navigate. especially for someone who is homeless and struggling with mental illness or other issues. so, sort of simplify that service access for folks and begins that initial -- sorry, the next hit of the robust services we can offer someone. project homeless was a way to do that. i think it's a comfortable way [speaker not understood]. and it was a warm inviting environment with them. it didn't build homeless, but it helped under [speaker not understood], it was a huge volunteer effort. at the time we were getting a lot of significant negative feedback from folks who felt the city didn't know what we were doing with homeless [speaker not understood]. we knew. we had a lot of effective intervention. bringing volunteers in, to see wow, these guys are doing a lot. it was important in terms of momentum moving forward to solve this issue.

so, supportive housing, as i said earlier, we were really under the leadership of the department of public health, their direct access program, and supportive housing followed along. what is supportive housing? [speaker not understood]. it means people get housed and stay housed. and it means that individuals who get housed, their reliance on other systems of care decreases significantly, meaning emergency room visits, incarceration, mental health, crisis mental health interventions, [speaker not understood]. all those go down when you house someone. we have about a 90% or more housing retention rate after a year. people do stay housed. we know it works and that's why the cornerstone of our ten-year plan really was about supportive housing.

and we did as former supervisor dufty said, we had a goal of 3,000 units. again, i'll talk about the numbers later. so, the last piece of the sort of -- if you want to call it that. plan was prevention. what does prevention look like in the context of the plan? our home ward bound program which is the plan reunification with the program talk about. [speaker not understood] which we funded over $7 million in the city. ssi advocacy which increases income for individual and individual recently disabled. aloe man pating foster youth. we were emancipating 250 youth at the time. similar to that, discharge planning, we didn't want to discharge folk into the hose advertise. that was part of the plan. so, how well did we do? ~ hospice

>> home ward bound is not a -- some folks call greyhound therapy or dumping homelessness on someone else's city or state. but does it work? it's cool, clearly doesn't help the individual and doesn't help the city or us in the long term. what we did was for individuals we came in contact with through our public assistance office, on the street, police department on the street, it sorts of came about because [speaker not understood] a lot of folks saying, i want to go home. i came here, i thought things would be better. i don't have the resources to get home. home ward bound says if you have a homemaker, family member, close friend, employer, social worker, someone who agrees to take you in to be a

caretaker, we'll send you back home. we verify it. and say do you agree to take so and so home? we screened that person to make sure they're sari for travel, if they're mentally ill, they're handling their illness through medication or be able to travel. we give them food, money, the ticket and we get us a ticket. we send them home. this is data through 2005, 1260 people served in the last year and a half. half the people we served, it's by 105 days, a little less than 4 months. we're thinking maybe they lot that job, maybe they thought they had a roommate, helping folks go back to where they really live and their support structures are. we've sent folks back to all 48 contiguous states.

>> thank you for pointing out the tischtionvs. ~ distinctions. the nevada case, no one would support ever around here. all the steps and all that we do, in terms of people that we've sent home to family members or other loved ones, enthuse vogt about it or do we even have stats about people who come back to the city of san francisco? >> jump ahead, right up on the stats. so, since we began this program -- >> '03-'04. >> 7 86,000 individuals were reunited with family members. average cost of person, $179. what we do, we don't have a lot of staff to run this program. we have either two or 1-1/2 staff to do this through a contract with a nonprofit agency. but what we are able to do is follow-up with the caretaker

one month after we transport the have ictionv. so, i took a snapshot just this morning of data from folks who traveled in august, september and october of last year. and of the 239 folks who did travel, over half of them were in the receiver's care in a movement 23% were living independently. 9% we couldn't get hold of the caretaker. 7% we got hold of the caretaker, they didn't know where the person was. 0% showed up in our system. folks aren't returning to san francisco. here and there, there might be one or two. in terms of getting folk back in a support structure with friends and family, it does seem to be working. the limitation of our data, we only follow-up after a month, we don't have the resources month after month, almost 8,000 folks having traveled. but i do think it suggests

maybe we can enhance that program and make it more of a tool for folk who are on the street. and while i'm on it, i was going to save all my ideas for the end, but i'll throw this one out there. one of the interesting pieces of data at the homeless count, we are not unlike any other urban center in the kungtrivthv. the homeless population is a mobile population. so, i'm not saying we're unique in this, sort of the magnum effect. there's an urban magnet effect across the country. 38% of foex self reported we were here before they came to san francisco. that is reported, so, it might be an under count. we're not going to close our borders, what it suggest to me is folks are coming here for a

