>>> GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO
THE JUNE 25 MEETING OF THE
CIVIL RIGHTS, UTILITIES,
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND ARTS
COMMITTEE.
MY NAME IS LISA HERBOLD, I'M
THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE AND
COUNCIL MEMBER REPRESENTING
WEST SEATTLE AND SOUTH PARK
DISTRICT ONE.
I'M JOINED BY COUNCIL MEMBER
SAWANT AND O'BRIEN.
IT IS 9:39 A.M.
ON OUR AGENDA TODAY WE WILL
START WITH PUBLIC COMMENT AND
MOVE INTO THE TWO ITEMS OF
BUSINESS ON THE AGENDA,
APPOINTMENT, REAPPOINTMENT TO
THE LGBT COMMISSION AND A
BRIEFING FROM THE HUMAN
SERVICES DEPARTMENT ON THE
NAVIGATION TEAM SECOND QUARTER
PROVISO REPORT.
NO OBJECTIONS, I'LL MOVE
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA.
>> I SECOND.
>> ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.
ANY OPPOSED?
THE AGENDA IS APPROVED.
SO YES WE CAN START WITH PUBLIC
COMMENT.
NO PUBLIC COMMENTS LINED UP FOR
TODAY.
ALL RIGHT, GREAT.
SO THEN FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS.
>> AGENDA ITEM ONE IS
APPOINTMENT 01376 APPOINTMENT
OF BYRAM SIMPSON AS MEMBER,
SEATTLE LGBTQ COMMISSION, FOR A
TERM TO APRIL 30, 2021.
>> GREAT, THANK YOU.
JOIN US AT THE TABLE, PLEASE.
WELCOME.
START WITH SOME QUICK
INTRODUCTIONS.
>> THANKS.
>> I'M ERICA PABLO FROM THE
SEATTLE OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS.
>> DIMITRI GROCE, OFFICE OF
COUNCIL MEMBER HERBOLD.
>> THANK YOU.
IF YOU MIGHT START WITH A QUICK
OVERVIEW OF THE COMMISSION AND
WHAT IT DOES FOR THE VIEWING
PUBLIC.
>> GREAT, SO YEAH, THE LGBT
COMMISSION'S JOB IS TO ADVISE
THE CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR, ON
ISSUES PERTAINING TO THE LGBTQ
COMMUNITY.
THIS WEEK IS THE LAST WEEK OF
PRIDE, AND SO THE COMMISSION
AND THE CITY CONTINGENT WILL BE
PARTICIPATING IN THE PRIDE
PARADE ON SUNDAY.
TRANSPRIDE IS ON FRIDAY, SO THE
COMMISSION WILL BE TABLING
THERE AND TRYING TO ENCOURAGE
FOLKS TO APPLY FOR THE
EXCISION.
>> FANTASTIC.
AND BYRAM IS A COUNCIL
REAPPOINTMENT.
DO YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE TO SAY
A FEW WORDS?
>> BYRAM, UNFORTUNATELY COULD
NOT BE HERE TO ACCEPT THIS
REAPPOINTMENT.
BUT UP UNTIL THEN BYRAM HAS
SERVED A TWO-YEAR TERM ON
BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL
COMMISSION.
CURRENTLY WORKING AT YOUTH CARE
AND THEIR INTEREST SPAN FROM
THERAPEUTIC PROVISION FOR YOUTH
AND YOUNG ADULTS EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS.
THEY WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO
SERVE ON THE CAPACITY OF LGBT
COMMISSION PARTICULARLY
FOCUSING ON HOUSING AND
AFFORDABILITY, IMPASSE CLEAR
THROUGH PEOPLE OF COLOR, AND
THAT'S WHY THEY'RE EXCITED FOR
THIS APPOINTMENT.
>> OKAY, GREAT, THANK YOU.
BYRAM IS ACTUALLY A
REAPPOINTMENT, THE AGENDA AND
THE CLERK FILE DOES NOT REFLECT
THAT, SO I WILL MOVE TO AMEND
APPOINTMENT 1376, THE
APPOINTMENT TITLE ITSELF BY
REMOVING APPOINTMENT AND
REPLACING IT WITH THE WORD
REAPPOINTMENT.
THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT
AYE.
NONE ROB STAINING.
IF. WE CAN LET BYRAM KNOW THAT
THEIR REAPPOINTMENT WILL MOVE
ON TO FULL COUNCIL MONDAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>> AGENDA ITEM TWO IS
NAVIGATION TEAM SECOND QUARTER
PROVISO REPORT.
>> WELCOME, GOOD MORNING.
>> THAT'S ALL RIGHT.
WE'LL DO A QUICK ROUND OF
INTRODUCTIONS AND THEN JEFF
SIMS WILL DO AN INTRODUCTION TO
THE ISSUE.
>> OKAY.
JEFF SIMS, CENTRAL COUNCIL
STAFF.
>> TIFFANY WASHINGTON, HUMAN
SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
>> ALI PETERS, HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT.
>> WILL LEMKE, HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THE REPORT WE'RE GOING TO BE
DISCUSSING TODAY IS THE SECOND
RESPONSE THAT HSD HAS SENT IN
RESPONSE TO GREEN SHEET 1495A4.
THAT WAS THE GREEN SHEET THAT
PROVIDED FUNDING FOR THE
NAVIGATION TEAM.
THERE IS PROVISO IN THAT
CALLING FOR A SET OF DATA TO BE
REPORTED QUARTERLY AS WELL AS
SOME FOLLOW-UPS ON THE REPORT
PREPARED BY THE CITY AUDITOR.
FOR FURTHER CONTEXT ON THAT,
THE CITY AUDITOR'S REPORT WAS
FIRST PREPARED IN NOVEMBER OF
2017.
IT OUTLINED
>> SO I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE
THE 2019 PROVISO REVISITS THE
AUDITOR'S 2017 OBSERVATION OF
THE TEAM.
FAS, WHERE THE PROGRAM USED TO
RESIDE IN HSD HAVE BEEN
RESPONDING TO THE AUDITOR'S
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TWO YEARS
NOW.
IN THAT TIME FRAME A LOT HAS
CHANGED, WHICH MAKES REPORTING
CHALLENGING.
AND THERE ARE A DOZEN OF CHECK
POINTS AS THE COUNCIL MEMBER
DESCRIBED THAT WE COULD DISCUSS
DURING THE PRESENTATION, BUT WE
WILL FOCUS ON KEY DATA POINTS
AND PROVISO CHECK POINTS.
SO -- THERE WE GO.
THE Q1 DATA AND THE Q2 REPORT
IS WHAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT
TODAY.
I WANT TO -- WE SUBMITTED THIS
REPORT ON MAY 16.
JUST WANT TO CALL OUT THAT
CONSISTENT QUARTERLY REPORTING
IS NEW FOR THE NAV TEAM.
SO WE WERE REPORTING IN THE
PAST, BUT IT WASN'T
CONSISTENTLY IN EVERY QUARTER.
SO JUMPING INTO THE PERFORMANCE
FROM JANUARY THROUGH MARCH OF
2019.
WHAT WE SEE IS THE INDIVIDUALS
ENGAGED, THE 731 INDIVIDUALS
ENGAGED ARE UNIQUE PEOPLE THAT
THE TEAM TALKED TO AND
INTERACTED WITH.
THE CONTACTS ARE THE NUMBER OF
CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE
OCCURRED.
IT'S INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE WHO
COULD BE CONTACTED MULTIPLE
TIMES OR JUST ONCE.
SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ONE
AND TWO IS ONE IS UNIQUE AND
TWO COULD BE DUPLICATES.
AND THEN THE REFERRALS TO
SHELTER ARE UNIQUE INDIVIDUALS
THAT ACCEPTED A REFERRAL.
>> THE REFERRAL NUMBERS IS A
NUMBER OF REFERRALS, SO IT
COULD BE MULTIPLE REFERRALS TO
ONE PERSON.
THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF REFERRALS
IS 208.
>> I REMEMBER THAT.
>> 203.
>> 203 IS THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF
PEOPLE THAT GOT REFERRED, SO 18
OR SO OF THOSE ARE MULTIPLE
REFERRALS.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> REFERRALS -- EXCUSE ME.
REFERRALS COME FROM THE POLICE
OFFICERS ON THE NAV TEAM OR
FROM THE REACH TEAM?
>> CORRECT.
>> AND DO WE HAVE A BREAK DOWN
OF THAT OR DO WE KNOW?
>> WE DO NOT HAVE THAT
BREAKDOWN RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE TRYING
TO GET IN THE TRACKING SYSTEM.
>> OKAY.
>> AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE
TALKED ABOUT DURING THE BUDGET
PROCESS WAS FIGURING OUT WHAT
WE CAN DO TO LEARN MORE ABOUT
THE OUTCOME OF THOSE REFERRALS.
YOU COULD ONLY KNOW WHAT IS
ABLE TO BE REPORTED BY OR WHAT
IT IS REPORTED BY, THE SHELTER,
RECEIVING THE REFERRAL.
HAVE WE DONE ANYTHING TO TRY TO
ASCERTAIN THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE
THAT WERE REFERRING THAT AND
ACTUALLY ACCEPT THE SHELTER
REFERRAL THAT THEY'VE BEEN
GIVEN?
>> YEAH, WITH THE ADDED
CAPACITY WITH THE DATA ANALYST,
WE'RE ABLE TO NOW USE DATA TO
SEE THOSE WHO WERE REFERRED, IF
THEY ENROLLED IN A SHELTER, HOW
LONG THAT IS.
IT'S A LITTLE MORE COMPLEX
BECAUSE THOSE THAT OFTEN DON'T
CONSENT, IT'S HARD TO TELL IF
THEY GO.
SO WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF
DOING THAT AND GOING THROUGH
2019 AND LOOKING, AND TRYING TO
GET ALL OF THAT, BASICALLY THE
CODE TO MATCH THOSE.
SO WE ARE IN THE PROCESS AND
HOPE TO HAVE THAT LATER THAT
YEAR.
>> BUT SOMEONE DOESN'T CONSENT?
>> OF COURSE.
AND SO WE COULD HAVE A LARGER
PICTURE FOR YOU.
>> I'M ASSUMING THAT IF WE ARE
COUNTING IT AS A REFERRAL, AT
LEAST AT THAT LEVEL, THEY ARE
CONSENTING.
THEY ARE CONSENTING TO ACCEPT
THE REFERRAL.
>> CORRECT.
>> WHAT HAPPENS TO RECEIVING
THE REFERRAL AND THE SHELTER
ITSELF?
IT IS A WHOLE OTHER BALL GAME.
BUT STILL IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US
TO KNOW OF THE REFERRALS THAT
YOU GIVE HOW MANY PEOPLE
ACTUALLY END UP IN A BETTER
PLACE THAN WHERE THEY WERE
STAYING PREVIOUS TO THE
ENCAMPMENT REMOVAL.
>> YES.
>> AND SO THIS NEXT SLIDE IS A
GENDER BREAKDOWN AND IT'S UP
HERE JUST TO SHOW THAT WE'RE
CAPTURING THE DATA, BUT IT'S
TOO EARLY TO ANALYZE ANY TRENDS
HERE.
AND SAME WITH THE RACE METRICS.
IT'S TOO EARLY TO DEFINE TRENDS
AND ANALYZE MANY OF THE
DEMOGRAPHIC DATA SETS.
BUT WHAT WE CAN SEE IS WHAT IS
IN MOST DATA,
DISPROPORTIONALTY.
AND THEN WE ALSO WANT TO NOTE
THE RACE AND ETHNICITY
CATEGORIES ARE SET BY HOOD.
