June 14, 2007
Mayor Hack and City Commissioners,
Thank you for the opportunity to serve our community by working to implement the recommendations in the City’s Task Force on Homeless Services Report.
We begin this report by acknowledging that progress on solving this complex issue is happening. We have many in this community who have worked with us to develop a proactive plan for implementation and want to publicly thank the city staff for their guidance and commitment to our task.
The Mayor’s Task Force on Homeless Services report was published in June, 2005. Our Commission, brought together with the goal of implementing that plan, convened in October, 2005. Since that time the community has made progress on several action items detailed in the plan.
These accomplishments are progress to be celebrated, and are all part of the recommendations in the original task force report adopted by the City Commission in 2005.
OUR HOMELESS POPULATION
A point-in-time count completed January 29th, 2007 identified 373 homeless adults and children in Lawrence. Of that number, 192 are individuals in homeless families with children. Lawrence Public Schools’ demographics report at least one homeless child in the past 12 months in every school in the district. We have attached the count data for your review.
The recommendations in this presentation have been developed with the point-in-time count as the baseline to develop solutions and measuring progress over the next few years. We believe this gives us a true picture of the homeless needs in the community and not just the needs of the visibly homeless.
Our commission is united in presenting the vision of the housing options we will pursue to adequately house our citizens who find themselves homeless. It is a big and challenging picture, but we believe that it is an innovative plan for our community and that the public/private partnership we envision can become reality in a city known for caring for others in need.
Fundamental to its success is that we all work together. We cannot rely solely on City Commissioners and city funding; nor can we rely on private funding alone. The housing options we envision for our community will become reality with enormous community and city support. To provide successful solutions for the homeless population we will need the creative goodwill, hard work and resources of our entire community.
The Housing Solutions needed to house the homeless population in our point-in-time count can best be addressed in creating a variety of housing options for the various homeless individuals and families. We do not believe that the concept of a “big box” shelter will meet the needs of this population; nor is it a concept that Lawrence desires. Much of the frustration and failure of existing emergency shelter providers has been due to the lack of available housing options other than emergency shelter. We are recommending housing solutions that include the following:
ü Emergency shelter
ü Multiple site temporary housing
ü Transitional housing
ü Permanent supportive housing
ü Permanent housing
Each of these housing solutions allows for progress and growth toward increased stability and independence. We believe that providing permanent, safe and decent housing alternatives will aid in the goal of helping the homeless population progress to independence and alleviate some of the challenges they currently face.
There’s a saying, “The people perish for lack of a vision.” Part of instilling a hope-filled vision in the homeless community is making possible and plausible the opportunity to become housed.
We know that implementing and expanding these housing solutions to meet existing needs is a vision that will take several years to achieve. We also know that the housing solutions we are recommending will require diligence, commitment, and the public will to provide the housing needed for our vision.
It is our hope that by identifying the need, new housing providers will step forward. We also anticipate that in some cases, existing providers may well position themselves to fill the needs identified.
EMERGENCY SHELTER
We need one safe adequate shelter for 50 individuals. This shelter is to provide as brief a stay as possible in a progression to better, more stable and longer term options. The progression to longer term alternative housing is best for individuals and families. Studies show that the briefer the shelter stay, the better the chances of obtaining and maintaining permanent housing.
The policies and mission of this facility should reflect a strong commitment to moving individuals toward more permanent and stable housing and their highest possible level of self sufficiency and responsibility. This is difficult work and integral to the success of this option is that our community grants the trust and authority to the shelter in making appropriate decisions regarding individuals. Included in our report are the minimal expectations of what the facility and programmatic components of this shelter must offer.
Although additional city funding is needed for Emergency Shelter bricks and mortar, equally essential is that our city and its Commissioners become actively involved in identifying and acquiring the property suitable for this use.
This facility will not replace more specialized existing providers such as WTCS, housing female victims of domestic abuse. It will not be a big-box, one-size-fits-all, takes-all-comers facility. Our hope, instead, is that this emergency shelter will serve a population of fewer than 50 people. We do believe a site with a capacity for as many as 75 would be a wise choice. This is because our community, as others, can find themselves in a crisis situation that requires the ability to respond to an increase in short term emergency housing.
TEMPORARY HOUSING
Multiple Site Temporary Housing for 100 individuals will provide a concurrent alternative to emergency shelter and will allow individuals and families to obtain immediate housing while waiting for more permanent arrangements.