new life and it's not easy in san francisco. rents are high. our shelters are 59% full on any given night. the entry level job market, the higher end is certainly robust. the entry level job market has not caught up. one thought around the home ward bound program is to maybe station an outreach worker, home ward bound folks. and to folk who are here to start a new life, engage them. if you fall on hard times, this is where you can get a home ward bound. this is where rather than sort of coming to a strange city, maybe they were dumped from reno or dumped from somewhere else and don't know what to do. i think it's worth considering and talking to them about sort of what opportunities they have. are you going to move in with a friend, can i help you get there, and sort of begin that

immediate engagement. like i said, i think it might be worth a shot. all right. so, what did we accomplish? >> can i ask you one question? this is a theoretical. you jumped one idea, part of it. the overall topic, but there is kind of the conceptual notion of if we provide more services in san francisco or do a better job, if you will, and i think obviously we have a lot, we could do more than san francisco becomes a quote-unquote magnet for more people to come here as a city and becomes kind of -- i've heard this before, this debate where we don't want to put more resources hidv it because then we'll have more people come here. ~ behind how do you think about that? for instance, we house 3,000 more people. we sent home to great statistical success that they're doing well in their own supportive structures. ghosh, if we hadn't had those

programs where would we be as a perspective. what do you think about it generically? >> i think the notion more services is a magnet for others to come and stay. it's an empirical stamp. we continent have any data to support it. what we do know is that 40% of our folks didn't become homeless here. i think it's worth a dialogue, something that may be controversial. bevan mentioned the woman from ohio who had a felony and axon get into housing here. it begs the discussion, consideration of prioritization around our resource he. we do have limited resources. we can't serve all 64% in our system either in our street or house iftion, transitional housing much like the strategy we had under the homeless plan we folk on resources for those

who are most acutely in need. those who go to the emergency room, the thickest. long-term stelter stayers. we've gotten away from that a little bit. folks who are very, very sick and folks who have been here awhile. that was what the chronic plan attempted to do from just focusing on the chronically homeless and look at the 6300 who are in our system, or more, we don't necessarily have that much of a targeted approach. we do -- barbara might talk about the acutity index we like to use at time. hsa got away from [speaker not understood]. i think it's worth a discussion sort of around prioritization around resource he. should a woman -- she has needs, we want to help everyone who has needs. someone who is here from ohio six months jump into really coveted affordable housing in the city maybe for someone who

all their life got moved out in the bayview, and i think it's worth a discussion. >> supportive housing, again, we use supportive housing well. when i say we, i don't mean the city alone. all our nonprofit providers, [speaker not understood]. they do a fantastic job, they do a good job providing quality housing, housing, and keeping folks housed. we wanted to get as many people as shelter as possible. people didn't need to get housing ready. they needed to [speaker not understood]. the vast majority for chronically homeless single adults. we have a number of 43 1 units in the pipeline that should come online over the next two years or two plus years.

once they're online, we'll hit our goal over 3,000, 386 units according to the plan. and again, i talk about targeting, the vast majority of units are dedicate today chronically single homeless single adults [speaker not understood]. >> can i ask you a question on that? in reading around the documents, funding is a big deal for us as a city for every issue, let alone this. several dollars seem to be targeted on what the definition of homelessness is and limited in a way because of that. so, our foil us on the chronically homeless, 2700 units, how much of that is our policy city to do that? >> actually we're just getting back into that. >> that's a great present.

for the locally funded s-r-o housing first or direct access to housing through department of public health, it is a priority. hsa for two units, one would be chronically homeless. that's how we got to that condition. >> [speaker not understood] we administer, almost 700 vouchers. you have to have a disabling condition in order to qualify. some of the money that flows through the mc kinney, federal mc kinney act, which is the largest part of federal money we get serves both. certainly the federal government recognizes permanent housing [speaker not understood], mc kinney scored higher. we had a grant increase $4 million the last five years or so. so, the focus is at the federal level.

