170 likes | 312 Views
Short Term Rent Assistance. Redesigning Short Term Rent Assistance to Create a Unified System Portland, Oregon/Multnomah County. The Decision to Redesign. Challenges Six different funding sources, different requirements
E N D
Short Term Rent Assistance Redesigning Short Term Rent Assistance to Create a Unified System Portland, Oregon/Multnomah County
The Decision to Redesign Challenges • Six different funding sources, different requirements • Four jurisdictions managing funding sources with different models and requirements
The Decision to Redesign Inefficiencies • Staffing at all four jurisdictions • Outcomes tracked differently by all jurisdictions • Varied data collection methods • Differing program requirements • Eligibility • Dollar caps per household • Allowable length of service • Reporting dates
The Decision to Redesign 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness & Expiring Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) • Made improving short term rental assistance a goal of the 10 Year Plan • Made IGA contingent upon community redesign process
The Redesign Process Short Term Rent Assistance Workgroup • Led jointly by the County and City • Made up of stakeholders, elected officials, and agencies • Challenges: jurisdictional agendas, providers’ fears of losing funds, trouble thinking outside the box, fear of change
The Redesign Process Short Term Rent Assistance Workgroup • New program model • Outcomes, evaluation, and data collection • System support • Allocation formula • Unified system
The Redesign Process Short Term Rent Assistance Workgroup – The Approval Process • Community hearings • Housing & Community Development Commission • Inter Jurisdictional Working Group (engaging management) • Housing & Community Development Commission/ Board of County Commissioners
Managing the Change The Transition • Selection of administrative entity done by a group of staff working for elected officials • Adjusting to the transition (staffing changes, model changes, changes in how funds could be used, etc.)
Managing the Change Implementation Process • Relationship building with providers • In the first month: • Removed fund restrictions not mandated by funder • Streamlined paperwork/went electronic • In the first six months: • Met monthly with providers for feedback • Introduced new policies as needed SIMPLE CHANGES = BIG IMPACT
Managing the Change Implementation Process (cont.) • In the first year: • Implemented consequences for non-compliance with data entry and reporting requirements, which improved reporting • Re-focused providers to concentrate on outcomes • Provided administrative funds for all providers and convinced funders to increase those funds in future • Reached cross-jurisdictional agreement on funding formula for 2007-2010
Managing the Change Oversight and Policy Decisions • Inter Agency Housing Meeting • Monthly meeting of all providers • Making connections across homeless systems (families, singles, youth, domestic violence) • Announcements, training, best practices • Forum for feedback that directs and/or impacts policy discussions at higher levels • Opportunities for providers to come together to advocate on systems issues
Managing the Change Oversight and Policy Decisions • Oversight Committee • 2 reps each from City, County, HAP and 5 providers • Oversee transition of program administration • Overarching policy discussions: data collection, outcome expectations, use of funds, administrative funds for providers, information sharing across system, etc. • Inter Jurisdictional Discussions
How the System Looks Today • Income eligibility aligned • Dollar caps removed • Outcome requirements aligned • Data collection all into same system • All providers attending same meetings, regardless of funding source (see handouts for before/after comparison)
How the System Looks Today • Successes and what is working • Collaboration across 4 homeless systems • Providers engaged in more consistent dialogue • Shared outcomes and reporting tools for better comparisons • Jurisdictions working together • Continued challenges and what isn’t working • Some funding sources are cumbersome • Still boutique programs not part of unification • Refining shared goals across jurisdictions
Looking Forward • RFP for Funds • Access and efficiency - may impact # of agencies served • Outcomes focused • Matching of services with funding sources • HMIS Implementation • Program Evaluation • More coordinated referral system
Looking Forward Long Term Goals • Less compartmentalized system • Increase amount of funds in unified system • Connect short term rent assistance to longer term subsidies at HAP • Build linkages with other related programs
Contact Information • Rachel Devlin, Rent Assistance Program Manager, Housing Authority of Portland • Tiffany Kingery, Program Development Specialist, Multnomah County Human Services (formerly Department of School & Community Partnerships)