HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-10-25; City Council; Resolution 2016-214RESOLUTION NO. 2016-214
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,
CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION AND EXPENDITURE OF
$25,000 IN HOUSING TRUST FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE NORTH COUNTY
REGIONAL BRIDGE HOUSING SYSTEM TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO THE
HOMELESS POPULATIONS.
Exhibit 1
WHEREAS, The Alliance for Regional Solutions was formed to develop a North County
Regional Winter Shelter Program through a coordinated effort between local governments and
social service providers to address homeless needs during the winter months; and
WHEREAS, a subcommittee of Alliance members have worked with staff representing all
Northern San Diego County cities to provide winter shelter at four sites in Carlsbad, Oceanside,
Vista and Escondido; and
WHEREAS, there is a need to shift from solely a winter shelter system to a year round model
which provides transitional bridge housing for individuals and families until permanent housing
can be achieved (referenced in Attachment A); and
WHEREAS, there is sufficient funding in the Housing Trust Fund to appropriate monies to
support the regional bridge housing system; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad,
California, as follows:
1. The above recitations are true and correct.
2. The Carlsbad City Council hereby authorizes the Administrative Services Director to
appropriate and disburse funds in the amount of twenty five thousand dollars ($25,000} from the
Housing Trust Fund as a contribution to the North County Regional Bridge Housing System to serve the
homeless populations.
Item #5 October 25, 2016 3 of 53
Exhibit 1
3. The Carlsbad City Council authorizes the Housing & Neighborhood Services
Director to execute all appropriate documents needed to provide the contribution to the North County
Regional Bridge Housing System to serve the homeless populations.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 25th day of October, 2016, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Hall, Wood, Schumacher, Blackburn, Packard.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
A HALL, Mayor
(SEAL)
Item #5 October 25, 2016 4 of 53
Alliance for
Regi.anal Solutions
Connecting North County
REGIONAL BRIDGE HOUSING SYSTEM FUNDING REQUEST -CARLSBAD
ATIACHMENTA
Executive Summary 9/7/2016
1
The Alliance for Regional Solutions is requesting that the City of Carlsbad contribute $25,000
towards the tenth year of the regional shelter system serving homeless popJlations in Northern
San Diego County. For the past nine years, the Alliance for Regional SolutionJ has provided
winter shelter systems addressing the pressing needs of homeless individuall and families in
North San Diego County. Recently, three Alliance for Regional Solutions shelt~rs increased their
capacity, and now provide year round bridge housing services, while simulta1eously offering
otherwise highly vulnerable adult clients the opportunity to utilize workforce ~evelopment
services to pave a concrete pathway towards self-sufficiency and stable housing.
I
The Alliance for Regional Solutions request is reflective of past years, with slight modifications
to aid in supporting our three new North County San Diego year-round sheltr rs. The tenth year
of this regional approach will focus on continuing to strengthen transportation support for
shelter residents, providing on-site behavioral health assessments, services tlargeting the
chronically homeless, and implementing further collaborative best practices 1on a regional basis. ! i
As in past years, the goal of the regional homelessness shelter system is to provide homeless
individuals and families in North County with not only a safe haven, but to al~o provide the
tools and motivation necessary to move them towards self-sufficiency and t t eir maximum level
of independent and responsible functioning. This includes a requirement th~t shelter
participants not be under the influence of alcohol or other drugs, and that t ~ey demonstrate
positive progress through a case managed program that includes personal aycountability.
Services under the proposed Bridge housing network will include three year lround shelters
operating 365 days a year in Carlsbad, Escondido, and Vista, and three winter shelters serving
Oceanside and the North County Coastal and Inland communities. The Bridg~ Housing Network
has the capacity to provide a total of 4,504 bed nights for the FY 2017 (July 1., 2016-June 30,
2017). The total tenth year budget for the regional Bridge Housing system is/$1.S million and
includes funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency througH the Emergency
Food and Shelter Program (EFSP), municipal and county governments, and the private . I
resources of shelter providers. The requested $25,000 represents less than 2% of the total I
budget for the proposed system. I
The Alliance for Regional Solutions is grateful to Carlsbad for past support provided to our
winter shelter network. With a recent expansion to meet the pressing need$ of homeless
i I i
Item #5 October 25, 2016 5 of 53
individuals and families comes increased costs. Our partner city Oceanside h s already
committed to increasing their giving. Funding covers such expenses as staffin , operational
costs, and direct program services. Staffing plans include onsite case manage s, night security
staff and medical assessment staff that will assist shelter participants. Courtn y and Kevin we
would like to meet with you to discuss the expansion of our shelter network swell as the
possibly to discuss your support of this pertinent and timely initiative.
Data will be collected from all participating sites and entered into the Homel ss Management
Information System for tracking, documentation and evaluation purposes. E luators from the
Regional Task Force on the Homeless will continue to track the quantitative nd qualitative
aspects of the system performance and provide both a season end, and qua erly end
(applicable specifically to the three year-round emergency shelters) report o impacts. A copy
of the report for the last winter season is attached.
Regards,
Greg Anglea
President of the Alliance for Regional Solutions
Item #5 October 25, 2016 6 of 53
~~venue
. Sour:ce Total
¢ity ~hare
Shelter Providers
EFSP
SDG&E Grant
City of Escondido
City of Oceanside
City of Vista
City of Carlsbad
City of San Marcos
City of Encinitas
City of Poway
City of Solana Beach
I. subtotal ' . '
I Revenue Total
I eipense
_ Item .