This is a bold idea predicated on the belief that this community has the resources and goodwill to provide for its own. We know that public money is insufficient to close the housing gap in our community and that we must have the help of the private sector. The help will most likely take many different forms and will fit the needs of individuals.
Some of those in need of housing simply need help meeting housing expenses for a limited amount of time. To that end, individuals or organizations could simply pledge to provide a rental subsidy of an agreed amount for a pre-determined period of time.
Others need intensive case management and can benefit from mentoring relationships with trained volunteers, close supervision by case workers, classes in budgeting, or job procurement and an apartment paid for entirely or in part by donations from community members.
Our hope is that the current vacancy rate in rental housing in the community can become part of the solution as landlords, church members, social service providers, and civic organizations and all creative Good Samaritans step forward and partner with the city to house 100 individuals, many of them being children. Existing units, even space in private homes, will be used to meet the bulk of this need.
Our Commission plans to begin outreach efforts to potential partners in this effort to determine exactly what kinds of incentives and collaborative help would make these partnerships desirable and successful.
Identifying an agency to coordinate this effort, receive funds, pay landlords, provide maintenance of units, and work with the community and the city to establish an “insurance fund” to cover repair and general maintenance in donated units, will give this innovative option appeal for those who might be reluctant to participate in this housing option otherwise.
Developing social contracts between families, community members and helping agencies to address barriers and ensure success will be an essential component of this option. Partnerships can be as varied as the groups providing the resources desired; and might reasonably require training in goal setting, budgeting, life skills, job counseling, substance abuse classes, education, etc. Nationwide such public/private partnerships providing housing along with supportive services are proving successful.
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
Transitional Housing goals for the community are for 35 new units. These additional units could be made available as vouchers provided to the Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) program administered by the Lawrence/Douglas County Housing Authority. However, a major gap in this housing option is housing for those precluded from LDCHA due to methamphetamine convictions, sex offender status or other recent drug convictions. Again, our community’s ability to find housing for these individuals is dependent on private sector participation.
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
Permanent Supportive Housing goals are for 22 new units. Provision of long-term supportive housing for individuals with mental illness, addictions and disabilities is desperately needed and essential to the success of the other housing options described in this report. The current dearth of options for those with severe and persistent mental illness has an enormous impact on many of the chronically homeless individuals in our community. This often leaves desperately troubled individuals no option but arrest, emergency rooms, public parks and streets and existing shelters. This mode of care leaves individuals reeling from crisis to crisis and back to the streets and does nothing to foster lasting stability.
The current shortage of supportive housing options places an enormous financial burden on local emergency services. Creative private sector partnerships, with the assistance of existing providers give us the best answer to this challenge.
An example of one creative partnership in the formative stages is The Home-Makers project, currently being promoted by Steve Ozark and members of the Lawrence Interfaith Initiative. A Home-Maker facility would rely on church funding to provide housing for 4-5 people with live-in supervision provided by a KU social welfare student in exchange for room and board. Faith group volunteer involvement will be encouraged and case management would be provided by Bert Nash. Similarly run projects are having success in Kansas City and other communities.
PERMANENT HOUSING
Permanent Housing completes the housing options described in our continuum. Affordable housing projects are still in short supply in Lawrence. Developing this option is the work of the community and may best be addressed by the Housing Needs Task Force. This option also requires the city and its citizens to work with us in envisioning the solutions that will address this housing need.
WHAT’S NEXT
As in any successful public/private partnership it will take 100% support of our mayors and city commissioners to really make progress in ending homelessness in our community.
We have provided you with a recent article from the spring edition of NeighborWorks, regarding initiatives that we are proposing for our community.
In every housing solution there must be an outcomes based component. All social service agencies will need to collaborate and creatively address this housing vision and we will need the entire city commission behind this effort.
The Community Commission on Homelessness and the Community Cooperation Committee is committed to the outreach work.
We need for you to support our work at every opportunity and to trust that this commission will work towards achieving the housing vision set out in the letter.
We look forward to working with you in the years ahead and believe with your help and the help of the community we will be taking the practical steps to meet the needs of the homeless population in Lawrence and Douglas County.
