GREATER
HARTFORD COORDINATED ACCESS NETWORK
MEETING
NOTES
WEDNESDAY, April 22nd, 2015
NEXT MEETING: WEDNESDAY, April 29th, 1:30
– 3:30 pm
|
In Attendance:
Rubi Alegria – Mercy Housing
Brian Baker – South Park Inn
Shannon Baldassario – MACC
Sandy Barry – Salvation Army Marshall House
Aisha Brown – CHR
Crane Cesario – DMHAS
Roger Clark – ImmaCare
Rebecca Copeland - CHR
Willem Donahue – Journey Home
Alfredo Echevarria – ImmaCare
Fred Faulkner – The Open Hearth
Chris Fortier – The Open Hearth
Clarissa Garcia – ImmaCare
Amanda Girardin – Journey Home
Ruby Givens-Hewitt – My Sisters’ Place
|
Tenesha Grant – Mercy Housing
Dalila May – Interval House
Philomena McGee – CHR
Sarah Melquist – MACC
Matt Morgan – Journey Home
Heather Pilarcik -
South Park Inn
Chris Robinson – Chrysalis Center
Amy Robinson – CRT
Rob Soderberg – CHR
Beth Stafford – MACC
Sandra Terry – CRT
Sarah Trench – Journey Home
Jose Vega – McKinney
Tamara Womack – My Sisters’ Place
|
1. Introductions
& GH-CAN Meeting Notes for last week, 4/15/2015 (emailed)
a.
There
was a fire in Hartford this week that displaced 28 families, including 50
children. Although most housing
resources of the GH CAN are currently being prioritized for the chronically homeless
households in our region, please let us know if you have or know of additional
resources that might assist these families.
2. GH
CAN Stats Update – See p. 2
|
Greater Hartford
Coordinated Access Network Statistics
|
|||
|
Updated as of April 14th,
2015
|
|||
|
Changes from last week have been bolded
|
|||
|
Topic
|
Data
|
Comments
|
|
|
Coordinated
Entry
|
Total Number
of GH CAN Assessment Appointments Per Week
|
90
|
There are 90
scheduled slots each week
|
|
Total Number
of Hours at Drop In Centers
|
15 Hours per
week
|
6 hrs at
Chrysalis Center Thurs.
3 hours at
CHR Manchester on Thurs.
3 hours at
Hands on Hartford
3 hours at
Center Church
|
|
|
No-Show Rate
11/17/14 – 3/30/15
|
75%
|
1752
Appointments Scheduled in Nov – Mar
435
Appointments Completed Nov – Mar
25%
Attendance to appointments
|
|
|
No-Show Rate
for March, 2015
|
65%
|
557
Appointments Scheduled for March
194
Appointments Completed
35%
Attendance to appointments
|
|
|
Next
Available Appointment Slot: Individual Men
|
6/23/15
|
Booking out 1
days further since last week
|
|
|
Next Available
Appointment Slot: Individual Women
|
6/22/15
|
Booking out 0
days further since last week
|
|
|
Next
Available Appointment Slot: Families
|
6/18/15
|
Booking out 0
days further since last week
|
|
|
Total Number of CA HMIS Data System Modifications
|
242
|
That is 57 additional cases to resolve compared to
last week.
|
|
|
Coordinated
Exit
|
Total Number of New Available Housing Units
Reported to GH CAN this week
|
0
|
No additional program openings were submitted this
week.
|
|
Housing Units Awaiting Referrals
|
16
|
Mercy Scattered Site PSH, ImmaCare RAP, Shelter
Plus Care, Next Steps Enfield, CHR Manchester, My Sisters’ Place TLP
|
|
|
Total Number of Available Housing Units Reported
through GH CAN in 2015
|
60
|
Available Units have been reported in the following
programs: MSP TLP, CRT PSH, CRT Project Teach, Chrysalis Veteran’s Support,
Chrysalis Family Matters, Mercy DMHAS
RAP, CRT Bloomfield Scattered Site, Mercy St. Elizabeth, Shelter Plus
Care, Chrysalis Project HEARRT 20
|
|
|
100
Day Campaign
|
Total Number
of Available Housing Units expected for 100 Days Team
|
92
|
These are
from a variety of programs. Some units are available immediately, others in
the next few months.
