Aligning housing resources through system modeling, strategic investment planning, and improving access, can lead to transforming the work to end homelessness
Throughout the community engagement process, stakeholders including system leaders, people with lived experience and those at the front lines of homelessness identified 1) the lack of necessary housing resources across the entire region, 2) the inequitable supply of existing resources across the counties within the region, and 3) the structural issues to accessing the resources available, particularly as people are moving across county boundaries while experiencing homelessness. With the significant new financial investment in housing and homelessness in recent federal and state legislative packages, we are in a critical moment to begin addressing all three of these identified issues and transform the way in which the region approaches homelessness.
Proposed Action 2 outlines more immediate and medium term strategies that can begin aligning those resources in a way that can address the above issues, begin building the housing justice agenda in the region, and flex the regional decision-making muscle of the regional kitchen table discussed in Action 1; that muscle will be critical to create and implement the long-term regional vision for housing justice. Proposed Action 2 can help to build the short/medium term housing goals for the region while the regional kitchen table moves to creating longer term, more comprehensive housing goals over the next year.
Strategies for Proposed Action 2:
- Create a regional system model that can predict the levels and types of prevention, crisis response, and long term housing needed and the possible new and existing local, state, and federal funding sources that can be utilized & utilize it to set more immediate housing goals for the new regional kitchen table
- Performing regional strategic investment planning can bring in a diverse set of stakeholders from prevention to affordable housing and include people with lived experiences to make more equitable decisions on what to fund across the regional system model.
- Better align the 3 coordinated entry systems to ensure more aligned and streamlined access to CoC funds across the continuums and to ensure regional pathways to the prevention and affordable housing options being developed
Creating a regional system model will help predict the levels and types of prevention, crisis response, and long term housing needed and the possible new and existing local, state, and federal funding sources that can be utilized & utilize it to set more immediate housing goals for the new regional kitchen table.
In the fall of 2021, the regional kitchen table should begin creating a regional system model for housing justice that includes prevention, crisis housing, & affordable housing, starting with the new federal and state investments under the recovery bills. This system model can be utilized to set the more immediate housing goals for the regional kitchen table as the longer term, more comprehensive goals are set over the course of the next year.
System modeling, a community-driven planning process in which representatives across the homeless response system collaborate to determine the “right size” of program and services needed across the region based on local data and experiences of individuals. The process of system modeling accounts for the relationship between how people access resources, move across programs and the average length of time people are using different types of programs.
By centering the values set within the foundational work of Proposed Action 1, the process of system modeling offers an opportunity for the region to apply an equitable decision-making that directly impacts the type and scale of system resources that are needed to meet the needs of households across the region. It can offer a tangible step toward setting and enacting the larger housing justice goals being set at the regional kitchen table discussed in Proposed Action 1.
Steps to Creating a Regional System
Convene an equitable regional modeling workgroup directly connected to the regional kitchen table
The region should explicitly center equitable participation across the system modeling process. Specifically, system modeling should ensure participation from people with lived experience of the programs and services within the community that represent different population perspectives (e.g. youth, families, single adults, etc). In addition, the workgroup should include positional representation such as CoC leadership; local HMIS data analysts; housing service providers; local funders; county human service agency representatives, and state offices that support housing planning efforts. All workgroup participants should be representative of diverse identities including, but not limited to Black, Asian, Latinx, Pacific Islanders, and Indigenous people. In addition, include people who identify as LGBTQ; people living with disabilities; people with experience in the criminal system, people with lived experience of homeless. All participants should be compensated for their time and expertise throughout the process if not paid via representing an agency or other organization as an employee.
As part of this action step, the system modeling regional workgroup should create smaller groups to perform system modeling across the 3 CoC, using the same methods and tools, and accounting for the resources that are not confined to the boundaries of the CoC. The smaller groups should ensure there is cross-over among the stakeholder performing the system models within each CoC and then re-convene as a regional workgroup, inclusive of the 3 CoC to create a region-wide model.
Identify a modeling tool to use
Homeless system modeling has been performed across many communities – specifically the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program (YHDP) applied this practice as part of the coordinated community planning process as an effective tool to identify program needs and scale for new funds. Different HUD Technical Assistance (TA) firms (e.g. Abt Associates) have access to these tools and can provide technical support for the overall process.
