Greater Hartford CAN Meeting 6/10/15

GREATER HARTFORD COORDINATED ACCESS NETWORK

MEETING AGENDA

WEDNESDAY, June 10th, 2015

NEXT MEETING: WEDNESDAY, June 17^th, 1:30 – 3:30 pm

1.      Introductions & GH-CAN Meeting Notes for last week, 6/3/2015 (emailed)

In Attendance: Janet Bermudez – Hands On Hartford Suzan Bibisi – Tabor House Cordelia Brady – The Open Hearth Aisha Brown – CHR Enfield Traci Burdick – Community Health Network Crane Cesario – DMHAS Roger Clark – ImmaCare Rebecca Copeland – CHR Rosa DeJesus – Mercy Housing Bryan Dixon – InterCommunity Alfredo Echevarria – ImmaCare Nate Fox – Center Church David Gemma – VA Ruby Givens-Hewitt – My Sisters’ Place Amanda Girardin – Journey Home

Tenesha Grant – Mercy Housing Mollie Greenwood – Journey Home LaQuista Harris – VA Steve MacHattie - ImmaCare Gerilyn Maciel – Salvation Army Marshall House Matt Morgan – Journey Home Theresa Nicholson – Chrysalis Center Heather Pilarcik – South Park Inn Iris Ruiz – Interval House Sarah Simonelli – Chrysalis Center Sandra Terry – CRT Sarah Trench – Journey Home Jose Vega – McKinney Ymonne Wilson – CRT Tamara Womack – My Sisters’ Place

2.      100 Day CAN Data Update as of 6/9/15:

Population Housed through GH CAN Programs	During 100 Day Campaign-  3/11/15 – Present
CHRONIC	PSH	35
	Rapid ReHousing	7
	Other Housed	6
	Subtotal	48
NON-CHRONIC	Transitional Housing	73
	Rapid ReHousing	46
	Subtotal	119

3.       

4.      211 Protocol Review  -

a.      After the 100 Day Team submitted a Hartford-specific script to help call specialists appropriately direct clients who are in a housing crisis, 211 asked for similar guidance from all regions of the state.  We distributed the guidance that has been prepared for specific types of calls in our region, and encouraged the group to send any revisions they have before we submit it to 211.  

5.      Announcements

a.      State Budget Approval – The state legislature has approved this budget, and is now just waiting on the governor to sign off on the budget.  The legislature has approved several increases to supportive housing programs, included those listed below:

                                                        i.      $1 million in FY 2016 and $2 million in FY 2017 for support services provided by the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) and another $900,000 in FY 2016 and $1.8 million in FY 2017 for Department of Housing (DOH) rental subsidies to support a total of 200 new units of supportive housing related to the Governor's Second Chance Initiative, specifically for the Connecticut Collaborative on Re-Entry (formally known as FUSE) which is designed to serve those who frequently cycle through the criminal justice system and homeless shelter services.

                                                      ii.      $1 million in FY 2016 and $1 million in FY 2017 to DMHAS for wraparound services for chronically homeless individuals as part of the Governor's Zero: 2016 initiative.

                                                    iii.      $1 million in each year to maintain the Homeless Youth Services in the Department of Children and Families.

                                                     iv.      $1.1 million in FY 2016 and $1.15 million in FY 2017 to DOH for the non-profit housing tax abatement program.

                                                       v.      $527,000 in FY 2016 and $541,000 in FY 2017 to DOL for the Veterans' Opportunity PILOT, a job training and subsidized employment program for veterans who have been homeless or at risk of homelessness.

                                                     vi.      A portion of Community Investment Act funding, which is projected to reach a potential of $20.3 million over the biennium, of which 25% is authorized for housing and homelessness programs.

                                                   vii.      $1.43 million in each year to the Department of Labor to provide funding for the expansion of the Integrated Basic Education and Skills program as part of Gov. Malloy's Second Chance Initiative.

                                                 viii.      $1.5 million in FY 2016 and $3 million in FY 2017 to DMHAS for grants to organizations that provide acute care and emergency behavioral health services, care coordination, access to information and referrals to healthcare and social service programs.

