Data Work Group – Minutes
February 27, 2014
1 – 3 pm
In Attendance:
Kim Dear (Seton); Ben King (Seton Clinical Research Institute); Ann Kameron (ECHO);
Richard Dodson (ECHO); Rick Rivera (Salv Army); Preston Petty (Caritas); Ann Howard
(ECHO); Niki Paul (ECHO); Chantel Bottoms (United Way of Austin);
Welcome and Introductions
Kim Dear, Chair
 Overview of Seton’s role via Kim Dear
 Focusing on data sharing
 Andy focuses on EMS and focusing on “Community Paramedics”
Approval of Minutes
 No minutes from last meeting to approve
Kim Dear, Chair
Announcements
Ann Howard and Group
 Review of Coordinated Assessment and role of new ECHO staff (Kameron and Niki)
 Shontell is feeding data into City for Housing Market Study and will be sending data
to Kameron Fowler all referral demographic data. Agreed to look at that agenda for
the March 27th meeting.
 ECHO has request from Jonathan Tomko from NHCD to assist with market analysis
report and will follow up
PSH Prioritization
Ann Howard
 Overview of evaluating Permanent Supportive Housing and Framework for Housing
Stability
 Discussed prioritization process and streamlining eligibility requirements for housing
 ICC Data
o Want to focus on medical and social data share
o ICC would possibly add to current ROI document to streamline
documentation
o Brackenridge is still using separate ROI
o Mobile crisis team operated by paramedics and added 2 SW to that team
(both staff are able to share data)
o Social work and ER to communicate data (real time)
1
o Population barrier:
 The federal gov protects anyone that goes into Drug/Alcohol Rehabwill not
 Possible work around would be to share aggregate data, but not on a
patient/client level
 Criminal Justice Data
 EMS Data
PSH Evaluation
Ann Howard & Ben King
 Reviewed ECHO Proposal to Evaluate Permanent Supportive Housing Strategy
document
 Need to do outcomes over 2 years
United Healthcare
Ann Howard
 Walter Moreau (Foundation Communities) and Corporation for Supportive Housing
are talking to United Healthcare and entering into contract
 UH serves people over 65, blind or disability via Star Plus Medicaid program
 22,000 people in Texas that are enrolled in the Star Plus program and the program
cannot find them
o About 2,000 are in the Austin/Travis Co
o Want to use existing resources to locate these individuals and improve health
o Seeking to merge medical and social services
 Question: Can you add insurance companies to ROI? How can we use HMIS with the
group like United Healthcare w/o serve the same clients
 Discussion: staff can get names from united healthcare and identify clients, inform
clients, but not inform
 “Participating Agreement” and “Business Agreement” signed with ICC
 Seton has monthly “high user” list for Seton, EMS and St. David’s
 Kim offered to share the current HIPPA-came from Seton legal team
 Kameron to attend meeting (every 3rd Monday)
New ROI
Ann Howard/Kameron F.