Prepare system data necessary for modeling
While no system has perfect data, it is important to have an understanding of key data inputs to support your modeling process. The workgroup should collaborate with homeless system data leads to identify estimates of the following data:
- Who experiences homelessness in each CoC? Disaggregate this data based on race & ethnicity.
- What is the annual number of people accessing the system based on population type?
- What types of housing and services are currently available for these individuals and families, and what types of housing and services most effectively serve various populations?
- For each type of intervention (e.g., rapid re-housing, permanent supportive housing, etc.) how many beds or housing units does the CoC currently provide?
- How are those programs utilized?
- How well does the current distribution address the need, and how many beds or units are needed to effectively end homelessness?
Align the regional vision and set the values for the process rooted in equity
As the workgroup begins the modeling process, it is important to clearly articulate the vision and core values as a group to create explicit accountability to equity throughout the modeling process; these should be aligned with the values of the regional kitchen table.
Map out the system components & understand how programs are utilized
The workgroup will then need to map out the components that reflect the vision of the regional system and identify the component types that are part of the broader system vision. Examples of component types include, prevention, diversion/problem solving, crisis housing, rapid re-housing, permanent supportive housing, and other affordable housing. For existing components, the group will map out how each of these components are typically utilized (e.g. all people who stay in shelter also access an additional housing resource) and include descriptions of what each of the program components include.
Identify the “ideal” pathways & assumptions based off data
From this place, the workgroup can identify what the pathways should be set up as the region moves toward its vision of housing justice. The group should collectively set assumptions about the number and percentage of people that need each pathway to exit homelessness and the average length of assistance needed for each program type. Examples of pathways include, entering crisis housing and moving to rapid rehousing, or going directly from outreach with an unsheltered into a housing voucher.
Input the data in the modeling tool and review outcomes with the community stakeholders
After the steps have been completed, the workgroup will input data within the model tool and review results with the regional stakeholders. The group should reflect back the regional vision, program component types and scale of resources needed to achieve the housing justice agenda and make adjustments as needed to best authentically reflect the regional system needs.
Apply the model to strategic investment planning & commit to a continuous alignment process
On a quarterly basis, the workgroup should update the data within the modeling tool to adjust for any real-time insights or necessary changes to allocations to maximize its usefulness. As will be discussed in the coordinated investment planning process, this model should be used to inform key decisions on program type and scale across each of the 3 CoC and city and county human services departments administering homelessness funds within the region to inform funding priorities.
Performing regional strategic investment planning can bring in a diverse set of stakeholder from prevention to affordable housing and include people with lived experiences to make more equitable decisions on what to fund across the regional system model.
Building off the system modeling outlined above, it is critical to maximize the opportunity to strategically align new resources and utilize existing funds in new ways to strategically fill identified gaps across the housing justice agenda in the region. The process can help to identify ongoing strategies on how funding can and should be prioritized based on intentional strategy and equitable decision-making.
The regional kitchen table should launch the strategic investment planning in the Winter of 2021-22. Although some decisions on new federal and state funding may need to be established before the planning can occur, it can still offer a guide for the next round of investment and even open discussions for ways that initial investments can pivot over time to better align with the modeling and investment planning that is driven by the community. This process will be the first major step in shifting decision-making power to a broader group of regional stakeholders.
Steps to Aligning Resources Alongside the Regional System Model
Practice an equity-based decision-making process to make equitable funding decisions that center people with lived experiences and Black, Indigenous, Brown and LBGTQ communities
Consistent with the system modeling process, the workgroup’s coordinated investment planning requires intentional and authentic collaboration that centers communities most deeply impacted by inequity across the region. Funding decisions that directly impact communities that have experienced historical and current marginalization cannot be made without those whose lives are being impacted.
Consider using the HUD coordinated investment planning tool
While there may be other tools and methods for coordinating investments across the regional systems, the HUD Rehousing & Coordinated Investment Planning tool provides an adequate tool to coordinate funding across federal, state, county, CoC and private levels. This tool will utilize some of the inputs provided through system modeling, but provides more specificity on investments, timing considerations and how decisions are typically made regarding those funds.
Create estimates of program component costs per person
Based on input from providers who have operated different program types, the workgroup should identify how much typical staff, operations, housing, and administrative costs are per housing program model. As many programs are not yet paying equitable wages, round estimates upwards towards costs that would align with housing justice agenda values.