Personnel -::-··· --·---
On-site Case Management
Night Watch
,. System $u-pp~rt-
Regional Shelter Administration
Fiscal Agent
Evaluation
Fiscal Audit
50,000
50,000
18,778
25,000
14,450
11 ,556
11 ,112
3,200
· System Support
,Jptal
; Shelter Costs . ~------
Shelter Management Personnel
Non-Personnel costs
Meals In-kind
Statµs
Committed/Pending
Pending
Pending
Committed
Committed
Committed
Committed
Committed
Committed
Committed
Committed
*city grants paid directly to
providers
'. $µppo11·1v.~Seryit~s _. · ··, _________ , .•......... _ ....
Bus passes and other needs -~ -u .,_..., ----·-·
'. Supportive·,services Tatal
· System cost :
$289,640
$40,786
$25,000
$33,000
$50,000:
City cr~dits
basic shelter
~
-amounts raised by
providers
-EFSP based on
prior year
SO *25,000 city grant
$18,778, $9 *65,000 city grants
$0 *17,000 city grant
$11,1 d
$3, 1 ?cl
$47.1,49~ 1
$107,000 I
$578,49~ I
totals lJ ' I
$146,582 I $164,515
$311,09i ' ·-··-r
s12,00J
$9,?0J
I
$5,509
$1 ,000 -I.
.$~8,,20!\
I i
·1 !
$401 ,256
$286,52$
$69,640
,·-. ;: ... : 1-· -,_
$75!;42&:
;
-l: •"''·•-·-----.~-·-t~·
$22,680
· · $·22,ss_p ; . ' $1,,119,40~
Item #5 October 25, 2016 7 of 53
Alliance for
Regional Solutions
Shelter Provided to the
Homeless in I
North San Diego County !
Winter Shelters !
2015-2016
R EGIONAL T ASK F ORCE
H OMELESS
Oun C OMMUNITY • OuR Hor-lELESS · O uo lssuEs
!
Report prepared l.y: !
Regional Task Force on the Homeless
4699 Murphy Canyon Road I
San Diego, California 92123,
858-292-7627 /
http://rtfhsd.org
August 2016
Item #5 October 25, 2016 8 of 53
Aclmowledgements
This report was prepared by the Regional Task Force on the Homeless (RTFH), on beh~lf of the Alliance for
Regional Solutions (ARS). '
The authors greatly appreciate the efforts of the member agencies and staff opec11:ing the ARS wjmer shelter,. In
particular \Ve would like ro co mmend the data collection and data entsy staff, whose thoroughness and attention to detail
has made rhis report meaningful and rich. ;
In adclition, the IGFH would like to acknowledge the Institute for Public Health (IPH) at San Dlego State University.
The IPH prepared the ,vinrer shelter report for the past several seasons investing time and thougbt into the development
of a basic report template and analysis methodology. I
2015-2016 J\RS North County Winter Shelter Report
Item #5 October 25, 2016 9 of 53
Table of Contents
Introduction~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~----'-~~~~~~~1
Background 1
A. Data Collection 1
B. Data Analysis 1
C. Limitations 2
Res~u 3
A. Location and Length of Service 3
B. Demographic and Prior Living Situation Information 4
1. Information Collected from All Clients 4
2. lnfonnation Collected from ,\dult Clients 7
C. Income, Non-Cash Benefits, and Employment Situation 12
D. Primary Reason for Homelessness 15
E. Reason for Leaving the Shelter and Destination · 17
F. 2014-2015 Returning Clients 20
s~~ry M
References 25
Appendix A -Data Tables 26
A. 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelter Clients 26
B. 2014-2015 North San Diego Winter Shelter Returning Clients 40
Appendix B -Recommendations 43
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
Item #5 October 25, 2016 10 of 53
Introduction
The Alliance for Regional Solutions (ARS) collected client shelter stay data during it 2015-2016 Winter
Shelter homeless services in North San Diego County. This report describes the numb of clients that were
sheltered, the demographic characteristics of these clients, the reason for their homeless ess, the length of
shelter provided to these clients, and what housing plans the clients had upon exiting th shelter program,
plus a brief review of clients served during both the 2014-2015 winter season and the 20 5-2016 winter
season.
The ARS commissioned the Regional Task Force on the Homeless (RTFH) to anal ze the 2015-2016
winter shelter data. The data was entered by winter shelter staff into a secure online da base and extracted
for analysis in July 2016.
Background
Each year in North San Diego County, six winter emergency shelters open up to pr vide shelter to the
homeless during the coldest of the winter months -primarily December through April. or the 2015-2016
winter months, two of the six ARS shelters operated from the first week of December 2 15 through the end
of March 2016. A third shelter began operation in the third week of October 2015 and ded in the last week
of March 2016; another began at the end of November 2015 and ran through the first ek of February
2016. A fifth shelter began at the beginning of November 2015 and ran through end of arch 2016; Haven
House started operating from the last week of December 2015 and will continue throug out the year.
A. Data Collection
Shelter staff collected information about the residents that stayed in their respective shelters. This
information included client demographics and information such as reason for homeless ess, reasons for
leaving the shelter, and planned destination upon exiting. The staff members entered data into a secure
online homeless management information system (HMIS) database called ServicePoint In 2016 RTFH
updated a data extraction report within ServicePoint and downloaded the winter shelter ata into a collection
of Microsoft Excel worksheets. Data represents ARS winter shelter program entries rec rded in ServicePoint
as of July, 2016.
B. Data Analysis
Most of the data manipulation was done using ServicePoint's Advanced Reporting ool (ART Reports)
capabilities, which generated the final numbers used in this report All graphs and c were created using
Microsoft Excel.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report llPage
Item #5 October 25, 2016 11 of 53
C. Limitations
Any time data is collected there can be errors in the data collection or the data en processes. During
collection, data may not be completely collected, or it may be recorded erroneously or, · cases of clients
already in the data system, changes in data may not be fully updated in the database. Th error rate for data
collection and data entr"f for this data set is largely unknown. Another limitation is that ost questions
primarily rely upon client self-report, which may or may not be truthful. Self-report, ho ever, is often the
only method available.
