Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 10/27/2020 - HOMELESSNESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE FINDINGSDATE: STAFF: October 27, 2020 Honore Depew, Interim Policy and Project Manager Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Homelessness Advisory Committee Findings. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to provide Council with an overview of recommendations and considerations for homeless shelters and co-located services from the City Manager’s (Temporary) Homelessness Advisory Committee, made up of multi-sector community members and service providers, and to seek guidance on next steps. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED What feedback and additional considerations do Councilmembers have for the proposed next steps? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Like other cities in the U.S., Fort Collins is a place where there are individuals and families experiencing homelessness. Existing service providers are being strained by the extent of the need and, in some cases, are outgrowing their facilities. Some of the key pressures on the local system of support for people experiencing homelessness (PEH) include: • Insufficient shelter capacity (both day shelter and overnight shelter): o Leads to perpetually having to find emergency overflow spaces. o Exacerbated by COVID-19 space requirements. o Current building and location of Fort Collins Rescue Mission (FCRM) is not adequate - seeking partnership and assistance to help improve. Durable partners in the community want to support a successful transition for FCRM. o Current Catholic Charities facility also facing space constraint challenges. • Gaps in hours when shelter is available throughout the day and night: o The lack of adequate local shelter pushes PEH onto the streets and can cause conflict due to disruptive behaviors that impact residents and businesses. o Successful mitigation strategies include street outreach by the local nonprofit Outreach Fort Collins to build relationships and connect people with services. • Gaps in support for certain identities and types of services: o E.g., LGBTQIA+, couples, pets, respite/recuperative, regular medical treatment preventative/routine, acute, and serious conditions, long-term mental and behavioral health treatment. • Distance between shelters: o PEH have said it is like having a full-time job to travel between sites due to walking or finding public transportation from place to place throughout the days. ▪ Especially tiring and difficult for people with disabilities. • Emergency shelter being used as de facto housing. October 27, 2020 Page 2 • Lack of “bridge housing” options, rapid rehousing (flexible funding streams to help people get stable housing), reconnection with families/friends/employment, lack of affordable housing options. • And new models present opportunities for community wellbeing. Temporary Homelessness Advisory Committee In November 2019, the City Manager convened a Homelessness Advisory Committee (HAC) of diverse members representing business owners, service providers, members of the faith community, healthcare professionals, and community members (with and without lived experience of homelessness) to develop recommendations and considerations for expanding emergency shelter capacity within the City. (Attachment 1) The committee began this work in support of our community’s goal to make homelessness rare, short-lived, and non-recurring. Meetings were open to the public to observe and were often well attended. The HAC was formed in response to the systemic pressures listed above and specifically after a site search for potential new shelter space and co-located services in 2019. Concerns were raised by some community members after a site in north Fort Collins was secured as an option. City Manager Atteberry then decided to pause the exploration process and zoom out for additional dialogue. The charge of the Homelessness Advisory Committee was to: • Understand current conditions • Consider response models • Explore opportunities / tradeoffs of a co-located (campus) model • Seek strategies to address and mitigate challenges • Determine criteria for site feasibility • Consider potential locations Members of the HAC were asked to: 1) Advise the City Manager on key considerations and varying perspectives; and 2) Represent community interests to identify opportunities and concerns related to concepts and potential sites, if appropriate. The initial makeup of the committee was intended to create a balance of perspectives. Early in the process the committee decided for itself that representation from the nonprofit shelter providers (Catholic Charities and Fort Collins Rescue Mission) and Larimer County was needed, so several additional members were invited to join the HAC. [Noted below with an “ * ”] Business Dean Hoag - President of NFCBA Ben Mozer - Lyric Cinema Luke McFetridge - Midtown Business District Fernando Leyva - Fernside Landscape Matt Robenalt - DDA Community Johnny Square - Fort Collins Church Network Cheryl Zimlich - Bohemian Foundation Alma Vigo-Morales - Community Member Jeff Swoboda - FCPS Chief of Police Kristen Psaki - Fort Collins Unitarian Church Desiree Anthony - Community Member Lily Adams - Community Member October 27, 2020 Page 3 Service Providers Nick Verni Lau - Outreach Fort Collins Holly LeMasurier - Homeward 2020 David Rout - Murphy Center/Homeward Alliance Julie Brewen - Housing Catalyst Mike Sinnet* - Catholic Charities Seth Forwood* - FC Rescue Mission Josh Geppelt* - Denver Rescue Mission Health Services Brian Ferrans - Health District of Northern Larimer County Yvonne Myers - Columbine Health Laura Walker* - Larimer County, Director of Human and Economic Health Services Stage 1 - Build Understanding - November 2019 - February 2020 Throughout the first half of committee work the HAC explored the current situation faced by people experiencing homelessness and affected parties by reviewing data, hosting panel discussions with providers, responders and business owners, engaging in conversations with one another, and visiting shelters. These experiences helped the group identify gaps in these areas: • Services • Locations • Populations Not Well-Served • Space Needs Stage 2 - COVID Response - March 2020 - May 2020 When the global pandemic brought uncertainty and physical distance requirements the committee suspended meetings, and numerous members began collaborating with City staff on standing up a temporary emergency shelter that could operate around the clock, seven days a week at the Northside Aztlan Community Center. The COVID-19 response and the temporary shelter experience offered many important lessons regarding 24/7 shelter in Fort Collins. Positive aspects of the experience, as identified by HAC members, included: • Collaborative effort of all agencies within their particular strengths adding to the whole • Familiarity of relationships helped people come together quickly; homelessness and health services • Practice of what it might look like with everyone (providers) pitching into one building • Rapid community response that made day and overnight shelter much safer • Impacts from homeless population on businesses were lessened Aspects that did not go as well as hoped included: • Seniors and people medically vulnerable needed case management and one-on-one support • Not enough capacity in current shelter facilities to accommodate need o Disproportionate impact from COVID on already marginalized populations Stage 3 - Develop Recommendations and Considerations - June 2020 - September 2020 Despite work being interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic for several months, most committee members continued participating in active, virtual meetings to assemble a final report. (Attachment 2) Ultimately the committee’s final offering includes “recommendations” where there was agreement between committee members and “considerations” where opinions diverged. October 27, 2020 Page 4 Areas of agreement: • 24/7 shelter model needed • The city's current shelters are strained by the need o Exacerbated by the pandemic, which has highlighted the urgency of this need • Safe emergency shelter and more affordable housing is needed • Service providers must work together to avoid duplication of services • New facilities or services should avoid overburdening any one geographic location • New facilities must meet basic needs (e.g., beds, showers, meals, storage and full staffing for case management and intake) Areas lacking agreement: • Whether a co-located (campus) model or distributed model of shelters would best serve the community • What specific types of services should be offered at a future shelter • Resourcing considerations (complex issue needing further attention) • Location(s) for new/expanded shelter The areas where key tensions arose for committee members and need resolution as future emergency shelter decisions are considered, could be summed up as: 1. Co-located vs. Distributed shelter/services (to achieve 24/7 shelter model) 2. Concentrating shelter/services in North Fort Collins could overburden vs. Future facilities should be near existing services and transit accessible Committee members differ whether shelter and services should be co-located on a large campus or distributed throughout the community. Some members favor adding capacity to serve people experiencing homelessness at mainstream community services sites rather than a ‘service rich’ model at a central shelter facility. Some members favor the efficacy of locating future facilities near existing services. Additional City Efforts The work of the HAC focused narrowly on emergency shelter - just one point of intervention along a spectrum of solutions to address homelessness. There are many ways that the City is supporting (directly and indirectly) community and regional partners working to make homelessness rare, short-lived, and non-recurring. • Northern Colorado Continuum of Care • Coordinated Assessment & Housing Placement System (CAPHS) • Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) • Outreach Fort Collins • Murphy Center • CARES & CDBG funding support • 1301 Blue Spruce Drive temporary overnight shelter and expansion of women’s shelter at Catholic Charities (early November) • Non-congregate shelter program • Seeking expanded day shelter options and providing funding • Affordable housing work (Land Bank Program, 2021 housing surge, Housing Strategic Plan, Affordable Housing ad hoc committee, etc.) • Homeward2020 final report coming in early November. Culmination of ten-year planning effort focused on the whole spectrum of interventions. Next Steps In addition to continued support for the efforts listed above, staff recommends convening a willing subset of the HAC to focus on potential impacts and opportunities, sharing recommendations for implementation with Council in 2021. October 27, 2020 Page 5 Members of the HAC who have expressed interest in continuing the work of the committee in this next phase include: • Josh Geppelt - Denver Rescue Mission • Seth Forwood - FCRM • Brian Ferrans - LC Health District • Matt Robenalt - DDA • Yvonne Myers - Columbine Health • Desiree Anthony - FCRM • Dean Hoag - NFCBA • Cheryl Zimlich - Bohemian • Additional members as identified by staff and Council o E.g., Larimer County, day shelter providers, etc. The next six months will bring an end of winter shelter season, a new seated Council, a housing surge to decompress shelter need, a better understanding of COVID impacts, a new City homelessness coordinator in place (if recommended budget is adopted), and data about the identified ongoing emergency shelter capacity needs. Specific recommendations from the second phase of the committee work will reflect those 2021 developments with a focus on working through the details and tensions identified in their 2020 report. ATTACHMENTS 1. Homelessness Advisory Committee Charter (PDF) 2. Recommendations and Considerations (PDF) 3. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF) City Manager’s Office City Hall 300 LaPorte Ave. PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6505 970.224.6107 - fax fcgov.com MEMORANDUM DATE: October 3, 2019 TO: Mayor Wade Troxell & City Councilmembers FROM: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager RE: Advisory Committee For Affordable Housing & Homeless Services Site Introduction This memorandum describes the creation of an Advisory Committee to the City Manager regarding the potential development of new Affordable Housing and Homeless Services facilities. Purpose Convene an Advisory Committee to enhance the overall community engagement process with in- depth, joint exploration and recommendations regarding the potential development of affordable housing and homeless service options in Fort Collins. Members Members of the Advisory Committee will represent diverse stakeholder groups and backgrounds to inform the City Manager. The committee will be comprised of service providers, business owners, faith-based groups, non-profits, housing specialists, health specialists, neighbors, and community members. It will also include various geographic areas of Fort Collins. Role of Members: • Advise City Manager on key considerations and varying perspectives • Represent community interests to identify opportunities and concerns related to concepts and potential sites, if appropriate City Staff Provides strategic direction and background to ensure overall organizational alignment on work related to housing and homeless services. Will also act as the lead presenter during meetings to provide context on the City’s work. ATTACHMENT 1 External Facilitator Neutral party that facilitates meetings to ensure all members’ opinions are heard. Works to keep discussions on task to best utilize meeting time. Meeting Frequency The Advisory Committee will meet twice a month over the course of six months (12 meetings total). Meetings will start at the end of October/early November. Terms A six-month commitment is required with the potential to extend based on need. Member Accountability • Attend and actively participate in two, 90-minute meetings a month. • Prepare for the meetings by reviewing the meeting agenda and completing the pre-meeting homework. • Alert the City Staff Executive Representative if unable to attend the meeting. • If necessary, a Committee member can send a proxy in their place. Decision Types and the Decision-Making Process • The group utilizes the City’s Public Engagement Spectrum (inform, involve, and collaborate) to determine decision making and influence type. • Perspectives are shared with relevant City staff. • Group consent is assumed if no dissenting notes are offered. Meeting Structure The meetings will focus on specific areas and follow a sequential approach. Meeting topics include: 1. Awareness a. Understanding ‘The Why’ behind the Advisory Committee and its work b. Understanding and sharing past learnings c. Understanding the homeless challenge in Fort Collins d. Understanding and determining gaps in the community 2. Effective Response a. What models should be considered and what do they entail? b. How can evidence from other communities help shape an effective response? 3. If a Campus Model… a. What are the concerns? b. What are the opportunities? c. Where can we collaborate? d. How can we improve efficiencies? 4. Mitigation Strategies a. Knowing the concerns, how do we best mitigate them? 5. Siting Criteria a. What makes a good site? b. Should there be more than one? 6. Potential Locations a. Using the siting criteria, what locations make the most sense? 7. Recommendation & Mitigation Strategies a. Recommend a location or locations and establish mitigation strategies Next Steps Late next week, the City Manager’s office will invite and confirm members to the advisory committee and advise City Council of the membership. Staff will continue additional targeted stakeholder engagement including meetings with concerned neighbors, business owners and service providers. We will provide Council with periodic updates and a final report. Recommendations and Considerations for Homeless Shelters in Fort Collins - 9/14/20 Final Executive Summary In November 2019, the Fort Collins City Manager convened an Advisory Committee of diverse members representing service providers and community members with and without lived experience with homelessness to explore and surface recommendations and considerations around expanding emergency shelter capability within Fort Collins. The committee began this work in support of our community’s goals of making homelessness rare, short-lived, and non-recurring. The committee learned about the current situation facing community members experiencing homelessness through reviewing data, panel discussions with providers and responders, conversations with each other, and visiting current shelters. They surfaced current gaps in services for different populations and trends in data. Despite being interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, most committee members continued participating after a multi-month break in active meetings to assemble this report. The committee recommends a 24/7 shelter model to serve basic needs, built for current and future capacity and uses, fully accessible for the population(s) served, and able to assess the needs of the whole person. The committee differed on structure, oversight, and amount of services, and how population(s) would be best served - including how much medical, trauma-informed services, and outdoor space use would be ideal. Considering a campus or co-located model, the committee recommends: achieving clarity around who is being served; shared governance model, roles, responsibilities, and non-duplication of services amongst providers; ensuring basic services can be provided; and locating shelter near public transportation. The committee agrees serving multiple populations safely may be challenging. Opportunities of co-location include efficiency in service delivery and helping the community understand the real need for services. Points of difference and tradeoffs around a campus or co-located model include: whether to locate services on a large campus or throughout the community, cost increases with enhanced services, unduly burdening one part of our community versus spreading our shelters, and inclusion of permanent supportive housing with the shelter. Concerns of a campus model include increased cost for a larger parcel of land, increased cost for security and safety for those accessing services and the surrounding areas, and risks of undesirable or illegal activity. Criteria for site feasibility include recommendations to