Respectfully submitted,
Shirley Martin-Smith, Chair
On behalf of the Community Commission on Homelessness
|
Emergency Housing Options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Shelter
*75 (one facility) |
|
Temporary Housing
*100 new |
|
Transitional Housing (TBRA) *35 new |
|
Permanent Supportive Housing *22 new |
|
Permanent Housing |
|
Transients (10 – outreach worker estimate) – may or may not seek shelter. Chronically homeless (32 – PIT count) - may or may not seek shelter, may or may not be interested in permanent ETH, TH or PSH. |
|
Single Homeless and Families without Children (70 PIT count) – likely will seek shelter; 35% will move into TH; some will need PSH and others will need private housing. Homeless Families with Children (45) – likely will seek shelter; many will move into TH; some will need private housing. |
|
Single Homeless, Families Without Children and Families with Children (35 HA estimate) – likely will qualify for TH immediately if vouchers are made available. |
|
Single Homeless, Disabled and/or Chronic (22 estimate) - assuming not ALL disabled will need PSH and not all chronically homeless will pursue PSH. |
|
|
HOUSING SOLUTIONS CHART (06/14/2007)
* Number of units needed to meet immediate housing needs, based on 2007 Point-in-Time (PIT) Count numbers and service provider estimates.
Emergency Shelter: A short-term facility (90-120 days) used to get people off the street in order to stabilize for movement to better housing options. This option does not include or account for shelters that serve special populations (WTCS, First Step House, etc.).
Emergency Temporary Housing: A parallel alternative to the shelter, where people can obtain immediate housing while awaiting a spot in TH or other longer-term housing, working to address housing barriers.
Transitional Housing: Assisted housing with support services, available for up to two years. Major gap is for people who are precluded from LDCHA due to methamphetamine conviction, sex offender status or other recent drug convictions.
Permanent Supportive Housing: Permanent housing with ongoing support services.
Permanent Housing: Assisted or non-assisted public or private housing with no time limit.
Emergency Shelter Summary (06/14/2007)
Participants: Jeannette Collier, Hubbard Collinsworth, Wes Dalberg, Katherine Dinsdale, Helen Hartnett, Phil Hemphill, Loring Henderson, Charlotte Knoche, Rick Marquez, Shirley Martin-Smith, Robert Mosely, Lesley Rigney, Margene Swarts
I. Emergency Shelter: A short-term (90-120 days) facility designed to assist people to move off the street in order to stabilize for movement to better housing options. This shelter will focus intentionally on helping people move to their highest level of self-sufficiency.
II. Target Population: Homeless Adults
III. Essential Components
a) Physical
i. Open 24/7
ii. Beds
iii. Storage
iv. Kitchen/Laundry/Showers
v. Offices – private
vi. Offices – services
vii. Separate spaces for women and men
viii. Accommodate up to 75 with possible overflow/flex space for families and people who are inebriated or ill
b) Programmatic
i. In-house case management to provide intake, assessment, information and referral to any needed services, advocacy
ii. Access to transportation – public or private
iii. Access to three meals a day
iv. HMIS
v. Phone/Mail/Message service
IV. Assessment
a) Desired Outcome: Decrease number of families and individuals living on the streets.
(Next Point-in-Time Count)
b) Measures
i. # of people living on the street
ii. # who move on from shelter and where they go
iii. Average length of stay; barriers to moving on
Emergency Temporary Housing Summary (06/14/2007)
Participants: Vivian Baars, Jeannette Collier, Hubbard Collinsworth, Wes Dalberg, Katherine Dinsdale, Helen Hartnett, Phil Hemphill, Loring Henderson, Charlotte Knoche, Rick Marquez, Shirley Martin-Smith, Robert Mosely, Lesley Rigney, Margene Swarts
I. Emergency Temporary Housing: 75-100 public and private housing units for individuals and families waiting for housing or working to address housing barriers. Two programs: sponsorship program and agency-run program.
II. Sponsorship Program
a) Target Population: Homeless families and individuals waiting for subsidized housing (assumption: many barriers will have already been addressed).
b) Physical Components: 50 scattered site units funded or provided by churches, individuals, or other private or serviced-based entities.
c) Programmatic Components: Professional case management to provide intake, assessment, information and referral to any needed services, as well as advocacy if needed. Volunteer mentors from sponsoring organizations and/or individuals. Lead agency to manage program and train volunteers.