>> AND SO WHEN YOU SAY IT'S TOO
EARLY TO ANALYZE THIS DATA TO
COME TO ANY CONCLUSIONS, CAN
YOU JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE
ABOUT WHAT YOU MEAN.
IS IT SAMPLE SIZE THAT MAKES IT
MORE ABLE TO BE ANALYZED AND IF
SO WHAT IS THAT NUMBER?
>> I THINK WHAT WE'RE WANTING
TO SEE IS THE CONTINUATION OF
THOSE THAT ARE ENGAGED AND
SEEING SOME EQUITY AROUND THERE
AND THEN, OF COURSE, THOSE THAT
ACTUALLY RECEIVE THE REFERRALS,
AND AS YOU MENTIONED ACTUALLY
STAY IN A SHELTER.
SO A PART OF THIS IS THE LONGER-
TERM ANALYSIS THAT WE'RE DOING
THIS YEAR TO SEE WHO ACTUALLY
STAYS IN A SHELTER.
POSSIBLY IN GETTING FOLKS TO
SHELTER.
>> AND THESE NUMBERS -- DO
THESE NUMBERS REFLECT CONTACTS
OR REFERRALS?
>> PROBABLY CONTACTS.
>> CONTACTS, YES.
>> OKAY, AND NOT PEOPLE ENGAGED
IN THE CONTACTS?
>> CORRECT, CORRECT.
AND ONE MILESTONE WE DID MAKE
THAT WILL CHANGE THIS
DEMOGRAPHIC DATA A LITTLE BIT
FROM THE PREVIOUS YEARS IS THAT
WE'VE CHANGED THE PRACTICE TO
NOW NOT MARKING PERCEIVED RACE
OR GENDER, GENDER IDENTITY,
WHICH WAS HAPPENING BEFORE.
AND SO YOU'LL SEE A LITTLE MORE
DATA NOT COLLECTED AND THAT'S
INTENTIONAL THAT IT'S NOT FOLKS
THAT ARE IDENTIFYING OTHER
FOLKS AS A PARTICULAR REASSORT
NECESSITY.
SO WE'RE REALLY TRULY HAVING
THEM IDENTIFY THEMSELVES AND
NOT HAVE ANY PERCEPTIONS.
>> OKAY.
>> OKAY, SO WHAT YOU SEE ON
THIS SLIDE IS THAT ENHANCED
SHELTERS AND TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES REMAIN THE MOST
ATTRACTIVE RESOURCES FOR PEOPLE
LIVING IN SHELTERS.
I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT.
IT'S NOT SHOCKING.
WHAT WE ARE FINDING THOUGH TINY
HOUSE VILLAGES ARE GENERALLY
FULL ON A DAILY BASIS.
SO THERE'S OFTEN MORE ENHANCED
SHELTERS AVAILABLE THAN TINY
HOMES.
THE 28% REFERRAL RATE IS FOR
UNIQUE INDIVIDUALS, NOT ALL
REFERRALS MADE.
>> WHEN YOU REFER TO PEOPLE WHO
EVENTUALLY RECEIVE THE SHELTER,
HOW ARE YOU QUANTIFYING THAT
TERM EVENTUALLY?
>> IT JUST MEANS THEY COULD
HAVE BEEN CONTACTED, ENGAGED 50
TIMES BEFORE ACCEPTING SHELTER.
BECAUSE THE CONTACT CATEGORY IS
DUPLICATED.
>> SO IS THERE A NUMBER, LIKE
AN AVERAGE NUMBER OF TIMES?
>> YEAH, THAT'S OLDER DATA.
WE DON'T HAVE THAT SPECIFIC
BOILED DOWN TO HOW MANY DIRECT
CONTACTS THERE ARE, BUT
FORMALLY WE DID REACH THAT.
[ INAUDIBLE ]
>> BUT IT'S REASONABLE TO
ASSUME OUT OF THE 28% THAT
EVENTUALLY ACCEPTED A REFERRAL
TO SHELTER.
SOME OF THEM ACCEPTED REFERRAL
THE DAY IT WAS OFFERED.
SO IT WOULD HELP TO KNOW WHAT
RANGE THAT EVENTUALLY IS.
AND YOU KNOW MAYBE GET A SENSE
OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT PERCENTAGE
ARE ACCEPTING SHELTER WHEN IT
IS OFFERED AND HOW, YOU KNOW,
WHAT THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF
ENGAGEMENTS IS NECESSARY IN
ORDER TO GET PEOPLE INTO
SHELTERS.
COUNCIL MEMBER SAWANT?
>> THANK YOU, HERBOLD.
ON THE PERFORMANCE METRICS, I
MEAN ALL OF THIS IS YOUR
PRESENTATION ON PERFORMANCE
METRICS.
I'M NOT SURE ESPECIALLY ON YOUR
SLIDE, WHERE YOU FIRST TALKED
ABOUT PERFORMANCE METRICS.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU CAN PULL
THAT UP.
I HAVE SEPARATE QUESTIONS ABOUT
THE SOCIAL ANALYSIS, BUT JUST
OVERALL, AND AGAIN IT HAD IS
NOT A NEW THING, BUT IT'S
TROUBLING TO ME THAT IT
CONTINUES TO BE THIS WAY WHERE
IN COMPARISON TO VIRTUALLY
EVERY OTHER SERVICE THAT THE
CITY CONTRACTS WITH WHO ARE
REQUIRED TO HAVE ACTUAL METRICS
IN TERMS OF TRANSITIONS TO
PERMANENT HOUSING.
HOW IS IT THAT THE NAVIGATION
TEAM ALWAYS PRESENTS STUFF LIKE
THIS WHERE INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE
ENGAGED, CONTACTS MADE.
I MEAN HONESTLY IT DOESN'T TELL
PEA ANYTHING.
LIKE WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
WHAT HAPPENED?
WAS IT CONTACT EXPERIENCE WHERE
THE HOMELESS PERSON ACTUALLY --
WITHOUT THE SERVICES THAT WERE
OFFERED TO THEM WERE SOMETHING
THEY WERE ABLE TO ACCEPT OR
NOT, BUT WAS IT A FRIENDLY
EXPERIENCE IN THE FIRST PLACE?
WE HAVE NO IDEA.
I MEAN THIS IS VERY OPAQU
HERBS.
I DON'T THINK THIS IS ENOUGH.
IT HAS TO GO MUCH DEEPER.
AND IN ADDITION TO THE POINTS
CHAIR HERBOLD ALREADY MADE, I
THINK YOU HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHAT
DOES IT MEAN, INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE
ENGAGED.
CONTACTS MADE.
THESE ARE JUST WORDS IN MY
VIEW.
THE OTHER THING I'M CONCERNED
ABOUT IS WHEN YOU SAY I
UNDERSTAND HOW YOU EXPLAIN THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PEOPLE
ENGAGED IN CONTACTS MADE AND
THAT THE INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE
ENGAGED IN THE METRIC IS LIKE
UNIQUE PEOPLE, INDIVIDUALS.
BUT IT'S ONLY UNIQUE AS TO A
GIVEN SWEEP, RIGHT?
YOU CAN'T TELL ME IT IS UNIQUE
IN A SENSE THAT SOME OF THE
SAME ENCAMPMENTS ARE SWEPT OVER
AND OVER AGAIN.
SO IN THAT SENSE IT IS NOT
UNIQUE AND PROBABLY THEY HAVE
BEEN, THOSE INDIVIDUALS HAVE
BEEN SWEPT BEFORE.
REQUESTING TO SAY THAT'S NOT
TRUE BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S TRUE.
IN MY OWN COMMITTEE I'VE HAD
HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE
TOLD US, WHO HAVE TOLD THE
COUNCIL THAT THEY ARE SWEPT
OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
AND SO THEY WOULD SHOW UP AGAIN
AND AGAIN AND AGAIN, SO I'M NOT
EVEN SURE IF THIS WAS IN ANY
WAY USEFUL TO ME, WHICH IT IS
NOT.
I DON'T THINK IT IS UNIQUE IN
THAT SENSE.
I THINK THAT CONTENT NEEDS TO
BE ANALYZED.
IF THE SAME PERSON IS BEING
SWEPT OVER AND OVER AGAIN
WITHOUT ANY SOLUTION BEING
PROVIDED TO THEM, THEN WHAT ARE
WE ACHIEVING BY SPENDING MONEY
OVER AND OVER AGAIN ON THE
SWEEPS, DO YOU KNOW WHAT I
MEAN?
SO I THINK YOU ALSO HAVE TO
HAVE METRICS ON HOW MANY TIMES
THE SAME PEOPLE HAVE BEEN
SWEPT, LIKE KEEP A RECORD OF
THAT, KEEP A RECORD OF THE SAME
ENCAMPMENT.
FOR EXAMPLE, THERE HAVE BEEN
ENCAMPMENTS.
HOW MANY TIMES, I KNOW IT HAS
BEEN SWEPT FOR AT LEAST FIVE OR
SIX TIMES BECAUSE I'M SAYING
FIVE OR SIX.
THIS IS A YEAR AGO WHEN WE HAD
THEM IN OUR COMMITTEE AND THEY
ARE PROBABLY BEING SWEPT AGAIN.
WE NEED A RIGOROUS REQUIREMENT
TO TRANSITION TO DEPARTMENT
HOUSING BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT'S
CUED, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE ASKING
OTHER SERVICES TO PROVIDE THE
METRIC, BUT YOU'RE NOT USING
THAT METRIC FOR YOUR OWN
SERVICE.
I DON'T THINK THAT WILL PROVIDE
US.
SCIENTIFICALLY SPEAKING, WE
DON'T WANT TO COMPARE APPLES TO
ORANGES, BUT WE WANT THE SAME
METRICS ACROSS THE BOARD.
BUT YOU ALSO HAVE TO INCLUDE
THE METRICS BY WHICH OTHER
SERVICES ARE HAVING TO COMPLY
WITH.
AND THEN ONE OTHER QUESTION
THAT I HAD BEFORE THE RACE AND
SOCIAL JUSTICE DEFICIT, CAN YOU
EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE
REACH?
MY UNDERSTANDING IS ACTUALLY --
IS IT OKAY IF WE HAVE JEFF JUST
QUICKLY EXPLAIN WHAT WE
BELIEVE?
>> SO CAN I ANSWER THE FIRST
QUESTION AND THEN I WANT ALI TO
ANSWER THE SECOND QUESTION.
YOU BRING UP THE POINT IN TERMS
OF THE CONTINUANCE, WHICH IS
WHY WE DON'T REFER TO TAKE A
PROGRAM OUT OF THE CONTINUUM
BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
THERE'S A HOMELESS CONTINUUM
AND OUTREACH IS A PIECE OF THE
HOMELESSNESS CONTINUUM.
SO WE HAVE HOW MANY AGENCIES
CONTRACTED FOR OUTREACH?
URBAN LEAGUE, YOUTH CARE, CHIEF
SEATTLE CLUB.
WE HAVE 15 OUTREACH AGENCIES.
NONE OF THEM ARE PAID OR
MEASURED ON EXITS TO PERMANENT
HOUSING.
THEY ARE PAID ON THE SAME THING
THAT THE NAV TEAM OUTREACH HAS
PAID FOR, WHICH IS A NUMBER OF
CONTACTS AND NUMBER OF
REFERRALS TO SHELTER.
SO YOU THINK OF IT AS A BATON.
THEY PASS THE BATON TO THE
SHELTER.
THEY GET THE PEOPLE IN THE
DOOR.
ONCE THEY'RE IN THE DOOR, THEN
THAT SHELTER IS RESPONSIBLE TO
GET THAT PERSON INTO PERMANENT
HOUSING ALONG WITH CASE
MANAGEMENT.