the funding flows from that and to your question drives some of our placement some of our developments. so, i've talked about units. let me talk about what's more important, which is the actual number of folks we've housed. this number is astounding. since january 2004 we housed 9,64 1 homeless single adults, this doesn't include over 1100 people and family we've housed. we're focused on chronically sipping l adults. we show each month how many hour is [speaker not understood]. care not cash, we housed 245 individuals. >> i'm sorry to interrupt, but when it comes to these different sections, do you have any data about how long people are housed when they're housed? i think it's also really important aspect. >> i'm not sure if [speaker not

understood] as well. >> you're out of the room. we talked about the surviving portfolio. how effective they are. the number one goal is to get them housed -- i guess that's two goals, get them housed and keep them housed. our housing retention rate meaning folks who stay after a year, is 90% across our portfolio. so in that one year, they are being housed. there are low levels in sur supportive housing. we have -- so, there's 9600 folks we have, that number feeds into not just the 2600 units we created under the plan, but really more the what's close to 6,000 supportive housing units or subsidies in the city. we have about 4,000 under hsa, 2000 under department of public health. some positive, some negative, some folks move away, we don't

know why they left. you're partnering to do [speaker not understood] to look at a more robust issue. supervisor, how long are folks staying? is there information about who is staying, why they're staying? what is the appropriate supportive mix in housing now that we've moved into housing first? we're not getting as much turn over. if you turn more turn over, you can house somebody else. are we not targeting the [speaker not understood], we're hoping the budget analyst through the dataal analysis would help us, too. >> [speaker not understood]. >> right, right, how the housing authority could become part of that [speaker not

understood]. first is the general fund of fundsed, housing portfolio. not through care not cash. [speaker not understood] dph program under 2,500 -- i'm running through this quickly, i know. our local operating subsidy program which is the partnership with mayor's office of housing, dhp provides the fund [speaker not understood], 333 placements. so, people say how can you solve homelessness? i think we're really good at solving homelessness for the individual. i think there are systemic reasons why we haven't solved it in san francisco. we will have further dialogue on that ~. back to prevention and what we've accomplished -- >> [speaker not understood]. as a manifestation here in san francisco, i think it's

important to say that, but to really make connection. >> i'm glad you said that supervisor. a reporter asked a couple who the a about. you've housed so many people and committed so many resourcies yet there is a consistent homeless problem. what frustrates all of us i think the state to recognize this as a homeless issue as well. we get a grant $100 million [speaker not understood]. we get $30 million a year from the feds or homeless budget, in hsa alone is 122 million. what's frustrating is we have a poverty rate of 25%, still hasn't given us the resources to solve homelessness, to your point, it always has to be

discussed within the context. the reality is we are [speaker not understood] to serving people on the street and we need to do our best within our resources to do that. so, i segued into funding. so, increased funding. one additional half million dollars in supportive services. >> this is in hsa [speaker not understood]. you can see the units attached to that 370 units. and then our master lease program we've really -- and it's notable given the budget cuts we had to ensure the last number of year. we were preserved. we didn't cut [speaker not understood]. we have increased through business increases he, and there's been a couple privacy. . that's atrictionvable to some of the countries.

i know this was lengthy, but it was a lengthy plan. homeless prevention, we were lucky to get a 89 thousand dollars influx of [speaker not understood] from the feds in ara in three years. ~ $9 million home for the holidays was mentioned earlier between sales force and us. i amoebationved mcgriffin mc kinney, $4.3 million over five years primarily again because we are really good for applying for homeless supportive project. we get the bonus almost every year. >> can i ask a question truly, though, we are an year to year basis on that, or is there some security we think will continue?

>> good question. nobody from my staff is here. she could answer that. [speaker not understood] generally applies for a project, we can apply for a month et one a year. [speaker not understood]. another advancement -- introduce a discussion and [speaker not understood], that's shelter enhancements. so, since -- really it's more the last 2.3 just, our emergency sell term system. rear now [speaker not understood] that's about $13,800 a bed per year for emergency shelter. the plan specifically calls for as we develop an increase of supportive housing units to