Lastly, yet importantly, these findings apply only to the persons who used these win er shelters, not to the
homeless population at large in North San Diego or to all sheltered clients in San Diego Whether or not
these sheltered clients were similar to those served in other winter shelters in San Diego or to the general
homeless population was not examined.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 21Page
Item #5 October 25, 2016 12 of 53
Results
A total of 538 unique individuals received shelter from the six 2015-2016 North San Diego ARS W1nter
Shelters. The four large Alliance North San Diego Shelters provided shelter service to 4 unique clients -
89% of the total number served (La Posada de Guadalupe, Bread of Life, Haven House, and Operation
Hope) (fable 1).
A. Location and Length of Service
A total of 188 ARS beds were available to temporarily house homeless individuals· the North San
Diego area during the winter months (fable 1). Together these beds enabled 16,041 be -nights to be
provided to the 538 clients served. Program utilization (bed-nights used / bed-nights av · ble) ranged from
39% to 85% (utilization data not shown).
The 538 unique clients stayed in the North San Diego Winter Shelters for an averag
although the number of nights per client ranged from 1 to 160. Sixty percent (60%) of
sheltered for 30 nights or less, forty percent (40%) for more than 30 nights (Graph 1).
Twenty-four of the 538 clients (4%) utilized more than one shelter location during e season, and 69 of
the 538 clients (13%) exited and re-entered the North County W1nter Shelter system mo e than once during
the season (not graphed). Those 69 clients account for 209 separate client stays during e season.
Table 1. Shelter Capacity and Shelter Provided, 2015-2016 North San Diego w·
Program Name
Number of Bed-Nights
Clients seMd Beds• Availablel
Interfaith Shelter Network Coastal 12 160 1920
Men, 1110men fllldfamiliu
Interfaith Shelter Network Inland 12 70 840
Men, 11/0men andfami.ies
La Posada de Guadalupe 20 122 2440
Men
Operation Hope 45 151 6795
Families and women
Bread of Life 50 ,122 6100 t · Men and women
Haven House 49 130 6370
Mm and women
Total 188 755 24465
1 Number reported by project staff.
Shelter Provided
Total Clients
Sheltered
42l
335 17
641 16~
' : ..
143 103
156 1ot . r.:
478 104
538
Dates of operation reported by project staff, operating nights were calculated based on what was reported to the R during the 2015 Housing
Inventory Count (l'Hq.
3 The number of beds times the number of operating nights.
• One person staying one night is a bed-night.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 3 I P a g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 13 of 53
18%
16%
14%
12%
10%
8% 7%
6% I 4%
2%
0%
1 Night
13%
Graph 1
Number of Nights of Shelter per Client per Stay, I
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters I
(n=538 clients stays) ~0%
1
,
10 60% '--~~~~~~~~~~-
16% 17%
15%
13%
I
2-5 Nights 6-10 Nights 11-20 Nights 21-30 Nights 31 -60 Nights 61-9q Nights 91-160 Nights
I 1 Clients with multiple ~helter stays were combined for a cumulative total of shelter nights.
When unrounded numbers arc summed, sixty-two percent (62'',,) utilized the shelter for 30 nights or less, and thirty-eight percent (38%) utili7.cd the
shelter for 31 or more nights. j
l
!
B. Demographic and Prior Living Situation Information l
Demographic and prior living situation information for the clients served is presentbd below. Most data
was collected on both adults and children entering the shelter. !
1. Information Collected from All Clients j
I As seen in the graphs that follow, most sheltered individuals were males and Non-ll[ispanic/Latino
(Graphs 2 and 3). The large majority (75%) identified as \X/hite, followed distantly by Black/African-
American (17%) (Graph 4). · I
Graph 2
Gender of Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego
Winter Shelters
{n=538 clients)
Male
69%
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
Non-
'
Graph 31
Ethnicity of Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North s1n Diego l Winter Shelters ! (n=538 clients with intormation)'
Hispanic/Latino
28%
DKR
2%
Hispanic/Latino_ I . Missing
69% 1%
Hcsponsc cmcgorics Client DoL'sn't Know/Cl~ent Rcfus~d were
collapsed into om: c:ncgory, "DKJ<''. !
i
41Page
Item #5 October 25, 2016 14 of 53
80% 75%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
White
17%
II
Graph 4
Primary Race of Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=479 clients with information)'·'
5% 1% 1% -Black/African American Native Asian
American Indian/Alaskan Hawaiian/Other
Native Pacific Islander
1 Pcrccnr:iges m:iy :u.IJ up to br; grcarcr th3n l 00'_}" due to rounJing.
Hc!-pon~c categories Cli<.:m Doc:in'r hnow/Clicnt Refused wen: collap~cd into one curcgory. "DKR''.
1% I
I
Data not
Collect~d
1%
DKR
In total, over one-third (35%) of the clients sheltered were over the age of 50 years. ,Children (17 years or
younger) made up 15% of those served (Graph S). Fifty-one percent (51 %) of the total Flients sheltered were
between the ages of 18 and 50.
Graph 5
Age Group' of Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=S38 clients)'~
25% 24%
20%
20%
16% 15%
15% 14%
10% 8%
5% I 3%
<1% II 0%
< 1 Year 1-17 18-30 31 -40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71 + Years
Years Years Years Years Years Years
1 Age :u first program cn1ry during tht: 2015-2016 shelter :-cason.
Pcrccnragcs may add up w be greater than 100Ut1 due 10 rnum.ling.
