1. CoC Debriefing Summary 2009

2. CoC Scoring 2009 Scoring CategoryMaximum Score (Points) CoC Score (Points) CoC Housing, Services and Structure1413.25 Homeless Needs and Data Collection2621.75 CoC Strategic Planning2217.75 CoC Performance3226.5 Emphasis on Housing Activities64.5 Total CoC Score10083.75

3. CoC Scoring 2008 and 2009 Scoring Category Maximum Score 2008 Maximum Score 2009 CoC Score 2008 CoC Score 2009 CoC Housing, Services and Structure 14 13.75 13.25 Homeless Needs and Data Collection 242619 21.75 CoC Strategic Planning162212.75 17.75 CoC Performance283225 26.5 Emphasis on Housing Activities186 4.5 Total CoC Score100 88.5 83.75

4. Scoring Change: 2008 to2009 Scoring CategoryChange Rate of Score 2008 Rate of Score 2009 CoC Housing, Services and Structure ----.598.2% 94.6% Homeless Needs and Data Collection +2+2.7579.2% 83.6% CoC Strategic Planning+6+579.7% 80.6% CoC Performance+4+1.589.3% 82.8% Emphasis on Housing Activities -12-13.5100% 75% Total CoC Score100-4.7588.5% 83.75%

5. National Scoring Information 2009 High Score: 91.25 (TCHC 83.75 = 92%) (tchc 2008 88.5 = 96%) Low Score: 43 Median Score: 75 Funding Line: 71.25 (TCHC 83.75= +12.50) (tchc 2008 88.5 = +10.25)

6. TCHC Overall Comparative 2008 to 2009 Did not score as high More national competition Always room for improvement…. – So let’s review……

7. Competition Summary Renewals were NOT competitive Streamlined renewal process – Eligible SHP and S+C projects announced soon after submission deadline – New projects announced … July 2010… Samaritan House Villages II Acquisition PNS HOSO III

8. Point Structure For the 2009 CoC Competition, HUD awarded up to 100 total points for all five scoring categories I.CoC Housing, Services and Structure II.Homeless Needs and Data Collection III.CoC Strategic Planning IV.CoC Performance V.Emphasis on Housing Activities

9. CoC Housing, Services& Structure Max Score Possible FW/ARL/TC CoC Score 2008 FW/ARL/TC CoC Score 2009 Difference 1413.7513.25-.50 ANALYSIS of 2009 1.Coordinated, inclusive, Outcome-oriented process 2.Housing developers, business associations 3.Well-defined comprehensive strategies to address entire CoC system 4.Serving all subpopulations: DV, HIV/AIDS, VETS, SMI, Chronic Substance Abuse 5.Community-wide inventory of housing and services

10. CoC Housing, Services & Structure IMPROVEMENTS INTO 2010 1.Coordinated, inclusive, Outcome-oriented process: Planning Council Re-org; Consumer Council 2.Housing developers, business associations Corporations for Supportive Housing, MACH Housing Sub- Committee 3.Well-defined comprehensive strategies to address entire CoC system… TCHC, Planning Council Strategic Work Plans 4.Serving all subpopulations: DV, HIV/AIDS, VETS, SMI, Chronic Substance Abuse VA/VASH; Directions Home: SoS; MHMR Add Serv 5.Community-wide inventory of housing and services Expansion of website, housing inventory, services inventory

11. Homeless Needs & Data Collection Max Score FW/ARL/TC CoC Score 2009 2621.75 ANALYSIS of 2009 1.3 of 4 AHAR participation (2008 2 of 4) 2.ES Individual not over 86% coverage 3.De-duplication of data plan/procedures – validating data on entry, timeliness 4.Unsheltered homeless data 5.Null value rate unchanged

12. Homeless Needs & Data Collection IMPROVEMENTS INTO 2010 1. 3 of 4 AHAR participation (2008 2 of 4) Goal of 7 / 7 in new HMIS Goals and Objectives AHAR (including VETS Data) 2.ES Individual not over 86% coverage – +86% in new HMIS Goals and Objectives, need weekly and monthly PIT for ES facilities 3.Deduplication plan/procedures – validating data on entry, timeliness New MOA between TCHC, COC and TCACCESS October 1, 2010 4.Unsheltered homeless data PATH and SOS teams, survey design for 2011 census 5.Null value rate unchanged: New MOA…

