MTW Conference February 4-5, 2014

MTW ConferenceFebruary 4-5, 2014

Models for Addressing Homelessness at the Local Level

Presented by:• Portage Metropolitan Housing Authority• Home Forward• Housing Authority of the County of San Mateo


Portage County, Ohio

Presenter: Fred ZawilinskiPortage Metropolitan Housing Authority

Moving to Work Conference, February 4-5, 2014


Attacking One Cause of Homelessness• Through Moving to Work, PMHA has enabled the

creation of the first residential drug and alcohol recovery program in Portage County.

– Prior to this program creation, men with addiction problems had to hope for the rare open slot in another county, attempt to address recovery as an out-patient, or hope for assistance through the criminal justice system


Background• For 25 years, PMHA owned and maintained a group

home for persons with severe developmental disabilities as part of the conventional Public Housing Program. Named Washington Group Home and built with PH Development funds, it housed eight persons with individual bedrooms, but kitchen, bathroom and living areas were shared by all residents. 24/7 staffing provided assistance with daily living activities as needed.

Background• 2008: Discussion over 50058 submissions led to

speculation at HUD that the group home was not an allowed use under Public Housing, and that PMHA would either convert the property into more conventional rental housing, or dispose of the property.

• Approval for continued use as a group home requested for 2009 as insurance to PMHA.


Background• 2009: The supportive services agency purchased

their own home, vacated the property.• Meanwhile, PMHA investigates permanent

supportive housing as an option for housing young adults who age out of the foster care system

• A partnership is formed, and fails.


A Different Approach• In 2012, discussions between PMHA and the

leadership of a non-profit reveal that, while there is a long-running recovery program for women with addictions, there is no similar program for men.

• With a history of successful collaborations between the non-profit and PMHA, discussions moved forward to explore MTW as a tool to help PMHA better utilize WGH and address community needs.


Addressing Addiction• Through the Annual Plan process and numerous discussions

with HUD MTW and field office staff, PMHA gets permission to operate WGH as a home for men recovering from addictions.

• PMHA retains ownership and maintenance responsibilities, leases the property as a whole to the non-profit partner for their program operation. The partner, as in the previous days of the group home, provides all 24/7 staffing and care of the residents. The property is leased to the non-profit on a short-term, renewable lease between the organizations.



Washington Group Home


Funding• Property related funding: PMHA receives rent from the

non-profit based on a calculation assuming 8 residents with an SSI-only income, similar to what it received as a DD group home. PMHA also receives operating subsidy from HUD.

• Program funding: The county Mental Health board provides for staffing and recovery program activities. A citizens group led by a mother whose son died from an overdose holds fundraising events on behalf of the program.


Early Results• Since June 2013, 29 admissions.• Expected population: Range of ages with addictions

to a variety of substances, including alcohol, prescription drugs, various illegal drugs

• Actual population: Primarily younger men, with almost exclusively a primary addiction to heroin.– Neighboring Cuyahoga County has seen heroin deaths

increase 400% since 2007 and deaths from heroin now outnumber homicides and automobile accidents


Early Results• Nine of the 29 admissions have graduated from the

program as “successful”• Twelve participants left the program as

“unsuccessful,” for reasons ranging from violating house rules and voluntary premature departure to termination for smuggling in banned substances.

• Grads are returning to volunteer with program activities

• No neighborhood complaints from nearby condos, child day care, or churches.


Other Homelessness Activities

• Homeless Shelter—Public Housing– Freedom House for homeless veterans

• Transitional Housing– Renaissance Place: 2-year term limited Public Housing– Voucher-based Transitional Housing


Lessons Learned• Having PMHA involved in the homelessness programs in the

county provides:– Needed Services– Credibility with non-profits, poverty advocates– Improved efficiency and effectiveness of the Continuum of Care– Improved knowledge of housing needs

Program Based Rent Assistance

What is Program Based Assistance?

