Excellent Positive Piece on PSH on NPR’s Weekend All Things Considered

Sunday afternoon, NPR’s Weekend “All Things Considered” had a great piece about LA’s Skid Row (http://www.npr.org/2014/10/26/359112842/as-downtown-l-a-grows-so-does-urgency-to-fix-skid-row). About half of the piece was devoted to an extremely comprehensive and positive portrayal of a Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) project, the Star Apartments on Skid Row, developed by the non-profit Skid Row Housing Trust. The piece succinctly explained the idea behind PSH (and Housing First, though the latter is not mentioned by name), “The best way to tackle homelessness, as well as handle all the chronic health and mental health problems, is to get people housed first and then work on the other issues — issues which can seem extremely challenging.” It profiled a specific resident, Jude Burns, and vividly described how this project essentially saved his life. It quoted Dennis Culhane, a professor of social policy at the University of Pennsylvania, “The research is very robust. It shows that about 85 percent of the people who are placed in this housing remain there one year later. Even among the people who exit, many of them are exiting to other planned arrangements. Only a few percentage is actually returning to homelessness." Finally, the piece highlighted how much money is saved through PSH, as opposed to the other options out there.

The MDHA Model

If you follow this blog, you already know what MDHA does. It is an association of organizations devoted to ending homelessness in Dallas and Collin Counties, by putting people into homes. In order to end homelessness, we facilitate over $16,750,000 of annual federal funding, coordinate services, and drive improvement in more than 45 different transitional housing (TH), rapid rehousing (RRH), and permanent supportive housing (PSH) programs. 

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) does not directly fund service providers, rather mandates that they be funded through local Continuum of Care (CoC)[1] organizations, which coordinate services for those experiencing homelessness. HUD requires all service providers it funds to report on their performance through a Homeless Management Information System (HMIS)[2], which tracks, grades and drives improvement across the CoC, and in each individual organization. Increasingly, the federal government is requiring even service providers funded outside of the local CoC to report on their performance through HMIS. MDHA is the federally designated CoC organization and HMIS operator for Dallas and Collin Counties[3].

Interestingly, different communities build different models to fulfill the above CoC and HMIS functions, and these models can change in the same community with time. These functions may be fulfilled by the same organization, as in MDHA’s case today. They may also be fulfilled by two separate organizations, as it was in Dallas before 2010, when the Community Council of Greater Dallas was the HMIS operator. These functions may be fulfilled by a department of local government, as was the case with the CoC function in Dallas before 2004. Alternatively, as in Dallas today, these functions may be fulfilled by an independent non-profit organization, like MDHA. Finally, these functions may be fulfilled by an organization, that also provides some type of direct services, while in others, they are fulfilled by an organization that quite purposefully does not. Between 2007 and 2011, MDHA was an example of the former, The Bridge operating under MDHA, at the time. Now it is an example of the latter, having spun The Bridge off as a separate non-profit three years ago this month.

 
MDHA’s board and community leaders chose the current model very deliberately. MDHA serves as the lead agency for the CoC and as the HMIS operator. This enables the CoC and HMIS functions to work symbiotically, hand in hand. The CoC application process for federal funding is a competitive one, and the more MDHA can drive improvement of the service providers through the use of a high functioning HMIS, the better the odds of winning more funding. MDHA purposefully does not provide any direct services, and is an independent non-profit organization. This enables MDHA to be objective, with the exclusive needs of the consumer in mind, remaining nimble, efficient and responsive to those very needs.

---

[1] See http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/hudprograms/continuumofcare

[2] See http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/comm_planning/homeless/hmis

[3] See https://www.onecpd.info/resources/documents/HEARTH_ESGInterimRule&ConPlanConformingAmendments.pdf,  http://www.va.gov/HOMELESS/docs/SSVF_Data_Collection_Guide.pdf, https://www.onecpd.info/resources/documents/HDX_VAInitiatesParticipationinHMIS_12.30.10.pdf

Who is Homeless According to the Federal Government? Not Even the Federal Government Can Decide!

