DHCD posted an RFI for EA to inform the RFR. Wait…what???

Imagine a world without acronyms.  Let’s take some pause to explain what that means and give some history and context.

Translation: The Department of Housing and Community Development has posted a Request for Information relative to the Emergency Assistance Program to inform the Request for Responses, which is a bid or application for a contract and funding.

We should start with the question, “What is a re-procurement?” The answer, “to procure something again” is not exactly helpful, so turning we turned to Google:

In this context, it is the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, specifically the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), is seeking to obtain shelter units for families experiencing homelessness, to meet the state’s legal and moral obligation to ensure the safety and well-being of children. Because the state currently has contracts with nonprofit agencies to provide shelter, this is a re-procurement.  It is an opportunity to re-contract – potentially funding new programs and ending contracts with others, to adjust portfolio size and program models; to make financial adjustments; and to introduce new program components, outcome measurements, and expectations.

The Request for Information (RFI) is a key component to the “especially with care or effort” part of the definition. This is when the purchaser (DHCD) takes the time to understand the needs and nuances of the system and the people it serves through a formal written series of questions. Potential bidders (shelters) and the broader community have an opportunity to respond the the questions. Responding to the RFI is not mandatory; respondents are not required to answer all of the questions. Responses must be made through the state’s bid solicitation system (CommBuys) and are considered public information.

Q: What is being re-procured?

The Emergency Assistance (EA) Program, commonly referred to as Family Shelter. This program currently contracts about $170 Million per year across about 50 programs to serve approximately 3,700 households per night.

Q: What are the steps of the re-procurement?

Q: When was the last re-procurement and what changes were made? 

The last procurement process took place in 2008 and the new contracts were implemented in 2009.  As part of the last re-procurement:

• The Housing Assistance Program, which was responsible for prevention and housing search, was dismantled and agencies were given the flexibility to bring housing search into programs or contract with an outside agency.
• Stabilization was added as a responsibility of EA programs, again through direct programming and staffing or subcontracts.  Prior to the 2009-2019 contracts, stabilization was not a requirement. Some programs had outside funding and independent programs, but many did not.
• There were a few programs that were eliminated, a few new programs added.  The overall shelter stock shifted – reducing the number of congregate shelters and adding more scattered site units. Rates, staffing patterns and program sizes also shifted.

Q: What was the context then and what has happened since? 

• Around the time of the 2009 Procurement, a Commission to End Homelessness released a 5 year plan that included broader systems change efforts and investments, primarily in prevention pilots.  The vision was that investment in prevention would lead to a decrease in homelessness, and the money saved from the reduced need for shelter would be reinvested in housing.
• The recession and housing crisis hit soon thereafter, and homelessness across the nation and in MA skyrocketed.
• Since the 2009 Procurement, there have been many policy changes and shifts including:
  • Transferring the EA and individual shelter system oversight from the Department of Transitional Assistance to DHCD
  • The HomeBASE program was launched, revamped, revamped, and revamped
  • More restrictive eligibility criteria was implemented
  • The number of EA shelter units expanded by approximately 1,700 units, including the implementation of the co-shelter model
  • Diversion by EA providers was implemented in the local offices, including pilots for prevention
  • There have also been shelter contract funding cuts and re-negotiations
  • Over the ten year period, the nightly census of families in shelter increased from about 1,700 families to a high of 4,800 (with 2,400 in motels) and has plateaued to about 3,700 families (with 32 in motels)

So, while a procurement is certainly a time of change, it does not preclude other changes after implementation.

Q: What changes are anticipated in this procurement? 

That is for all of us to influence,  and for DHCD and the Baker/Polito Administration to decide. Here is the statement from the RFI cover letter with DHCD’s vision:

DHCD envisions an EA system that prevents families from becoming homeless, safely shelters families for whom homelessness is unavoidable, works to quickly find stable and sustainable housing for families in shelter, supports families in their transition into the community, and connects families with the services and supports they need. Consistent with a Housing First approach, DHCD believes that families can best address their needs when they are in their own homes.