SO WHEN YOU PRESENT THE NAV
TEAM OUTREACH SEPARATE FROM ALL
OF THE DATA THAT YOU HAD
REFERRED TO WHEN YOU SAID YOU
SAW THE WHOLE CONTINUUM, IT IS.
>> I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU SAID.
BUT THE CONTINUUM I WAS
REFERRING TO WAS THE SWEEPS
THEMSELVES.
LIKE HOW MANY TIMES HAS THE
SAME PERSON BEEN SWEPT OVER AND
OVER AGAIN.
>> AND THAT IS WHAT ALI WILL
ANSWER.
>> YEAH, YEAH.
>> SO CHIEF SEATTLE CLUB IS AN
OUTREACH PROVIDER.
SO THEY GO OUT.
>> ON PAGE EIGHT OF THE REPORT
IT DOES SAY THAT ALL HSD-FUNDED
OUTREACH CONTRACTS REQUIRE
CONTRACTING AND REPORTING ON
THE SAME PERFORMANCE AND
INCLUDES EXITS OF HOUSEHOLDS
THAT ENTER PERMANENT HOUSING.
SO IT IS A REPORTING CRITERIA,
BUT THEN YOU GO ON TO SAY THAT
-- WELL THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS.
>> IT MIGHT BE THE CONTEXT.
SOMETIMES WE HAVE OUTREACH
AGENCIES THAT ARE ALSO
SHELTERS.
>> IT DOES SAY NO OUTREACH
PROVIDER HAS THE ABILITY TO
TRACK DATA ON OUTRIGHT SERVICE
REFUSALS, BUT CLEARLY SAYS THAT
PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT
ENTER PERMANENT HOUSING IS A
DATA POINT.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FROM SOME
ADVOCACY THAT I DID A COUPLE
MONTHS AGO THAT WITH OUTREACH
THAT IT ACTUALLY IS A DATA
POINT.
>> AN ERROR.
WE CAN SEND YOU A CONTRACT, AN
YOU WON'T FIND EXITS TO
PERMANENT HOUSING IN THAT.
>> ACTUALLY THE ATTACHMENT TO
THE HSD, RFP IS NOT FOR
OUTREACH AGENCIES, THAT'S
CORRECT.
IT DOES NOT LIST EXITS TO
PERMANENT HOUSING.
IT FOCUSES ON REFERRALS AND
OUTREACH CONTRACTS MADE JUST
FOR THE OUTREACH PROVIDERS.
THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN AN ERROR
HERE WHERE THERE IS A CUT AND
PASTE OR SOMETHING.
BUT OTHER CONTRACTS ARE
ACTUALLY PROVIDED.
I CAN FOLLOW UP WITH THE
ATTACHMENTS, WHICH IS WHAT ALL
GRANTEES THAT RECEIVES OUR
CONTRACTS.
>> I WANT TO BE CLEAR THIS IS
WHAT ALL OUTREACH CAPTURES.
IT DOESN'T TELL A FULL PICTURE.
I THINK WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING
AND WHAT ALI IS TRYING TO SAY
IS WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY
WHEN WE HAVE A NON-CONSENT LAW,
WHICH AS WE SHOULD, WHO WENT TO
PERMANENT HOUSING.
HOW SOMEONE WENT THROUGH THE
WHOLE CONTINUUM FROM START TO
FINISH.
IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT'S
NUANCED, BUT I THINK THAT'S
WHAT I'M HEARING.
WHAT'S THE STORY OF A PERSON.
DID ONE OF THESE PEOPLE END UP
IN PERMANENT HOUSING?
ARE THEY BETTER OFF BECAUSE OF
WHAT HAPPENED IN THE BEGINNING?
SO DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT
DUPLICATES AND I THINK YOUR
QUESTION, COUNCIL MEMBER, WAS
IT DOESN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY
PEOPLE WERE REMOVED OVER AND
OVER FROM AN ENCAMPMENT.
WAS THAT -- [ INAUDIBLE ]
>> THE RETURNS TO THE SAME
LOCATION.
BUT EVEN OTHERWISE IT WILL BE
EVEN BETTER IF WE TRACK THE
INDIVIDUALS BY NAME, SO THAT
EVEN IF THEY ENDED UP GOING TO
A DIFFERENT ENCAMPMENT, THEN
YOU HAVE A TRACKER ON THAT AS
WELL.
>> THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE
ARE STARTING TO DO IN 2019 IS
WE'VE KIND OF ALWAYS HAD
IDENTIFIERS FOR THOSE THAT WE
SEE ON A REGULAR BASIS.
SO WE ARE ABLE TO UNDUPLICATE
THOSE.
IN AN INSTANCE WHERE THEY ARE
NOT WILLING TO GIVE NAMES OR WE
DON'T HAVE A CLEAR IDENTIFIER
OF WHO THEY ARE, THEY MAY GET
COUNTED A COUPLE OF TIMES.
BUT IN OUR SYSTEM, WHEN THEY
HAVE A MEANINGFUL CONTACT FOR
SOMEONE AND GIVE INFORMATION,
THEN THAT PERSON IS IN OUR
SYSTEM BY A NAME.
AND THEN THE NEXT TIME THEY SEE
THEM, THEY WILL ATTACH THAT,
THE NEXT ENGAGEMENT CONTACT
WITH THEM TO THAT RECORD.
SO WE ARE ABLE TO DIG DOWN INTO
ACTUAL UNDUPLICATING AND SEEING
HOW MANY TIMES, WHICH IS I
WROTE DOWN HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE
CONTACTED AT VARIOUS PLACES.
WE CAN ADD THAT TO THE ANALYSIS
AND START LOOKING.
>> YEAH, I THINK THAT IS VERY
IMPORTANT AND THEN REACH.
>> SURE.
PREVIOUSLY I WOULD SAY TO THIS
TIME LAST YEAR REACH WAS
CONTRACTED TO PROVIDE OUTREACH
SERVICES TO THE NAVIGATION TEAM
AND HAD EIGHT CASE MANAGERS
THAT WOULD GO BOTH WAYS.
THERE WAS A 72-HOUR NOTICE FOR
ANY ENCAMPMENT TO BE REMOVED
AND ON THE DAY ANY ENCAMPMENT
WOULD BE REMOVED.
THEN THE CHANGE THAT HAS
HAPPENED OVER THE LAST FEW
WEEKS I WOULD SAY IS THAT
OUTREACH NO LONGER HAS STAFF
THAT COMES ON THE DAY A SWEEP
IS ACTUALLY TAKING PLACE.
THEY WOULD ONLY COME TO AN
ENCAMPMENT WHEN A 72-HOUR
NOTICE IS PROVIDED.
INCREASINGLY IF YOU DO
COMPARISONS TO LAST YEAR, MORE
ENCAMPMENTS ARE NOT RECEIVING
THAT 72-HOUR NOTICE, WHICH
MEANS REACH IS NOT ENGAGING
WITH THOSE ENCAMPMENTS.
AND WHAT WAS SHARED A FEW WEEKS
AGO, RATHER THAN TAKING THE
FUNDS PROVIDED IN THE BUDGET TO
EXPAND THE CONTRACT AND HAVING
MOR OUTREACH STAFF, HSD HAS
HIRED TWO PEOPLE DIRECTLY,
DESCRIBING THE SYSTEM
NAVIGATORS.
AND THOSE NAVIGATORS -- WILL
TAKE PLACE, PERFORMING THE TYPE
OF OUTREACH SERVICES THAT THEY
WOULD HAVE PROVIDED PREVIOUSLY.
>> SO IT IS HONORING THE
REQUEST, WHICH IS REASONABLE
HAVING BEEN AN OUTREACH WORKER.
THEY DON'T WANT TO BE
ASSOCIATED ON THE DAY OFF
BECAUSE THEIR CREDIBILITY OF AN
OUTREACH WORKER IS KEY.
AND SO THEY WANT TO DO ALL OF
THE PRE OUTREACH, BUT ON THE
DAY OF THE CLEAN THEY HAVE
REQUESTED CONTINUOUSLY TO NOT
BE PRESENT.
AND SO WE'VE HIRED TWO PEOPLE
TO BE PRESENT SO THAT THEY
DON'T HAVE TO BE.
>> BUT WHAT THAT EFFECTIVELY
MEANS SINCE THERE ARE FEW 72-
HOUR CLEANS HAPPENING, THAT
BODY OF WORK.
>> AND SO REACH IS BOTH A PART
OF THE OUTREACH SPECIFICALLY
FOR THE NAV TEAM AND OUTREACH
GENERALLY.
>> I KNOW THEY ARE STILL DOING
OUTREACH.
I'M SAYING AS IT RELATES TO THE
NAV TEAM'S WORK, SINCE THERE
ARE VERY FEW 72-HOUR CLEANS
BEING DONE.
REACH IS VERY ENGAGED IN A VERY
SMALL WAY WITH THE NAV TEAM'S
WORK AT THIS POINT.
>> AND SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT
YOU'RE TRYING TO ASK.
IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.
THERE IS A POPULATION OF
UNSHELTERED INDIVIDUALS, RIGHT?
THAT ALL OUTREACH IS
RESPONSIBLE.
WE CAN'T MAKE THE HYPOTHESIS OF
HOW MUCH REACH IS TALKING TO
SOMEBODY THAT THE NAV TEAM
MEMBER IS EVENTUALLY GOING TO
ASK TO MOVE.
>> I WASN'T SUGGESTING THAT
REACH IS NOT ENGAGING WITH
INDIVIDUALS SEPARATE FROM THE
NAVIGATION TEAM'S WORK.
I'M SAYING THEY'RE NOT ENGAGED
IN THE NAV TEAM BECAUSE THE NAV
TEAM ISN'T DOING VERY MANY 72-
HOUR SWEEPS ANY LONGER.
AND SO YES IN THE COURSE OF THE
OUTREACH WORK THAT THEY DO,
THEY WILL COME INTO CONTACT AND
ENGAGE WITH PEOPLE THAT THE NAV
TEAM DETERMINES ON A SEPARATE
TRACK IS AN ENCAMPMENT THAT IS
SLATED FOR REMOVAL.
I'M NOT QUESTIONING THAT.
>> NO, I HEAR YOU.
I FEEL LIKE IT IS A FINE LINE.
IT COULD POSSIBLY SET UP THE
NARRATIVE THAT'S CONFUSING.
>> YES.
>> IT'S NOT THAT CLEAN.
>> IF I COULD ADD.
SO REACH IS STILL MEETING WITH
THE NAV TEAM ON THE DAILY AND
WEEKLY BASIS.
THEY ARE STILL WORKING WITH THE
NAV TEAM TO DO ADVANCED
OUTREACH, TWO SITES THAT ARE
EITHER GOING TO BE PRIORITIZED
FOR REMOVAL OR SITES THAT THEY
ARE JUST VISITING A PART OF
THEIR CONTINUUM WORK.
VERY MUCH MAKING CONTACTS,
WHICH WILL BE REFLECTED IN THE
DATA SETS.
THEY ARE JUST NOT GOING TO BE
THERE ON THE DAY OF THE 72-HOUR
PLEAD.
SO LET'S TAKE AN EXAMPLE OF
WHICH GOT A LOT OF PUBLICITY.
THEY WOULD STILL BE RESPONSIBLE
FOR DOING THE OUTREACH
BEFOREHAND.
SO IN THE WEEKS LEADING UP TO
THAT, THEY WILL STILL BE DOING
THE VISITS.
THEN THE 72-HOUR WINDOW THEY
WILL BE DOING VISITS.
BUT THE DAY OFF, THE SYSTEM
NAVIGATORS WILL BE THERE IN
CASE THEY WANT TO TAKE AN OFFER
OR SERVICE.
