1 / 15

Targeting and Prioritization: Best Practices for Serving the Most Vulnerable

Targeting and Prioritization: Best Practices for Serving the Most Vulnerable. Kim Walker Senior Program Manager, CSH September 22, 2014. Our Mission. Advancing housing solutions that:. Supportive Housing Training Center. Agenda. Coordinated Assessment: A Tool for Targeting

oakes
Download Presentation

Targeting and Prioritization: Best Practices for Serving the Most Vulnerable

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Targeting and Prioritization: Best Practices for Serving the Most Vulnerable Kim Walker Senior Program Manager, CSH September 22, 2014

  2. Our Mission Advancing housing solutions that:

  3. Supportive Housing Training Center

  4. Agenda • Coordinated Assessment: A Tool for Targeting • Prioritization Standards • Targeting Example: FUSE

  5. Shelters Coordinated Assessment Process to Determine Housing Exit Strategy Coordinated Access Processes Rapid Re-Housing Permanent Supportive Housing Homelessness Prevention Community Supports

  6. Systemwide Targeting with Coordinated Assessment • Clear definitions and parameters for all interventions • Data-informed decisions and targeting • Housing First system orientation • Commitment to low-barrier entry to programs

  7. ProgessiveEngagement… Light touch Consumer resilience Outcome driven SERving ALL Housing stability

  8. Assessment Tools: Qualities Barriers related to housing Length of homeless episodes Success or failure of previous interventions Referrals correspond to prioritization standards and community priorities

  9. Diversion “Where did you stay last night? Could you safely stay there again?” “Why did you have to leave where you stayed last night?” “Is there anyone else you could stay with for a few days while we work with you?”

  10. HUD Prioritization Guidance • For chronically homeless households (and CoC CH PSH beds) • Longest history of homelessness + most severe service needs • Longest history of homelessness • Most severe service needs • All other CH households • For non-chronically homeless households (and CoC non-CH PSH beds) • Households with disabilities + most severe service needs • Households with disabilities + long period/episodic homelessness • Households with disabilities coming from PNMFHH, Safe Havens, or emergency shelter • Households with disabilities coming from TH

  11. What is FUSE? FREQUENT USERS SYSTEMS ENGAGEMENT • Thousands of people with chronic health conditions cycle in and out of hospitals, jails, detox, and homelessness - at great public expense and with limited positive human outcomes. • Targeted supportive housing for the most vulnerable and costly of this group can reduce costs while getting better outcomes • FUSEprogram serves as a catalyst for system change at the local level

  12. FUSE & High Utilizer Initiatives Washtenaw FUSE/SIF King Co FACT Detroit FUSE Rhode Island FUSE Hennepin Co FUSE CT FUSE CT SIF KCC/SIF NYC FUSE Douglas Co, NE FUSE Wash. DC FUSE Chicago FUSE Denver FUSE Columbus BJA FUSE Richmond FUSE SIF+FUSE/Ert Just in Reach 2.0 Louisville ACT Project 25 MeckFUSE Maricopa Co FUSE Travis Co BJA Bexar Co High Utilizers- TBD Frequent user program totals 17 re-entry FUSE programs 8 health high utilizer programs Approx. 1000 people housed Approx. 825 to be housed Re-entry FUSE – Operating Re-entry FUSE – Significant planning Health FUSE – Operating Health FUSE – Significant planning

  13. The FUSE Blueprint

  14. Evaluation Results:FUSE Reduces Recidivism Results from Columbia University’s evaluation of the New York City FUSE program, released in November 2013 • 40% fewer jail days • 91% fewer shelter days • 50% fewer psychiatric inpatient hospitalizations (not shown)

  15. Kim Walker Kim.walker@csh.org 323-681-8266

More Related