|
|
Total Number of Rapid Re-Housing Referrals this
week
|
2
|
Please note, CHR is unable to accept new referrals
to CT RRH at this time.
|
|
|
Total Number of Clients on Prioritized List
|
95
|
This list is comprised of clients who have a
length of time homeless that could classify them as chronically homeless.
|
|
|
On Prioritized List, number of clients with UHA
|
72
|
|
|
|
On Prioritized List, number of clients with a
navigator
|
44
|
|
|
|
On Prioritized List, number of clients
conditionally matched
|
29
|
|
|
|
On Prioritized List, number of clients housed
|
10
|
|
3. Updates
from 100 Day Team – Today is
day 43, planning is underway for the Document Fair on May 8th at
Chrysalis Center. The team will be
having a 50 Day Check-In on Tuesday, April 28th at M L Keefe
Community Center, 11 Pine Street, Hamden, CT, from 9:30am-4:30pm.
4. Inclusion/Outreach
Meeting Update- One of the
big gaps we know since going live with 100 days is getting the chronically
unsheltered clients on our prioritized list.
We have been gathering information from the Universal Housing
Application, HMIS, GH CAN appointments, and the Point in Time count, but there
are clients who we do not yet have on our radar. After last Thursday’s outreach meeting, Tony
Mack of ImmaCare identified 50 clients, 45 of whom were not on our radar. We are pushing to complete VI-SPDATs and homeless
verifications from outreach workers on most of those people.
a.
We
need to provide outreach staff with paper releases of information, as many
outreach clients have not yet signed a GH-CAN ROI. There are a number of security issues to
resolve before we can use tablets in the field.
b.
Yesterday, Bradley Airport administration
called Crane and said that they had 30-33 clients staying there. She will meet with them soon. This increase
started after the No Freeze shelter closed. They have been having problems with
people doing laundry there.
Additionally, we have heard that bus drivers have been allowing some
people to ride to the to the airport at no cost. We will need to ask outreach staff to go to
the airport to work with people to stay elsewhere.
5. Coordinated
Access Data Quality Comparison
– We have received Data Quality information from CCEH. Greater Hartford has 171 unprocessed
referrals in our CAN. This means that
out of all appointments that have been scheduled, 171 do not have an outcome of
enrolled in a program, or diverted out of shelter. These 171 cases are 9% of all appointments
scheduled in the GH CAN since November 2014.
a.
Please
note, there have been new options added for the outcome of a GH CAN assessment
appointment. Options now include no-show,
accepted for enrollment, diverted before CAN, or diverted at CAN
assessment.
6. Zero 2016: Connecticut Housing Placement
Targets
a.
CCEH
did some data analysis and determined that we would need 184 additional beds to
house all of our chronically homeless by the end of 2016. This is an estimate.
b.
When
looking at these numbers, we need to consider the turnover rate of PSH units in
considering how many new units would be required to fill the need.
7. VI-SPDAT
for Distribution –
a.
A
few weeks ago we discussed how we should handle distributing VI-SPDATs to
clients who request the tool. The
statewide best practice is to explain the tool to the clients, and why it is
being used. If you decide to give them a
copy, only give one without the scoring formula. Typically standardized test copies are not
distributed.
b.
Staff
can now find a copy of the survey that does not include scoring criteria on the
Journey Home website, http://journeyhomect.org/projects/gh_can/.
8. Manchester
Area Conference of Churches Samaritan Shelter Changes-
a.
On
April 1st, the board of directors for MACC Charities met to reassess
whether the shelter was adhering to the current mission statement. The board determined that since 93% of
shelter residents since November have not been residents of Manchester or
Bolton, the shelter is no longer serving the population it was intended to
serve.
b.
The
board has decided that the shelter will be transitioning into a community
center focused on providing economic opportunities. There are plans to create a program similar
to Billings Forge in Hartford, with ServeSafe training from restaurants.
c.
MACC
still wants to stay connected to this community and continue to help as they
can, however the organization will be going in a new direction soon.
9. Working
Groups:
1.
Housing Referral Group:
a.
The HRG was given a handout with a summary of
the number of units awaiting referrals, the number of units with conditional
matches in progress, and a follow-up from last week’s referrals.
i.
There are a lot of conditional matches in
progress.
ii.
This data is good as of 10am on Wednesday
morning.
b.