                                                     ix.      $138,000 in each year for supportive housing services at Jefferson House in New Britain and Horace Bushnell Apartments in Hartford.

b.      The 100 Day Campaign Wrap Up will be held on Wednesday, June 24^th, from 12:30-3:00 PM at CRT’s Lumsden Center, 555 Windsor St., Hartford.  We hope to see everyone there!  There will be a presentation from the 100 Day Team about progress they have made, challenges faced, and what kind of planning has been done for systemic sustainability after the campaign ends. 

c.       HMIS Data Elements Update: Medicaid / HUSKY A, C, D and HUSKY B (State Children’s Health Insurance).  Statewide HMIS has data elements are changing in the non-cash benefits section.  From now on, Medicaid and HUSKY health insurance will no longer be separate options.  The options will now be as follows: Medicaid/ HUSKY A, C, and D, and HUSKY B (State Children’s Health Insurance) will be another option. We believe this change will be taking place in July. 

d.      Zero 2016 Chronic Homeless Veterans Check-In –

                                                        i.      We asked whether any staff knew of any chronically homeless veterans, or any homeless veterans who were not currently connected to services.  A Salvation Army Marshall House staffperson indicated that she had a client at her shelter who was a veteran.  She has contacted SSVF, but has not yet heard a response, possibly caused by serious staffing changes.  The staff person will follow up with the supervisor. 

                                                      ii.      Some clients who are veterans have been determined to be ineligible for VA services or SSVF.  For these specific people they are referred back to the CAN to see if any homeless service programs can serve them.  There are some RAP certificates available for veterans who score a 10 or higher on the VI-SPDAT.   We will need to continue working collaboratively to figure out how to best serve these otherwise ineligible clients in our CAN.

                                                    iii.      Another issue we discussed is how to handle housing slots that have been prioritized for chronically homeless veterans if we are no longer able to locate chronically homeless veterans.  DMHAS provided guidance this week about how to best handle these units if the CAN is unable to identify appropriate clients.  For scattered site units if chronically homeless veterans cannot be identified, then units should be prioritized for chronically homeless non-veterans.  For project based units if chronically homeless veterans cannot be identified, units should be prioritized for non-chronic homeless veterans. 

6.      Strategy for Missing and Matching Documentation –

a.      We need to gather a lot of missing information.  Our Maybe Chronic list grows every week and Journey Home is not always able to see complete homeless histories in HMIS because of previous sharing restrictions. 

b.      In order to place someone on the priority list, we need additional verification of homeless stays.  Anyone who can verify that someone was homeless for a specific period of time that we do not yet have documented is essential.

c.       Recently, a handful of staff devoted part of their time to visiting soup kitchens to try and locate folks who had been homeless for more than a year.  This kind of effort needs to be sustained.  One suggestion was to see whether staff could request to commit one day per month to doing some in-reach to the different soup kitchens. 

d.      This in-reach process is not just limited to completing UHAs and VI-SPDATs for clients.  Another major component is collecting that documentation of homeless history, including shelter letters and outreach letters to verify periods that are not shown on HMIS.  For next week, Journey Home will work with soup kitchens to figure out a schedule that would be helpful for staff to show up to help with this process.

e.      Another suggestion was to meet people at the library.  We know there are some clients who avoid soup kitchens, and we also know the library is eager to help.  The Executive Director of the Hartford Public Library has volunteered some private rooms in the library, and Sara Salomons has contacted a couple of APRNs who are willing to help complete disability assessments.

f.        Another topic we discussed was working with outreach staff- moving forward it will be important to do consistent check-ins with outreach staff, and maybe consider doing some mapping of the area.  The Needle Exchange keeps track of a few sites where they regularly encounter clients, but there are only three sites so far.  We may want to consider building on the process they have already developed as we start thinking about mapping our outreach efforts. We have a connection to City of Hartford mapping department, they gave us maps for census of the homeless.  We have those maps still, and during the Point in Time count

g.      A number of homeless people we are likely missing are those staying in vehicles.  People staying in cars and other vehicles, are difficult to catch up with, as they move frequently. It could be helpful for us to identify parking lots and other places people stay, to assist with outreach efforts.

h.      Nate Fox mentioned that an outreach worker he knows in Rhode Island has created an app for smartphones that helps map client locations.  She has found it very helpful, and Nate offered to look into this process. 