>> I'M JUST SIMPLY SAYING THE
MAJORITY OF THE REMOVALS ARE
NOT THE TYPES OF REMOVALS THAT
YOU'RE DESCRIBING.
THEY ARE NOT ONES WHERE THERE'S
MULTIPLE DAYS OF OUTREACH
THERE, REMOVALS THAT PEOPLE ARE
GIVEN 30 MINUTES NOTICE.
AND THERE IS NO ADVANCED
NOTICE.
>> SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO
DIFFERENT THINGS?
SO THE FIRST THING IS YOU'RE
SAYING THAT THERE'S NOT, THERE
ARE LESS 72-HOUR CLEANS THAN
THERE WERE THIS TIME LAST YEAR.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS TRUE.
I COULD HAVE ALI CHECK THAT.
BUT THAT DOESN'T HAVE A DIRECT
BARING ON OUTREACH OR NOT
OUTREACH.
SO I'M TRYING TO, YOU'RE MAKING
TWO POINTS AND YOU'RE COMBINING
THEM TOGETHER AND THEY ARE NOT
NECESSARILY COMBINED TOGETHER.
SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
>> I'M WONDERING IF I COULD
JUST REPHRASE A LITTLE BIT,
KIND OF WHAT STEPHANIE IS
SAYING.
AND REACH'S CONCEPT IS THEY
WANT TO COVER THE REGION.
SO WHEN AN ACCESSIBILITY OR A
RIGHT OF WAY DOES COME IN
BECAUSE THERE'S LESS TIME, THAT
REACH HAS ALREADY BEEN THERE.
>> CORRECT.
>> AND SO I THINK YES, THEY DO
HAVE A FOCUS FOR THE 72 HOURS.
THERE ARE LESS.
SO THE EXPANSION OF WHAT WE'RE
ASKING THEM TO COVER IS LARGER
NOW.
IT'S NOT FOCUSED ON JUST 72-
HOUR SITES.
WE KNOW THAT THESE FIVE AREAS
OFTEN HAVE PEOPLE THAT WILL
COME STAY THERE.
WE ARE ASKING YOU TO GO THERE
BECAUSE IF ACCESSIBILITY OR
RIGHT OF WAY, YOU KNOW, CLEAN
HAPPENS, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE
HAD OUTREACH ALL ALONG.
AND SO WHILE I AGREE THEY ARE
NOT, THERE'S LESS 72-HOUR
CLEANS, WE ARE ASKING THEM NOW
TO COVER A LARGER BASE.
SO WHEN SOMETHING DOES HAPPEN,
THEY HAVE HAD OUTREACH.
AND THEY HAVE HAD MULTIPLE
OUTREACH AND THEY WANTED THAT
OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE MEANINGFUL
ENGAGEMENTS OVERTIME AND NOT
JUST, YOU KNOW, 72 HOURS RIGHT
BEFORE IT HAPPENS BECAUSE
THAT'S NOT A REAL GREAT
OUTREACH STRATEGY.
>> CORRECT.
>> AND SO AGREE THE WORK ON 72
HOURS IS LESS, BUT WE ARE
ASKING THEM TO DO A LARGER
COVERAGE AND GET EVERYONE
POSSIBLY IN THOSE AREAS TO
ENSURE THAT PEOPLE DO GET
MULTIPLES BECAUSE OF THE OTHER
STRATEGIES THAT ARE HAPPENING.
>> I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE
SPECIFIC RULE OF THE NAVIGATION
TEAM.
AND SO REACH DOES A LOT OF
STUFF FOR THE CITY.
THE BROADER OUTREACH, THE WORK
WITH THE LEAD AND THE CASE OF
WHETHER THERE IS 72-HOUR
NOTICE.
AND SO REALLY APPRECIATE THE
AMAZING WORK REACH DOES.
WHEN THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY
TO DO IT, THEY ARE WORKING
WITH, YOU KNOW, SOME REALLY
CHALLENGING CONDITIONS, AND I
THINK THEY DO SOME AMAZING
WORK.
BUT YOU SAID THAT THERE WOULD
BE A NAVIGATION TEAM AND DAILY
AND WEEKLY.
ALL RIGHT, WHICH ONE IS IT?
>> WEDNESDAY THERE'S A DISPATCH
MEETING, WHICH I KNOW THEY
ATTEND BECAUSE I ATTEND THOSE
MEETINGS AS WELL.
I BELIEVE IT IS DAILY, BUT I
CAME FROM THE OUTREACH.
>> AND THERE IS REACH.
THERE IS ALWAYS A REACH PERSON
THERE.
>> GOT IT.
>> AND SO THEY ARE A PART OF
THE TEAM.
>> YES, EVERY DAY.
>> BECAUSE THEY KNOW THE PEOPLE
ON THE PLANNING SIDE.
AND FOLKS COULD ANSWER THAT
QUESTION.
THAT IS HOPEFUL TO KNOW.
MY UNDERSTANDING OF SOME OF THE
THEORIES THAT HAVE CHANGED
AROUND AND MAYBE I'M USING THIS
TERM INCORRECTLY HERE, BUT HOW
THE NAVIGATION TEAM WAS WORKING
HISTORICALLY WAS A COUPLE OF
THINGS THAT WERE GOING ON.
ONE, WE ARE GOING BACK A FEW
YEARS AGO, BUT THEY WOULD
IDENTIFY SPECIFIC PLACES FOR
WHATEVER REASON THEY REALLY
DECIDED PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE
HERE.
FOR A WHILE IT WAS RIGHT ALONG
THE SIDE OF THE FREEWAYS.
THEY WERE SAYING WE COULD NOT
HAVE PEOPLE HERE AND THERE WAS
A COMMITMENT THAT WE DIDN'T
HAVE GOOD SHELTER OPTIONS FOR
PEOPLE WHO DID THAT.
NOW WHEN YOU'RE IN A MOMENT IN
A NEW TINY HOUSE VILLAGE THAT
OPENS UP AND A NEW LOW BARRIER
SHELTER OPENS UP, AND THERE'S A
NEW PERMANENT SUPPORTER OPENING
UP, YOU HAVE A RANGE OF
OPTIONS.
YOU WALK INTO A SITE LIKE THAT,
YOU GIVE THE NOTICE, REACH IS
THERE, PEOPLE HAVE A VARIETY OF
HOUSING OPTIONS AND HOPEFULLY
THERE'S LOTS OF GOOD FITS
THERE, AND PEOPLE, YOU KNOW,
WHEN THAT WORKS, THAT WORKS
REALLY WELL IS MY SENSE.
NOT PERFECTLY.
THERE'S STILL PEOPLE WHO WILL
REFUSE AND THEY'RE NOT READY.
THERE'S A VARIETY OF REASONS.
BUT THE MOMENTS WHEN WE HAVE
MULTIPLE GOOD SHELTER OPTIONS,
THEY'RE PRETTY RARE.
AT LEAST FOR A LARGE
POPULATION.
AND SO, SO IT FEELS LIKE FOR
THE NAVIGATION TEAM -- I'M NOT
EXACTLY WHICH DRIVE HAS SHIFTED
FROM THIS KIND OF TARGETED
MODEL TO MUCH MORE WHERE WE ARE
JUST -- I FEEL LIKE WE'RE BACK
ON OUR HEELS A BIT.
WE'RE CONSTANTLY GOING BACK AND
SWEEPING PLACES.
MOSTLY WE'RE DECLARING
EMERGENCIES.
I CAN'T QUITE TELL IF THE
DEFINITION HAS SHIFTED OVER THE
LAST YEAR OR TWO OR IF IT'S
JUST THAT THERE'S CERTAIN
AREAS, YOU KNOW, THE SIDEWALK
IN FRONT OF WHEREVER, IT KEEPS
GETTING REPOPULATED AND WE COME
BACK EVERY THREE DAYS AND IT'S
A GAME OF CAT AND MOUSE.
BUT ON ANY GIVEN REACH, WE
CAN'T ENGAGE EFFECTIVELY IN
THAT THING.
AND YOU GUYS ARE MAKING YOUR
DECISIONS ON WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
BUT IT DOES FEEL LIKE THE
RESOURCES WE'RE SPENDING ON
THESE ISSUES, IT DOESN'T FEEL
LIKE IT IS WORKING.
AND I'VE BEEN WONDERING WHEN WE
LOOK AT THE SYSTEM, IS IT LIKE
NO, THIS IS ACTUALLY WORKING IN
HERE AND A THEORY, AND WHAT WE
FIND IS THE BIG SIDEWALK.
THEY DON'T COME BACK.
HERE IS HOW WE MANAGE THAT.
OR IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE
THAT'S GOING ON.
>> DO YOU WANT TO ADD OR DO YOU
WANT ME TO ANSWER?
>> PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> I SEE THE NAV TEAM STILL THE
SAME WAY AS YOU DESCRIBED IT
FROM BEFORE.
THE NAV TEAM CAN ONLY GO OUT
AND DO 72-HOUR CLEANS IF
THERE'S VIABLE SHELTER OPTIONS
OPEN.
AD SO YET NUMBER OF SHELTER
BEDS THAT PEOPLE WANT TO GO TO.
IT DICTATES WHETHER OR NOT THEY
COULD GO OUT.
HOW MANY 72-HOUR CLEANS THEY
COULD DO.
>> GOT IT.
>> SO WE'VE GOT AN AVERAGE OF
17 SHELTER BEDS AVAILABLE ON A
DAILY BASIS.
WE KNOW THAT WE'VE INVESTED IN
SHELTER CAPACITY, BUT YET WE'RE
UNDERPERFORMING ON SUCCESSFUL
SHELTER REFERRALS.
IS THERE A LESSON TO BE
LEARNED?
ABOUT BALANCING INVESTMENTS IN
NEW SHELTER BEDS AND
SPECIFICALLY ENHANCED SHELTER.
AS WE HAVE SEEN BEFORE THE
ACCEPTANCE OF SHELTERS IS MUCH
GREATER WITH WHEN THERE'S
AVAILABILITY IN AN ENHANCED
SHELTER AS WELL AS TINY
HOUSEVILLAGES.
>> SORRY, SAY THAT AGAIN?
>> THE ACCEPTANCE RATE IS
HIGHER IF THERE'S TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES AND ENHANCED SHELTERS?
SO ARE WE USING THAT KNOWLEDGE
TO COME UP WITH A PLAN TO
CONTINUE INVESTMENT AND MORE
ENHANCED SHELTER AND TINY
VILLAGES?
>> YEAH.
>> SO THERE'S ANOTHER --
>>
WE'RE IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
EXECUTIVE OFFICE RIGHT NOW
ABOUT THE ABILITY TO SWITCH ANY
BASIC SHELTER TO ENHANCED.
WE DID A LOT WITH THE PATH TO
500 AND STRETCHED SERVICE
PROVIDERS TO THEIR LIMIT.
WE'RE DOING ANOTHER LOOK
THROUGH TO SEE IF THERE'S FIVE
BEDS, TWO BEDS, WHAT COULD WE
DO TO TRANSITION BASIC SHELTER
TO ENHANCED SHELTER.
>> OKAY.
>> SOME OF THE BUILDING
RESTRICTIONS ARE THE BARRIER.
IT'S JUST NOT POSSIBLE.
OTHER ONE IS A SCATTERED SITE.
LIKE THE CHURCH SHELTERS, IT
CAN'T BE.
SO I THINK THE STOCK OF BASIC
SHELTER HAS DROPPED
TREMENDOUSLY.
>> SO THAT'S ON THE CONVERTING,
EXISTING BASIC SHELTER?
>> I DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION
ON BUILDING NEW ENHANCED
SHELTERS AT THIS TIME.
