Monday, November 9, 2015

Greater Hartford CAN Pre-Implementation 7/9/14

Greater Hartford Coordinated Access Network

 Meeting Notes

July 9, 2014

In Attendance:
Sandy Barry- Salvation Army
Crane Cesario – DMHAS/Hartford CoC
Roger Clark- Immaculate Conception Shelter and Housing Corp.
Bryan Dixon- Intercommunity
Fred Faulkner- The Open Hearth
Lou Gilbert- Immaculate Conception Shelter and Housing Corp.
Andrea Hakian- CHR
Dave Martineau- Mercy Housing
Sarah Melquist- MACC Charities
Matt Morgan- Journey Home
Amina Musa- Journey Home
Lynn Naughton- Salvation Army Marshall House
Pieter Njissen- Tri-Town Shelter
Roxan Noble- Chrysalis Center/ YWCA
Barbara Shaw- Hands on Hartford
Dave Shumway- Immaculate Conception Shelter and Housing Corp.
Josephine Wilson- Salvation Army Marshall House
Jose Vega- McKinney/ CRT
Tamera Womack- My Sisters’ Place

·         Discussed statewide implementation:
o   At the last statewide meeting we agreed that there is a need for a statewide implementation process.
o   Shelter intake form DOH just approved, includes Hearth Act regs
o   There has been 8 diff regions created for Coordinated Access but why can’t everything be centralized?
·         Recommended for someone to keep a list of topics we need to address later, what are questions for statewide
o   Sarah Melquist will handle statewide questions
o   What is CCEH’s role?
§  Technical advising
·         In order to maximize meeting time, maybe we should make a list of things that we don’t need to be unique about. For example, release of information and grievance procedure** are processes that are centralized. Will be written on the statewide questions
o   Who are the grievance policies going to?
o   If you get denied acceptance to a program you will grieve to that program. However if a person is denied to multiple who will they grieve to? The CAN? These are questions that need to be figured out on a statewide basis but we will still need to customize this for our CAN. We need to figure out the limitations of our local CAN
·         Can organize meetings by different topics that each person is interesting in exploring. We could take time out of meeting time to split up. Have meeting groups one week with the big group and another week with the small group.
·         We could also use the first part of meeting to break up into groups then the second half we report our discussion to the larger group. à Agreed?

First Main Topic of conversation
What is the process of referring a household to shelter in 24 hours or longer?
·         If someone comes in for a Coordinated Access assessment today at intake we will have to utilize energy to divert them. How are we going to place that client into shelter if they need shelter tomorrow?
·         We can’t tell them there will be a bed available tomorrow if the shelter is currently full
·         If someone says I need somewhere to sleep in 2 or 3 days . We have a bed available for tonight but we cannot guarantee that you will have a bed tomorrow
·         If we decide to have a certain amount of beds at a shelter reserved for CAN referrals we can do that as a community. For example, 10% of our beds can be reserved.
·         Need to add that while the person needs a bed and we have a tentative reservation for them what will happen if the person is on the banned list at the shelter they were referred to.
·         SAMH will tell a client to call back at 6:30 pm and they will ensure them shelter that night. If all shelters are full they can end up in the hotel.  HPRP works to put the client in a shelter once they are put into the system.
·         Need to be mindful of mind who we’re serving and if we are able to effectively serve those that are the most vulnerable.  (remembering appointment dates, etc for a person w
·         Sarah-Who owns the client? If you came into my shelter for the assessment do you come back to me when you don’t like where you referral site is?
o   Could be happening simultaneously
·         Clients will call Salvation Army Marshall House (SAMH) saying they need to stay at SAMH because their families will be able to stay together. However, If SAMH is full and they get referred to another shelter many times clients won’t show up to the other shelter. We need to think about what to do with clients in situations like this.
·         We can’t own people after CAN assessment. Case managers already have clients that they are responsible for and contractual obligations. Having the CAN assessments at a centralized location will make it easier for clients to comprehend that the person doing the assessment is not their case manager.
·         Do the shelters have a time when the bed will not be held anymore?
o   Every shelter has a different curfew on when a bed won’t be held for a client anymore.  Maybe moving towards standardizing this time would be easier for our community going ahead with this CAN.
·         What are we going to do in the case of repeats (people who aren’t showing up for their next appointments and continuously going through the system? They will go back to the original staff member that did CAN in the first place. We don’t want to have people doing multiple assessments
o   Need to also get rid of the preferred shelter mentality. Clients will have to accept going to whichever shelter has a availability.
o   Also need to promote that the assessment is important and needs to happen. We will serve immediate needs that night but they still need to do a CAN assessment.
·         Well if we have a centralized assessment location clients won’t associate the person doing their assessment as their case managers
·         The strength of Coordinated Access is the case manager’s local knowledge. If a person needs shelter in 3 days the case manager’s doing the assessment know what resources are available to have them in a stable housing situation
·         If a person has come in for an assessment and they need a bed that night we could say there’s an empty bed at South Park Inn tonight and they can go there. But this bed is owned by Ralph who is coming tomorrow night via CAN appointment
·         A lot of people are coming to shelters for resources. We need to fine tune our assessment so we are able to help people efficiently and not place them in shelter when they don’t need to be
·         Families will have some kind of benefits usually. If a family says I can come tomorrow, we tell them if there is a bed available now if you want to come.
·         If a person is in detox, the bed is not available.
o   Some shelters will let someone else stay there temporarily until the person in detox comes back.  The other client would then have to stay on a mattress if at capacity
·         General agreement of the meeting, if someone needs a bed tomorrow we will offer them a bed tonight, if we have one and won’t guarantee a bed
o   Each shelter needs to figure out what an open bed means to them
·         Challenge DOH (and or DSS) to change their policy, if a person is staying in shelter only to access security deposit it’s a waste of resources