7.      Navigator Role – 100 Day Team has been working on navigator role.   Does anyone want to say what they think the components are of this role?

a.      For Chrysalis CABHI staff, the role of navigator has been about building trust and rapport.  Clients complete the assessment tool with a staff person, and then start working together to gather documentation.  The process for discussing navigation has been helpful to understanding some barriers clients face in shelters, and was helpful in structuring the document fair.

b.      One unintended side effect of using 211 to locate shelter is that we have seen a lot more shelter-hopping.  In the past, shelter staff communicated more closely about client whereabouts to ensure clients were not shelter-hopping.  Now that we see it as a reality of our CAN structure, the role of a navigator that can work with people regardless of which shelter they’re in has become very important.

c.       Transportation is a key segment of this navigation role.  Being able to help clients get to appointments is important, so it could be helpful if navigators were able to drive clients to appointments, or meet clients at appointments.  We may need to consider community-wide transportation options.   

d.      Navigators should understand the social service system, and have a good understanding of which agencies you need to visit to get necessary documentation or resources for clients.  It’s a case management function that needs to be demonstrated by staff in a navigation role. 

Navigators need to understand the social service system- where do you go to get certain types of documentation to prove identity, homeless status, or disability status.  It’s a case management function. 

e.      It will be important for any navigation duties assumed in addition to existing responsibilities to be flexible in terms of work hours.  Agencies whose staff assume this role on top of existing roles will need to have some flexibility for staff providing these sorts of assistance. 

f.        Another suggestion was to hire peers who have experienced homelessness, but who are now housed to help clients navigate this process. 

                                                        i.      Additionally, more client input in the CAN decision-making process could be helpful moving forward, perhaps in the format of a focus group. 

8.      GH CAN Sustainability – Following the 100 Day Campaign, GH CAN meetings will be taking place bi-weekly, rather than weekly.  At the 6/17 CAN meeting Journey Home will present a proposed schedule for next year.

9.      Airport Update –

a.     Crane Cesario of DMHAS and Lou Gilbert of ImmaCare went to the airport last week to discuss the airport policy regarding staying at the airport.  There was an opportunity to discuss the situation of more people using the airport as shelter.

b.     In speaking with the new Police Lieutenant, a plan was developed to further the education process during roll call.

c.      The group had a conversation about the Coordinated Access process and households' choices.  The implementation of the policy will include Airport Administration, Marketing, Security, Housekeeping, Maintenance, Contracted Cleaning and CT State Police.

d.     The recommendation was made for Airport Administration to have further discussions with the Department of Transportation, to arrange for bus passes.  There may also be a possibility of developing a contract with a cab company.

e.     The airport staff and police lieutenant are planning to deliver a consistent message that people are not welcome to stay unless they have legitimate business at the airport: they are a ticketed passenger, or picking up an arriving passenger.

10.  Housing Referrals

a.      New Referrals

                                                        i.      At the time of this meeting, only one Priority Level 1 client had been identified.  This client was referred to an opening in CHR Enfield. 

                                                      ii.      Crane announced another opening at Mary Seymour Place, and another upcoming opening at Hudson View Commons.

b.      Review History of Homelessness for Priority Level 3 

                                                        i.      Many of our clients who are designated as Priority Level 3 are there because we have limited access to homeless histories.  Often, a full history is not available through CT HMIS either because of sharing restrictions, or because a client was staying out of doors. 

                                                      ii.      We need additional information from providers to determine whether any clients who are currently listed as Priority Level 3 are actually Priority Level 1. 

GH CAN Coordinators:

Matt Morgan, Journey Home  matt.morgan@journeyhomect.org 

Crane W Cesario, CRMHC – DMHAS   crane.cesario@ct.gov