ensure: services needed by the population(s) served are available through co-location or are nearby; not overburdening any part of our community; understanding of affordability and needed infrastructure now and into the future; and early and effective engagement with potential neighbors. Considerations include design of the facility for mental health and wellness, efforts to combat isolation and foster positive connection with the broader community. Strategies to address and mitigate challenges focused on several concerns, namely, how to: prevent restricting poverty to one part of town; resource upfront and ongoing costs of new shelter; both safe shelter and more affordable housing are needed yet are seen as competing for resources; dealing with the current pandemic and what comes next; and how to continue community and neighborhood dialogue. Unresolved questions are listed at the end of this report for future reference and use in this process. ATTACHMENT 2 Recommendations and Considerations for Homeless Shelters in Fort Collins - 9/14/20 Final Introduction - Committee Process Like other cities in the United States, Fort Collins is a place where individuals and families experience homelessness. Our community has adopted the goal of making homelessness rare, short-lived, and non- recurring. Yet our existing shelter facilities are strained by the extent of the need. The City Manager convened an Advisory Committee in the fall of 2019 to “enhance the overall community engagement process with in-depth, joint exploration and recommendations regarding the potential development of...homeless service options in Fort Collins.” Members’ roles were to “Advise City Manager on key considerations and varying perspectives” and “Represent community interests to identify opportunities and concerns related to concepts and potential sites, if applicable.” Meetings topics included awareness and understanding of the homeless challenge and gaps, effective response models, concerns and opportunities around a campus model, mitigation strategies, siting criteria, potential locations, and recommendation and mitigation strategies. While the original charter indicated “affordable housing” would be covered, the committee quickly honed in on emergency shelter as its primary focus within the housing continuum. Members of the committee visited current shelters to understand current conditions and needs first hand. The diverse group of committee members selected included service providers, business owners, faith-based groups, nonprofits, housing and health specialists, and those with lived experience. In an effort to include more perspectives, the committee voted to add three additional perspectives to include regional shelter leaders and County representatives. The group’s work took place in two phases: 1. Awareness and Understanding of Current Situation. From November 2019 to February 2020, the committee learned about response models, current community situations, and gaps in current services from community members and service providers. The COVID-19 public health crisis caused the group to pause for four months. 2. Developing Specific Recommendations and Considerations. The group reconvened virtually starting in June 2020, drawing upon lessons learned from the COVID-19 response setting up and operating a 24/7 emergency shelter at Northside Aztlan Community Center. Between June and September the committee began developing specific recommendations and considerations, based on previous dialogue and new learnings. Awareness and Understanding of Current Situation The first half of the committee’s work focused on building an understanding of current conditions, learning about different response models, hearing directly from affected community members, and identifying gaps Recommendations and Considerations for Homeless Shelters in Fort Collins - 9/14/20 Final throughout the system of services and facilities for people experiencing homelessness. Service providers in Fort Collins use the Housing First Model and operate with the philosophy that providing services is more effective if people get housing first. While adopted by the City and required by the State of Colorado and HUD for emergency shelter funding access, not all Committee members agree with this approach. Lack of livable wage, affordable housing, high child care costs, and unreliable transportation influence the ability to maintain housing. Abuse, trauma, chemical dependency and crises significantly compound to create the need for complex, individualized plans for recovery. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbates these challenges. There is a difference in need and response for those chronically homeless and the short-lived situations. Stereotypes and stigma often focus public perception to a single male experiencing homelessness. Yet lived experiences are diverse and categories of labeling overlap. Fort Collins currently lacks the differentiation of shelter options for different populations and the committee recognizes unique needs for the following groups: non-family couples, families with school-aged children, unaccompanied youth, disabled people/seniors/those with ADA needs, sober/in-recovery, those coming out of jail, LGBTQIA+, and people with pets. *This data is of people experiencing homelessness of 6 months or longer, and only those who utilized services. Graphic produced by Housing First Initiative - homeward2020.org According to our service providers, individual case-management and affordable housing help people self- Recommendations and Considerations for Homeless Shelters in Fort Collins - 9/14/20 Final resolve. As of February 24, 2020, individuals and families experiencing homelessness could seek services at The Murphy Center, Fort Collins Rescue Mission, Catholic Charities, Crossroads Safehouse, and Family Housing Network. On average, these sites serve 275 individuals at a time: 220 bed + 4 family rooms + niche sites. Both the Fort Collins Rescue Mission and Catholic Charities shelters are over capacity and regularly overflow with mats on the floor in multi-purpose rooms. The committee learned in our community, shelters are de facto housing for about 300 - 400 people at any given time. Service providers agree