The document asks specific questions in the following areas:

1. Respondent’s Background Information
2. Prevention and Diversion
3. System Connections for Families in Shelter
   • Mental Health and Other Disabilities
   • Employment
   • Length of Stay
4. Portfolio Mix and Size
5. Housing
6. Post-Shelter Stabilization
7. Data and Finance
8. Other

The RFI can be accessed here. Homes for Families will be looking to our community to inform our response and encourage agencies and individuals to submit responses as well.

 

LH

Domestic Violence Awareness: Recap of this month’s community meeting

We share this post as domestic violence awareness month comes to a close; however our commitment to ending domestic violence, honoring victims and standing in solidarity with survivor continues

October is domestic violence (DV) awareness month, and we were joined by local DV organization HarborCOV to discuss safety planning and challenges for survivors of DV in the current climate (e.g. immigration).

Key Points from the Discussion

• Participants shared feeling that state agencies and institutions don’t recognize abuse that is not physically violent in the way they need to (e.g. high standards of evidence like restraining orders).
  • In the EA system, decisions are made for people in DV situations – these decisions can be fast, ill-considered and lead to a bigger mess afterwards.
  • A lot of long-term state contractors toe the line, doing things in the interest of DHCD over families.
• Housing and a safe place to go can make a real difference in survivors’ ability to leave abusive situations.

The Meeting
Jasmine Pérez-Pimentel, Director of Programs and Services, and Uma Venkatraman of HarborCOV shared first about HarborCOV’s approach to DV as a social justice issue and working for creative solutions for survivors. They emphasized the importance of a fully supportive approach working with survivors, without ever judging.

The group brainstormed what DV is and can look like, to highlight the many ways abuse can take place outside of physical violence. Threatening self-harm, attacking self-esteem, isolation, and manipulation are examples of the many different ways abuse can look. DV happens in patterns/repeated acts, represented in the cycle of violence –  different kinds of abuse (e.g. emotional, physical violence) all can go through the cycle of violence:

Image from delaware.gov

Safety Planning

• Give power to the survivor & know their priorities for safety
• Keep parents with children (DCF)
• Understand shelter is often not an option for survivors
• In EA, sometimes couples with abusers are in shelter together
  • Separate case managers for each person in a couple is something some providers are doing to build trusting relationships and to be able to really know families to be able to advocate for them.
  • Sometimes it can be difficult to tell who is the abuser and who is being abused.

Immigration

• Two options to know about for people with different immigration statuses:
  • VOWA – self-petition option
  • UVISA – option for some victims of crimes, including DV
• EA providers in the room were adamant about more trainings for staff around ICE and the current climate.
  • One important tip HarborCOV offered: look into options around marking certain spaces as private, there is potential to limit ICE’s access to these spaces.
• Evictions because of DV are illegal in MA, but people with undocumented status are at risk of being exploited in this way.

Additional Resources

• If you or someone you know is in danger, SafeLink is a resource for anyone affected by domestic or dating violence. The SafeLink toll-free number is (877) 785-2020.
• Simmons School of Social Work offers an online training course which provides an an overview of the essential knowledge about domestic violence

Putting Survey Data Into Practice: Part 3, Community Connections

“If the providers understand the family’s perspective on things, they
are better able to help, are more sympathetic, and the family’s needs
can be better met.” 

— Homes for Families Consumer Advocacy Team (CAT) Member, 2017

In September of 2017, HFF released a full report on Family Experiences of Homelessness in Massachusetts. We are continuing to explore and build off of the survey data used in that report, and one way we are doing this is with this blog series, a continuation of the “Putting Survey Data Into Practice” document released in January. The series incorporates the perspectives of families and providers in relation to key data points, and works towards solutions for families and family-centered care.

Stay tuned every Monday in April at 10am for a new (coffee break) installment of this blog series!

Community Connections

Important points from the survey results (page numbers correspond to the full report):

• Families in congregate shelter were less likely to feel shelter staff helped them become aware of community resources (p. 18)

 

We wanted to hear from families! What would be some of the best approaches to support and facilitate community connections for families experiencing homelessness? The HFF Consumer Advocacy Team (CATs) shared their reflections, summarized here:

How can organizations support well-connected relationships between families and community resources?