Create a resource inventory of all funding resources & decision-making
Next, the workgroup should create a chart with all sources of funding that supports programs across the region. Within the chart, include federal, state, local and philanthropic funding with amounts (actual or estimated); any population restrictions; allowable costs/activities; allowable project types (e.g. PSH, RRH, or non restricted); who is responsible for making the funding decision; any fund-specific priorities/dedication; and timeline for utilization of funds and/or renewal. This could be further built out over time to include an analysis of what decision-making is legislative and administrative in order to better create gaps and power analysis that can lead to more long term change in resources and decision-making.
Use the regional system model data to create a regional system funding strategy
Finally, the workgroup should come back to the larger the regional kitchen table to analyze existing system funds against the regional system vision. Reflection questions to work through across the table:
- What funding is not being utilized most impactfully?
- What new funds are available and where are they most needed based on our regional modeling process?
The regional kitchen table should use this information to create a regional system funding strategy with concrete actions steps for funders and accountability commitments. This process will require project coordination across different groups and should be invested in equitably. This project coordination should be the work of the larger regional kitchen table; this work should be seen as the more immediate steps in moving the regional vision and goals to be set and implemented by the regional kitchen table.
Better aligning the 3 coordinated entry systems will help to ensure more streamlined access to CoC funds across the continuums and help to ensure regional pathways to the prevention and affordable housing options being developed through modeling and investment planning.
The regional table should evaluate each coordinated entry system and chart a path for alignment in approach and implementation to improve access to the full set of housing justice resources being built out across the region. As more resources are coming online across CoC funding and other state and federal funds geared at addressing homelessness, it will be critical that the coordinated entry systems across the 3 CoCs are aligned and highly functioning to improve access. The 3 CoCs should focus on improving direct access to CoC funded projects through coordinated entry while also ensuring a clear set of pathways from coordinated entry to non-CoC funded projects, particularly the large new investments in Rent Help MN, and state, county, and city newly funded ESG, HOME, and HOPWA projects. As discussed above these new funding sources have the potential to build out prevention, crisis response, and affordable housing resources.
Coordinated entry will need to be able to respond to connecting people in crisis to a broader and deeper set of resources, even if those resources do not have formal entry through the coordinated entry system. This strategy is a medium term goal that can be developed over the course of the next 3 years as these projects come online and can contribute to the long term goals of the regional kitchen table. Broader strategy and accountability measures should be directly connected to the forming regional kitchen table to help ensure this work is part of the longer term goals of the kitchen table that can help lead to housing justice.
Ways to Improve Coordinated Entry across the 3 CoCs
Establish regular coordination meetings across the 3 CoC leadership teams
The regional kitchen table should host more regular coordination meetings across the 3 CoC coordinated entry lead agencies, that includes people with lived experiences using coordinated entry can help to identify areas of potential alignment and develop strategies to better match the experiences of people across the Coordinated Entry Systems (CES) systems. Suburban Metro Area CoC (SMAC) Director’s Council efforts to align CES across the 5 counties in the SMAC CoC is a great example of the power of these types of coordination meetings, particularly those led by people with lived experience.
Evaluate CES policies & procedures across the 3 CoCs to identify where there can be strategic alignment in accessing CoC resources
The 3 CoC could utilize the coordination meetings to evaluate the CES policies and procedures across the 3 systems, particularly those related to access, assessment, prioritization, and referral. An example of this time of alignment is the work SMAC and Ramsey have been doing to align behind the same assessment. The process is helping to understand how to improve the experience of those who might be moving across the CoC and identifying areas that can further be aligned to continue improving the experience. Differing policies around access, assessment, prioritization, and referrals may make sense when centering the needs of administering a system but for a person trying to address their housing needs across county boundaries, it leads to barriers to more quickly accessing needed resources.
Align strategies across the 3 Coordinated Entry Systems for access and connection to prevention and affordable housing resources in the region
As the region moves to making more strategic investment decisions, as discussed above, it will be critical to ensure that access to those resources can be easily connected through the three coordinated entry systems. This must include access to prevention programs and affordable housing programs being developed. The strategies to create person-centered pathways into these programs should look similar across all three CoCs helping to ensure ease and equity in access to these newly developing programs. These strategies may include ideas identified during interviews and workshops, including universal housing applications across the Public Housing Authorities and other publicly funded affordable housing programs in the region, and a universal application for all prevention funds building off the lessons learned from the RentHelpMN efforts.