existing space and shelter are inadequate for our community’s current and anticipated needs. Panel presentations from nonprofit and county service providers, Fort Collins police, and business owners helped the group identify gaps in these areas: ● Services ● Locations ● Populations Not Well-Served ● Space Needs Additionally, members of the business community feel responsibility for caring for people experiencing homelessness is falling disproportionately on one segment of the community. These members expressed continued frustration at unsafe and threatening activities like loitering, exposure to needles, and trash in the areas near existing shelters. The unexpected COVID-19 pandemic and resulting rapid, collaborative response to the crisis helped providers realize benefits of a 24/7 shelter model. In three months of emergency services, the Murphy Center served 20% more people than they planned to serve in a whole year. Currently (August 2020), requests for rent assistance continue to increase, and with the moratorium on evictions coming to an end in September 2020, service providers anticipate an increased need for emergency shelter and rehousing assistance for individuals and families. Specific Recommendations and Considerations These are in four sections, roughly corresponding to the charter of this committee: ● Effective Response and Priority Services ● Opportunities and Tradeoffs of a Campus / Co-located Model ● Determining Criteria for Site Feasibility (and Considering Potential Locations) ● Strategies to Address and Mitigate Challenges Additionally, the committee felt it important to include a section on Unresolved Questions where further exploration could benefit the overall approach to emergency shelter. Recommendations and Considerations for Homeless Shelters in Fort Collins - 9/14/20 Final Effective Response and Priority Services Each section of this report covers Recommendations / Areas of Agreement where the committee recommends actions and/or is in agreement about factors and conditions which should influence City decisions when supporting the community’s emergency shelters. This section covers responses and services supporting the different populations of people experiencing homelessness in our community. Recommendations / Areas of Agreement The committee identified the following gaps regarding effective response - space capacity for day shelter, fluctuation of demand, access to transportation, and accessibility of site. The committee understands the complexity of effective response and agrees on the following: ● A 24/7 model is needed and possible as demonstrated by a successful, collaborative COVID-19 response by our current service providers. ● Effective shelter provides basic needs including showers and laundry, toiletry supplies, meals, lockers and locations to store belongings. ● To meet the needs of today and tomorrow, build in future capacity with a forward focus on scale, size, and flexible use space. This includes not only adequate space for basics, but also flexible convertible space to respond to on-going and changing needs. ● The facility must be built to be accessible to different kinds of people and their needs (non-family couples, families with school-aged children, unaccompanied youth, disabled people/seniors/those with ADA needs, sober/in-recovery, those coming out of jail, LGBTQIA+, and people with pets) so that retrofitting is not necessary later and therefore more expensive. ● The more robust the services provided the higher the costs will be. ● Staff running this facility must be highly trained and be kind, friendly and accepting. ● To monitor performance and deliver the right services to shelter users, utilize a collaborative system for robust data collection across providers. ● Provide assistance and guidance to accessing options for housing (Permanent Supportive Housing, Bridge or other) and housing navigation. Members of the business community also recommend including “For Sale” options - not just rentals. ● The ability for full assessment of the needs of the whole person - medical, mental health, food, community support, etc. was another agreed upon priority to occur within this facility. Coordinated Assessment and Housing Placement System (process that matches housing resources with people who need them) and VI-SPDAT (assessment that helps with this process) were mentioned, and more detail and expertise is required to get the full scope of how tools could be implemented. Recommendations and Considerations for Homeless Shelters in Fort Collins - 9/14/20 Final Considerations / Points of Difference Committee conversations and learnings lead to the following considerations around effective response and priority services: ● Many in the committee are still unclear regarding structure, oversight, and what service organizations should operate out of the chosen response and therefore what range of services are offered. Solutions differ depending on the chosen demographic group and scope of project. Each choice brings different considerations for funding and structure. ● The committee was not clear, nor agreed, how much housing, navigation, case management or mental health support should be offered on-site. Some support exists for an approach of providing as many co- located services as possible, while others support providing basic needs in-facility and emphasize the need for a location in close proximity to other resources. ● Trauma-informed care was highlighted as a central guiding principle by a large majority of committee members, though with variation about how in-depth the practice should be implemented. Specifying exactly how trauma-informed practices are utilized for architecture/structural issues, staff training, and daily operations will require more detail, thought, and expertise. ● Some believe full scale medical care is not realistic, while others believe pop-up medical services are a viable and necessary option. Some members advocate for a preventative healthcare model for cost avoidance down the road. However, mental health providers are concerned about the inclusion of actual medical services at this site. The complexity and regulations around opening such a site could be time prohibitive. ● The use and function of outdoor