About one-quarter (26%) of all clients entered a shelter as a part of a family group (Graph 6). Over two-
thirds (69%) of the families with children were headed by a single adult female, while unly 9% were headed by a
single adult male (Graph 7).
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report SIP a ge
Item #5 October 25, 2016 15 of 53
Graph 6
Entered with Family
Sheltered Clients,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=S38 clientsJ•.2
Yes
No
74%
Graph 71
Head of House~old for
Families with Children Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diegb Winter Shelters
(n=45 familes with lhildren)'.2.3
I
22%
I --
1 'Family' includc.s persons in multi-adult households and persons in
households with childrclL
• One adulr female per household with thild(ren).
One adulr female and one aduh male rtcr household with child(rcn).
One adulr male per household with child(ren). 111c 'No' category include:; pl:'r:.uns entering ns indi,·idua.h:, jnd includes
persons who5c ftrsr entry during the 5:cason was as a single adult: bur who
subsequent!,· entered with a child. l l
Close to half (42%) of the families with children were comprised of two people -ari. adult and a child -
while less than a quarter (18%) were made up of five or more individuals (Graph 8). ·
45% 42%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2 people
Graph 8
Family Size of Households with Children Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters,
(n=45 families with children)
27%
16%
13%
3 people 4 people 5 people
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
2% -6 people
6f Pa ge
Item #5 October 25, 2016 16 of 53
2. Information Collected from Adult Clients
Some demographic information was collected only for adult clients aged 18 and older. Thirteen percent
(13%) of adults indicated a history of military service (Graph 9). This is up &om 11 % in the previous 2014-
2015 season (Alliance for Regional Solutions, July 2015).
Graph 9
Military History
of Adult Clients Sheltered,
Graph 10
Pregnant Atjult Female
Clients SHeltered, 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
Not {n=459)'-' 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=133 adult female~ with information)
: Yes Recorded
No
85%
1 Respon::e c11e.gorjes Clienr Doesn1t Kno\\'/Clicm Ilcfu~cd wcrl'
colbp:scd into one category, "DKR".
Pcrccnt::igcs m:?y or may not aUd up to 100'-'" clue fO rounding.
No
89% 3% Client
\ \...Missing
7%
i Of the 133 adult female clients for whom pregnancy status was recorded, 3% reportpd being pregnant at
the rime of entry (Graph 10). This is lower than the 5% reported in the previous 2014-2015 season (Alliance
for Regional Solutions,July 2015). ·
Divorced 22%
Single
Graph 11
Marital Status of Adult Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego
Winter Shelters
(n=4S9 clients)1
51% ---====----
Separated 9% Widowed 4%
DKR/Missing
5%
Married
1 Rc:;porn;t c m:gorics Clir.:nt Doesn't Know/Client llt·f1.1~c.:d/i'.fissing \\'t.:rc C(ilbps(·d into nm:: car.cgnry, "DK~l /i\'fi:.;:.ing~'.
Over one-half (51 ~lo) of adult clients served by the North County winter shelters ide!1t.ified as single
(unmarried) (Graph 11). Seven-percent (7%) were married and 2% were co-habirating. Over one-quarter
(31 %) were either divorced or separated, and 4% were \vidowcd.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
Item #5 October 25, 2016 17 of 53
i
Twemy percent (20%) of adults reported being domestic violence ,:-ictims/stmrivorsl (Graph 12). When
examined by gender, close to half (47%) of the female adults and 8% of the male adults eportcd being
domestic violence victims/survivors (Graph 13). · i
Graph 12
Domestic Violence Victims/Survivors,
Adult Sheltered Clients,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=459 adults with information)'
DKR/
Missing
3%
Yes
20%
No
77%
1 Response categories Client Doesn't Know/Client Refused were collapsed 1
into om: category, c'l)Kll".
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Graph 1~
Domestic Violence Victims/Survivors by Gender,
Adult ShelteredlClients,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n= 133 females, 325 males,!1 transgender male
to female)
47% l
8% -Female I Male
One rransgcnder male to female is not +O\rn in the grarh.
A little less tlrnn half (46%) of adults reported having a disabling condition (Grapi1 114). 1vfental health
problem and physical ,vere most frequently cited (56% each), followed by chronic health; condition (46%), botl1
alcohol and drug abuse (18%), drug abuse (17%), and alcohol abuse (16%). Few reporte~ a devclop1nental
disabili ty (12%) and HIV/ AIDS (1 %) (Graph 16).
Of the adults reporting a type of disabling condition, 65% reported ha,:-ing two or niore co-occurring
conditions. Thirty-five percent (35%) reported having only one type of disability. Thirry-1one percent (3 1 %)
reported having two co-occurring disabling conditions. Four percent (4%) reported having five or more
disability types.
No
53%
Graph 14
Disabled Adult Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=459)'
Yes
46%
1%
1 Rc:-pon!=c otcgorics Client Doesn't Know/Ch:m lkfu:.cd/.Mis~ing were
colbpscd into one category, "DKR/lllissing".
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
j
Graph 1~
Number of Disability T~pes Recorded,
Disabled Adult Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
One Type
35%
Seven Types
<1%
Six Types
2%
Five Types
2%
Four Types
10%
(n=210 adul'ts)1
I
Two Types
31%
1 Percentage:-rn:iy or may not :iJd up ro I jm0 ~. due to rou_nding.
8jPa ge
Item #5 October 25, 2016 18 of 53
Graph 16
Disability Types Entered for Adult Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n= 210 adults with a Disabling Condition)1•2
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
56% 56%
~
46%
I 18%
I
-0~ ?.,·· ;_,,c; iy,~ ~.;:;
<:>.'-"'.:;, 0-(j (.f ,§'
~ ~
c7> cf' :::--.G . (;"<' ~'?' ~~ o"' 0 cf <o
1 Pcrccnt:igc of J is:ibk:d adults reporting c:lch d:Sability type.
17% 16% 12% I I II I 1% <1% l
~ I
"c "c I ~"' c' ~-:s ~-:s "'" o;s ?o'?' :::--.'?' ,$-c ~\'?'