 ECHO anticipates a final ROI on sharing
 Membership Council has approved greater sharing w/in the ECHO participating
agencies
 Expecting something from ICC soon and to come up with single document that will
cover all sharing needed for Coordinated Assessment
 Would be focus of this year’s Ethics Training
Point in Time Report
 Overall successful count
 Cold Weather Shelter description:
Richard Dodson
2





o CWS was included in HMIS
o Demonstrated 5% decrease from last year (Shelter plus Unsheltered)
 1,987 (2014)
 2,090 (2013)
o RR did not count as transitional program this year (previous years over 100
count)
Agree that trend of downward numbers demonstrate a thorough count process
Need a identify faith community to try and count any individuals being served in cold
weather through faith based community resources
South of 183 and Mopac area and increases on outer fringes
Possible request by to organize Pulse Count in Rundberg area
Need to include APD to improve relationship and better targeting for next year
o Charge to Point In Time Committee to develop relationship with APD and Faith
Committee
Other updates:
 Boarding homes are being cracked down in community
 Guadalupe and 2222 Lamar
 Old nursing home, $20,000 in the red with electric company
 Adult Protective Services (APS) searching
Next meeting: March 27th, 2014, 1pm-3pm, ECHO Offices
3
DRAFT COORDINATED INTAKE RECOMMENDATIONS
The transition to coordinated assessment represents an important opportunity to rethink how we do
things in Austin, why we do them that way, and whether there are more efficient and effective ways
of operating. The Steering Committee continues to develop details, but now brings the following
recommendations to the Membership Council in anticipation of launching a local coordinated
assessment process in January 2014:
1. Adopt the New Framework for Ending Homelessness (p. 5) as the structure in which our COC
and partners operate
2. Modify HMIS to become fully open and shared across participating agencies, allowing clients
to opt-out instead of requiring clients to opt-in (p.12)
3. Adopt the Coordinated Assessment tool consisting of Level 1 and Level 2 questions, leading
to the appropriate housing intervention needed for the client’s housing stability. (p.14)
a. Develop a Coordinated Assessment Team responsible for administering the tool at
multiple points of entry including: ARCH, Caritas, Lifeworks, SafePlace, Salvation
Army, several neighborhood centers (city/county), DACC, Travis County Jail and
Brackenridge Hospital
b. Pilot this tool for 30 days beginning Sept. 3, 2013 and report back to the
Membership Council Oct. 21, 2013
4. Identify resources to develop Diversion Strategies (p.6)
5. Develop a Team Approach to Housing Placement that includes both recruiting landlords to
participate in supportive housing (p.8) and securing apartments for individual clients
a. Designing messaging materials and training for current recruitment efforts
b. Developing a high-level outreach strategy
c. Consider bringing housing locator function to COC – wide level instead of at individual
agencies
6. Adopt Client-Prioritized by name. List based on ECHO PSH Strategy (2010)
a. Implement “community staffing” to match top priority clients with vacant units
7. Enhance Case Management Practices across the community (pgs. 7,10)
a. Adopt a standard for basic practices for PSH and Rapid Rehousing
b. Develop an on-call system to ensure 24-7 coverage response to client needs
c. Develop support system to improve knowledge about best practices and community
resources and to address job related stress and emotions
8. Explore greater use of City, County and private resources for Rapid Rehousing strategies (p.9)
a. Braid funding to insure effective use of program dollars across systems
b. Appoint task force to explore a loosening of both program and reporting requirements
in order to pool resources and make recommendations to Membership Council in
September/October.
4
ECHO COMMUNITY FUNDING PRIORITIES
The following priorities are not in rank order. Each needs funding. ECHO realizes that for certain
funding sources and opportunities, ranking of these priorities will be necessary. These CFP were
approved by the Membership Council on July 15, 2013.
