 Serenity House › Coordinated Intake › Case Manager’s Tool › Funder Reports › HPRP Requirement › Tracking Performance › Living up to a guiding principle of Clallam County’s Ten Year Plan  Spokane › High Volume Shelters

 Seattle/King County › HPRP Evaluation/Certification › Waitlist/Coordinated Entry › Evaluation of Programs for Funding  Department of Commerce: › HPRP Reporting › Reduce paper reporting (ESAP, THOR, etc) › Checking invoices for HPRP against HMIS data › Report on State Plan Measures

2008 NAEH Family Conference - Outcomes Workshop 5 Activities Outreach Shelters Case Management Rent Subsidies & Services Outputs # Clients Served by Program Service Linkages New PSH Units/Subsidies Vacancy Statistics Outcomes 30% exited to PH 40% increased income 25% reduction in CH 25% shorter LOS < recidivism How do we document our efforts? What did our efforts achieve? Inputs $ (CoC and Other) Programs Infrastructure Staff Should we adjust how we spend our resources? Should we add or change use of resources to expand our impact?

 For example, “Destination” data element (4.10) narrowly defines “Stably Housed” for you: › Permanent supportive Housing for formerly Homeless persons › Rental by client, no housing subsidy › Owned by client, no housing subsidy › Rental by client, VASH subsidy › Rental by client, other (non-VASH) subsidy › Owned by client, with housing subsidy › Staying or living with family, permanent tenure › Staying or living with friends, permanent tenure

Client ID Prog ID 1A 1B 2A 3C 2008 NAEH Family Conference - Outcomes Workshop 7 De-duplicate clients across programs Step 1 Consolidate sequential stays into single episode (gaps < 30 days = same episode) Step 4 Create table with all Entry/Exit Dates by Client Step 2 Calculate LOS for each Stay Step 3 Calculate mean (168 days), low (81 days), high (309 days) Step 5 Entry Exit Date Date 5/8/06 5/30/07 6/1/07 9/01/07 3/1/07 5/21/07 2/1/06 12/7/06 LOS

 Incidence of homelessness - Is homelessness declining?  Incidence of street or CH - Is street or chronic homelessness declining?  Length of stay in system, across all homeless programs - Do people stay homeless for shorter periods of time?  Prevention – Are fewer people experiencing homelessness for the first-time?  Rates of Recidivism – Are repeat occurrences of homelessness avoided or declining? Cross-tabulate results by core characteristics to understand if/how results vary for different subpopulations 2008 NAEH Family Conference - Outcomes Workshop 8

 Outcomes of people exiting housing (short term, transitional, and permanent supportive): › Housing outcomes › Income (below, at or above self-sufficiency)  % and # returning to homelessness after exiting to permanent housing after one, two and three years  % and # of people identified as homeless for the first time in HMIS year to year  # Homeless within one week of release from institutions (hospitals, jail, etc)

 Bed Management/Registration  Data Sharing  Assessment & referral  Multi-use program performance (beyond “Homeless”)  Self-Sufficiency Matrix  DSHS Data Matching Outcomes: › % homeless while served by DSHS › Data quality measures  Homeless Prevention study › Outcomes of those not served vs. those served

 There is more to performance measurement than conducting the analysis › Educate, train, obtain buy-in  Be careful about how you interpret and use the data › Jump in, but don’t be careless in how you use the results › Look at the results within the context of all the outputs, interim measures and impact measures to validate the interpretation that’s being made › Vet the results before publicly releasing anything › Appropriately caveat the limitations of the data and analysis 2008 NAEH Family Conference - Outcomes Workshop 12

Cindy Burdine Serenity House of Clallam Co. 360/ David Lewis City of Spokane 509/ Sola Plumacher City of Seattle 206/ Mary Schwartz Department of Commerce 360/