Implement continuous improvement strategies through a regional lens
As the regional kitchen table move to more closely align the 3 CoC systems it must ensure that alignment is having the intended impact, especially on equitable access for BIPOC and LGBTQ people experiencing homelessness. The 3 CoCs should more regularly look at the experiences of people who are utilizing more than one CoC, who are transferring across CoCs, and who are accessing non-CoC funded resources across the region including vouchers, public housing, public rental assistance, and other programs that move outside of CoC boundaries. This should be directly connected to accountability measures being developed at the regional kitchen table.
The individual CoCs must also continue to take action on improving coordinated entry to the experience of BIPOC, Queer, & Transgender populations using coordinated entry. See the resource section below for more information on possible strategies.
Strategy 3: Better align the 3 coordinated entry systems
More information on person-centered and trauma informed practices
Implement a quality improvement process that centers the experiences of BIPOC, Queer & Transgender populations and regularly evaluate experiences and outcomes
This process should include leadership from people representing BIPOC, Queer, and Transgender communities that have experienced the coordinated entry system. It should utilize both qualitative and quantitative data analysis. Qualitative data is critical to better understand the true experience of marginalized communities. And the data analysis should be done through a racially explicit analysis.
Implicit bias training for all CE staff and leadership
It is critical for all staff who have direct service interactions with BIPOC and LGBTQ communities, and their managers, to undergo implicit bias training on a regular basis. These training help staff and leadership understand the ways in which they may be biased toward the behaviors or appearance of historically marginalized groups and how this bias can have a direct impact on the ability to obtain housing and end homelessness.
Implement trauma-aware approach
As reflected in the barriers, for the people experiencing the coordinated entry process, the process in itself has been experienced as traumatic. Pivoting towards a trauma-aware approach for coordinated entry staff is critical for improving the experiences of people experiencing active housing crises and reducing experiences of retraumatization.
Some key strategies that can be applied:
- Assessment questions:
- Identify opportunity to use trauma-informed language within the coordinated entry assessment and assess for opportunities to address implicit bias
- Client Engagement:
- Acknowledge the whole person, what they may be experiencing and ask consent
- Be transparent on the type of information that may be asked of them
- Bring the person (or families) into the planning process for housing match and placement – use accessible language and provide all information.
- Be aware of the physical space where assessments or communication is taking place. Ensure people have access to quiet space and that also allows for safety and easy exit if they wish to leave at any point.
- Provide on-going support and care for staff impacted by secondary trauma. Work with the team to identify ways in which they would feel most supported emotionally and structurally.
- Report from Safe Housing Partnerships on recommendations on transformation Coordinated Entry Systems to increase survivor action to housing option. Transforming Our Coordinated Entry Systems to Increase Survivors’ Access to Housing Options
- In partnership with Building Changes and four CoCs, C4 Innovations conducted an analysis designed to examine the potential for CES assessments to perpetuate racial inequities. Coordinated Entry Systems: Racial Equity Analysis of Assessment Data
- This document prepared by homelessness technical assistance providers provides helpful recommendations for how communities can thoughtfully build out equitable stakeholder engagement. Untapped Expertise: Strategies for Stakeholder Engagement When Developing Your Coordinated Investment Plan
- National Innovation Service blog on An Equitable Systems Transformation Framework for COVID-19. Provides domains to transform towards system change towards equity. https://www.nis.us/blog
- The Stella P Race & Ethnicity Analysis Guide provides technical instructions for communities who wish to run HMIS specific reports in preparation for system modeling: Stella P Race and Ethnicity Analysis Guide
- Coordinated Investment Planning – this spreadsheet is a framework for communities to define and quantify their need for housing supports and services in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to plan to fulfill these needs with existing and newly available funding sources. COVID-19 Homeless System Response: Rehousing and Coordinated Investment Planning Tool. COVID 19 Homeless System Response Equity Driven Changes to Coordinated Entry
- Technical Assistance Collaborative provides community examples of how communities are working with young people with lived experience creating payment equity. https://www.tacinc.org/resources/the-gab-on-yabs/