Flexible MTW funds that serve targeted populations in partnership

with one or more local service providers

• Partner agencies identify participating families and determine amount and duration of assistance

• Partner agencies provide services• Funds are contracted to partners or administered by

Home Forward on behalf of partners

Target Populations

Program Based Assistance targets families for whom:1) success on the Housing Choice Voucher program would

be unlikely (ineligible or unlikely to find and retain housing on their own)

2) the delay in accessing rent assistance due to the Section 8 waitlist would most likely have devastating results (recidivism, relapse, death, homelessness, etc); or

3) the need for rental subsidy is short term while the client is receiving the support needed to achieve self-sufficiency or other permanent housing.

Program Model

Basic common guidelines across all contracted programs, with customization by partnering agency• Selection• Eligibility• Habitability Inspections• Subsidy Determination

• Use of Funds• Service Requirements• Outcomes

MTW Goals

Program Based Assistance meets MTW goals by:1) Achieving greater cost-effectiveness by reducing

administrative burden of administering rent assistance 2) Supporting families with children where the head of

household is engaged in a program to help the family become economically self-sufficient

3) Increasing housing choice for low-income families via a non-traditional model which supports families who might otherwise not be eligible for Public Housing or Section 8

4) Increasing the number of households a PHA can serve via a local non-traditional model that may cost less per family than a traditional Section 8 voucher

Examples of Program Based Assistance Partnerships

Short Term Rent Assistance (STRA)

Local jurisdictions, through a community process, developed a model for a comprehensive system of administering, accessing, and delivering short-term housing assistance.• Jointly funded by Multnomah County, Cities of Portland

and Gresham, and Home Forward• System administered by Home Forward• Assistance delivered by 19 contracted agencies that

provide services to families• Serves households that are homeless or at-risk of

homelessness• Outcome goal: long term housing stability, measured by

housing retention after end of assistance

Benefits of a Shared System

Prior to creation of STRA• Staffing at all four jurisdictions• Different eligibility requirements and funded activities• Varied data collection and reporting requirements• Different outcome measures

Strengths of the unified system• Focus on shared outcomes• Improved system support and accountability• Increased flexibility for providers• Administrative efficiency for funders and ease for

providers• Ability to use STRA infrastructure to deploy new

resources for housing assistance rapidly

Funding

Funds Administered through STRA System Infrastructure 2012-13

Total $4.67 million

Multnomah County $945,000

City of Portland $1.73 million

Home Forward MTW Funds $1.98 million

City of GreshamAlso Contributes HOME funds via City of Portland, as those funds come into the region via a consortium

$7,000

• General Funds• Emergency Housing Account• Emergency Solutions Grant

• Housing Stabilization Program (TANF Block Grant)

• State Low Income Rental Housing Fund

• General Funds• Emergency Solutions Grant

• HOME TBRA Funds

• Flexible MTW Funds• Payment in Lieu of Taxes

(PILOT)

• Emergency Food & Shelter Program funds (via Department of Homeland Security)

Outputs

People and Households ServedYear People Households

2008-09 Fiscal Year 3,911 1,7152009-10 Fiscal Year 5,605 2,2992010-11 Fiscal Year 5,728 2,3652011-12 Fiscal Year 5,787 2,4162012-13 Fiscal Year 6,663 2,655

Average Assistance Provided

Average assistance for households receiving eviction prevention or homeless placement assistance

$1,530

Average length of rent assistance provided 3 months

Housing Retention

Short Term Rent Assistance Program Post-Assistance Housing Retention Outcomes

Permanent Placement Eviction Prevention3

months

6 month

s

12 month

s

3 month

s

6 month

s

12 months

2012-13 90% 86% 74% 87% 86% 77%

Action for Prosperity

Partnership between Home Forward, Workforce Investment Board, County network of non-profits, and Department of Human Services• County’s network of non-profits provide intensive,

employment-focused case management• Workforce Investment Board provides set-aside of

training and employment resources• DHS provides some coordinated case-planning for TANF

families, including access to childcare• Home Forward provides rent assistance (contracted to

non-profits)

