Using Data to Rightsize Your System NAEH February 2017 Session 2.02 2:15 – 3:45 Suzanne Wagner swagner@housinginnovations.us

Why Rightsize? To end homelessness Continue evolution from “collection of programs” to a system Projects developed out of need Update based on data Serve all homeless populations New research, new practices System changes affect need Maximize households served per dollar Aligned to Opening doors a)review all existing projects using CoC-approved scoring criteria and selection priorities, to determine the extent to which each project is still necessary and addresses the HUD policy priorities above. Funds for projects that are determined to be underperforming, obsolete, or ineffective should be reallocated to new projects that are based on proven or promising models; Seek and provide info to stakeholders re mx resources, esp Afford Care Act, Coord with state and local employ, mh, SA agencies to ensure best practices and appropriate oversight c) PHAs, philanthropy, etc d) TH effective for specific subpopulations–such as homeless youth, domestic violence survivors, and the homeless with substance abuse issues. Research shows that transitional housing is generally more expensive than other housing models serving similar populations, it is often more service-intensive than most homeless households need, and that the criteria for entry into many transitional housing programs are rigorous (underutil and not serving HH with most intense needs); review the transitional housing models within the geographic area for costeffectiveness, performance, and elig criteria and determine if rapid re-housing may be a better model

How to Rightsize Identify the specific needs of those experiencing homelessness within the community. Define what and how much of each intervention is necessary to meet those needs. Determine how resources can be allocated to meet those needs. Set system performance targets and analyze performance data regularly. Adjust as necessary to reach the goal of preventing and ending homelessness. Aligned to Opening doors a)review all existing projects using CoC-approved scoring criteria and selection priorities, to determine the extent to which each project is still necessary and addresses the HUD policy priorities above. Funds for projects that are determined to be underperforming, obsolete, or ineffective should be reallocated to new projects that are based on proven or promising models; Seek and provide info to stakeholders re mx resources, esp Afford Care Act, Coord with state and local employ, mh, SA agencies to ensure best practices and appropriate oversight c) PHAs, philanthropy, etc d) TH effective for specific subpopulations–such as homeless youth, domestic violence survivors, and the homeless with substance abuse issues. Research shows that transitional housing is generally more expensive than other housing models serving similar populations, it is often more service-intensive than most homeless households need, and that the criteria for entry into many transitional housing programs are rigorous (underutil and not serving HH with most intense needs); review the transitional housing models within the geographic area for costeffectiveness, performance, and elig criteria and determine if rapid re-housing may be a better model

Example: Compare Inventory to Need

Example: Inventory Gaps Analysis # of Homeless families in a year % Needing RRH % Needing PSH % Self- Resolving 1000 40% = 400 Units 15% = 150 Units 45% Inventory 60 Units Turnover @ 20% = 69  N/A Gap 400-60 = 340 150 – 69 = 81

Evaluating Cost Per Permanent Housing Exit Total Project Budget including Match Number of Exits to PH in last year % of Exits to PH Cost Per PH Exit $296,680 11 79% $ 26,971 $250,031 23 77% $ 10,871 $111,599 24 89% $ 4,650 $64,495 15 100% $ 4,300 $244,979 45 94% $ 5,444 $262,509 14 93% $ 18,751 $318,749 19 50% $ 16,776 $355,360 50 65% $ 7,107

Presenters: Dawn Gilman, Jacksonville, Florida Mandy Chapman Semple, Houston, Texas