space is another area of disagreement with some desiring several levels of architectural space for different levels of engagement in shelter (i.e. an enclosed outdoor area for camping or outside courtyard) and others supporting a traditional indoor shelter space only. Opportunities and Tradeoffs of a Campus / Co- located Model This section covers the potential opportunities and tradeoffs around a co-located or campus model with multiple services available in a single location. Recommendations / Areas of Agreement The committee identified the following gaps around co-location - economy of scale, transportation access, and avoiding concentration of poverty. The committee understands the complexity of a campus / co-located model and agrees on the following opportunities: Recommendations and Considerations for Homeless Shelters in Fort Collins - 9/14/20 Final ● A co-located model can provide efficiency in service delivery, staffing, building operations expense, and avoids duplication of services. ● Nearly unanimous agreement of the importance of a shared governance model well-defined before construction begins. With clarity of roles and responsibilities around intentional structure, providers hope to create and embed a culture of shared best practices and resources. ● Service providers must work together to avoid duplication of services. The COVID-19 response proves this is possible. ● Many on the committee expressed they do not support simply relocating community shelter without securing both 1) adequate facility accommodations for basic needs services (beds, showers, meals, storage, case conferencing, etc.), and 2) full staffing ratios for intake, assessments, data collection, diversions, coordination and case management (best practices). There was little enthusiasm to simply move to a new location without clear commitment for adequate resourcing of a strong model. ● Difficult to meet the needs of different groups to be served - men, families, veterans, etc. Questions remain if a large campus can accommodate both behavior-based and breathalyzer-enforced models. Several committee members recommended drawing upon learnings from other communities, such as Boulder where joint services are provided. ● Having the shelter located near public transportation was agreed by most. ● The community should understand the real need for services, the cost of not doing something, and the overall benefit for the entire community - which will require a good marketing campaign to discuss the need for services. Neighborhood buy-in will be difficult. Considerations / Points of Difference The committee identified the following differences and tradeoffs of a campus model: ● Some members desire a clear definition of the services that need to be co-located and why before any project begins. ● Members differ whether to locate all services on a large campus or throughout the community. Some members favor adding capacity to serve people experiencing homelessness at mainstream community services sites rather than a ‘service rich’ model at a shelter facility. These members believe this is key to solving a community problem with a community solution (rather than overburdening any single location in the community). ● Services costs may increase in an enhanced shelter model, yet these can reduce costs to other systems such as criminal justice, hospitals, 911, police and crisis response. ● Concerns of a campus model include: a larger piece of land could cost more; increased cost for security and safety for those accessing services and the surrounding areas; and risks of undesirable or illegal activity. Recommendations and Considerations for Homeless Shelters in Fort Collins - 9/14/20 Final ● Inclusion of permanent supportive housing - Some say this model has worked in other parts of the country. Others believe supportive housing located away from emergency shelter provides better outcomes for the clients served. Determining Criteria for Site Feasibility (and Considering Potential Locations) Due to the differing perspectives on co-location, specific sites were not reviewed. Instead, the committee identified overall criteria for site feasibility, and noted the following gaps regarding site locations: north versus southeast, serving regional/Greeley/Denver/Boulder residents, land availability, and zoning and planning requirements. Recommendations / Areas of Agreement The committee understands the complexity of site feasibility and agrees upon the following: ● If “form follows function” then co-location of services must be addressed before the site is selected. In addition, the population(s) to be served by the shelter must be determined before identifying the appropriate site. ● If the final design is for little or no co-location of services, then the facility needs to be located nearby other essential services for people experiencing homelessness and not isolated in one corner of the community. ● Location must not over-burden any part of our community already experiencing a high degree of poverty. ● Understanding affordability, ensuring proper infrastructure, determining how many square feet are wanted/needed, as well as incorporating a certain degree of flexibility, will be useful in order to address needs as they evolve in the future. We must consider future changes in the community 10-20 years out, not only in terms of capacity, but also changes that may occur in the vicinity. ● It will be critical to engage with potential neighbors in advance so they can participate in planning conversations, provide their inputs, and ensure they can positively interface with the facility as their neighbor. While industrial locations tend to generate less controversy, they are difficult to locate in Fort Collins. Considerations / Points of Difference Committee conversations and learnings lead to the following considerations around site feasibility: Recommendations and Considerations for Homeless Shelters in Fort Collins - 9/14/20 Final ● Some members noted our mental health and wellness are affected by our physical space, so we must be mindful of the design of the facility so healthy recreation, pets, and different kinds of helpful therapies might be included. ● Some members picture the facility used for activities that