13. CoC Strategic Planning Max Score Possible FW/ARL/TC CoC Score 2009 2217.75 ANALYSIS of 2009 1.Ending Chronic homelessness and a 10-year plan 2.Discharge policy: clear description of WHERE people go other than a homeless situation 3.Goals and timelines to achieve the five objectives 4.HPRP coordination with all CoC

14. CoC Strategic Planning IMPROVEMENTS INTO 2010 1.Ending chronic homelessness and a 10-year plan Less emphasis on planning, more on outcome performance 2.Discharge policy: clear description of WHERE people go other than a homeless situation Still a major deficit with corrections and health care; draft proposal on health care for 2010 3.Goals and timelines to achieve the five objectives Continue specific measurable and related plan through Planning Council and Taskforces 4.HPRP coordination with all CoC VASH/HPRP developing; Prevention Task force should meet with all HPRP grantees for year 2 5.Leveraging of funds (Dallas has a 200% leverage requirement).

15. CoC Performance Max Score Possible FW/ARL/TC CoC Score 2009 3226.5 ANALYSIS of 2009 1.Achieved proposed action steps from 2008 2.Increase PSH beds for chronic homeless and reduction in chronic homelessness 3.Achieve the five objectives

16. CoC Performance GOALSPROPOSEDACTUAL+/ - Create new PSH beds for chronic homeless 361518157 over goal % Staying in PSH over 6 months at least 71% (80% for points) 7881+3 over goal TH to PH at least 63.5% (70% for points) 6468+ 4 over goal Employment at exit 38%27%-11 under goal Decrease number of homeless households with children 385545 First time measured 200 under goal

17. CoC Performance IMPROVEMENTS INTO 2010 1.Achieved proposed action steps from 2009 Planning Council and Task force action steps in place 2.Increase PSH beds for chronic homeless and reduction in chronic homelessness VASH: Chronic Vets; DH Fully lease up 3.Achieve the five objectives 1.Permanent Housing Bonus: HOSO III, HHSP beds 2.PSH: Eviction Prevention Planning; Housing Inventory; Housing Specialist 3.TH: utilization is down for third year in a row: TH Taskforce 4.Job Developer goals: 5.Homeless Households: HPRP +, show collaboration with ES

18. Emphasis on Housing Max Score Possible FW/ARL/TC CoC Score 2009 64.5 ANALYSIS of 2009 1.Significant drop in importance (2008 18) 2.Not about adding PSH; amount of local financial leverage for NEW permanent housing bonus. Dallas requires 200% leverage Our CoC Application 2009: 73%

19. The BIG Picture BIGGEST CHALLENGES 1.Evaluating progress and performance BEFORE the year is over by case managers, program directors and Executive Directors The CoC needs real-time, accurate, analyzable, accessible data and reporting at all levels of CoC implementation, management and evaluation

20. The BIG Picture BIGGEST CHALLENGES 2.Preparing for HEARTH and the new goal: Ending homelessness in 30 days (20 if you want to be high performing) The CoC needs real-time, centralized, rapid intake and assessment and immediate referral systems in place for new homeless

21. The BIG Picture BIGGEST CHALLENGES 3.Planning, coordinating and responding to needs cannot just mean more and more meetings…the CoC System most adapt smoothly with comprehensive CoC-wide input and agreement (RH and LH….) The CoC needs expedited identification of gaps in services or procedures and swift implementation of solutions that are consistent across key subject/target areas: e.g. VETS, SMI, ES, TH families, MHMR, Women

22. The BIG Picture BIGGEST CHALLENGES 4.The CoC should examine who does what best and define some shared roles and some distinct roles in service and housing. Top level CoC management needs to share and understand strategic directions of other CoC providers to assure non-duplication, opportunities for MOU, and their strategic fit with HEARTH Act and HUD CoC funding and policy changes

23. Painting that BIG Picture…