160 likes | 316 Views
Developing a Performance Measurement System in Utah. Effective Strategies for Homeless Services COSCDA September 17 th , 2013 Jayme Day, Utah HMIS. Planning Organization in Utah. Three Continua of Care Salt Lake CoC Mountainland CoC Balance of State CoC
E N D
Developing a Performance Measurement Systemin Utah Effective Strategies for Homeless Services COSCDA September 17th, 2013 Jayme Day, Utah HMIS
Planning Organization in Utah • Three Continua of Care • Salt Lake CoC • Mountainland CoC • Balance of State CoC • State Homeless Coordinating Committee • Twelve Local Homeless Coordinating Committees • State and Local Funders • ESG, VA, PATH, HOPWA, State Trust Fund, CSBG • Statewide Utah HMIS • 45 Organizations, 129 programs • 85% bed coverage statewide • Over 13,000 unique individuals tracked annually
Reporting Environment • Multiple funding partners • Multiple reporting requirements • Multiple sources of funding per program • Multiple sources of information • Few HMIS/CoC Staff • Question – how to see overall performance? • Solution – develop a single report per program
Comprehensive Approach Purpose - work across funders and communities to establish a comprehensive approach to performance measurement and grant reporting to simplify and target funding and strategic planning • For Providers • Focus on specific performance targets • Fewer reporting requirements to manage • For Funders • Work with reports that are more robust • Encourages coordination of funding • For Communities • Provides an overview of community outcomes on a regular basis to support planning efforts • For HMIS/CoC Staff • Easier to support with smaller staff and • Encourages more engagement of community partners and auditing of data
Performance Measures • Many measures have been established through the HEARTH Act • Reduced length of homelessness • Reduced number experiencing homelessness • Reduced number newly experiencing homelessness • Reduced rate of re-entry to homelessness • Increased earned income and benefits • Increased number regaining and maintaining permanent housing • Reasonable cost per person or cost per positive outcome
Levels/Types of Reporting Levels of Reporting • CoC/Community-level Performance • Program Performance • Case Manager Performance Types of Information • Demographic Trends • Performance Measures • Data Quality • Process Measures
Fundamentals • Universe of Programs • HMIS Coverage & Data Quality • Point-In-Time Count & Housing Inventory Chart • Grant Inventory Worksheet • CoC APR, CAPER, AHAR Reports • Reporting Requirements for Other Funders • Non-HMIS providers
Quarterly Reporting • Identified Quarterly Timeframes • Data Collection Dates: January, April, July, October • Data Reporting Dates: following month • Identified Existing Reports in HMIS • Work with reports that providers can access and audit • Compliment other reporting requirements
Reporting Process by Program Type • Housing Programs (TH, SH, PSH, Prevention, RRH) • Quarterly Data Entry • Timely Assessments (does NOT require quarterly assessment) • Eye on persons Exiting • Emergency Shelter Programs (ES) • Quarterly Point-In-Time Count - QPIT • Outreach and Service Programs (Outreach, SSO) • Quarterly Data Reconciliation for Contacts and Services • All Providers • Data Quality!! • Accurate Housing Inventory • Program Funding/Sources
Tying it all Together • Used the Housing Inventory Chart data collection process to collect additional information to tie to performance reports such as total program funding • Applied the HMIS program id or create community program id to other inventories to pull together information • Housing Inventory Chart • Grant Inventory Worksheet • HMIS Program Reports
Program Performance • Housing and Shelter Summary Reports for Each Continua • Detail Reports with Outputs and Outcomes for Each Program • Program Performance • Approach 1: Number of Indicators in Lowest Performance Tier • Approach 2: Number of Indicators below CoC Targets • Apply to all programs and CoC funded programs
Working with the Community • Important that all providers were aware of process and how their data would be reported • Committee review - Includes funders, continua leadership, providers, and local researchers through • Measures to Include • Setting Benchmarks • Draft reports created for public review and comment
2013 – year in development • Important to go through the motions for first year • Use first quarter in 2013 to develop initial benchmarks • Reports will be available for monthly CoC meetings and agencies will be strongly encouraged to attend meetings in order to be a part of the process • Reports, deadlines, and report guides will be available on the Utah HMIS website
Thanks! Contact Information: Jayme Day Utah HMIS 801.468.0117 jday@utah.gov Utah HMIS (http://hmis.utah.gov/)