attract other community members to help diminish isolation people experiencing homelessness often feel. For example, the facility could host classes, club or group meetings, concerts or social gatherings, and incorporate opportunities for employment, skills development, entrepreneurship and the creation of small businesses. ● Some members want to ensure sites serve people experiencing homelessness fully to prevent panhandling and other undesirable behaviors. Strategies to Address and Mitigate Challenges This section covers concerns and challenges along with ideas of how those might be addressed and mitigated. Concern: Restricting poverty to one part of town ● Utilizing walkability factors and our public transportation system wisely, we can prevent restricting poverty to just one part of town and expecting one neighborhood to bear Fort Collins’ total responsibility to address homelessness, rather than the whole community sharing the responsibility of caring. Concern: Resourcing upfront and ongoing costs of new shelter ● Resource limits need to be recognized. Better outcomes might be achieved when focusing comprehensive services on a smaller population than spreading limited resources over a larger population, such as serving only local residents. This approach has been adopted in other communities. ● Contributions from philanthropy, business, private and faith-based sources could be realized if the shelter model concept can demonstrate benefits to the community and funders’ varied interests. ● A financial model should include both upfront acquisition and development costs, as well as ongoing operating and maintenance costs. ● Concern about this effort impacting the on-going challenge of our service providers to fundraise every year for their services and the importance of sustainable funding. ● Other communities, such as Denver, use a Social Impact Bond program to help fund services. Concern: Both safe shelter and more affordable housing are needed yet are seen as competing for resources ● Investments in emergency shelter should not take away or supplant investments in affordable housing solutions. Recommendations and Considerations for Homeless Shelters in Fort Collins - 9/14/20 Final ● Rigorous collaboration between housing and shelter providers can create smooth transitions between shelter and housing. Concern: Continuing to use shelter beds for de facto housing ● Rental assistance is an immediate solution. Employed persons could benefit from rental assistance so they can exit shelter, and may come at the same cost, or less, as delivering emergency shelter services. The cost of utilizing emergency shelter beds as de facto housing for non-emergencies could be transferred to rental assistance subsidies. ● Considerations to reduce emergency shelter bed use, and therefore need for shelter bed resources, include low cost ‘pay to stay’ housing for low wage workers, seasonal workers and travelers currently utilizing shelter as de facto housing and cheap accommodation. Concern: Dealing with the ongoing and/or next pandemic ● The crisis highlighted and affirmed there is not enough capacity in current shelter facilities to accommodate need, especially with necessary health and safety distancing protocols. ● Familiarity of relationships helped homelessness and health service providers come together quickly. ● Planning for any new facility needs to consider how to rapidly move people out of congregate shelter spaces and avoid crowding and accumulation in shelter. ● Increased staffing and cleaning is needed to prevent spread and reduce viral loads. ● The ongoing pandemic will likely increase homelessness due to declining economic situations – how to proactively address and provide services and help people navigate. Concern: How to continue community and neighborhood dialogue ● Some mitigation: Camping ordinance can be applied without legal challenges when there are sufficient shelter beds Recommendations and Considerations for Homeless Shelters in Fort Collins - 9/14/20 Final Unresolved Questions The committee raised these questions during the creation of these recommendations and considerations, and the answers may inform some of the next steps in the process of enhancing emergency shelter in our community. ● Who will own the shelter - a not-for-profit, City and/or County owned, or a combination? ● What structure, oversight, and service organizations should operate out of the chosen emergency shelter response and therefore what range of services are offered? ● How much housing, navigation, case management or mental health support should be offered on-site at an emergency shelter? How much will the County’s new behavioral health campus provide support for our community and vulnerable populations? ● How much will trauma-informed practices be utilized and influence the design and operation of an emergency shelter? ● If we build it, will they come? (Did Northside Aztlan Community Center COVID-19 shelter clients come from mostly Fort Collins, or from Weld County, Loveland, Longmont, and Boulder?) ● To what extent must shelter users be Fort Collins residents? How will this be verified (noted as very difficult yet done elsewhere)? ● Will regional interests develop necessary permanent housing or only Fort Collins? Will our community bear the brunt of a regional housing development issue? ● Does inclusion of permanent supportive housing with a shelter or does locating supportive housing away from emergency shelter provide better outcomes for the clients served? ● How much can our community include ownership housing in the mix of affordable housing offered to create wealth and break the cycle of dependence? ● Do the costs of services increase in an enhanced shelter model, or do these offset cost reductions to other systems such as criminal justice, hospitals, 911, police and crisis response? ● Can a large campus accommodate populations under both behavior-based and breathalyzer-enforced models? Several committee members recommended drawing upon learnings from other communities, such as Boulder where joint services are provided. ● Would a centralized service center respond better and be more cost- and resource-efficient, especially in a pandemic? ● Would better outcomes be achieved by focusing comprehensive services on a smaller population than spreading limited resources over a larger population - e.g. Fort Collins residents only? Council Work Session Oct 27, 2020 Homelessness Advisory Committee Findings Jackie Kozak Thiel, Honore Depew, Beth Sowder ATTACHMENT 3 Direction Sought What feedback and additional considerations do Councilmembers have for the proposed next steps? 