~o ~ot::! :;;
(j'-:s 0 ,,.c ~(, (jQ.,
PcrccnD.gcs m~:· ldJ up rn be grc3rcr than 100"0 because clients could rcpon more rh::in one Jisabiliry type.
Chronic homelessness is characterized by extended or frequent homelessness (living on the streets, in
emergency shelters, or in a safe haven) plus the presence of a long-term disabling condi~on (Graph 18 footnote
3). Th.is season, o\·er one qmtrter (27%) of the adults served were chronically homeless.
Information from other sources state that the chronically homeless spend a long pe1~od of time -often
years -either living in shelters or on the streets or cycling between hospitals, emergency rooms, jails, prisons,
and mental health and substance abuse treaunent facilities. The chronically homeless ha{·e also been shown to
be very expensive in terms of costs incurred by public systems of care, altl~ough they mai· only represent a
small percentage of tl1e emire homeless population (National Alliance to Encl Homeless*ess, l\farch 2007).
Therefore, it is important to identify tl1e chronically homeless among our homeless pop1.1htion, so proper
interventions can be realized. l
Yes
Graph 18
Chronic Homelessness among Adult Clients
Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=459 adults with information) 1•2 _ DKR
0%
73%
1 In thi!'i an;1lysis. all adults wt:n: incluJt.:J withour con;;idcrat.ion fo r family st3ru:i.
I
!·IUD Chrnnic I lmnc:bsnc~s Definition: an individual (1)
with _a dis:1blin~ com.li~on oy c~p1.:creJ tu be of_long.-_
conttnul'd am.I 111dcfi 11Ht: d11t:al1on :1nd sub:.t:mrmlly 1mp:1Jrs
abilitr to l.i\'l~ i11dt:pc11Jcmly br physical Jisabllity,
dc,·cl(lprnenral disabili1-y) ch~nnic hc:ilth condition,
I I IV/,\ IDS, mental he:tlth rlrnblem or substance abuse,
and (2) who enter from :Hn.:ets, emergency shdtcr or safe
harcn, and (.,) has been conbnuously homeless for a year
or more, or h;is haJ ar least four episodes of homcltssncss
in the past three years, (jR (ti) a household member of a
head oF household (who nu} be a child) nr any adult in the
household meeting the pn:\'jous Ji:-Jbility & homelessness
criteria outlined in I, 1 anJ } (11 ~IIS Standan:I Reporting
·1't.~rminolng\· Glos;,;;in•, Octdbc:r 2015, Version 2.2). . , I
i
Information about education levels were collected for all clients, however for dus report only information
about adults is described (Graph 19). Data collected by project staff show that more thaii a ha.If (58%) of adult
clients have graduated from high school, attained a GED, or have college experience bu ~ did not acquire a
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 9 IP ag e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 19 of 53
degree, and 15% have completed some sort of college degree. Seventeen percent (17%) ~1ave 9th to 121h grade
completion (no diploma), and only 4% have lower than a 9u, grade education level. i
I
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5% 4% 4%
0% I I
Graph 19
Highest Level of Education Attained among Adult Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=459 aduts)'
33%
16%
13%
9%
I 7%
I 5%
I 3%:
11
i t Response categoric; Client Doesn't Know /Client Rduscd/~!i;;ing were collapsed into one category, "DKR/~lissipg".
5%
I-1% -
Information describing clients' living situation the night before entry into a shelter rl rogram was recorded
for most adult clients (Grnph 20). The most commonly reported living situation was a 'place not meant for
human habitation' (36%) and represents locations such as on the street, in a car, in an a~andoned building, in a
field, under a highway overpass, or any other similar place. The nc."t most commonly reported prior living
situations were 'hotel/motel paid for with an emergency shelter voucher' (15%), living ,1 ith family (11 %), and
living with friends (10%).
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 10 IP age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 20 of 53
Graph 20
living Situation Prior to First Shelter Night for Sheltered Adult Clients,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=459 adults)1•2
i l 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Place Not Meant for Habitation
Emergency Shelter or Hotel/Motel with Voucher
Living With Family
Living With Friends
Hotel/ Motel without Emergency Voucher
Other -5%
Hospital -3%
Rental House/Apartment (no subsidy) • 3%
Psychiatric Hospital or Facility • 2%
Substance Abuse Treatment Center • 29b
Safe Haven I 1%
Transitional Housing for Homeless I 1%
Jail, Prison or Juvenile Facility I 1%
Residential Project or Halfway house with no homeless I 1% criteria
Permanent Housing for Formerly Homeless 0%
Long-term care Facility or Nursing home 0%
Owned by Client (no subsidy) 0%
Bo, 10
11%
10%
15%
OKI/Missing I 1% I
I
1 PcrccmagL·~ may .idd t1p to be.: gn:alcr th:111 l1J0'1·~J pcrc<.;;nt due to rnun<ling. I
Rcsponsl" Gllc.:goric:~ Cl.icnt Duc~n't i(now/Clicnt Refu~cd/i•.,.[i:;sing were cnll:1psed inrn nne cat egory, "l)K.ll/!\·fo;sing:·.
i '
36%
Of adult clients provirung information about L11eir zip code of last permanent residqnce (90 days or longer),
approximately two out of three (68%) reported living within Northern San Diego CounLT, prin1arily in
Oceanside (29°/o), Escondido (20%), Vista (6%), Carlsbad (5%), Encinitas (5%), San i'viarcos (2%), Del l\Iar
(<1%), and Poway (<1%) (Graph 21). Approximately one out of five (22%) adults reported their last
permanent residence in central San Diego. The vast majority (93%) of all adult clients r4portccl their location of
last permanent residence as being within the state of California. I
2015-2016 ARS Nm·th County Winter Shelter Report
' 1
lllPag e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 21 of 53
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
I i i
Graph 21 I
Zip Code of Last Permanent Residence, Sheltered Adult Clien 's, .---~~~~~~~--.
