Greater Hartford
Coordinated Access Network
Leadership Meeting
Wednesday, February
22, 2017
Notes
1.
Welcome and Introductions
a.
Matthew Morgan, Crane Cesario, Tenesha Grant,
Dave Martineau, Cat Damato, Tina Ortiz, Andrea Hakian, Christy Corrigan, Diane Paige-Blondet,
Steve Bigler, Steve MacHattie, Brenda Earle, Amy Robinson, Barbara Shaw, Cathy
Zeiner, Leianna McIntire, Sara Dimiao, Angel Fernandez, Kyren McCrorey
2.
Housing Data Updates (see p. 2)
a. Eighty-seven
(87) people are verified chronic and have been matched to housing, and 7 people
are verified chronic but not yet matched. This is the first time in two months that
everyone who has been verified chronic is not matched to housing. Matt would
like everyone to monitor this number. There are 61 people who are potentially
chronic and are in the process of being verified.
3.
Disabling Condition Verification Form (see p.
3-4) – Crane Cesario
a. The
form was brought up at CT BOS where they changed the title from “Disability
Verification” to “Disabling Condition Verification” because a lot of clinicians
thought patients are being verified for disability which is not the case and BOS
also thought the new title was a bit friendlier. Crane has the following issues
with the form:
i. The
general information section does not ask for the name & contact information
of the person completing the form;
ii. The
diagnosis should be written on the form because HUD wants to know the diagnosis;
and
iii. There
is no effective date on the form.
iv. Please
let Crane know if any additional information should be added and she will have
them change it.
v. Matt
believes that this form will be helpful for SOAR.
4.
Housing Resource Update from Zero: 2016 Housing
Resource Summary (see handout) – Matt Morgan
a. This
form was being used statewide during the Zero: 2016 Campaign and is still being
used to try to get to functional zero.
i. According
to Crane, Beau is in the process of updating this form.
b. Which
programs anticipate openings?
i. Matt
asked everyone to take a look at the form and let him know if there are any new
openings that will become available soon. He briefly went down the list of
openings:
1. Remaining
BOS 193 was rewarded to the CoC a few years ago. The form says there are 5 left
but Crane does not believe that there are any left.
2. Hartford
Housing Authority is listed at 20. These were the site based units for
seniors/disabled that were set aside by the city. Chrysalis has been working
with the housing authority to go through their existing waitlist to make sure
there is no one who was eligible in that program. They finished that process
and we are now waiting on the housing authority to take the next steps (to
lease up); however, chrysalis is fully utilizing their service capacity.
According to Crane they are maxed out on their services. They need to finish
housing people in Hartford and then they will focus on Waterbury, which is at
40%, so it is unknown where the housing authority piece will fit in. The 20
units are still available and there is still commitment from the housing
authority to move forward with them.
3. CHFA
units are now all matched to clients; there were 50 statewide and Hartford
received 22. According to Crane they are 5 year certificates so we have to be
prepared to move/transition folks. She is unsure if the people in those units
are still maintaining chronic status.
4. All
the Shelter Plus Care units have been matched.
5. The
6 Moving On were for the Section 8/HCVP. Matt just estimated 6 thinking that at
least 6 people who were moving out of PSH would be leased up by the end of the
year. Over 100 people were awarded a
voucher.
ii. Any
other resources for our CAN that will be opening soon
a. According
to Crane 9 Shelter Plus Care will be coming online. She also believes that it
is a little deceptive to look at ourselves as 60% of the way there because no
one else has the volume of potential chronic that we do.
5.
Permanent Supportive Housing Resource
Prioritization – Crane Cesario
a. Yesterday
at the Coordinated Exit meeting they talked about whether or not they should be
matching in order of highest score or by the date that the clients were
verified since they are supposed to be housed within 90 days of being verified?
The 90 day rule came from the United States Interagency Council on Housing
(USICH). The CAN is striving for the 90 day goal in order to show that the
system is working, but there are no repercussions if it is not reached. In the
end the Coordinated Exit team made the decision to match by the date of verification.