Capital investment, operations subsidies and service dollars to implement Permanent Supportive
Housing (PSH) consistent with evidence-based practices and local standards, i.e. housing first and
project based, giving strong emphasis on housing for persons who qualify as one of the following:
 chronically homeless families (ECHO Plan, ECHO PSH Report, HMIS APR, HMIS AHAR,
City Resolution, HUD goals, PIT, HMIS Bed List
 individuals or families who have experienced family violence (ECHO Plan, ECHO PSH
Report, City Resolution, PIT, Bed List, Safe Place Wait List, Safe Sleep reports)
 frequent users of public systems (EMS, jails, emergency shelters & hospitals) with a
history of chronic homelessness, mental illness and/or vulnerability* (ECHO Plan, ECHO
PSH Report, DACC, 100 Homes (VI, Jail, EMS, ICC), CJP) *ECHO is currently holding
community discussions about our PSH strategy including data collection, definitions,
significance and measure of vulnerability and key components which may impact this
wording in coming months)
Rental assistance, case management and other resources to implement Rapid Rehousing strategies
consistent with evidence-based practices and local standards giving strong emphasis on housing for
 families and single women (ECHO Plan, HUD goals, HMIS Community Data, HMIS Bed
List, HMIS APR, HMIS AHAR, CAN, NHCD, Safe Sleep reports, Safe Place Wait List)
 veterans (ECHO Plan, HUD goals, PIT, 100 Homes, HMIS Bed List)
 individuals in poor health (100 Homes, HIC)
Capital investment, operations and services to expand interim housing options like shelter while we
increase our permanent housing stock, recognizing the immediate needs of
 families and single women (PIT, AHAR, APRS, HMIS Bed List, Safe Sleep Reports,
Salvation Army Call Back List, Safe Place Wait List)
 chronically homeless men (PIT, HMIS Bed List, Front Steps, Salvation Army)
 individuals in poor health or needing recuperative care (100 Homes, Front Steps
Recuperative Care Annual Report, Seton High Alert)
Personnel and tools needed to plan and implement Coordinated System Improvements including
common assessments, diversion, landlord outreach specialists and data/technology supports (HUD,
ECHO work plans)
5
Number'of'Chronically'Homeless'
Individuals'(PIT)'
Number'of'Chronically'Homeless'Beds'(HIC)'
369+
400+
350+
1200+
305+
300+
260+
200+
100+
50+
Number+of+Chronically+
Homeless+Beds+
123+
150+
45+
57+
2008+
2009+
25+
600+
733+
529+
Number+of+Chronically+
Homeless+Individuals+
458+
400+
200+
0+
2007+
2013
GOAL
CURRENT
369
2010+
2011+
12+MONTH
390
2012+
2013+
5+YEAR
450
2009+
100+
77+
69+
65+
77+
91+
83+
85+
60+
HUD+GOAL+
40+
2009+
20+
2010+
0+
2011+
2013
GOAL
2009+
CURRENT
85
2010+
12+MONTH
86
2011+
2012+
5+YEAR
88
100+
95+
90+
85+
80+
75+
70+
2013+
10+YEAR
90
60+
53+
43+
40+
40+
39+
44+
43+
10+
2011+
0+
2012+
2013
GOAL
CURRENT
53
12+MONTH
48
2012+
5+YEAR
55
HUD+GOAL+
89+
87+
2008+
2009+
2010+
2008+
2009+
2010+
CURRENT
87
76+
80+
20+
2011+
80+
2011+
12+MONTH
87
72+
HUD+GOAL+
2010+
2010+
88+
82+
2012+
2013+
5+YEAR
88
2011+
10+YEAR
90
Percentage'of'adults'with'nonFcash'
benefits'at'exit'(APR)'
2008+
20+
2009+
2013+
95+
2013
GOAL
2009+
HUD+GOAL+ 2008+
2012+
91+
HUD+
GOAL+
Percentage'of'adult'par=cipants'in'all'CoC'
funded'programs'employed'at'exit'(APR)'
50+
2011+
Percentage'of'par=cipants'in'CoC'PSH'
programs'who'stay'for'6'months'or'
longer'(APR)'
2008+
HUD+GOAL+ 2008+
2010+
10+YEAR
500
Percentage'of'par=cipants'in'CoC'
Transi=onal'programs'who'move'to'
Permanent'Housing'(APR)'
30+
793+
800+
0+
80+
982+
1000+
250+
2013+
10+YEAR
66
69+
60+
HUD+GOAL+
2011+
40+
20+
2012+
20+
2013+
0+
HUD+GOAL+
2013
GOAL
2011+
CURRENT
69
2012+
12+MONTH
(tabled)
2013+
5+YEAR
(tabled)
10+YEAR
(tabled)
Number+of+Homeless+Households+with+
Children++(PIT)+
800+
700+
600+
500+
400+
300+
200+
100+
0+
663+
699+
294+
215+
2009+
2010+
2013
GOAL
CURRENT
195
676+
717+
616+
People+
230+
2011+
12+MONTH
190
252+
2012+
5+YEAR
175
195+
Households+
2013+
10+YEAR
150
6