1 / 7

Rapid Re-housing with TANF Families: What We Learned in California

Rapid Re-housing with TANF Families: What We Learned in California. Katharine Gale August 6, 2014 www.focusstrategies.net. Introduction. Communities across the State administered HPRP between 2009- and 2012 A few also used TANF Emergency Contingency Funds

ovid
Download Presentation

Rapid Re-housing with TANF Families: What We Learned in California

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. Rapid Re-housing with TANF Families: What We Learned in California • Katharine Gale • August 6, 2014 • www.focusstrategies.net

  2. Introduction • Communities across the State administered HPRP between 2009- and 2012 • A few also used TANF Emergency Contingency Funds • Focus Strategies worked in two counties that combined HPRP and TANF, and provided technical assistance and evaluation support in other communities • Summary of observations: • - Program Design • - Data • - Culture and Coordination

  3. Program Design • Rapid Rehousing worked for many kinds of families, including families without income • Not all families needed housing search help • Hardest to rehouse large families, undocumented • Households with higher barriers more likely to be lost to the program before getting housing, but once housed outcomes were similar

  4. Program Design • TANF funding was great addition because more flexible – could cover costs like furniture which families needed • Income changes more likely after more time in program, but housing stability not increased • Screening tools helpful to provide consistent practice and guide conversations to make housing plans • - In one community that used flexibility on amounts, tool did not predict length of assistance needed

  5. Data and Data Systems • Shared look-up capacityin CalWORKS database helpful to housing workers • Entering data about services into Homeless Management Information Systems for both TANF and HPRP resources was good for billing and for reporting • Data quality increases with frequent reporting and program utilization • Follow up with families outside of HMIS very difficult.

  6. Culture and Coordination • Families experiencing homelessness didn’t always trust their “worker”; some had had negative consequences of reporting homelessness previously • Important not to put the client in the middle – everyone on board with the housing plans • Regular gettogethers and learning collaboratives important – at all levels

  7. For more information • Katharine Gale • Katharine@focusstrategies.net • (510) 710-9176 • www.focusstrategies.net • 1

More Related