68% from North
Coastal or Inland and
22% from Central
91% From
San Diego County
93% From
California
<1% <1% <1% <1% <1%
> ~ .l9 0 .... "' -0 "' ;;; <IJ "' ~ 5 re
0 :?: C: a. re 0 ai re "3 0 0 --' _,: u u
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
<1% 1%
_,: .... u C re a <IJ E c:i ~ "' "rti ·;: u (!)
C.
.§
(n=459 adults)•.2,.1
1% 1% -C: C: 0 ;;; "c,' a u c ;:;:; ;;; 0 0
2%
•
"' a ~ re ~
C re Vl
2% • <( u
C
£ '3:
'5 .D > 'i: ::, a u
0 Vl
<IJ ""O
i? ::,
5% 5%
2% I I • <( -0 "' u "' 19
<IJ -5l ·2 ""O -;:: ·u
".Ei re C u UJ ::, a .... -(!) _,:
0
; 20%
6%
I
.l9 a ao "' 5 <IJ i5
C re Vl
I l'crccnt:J.gcs may add up to be greater thnn trnr"o percent due to rounding. O I
29%
20%
5%
I
a <IJ ao
-0 -0 C: 'c ·.;; -~ C C re ~ a (!) ~ u -.... u., 0 cc "' 0
Response carcgoocs Client Doesn't Know/U,ent Refuscd/1\!issing \\ere collapsed into one category, "DKR/i\!issing''.
Not 1,=phcd arc f'allbrook, Rancho Bernardo, Spring Valley, San Ysidro, :\]pine, Bonsall, Cardiff, Dulzura, l-~kesidc, ~ational City, l'awna \'alley, and
Warner Springs, which all had zero percent. I
C. Income, Non-Cash Benefits, and Employment Situation
Information regarding whether or not income and/ or non-cash benefits had been received was recorded for
adult clients served. Forty-six percent (46%) of adult clients reported having at least one :source of income, and
54% said they did not have any source of income (Graph 22). Forty-five percent (45%) qf adult clienrs reported
that they were receiving non-cash benefits, while 53% responded they were not (Graph 23). Clients with income
most conunonly reported earned income (48%), SSI (35%), or SSDI (21 %) (Graph 24). }\mong clients' receiving
non-cash benefits, 99% indicated receiving SNAP (food stamps). Clients could report m~re than one source of
income or non-cash benefit (Appencfo:: A, Table 12). j
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 12 I P a g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 22 of 53
Graph 22
Income Source In Past 30 Days,
at First Entry Adult Sheltered Clients,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=459 adults)1,2
Graph 23
Currently Receiving No1-cash Benefits,
at First Entry Adult Sheltered Clients,
2015-2016 North San Diegb Winter Shelters
(n=459}11
60% 54% 46% 100% !
40% 50%
53% 45%
20% I I 1% II ' 2%
0% 0%
No Yes ORK/Missing No DKR/Missing
1 Response cucgoric.s (:Jicnt I )ucsn't Know /Client Refused/ i\l.issing were
cnlbpscd inro one c:ucgory, "l)KR/i\fo;.sing,,.
1 Response c:ucgoric.::s Client l)nc:-:n't Kn w /Cljcnt RcfuscJ/Mis:;ing were
collapsed into one c1tcg<1ry, Hl)f-.:H/P.ti.~ing".
Pcrcc.ntngcs may a<l<l up w be more tlrn.n 1 oou'o <luc w rounding.
50% 48%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
QJ
E 0 u C
-0 QJ E re UJ
35%
21%
I
vi a V) V) V)
Graph 24
Income Sources at First Entry for Adult Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=208 adults receiving income)1,z,3
13% 12%
I I 9%
I 6% 6% 6% 5% 4%
I I I I I
<1J <1J ?; u.. :;; -<1J C -0 z L -0 0 2 u E ·.: 0 u C 0 :;; <( .c a. C 2 :;:; u 2 u u t-0 a. ~ u ~ <1J C "' C <1J ::, ::, <1J C C 0 ·.;; -V) V) "' § (lJ C ·.;;
~ --32 .E a. 0 C C "' 0 u E ·g :.c .., u E QJ
ro u C: 0 QJ Cl. "' .:! ?; .; ~ V) QJ u u
C E E -~ ~ C: ::: ·.::; > <1J ·-Cl) QJ 0 0 Cl) V) .D l9 c::: .;: a. V) :0 ' "' <( "' C .~ E oa > "' Cl) i:5 z
C <( :) >
1 l'crccntagc of disabled :1dul1s reporting c:1cl1 income source.
Pcrccnr:igcs may :1dd up rn be..· grcatL·r than 10l1''o as clients cnukl n.:port mon: th:m one 5ourcc of incrnnc.
' \v'orkcr'~ Comp~ns.ation is nnt -grapht:d bi.:cau~e it is zero rcrccnt.
