 2009 federal allocation of $4.175 billion was shared by HUD ($3.391 billion [81%]), Heath and Human Services ($396.95 million [9%]), VA ($109.5 million [3%]), and all other federal agencies combined ($278 million [7%]).

13. Purposes of Project To identify alternative approaches to dealing with the wicked problem of homelessness. To document the role that the homeless can play in working toward a solution.

15. Interviews

16. More than 20 direct interviews conducted over three months.

17. Interviewees represent broad cross-section of service providers, governments [local, state, federal], and community.

18. Interviewer/interviewee relationship-building continues to support on-going research.

19. Surveys

20. Two, 10 questions each, internet-based.

21. 75 invitations to participate sent; 51% response. Interviewees represent broad cross-section of service providers, governments [local, state, federal], and community.

22. Numerous additional contact points gained; will enhance on-going research.

23. Personal Experience

24. Face-2-face conversations over 14 years with service providers, public- and private-sector leaders, electeds, those in poverty/homeless.

25. Coordination of two multi-jurisdictional steering committees in creating plans to address local issues of homelessness.

27. Didn’t include direct interviews with faith-based community.

29. Systems Thinking

31. The homeless community must be an active and focal participant in the process: feedback loops, personal development, and practical [organic] innovations.

33. Service providers identify collaborative partnerships as being the centerpiece of creating new models.

34. Redesigned systems and innovations need to include the continuum of homeless.

35. Homelessness is more than a 'housing problem; it reflects an inadequate safety net, a manifestation of other issues (addiction, poverty, education).

36. Co-production is desirable and already happening.

38. The cost of managing co-productive systems could be prohibitive, especially in smaller, rural jurisdictions.

39. The possibility of participants in the co-productive process of remaining ‘stuck’ in prevailing human/social services and being fearful of the risks of the homeless themselves delivering services.

40. Language around co-production could be interesting to develop, e.g. By its nature the process expects all participants will contribute to the collaboration (balanced for all). * Interviewees represent a broad cross-section of service providers, governments [local, state, federal], and communitymembers.

42. Service providers/advocates comprise the majority of respondents; many identified multiple categories. No homeless (or formerly).** In a subsequent question, 47% of respondents indicated participation of the homeless in current or former local collaborative partnerships.

43. 77.8% of respondents would collaboratively participate in developing innovative interventions and new human/social service delivery designs. * Two, 10 questions each, internet-based. 75 invitations to participate sent; 51% response. ** Relationship-building for thoughtful interviewing takes time, and the target population isn’t equipped to participate unassisted via internet-based survey.

45. Have much to teach. The volume of their life experiences and unique wisdom could never be learned by providers, elected officials, or community members;*

46. Want to participate in a solutions-driven process; they don’t want to be homeless forever.* Unless they are homeless themselves.

48. Innovation and outside-the-box thinking are important in developing updated organizational models.

50. The diversity of leadership tools and methods should be more widely shared to encourage both leaders and followers to develop more engaging, co-productive, and sustainable systems.

51. The five effective practices of exemplary leadership as defined by Kouzes & Posner defines a perfect roadmap for moving a co-productive partnership forward: Model the Way, Inspire a Shared Vision, Challenge the Process, Enable Others to Act, and Encourage the Heart.“We do not describe the world we see, we see the world we describe.” ~~David Cooperrider (‘father’ of Appreciative Inquiry)

53. Family

54. Co-workers

55. Classmates

56. Professors

57. Editors

58. the Homeless