Rethinking ServicesPartnering for Results

Kay Moshier McDivittLancaster County Coalition to End Homelessness610 North Queen Street, Suite 610Lancaster, PA 17603717-735-8485kmcdivitt@co.lancaster.pa.us

Local Shift

Transitional Living Center– 2005

• 54 Room Long Term Transitional Housing Program with mandated 6 months program services

• Average length of stay 2 years with 35% “graduation” rate• Budget Issues: Merger with larger organization

– Current• Transitioned to a “housing first” philosophy model • Length of stay not program or participation driven• Determined by individual family plan to find permanent

housing, not by program “requirements” • Developed service partnerships to provide the supportive

services

2

Why the change

• What we were doing wasn’t working– Long length of stay – Low success rate moving to permanent

housing after long program stay– Fostered cycle of “dependency” on programs

services• Revolving door

– Experience with “rapid re-housing” successes– Fiscally responsible 3

Steps in Making the Transition

1) Evaluate current program

2) Create the vision for the transition

3) Shift in approach requires systemic change

4) Re-define role of “supportive services” (move from mandatory to voluntary supportive service model)

5) Identify service partners needed

6) See the Results

4

Evaluate the program:What we found

• Required “program” participation in staff driven services created barriers

• More households exited for non participation with mandatory services than for “program completion”

• Trying to be “all” to “all issues”

• Creating a “cycle of dependency”– Folks asking to come back even after

program completion to access services5

Create the Vision

The result we want is:

Successful move to a permanent solution in the shortest amount of time with

household connected to services that can support them outside the facility

6

Next Steps

• Redefine role of program– Individualized program for each

household

• Redefine role of supportive services– Leverage external service providers– Voluntary “program” participation

• Redefine role of staff– Supportive Service Coordination

7

Transition to a “Service Brokerage" Approach

Services are unique to each household needsIntake identifies current support systems,

individual strengths and gaps/barriers for each family

Individualized supportive service plan developed specific to that assessment

Engage external service providers

8

What that meant for us• Redefined Staff Role:

Supportive Service Coordinator – Shift from “what you need to do to

stay in the program successfully” to “what you need to leave successfully”

– Role is not to counsel or “fix” but to connect residents with the services identified on the supportive service and permanent housing plans

– Required reaching out and developing partnerships with community providers

9

What that meant for usDeveloping Strategic Partnerships• Identify services and providers to

engage• driven by the population(s) served

• Networking– More time in community to develop

relationships

• System of Coordinated Services– Includes existing supports and identifies

new systems to meet gaps– Collaboration and coordination critical

10

Strategic Community Partnerships• Job Readiness and Employment Programs• Food and Clothing Banks• Parenting Programs• Counseling Centers• Financial Literacy and Budgeting Programs• Child Care• Faith based Organizations and Houses of Worship• Treatment Programs • Mainstream Providers• VA• Re-entry Management Organization• Community Based and Agency Programs

11

Benefits of Service Parternships

Creates a “comprehensive" support systemLess dependence on the programEnsures an ongoing sustaining support

system within the larger communityAllows for specialized expertiseStaff job can now be more focusedCost Effective

12

Developing Your Partnerships

• Identify providers needed• Build on existing relationships with

providers/partners (who shares common goals)

• Who do you know in that organization• Be prepared to present your “Win Win”• Identify a single point of contact with partner

agencies • MOU’s to define each organizations role

13

See the Results

Participation with supportive services increased Community Service Providers became active partners Supportive Service and Housing Plans were followed

They “owned” them Average length of stay dropped from 8-12 months to 3-4

months 74% of households in the Transitional Living Center

moved to permanent housing 90% + maintain permanent housing for six months Revolving door stopped

Families return only to share how well they are doing14

Additional Benefits/Results

Staff retention increasedStaff benefited by being out in the

community networkingGreater sphere of servicesImproved/positive atmosphereIncreased cooperationMentoring program started

15

Challenges

Change is hard; “fixing” is what we doStaff and Community can be resistantOvercoming “old ways” of thinking,

easy to slip back to “we must do it all”Partnerships can be challengingClearly defining each partners role

Communication is key16

Final Thoughts

Service Partnering requires a culture that embraces change

Clear roles and relationships are imperativeCreate partnership services that can adjust with each

unique households-its not about the “right families” for our program but about the “right program” for each unique family

Evaluate and adjustRemember, “its not the letting go that hurts, it’s the

holding on”.17

Thank You

18