HAVE YOU GUYS HEARD ANYTHING?
>> A COUPLE HOUSING BEDS/TINY
HOUSE VILLAGES.
SO I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE A
POINT OF CLARITY HERE.
THE 17 FIGURE IS JUST, THE 17
BED SAFER SPACES, FIGURED FOR
ONLY NAVIGATION TEAM SET ASIDE.
THOSE ARE ONLY FOR PLACES THE
NAVIGATION TEAM REFERS TO
EXCLUSIVELY.
THAT'S TINY HOUSE VILLAGES.
IT DOES NOT REFLECT THE ENTIRE
SYSTEM.
I'M NOT PREPARED TO SPEAK
ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE VACANCY
RATES THERE.
I DIDN'T COME PREPARED WITH
THAT.
BUT THE 17 FIGURE IS BASICALLY
WHAT THE NAVIGATION TEAM HAS
OFFERED, HAS AT THEIR
FINGERTIPS ON A DAILY BASIS.
>> I BELIEVE YOU'RE ASKING WHAT
THE TOTAL CAPACITY OF ENHANCED
BASIC SHELTER AND TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES.
TOGETHER ALL THOSE BEDS ON A
GIVEN NIGHT IS 2,000.
>> I APPRECIATE THE
CLARIFICATION OF THIS NUMBER
17.
THE POINT I WANTED TO MAKE WAS
TRYING TO GET A SENSE OF HOW
MUCH VACANCY DO WE HAVE IN THAT
SYSTEM?
AND MY SENSE IS VACANCY IS
INCREDIBLY LOW.
17 IS ONLY THE NAVIGATION TEAM,
THE OTHER VACANCIES OUTSIDE OF
IT.
SO MY MATH IS NOT GOING TO BE
QUITE RIGHT.
BUT 17 OUT OF 2,000, LESS THAN
1% VACANCY.
YOU KNOW, TRYING TO -- A HOTEL
PROFESSIONALLY MANAGED WITH,
YOU KNOW, ONLINE BOOKING
SYSTEMS, CREDIT CARDS CAN'T
MANAGE TO LESS THAN 1%.
THIS IS EFFECTIVELY AT
CAPACITY.
AGAIN ALTHOUGH, YOU KNOW, IF
YOU WANT TO TELL ME THERE ARE A
COUPLE HUNDRED OUTSIDE THIS
SYSTEM THAT ARE AVAILABLE.
I CAN ONLY IMAGINE THAT IT'S,
YEAH.
THERE AREN'T A LOT OF RESOURCES
ON THE BACK END, WHICH MAKES IT
HARD FOR THE NAVIGATION TEAM TO
GO OUT AND DOT 72-HOUR CANVAS
SWEEPS AND OFFER PEOPLE GOOD
SOLUTIONS WHEN WE CAN'T BRING
THEM ON.
AND SO I KNOW OF A BIG EFFORT
WITH THOSE SHELTER SYSTEMS, IT
IS THROUGHPUT.
AND TO GIVE PEOPLE A CHANCE TO
MOVE INTO HOUSING.
AS SOON AS WE DO THAT, THERE IS
A BED OPEN, THE ROOMS WILL BE
READY TO TURN, THE BED IS READY
TO TURN, PACK IN THE SYSTEM,
AND PROBABLY FILLS UP.
>> YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT.
I WORKED AT EMBASSY SUITES WHEN
I WAS IN COLLEGE.
EVEN THE MOST SOPHISTICATED
SYSTEM, THEY MESS UP.
PEOPLE SHOW UP, AND THEY HAVE
OVERBOOKED, RIGHT?
THEY ARE BANKING ON THE
PERCENTAGE.
THEY HAVE TWO, THREE DATA BASES
DOING THAT FOR THEM.
>> SO IN YOUR STATEMENT EARLIER
ABOUT THE NAVIGATION TEAM'S
WORK BEING DEPENDENT ON THERE
BEING AVAILABLE SHELTER BEDS TO
REFER PEOPLE TO.
IS THAT ONLY FOR THE 72-HOUR
REMOVALS OR IS THAT ALSO FOR
THE OBSTRUCTION REMOVALS?
>> BOTH HAVE REFERRALS, BUT I
THINK WHEN YOU HAVE
INSTRUCTIONS AND RIGHT OF WAYS,
IT'S ABOUT THE STUFF, NOT THE
PERSON.
SO THE PERSON DOESN'T HAVE TO
LEAVE, BUT THEY CAN'T HAVE AN
ENTIRE SIDEWALK BLOCKED, SO
THAT PEOPLE, PEDESTRIANS HAVE
TO STEP IN TO THE STREETS AS I
DID WHEN I WAS COMING FROM THE
TRAIN TO GET SOMEWHERE.
>> THERE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ANY
AVAILABLE SHELTER BEDS IN THOSE
INSTANCES, BUT YOU'RE NOT
MAKING THE PERSON LEAVE, YOU'RE
ONLY MAKE THE STUFF GO AWAY?
> YES, WE FOLLOW THEM INDOORS.
THE SYSTEM NAVIGATORS AND THE
FIELD COORDINATORS AND THE
OUTREACH WORKERS WILL TRY TO
MAKE SURE THEY OFFER EVERYBODY
NO MATTER WHAT, WHETHER IT WILL
BE 72 HOURS OR OBSTRUCTIONS,
OFFER THEM A PLACE TO GO.
>> I'M SAYING IN THOSE
INSTANCES THAT THESE 17 AVERAGE
SHELTER BEDS THAT ARE
EARMARKED, THAT THEY ARE NOT
AVAILABLE?
THAT THERE IS NO, THAT THE
VACANCY IS ZERO.
YOU STILL WILL GO AND DO THOSE
OBSTRUCTION REMOVALS?
>> WE WILL DO OBSTRUCTION
REMOVALS.
TO WILL'S POINT, THERE IS NEVER
A SITUATION.
I HAVEN'T ENCOUNTERED IN TWO
YEARS WHERE THERE IS NOT A BED
TO REFER PEOPLE TO.
>> SO IT IS ALSO ONE OF THE
REASONS WHY THE SYSTEM
NAVIGATORS WERE BROUGHT ON TO
BE THERE FOR A REMOVAL FOR WHEN
SOMEONE WANTS TO GO INSIDE OR
GET CONNECTED TO THE -- TO
TIFFANY'S POINT RIGHT NOW, I
CANNOT RECALL A POINT WHERE
THERE WAS NOT A SINGLE SPACE
FOR SOMEONE TO GO.
CITY HALL SHELTER EXPANDED TO
THE SECOND FLOOR.
BASIC SHELTER BEDS THERE.
THERE IS A SPOT FOR SOMEONE TO
GO.
WE WILL MAKE IT HAPPEN.
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO FALLING
IN, YOU ARE CORRECT.
WHERE THE 72-HOUR RULES DO HAVE
THAT COMPONENT, WHERE WE DO
NEED TO HAVE THE BEDS SET
ASIDE.
THE WAY IT WORKS, YOUR LARGER
ENCAMPMENTS WHICH PRESENT A
WHOLE HOST OF COMPLEXITIES ON
THE PEOPLE'S SIDE AND LOGISTICS
SIDE, THOSE WILL BE APPROACHED
WITH THE 72-HOUR RULES AND THEN
YOUR SMALLER ONES, SUCH AS
BLOCKING SIDEWALKS ON FOURTH
AND YESLER OR DOWN ON SECOND
AVENUE, EXTENSION SOUTH.
THAT'S WHERE YOU'LL SEE MORE OF
THE WORK, IT'S ABOUT THE STUFF,
CELL BLOCKING.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> SO I WOULD, ONE THING I WANT
TO MENTION BEFORE WE MOVE ON,
JEFF MENTIONED THIS.
THE WINTER STORM DATA IS NOT
REFLECTED IN THE DATA SETS.
IT WAS AN EMERGENCY SITUATION,
AND IT WAS ABOUT MAKING SURE
PEOPLE WERE SAFE INSIDE.
SO THIS SLIDE IS ABOUT THE
AUDITOR RECOMMENDED THAT WE
SHOULD TRACK REASONS FOR
REFUSAL TO SERVICE, COUNCIL
MEMBER, I THINK YOU MENTIONED
THAT A COUPLE OF SLIDES AGO.
MOST OF THE DATA REFLECTS
UNKNOWN OR OTHER.
NOT WANTING SHELTER WAS THE
MOST RESPONSE, THE MOST
RESPONSES WE GOT FOR SOMEONE
DECLINING IS NOT WANTING
SHELTER.
THERE WAS 186 TOTAL REFUSALS.
WE DON'T KNOW WHY SOMEONE
DOESN'T WANT SHELTER OTHER THAN
WE DON'T WANT SHELTER.
OR I DON'T WANT SHELTER.
SOME OTHER RESPONSES WE SAW WAS
FOLKS DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN A
COMMUNAL SPACE.
THEY WANT AN ENHANCED SPACE,
TINY VILLAGES, OR THEY'VE HAD A
NEGATIVE EXPERIENCE WITH
SHELTERS AND THEY DON'T WANT TO
GO BACK INTO THE SHELTER
SYSTEM.
>> SO IS THERE LIKE A LIST OF
REASONS THEY CHECK WHEN THEY'RE
TRYING --
>>
THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE
INSTITUTED IN 2019.
IT TOOK FIRST QUARTER TO GET
ALL THE DATA BASE SET UP AND
ALL THE TRAINING WITH ALL THE
OFFICERS, SO WE ARE NOW
COLLECTING MORE SPECIFIC DATA
ON WHY.
>> AND WE WILL BE ABLE TO SEE
MORE AS THE QUARTER PROGRESSES.
>> CORRECT.
>> SO JUST ON THE QUESTION OF
REASONS FOR REFUSALS OF
SERVICES, OBVIOUSLY AS YOU,
YOURSELF, ARE NOTICING THROUGH
THE DATA, THE RATE OF
ACCEPTANCE, THE TINY HOME IS
GREATER THAN OTHER TYPES OF
SHELTERS FOR OBVIOUS REASONS.
AND SO
SHOULDN'T -- I MEAN THE
DEPARTMENT AND THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE, THEY SHOULD BE LOOKING
TO EXPAND THOSE OPTIONS BEFORE
CONTINUING TO DO THIS SORT OF
AS A MATTER OF ROUTINE, DOING
THE SWEEPS AS A MATTER OF
ROUTINE.
YOU KNOW, I CALL THEM SWEEPS
BECAUSE THEY ARE INHUMANE AND
EFFECTIVE.
YOU DON'T HAVE SOMEWHERE VIABLE
TO GO TO AND VIABLE COULD NOT
BE DEFINED BY THE DEPARTMENT OR
THE CITY.
VIABLE IS WHAT IS VIABLE FOR
YOU AS A HUMAN BEING, YOU KNOW,
WHERE CAN YOU GO WITH YOUR PET,
YOUR BELONGINGS, SO ON.
AND REPEATEDLY HOMELESS
COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE TOLD US
AS I'M SURE YOU ALL KNOW
ALREADY THAT THEY DON'T ACCEPT
OTHER SHELTER OPTIONS BECAUSE
THEY ARE TEMPORARY.
OFTEN THEY SOMETIMES, NOT
OFTEN, BUT THEIR BELONGINGS ARE
STOLEN BECAUSE THEY NEED TO PUT
THEM IN STORAGE.
AND SOMETIMES THEIR LIVELIHOODS
ARE CONTAINED IN THE BELONGINGS
THAT THEY HAVE.
AND SO IF THEY HAVE A SECURE
PLACE TO GO TO WHERE THEY CAN
HAVE ALL THEIR BELONGINGS,
THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS WITH THEM,
AND IF IT IS A PLACE THAT
ACTUALLY TRANSITIONS THEM INTO
HOUSING AND JOBS, THEN IT IS
VIABLE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO KNOW.