They also decided that anyone who is in the threshold of PSH (scored an 8 or
above) they will take them by their score. This conversation will be continued
at future Statewide CAN and CAN Leadership meetings.
b. Crane
raised the issue of incomplete paperwork for clients who are matched. There are
times when a person is matched and their verification is not complete. For
instance, a family was matched on February 1st but the verification
form was not received until yesterday. This was an unusual situation because
the client would become chronic in October but was matched early so her
paperwork was not done. Crane would like providers to be vigilant and make sure
that all documents are completed and that the client is verified prior to being
matched.
6.
Single Women Seeking Shelter – Dave Martineau, Rosemary
Flowers (Rosemary was not present
a. Mercy
has a respite program with Capitol Region, and a DOH program for people with
HIV/Aids and addictions. Tenesha sent
Mollie a list of qualifications for Catherine’s Place and TWP. In order to
qualify for the VA program clients have to be a veteran and to get into the
respite program clients have to go through Capital Region. Clients must also
have a diagnosis of HIV/Aids in order to get into the Mercy Housing program.
b. Crane
brought up the issue of there being too few single women beds. Cathy Zeiner
mentioned that the YWCA would be adding 4 more beds. Dave Martineau also has a
10 bed facility that is still empty and St. Patrick St. Anthony’s has 14 beds
but there is no staff. If the committee can figure out a way to staff these
facilities then Dave would work with the church.
c. There
will be a meeting next week to decide how to use diversion funds.
d. Matt
met with someone at Intercommunity who said that they could potentially take
referrals to their recovery programs.
e. Crane
mentioned that the RRH program for the City of Hartford was changed to provide
only 1 month’s rental assistance and security deposit.
f. Legion
Courts units are still open according to Tenesha.
7.
Management of By-Name-List: Follow up from RRH
meeting – Matt Morgan, Sarah DiMaio, Heather Pilarcik
a. Matt
was informed that there was a report from one of the CAN subcommittees and a
discussion around the By Name List management. According to Sarah, most of the
meetings, with the exception of the most recent one, were a mess because the
BNL was so long but Journey Home cleaned up the list and Brenda was also present
at the last meeting which helped. The BNL is now down from over 1000 to 700
people. However there are still some issues:
i. The
list is still very large and many of the folks are unknown to those who attend
the meetings especially since not everyone who is supposed to be at the meeting
actually attends.
ii. The
other issue is how to clean the BNL, keep it clean and how to follow up with the
people who are still on it to make sure they are not skipping people who are
still in shelters? Sarah said that Mollie recommended some type of procedure
that would help identify people once they enter or leave a shelter or housing
program. Some people are being housed and it is not making it to the BNL. Crane
suggested having all the referring entities review the list once per week in
lieu of going to a meeting. Crane will meet with Beau to discuss if there is
some way to keep the list clean automatically through HMIS.
iii. Another
issue is that even when case managers at the meeting know the client they don’t
really know enough about them to make a referral at the meeting. Dave Martineau
suggested using the people who are taking the names of folks who are entering
shelters & soup kitchens because they know who are coming and going. Crane
is concerned that this might not be a reasonable use of people’s time if only 1
out of 30-40 people will he matched to housing; it’s a lot of effort for not
much results but she does want to keep the list as small and viable as
possible. She suggested sending the list out to have people review it prior to
the meetings.
8.
Announcements
a.
Brenda mentioned that there has been some
conversations across the state about who should be attending meetings. This
meeting is specifically for executive level staff so please do not send case
managers in place of executive staff. Someone who can make decisions for the
agency should be at the meeting and if that staff person cannot attend they
should send an email to the chairs. Dave Martineau (responding to Crane’s
suggestion to exempt larger agencies) does not believe that the larger agencies
such as CRT should be exempt because every other Executive Director makes the
effort to attend.
b.
There will be no GH CAN Operations Committee
Meeting after today’s meeting.
c.