• Keep in contact with families.
• Maintain awareness of existing, new, and changing community resources and share this information with families.
• Actively work to engage families in a community that may not be their own, recognizing and supporting the challenges that come with being in a neighborhood other than one’s own. 
• Understanding families’ needs on a personal level and maintaining contact for as long as necessary to support community connections. 

This post authored by I.W. & N.M.

Putting Survey Data Into Practice: Part 1 Health and Wellness

“If the providers understand the family’s perspective on things, they
are better able to help, are more sympathetic, and the family’s needs
can be better met.” 

— Homes for Families Consumer Advocacy Team (CAT) Member, 2017

In September of 2017, HFF released a full report on Family Experiences of Homelessness in Massachusetts. We are continuing to explore and build off of the survey data used in that report, and one way we are doing this is with this blog series, a continuation of the “Putting Survey Data Into Practice” document released in January. The series incorporates the perspectives of families and providers in relation to key data points, and works towards solutions for families and family-centered care.

Health & Wellness

Important points from the survey results:

• Mental health is captured as a contributing cause of homelessness
• A high percentage of parents reported their health and stress got worse after entering shelter.

We wanted to hear from families! What would be some of the best approaches to address families’ health and wellness needs while experiencing homelessness? The HFF  Consumer Advocacy Team (CATs) shared their reflections, summarized here:

How can programs move toward addressing clinical needs?

• Assessments—identify mental health needs and provide early support before homelessness, or challenges following homelessness, occur.
• Front-door assessments are an opportunity to identify whether or not mental health may have been a contributing cause to a family’s displacement, and providing supports early on if they are necessary. 
• Provide childcare to families—some are unable to receive proper care without it.

How can serving mental and emotional health needs be built into practice?

• Recognize the different practical needs that families face compared to individuals—families should not have to choose between their health and their children. 
• Trauma-informed care, a better understanding of the health issues associated with families being displaced; providers should have easy access to training, resources, and connections to health centers. 

How can we create a system that allows for greater flexibility and more specialization of services?

• Find support early on, and do so through intake assessments to avoid making assumptions about a family’s specific needs. 
• Staff training in specialty areas that address the different challenges families may face (domestic violence, substance abuse, etc.). 

This post is authored by I.W. & N.M.

Promising Practices for Addressing A Fear Inducing Federal Policy Climate

At Homes for Families we look to families and the provider community to name the problems that perpetuate family homelessness and work with us to identify the solutions. Over the past year, family shelters in Massachusetts have been confronted with responding to a fear-inducing federal policy climate that is a continual threat to the families they serve, and the livelihoods of many of their staff as well. This is especially the case among immigrant families or families with members of varied immigrant statuses. In response to this challenge, we created a tool with promising practices and tips on how to respond to the federal climate we are operating within with a focus on immigrant populations.

Addressing Fears Amidst An Anti-Immigrant and Harmful Federal Policy Climate: Tips and Ideas for Family Shelter Practice

We hope providers find this tool insightful, as it showcases some of the innovative practices happening across the state currently. We welcome families to share their insights and providers to share other practices we have yet to capture!

-Liz

Director of Operations and Member Engagement

Family Shelter Scattered Site Report

We are excited to release our Scattered Site Brief, a report presenting promising practices and policy recommendations around this Emergency Shelter Assistance (EA) model. We created the brief in partnership with EA providers. It includes family voice and a variety of types of data from providers. Note there is a tool in the Appendix meant to facilitate provider assessment of their practices in relation to recommendations in the report.

We welcome reactions, comments and feedback on the brief, as well as experiences and ideas from families and staff relative to the scattered sites.

Click here to link to the report.

REPORTS RELEASED! Family Experiences of Homelessness in Massachusetts & Evidence Based Stabilization

Massachusetts is home to the country’s only statewide shelter system with a legal mandate to provide immediate shelter to all families who meet the strict eligibility criteria. The Emergency Assistance (EA) shelter program is administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development funded by state dollars and includes 52 distinct non-profit shelter providers. Homes for Families is dedicated to learning from the experiences and perspectives of families overcoming homelessness and family shelter community.  As a part of that work, we embarked on a three year research project funded by the Oak Foundation. The research intended to look at the role and components of assessment, the range of shelter programs in Massachusetts, the experiences of families in EA shelters, and national trends and research to inform the next steps address homelessness in the Commonwealth.

