T-40 Bridges to Housing: Serving High Need, High Barrier Homeless Families in the Portland Metro Area 5/12/2011, 3:45 pm - 5:15 pm Janet Byrd, Executive Director, Neighborhood Partnerships Diane Yatchmenoff, Ph.D., Portland State University Regional Research Institute Alison McIntosh, Policy Manager, Neighborhood Partnerships

Bridges to Housing Alleviating Family Homelessness in the Portland–Vancouver Metropolitan Area T-40 Bridges to Housing: Serving High Need, High Barrier Homeless Families in the Portland Metro Area 5/12/2011, 3:45 pm - 5:15 pm

Who are we? Four county, two state effort to serve homeless families who previously were left unserved by our systems B2H

Who do we serve? High need homeless families in the Portland metropolitan area who have significant barriers to stability B2H

Who do we serve? B2H Best served with short term rent assistance, emergency aid. Many may not enter system Served primarily with transitions in place housing plus short term services Homeless Families with moderate service needs, significant chance of success with short term support Situationally Homeless Permanent Supportive Housing ongoing need for housing and coordinated supportive services Families face significant barriers to success. Permanent Affordable Housing PLUS Intensive Enhanced Services PLUS Mainstream Services PLUS Child Care will support family success over time Families facing on- going chronic issues Heads of Household permanently unable to work B2H: High Need Homeless Families

Bridges to Housing Model Permanent affordable housing Intensive and coordinated case management – strengths based using motivational interviewing Focus on child and family health and well being B2H

What weve done Launched Pilot program in 2007 Model in place in four counties as of 2008 Served 350+ families Centralized development and administration Program transitioning now to local control B2H

The Model: Housing Bridges to Housing: Families are placed in permanently affordable housing, using a Housing First model. Housing is family friendly, with access to amenities such as transportation, recreation, shopping. Most located in affordable housing developments. Some scattered site, and some private market housing.

B2H The Model: Services Intensive Case Management – 2 to 3 years – Strengths-based – Motivational Interviewing – Trauma Informed Service Delivery – Voluntary Services – 1:15 Case manager to family ratio – Flexible Client Funds – Child Care

B2H The Model: Flexible Client Funds and Child Care Up to $1700 per family, per year. Many uses Basic Needs upon move in Employment & Education Health Childrens Needs Past debts Emergencies Matching Funds Case Management Tool Prevent Eviction and Maintain Stable Housing Move forward with Case Plan Budgeting Matching Funds

Evaluation Conducted by Portland State Universitys Regional Research Institute HMIS is our primary data collection tool B2H

Evaluation Components Longitudinal outcome study. Process study on implementation and experiences. B2H

Governance & Communications Regional Steering Committee Coordinating Team Service Provider Workgroup County Jurisdictional Implementation Teams B2H

Bridges to Housing Annual Report April 2011

Overview 359 families enrolled across four counties – Clark County – Multnomah County – Washington County – Clackamas 197 families have exited Length of stay varied – Program structure, resources – Participant experience

2011 Annual Report Core B2H Outcomes (24 month data) – Stability in housing – Stability for children – Safety and wellbeing Progress Indicators: current caseload Focus on Exits – Status at exit Housing security Family wellbeing

Core Outcomes Stability – Moves within prior 6 months Safety – Freedom from family violence – Child welfare involvement Wellbeing – Children stable in education/child care – On track academically – Access to medical/dental care

Families Nearing Exit Families 18 months or longer on current caseloads. Case manager reports – Employment, school, job training – Status and progress achieved: Life skills Social Support Mental health Substance abuse – Expectations after B2H

Families in B2H 18+ Months 83 families on current caseloads – months (n=39, 47%) – months (n=44, 53%) Samples vary by provider – Multnomah County 62/83 families – months in B2H: INW & HS (42) Criteria for extension of services – Higher needs – Greater likely benefit

Families in B2H 18+ Months Multiple and complex challenges In this sample: – Drug/alcohol issues 44% – Mental illness 46% – Physical health issues 33% – History of Domestic Violence 69% – History of trauma/abuse 67%

Progress in Core Life Skills Basic Life skills (care of self and family) Greatly improved 33% Somewhat improved 57% Financial wellbeing – Managing money better – 76% – Paid off debt – 42% – Increased financial assets – 36% – Took a financial literacy/budgeting class – 34% – Opened checking acct – 24%

