A highly complex and too-often fragmented network of programs and policies responds to the needs of the diverse population of homeless people. These programs often target particular homeless populations and address the unique problems and needs of each subgroup. Effective coordination among service and housing providers is necessary for homeless individuals to receive the help they need from agencies and organizations. Since 1995, HUD has promoted the establishment of Continuums of Care (CoCs) for homeless services through a competitive funding process authorized by the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act of 1987, which was renamed the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act. This process requires recipients to participate in a community-wide plan for a CoC system to help people who are or have been homeless or who are at imminent risk of homelessness. A full CoC system includes prevention, outreach and assessment, emergency shelter, transitional housing, permanent supportive housing, and affordable housing, plus supportive services in all components. A new report from HUD's Office of Policy Development and Research presents the results of research into how communities have responded to these funding requirements and organized themselves into CoCs. The report, "Evaluation of Continuums of Care for Homeless People," is the first systematic assessment of CoCs for homeless people in the United States. Overall, the research found that more people received more services and participated in programs that offer more support as a consequence of the CoC approach than before it was implemented. In its analysis of CoCs, the study looked at the following areas:
Researchers examined 25 CoCs, all of which ranked in the top half of applicants for HUD McKinney-Vento Act competitive funding. The study intentionally focused on communities that appeared to have succeeded in implementing a CoC process because, at the onset of the research, HUD was interested in documenting whether the concept had achieved measurable results in fostering a coordinated local response to homelessness. CoCs in the sample were evenly dispersed geographically and included two state applicants, four regional applicants, one county applicant with a major city that applied separately, four counties without a major city, five cities, and nine city/county jurisdictions. Researchers visited communities for two to three days of observation and interviewed people representing all aspects of homeless planning, programming, service delivery, and advocacy. How CoCs Organize One major goal of the study was to learn how CoCs are organized. Most of the 25 localities view the CoC as a single system covering a locally defined area and including all of the components of a CoC, as mentioned earlier. Eight of the 25 communities view the CoC only in terms of the activities eligible for funding from HUD. Due to geographical considerations, a few communities have formed what can be thought of as sub-CoCs serving smaller areas within the larger application region. In addition to prevention, outreach and assessment, emergency shelter, transitional housing, supportive services, permanent supportive housing, and permanent affordable housing, many CoCs also offered low/no demand programs. Low/no demand programs provide a safe haven for people uninterested in supportive services but do not require participants to change their behavior or participate in activities in return. The Role of Planning in the Provision of Services The HUD funding application requires communities to engage in planning processes for all of their homeless programs. This study looked at variations in the planning process and found that communities in the sample generally fell into three categories based on their level of effort in planning. Approximately one-third of the communities engaged only in basic planning - focusing on the CoC application and the necessary steps to complete it. These CoCs concentrated their efforts in the few months leading up to the submission of the application. Another third of the communities pursued more in-depth, year-round planning, with a focus on the larger system of homeless programs and services, including the integration of other mainstream programs and services. The last third of the communities engaged in intensive and long-term planning - conducting multi-year, strategic planning for homeless programs and well-integrated services. For a few of these communities, this comprehensive effort was beginning to make inroads into systematic responses to chronic homelessness and accessing of mainstream programs. Research Implications The completed study provides a rich array of information on activities of high-performing CoCs and documents the progress of the studied communities along many dimensions. The research concludes that HUD's adoption of a community-wide approach to distributing limited homeless assistance dollars moved communities to create networks of more cohesive programs and services that offer more support to homeless people. This would not have happened without HUD's assistance. To continue understanding CoCs and their impacts, the report suggests that additional research should be focused on the workings of transitional and permanent supportive housing programs.
|