4) Existing Waiting lists

(transitional housing, permanent housing)
·         Mercy Housing has a day list. If people call and ask if they’re still on it they will remain on it
·         YWCA has two separate lists for TLP and PSH
·         Between the VI SPDAT and length of time homelessness we need to come up with a unified housing list that prioritizes people with the greatest need
·         CHR has close to 30+ people on their waiting list
o   They continuously purge out their list. If the people on the waiting lists are inaccessible, they will follow up and if not take them off the list
o   Immaculate has close to 38
·         Should Rapid Rehousing be included in the waiting list? SAMH just received funding for Rapid Rehousing
·         Crane offered a position for a summer MSW intern to administer the VI SPDAT for people on waitlists which is an op
·         We need to keep in mind there are two different kinds of transitional housing- Transitional housing in place and transitional housing project based. What is going to happened to transitional down the line?
o   We need to prioritize TLP for our community
·         Cross training across agencies for the VI SPDAT – Clients will respond in a way that’s misconstruing information. Clients will answer questions in a way that is not accurate to their level of need so we need to be trained to understand how to give people appropriate services
o   Need a broad training to happen in Greater Hartford in August
o   Let’s link ECM and VI SPDAT training
·         Do we include transitional living programs on the unified list?
·         Time frame to close existing lists?
o   Aug 1st?After this date will we not take in new people on wait lists
o   Case managers need to check in with the people on the wait lists to assess them with the VI SPDAT
o   It’s easy for those clients who are the GH Universal Housing Application to be assessed ?
o   Need to send a release to that person (client) to see if they are on the Journey Home Universal Housing Application
§  Would it be easy to send a letter to clients to figure out all the different wait lists they are on? Yes
·         Sept 15th purge by then?
o   If the winter is starting to turn cold people might start to respond at that point so we need to keep in mind that we might have increased volume of people whgoing to do with those that we thought we’re purged out of the system
·         Everyone on a PSH waiting list should be on the UHA waitlists
·         Future workgroup: PSH issue work group


Next Steps:
-Look at Households needing shelter in 24 hours or longer in one group and Individuals needing shelter in 24 hours or longer in another  
-Training in Aug for VI SPDAT
-Hopefully Crane’s summer intern will be able to VI SPDAT people on the wait lists
-How we will manage Coordinated Access combined wait list
-CAN Release of Info and Purge letters




No comments:

Post a Comment