Moving towards self-sufficiency Someone in the family: – Obtained new job skills – 42% – Found employment – 34% – Entered college – 31% – Started volunteering – 27% – Completed job training/cert program – 15%

Increasing Protective Factors Personal Support Networks were: – Greatly improved for 37% – Somewhat improved for 49% Specific indicators included: – Managing conflict better – 61% – Reaching out to others – 71% – Improved communication skills – 69%

Parenting Case managers noted: – Relationships in the family stronger – 74% – Parenting skills improved – 83% – More involvement in child(ren)s education - 72% – Children connected to needed resources – 80%

Engaging in the Future Case managers rated engagement in needed services. – 31% highly motivated – 33% moderately so Remaining needs varied – Income and employment – Mental health and/or addiction treatment – Services for child(ren) – Safety (dv)

Challenges to Long Term Stability Employment rates are low (<25%) – Among those employed: Fewer than half have full-time job with benefits. Virtually none receive a living wage. 52% of entire sample are managing well on income from all sources. Long-term support may be needed for nearly 40% of those not working now. – Mental health – Coping skills – Cognitive capacity

Families who have exited Case manager reports (n=196) – Reasons for leaving – Stayed in B2H housing or left? Where did they go? Financing for housing Longer term security – Income Sources, adequacy, living wage – Employment/school/training status Connection with community resources

Exit Status Graduation – Graduated with honors. No longer needed intensive case management. Stayed in B2H housing or left with other housing secured. – Exited at/around 24 months. Remain in B2H housing or left with housing secured. Most were doing well; others timed out. Early Exits – Remain in B2H housing or had other housing secured.

Housing Stability Financing for housing post B2H – 35% Project-based Section 8 – 19% Tenant-based Section 8 – 35% Market Rate; 3% Income Restricted – 9% Public Housing More than 80% of housing/family situations appeared stable, at least in the short-term.

Future Trajectory When case managers see long-term stability: – Client has done wonderfully, has full-time job, makes good choices… – Client getting 4.0 at CC; will enroll at PSU next year. When case managers see short-term stability: – Concerns about relapse; concerns about continued income source; dependence on education grants. When it is precarious at best: – Relapse, mental illness, domestic violence, eviction.

Employment and Income Employment rates remain low. – About 26% had jobs (51/196 HOHs). – 31 (16%) had full-time work (14 with benefits). – Among those with partners, 20% had another adult in the household who was working. Gross monthly income – 90% made less than $2000 per month – Half less than $700 – 75% no more than $1200 per month Based on area and family size, only one HOH was making living wage.

Connecting to Supports Case managers linked families to: – Mental health services – 44% – Energy Assistance – 43% – Childcare resources – 39% – Addiction recovery support – 35% – Informal/personal support – 32% – OHP – 28% – Disability income – 16% – Domestic violence services – 15% – Education support – 15%

Summary B2H has effectively stabilized families. – Improved safety – Stabilized children in childcare/education. – Increased parental involvement in childrens education. – Increased life skills and personal support networks. What will it take to gain living wage jobs and long-term financial stability?

I cant stress enough how much [Bridges to Housing] was really there for me...Ive got a lot of gratitude and Ive taken the things that I got from the program and continued moving forward with them. [My case manager] gave me the resources and the tools and I took them and ran with it... - Bridges to Housing Head of Household

B2H Challenges Serving families with mental health and cognitive issues remains challenging. – Retention – Employment Success Use of Emergency Rooms – Systems Issue with Medicaid and other providers Employment

B2H Partnership with DHS/DSHS Partnership with TANF Agency Meet quarterly with staff from DHS/DSHS Increase collaboration Increase resources & access for clients Better understand changing programs & policies

Employment Received planning grant from Corporation for Supportive Housing in 2008 Looked at systems options Promising model emerging in two counties B2H

Advocacy Articulate need for targeted response for families with complex barriers. Employment strategies must continue to be refined. B2H

Trauma Informed Services Systems and partners must recognize and address impacts of trauma Impacts of trauma are pervasive and severe; and impact ability of families to maintain housing Pilot launched in late 2010 B2H

Where are we now? Evaluation will continue through 2011 Communication across counties continues to share learning Counties considering budget requests to serve new families B2H

Questions? B2H

Contact info Bridges to Housing c/o Neighborhood Partnerships Portland, OR Janet Byrd Diane Yatchmenoff, Ph.D. Alison McIntosh