Hidden in Plain Sight: IMPROVING Youth inclusion in point-in-time counts

1. Hidden in Plain Sight:IMPROVING Youth inclusionin point-in-time counts CCY Webinar – March 21, 2014 Colette (Coco) Auerswald, MD, MS – UCB School of Public Health coco.auerswald@berkeley.edu

2. Collaboration between the California Homeless Youth Project and the UC, Berkeley School of Public Health

3. Hidden in Plain Sight Assessment • Goals: • Describe current approaches to counting unaccompanied minors and TAY in the PIT count • Describe best practices and innovations in California • Describe barriers • Recommendations • Methods: • Review of data from CoC reports in 2011 and 2013 • Interviews with 31 CoCs and 5 consulting groups conducted in early 2013.

4. The Numbers: Unsheltered Minorsand TAY, 2011 vs. 2013

5. The Numbers: Unsheltered Minorsand TAY, 2011 vs. 2013

6. PIT Count Numbers: 2011 vs. 2013 Homelessness Reports - http://www.hudhre.info/index.cfm?do=viewHomelessRpts

7. Youth Numbers: 2011 vs. 2013 Homelessness Reports - http://www.hudhre.info/index.cfm?do=viewHomelessRpts

8. Findings: Methods for youth inclusion

9. Findings: Methods for youth inclusion Include unaccompanied minor and TAY categories in PIT count.

10. Findings: Methods for youth inclusion Include youth providers in PIT count planning:

11. Findings: Methods for youth inclusion Collaborate with McKinney-Vento school liaisons:

12. Findings: Methods for youth inclusion Include youth in PIT count planning

13. Findings: Methods for youth inclusion Include youth service providers and youth themselves as enumerators. Incentivizeyouth participants.

14. Findings: Methods for youth inclusion Includeyouth-inclusive or youth-specific, flexible enumeration routes, times of day, or survey sites: “We targeted areas that youth knew specifically were more likely to find homeless youth.”

15. Findings: Methods for youth inclusion Include youth-related survey questions in PIT count interviews

16. Findings: Methods for youth inclusion Implement many of the changes described, and Conduct a dedicated, youth-specific count

17. Findings: Youth-Specific Barriers • Hard to identify • Sub-groups of youth

18. Findings: CoC-related barriers • Limited integration of youth service providers • Geographicalfactors • Winterweather conditions

19. Findings: Methodological Barriers • Warinessof statistical methods • Concerns about ability to compareresults over time • Inexperiencewith counting TAY

20. Findings: Structural Barriers • Lack of funding • Limited provider capacity • Concerns regarding reporting obligations • Concerns regarding implications of increasing numbers • Conflicting definitions of homelessness

21. Recommendations: Policy • Clarificationof the goals and outcomes of the PIT count on a federal and local level. • Assurancethat increases in PIT count numbers related to efforts to conduct more youth-inclusive counts will be praised, not penalized. • Recognitionthat standardized PIT count methods may lead to systematic undercounting.

22. Recommendations: Policy • Expansionof the PIT count definition of youth homelessness. • Coordinationof definitions and data systems for the homeless across federal level programs. • FundingPIT count efforts overall and youth-specific efforts in particular.

23. Next Steps: Technical Assistance and Structural Change

24. Technical Assistance Project: Three phases • Phase 1: • Technical Assistance for all CoCs. • Phase 2: • One-on-one technical assistance for two CoCs. • Phase 3: • Structural interventions informed by study findings.

25. Convenings: Spring 2014 • 8 day-long regional convenings • CoC’s, partnering youth agency(ies), and school liaisons. • Travel costs reimbursed. • Stipends as needed to support attendance.

26. Convenings: Spring 2014 • Logistics and Materialsfor training, promotion, and enumeration. • Moving one step along the continuum • Engaging youth • Engaging local partners • RHYproviders and other youth providers. • McKinney-Vento liaisons. • Other youth serving agencies • Leveraging resources • Support for enumeration using multiple definitions of youth homelessness

27. Seed Grants • Seed grants for youth-specific counting initiatives • Examples of potential initiatives: • Youth advisory boards • Stipends for youth enumerators • Reimbursing youth for participating in youth surveys • Advertising counts to youth • Hosting events to draw youth to be counted • Sharing information back with the community • Other practices as determined by communities

28. Standardized survey • For CoC’s conducting a survey, development of aninstrument that will be: • Brief • Inclusive of HUD and McKinney-Vento definitions • Compatible with HMIS • Standardized across CoC’s (for data aggregation)

29. One-on-One Technical Assistance • Provision of intensive technical assistance to two mid- to-low-resource communities for the 2015 PIT count. • Goals: • To serve one rural and one mixed site. • Support local capacity for improving count practices. • Share ongoing work with larger community.

30. Structural Change • Working federally to: • Clarify HUD policies about the count • Broaden the data that can be reported to federal partners • Working with legislators to: • Prioritize youth counts • Increase awareness of the scope of the problem • Working with local CoCs and advocates to: • Employ numbers for advocacy and funding

31. Youth cannot be counted without the collaboration of those who work with them! We need you!! Shahera Hyatt, MSW California Homeless Youth Project Coco Auerswald, MD, MS UCB School of Public Health Laura Petry, MSW ’14 UCB School of Social Welfare Jess Lin, MPH UCB School of Public Health

32. Thank you! • To access the full report, visit http://cahomelessyouth.library.ca.gov/publications.html • Coco Auerswald, MD, MS: coco.auerswaldc@berkeley.edu • Shahera Hyatt, MSW: Shahera.Hyatt@library.ca.gov • Jess Lin, MPH: jess.lin@berkeley.edu • Laura Petry: lkpetry@berkeley.edu