We continued our discussion from last week of
what to do with clients who have negative exits from housing programs.
i.
It is not unusual for clients to follow this
pattern of repeatedly failing out of housing programs. Clients who are very
vulnerable are the ones who are the most likely to not be able to stay in their
housing programs. Also, in cases like
this, it is common for there to be a lack of support services to help keep the
client in the program.
ii.
Last week we discussed how we could have the
client start a restitution plan before being admitted to another housing
program. We need to research restitution
plans to figure out how this process would work. For example, it would figure out if a client
would owe money to the housing program or a landlord.
iii.
Clients could also be encouraged to have
rep/payees, however, unless this has been mandated by a physician or
psychologist, the client could always choose to have the rep/payee
revoked.
iv.
Moving forward, it may be helpful for programs
to collect a list of clients who have failed out of their program for reference
during housing match conversations.
c.
If you are requesting a statewide background
check for a client, send Crane an email.
Then send her a fax with the client’s name, alias, social security
number, and date of birth.
d.
Clients who refuse housing
i.
For clients who refuse a housing option that is
offered to them, choosing instead to stay in shelters, are there other options
available? The group discussed shelter
fees and savings plans, however for clients who refuse to engage with housing
programs, these kinds of solutions may just push them to disengage further.
e.
There are clients who are being added to the
referral list who have higher priority levels than clients that had previously
been identified. This will be an ongoing
problem- clients may always be added to the priority list who are higher priority
than those previously identified.
i.
Each week, Journey Home updates the unified
referral list by collecting information about newly completed UHAs or CAN
appointments. For all clients who report
that they are chronically homeless, we create an HMIS timeline. If this timeline appears to verify chronic
homelessness, Journey Home adds them to the prioritized referral list. Each week, the highest priority clients on
the unified referral list are brought to the Housing Referral Group, and those
who aren’t matched are the first to be referred.
ii.
Because of this, it’s important that staff
continue to utilize the Report Housing Outcomes Form, available here, https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Ob9qxQSnU49TNhElr-K3t-4gZj8NwTxu9VINb8hhu1s/viewform
to report how many attempts have been made to outreach to clients, as well as
the outcomes of these attempts.
iii.
Because we are working with navigators, it could
be problematic if housing providers decided to move onto a different, higher
priority client once a referral has already been made. It will be very important that messaging is
clear across the board that housing is not guaranteed after a referral has been
made.
a.
100 Day Team:
i.
Updates:
1.
Tamara’s client is housed: #11
2.
Another client has been housed through the
Connection, the team would like to count this client towards the 100 clients we
are housing.
ii.
Document Fair:
1.
Team members received questions on acquiring (1)
passports and (2) copies of GED/transcripts that have been lost- this is
something we may need to keep working on throughout the rest of the campaign.
2.
ICEE Vendor will cost under $500- the team will
pursue this option
3.
Alfredo will also follow up on getting ice cream
truck: will check in before Friday on the status of this option.
iii.
Tuesday 4/28: 50 day meeting in Hamden
1.
On the 50 Day check-in on April 28th
the team will use its time to strategize and plan in the following areas:
a.
Stepping back from the document fair and letting
Mary manage.
b.
Mapping the process for referrals to determine
what gaps still exist.
c.
Finding all the people missing from the priority
list.
iv.
Danny with Rapid Results sent Power Point
presentation to be completed before arrival:
1.
Challenges overcome (PowerPoint Presentation):
a.
Planning document fair
b.
Progress/better understanding of the referral
process
c.
Communication improvements between
member/agencies
d.
Data work/organizational/navigation
v.
Challenge we are working on:
1.
Surprise demands on time/check-ins: 10-15 hours
a week of extra work.
2.
Time management- more clear expectations-
ideally the team would have better communications on commitment level at the
onset, and throughout the campaign.
3.
Referral process becoming issue at this point-
lots of people with low VISPDATS who have been homeless for a long period and
remain unconsidered- how can we address the needs of these clients?
vi.
People that get referrals and have not been
contacted for a long time:
1.
J.E- has not been contacted by scattered site
2.
D.B- has not been followed up with for Next
Steps Enfield
vii.
Support we may need for future goals:
1.
Clarification, accountability, transparency
2.
211 in general: chipping away at issues
10.
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
GH CAN Coordinators:
No comments:
Post a Comment