III. Single Sites Program:
a) Target Population: Homeless individuals and families waiting for housing and working to address housing barriers.
b) Physical Components: At least three sites with a combined 50 units, agency-run facilities with private rooms and shared or private living space.
c) Programmatic Components: In-house case management to provide intake, assessment, information and referral to any needed services, as well as advocacy when needed. Access to transportation and meals and phone/mail/message service.
IV. Assessment:
a) Desired Outcome: Decrease number of families and individuals living in shelters and on the streets. (Next Point-in-Time Count)
b) Benchmarks: 50 units during year 1; 50 units during year 2; maintain and strengthen partnerships during year 3.
c) Measures:
iv. # families on the street, in shelters, and doubled up with other families
v. # individuals on the street and in shelters
vi. # people who moved on and where they went
List of Terms/Concepts for Shelter Discussion
Beds- Places for sleeping that include a mattress and frame lifted from the floor.
Housing First Model- Approach to helping people secure and maintain housing that gives people a permanent place to live while providing social services in a graduated manner, depending upon the needs/barriers faced by the individual or family.
Rehabilitative Model- Approach to helping people deal with the barriers faced. Implies a service intense model designed to help people reach their fullest potential.
Emergency Shelter- short term typically less than 90 days.
Homeless Shelter- same as above
Transitional Housing- longer term, typically houses/apartments stay is up to 2 years
Permanent Housing- housing with no time limits.
Permanent Supportive Housing- programs that are designed for people in need of long term support to maintain a permanent residence.
Detox Center- a facility which can medically and through social services help someone deal with the first stages of recovery (getting the drugs/alcohol out of the system) before moving to other centers or programs.
Case management- an approach to assist people in creating and achieving their own determined goals. Includes relationship building, resource knowledge and “hunting”, information and referral to resources, monitoring the outcomes of resource access and progress, and in some cases advocacy for new/expanded/accessible resources. If a person needs ‘clinical’ intervention, this is a part of the referral process. Most case managers know and listen to people’s stories but the focus is on getting them connected to resources in the community.
Strengths based- an approach which considers all people as having personal and community strengths. It requires a shift in considering deficits and problems, but rather helps people realize their own power and capacities as a tool in overcoming any obstacle/barrier.
HMIS- Homeless management information system. a computerized tracking system (several programs/options), requested by HUD to maintain data on numbers of people and service use. It is typically implemented through a community wide intake form, requiring a release of information form, data is reported in aggregate form.
Open shelter- typically used to imply that people in whatever state (drinking), or with whatever history (arrests/felonies) are allowed to stay.
Drop-In Center- typically a day space where people can come to receive basic need services (laundry, food, phone, information), also provides people with a place to be in bad weather, or a place to socialize. Often common in cities where shelters are not open during the day for people.
|
SUMMARY COUNT |
|
|
|
Total Homeless (Adults and Children) |
|
373 |
|
Total Chronically Homeless |
|
32 |
|
Total Adults Homeless |
|
262 |
|
Total Homeless Families With Children |
|
79 |
|
Total Number of People in homeless families with children |
|
192 |
|
|
|
|
|
QUESTIONS |
|
COUNT |
|
What is your living situation? |
|
|
|
Staying in my own home or apartment |
|
0 |
|
Staying with family or friends |
|
23 |
|
Homeless - Staying on the street, etc. |
|
28 |
|
Homeless - Staying in an emergency shelter |
|
151 |
|
Homeless - Staying in transitional housing |
|
55 |
|
Are you homeless with a spouse or partner? |
Y |
25 |
|
Total number of children in the family |
|
151 |
|
Total number of children homeless with you |
|
111 |
|
Are you a U.S. Veteran? |
Y |
15 |
|
Have you ever been a victim of domestic violence? |
Y |
38 |
|
Have you ever been told that you have a disability? |
Y |
85 |
|
If yes, was it related to…? |
|
|
|
Physical/medical |
|
24 |
|
HIV/AIDS |
|
1 |
|
Developmental |
|
1 |
|
Mental health |
|
66 |
|
Substance abuse |
|
32 |
|
Other |
|
4 |
|
How long have you been homeless? |
|
|
|
Less than 1 month |
|
5 |
|
1-6 months |
|
56 |
|
6-12 months |
|
16 |
|
1-3 years |
|
36 |
|
3+ years |
|
18 |
|
Is this the first time you have been homeless? |
Y |
59 |
|
If no, how many times in the last three years? |
|
|
|
2-3 times |
|
39 |
|
4 or more times |
|
15 |