1. Coordinated Entry System Committee January 28 th, 2016 Meeting 1

2. Agenda Welcome, Intros, Overview of Project, Timing (20 min EOH) CES Planning, Components and Examples (20 min BAHP) Alameda County Guiding Principles (30 min) HRC Geographical Model (15 min BAHP) Access Points (30 min) (Small Group) Wrap-up (10 min BAHP) 2

3. Project Overview and Context Project is a major component of our system redesign which launched in February of 2014 Included a Community Planning Charette in July with over 200 stakeholders providing input into what would help our CoC respond to people without homes more effectively Consumers and providers strongly advocated for more streamlined access to services that were prioritized for the most vulnerable and better matched to people’s needs—that’s Coordinated Entry. The 2012 HEARTH Act Interim Final Rule also requires that all CoCs operate a CES. 3

4. Process and Timeline EveryOne Home Charter Adopted October 2015 Funders Collaborative established October CES Committee established January (today!) CES Committee Design process Jan-May Community Meeting April Leadership Committee June Implementation planning July – October, including written standards, protocols and performance measures Launch County-wide 4

5. What is CES? (from the CoC Regulations) A centralized or coordinated assessment system: Covers the CoC's geographic area Is easily accessible by households seeking housing or services Is well-advertised Uses a comprehensive and standardized assessment tool Responds to local needs and conditions Covers at least all CoC and ESG programs Includes a policy to address needs of those fleeing DV but seeking service from non-victim service providers 5

6. What should CES accomplish? Simplify access for clients Ensure fairness, consistency and transparency Speed movement from homelessness to housing Prioritize must vulnerable for assistance Match households to most appropriate available intervention Target limited resources more efficiently 6

7. What CES (alone) can’t do Should get people to programs faster … but, programs still have to house them quickly Free up staff capacity (reduce front end work) but doesn’t create new housing or services Give information about bottlenecks and gaps, but alone can’t fix them May affect demand – consider how impacts client and program behaviors Some agencies may never join 7

8. What are key elements of effective CES? (from HUD Coordinated Entry Brief) Highest Needs PrioritizedLow Barriers at CES and in programs Person-CenteredHousing First Orientation Fair and Equal AccessEmergency Services (e.g. all hour access) Standardized Access and AssessmentInclusive (all populations addressed) Referrals fill all dedicated vacancies (no side doors) Rejections Rare and Justified Includes Street OutreachStakeholders in Planning and Consultation CES informs local planning and system change Considers Physical and Political Geography Incorporates Safety PlanningUtilizes HMIS Covers Full Geography 8

9. Housing Resource Center (HRC) Background Alameda County has successfully implemented HRC’s in the past. HRC concept was used to implement HPRP Implementation included common screening, tools, eligibility and program standards, shared data system HRCs set own processes and staffing models by region or population End of HPRP funding resulted in substantial loss of HRC model CES gives us the opportunity to design new HRC’s, using what we have learned. 9

10. HPRP Hubs in Alameda County (2009 – 2012) 10

11. CES/HRC Models in Other Communities Los Angeles – 10 Family Solution Centers provide entry point for housing services, link to mainstream Maricopa County, AZ – One service center, co-located providers Houston – Geographic Hub Model San Francisco – Centralized intake for each component, not yet combined. San Mateo – Core Agencies, all provide CES and Housing Counseling. 11

12. Systemwide Progress in Alameda County EveryOne Home CES Home Stretch: Re-launching in March. Meeting with housing providers this month. Developing standard tools. Shelters: Survey responses being compiled. Looking at funding models and referral systems. Berkeley HCRC 12

13. Designing the HRC in Alameda County Locations – How many and where? Outreach/Access Core Services Co-located Services Referral/Placement Services Staff Positions 13

14. Permanent Supportive Housing RRH/Market Rental Triage Literally Homeless Non - Homeless Emergency Shelter Housing Centered Case Management Transitional Housing Housing Prioritization & Matching Subsidized Rental Friends/Family Diversion and prevention Coordinated Entry System Outreach – Access - Referral Connected Services: Health, benefits, Behavioral Health, Substance Abuse, legal, Childcare, Education, Employment Services HRC/HUB Diversion 14

15. Small Group Question 1: Access One of the key requirements for CES and participating programs is easy access. How will that look in Alameda County? a. How many and what type of access points will work best for homeless individuals and families in an HRC model? b. In addition to HRC’s as entry points, what is the potential role for phone, virtual, mobile or other forms of access? Which are most critical? 15

16. Small Group Question 2: Outreach What kind of direct outreach to people living on the street should the CES system have in place? To what extent do we already have this in place? What else needs to be done to reach otherwise hard to engage people in need of CES? 16

17. Small Group Question 3: People In addition to considering the varying needs of singles and families, what else needs to be built into the CES system to maximize responsiveness? a. How will the CES and HRC’s prepare to serve Transition Aged Youth, Seniors, Domestic Violence survivors, others? b. What languages, cultural understanding, or other capacity will be needed and what are ways for these to be integrated into the CES system. 17

18. Next Steps and Timing CES Committee and Sub-Committees ◦ Next full meeting 3/3 ◦ Subcommittee on Referrals 2/11 Home Stretch Committee Public and Stakeholder Input ◦ EveryOne Home Community meeting - April 18