Harry Truman once said that he needed to find a one armed economist. When asked why, he said that every time he would ask any economist a question, the economist would say, “On the one hand… but on the other hand…” and he could never get a straight answer, hence he needed a one armed economist… Now good old Harry could have been talking about many other areas of government policy too. It is many times really difficult to get a simple, straight answer! 

Since we are MDHA, we are very interested in the basic question, who is homeless? That might seem like a simple question, to which there is a simple answer. Far from it! Obviously, someone who lives unsheltered on the street is experiencing homelessness, but what about someone who lives in transitional housing? According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the latter are also considered homeless, even though they are sheltered. 

What about chronic homelessness? Is someone who has lived on the streets for a year or more not chronically homeless? Well, not necessarily, since the federal definition of “chronically homeless” is not met unless the person has a disability. (Though, as I often say to people, if I am on the street for a year, and I have not developed a disability, I would think there was something really wrong with me!)

OK, but at least the federal government as a whole agrees what the definition of homeless is, right? Wrong again! Different government departments disagree even on that basic fact. Some of the most glaring examples are the differences between how HUD and the U.S. Department of Education define homeless children and youth. Just one of the differences has to do with what is referred to as “doubling up”.

Millions of Americans, due to poverty and related conditions, live with other families, in a residence not their own, and are one step away from the street or a shelter. Are these people homeless? According to HUD, they are “at risk” of homelessness, but they are not homeless. The Department of Education, however, by law, must consider children and youth, who are, “sharing the housing of other persons due to loss of housing, economic hardship, or a similar reason,” i.e. “doubled up” as homeless.

 
Obviously, this is very important and complicated issue, that goes far beyond what a blog post can address. We encourage you to check out the website of Hear Us Inc., www.hearus.us, to learn more, and educate yourself about this very important issue.

So, Why Again Should I Give to MDHA on North Texas Giving Day?

Well, by law the only way our community can continue to get almost $17,000,000 of federal funding for housing programs for those experiencing homelessness, is if MDHA continues to exist, nay thrive. And, the federal government foots that very large $17,000,000 bill for those housing programs, but expects the community (that’s you and me!) to fund the much smaller cost of mechanism for getting it, MDHA. Beyond that, just look at what MDHA has accomplished with its partners, a 65% reduction in chronic homelessness, a 1200% increase in permanent supportive housing (PSH - 2000 units now!), and a public investment by DHA in housing 3400 formerly homeless individuals and families at an annual value of $28,000,000, and much much more. And, you know what? You ain’t seen nothing yet. We will add another 1800 units of PSH, and we will end chronic homelessness by the end of 2016; you just wait and see. That is why you should give to MDHA.

Just click here on September 18, 2014: https://northtexasgivingday.org/#npo/metro-dallas-homeless-alliance

or here the other 364 days of the year:
http://www.mdhadallas.org/donate/

Defending a Basic Right by Charles Gulley, Vice President of Programs, MDHA

It is unfortunate that time must be spent defending a basic right that belongs to all human beings in the free world, i.e. the right to live where one wishes to live. In Frisco, there are those who believe that developing restrictive covenants or deed restrictions provide protective immunity to practices of institutional classism, making the bold assumption that persons from lower socio-economic strata would lower property values.

This past week, the Dallas Morning News released the 2014 Point-in-Time Homeless Census Count that shows a trend of increasing homelessness among families, women with children, and youth.  Several studies over the past decade and a half have shown the Dallas area lacking affordable housing for low-income households. The lack of affordable housing, coupled with those who would restrict where persons could live, only exacerbates the problem of homelessness. Unless preventative measures are taken like those being exercised by City House, i.e. housing the homeless to improve persons lives, homeless numbers are bound to grow. If HOAs and other communities can deed restrict communities and deed restrict the use of those properties to keep certain groups out, where are people supposed to live? Where will families and young adults live who need to stabilize their living conditions to improve their lives?

The disregard of inalienable rights of human beings being subordinated to the maintenance of property values cast a dark shadow on the HOA and Frisco, leaving way to charges of societal prejudice and class discrimination. Fair housing laws must be invoked to protect the rights of those who only want a place to live. There is no evidence that City House’s action of moving into the Frisco neighborhood has negatively impacted any property values.