2 Strategic Plan Alignment Collaborate with other agencies to address poverty issues and other identified high-priority human service needs, and to make homelessness rare, short-lived and non-recurring. 3 Strategy 1.2 Current System Pressures •Insufficient shelter capacity •Gaps in hours when shelter is available •Gaps in support for certain identities and types of services •Distance between shelters •Emergency shelter being used as de facto housing •New models present opportunities for community wellbeing 4 Best Practice: Data-informed solutions Best Practice: Housing First approach Shared goal: Homelessness is Rare, Short-lived, Non-recurring City Investments in Homelessness Initiatives q Northern Colorado Continuum of Care q Outreach Fort Collins & Murphy Center support q CARES & CDBG funding support q Te mporary overnight shelter expansion q Non-congregate shelter program q Seeking expanded day shelter options and providing funding q Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) q Coordinated Assessment & Housing Placement System (CAHPS) q Affordable housing work (Land Bank Program, 2021 housing surge, Housing Strategic Plan, Ad Hoc Housing Committee, etc.) q Homeward2020 Partnership q Final report in early November 5 Advisory Committee Origin 6 •Potential N. Fort Collins shelter location raised some community concerns •Committee convened in Fall of 2019 by City Manager Atteberry Charter for Advisory Committee Meetings q Understanding current conditions q Considering response models q Opportunities / tradeoffs of co-located services model q Strategies to address and mitigate challenges q Determining criteria for site feasibility q Considering potential locations Committee Members Business Dean Hoag –President of NFCBA Ben Mozer –Ly ric Cinema Luke McFetridge –Midtown Business District Fernando Leyva –Fernside Landscape Matt Robenalt –DDA Community Johnny Square –Fort Collins Church Network Cheryl Zimlich –Bohemian Foundation Alma Vigo-Morales –Community Member Jeff Swoboda –FCPS Chief of Police Kristen Psaki –Fort Collins Unitarian Church Desiree Anthony –Community Member Lily Adams –Community Member 7 Service Providers Nick Verni Lau –Outreach Fort Collins Holly LeMasurier –Homeward 2020 David Rout –Murphy Center/Homeward Alliance Julie Brewen –Housing Catalyst Mike Sinnet –Catholic Charities Seth Forwood –FC Rescue Mission Josh Geppelt –Denver Rescue Mission Health Services Brian Ferrans –Health District of Northern Larimer County Yvonne Myers –Columbine Health Laura Walker –Larimer County, Director of Human and Economic Health Services Committee Timeline 8 First Half (5 meetings) •Build understanding November 2019 –February 2020 COVID Break NACC 24/7 Shelter Experience Second Half (5 meetings) •Develop recommendations and considerations June 2020 –September 2020 Role of Members: •Advise City Manager on key considerations and varying perspectives •Represent community interests to identify opportunities and concerns A S pectrum of Solutions 9 •Prevention •Diversion •Emergency Shelter •Affordable Housing •Retain •Sustain Source: www.homeward2020.org Building Understanding 10 •Community-wide issue, community- wide responses •Many factors contribute to homelessness •Emergency shelter system is stressed COVID-19 & NACC Lessons Learned What went well? Collaborative effort of all agencies within their particular strengths adding to the whole Familiarity of relationships helped people come together quickly; homelessness and health services Practice of what it might look like with everyone (providers) pitching into one building Rapid community response that made day and overnight shelter much safer 11 What did not go as well as we would like? Seniors and people medically vulnerable needed case management and one-on-one support Not enough capacity in current shelter facilities to accommodate need Not enough PPE –have masks but need gowns –need to be more self-reliant Disproportionate impact on already marginalized populations Committee Report Sections 1.Awareness and Understanding of Current Situation 2.Effective Response and Priority Services 3.Opportunities and Tradeoffs of a Campus / Co-located Model 4.Determining Criteria for Site Feasibility (and Potential Locations) 5.Strategies to Address and Mitigate Challenges 12 Final Report = Recommendations and Considerations •Including all perspectives rather than forcing consensus Areas of Agreement •24/7 shelter model needed •The city's current shelters are strained by the need •Exacerbated by the pandemic •Safe emergency shelter and more affordable housing is needed •Service providers must work together to avoid duplication of services •New facilities or services should avoid overburdening individual geographic areas •New facilities must meet basic needs (e.g., beds, showers, meals, storage and full staffing for case management and intake) 13 Areas Lacking Agreement •What specific types of services offered •Resourcing considerations •Location(s) for new/expanded shelter 14 Concentrating shelter & services in N. Fort Collins may “overburden” vs. Future facilities should be near existing services & transit accessible Key tensions highlighted: Co-located vs. Distributed shelter & services Next Steps •COVID and Winter Season managed through increased temporary shelter •Homeward 2020 Final Report release in early November •Homelessness Coordinator position in recommended budget •On-going Affordable Housing work •(e.g., Housing Strategic Plan, Land Bank Program, Housing Catalyst+) •Regional Housing “Surge” (HW2020 with Corp. for Supportive Housing+) 15 Staff recommends convening a willing subset of the HAC to focus on potential impacts and opportunities, sharing recommendations for implementation with City Council in 2021 Direction Sought What feedback and additional considerations do Councilmembers have for the proposed next steps? 16