I KNOW YOU SAID YOU'RE WORKING
WITH THE EXECUTIVE, BUT WHAT
EXACTLY IS THE PROGRESS, WHAT
IS THE TIMELINE WE SHOULD
EXPECT THIS YEAR IN TERMS OF
EXPANDING THOSE TINY HOME OR
ENHANCED SHELTER OPTIONS SO
THAT THESE ARE NO LONGER
SWEEPS, BUT ACTUALLY HUMANE
SHELTER OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE TO
USE AND THEN TRANSITION TO
BETTER CONDITIONS.
>> SO I DON'T HAVE A TIMELINE,
BUT ALI AND HER TEAM ARE
WORKING ON SOME MODELING, JUST
LOOKING AT HOW MUCH IT WILL
COST FOR MULTIPLE ENHANCED
SHELTER OPTIONS.
IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE, BUT I
THINK WE AGREE WITH YOU THAT
IT'S WORTH IT.
PEOPLE WILL GO INSIDE IF THEY
FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE SOME SENSE
OF DIGNITY, RESPECT, PRIVACY.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
BUT I WOULD URGE YOU TO CONVEY
TO THE MAYOR'S OFFICE ALSO IN
TERMS OF EXPENSE, I MEAN LOOK
AT HOW MANY MILLIONS HAVE BEEN
SPENT ON THE SWEEPS.
THAT HAS NOT -- IN THE ABSENCE
OF ACTUAL OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE TO
TRANSITION TO, IT'S WASTED
MONEY.
AND SO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
EXPENSE, THEN LET'S ACTUALLY
PUT THE MONEY WHERE IT GIVES US
A RESULT RATHER THAN DOING
SOMETHING THAT HAS PROVEN OVER
AND OVER AGAIN TO NOT WORK
BECAUSE IT DOESN'T WORK FOR
HUMAN BEINGS.
I WOULD URGE YOU TO USE THAT
APPROACH.
>> I JUST WANT TO GO BACK TO
SOMETHING AROUND EFFECTIVENESS.
I DO BELIEVE THE NAV TEAM IS
EFFECTIVE FOR THE SIMPLE FACT
THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO ASK
PEOPLE TOMOVE ON TO HAVE SOME
SORT OF HUMANE ARM THERE OR
STAFF THERE TO BE THERE FOR
THEM WHEN ASKING THEM TO MOVE
ON AND PROVIDING SERVICES, CASE
MANAGEMENT, AND SHELTER
OPTIONS.
IT IS EFFECTIVE.
I THINK THAT WHAT YOU JUST
BROUGHT UP IN TERMS OF I THINK
WE ALL AGREE, WE NEED MORE
PLACES THAT PEOPLE WANT TO GO
TO.
BUT WHEN I DRIVE UP, I SEE OUT
ON THE STREETS, JACKIE OUT
THERE, AUGUST OUT THERE.
THEY'RE OUT THERE SITTING DOWN
TALKING TO PEOPLE.
THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO EVEN
HELP THEM AT THAT MOMENT, BUT
THEY'RE ALWAYS OUT THERE
TALKING TO PEOPLE.
WHETHER THERE IS GOING TO BE A
CLEAN OR NOT.
>> I DON'T WANT TO CONFUSE
BETWEEN THE KIND OF OUTREACH
THAT OTHER ORGANIZATIONS DO IN
TERMS OF TALKING TO COMMUNITY
MEMBERS.
WE DO THAT TOO.
I WILL TALK TO THEM AS HUMAN
BEINGS.
I DON'T WANT TO CONFUSE THAT
WITH THE SWEEPS.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO KEEP
THAT SEPARATE.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT REACH
AS THE RESOURCE, BUT THE SWEEP
AS A WASTED RESOURCE.
IT'S A STRONG INDICATOR AS YOU,
YOURSELF SAID, TIFFANY, REACH
DOES NOT WANT TO PARTICIPATE ON
THE DAY OF BECAUSE THEIR
CREDIBILITY IS ON THE LINE.
WHAT DOES THAT TELL US?
MEMBERS ARE UNHAPPY ABOUT THE
SWEEPS FOR OBVIOUS REASONS.
REACH HAS A GOOD REPUTATION
BECAUSE THEY HAVE PROVIDED A
HUMANE APPROACH.
WHETHER THEY HAVE SERVICES TO
OFFER OR NOT, IT IS A HUMANE
APPROACH.
THEY APPROACH HOMELESS PEOPLE
FROM THE HUMANE STANDPOINT.
THEY DON'T WANT THEIR HAD OWN
CREDIBILITY.
THEY ARE PUTTING IT INTO
QUESTION.
SO THEY HAVE ASSOCIATED FROM
THE DAY OF.
TO ME THAT SHOULD BE AN
INDICATION.
HOW MANY OF THAT ARE YOU
MISSING.
WHEN I SAY YOU, DIRECTED AT THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE.
YOU'RE WORKING ON THE
DIRECTIVE.
>> SO DR. MARSHALL WHO DOES
GANG VIOLENCE PREVENTION IN
CALIFORNIA HAS A TRAINING
CALLED ALIVE AND FREE AND TALKS
ABOUT THE DISEASE VIOLENCE.
FOR THOSE OF US WHO GREW UP
WITH THE DISEASE OF VIOLENCE,
WHICH HE BELIEVES COULD BE BOTH
PREDICTED AND TREATED HAVE
TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCES IN OUR
PAST AS IT PERTAINS TO POLICE.
SO GROWING UP I DIDN'T LIKE
POLICE.
I DIDN'T KNOW WHY I DIDN'T LIKE
POLICE.
IT'S BECAUSE OF THE DISEASE OF
VIOLENCE.
THAT WAS AN INCORRECT -- THAT
WAS AN INCORRECT CHARACTERISTIC
ON MY PART BECAUSE I NEEDED TO
HEAL THE TRAUMA, SO THAT I
COULD ENGAGE WITH POLICE
OFFICERS IN A WAY THAT WAS
HEALTHY, NOT NEGATING THE FACT
OF THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON IN
SOCIETY.
REACH DOESN'T WANT TO BE THERE
ON THE DAY OF CLEAN NOR DO ANY
OUTREACH WORKER WHEN I WAS AN
OUTREACH WORKER BECAUSE THEY
ARE VERY AWARE THAT PEOPLE THAT
LIVE UNSHELTERED, PEOPLE THAT
ARE UNDERSERVED OFTENTIMES HAVE
TRAUMA AS IT RELATES TO POLICE.
AND SO THEIR CREDIBILITY ISN'T
ABOUT WE DON'T WANT TO BE
AROUND CLEANS.
THE CREDITABILITY IS IF CLIENTS
SO AND SO SEE I HAVE A
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE POLICE,
THAT MIGHT IMPACT THEIR ABILITY
TO WANT TO TALK TO ME BECAUSE
THEY THINK I MIGHT GIVE THEIR
NAME TO A POLICE OFFICER OR I
MAY DO THAT.
SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR
ABOUT REACH HAS PRACTICED NOT
TO BE PRESENT ON THE DAY OF
CLEAN ISN'T SPECIFIC TO THE NAV
TEAM OR CASTING JUDGMENT ON
WHAT HAPPENS ON THE DAY OF
CLEAN.
IT IS MORE ABOUT WHAT WE ARE
TAUGHT AS OUTREACH WORKERS,
PERTAINING TO MAKING SURE THAT
WE GET THE TRUST OF THOSE
POPULATIONS THAT ARE
UNDERSERVED.
AND SO I JUST TONIGHT TO LET
YOU KNOW THEY HAVE NEVER SAID
TO ME I DON'T WANT TO BE
PRESENT BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE
IN CLEANS.
THEY SAY I DON'T WANT TO BE
PRESENT BECAUSE I WANT TO
RESERVE MY RELATIONSHIP WITH
CLIENTS WHO HAVE HAD LESS THAN
POSITIVE EXPERIENCES WITH THE
POLICE OFFICER WHETHER
INDIVIDUALLY OR THEY'VE
EXPERIENCED IT THROUGH THEIR
FAMILIES.
>> I APPRECIATE YOU GIVING US
THAT INFORMATION.
THAT'S VERY HELPFUL.
I DO THINK THOUGH -- I MEAN
LOOK WE, I WANT TO AND I'M SURE
OTHERS WANT TO GO BY
STATISTICAL EVIDENCE.
BUT I HAVE TO SAY IT IS
STUNNING TO ME THAT WE HAVE
NEVER MET ANYONE WHO SAID HEY
THAT NAV TEAM CAME, THAT IS
WHAT HELPED ME.
I AGREE WITH YOU THAT IT IS NOT
STRAIGHTFORWARD.
WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE PERSON
THROUGH THE CONTINUUM AND AGREE
WITH ALL OF THAT.
BUT IT IS TROUBLING TO ME GIVEN
THE MILLIONS THAT YOU'RE
SPENDING ON THE SWEEPS THAT NOT
ONE ANECDOTALLY ONE PERSON THAT
IT HAS NOT HAPPENED.
ON THE FLIP SIDE I'VE HEARD
COUNTLESS PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT
THE TRAUMATIZING EXPERIENCE
THAT THEY'VE HAD AND IT IS NOT
TRAUMA FROM CHILDHOOD OR
ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
I WANT TO UNDERSTAND IT IS NOT
PAST EXPERIENCES THAT ARE
MAKING THEM FEELENING, ABOUT
IT, BUT IT IS THEIR ONGOING
EXPERIENCE.
I WILL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT.
>> DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT
YOU WANTED TO SAY?
>> I HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD THAT
WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER THAT
WE'RE DOING LESS CLEANS.
SOME OF THAT, WE ARE SEEING THE
BALANCE.
I THINK WE ARE RECOGNIZING AND
HEARING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING
ABOUT THE PEOPLE AND THOSE THAT
ARE GETTING CHOSEN FOR 72-HOUR
CLEANS DO HAVE PURPOSE.
WE HAD A CHILD GO INTO A SITE
WALKING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT
A COMMUNITY CHILD.
AND SO THERE ARE REASONS.
WE ARE SEEING THE NUMBERS
DECLINE BECAUSE THEY HAVE
PLACES AND PEOPLE THAT WANT TO
GO AND YOU'RE SEEING THE OTHER
RIGHT OF WAYS BEING CLEANED
BECAUSE THOSE ARE NOW PROVIDING
DANGERS FOR COMMUNITY PEOPLE,
WALKING TO WORK, AND SO WE'RE
SEEING SOME OF THAT SHIFT AND I
AGREE THAT WE DO NEED A VIABLE
PLACE AND IT IS A LARGER THING
ABOUT ALL THE WAY UP TO THE
SUPPORT OF HOUSING.
SO I JUST WANT TO SAY I HEAR
YOU AND YOU'RE SEEING THE
NUMBERS SHIFT SOME.
>> I THINK IT'S INTERESTING TO
OBSERVE THE SHIFT IN FOCUSES TO
PRACTICE ON THE TRUE
OBSTRUCTIONS AND HAZARDS.
AND REFLECT BACK ON A PIECE OF
LEGISLATION THAT COUNCIL MEMBER
O'BRIEN PROPOSED A COUPLE OF
YEARS AGO, WHICH ALSO HAD SORT
OF A ZERO TOLERANCE POLICY FOR
THOSE TYPES OF OBSTRUCTIONS.
WE HAD A DIFFERENTIAL, A
DEFINITION FOR PARKS THAN WHAT
YOU'RE USING.