4% I 2% I <1% • -<1J :;; t C
CJ .D u .c 0 C 0 E o ro 6: !:> ·:-~ L ::, .:;. a, 0 VI
(lJ .c .E >-c::: 0 C :J:
ci C t 0 ::, ro :0 E 0
C E < a. 0 ~ VI ·.;; ,g C i:5 Cl) 2 Cl. ro > ·.:
Cl.
This year, rhe amount of income received from various income sources ,vas recorded by sraff.
r\mong the 208 adults reporting receiving income within the dare of inquiry, income amounts ranged
from a minimwn of S2.00 ro a maximum of S2,258 from all sources (Table 2, footnote 1). The median
value was $147 and the average across clients receiving income was $218.
<1%
"' <1J till ro 3 ..,
C
<1J E > 0 a. E UJ ..... ai V)
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 13 I P a g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 23 of 53
Table 2. Income Amount of Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016 North San Dieg~ \Vinter
Shelters (n=208 adults ·with income amounts reported) I 1
Summary oflncome Amounts Reported
Minimum Maximum Median j Average
$2.00 $2,258 $147 l $218
1 Income amounts from all sources totak-d for each client. I
Only eighteen percent (18%) of adult clients reported current employment during the season
(Graph 25). Of those, 41 % reported having permanent work, while 24% were ternporart or seasonal
workers (Appendi.-.;: r\, Table 14). Of the unemployed clients, three-fifths (61%) reported that they were
looking for work (Graph 26). I
Yes
18%
Graph 25
Current Employment Status
of Adult Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=459)1
DKR/
Missing
4% No
1 lksponsc c.1ttgorics Client Doesn't Know/Client llcfus~cl/i\Jissing were
colbpscd into one c3lcgory, "DKR/l\lissing''.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
I Graph 2~
"Looking for Work?"
Unemployed Adult Cli~nts Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diegp Winter Shelters
(n=356)L2
DKR/
Missing
12%
No
27%
1 'l'ot:11 number of clients reporting other ban being currently employed.
Response categories Client Doesn't Kndw /Client Refused/Missing were
collapsed into one category, "DKR/llfisring".
I
14 JP age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 24 of 53
D. Primary Reason for Homelessness
Among the adult clients served in the North County Winter Shelters during the 2015-2016 season, the
most often cited primary reasons for homelessness were inability to pay rent/rnortgage and family issues, which
each represented 14% of adult clients (Graph 27). The third and fourth most commonly reported reasons were
unemployment 0oss of job) and underemployment/low income for a combined 23%. ,\ddiction, other, and no
affordable housing were the next most co1nmon reasons, at 5°/o each.
l
Graph 27
Primary Reason for Homelessness of Adult Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=4S9 adults)1
Unable to Pay Rent/Mortgage
Family Issues
Unemployment (loss of job)
Underemployment/low income 10%
Addiction 5%
Other 5%
No Affordable Housing 5%
Domestic Violence Victim 4%
Moved to Seek Work (or new to area) 3%
Mental Health 3%
Medical Condition 3%
Evicted 3%
Substance Abuse 2%
Divorce 2%
Jail/Prison (Release from Institution) 2%
Physical/Mental Disabilities -1%
Health/Safety -1%
Personal Choice -1%
Loss of Public Assistance -1%
Family/Personal Illness -1%
Unknown -1%
Not Applicable -<1%
Mortgage Foreclosure • <1%
Substandard Housing • <1%
Natural Disaster • <1%
Loss of Child Ca re • <1%
Criminal Activity • <1%
Missing 5%
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Percentages m,1y add up to bi.: !cs:-or greater than l(kl') u du.: IO rounding.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
14%
14%
13%
12% 14% 16%
15 IP a ge
Item #5 October 25, 2016 25 of 53
I
I
In order to better understand the population being served by North County ,,.,-inter kheltcrs, several
responses were collapsed into a pro::,.--y describing an 'economic reason' for homelessnes~. These responses
included: 1111empl0)!/llml (los.r ofjob), 1111den111ploy111eut/ low i11come, 1111ab/e to pqy rmt/ mortgage, 1w fffordahle bomi11g,
mortgage foredo.r11re, evicled, or loss of p11blic assistance. Fortyasi.x percent ( 46%) of the adults who reported a known
primary reason for homelessness cited an economic reason (Graph 28). This is a decreise from the prior
season which reported 58% as an economic reason for homelessness (Alliance for Regi6na1 Solutions, July
2015). I
\'\'hen comparing adults sheltered without children to adults sheltered as part of a fimi.ly with children,
those with children cited an economic reason for homelessness much less frequently thi n the adults without
children (28% versus 48% respectively) (Graph 29). I
Graph 28
Economic Reason for Homelessness, 1
Adult Clients Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=459 adults with information)
No
49%"'
""
Yes
,46%
5%
1 Se1..· lhl' iir:-t p:irngraph rm rhi:,; page fnr 'Economic Rca:,;rin' re-gpnn:-c
cri1crla.
60%
40%
20%
0%
I Graph 29
Economic Reason for H?melessness1 by
Household liype,
Adult Clients Sh~ltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=406 adults in adult-ohly households2, 1 n=53 adults in househol1s with children3)
48%
I
Single or in adult-only
Household ' j
28% • In household with
children
1 Ste the ftr:::t par~onph on thi:-page for Economic Rc.1son' rc:,"[)On:-c
critcriJ..
Total :mt.I percentage of adults with information at entry '""irh at least
nnt.: child' \·crsus withour :u:companyin~ child(rcn); children are~ 17
years of age; missing/nut recorded inf~rmarion and responses of
"Unknown" rca.son for homelessness were cxcluc.kd from the total.