Our research took place from 2014 to 2017. During this period, there were increases to the level of services in motels; an expansion of contracted shelter beds, the development of the co-shelter model; the restructuring and expansion of diversion practices; and increases to the benefit level of the HomeBASE program, and an increase in prevention funding and investments in the Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program. According to statistics from the Department of Housing and Community Development from January 2014 through June 2017:

• the average daily caseload during this time period was reduced from 4,458 to 3,545, a decline of 20%
• the motel caseload declined by 98% from 2,098 families to 46
• the number of contracted shelter beds increased from 2,018 units in September 2013 to 3,682 in June of 2017, a total of 1,644 units were added, an increase of 82%
• the diversion rate increased from 5% to 21%
• 9,140 families in shelters and motels were re-housed with the HomeBASE resource
• 15,484 families received prevention assistance through the RAFT program
• Over 1,700 families in shelters and motels were re-housed with vouchers through the Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program

 

http://www.mass.gov/hed/docs/dhcd/hs/ea/eamonthlyreport.pdf

As the numbers and graph clearly indicate this was a period of tremendous progress in addressing family homelessness, especially when family homelessness in other high cost cities continues to rise (e.g. New York City, Washington, DC). At the same time the system is still serving more than double the number of families since before the Great Recession, about half of the families that apply for shelter do not meet the eligibility criteria, and thousands more families are facing housing instability. It is imperative that the system continues to evolve to address the structural causes and individual instances of homelessness.

Our research provides a pathway forward through a series of 4 reports. Each paper examines the ongoing crisis of family homelessness through a distinct lens; however, there are clear themes shared across the series. Common themes across the four papers include:

1. Structural Gaps: We must address the structural issues that have created this crisis, namely the shortage of housing and the widening gap between wages and rent. We know that housing is the foundation to stability and services and opportunities can create a pathway to success.
2. Children: There must be a greater focus on children. The safety and developmental needs of children must be an integral and core component of all policies, programs, and systems addressing the needs of families without homes. 
3. Assessment: There must be an improved focus on conducting comprehensive, family-centered, and trauma-informed assessments.  The pathway to stability and improved well-being for parents and their children begins with a solid assessment. Strengths must be identified and risks assessed, and reliable and valid measures used to effectively target service resources.
4. Data: Evidence based solutions are driven by data; data is key to driving policy decisions. To craft and implement policies that will make a real difference in the lives of families experiencing homelessness, it must be accurate, reflect their voices, and capture the full range of their experiences- from shelter through stabilization.  In research, practice, or policy, family input and data are required for effective outcomes.

The first paper in the series was released in March of 2015. Assessment of Families Experiencing Homelessness: A Guide for Practitioners and Policymakers takes a step back to look at what is meant by the term “assessment” and walks through tips and strategies for a meaningful assessment process. The paper highlights the critical need to include children in the assessment process and the imperative to use the data to steer policy decisions.

The second paper was released in June 2015, The Family Shelter System in Massachusetts: A snapshot of program models, service needs, promising practices, and challenges  gives a general overview of the shelter programs across Massachusetts, with sections on system and family demographics, needs identified by providers and promising practices. This paper makes both programmatic and systemic recommendations, including issues around safety and program flexibility, a stronger focus on data and assessment, addressing generational poverty, cliff effects, and increasing coordination with community resources.

---

We are pleased to release the final two papers:

The third in the series, Family Experiences of Homelessness in Massachusetts: The Case for Family Centered Care highlights key data from a survey we administered with families in the Emergency Assistance (EA) program.  The survey was developed with the guidance of the Consumer Advocacy Team (CAT), a group of parents who have experienced homelessness and severe housing instability and that are full partners in our work.  Using a Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) approach, a total of 117 parents were surveyed in the Springfield and Boston areas in motels, congregate scattered sites, and co-shelters. This paper provides a glimpse into families’ experiences within the shelter system and other systems of care and makes the case for family centered care as a model to best align family needs with service delivery. Click here the summary of the data.