I THINK HAD COUNCIL MEMBER
O'BRIEN, YOUR PROPOSED
ORDINANCE FOCUSED ON ACTIVE
USES OF PARKS WHERE YOU'RE NOT
MAKING THAT DISTINCTION.
BUT THE ENFORCEMENT APPROACH AS
FAR AS WHERE THE CITY COULD BE
EXPECTED TO BE DOING IMMEDIATE
REMOVALS IS AWFULLY SIMILAR TO
WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT
THEN.
YOU BROUGHT UP THE ISSUE OF THE
REACTION PEOPLE HAVE TO THE
PRESENCE OF POLICE IN THIS
WORK.
SO I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT
ONCE AGAIN OUR ONGOING
CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD
YESTERDAY IN MY OFFICE AS WELL
AS AT THIS TABLE BACK IN
FEBRUARY ON UNDERTAKING THE
STAFFING ASSESSMENT INCLUDING
LOOKING AT THE INCLUSION OF
UNIFORM PATROLLED POLICE
OFFICERS AS PART OF THE
NAVIGATION TEAM.
I LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO
WORK WITH YOU ON COMPLETING
THAT DATA POINT THAT WAS DUE IN
AUGUST OF LAST YEAR.
IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, I
THINK, SO US AS IT RELATES
SPECIFICALLY TO THE COST OF THE
NAVIGATION TEAM AND ANALYZING,
AGAIN, THE DOLLARS SPENT AS
WELL AS HOW THAT STAFFING
CONFIGURATION IMPACTS CHANGE.
IF YOU COULD, COULD YOU TALK A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THE THEORY
OF CHANGE HAS CHANGED FROM WHEN
WE STARTED DOING THIS WORK?
THERE'S SOME ADDED LANGUAGE TO
HOW WE EVALUATE THIS AS A
SUCCESSFUL INTERVENTION OR NOT.
>> YEAH, I CAN SPEAK TO THAT.
I SPENT A FEW MONTHS WITH THE
TEAM AND THE DIFFERENT
COMPONENTS.
SO OUTREACH, SPD, AND THE FIELD
COORDINATION GROUP TOGETHER.
AND KIND OF JUMPING OFF FROM
THE ORIGINAL THEORY HAD
CHANGED, KIND OF RESULTED IT.
WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT
HAN THE LARGER MODEL THAT WAS
ORIGINALLY PRESENTED.
WHAT WE DID, YOU START IT BY
WHO IS IT YOU'RE TRYING TO
IMPACT AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE
FOR, WHICH KIND OF HELPS YOU
NARROW YOUR STRATEGY AND YOUR
FOCUS.
SO WE STARTED WITH THAT.
YOU KNOW, NOT ONLY IS THE
COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, THE
HOUSING COMMUNITY, BUT ALSO
THOSE LIVING IN THE
ENCAMPMENTS, THEY'RE LIVING
HOMELESS.
FROM THERE YOU WANT TO SAY WHAT
IS THE DESIRED RESULT?
WHAT IS IT THAT YOU WANT TO
CHANGE FOR THESE FOLKS?
AND REALLY THERE WERE, THERE
WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT REALLY
THE PEOPLE AT THE SITES TO BE
CLEANED, TO BE FOCUSED BECAUSE
SOME OF THAT STARTED GOING
LARGER AND LARGER, RIGHT?
AND WHEN THE INDIVIDUAL PERSON
ON THE CORNER WAS STARTING TO
BE INCLUDED IN THE IMPACT ON
HERE.
WHILE WE DO WANT TO IMPACT
THAT, THAT AGAIN IS THE LARGER
OUTREACH IN THE CONTINUUM.
AND THEN FROM THERE JUST SAY
WHAT ARE THE STRATEGIES YOU'RE
TAKING THAT WE WOULD TAKE TO
GET WHERE WE WANT?
AND SO WE'RE REALLY STARTING
WITH THE END IN MIND WHERE THE
LARGER MODEL YOU SAY WE HAVE
THIS MANY POLICE OFFICERS, THIS
MANY FIELD COORDINATORS.
WHAT CAN WE GET OUT OF IT?
INSTEAD WE START WITH WHAT IS
THE CHANGE WE WANT AND HOW DO
WE GET THERE?
AND SO MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS
AROUND THAT AND THEN THE
ACTIVITIES ITSELF, THEN VARY.
AND FROM WHAT WE WANTED TO DO
WAS BE ACCOUNTABLE.
HOLD EACH ENTITY, I CALL THEM
SPD THE ENTITY AND OUTREACH,
ETC.
BUT ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR PARTS
SPECIFICALLY AND WHAT WE WANTED
THEM TO BE IMPACTED AND WHERE
THEY CROSSED OVER.
BUT BEFORE IT WAS EVERYONE WAS
EXPECTED TO DO, TO HAVE
OUTREACH GOALS.
WELL THE FIELD COORDINATORS,
THEIR MAIN GOAL IS TO ENSURE
THEY GET CLEANED AND MAINTAIN
THE SITES AND STUFF.
SO IT WAS REALLY HARD TO TELL
WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO EVALUATE
THE TEAM, TRYING TO TELL KIND
OF WHAT COULD BE IMPROVED AND
WHAT CAN'T.
BY HOLDING THE ACCOUNTABILITY
WITH THE ACTIVITIES AND THE
VARIOUS GROUPS.
SOME OF THEM MAYBE, SO OFFICERS
AND REACH BOTH HAVE OUTREACH
ACCOUNTABILITY.
YOU KNOW, KIND OF CONTACTS AND
REFERRALS.
BUT THE STORAGE AND MAKING SURE
YOU'RE ON SITE TO MITIGATE ANY
HAZARDS AND ADDRESS THAT IS
FIELD COORDINATOR.
SO THE ACTIVITY ITSELF WOULD
GET INTO COLOR COATING THERE
FOR WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HOLD
THAT ACCOUNTABILITY.
IF THEY DON'T WORK WELL
TOGETHER, THEN IT WILL NOT
WORK.
THEN IT KIND OF GETS TO YOU
.ING IT BACK WHERE THE RESULT
BASIC ACCOUNTABILITY WILL HAVE
THREE WAYS TO MEASURE ITS
EFFECTIVENESS AND ITS IMPACT.
ONE IS THE QUANTITY.
HOW MUCH DID YOU DO?
QUALITY HOW WELL DID YOU DO IT,
AND IMPACT AND HOW THEY ARE
BETTER OFF.
SO WE WOULD REALLY TRY TO DIG
DOWN INTO ONE OF THE ENTITIES
AND HOW THEY WORK AND FIND SOME
ACCOUNTABLE MEASURES, TO
EVALUATE AND SEE HOW THINGS ARE
GOING.
THIS WAS DONE END OF LAST YEAR
AS KIND OF A REVAMP OF KIND OF
HOW WE THINK ABOUT THE WORK AND
HOW WE'RE ADDRESSING IT AND
EVALUATING IT.
A LOT OF THIS ALSO THE HIGH
LEVEL IS NOW WHY THERE'S MORE
METRICS IN THE QUARTERLY
PROVISO REPORT.
WE THEN REALIZED WE NEEDED A
STRONGER DATA COLLECTION
PROTOCOL AROUND THAT AND A
BETTER WAY TO ANALYZE IT.
SO WITH THE ADDED CAPACITY OF
THE DATA ANALYST THAT YOU ALL
HELPED PROVIDE, INSTITUTING A
LOT OF THAT IN THIS FIRST
QUARTER 2019 AND THE SECOND
QUARTER TO START GIVING YOU
BETTER METRICS ON EVALUATING
KIND OF THE IMPACT.
>> HOW LONG HAS YOUR TEAM BEEN
WORKING THE DATA PORTION WITH
THE NAV TEAM SINCE THEY MOVED
OVER?
>> SO I PERSONALLY STARTED
WORKING AS THE NAVIGATION TEAM
MOVED OVER AS AN EXPANDED ROLE
IN MY PHYSICIAN.
THE ACTUAL FUNDING FOR THE DATA
ANALYST DIDN'T COME UNTIL
JANUARY OF 2019.
SO I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE COME A
REAL LONG WAY SINCE THEN.
YOU KNOW, YOU WILL SEE
HOPEFULLY MORE FRUITFUL OF YOU
ARE EFFORTS LATER ON THIS-YEAR-
OLD THIS YEAR.
>> I'M JUST REMINDED ON THE
DIVERSION PIECE.
THIS WAS ANOTHER CITY AUDITOR
CHECKPOINT THAT CALLED FOR THE
UTILIZATION OF DIVERSION
SERVICES, AND I UNDERSTAND IN
MARCH ALL MEMBERS OF THE NAV
TEAM WERE TRAINED ON DIVERSION
APPROACHES AND A CENTRALIZED
VIRTUAL FUND WAS CREATED IN
2018.
BUT THIS REPORT DOESN'T PROVIDE
ANY INFORMATION INDICATING THAT
THE NAVIGATION TEAM HAS
ACCESSED THAT FUND.
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT
HOW AND IF THEY ARE ACCESSING
DIVERSION FUNDS?
>> YEAH, THEY WERE TRAINED.
REACH, ITSELF, HAS ALWAYS HAD
ACCESS TO DIVERSION AND THE
ABILITY TO DO THAT.
THE CENTRALIZED FUND CAME ON AT
THE VERY END OF THE YEAR.
SO WE ARE NOW WORKING WITH THE
SYSTEM NAVIGATORS CAME ONLINE.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO WORK THROUGH
LOGISTICS OF THEM BEING ABLE TO
PROVIDE DIVERSION SERVICES
THROUGH THAT.
BECAUSE MANY OF THE OTHER
OUTREACH PROVIDERS THAT WE MAY
WORK WITH HAS ACCESS TO THE
CENTRALIZED FUND.
THE DATA ITSELF FOR THE ENTIRE
CONTINUUM CHANGED THE WAY IT
WAS COLLECTING THE DATA AND
TRACKING IT WITHIN THE SYSTEM.
SO WE HAVE JUST NOT BEEN ABLE
TO REALLY GET DOWN INTO THE
FINE DETAILS OF WHERE THE NAV
TEAM DID DIVERSION YET AS THE
ENTIRE SYSTEM, THE CONTINUUM IS
STILL WORKING IN TRYING TO
CAPTURE THE DIVERSION OUTCOMES.
BUILDING CHANGES AND SOME
GIFTED FUNDS WERE FOR --
>>
WE ARE A PART OF PEOPLE WHO
COULD ACCESS IT.
>> CORRECT.
>> AND THEN WE DO FUND SOME
AGENCIES DIRECTLY FOR
DIVERSION.
SO THERE'S MULTIPLE ARMS RIGHT
NOW.
BUT THE DAY OF A SYSTEM
NAVIGATOR SAYING YOU HAVE A
SAFE PLACE TO GO IN MONTANA,
THAT RIGHT THERE, THAT LOGISTIC
IS BEING FIGURED OUT RIGHT NOW
OF HOW THEY DO THAT THROUGH THE
FUNDS THAT ARE AVAILABLE.
>> I'M HEARING TWO DIFFERENT
THINGS.
ONE I'M HEARING THE NAVIGATION
TEAM DOES HAVE ACCESS TO THE
DIVERSION FUND, BUT WE'RE NOT
ABLE TO REPORT THE USE OF IT.
I THOUGHT I JUST HEARD YOU SAY
THE OPPOSITE OF THAT, WHICH IS
WE HAVEN'T FIGURED OUT HOW TO
GIVE THEM ACCESS TO THE
DIVERSION FUND.
>> SO REACH THEMSELVES HAVE
ALWAYS HAD ACCESS.
>> I'M TALKING ABOUT THE SYSTEM
NAVIGATORS.
>> CORRECT, CORRECT.
