# Presentation: 207884

## Overview of the Homeless Policy Academy Initiative 

- Establishing Meaningful Outcome Measures and Optimizing Program Achievement: A Learning Community Workgroup
- November 30–December 1, 2006
- Houston, TX

## The Nature of the Problem

- The needs of people who are homeless cross the administrative boundaries established by existing funding streams
- Housing and service needs can be adequately addressed when those responsible for administering these services collaborate
- No single funding source or program will have the capacity or the energy to address the complex set of issues inherent in homelessness
- Mainstream resources, which can help address the issue, are underutilized

**Notes:**
We were speaking to the choir. 
Participants identified the need to bring other Federal agencies with programs could help to serve this population into the mix. 
National organizations include: American Public Human Services Association, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, National Association of Alcohol and Substance abuse Directors, National Association of County and City Health Officers, National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors, National Conference of State Legislators, National Governors Association, National Head Start Association and the U.S. Conference of Mayors.   These organizations helped us in many ways, including encouraging their constituents to persuade their State Governors’ offices to participate in the Policy Academies. 

## How Does the Policy Academy Initiative Help Address the Problem?

- States play a pivotal role in determining eligibility for accessing mainstream Federal and State programs
- Policy Academy activities are designed to help States think about new, collaborative approaches
- The Policy Academy Initiative is a **“results-based decisionmaking process”**—**not** an event—that focuses on:
- Promoting strategic decisionmaking
- Creating and reinforcing relationships
- Improving access to mainstream resources
- Providing TA to support States’ efforts

**Notes:**
There is also increasing recognition that mainstream health, social service, and housing programs for poor and at-risk persons need to be included in our planning about responding to homelessness.  

State Teams are encouraged to consider how current policies and program resources influence the response to homelessness and how these services can be made more accessible for persons who experience homelessness. 

## What TA Needs Are States Expressing?

## How Are We Addressing the TA Needs?

**Targeted State TA**
- Web-based or written materials, peer-to-peer and expert consultation, team meeting facilitation, State Policy Academies, or planning summits
**Learning Community Workgroups**
- Four, 1.5-day, peer-to-peer workgroup meetings focusing on youth, employment, transition planning, and data and outcome measures
- Followup products and conference calls to encourage peer-to-peer sharing
**SSI/SSDI Outreach, Access and Recovery (SOAR) Training**
- 24 States funded by HRSA, HUD, SAMHSA
- Provide States with targeted training on SSI enrollment and build upon States’ local infrastructures to sustain the training effort locally
**Policy Academy Web Site: www/hrsa.gov/homeless**

## What Are the DLCW Objectives?

**Peer-to-peer**

## What Are the Meeting Components?

**Welcome, Introductions, and Overview**
**Plenary and Breakout Sessions**
- Establishing Meaningful and Achievable Measures and Optimizing Program Achievement Through Data and Performance Measurement
- Promising Practices to Implementing Workable Data Outcome Solutions
**Peer-to-peer Discussion Sessions**
**Reflections on Day 1 and State Strategy Sessions**
**Plenary: What Are the Keys to Success, and What Does It Take to Move Forward? **
**Topical Roundtable Discussions**
**Next Steps, Wrap-up, and Evaluation**

## Which States Are Represented?

- Alaska
- Alabama
- Arizona
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Massachusetts
- Michigan

- North Carolina
- Pennsylvania
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Vermont
- Virgin Islands
- Virginia

## What Systems/Constituencies Do Participants Represent?

- Community-based
- Community development
- State agency
- Faith-based
- Private sector
- Homelessness
- Housing
- Mental health

- Primary health
- Social services
- Substance abuse
- Research and planning
- Information systems
- Economic security

## State Responses to Pre-Workgroup Questions

*Summary*

## Current Data Collection

- HUD universal, homeless extent and homelessness reason, and program data elements
- Point-in-time survey data
- Length of stay in programs
- Housing inventory data
- Various demographic data
- Annual progress report data
- Variety of other programmatic data

## Current Reporting

- Basic demographic reports
- Unduplicated count reports
- Data quality reports
- Financial draw data reports
- Open record certification
- Program performance reports
- PATH annual reports
- HUD Annual Progress Reports for homeless assistance programs
- HUD Emergency Shelter Grant reports

## Top Desired Workgroup Outcomes 

- Strategies for how to:
- Increase participation in data collection/entry across agencies and the State
- Optimize HMIS data collection/reporting
- Use data for education and public awareness
- Use data more effectively in policy- and decisionmaking
- Examples of other States’:
- Data collection system integration/centralization
- Analytical tools
- Barriers and challenges

## One Year from Now, States Want to Have... 

- Collaboration and Integration
- Data workgroup (statewide and/or interagency)
- Integrated data across systems
- Use of data for performance improvements and gap analysis by all stakeholders
- Meaningful Data to Inform Policy, Programs, and Funding
- Completed, standardized reports with meaningful data
- Data effective for use with homelessness policy recommendations
- Cost benefit data