Agenda Packet 5-13-19 Joint Work Session

Home Browse Search

and into housing as quickly as possible. Housing navigators should work closely with outreach, coordinated entry, and other provider staff as necessary. Finally, it is important that a case conferencing process be established to include the Outreach Coordinator/Manager, housing navigators, and coordinated entry administrative analysts. Case conferencing is a process by which all appropriate supports and resources can connect to each other to strategize around the needs of everyone on the CWL at once. The process also allows the CoC to translate individual data points into a bigger picture snapshot, enabling evaluation, troubleshooting, and process improvement across the entire local housing system. Specific CE Recommendations 1. Ensure referrals for all units dedicated to people experiencing homelessness (including non-CoC funded projects) are made through the CWL. 2. In addition to assessors at provider agencies and through outreach staff, add two county-level FTE assessors who have the capacity to conduct assessments through walk-ins and via phone. Outreach staff who conduct assessments should be provided mobile technology whenever possible to ensure assessments are placed into the system in “real-time.” 3. Ensure coordinated entry is fully connected to and engaged with the system-wide outreach team (see outreach recommendations). 4. Create strong housing navigation systems, including two to three FTE navigators throughout the system to connect people to diversion, outreach, emergency shelters, PSH, and RRH. Housing navigators will participate in the case conferencing process as well. 5. Eliminate separation and use of “buckets” for referrals to CWL for PSH & RRH. The Coordinated Entry system should allow people to access any of the resources for which they qualify, and not presume that certain households will not be successful in RRH. 6. Implement a progressive and phased assessment approach. This could include a tiered approach based on when assessments occur and the level of assessment provided in each phase. 7. Revise how assessments are updated to decrease the number of “expired” assessments. The CE system should not require that households go through a full assessment to remain active in the system. 8. Establish a case conferencing process among outreach, navigator, and coordinated entry staff to allow for a dynamic prioritization of households on the CWL. H. Create Centralized and Coordinated Landlord and Housing Partner Management Landlords and other housing partners are critical stakeholders in the effort to end homelessness. Oftentimes, landlord relationships are managed at the provider or even staff level, resulting in fragmentation when it comes to housing referrals and unit matching. Lane County should consider adding two FTE Housing Partner Coordinators whose sole job is to recruit new housing partners, create and maintain landowner relationships, and track levels of risk tolerance across housing partners. Similar to By-Name Lists of homeless households, Lane County should establish, either online or in a single database, a By-Name Landlord Management Tool. This would allow tracking of open units and willing landlords, and also provide a place to note risk aversion; for instance, noting which landlords will take individuals with past evictions vs. those who will not, as well as other factors that would help the housing match process. A risk associated with a centralized landlord management structure is variability in how different housing providers engage with and respond to landlord needs. Lane County should consider implementing a Housing Partner Handbook that outlines the basic expectations of housing providers when engaging with landlords and responding to landlord complaints, as well as communication protocol and minimum service expectations. This document could be accompanied by Memoranda of Understanding that commit the Continuum to providing landlord contacts and opportunities in exchange for service provider commitments relative to the communication protocol and the minimum service expectations outlined. Further, Lane County should institute a quarterly service provider landlord case conference system whereby housing providers can share information and lessons learned related to their direct interaction with area housing partners and landlords. Lane County should also consider a more robust landlord engagement strategy that both educates landlords on the housing services provided and validates landlord concerns in working with “housing programs.” This would include public messaging from county and city officials, uniform marketing material for the entire CoC, a housing partner seminar (supported by a private foundation) to recruit and inform housing partners of the efforts to end homelessness, and a social media strategy to highlight strong housing partners in the community. Lane County, in partnership with funders, should also consider a clear, transparent risk mitigation fund that can be used if or when excessive damage is done to units or rent loss becomes an issue. Other strategic partnerships may also be helpful for when damage is done in a unit (for instance, a local carpenter union contributing charitable time to fix units) or when clients need basic furnishings or necessities when entering units (for instance, a partnership with the colleges to obtain dormitory furniture when it is replaced). STRATEGIC POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS PAGE 17 May 13, 2019, Joint Work Session – Item 1