THE SYSTEM NAVIGATORS JUST CAME
ONLINE TWO MONTHS AGO.
SO THEY, THEMSELVES ARE GETTING
TRAINED, GETTING ACCESS TO
THAT.
REACH IS A PART OF THE
NAVIGATION TEAM AS OUTREACH
PROVIDERS FOR THAT.
>> CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG,
THAT IT'S HARD TO REPORT
BECAUSE IN PREVIOUS, THE
SYSTEM, WAS CALLING DIVERSION A
PROGRAM TO ENROLL IN.
>> CORRECT.
>> AND NOW IT IS WHAT'S THE
CHANGE?
>> A SERVICE THAT ALL PROGRAMS
HAVE ACCESS TO.
DIVERSION IS NOW BEING
AVAILABLE TO EVERY POSSIBLE
PROVIDER THAT WE'RE ABLE TO.
>> I THINK THIS QUESTION DID
COME UP IN MAYBE A DIFFERENT
WAY, BUT DO WE HAVE ANY NUMBERS
TO SHOW IN HOW MANY -- LET ME
ASK YOU THIS WAY.
ARE WE ABLE TO QUANTIFY IN HOW
MANY CASES THE DIVERSION
APPROACH, LET'S SAY, WHETHER IT
WAS COUNTED AS PROGRAM SERVICE,
WHATEVER, IT DOESN'T MATTER.
CAN WE QUANTIFY HOW MANY
DIVERSION APPROACHES ACTUALLY
ELIMINATED THE HOMELESS
SITUATION OFF THE PERSON
WHETHER IT WAS SOMEBODY MOVING
TO MONTANA BECAUSE THEY HAD
FAMILY THERE AND THEY JUST
NEEDED THE MONEY TO GET THERE.
DO WE HAVE ANY NUMBERS?
>> IN CONTINUUM WIDE, WE ARE
WORKING WITH KING COUNTY'S
EVALUATION TEAM TO LOOK AT THE
SYSTEM OF THOSE WHO UTILIZE
DIVERSION AND WHETHER THEY COME
BACK INTO THE SYSTEM OR NOT.
ARE YOU LOOKING FOR NAVIGATION
TEAM SPECIFIC?
>> JUST IN GENERAL.
>> BUT I GUESS I'M JUST
WONDERING IN GENERAL BECAUSE IT
IS A QUESTION OF WHAT IS
ACTUALLY WORKING AND WHAT IS
NOT WORKING, IT'S NOT JUST
LIMITED TO THE NAVIGATION TEAM.
BUT IN GENERAL HOW MUCH DOES
THAT HELP?
THE REASON THAT I'M ASKING IS
THIS.
I MEAN WE WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT EVERY POSSIBLE AVENUE IS
PRESENTED TO PEOPLE BECAUSE
THEY CLEARLY FACE DIFFERENT
SITUATIONS, YES.
I WANT TO KNOW THE NUMBERS
REGARDLESS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT
US TO FEEL OKAY, WE'RE
PROVIDING DIVERSION.
I MEAN I'M NOT -- IT HAS COME
UP A LOT IN GENERAL.
WITHOUT ANY NUMBERS, I DON'T
WANT TO GO OUT DOUBTING ONE
THING OVER ANOTHER ESPECIALLY
IN LIGHT OF THE OVERWHELMING
STATISTICS ON THE OTHER SIDE.
AND IT IS ALSO CAUSING THE RISE
IN HOMELESSNESS.
SO I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH OF
THAT COULD BE DEALT WITH IN
THAT WAY, BUT IT WOULD BE
USEFUL TO HAVE SOME NUMBERS OF
SOME KIND TO IS HAVE SOME
HANDLIN.
>> I'M HAPPY TO SEND YOUR
OFFICE THE 2018 NUMBERS AND THE
OUTCOMES FOR DIVERSION.
AGAIN, IT IS DEFINITELY JUST
ONE STRATEGY THAT WORKS FOR
SOME FOLKS.
>> CERTAINLY.
>> AND YOU WANT TO TRY.
>> YES.
THEY WILL BE HAPPY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> SO I THINK JUST THE LAST
SLIDE AND IF YOU HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS.
>> YES, I JUST WANT TO BE
CLEAR, IS THE UNDERLINING
LANGUAGE ON THE SHEET AT SITE,
DOES THAT NEED TO BE CHANGED?
AND IN THE THEORY OF CHANGE?
>> YES, IT IS ALWAYS, WE DIDN'T
CALL IT OUT SPECIFICALLY ENOUGH
BEFORE.
>> CORRECT.
>> IT WASN'T, IT DIDN'T SAY IT
HAD TO BE CLEANED, BUT JUST
NAVIGATE TEAM WORK, SO WE TRY
T MAKE IT VERY SPECIFIC.
THE WORDS.
>> YEAH, THOSE WORDS HAVE NOT
BEEN IN OTHER KIND OF WHAT THE
GOAL OF THE NAVIGATION TEAM I
WOULD SAY.
>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON
THERE?
SO JUST THE LAST SLIDE THE Q2
PROVISO REPORT HAD NINE CHECK
POINTS ENCOMPASSING THE REPORT
WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS.
WE JUST PUT OUT HIGHLIGHTS OF
WORK REPORTED IN THE Q2
PROVISO.
THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE ON THIS
LAST SLIDE.
SO I GUESS I WILL PAUSE AND SEE
IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS ABOUT
THA.
>> I WOULD JUST LOVE IT IF YOU
ALSO SORT OF TOUCHED UPON
BECAUSE THE OTHER PART OF THIS
REPORT IS WE'VE AGREED TO
COMBINE THE AUDIT CHECKPOINT
REPORTING WITH THE PROVISO
REPORT, THE DATA REPORTING.
CAN WE GO THROUGH SOME OF THE
HIGHLIGHTS THERE AS WELL?
I THINK THERE'S SOME GOOD NEWS.
>> DO YOU HAVE SPECIFIC ONES
THAT YOU WANT TO?
>> I THINK HIGHLIGHTING THE
ONES WHERE YOU'VE MADE SOME
SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS.
I THINK IT IS A GOOD PLACE TO
START.
>> I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS I
WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT, THE
AUDITOR DEFINITELY TALKED ABOUT
THE DATA COLLECTION PROCESSES
AND THE STORAGE OF THE DATA AND
THE ANALYSIS OF IT.
AND THE SUPPORT OF THE ANALYST
THAT WERE PROVIDED, WE ARE
MAKING SOME PRETTY BIG --
AND THE REASONS FOR SHELTER
REFUSALS.
SO ALL OF THAT HAS BEEN
DEFINITELY THINGS THAT THE
AUDITOR HAD WANTED TO SEE AND
THAT IS FULLY KIND OF MOVING
ALONG NOW, HAVING BETTER DATA
AND AVAILABILITY THE DAY OF.
THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED.
SO WE'VE MADE SOME BIG STRIDES
WITH THE ADDED CAPACITY.
>> OKAY.
I JUST WANTED TO ADD AND I SAY
THIS EVERY TIME I SIT AT THE
TABLE JUST BECAUSE OF MY
PREVIOUS WORK IN CRIMINAL
JUSTICE.
I WANTED TO JUST SAY HOW GOOD
IT IS TO SEE THERE ARE THE
GROUP OF POLICE OFFICERS WHO
PUT THEMSELVES WILLINGLY
THROUGH TRAUMA INFORMED CARE,
UNDOING THE INSTITUTIONAL OR
RACISM WHO CARE ABOUT FOLKS
THAT ARE UNSHELTERED AS MUCH AS
THE OUTREACH WORKERS THAT ARE
OUT THERE.
SO I THINK THAT'S A TREMENDOUS,
THAT'S A TREMENDOUS HIGHLIGHT.
>> IT SAYS WILL MAKE TRAUMA
INFORMED CARE ASSESSMENTS
AND/OR ALL TRAINING MANDATORY
AND THEIR SUPERVISORS.
DOES THAT INCLUDE THE POLICE?
>> YEP.
>> THAT WAS ACTUALLY SCHEDULED
IN JUNE.
THE TRAINER HAD A DEATH IN THE
FAMILY, SO WE ARE LOOKING FOR
JULY OR AUGUST NOW AT THIS
POINT, BUT IT WAS ACTUALLY
SCHEDULED.
>> BUT IT IS MANDATORY?
>> YEP.
>> OKAY.
>> YES.
>> AND THEN ONE OF THE OTHER
ITEMS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT
THAT I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO
ONGOING CONVERSATIONS IS HOW WE
CAN IMPLEMENT SOME OF THE
PRINCIPLES THAT ARE A PART OF
SORT OF AN EMERGENCY TYPE
RESPONSE TO THE WORK THAT YOU
DO AND IS I'M TRYING TO
REMEMBER WHAT IT STANDS FOR.
WE'RE ALL DRAWING A BLANK.
INCIDENT COMMAND SYSTEM.
YES, THANK YOU.
AND THEIR PARTICULAR
OPERATIONAL PROTOCOLS THAT ARE
USED AND WE'RE GOING TO
CONTINUE HAVING A CONVERSATION
ABOUT HOW NOT TO MOVE YOUR WORK
OVER TO THE ELC, BUT HOW TO
INTEGRATE THOSE PRINCIPLES INTO
THE WORK THAT YOU DO.
AND THEN FINALLY IN ADDITION TO
THE STAFFING ASSESSMENT, WE'RE
TALKING WITH THE EXECUTIVE
ABOUT THE RESOURCES THAT ARE
AVAILABLE ON THE PART OF
INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTIES TO DO
AN OUTSIDE EVALUATION OF THE
WORK AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR AGAIN HOW WE CAN HAVE
FIDELITY TO OUR THEORY OF
CHANGE FOR PEOPLE AND SPACES.
AND THEN LASTLY I JUST WANTED
TO MAKE MENTION THAT I HAVE A
PRETTY LONG STANDING AT THIS
POINT REQUEST FROM APRIL AS IT
RELATES TO THE PURPLE BAG
PILOT.
THE PURPLE BAG PILOT.
I'VE ASKED SEVERAL TIMES
WHETHER OR NOT THAT PILOT COULD
BE FROM HSD'S PERSPECTIVE
OPERATIONALLY, NOT FROM A
FUNDING PERSPECTIVE AND SPUs
CAPACITY.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW
WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE
BARRIERS LIMITING THE NAV
TEAM'S ABILITY TO DELIVER THE
PURPLE BAGS.
IN THOSE LOCATIONS THAT ARE NOT
NECESSARILY SCHEDULED FOR
IMMEDIATE REMOVALS BECAUSE
THERE ARE OBSTRUCTIONS.
BUT IN THOSE LOCATIONS THAT
YOU'RE GOING INTO THAT HAVE
LARGE ACCUMULATONS OF GARBAGE
AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY IT IS
RISING TO THE TOP.
I THINK I COULD WORK WITH SPU
ON THE OPERATIONAL SIDE OF
EXPANDING THE PILOT AND THE
FUNDING NECESSARY.
BUT WHAT I WANT TO KNOW, ARE
THERE ANY INTERNAL BARRIERS TO
THE NAV TEAM ACTING AS SORT OF
THE DELIVERER OF THOSE BAGS
INTO THAT.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
REALLY I APPRECIATE THE TOUGH
WORK THAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING
OUT IN THE FIELD AND THE WORK
THAT YOU'RE DOING RESPONDING TO
OUR INQUIRIES ON GOING BASIS.
>> THAT IS FOR YOUR CONTINUED
PATIENCE.
>> YES, ABSOLUTELY.
ARE WE GOOD?
THANK YOU.
WITH THAT WE WILL ADJOURN.
IT IS 10:52 A.M.