Metro Dallas Homeless Alliance stands in support of City House’s right to own and occupy a house in that Frisco neighborhood and any neighborhood of their choice. With increasing homelessness among certain groups and a short supply of affordable housing, restricting where people can live just to protect property values is, first and foremost, humanely wrong. Second, it is not good for the Dallas area if we want to stop homelessness and assist persons to become productive citizens. The legal action being taken by the HOA will only hurt the region’s image and the region’s attempt to overcome homelessness, poverty, and other associated societal problems.

The "Pattonization" of American Life

One of the most fascinating movies ever made is “Patton”. I recently rewatched it, and though the style is a little different than what we are used to today, for the most part it holds up, especially the tour de force performance of George C. Scott. The movie gives a very objective picture of the general, as one of those responsible for the Allied victory in Europe, but also as a greatly flawed man, who himself vacillates between dreams of greatness and awareness of his shortcomings.

The film begins with Patton facing an audience of soldiers, who we never see only hear, as the camera gives a POV shot of the general speaking to the audience. If all you did was watch that speech, you would get the essence of the movie and of Patton, the man. It strikes me, as an American who grew up abroad, and at times looks at America’s character as an outsider, that you get the essence of America’s internal struggle with itself from that very speech, and that that speech and Patton himself is a stand in for America writ large.

One of the most central points in both the speech and the movie, is Patton’s contention that “all real Americans love to fight,” and that we “love a winner,” and “abhor a loser.” It is clear and explicit that he believes that this is true in all instances, at peace or at war. General Omar Bradley, tells him that the difference between them is that while he, Bradley, does what he does because he was trained and he is good at it, Patton does it because he loves war. What we see in the film is that because of this approach, Patton is the perfect blunt instrument in the careful hands of his commanders on the battlefield, but an utter failure in almost every other situation.

Why is this? Why is Patton’s approach so patently wrong? Simply put, it is because except if you are fighting fascism (where ironically war is the lifeblood of society), you really don’t want to “fight”. You really don’t want there to be a winner and a loser. What you really want is to create as many win-win situations for everyone. That is what leads to success and happiness for as many people as possible, which should be the purpose of a democratic civilized society.

What we see today, as opposed to the war and post war period, is that all too often Patton’s erroneous approach is put into practice in our society, particularly in the economic realm. The examples are all around us. Corporate tycoons paying a smaller percentage of their income in taxes than their workers do; companies never getting off the dole, while the social safety net is gradually shredded; a small percentage of our population controlling more and more of the wealth, while on the opposite end of the spectrum poverty grows, and with it another generation laid to waste.

Patton’s old commander, Eisenhower, warned us in his parting words to the nation to beware the military-industrial complex. He told that if we did not pay attention, this faceless menace would overpower us. In fact, much worse has happened, we have adopted a military thinking, that tells us that if others don’t lose, we have not really won. We can do better. We must.

How About You Pick on Someone Your Own Size?!

Remember when you were a kid, and a bully picked on a kid much younger than him? You probably said in an indignant voice, "Hey! How about you pick on someone your own size?" That is what I (David Gruber) want to say to a few of my fellow Frisco residents in this infuriating story from the Dallas Morning News about a homeowners association in Frisco suing our partner, City House: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-news/frisco/headlines/20140905-suit-seeks-to-block-homeless-youths-from-frisco-neighborhood.ece

One of the wonderful programs City House has is a housing programs for teens and young adults, experiencing homelessness. These single gender groups live together, learn valuable life skills, and learn or work in the community, all under the supervision of a trained adult, who lives with them. They have been running this program in Plano, with nary a negative comment, for years now.

They identified a need for this program in Frisco too, and have already put in a lot of time and money into opening such a home in Frisco for young women. Now, instead of moving the young women into the home, they must contend with a lawsuit from the homeowners association, where the home is located, who seek to block them from moving the young women in. Fortunately, MDHA Corporate Champion, Strasburger & Price, has stepped up to the plate, and is representing them. We, at MDHA, wish City House and Strasburger & Price the best of luck in defeating this lawsuit.