p.e.s. and at san francisco, we are looking to expand that and laguna honda and working with the criminal justice system, as well. with you agree there's no need to having people go to criminal access points. >> so your department has to assign a priority level to each person. >> correct. >> and d.p.h. is sort of working on people with their mental health and physical health needs. what's the -- like, how do you -- so yesterday, i went -- there's a great new program at san francisco general. it's related to getting to zero, and h.i.v. and h.p.c. treatment. people get their treatment and they get social workers who try to get them into coordinated entry. they were saying it's a little bit of a mystery to them how the prioritization happens because it's of course from their perspective, 80 to 90% of these folks are not only hiv positive but have mental health or substance abuse issues. so how does prioritization happen? >> so i want to point out that d.p.h. and h.s.h. work closely together to

p.e.s., hummingbird or they go where? >> they could also go to urgent care, and after urgent care, they can decide if that person needs acute diversion, and they can go to housing for two weeks or plus, depending on their needs and what their needs are assess. and then, while they're there, they're continuously assessing what the next steps would be. >> supervisor ronen: okay. so let's say they go the urgent care route, which is probably the best route, 'cause there's a 12-day stablization crisis. but there's still no bed in the residential. where do they go? >> they're done with the a.d.u., and the question is where do they go next? >> supervisor ronen: yes. >> i think there will be a conversation about where do they go next? we may be looking at stablization rooms, various options. residential treatment is one option. and again, we have to look at the condition of the person. not every person is presenting in a situation that are in a crisis. there are people who are also presenting in a c

there's definitely gap there is so that when people are leaving p.e.s., whether or not there's housing available for them, if they still need care, -- sorry -- if they still need care and we don't either have permanent supportive housing or they still have medical issues that make it difficult for them to get into p.h.s., we really need more of those beds. but also as we're adding more community-based care we have to understand that those folks need to go somewhere. so, you know, for every transitional program that we set up we need to be planning for where those exits are going to be and whether they are to permanent supportive housing or whether -- which i think that we have a fair amount in the pipeline, or whether they're going to small co-op programs that i think that are more suitable for folks. we need more of those, but i will say that there has been a fairly robust development of permanent supportive housing over the past -- you know, 15 years in this city. but there's not been the same level of growth. in fact, i believe that there's actually been a shrinking of the community

p.e.s. used to be able to refer directly to progress a.d.u. beds and cannot do that any longer. so we're seeing that a lot of clients -- if you go into inpisht, you can be referred, but only for the first seven days of your stay. so people actually are not able to even make that simple exit. a.d.u.s are called acute diverse units, and they were designed and created as an outlet for p.e.s. now they're not being used that way, and that's problematic. >> supervisor ronen: good point. good point. >> chair mandelman: i think supervisor stefani -- >> supervisor stefani: no, i would like to give you my card because i would like to follow up with you and see that report. >> chair mandelman: we probably would call like to see that report. okay. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is gloria hernandez. i'm so glad to be here. originally from illinois, came here, started working with homeless, some of them are still homeless. i believe that people are doing the best they can. i believe that with my mind, heart, and spirit, but i have serious concerns that everybody needs to work togeth

how do we help the person that's leaving p.e.s.? how many more type of beds do we need? how many beds? that's what this hearing is about, because if we don't look at that -- at those investments, we're just going to keep doing this over and over again, which is the definition of insanity if we don't make any changes. so that's why i called this hearing. we need to understand what the departments are doing better. we are doing good work. i want to thank you four coming. there is a lot of work going on at s.f. general, a lot of good work going on. i know all of my colleagues here want to do better. we are in charge of the budget. we want to know how to spend your dollars to get at this problem to help the people who are suffering on our streets. that's what i want to do and that's why i called this hearing. i want to thank those who presented, i want to thank my colleagues for their thoughtful questions because we're going to keep at this. this is not the end of this discussion for me. i'm going to keep at it, i'm going to keep asking questions, demanding answers, and i'm

general, and i talked to the psychiatrists there, i learned that 68% of p.e.s.ons are homeless. second, i'd like -- i want to identify key points where departments interact or do not interact and could, such as when a person enters and exits psychiatric emergency services. again, a coordinated exit. third, i want to identify opportunities to improve the current coordination and services. are there ways we can leverage existing resources to provide more or better resources. are there points where we are losing people, where we can get them better services other than returning them to the streets? and i also want to understand what services could we be providing when people are leaving the hospital on a psychiatric hold? what are we lacking? where do we need to invest? is it more mental health beds? is it step-down beds? is it treatment on demand? what is it because i know we want to figure that out. we all do, and i want to figure out how to provide that. i also want to be clear in this hearing. this hearing is not focused on sb-1045 and conservatorship. this hea

p.e.s are really cheap right here, 10 compared to 17 in the u.s.cially on trade deals to play china and emerging market et fs. maria: the backdrop is weak, europe growing 1% if we're lucky, china slowing down. >> germany could be a negative, that could have a knock-on effect across the region. where is the money coming from? you say flows, talking about where it's going. curious where the money is coming from. >> a lot of money is coming from u.s. large caps as we've had a 10 year bull market for sure. you mention europe, developed europe, yes, it's hurting, not seeing as much money coming in but emerging markets have underperformed for the last five years, with the p.e.'s pretty low -- >> when you say emerging markets -- >> china, brazil, russia for a lot of reasons have underperformed and have kept pace with u.s. developed. from a trade standpoint and you look at china specifically, there are a couple etfs which is the fxi, the largest ishares etf which has state owned companies in there, the big thing going forward if you're investing in china i