The final and fourth paper in the series, Evidence Based Stabilization: A Solution to Reduce Family Homelessness in Massachusetts reviews national research about families experiencing homelessness and evidence based practices across the country.  The paper concludes by recommending an assessment and evidence based stabilization model be implemented across the Commonwealth. 

---

 

We would like to that the authors and researchers, Dr. Carmela J. DeCandia of Artemis Associates LLC and Marvin So, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health; the Department of Housing and Community Development and shelter providers for their assistance in this project; and the staff, interns, and consultants who provided great support and leadership. We give special thanks to the Consumer Advocacy Team, and to all the families that participated in the survey and ongoing work of Homes for Families.

We look forward to our continued work to ensure the voices and viewpoints of families and shelter providers are heard and understood. We must couple those efforts with data to drive positive systems change and solutions. We welcome your reactions, ideas and feedback.

LH

New Leadership at the Department of Housing and Community Development

Homes for Families is pleased to share the news that Jane Banks has been appointed as the new Assistant Undersecretary for the Division of Stabilization at the Department of Housing and Community Development. The announcement below was sent to family shelter providers on 7/7/17:

Dear Providers:

I am excited to formally announce that Jane Banks will be joining the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) as the new Assistant Undersecretary for the Division of Housing Stabilization.  Jane is coming to us from the Center for Human Development in Springfield where she worked for nearly twenty years.  While there she held leadership roles with oversight of an array of multi-services programs serving families, children and individuals. She has managed a number of programs including: one of the Commonwealths largest EA shelter programs with shelter capacity of 297 families within their portfolio, HUD funded Supportive Housing Programs, Community Housing Supportive Program for families and individuals in Northampton, a Single Room Occupancy Program, and an very successful EA diversion program.

We are excited to be able to draw on Jane’s extensive experience in management and supervision, program development as well as her deep understanding of housing and homelessness, ranging from emergency shelters to permanent supportive housing

I know you will be as thrilled as I am that Jane has accepted the Assistant Undersecretary position.  She will be transitioning into her new role on July 31^st.

Please anticipate that Jane will be reaching out to you all, once she arrives at DHCD.

Ita Mullarkey

Associate Director

Division of Housing Stabilization

Jane has been an active member of Homes for Families while in her roles at the Center for Human Development. We have long noted her commitment to the inclusion of the family voice, unifying providers, collaboration, and innovation. Her energy, commitment to the work, and positive attitude are inspiring and contagious.  These qualities will make her an exceptional leader at DHCD and guide the system through further progress and advancement in addressing homelessness in the Commonwealth.  We thank Jane for her outstanding work at CHD; we thank her for her role in strengthening the work of Homes for Families, including the growth of our Annual Visioning Day event; and we thank her for stepping up and taking on this new role; her perspective as a shelter and service provider will be an asset to the Department.  We urge the family homelessness community to welcome Jane and commit to partnering with her so that together we can continue to build on the strengths of families, shelter providers, and the community to end homelessness once and for all.

 

 

LH

Let’s talk about the 6 month clock

Families must earn less than 115% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) to be considered eligible for the state’s emergency assistance shelter program, click here to see the maximum monthly income by household size. Then once in shelter, there is a “6 month clock” for families who exceed the income limit. This rule is written into the family shelter line item in the State Budget:

provided further, that any family whose income exceeds 115 per cent of the federal poverty level while the family is receiving assistance funded by this item shall not become ineligible for assistance due to exceeding the income limit for a period of 6 months from the date that the income level was exceeded

Some things to consider in thinking about this policy:

• The Rental Market: In Massachusetts, a household needs to earn $25.91/hour to afford a 2 bedroom unit or work 104 hours per week
• The Wage Market: In Jan 2016, the Commonwealth increased the minimum wage to $10/hr.  Increasing wages is a good thing, right? We all want to Raise Up Massachusetts? But at $10/hr, households of 2 people are no longer eligible for shelter while working a full time minimum wage job. As the minimum wage increases,  so will the number of families that will face the shelter eligibility cliff, while still unable to afford market rent.