Programs for Former Foster Youth

Extensions for FUP Vouchers• For youth with expiring FUP vouchers • Case managers at DHS or partnering agency can

recommend youth for one year of rent assistance• Can be renewed for up to three years

New Doors• Oxford House-style housing for homeless former foster

youth who are working or in school• Rent assistance contracted to service provider• Local community college can refer in and also offers

scholarships to interested residents

Alder School

Alder Elementary School is the first school to be adopted by I Have a Dream Foundation

• Many providers offering services on site, but mobility was high

• Rent assistance to families at risk of moving out of catchment area

• Case management offered by local non-profit who can connect families to employment programs

Lessons Learned

• Short term assistance isn’t for everyone, but can work for many if paired with case management

• This model allows PHAs to serve more individual families over the long-term

• Housing stability vs. housing affordability • Offering partners a toolbox of flexible funds (such as

PILOT dollars) helps them tailor assistance to clients’ needs

• Contracting funds requires significant streamlining of paperwork/rules

• Balancing front-end verification by PHA with program auditing

• Partnerships like this can create strong relationships that can be built upon and leveraged

For additional information, contact:

Rachel DevlinStrategic Initiatives Program Director(503) [email protected]


Housing Authority of the County of San MateoHousing Readiness Program (HRP)

MTW Conference, February 4-5, 2014

Developed in response to the needs of the homeless in San Mateo County (SMC)

Originally designed in partnership with the SMC Center on Homelessness and other homeless service providers

Strategically positioned to be a part of the SMC HOPE Plan, the Counties 10-year plan to end homelessness

Housing Readiness Program (HRP)

HRP responds to the MTW goal of increased self-sufficiency by providing housing assistance in concert with supportive services

HRP increases the housing choice for individuals and families who would otherwise have little ability to receive housing assistance and for whom stable housing is often far out of reach

HRP leverages supportive services that ultimately result in overall cost savings for the community

HRP and the MTW Goals

Follows the “Housing First” strategy

HACSM allocates up to 100 vouchers

Establishes contracts with homeless services providers◦ Direct referrals to a

committee for review◦ Case management required

HRP – Program Design

HRP is voucher based Referrals follow all eligibility and

MTW program rules HRP has a three-year voucher

term Housing subsidy is based on

family income and HACSM rent reform program – the Tiered Subsidy Table

Case management services are provided by the referral agency

HRP – Program Design

HRP – Success Story

Delaware PacificNew Construction Housing

To date, HACSM has assisted 111 families, consisting of 186 family members

29 individuals were elderly and/or disabled

75 individuals were under 21 years of age

HRP – The Results

Over 50% of the current families have increased their income while on the program

On average in CY13, HRP families have increased their savings by over $1,700

On average, program participants have maintained stable housing for 669 days (or approx. two years)

HRP – The Results

To date, 52 families have exited the program

16 hardship extensions have been granted

No informal hearings have been requested

No terminations have been processed due to non-compliance with case management

HRP – The Results

Establish and maintain clear roles and responsibilities between the Housing Authority and the contract partners

Intensive case management non-negotiable, as it is vital to the success of the families

Clear and easy to use reporting system for partners

Exit plan for each participant at program entry

HRP – Lessons Learned

Variety of supportive services Short Term, Transitional, and Permanent

Housing – ensuring that partner organizations have the same definitions and are focused in the same direction

Strong Continuum of Care



The Pros The Cons

Ability to meet housing need in a timely manner

Leverage support and services across agencies

Motivated families Ability to reach more

families in need

Partners who are not able to provide long-term case management services

Conflicting priorities, at times, across agencies

Greater needs than assistance available

Time-limited vouchers to stabilize housing

Avenues for increased self-sufficiency

Freedom from the need for long- term government assistance

Strong and Engaged Community

The Housing Readiness Program

For additional information, contact:

Jennifer Rainwater, Planning and Program Innovation Manager(650) [email protected]

Cindy Chan, Rental Program Manager(650) [email protected]

Documents

MTW Conference February 4-5, 2014