reduce the number of emergency shelter beds ferment not necessarily eliminate funding that's going through the population, but to rethink about them, what they call them mobile crisis centers, 24-hour emergency crisis centers. what we're seeing now is many, many folk who have been in shelter familiar too long. the emergency shelter was designed for a rescue from the street. 12 beds or so. the reason we don't have a shelter for everyone, it's difficult to engage in job training and be successful. it's difficult to be treatment and be successful. all [speaker not understood] around the treatment and job training to shelter on the street and it's 3 or 4x in terms of effectiveness. so we i think we need to have a discussion for what that $17

million funding for shelter, what it currently does and how maybe it could be -- maybe the shelter service model should be looked at differently. maybe there should be a clean sell berg as mart of those shelters that are more -- there's a lot of ideas and there's a lot of models around the country to me wear -- it's troubling. i know the other side as well. if we didn't have the 1200 beds, there might be 1200 people sleeping on the street and we don't want that either. it is to me a public policy conundrum in that we have so much money now going for emergency shelter that really is not truly emergency for very many folks who are there. >> question for you in that regard. in looking through the ten-year plan, number one was 3,000 units of permanent supportive housing. again, i think remarkable that

in a ten-year time frame we've actually hit that. i think it's a good thing when government plans hit their goal. number 2 close hidv was a transition from shelters to, and i think it was a four to six year time frame. >> it was. >> again, i appreciate the dilemma. you certainly don't want any more people on your street. reenvisioning, what are you going to use those dollars for permanent supportive housing. what is the obstacle and here we are 10 years later we're not even close. >> it's a numbers game. it's hard to justify closing a shelter when you know you have 3,000 people on the street. but there's been a lot of -- dph is really kudos to barbara and her team, created about -- whether it's the sobering center, medical respites, sort

of these short-term models get folks admires they might be not suitable for different alternatives. : we have the facilities. should we provide them in a way with short term [speaker not understood] needed? these are all rhetorical questions here. honestly, we did close shelters over time. nothing was a policy. it was theerithv of losing the facility. and, so, we do have fewer beds now than we did in 2000, 3, 4. i just think again, it's really justify closing we know we have folks on the street. >> the homeless count, how many folks are on the street? >> homeless county identified 264 folk. the same we had in 2011.

6400 -- the definition of homelessness, they're in cars, in treatment, transitional housing, jails, hospitals. 3,400 folks counted were indeed on the street in shelter. another piece of data that i think speaks to our success at addressing the homeless chronic problem, the 1977 folk in 2013 met that definition of chronically homeless. in 2009 over 4,000 people met that definition of chronically homeless. so, that's a 50% reduction in the number of chronically homeless who we counted. in 2009 almost two-thirds, 62% of the folk we chronicled were chronically homeless. [speaker not understood]. that's positive progress. that means that folks who are really sick and who really are

in need of array of services and housing are getting them in more prevalence than they did in 2009. >> supervisor mar? >> i know we still have a bunch of other presenters, but i wanted to ask if -- the numbers are helpful. the demographic of the homeless po laytion. i know that from barbara's presentation. dph presentation, one shocking information was one-third of the population is african-american. i wonder if that's consistent with the demographics you see as well. you know, the demographics that we collect are from a public benefit program. when you look at the single adults receiving public benefits, that's about what it is. >> it's between 30, 40% actually? >> and then with the huge push out of the american population

over the decade now down to about 6% of the population. is so r it's 33% homeless are african americans and yet it's roughly 6% of the population. are there key cultural study,. we just went through the bayview homeless shelter issue. i'm just wondering what are the culturally relevant and competent strategies that you use in hsa. >> so, it's a to youedctionving to me that it's 24% and we stuv don't have a full service service in the bayview. [speaker not understood]. we have a drop-in center there, in just as recently as 2000, 2001 was simply just food. now it's services. you know, we -- a lot of folks come to the central city who are homeless, maybe from the southeast part of the city,

[speaker not understood], that's where the services are. we really need to do a better job of getting services that are more culturally competent. linguistickly competent to the folks who need them so they're not traversing across the city accessing services because there aren't any in their neighborhood. i think we're getting better. [speaker not understood] will testify, we have right now just providence church which is in the southeast part of the city. >> but i know we're fortunate with a lot of grassroots and community based in the neighborhood. can i share one thing that helped me as a policy maker on food and access, taking the snap challenge and putting myself in the soft shoes. i definitely understood issues of homelessness or of hunger and food clearly. i know there