We have been discussing and wondering, the impact that the 6 month clock has on families in shelter.  We posed the question to our member agencies,  and have heard some varied responses:

• Questions about the impact of this policy on HomeBASE eligibility
• Questions about families’ awareness of the policy and consistency of enforcement
• Direct examples of short term work triggering the 6 month clock, but then having no options or income at the end of the time period
• Concerns that families report feeling trapped and that they want to work and earn as much money as they can, but that rent will still be unaffordable
• Programs working directly on individual situations and trying to make HomeBASE or other alternatives work

So what do you think?

 

 

The SWM Budget and Key Programs Relative to Family Homelesness

The Senate Ways and Means Budget was released on Tuesday afternoon.  The budget proposal, entitled INVESTING FOR A RESILIENT COMMONWEALTH, begins with a message from Chairwoman Karen Spilka about resiliency:

Resilience is most often defined as the ability to achieve a good outcome in the face of adversity. Resilience can—and must—be built on a community-by-community and statewide basis, but there is no more important place to plant the seed of resilience than within our children. Strong, resilient children will grow up to be active contributors to a productive and thriving Commonwealth.

The Executive Summary gives an overview of the allocations by category with some of the reasoning of the committee:

 Stable, safe housing is critical for family wellbeing and the physical, emotional and educational success of children. In line with the mission of the Special Senate Committee on Housing, this budget invests $441M in low income and homelessness programs to help connect individuals, families and vulnerable populations with housing and supportive services, key foundations for resilience at all ages.

And notes regarding specific investments or initiatives:

As recommended by the Special Senate Committee on Housing, this budget requires the Executive Offices of Housing and Economic Development, Health and Human Services, Labor and Workforce Development and Education to enter into a memorandum of understanding to identify cross-agency solutions to the challenges faced by low income Massachusetts residents at risk of homelessness.

image screenshot from https://malegislature.gov/Budget/FY2017/Senate Click to enlarge

 

Program funding is listed, by line item, in the allocation section. Below are the key programs impacting families experiencing homelessness, listed with the proposed funding level, language, and key amendments. We will compile a full list of relative amendments when they are filed.

Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program (7004-9024)

SWM Proposed Funding Amount: $100,083,891

SWM Proposed Language: Adds reporting language and elimination of some technical changes related to program administration

Amendment: Housing Chair Linda Dorcena Forry’s amendment #779 proposed to increase funding to $120 million and make important adjustments to the program, including: establishing the Fair Market Rent (FMR) Cap at the current FMR; establishing a data management system; and mandating rapid voucher distribution.  Click here for our MRVP Action Alert.  Let your Senator know it is #779!

Emergency Assistance (7004-0101)

SWM Proposed Funding: $155,058,948

SWM Proposed Language: Includes language that families at imminent risk of homelessness would be eligible for shelter; increases advance notice language from 60 to 90 days; reduces reporting requirements

Amendment: Senator Jason Lewis’s Amendment #669 will increase reporting requirements to include the reasons why families are determined not eligible for EA and basic demographic information

 

HomeBASE (7004-0108)

SWM Proposed Funding: $31,943,664

SWM Proposed Language: Includes increased access to families in domestic violence and substance abuse family sober living programs

Amendment: Senator Sonia Chang Diaz’s amendment #426 will increase funding to $39,200,000; remove the funding cap for the expansion to domestic violence and substance abuse program residents and clarify eligibility for participants in those programs; and add language for voucher renewal

Other Useful Information

For more information about the Senate Ways and Means Budget Relative to Housing, please click the links for CHAPA’s full analysis and amendment list.

For more information on selected programs related to benefits, child welfare, housing and homelessness from Mass Law Reform Institute, click here

For a full analysis from Mass Budget and Policy Center, click here

Thank you to our partners in the advocacy community for this great work!

For tips of navigating the list of amendments, refer back to our blog post on the House Amendments; the Senate Amendments are a bit easier to navigate as they are listed by category.

And thank you, yes YOU, for your advocacy on these key issues!

LH

PS: Bonus thanks to any retweets of our #SenBudget tweets on Twitter!