The Next Steps Tool is available in CT
HMIS. Paper copies can be found on www.journeyhomect.org/provider-resources
The Meeting ended at 2:06 PM
GH CAN Housing Data Updates
|
Data Element
|
Number
|
Notes
|
|
Chronically homeless households housed in 2015
|
102
|
This includes clients housed through GH CAN programs as
well as through other subsidies or independent housing
|
|
Chronically homeless households housed in 2016
|
211
|
This includes clients housed through GH CAN programs as
well as through other subsidies or independent housing
|
|
Chronically homeless households housed in 2017
|
18
|
This includes clients housed through GH CAN programs as
well as through other subsidies or independent housing
|
|
Total Chronically homeless households housed in GH CAN
|
331
|
|
|
Verified Chronic Matched
|
87
|
|
|
Verified Chronic Not Yet Matched
|
7
|
We currently have 7 chronic verified clients who have not
yet been matched to housing.
|
|
Potentially Chronic Matched
|
0
|
|
|
Potentially Chronic Not Yet Matched
|
61
|
Right now we believe 61 households have the chronic length
of homeless history, but none of these individuals have their homeless and
disability verifications completed.
|
|
PART 1: INSTRUCTIONS
|
|||
|
· To be eligible for all CoC funded PSH, evidence
that one or more members of the household is diagnosed with a disabling
condition must be documented in the participant file.
·
To be eligible for a PSH unit that is dedicated to serve chronically
homeless people, the disabling condition must be documented for an adult head of household, or, if there is no adult
in the family, a minor head of household.
· This form can also be used for CoC-funded TH or
other programs that have committed to serving disabled people.
·
Complete all fields in Part 2.
·
Complete all fields under the relevant option in Part 3
·
Attach all supporting documents to this form.
·
Maintain this form and all supporting documents in the participant’s
file.
|
|||
|
PART 2: GENERAL INFORMATION
|
|||
|
Admitting CoC Agency Name:
|
CoC Project Name:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
Participant Name:
|
HMIS #
|
Date of Birth
|
CoC Project Entry Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part 3: DISABLING CONDITION CERTIFICATION
|
|||
|
Option #1: Social Security (SSI/DI) or Veteran’s
Disability
|
|||
|
Evidence must
include one of the following (Check One):
c A) Written verification from the Social
Security Administration; OR
c B) Copies
of a disability check (e.g., SSI, SSDI or Veterans Disability Compensation)
|
|||
|
ATTACH EVIDENCE OF EITHER A OR B TO THIS FORM c Check here to indicate that evidence
has been attached. |
|||
Option
#2: Verification by a Qualified
Licensed Professional
(Certifying professional must be licensed by the State to
diagnose and treat the qualifying condition.)
|
|||
|
I,
hereby, certify that _________________________________________________(Insert
Participant Name) has been diagnosed with at least one of the following:
· A
physical, mental, or emotional impairment, including an impairment caused by
alcohol or drug abuse, post-traumatic stress disorder, or brain injury that:
Is expected to be long-continuing or of indefinite duration; and
substantially impedes the individual's ability to live independently; and
could be improved by the provision of more suitable housing conditions; OR
· A
developmental disability, as defined in section 102 of the Developmental
Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 15002); OR
·
The disease of acquired immunodeficiency
syndrome (AIDS) or any condition arising from the etiologic agency for
acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV).
I also, hereby, certify that I am licensed by the
State of Connecticut to diagnose and treat the condition that I am certifying
above.
|
|||
|
c Check here to
indicate that additional information regarding diagnosis has been attached
(optional).
|
|||
|
Notes (optional):
|
|||
|
Information About the Certifying Licensed Professional
|
|||
|
Signature of Licensed
Professional:
|
Credentials:
|
Date:
|
|
|
Printed Name:
|
Organization:
|
||
|
License #:
|
Phone #:
|
||
|
Option #3: Intake
or referral staff observation
Must be confirmed within 45
days of the application for assistance by evidence from Option #1 or #2
above.
|
|||
|
I
hereby certify that ________________________________________________(Insert Participant
Name) meets the HUD definition of disability. (NOTE: This form does not require specifying
disability.)
|
|||
|
Signature of Staff:
|
Title:
|
Date:
|
|
|
Printed Name:
|
Organization:
|
||
No comments:
Post a Comment