1. Presentation to the CCEH Annual Training Institute 5/8/14
Building a Sustainable Coordinated Access System Through the Use of Best Practices and Critical Data Elements
Presentation to the CCEH
Annual Training Institute
5/8/14

2. Coordinated Access
Design a coordinated system of triage, assessment, and entry that effectively moves people out of homelessness quickly by providing increased access to appropriate housing interventions.

3. Connecticut Coordinated Access Network (CAN) Template
Client /Family in
Housing crisis
1. First effort: shelter diversion
Shelter Diversion
Client
CAN
Shelter
Client calls
2-1-1
2-1-1
If client needs not met with non-housing resources, complete basic screen and refer
client for
CAN intake
HOT Team
2. If diversion not possible, complete assessment (VI-SPDAT or similar ) and refer to shelter TH
RRH
3. If shelter is needed, but not available, refer to HOT team
Diversion to non-housing resources
4. Shelter/HOT team refers client to appropriate housing resource
DV Services
If DV case, refer to DV provider
PSH

4. “One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results”
Milton Friedman

5. During This Workshop We Will:
Discuss principles of evaluation research to document coordinated access activities and outcomes
Learn how to utilize data to inform systems change
Examine preliminary process and outcome data from coordinated access efforts in CT
Introduce tools used to evaluate effectiveness of coordinated access systems
Take a preliminary look at what our new HMIS can do to help us track and evaluate our coordinated access efforts

6. 4 Types of Program Evaluation
Process Evaluation- assesses whether a program or system is operating as it was intended to
Outcome Evaluation- assesses whether a program is achieving the goals it intended to
Impact Evaluation- assesses program outcomes against what would have happened if the program was not in place (ex.- randomized control trial)
Cost-benefit analysis- identifies all relevant program costs and benefits (in financial terms) to determine whether the program is cost effective

7. Evaluation Cycle Identify research questions
Choose performance indicators and choose critical data elements
Collect valid and reliable data
Analyze data
Communicate findings to stakeholders

8. Planning the Evaluation
Who Should Be Involved?
Housing providers (leaders and front line staff)
HMIS lead
CCEH
211
Health care providers
Behavioral health care providers
Representatives from the school system
Consumers
Others?
Other Considerations:
Who should manage and oversee the evaluation process?
How can we get program buy-in?
Who is responsible for analyzing and reporting out on the data?
How are results funneled back to the system?

9. Identifying Our Research Questions for Coordinated Access
What does a successful coordinated access system look like?
How many people will access the system
How many will be diverted from shelter
Number referred for shelter
Number enrolled in shelter
Number who access system multiple times in a specified timeframe
How will clients benefit?
Shorter period of time to shelter entry
Rates of homelessness declining
Shorter periods of time homeless
Less chronic homelessness
Percentage diverted who come back into the system
How will agencies benefit (efficiency, collaboration)
How does coordinated access impact staff time spent on answering phones, intakes, etc.
How well are agencies collaborating
[ASK FOR PARTICIPANT FEEDBACK ON RESEARCH QUESTIONS BEFORE DISCUSSING ITEMS BELOW]
Results Based Accountability- research questions should address the following domains: How much, How well, Is anyone better off

10. Choosing performance indicators and critical data elements
How do we operationalize our research questions?
Clear and consistent definitions (ex. what is an episode of homelessness, categories for exit destination, chronic homelessness)
Assess what data we already collect through HMIS
HEARTH indicators
Shelter length of stay
New entries into homelessness
Repeat episodes of homelessness
Job and income growth
VI-SPDAT or other universal assessment tool

11. Choosing performance indicators and critical data elements
What additional data should we collect?
How do we gather enough data to show meaningful outcomes, but not so much as to waste client and staff time?
What data are realistic to collect given our timeframe and resources?
Consumer surveys
Can qualitative data be collected and analyzed?
Interviews, focus groups, observations
This process can be very labor and cost intensive
How will data collection be coordinated?

12. Collecting valid and reliable data
Data quality
Train, train, train
Ongoing monitoring
What if what we’re looking to collect is not in HMIS
Use of common database/ forms
HMIS

13. ECM Reporting - SUR

14. ECM Reporting Other ECM reports: Data Quality Data Timeliness APR
CAPER
PATH
SSVF
HOPWA
Services by Program
Clients Served

15. Reporting - VITALS
VITALS (Valuable Information to Assess Local Systems)
Vision: Dashboard-style report
Relevant HEARTH measures
Web-based reporting portal
Aggregated information for programs and communities
Dynamic, drill-down capability
Level of Analysis
Program
Community (CoC / Sub CoC)
State
Currently under development

16. Analyze data Are there any comparison data available
Same system before coordinated access was implemented (PIT count)
Different, but similar community
What timelines are data pulled for?
Keep in mind that some outcomes are short term and some are long term
For process and outcome measures, break out results by subgroups to identify any trends
Gender
Race
geographical area
Age
household type (single vs. family)
Chronic homeless

17. Communicate findings to stakeholders
Communication should be ongoing and involve staff at all levels of the program or system
Preliminary findings should be discussed along the way and not just at the end (this allows for changes to be made if things are not going in the desired direction)
All findings should be discussed- both positive and negative, intended and unintended
Limitations of the data must be discussed so that everyone is clear on what the data do and do not tell us
Create a system by which program changes can or will be made based on evaluation results
Discussion on which results are presented to the community at large

18. What Have Data on Coordinated Access Efforts in CT Shown Us So Far?

19. New London Coordinated Access: Families
Coordinated Access system has been in place for about 2.5 years
211 is the primary point of contact
Process Data
In 2013, 948 calls to 211
54% were diverted from shelter
46% were scheduled for appointments for shelter
About a 30% no show rate
163 were diverted at the time of shelter intake
Outcome Data
50% Reduction in family shelter units/beds since 2011
In 2013, 44 families were rapidly rehoused
Average length of time in the shelter was 45.5 days

20. New London Coordinated Access: Singles
System for single adults started November 2013 with 211 as the first, centralized contact
Process Measures
An average of 20 new intakes each week
Rate of diversion of 16% in New London and 46% in Norwich
Of the 743 calls that came in between 7/1/13-4/30/14: 66% enrolled in shelter, 16% diverted, 12% wait listed, 4%v admitted to Covenant, and 1% no need for shelter.
Shelter length of stay: 60% stayed 30 days or less
Preliminary Outcome Data
47% of shelter exits were positive (permanent housing, treatment, or other stable housing situation)

21. Bridgeport Preliminary Data
This provides an example of the way data can be used to track population need over a period of several years.

22. Questions?

23. Additional Resources
What Gets Measured, Gets Done: A Toolkit on Performance Measurement for Ending Homelessness- ABT Associates
Coordinated Assessment Toolkit: Evaluation- National Alliance to End Homelessness

24. Presenter Contact Information
Meredith Damboise
Director of Quality Assurance, New Haven Home Recovery
Kelley Traister
Quality Assurance and Compliance Specialist, New Haven Home Recovery
Brian Roccapriore
Director of HMIS and Strategic Analysis, Connecticut Coalition to End Homelessness