1 ,\duhs in households with children inc!Ldcs households with at IL-ast
one adult(> 18 years of "!,'C) and one c~ild (< ·17 years of age)
l
Of the 45 sheltered families witl1 children, the proportion citing an economic reasop for homelessness
varied by family-type, from 26% among the single-mother households to 70% of two-parent households, and
none of the single-father households (Graph 30).
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Graph 30
Economic Reason for Homelessness' by Household Type,
Families with Children Sheltered,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=45)1
70%
26% -Two Adults Single Mother
1 Set: the firsr paragraph in this page fur 'Econornic Rc:1Sun' rcspon!'c crit~ri.:1.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 16 IP age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 26 of 53
It should be noted that persons are often homeless for a variety of reasons and maf or may not state the
most underlying or meaningful reason for their homelessness. For instance, a person s4ffering from a major
mental illness may indicate 'unemployment' as the reason for their homelessness when the real issue may be an
inability to get treaunent for their mental health or an inability to maintain regular emplq,yment due to their
mental illness.
E. Reason for Leaving the Shelter and Destination
Upon preparing to leave the winter shelter, reasons for ending the shelter stay were noted by case
managers (Graph 31 ). The mos r frequently reported response was that clients left for anotl1er housing
opporruniry (32%) and the next rwo conunon reasons for leaving the shelter were tl1at clients completed the
program (22%) and reached maximum time allowed (11 %). Nine percent (9%) of a client's reason for leaving
was unknown because tl1e client disappeared and did not reappear for services. A combiped 11 % ,vere either
non-compliant with program rules or disagreed with rules or persons.
35% 32%
30%
25% 22%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
ci. Ol) C. C: 0 '.Z co CJ
·" 'E. E "' E ro 5 0 to ..c: u 0
2 CJ Q. 0
ct::~
CJ .D ...J
Graph 31
Reason for Leaving at Last Exit1, Sheltered Clients,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=538 clients)'
i i
E :, u E CJ ·x 3
"' 0 E= ro
" CJ 1 E ~ oz:;
QI a::
7%
I
CJ ~ E
-~ E 0. Ol) E e 0 C. u ..c: g ·j
z
4% 4%
I •
1 lka:,;on for le~wing at hHt l'Sit from North County \Vinl'l'r Shdrcrs.
1\:.rct.:ruagc::; may add up 10 or gre~tel" th:m 100'1·;1 dut: to rnunding.
2% • " --CJ :, r 0 C: u Q) -l:'l .D
Q/ -Cl) 0 z C:
9%
<1% I
It should be noted that staff were instrncted to select 'Completed Program' when ilie client met d1e self-
sufficiency benclunarks of having earned income, and safe, stable housing. Therefore, 'left for housing
opportunity before completing the program' was selected for clients who transferred to Jnotber housing
program (e.g., Emergency Shelter, Transitional Housing, or anotl1er housing siruation) ,,.,j.thout meeting d1e
program's self-sufficiency definition.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 171 Page
Item #5 October 25, 2016 27 of 53
As reported, a combined 11 11') stated they did not know where they were going to g~ after leaving the
winter shelter, or they knew bur did not report this information to the case managers (Graph 32). The rest of
the clients had some type of destination, most often another emergency shelter (24%), J place not meant for
human habirntion (e.g. car, outdoors) (14%), or a rental (without subsidy) (13%). Fi,,e percent (5%) were going
to stay ,vith family on a temporary basis and five percent (5%) had no exit interview co~1pleted. Io total,
twenty-one percent (2 1 %) of clients specified a permanent destination: a rental with no\1 subsidy, staying with
family permanently, a rental with subsidy, staying with friends permanently, permanent ;1ousing for former:ly
homes persons, an owned home witl1 no subsidy, or rental by client ,vith VASH subsidf,).
Graph 32
Destination After Leaving Shelter1,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
{n=538 clients)2•3
Emergency shelter
Place not meant for habitation
Rental by client, no ongoing housing subsidy
Other 9%
Staying or living with family, temporary tenure 5%
No exit interview completed 5%
Staying or living with friends, temporary tenure -4%
Hotel/Motel, no emergency shelter voucher -3%
Staying or living with family, permanent tenure -3%
Rental by client, with other ongoing housing subsidy -3%
Transitional housing for homeless persons -2%
Substance abuse treatment facility or detox center • 1%
Residential project or halfway house with no homeless ... • 1%
Staying or living with friends, permanent tenure • 1%
Hospital or other residential non-psychiatric medical... I 1%
Permanent housing for formerly homeless persons
Psychiatric hospital or other psychiatric facility <1%
Safe Haven <1%
Owned by client, with ongoing housing subsidy <1%
Long-term care facility or nursing home <1%
Rental by client, with VASH subsidy <1%
14%
13%
DKR/Missing 11%
0% 5% 10%
1 Destination upon b~t t:Xit from North County \X1intl'r Shcltt·rs.
Response ca.rq;orics Clic:nt Doc..:~n1t Knnw/Clic..:nt Refused wc..:n: coll:tp~t.:d into one C3tegory.
1 Pcrccn[:1gcs may n<ld up w bt: gn::ncr rh:m 1l)tt1;) Jue to roUnJing.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
15%
i
24%
20% i 25% 30%
181Page
Item #5 October 25, 2016 28 of 53
I A closer look at the destination of clients infamilies 1vith childre11 shows 41 % reporteq permanent destinations, going
into rental housing (w-ith or without subsidy), and staying with family permanently (Graph 33). Thirty-five (35%) of
clients left for a rental by tl1e client with or witl1out a subsidy. Although the exact influence is unknown, it is hoped
that the shelter staff helped link most clients, especially households with children, to a safe place to stay.
Graph 33
Destination Upon Leaving Shelter\
Clients Sheltered as Part of a Family with Children,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=130 clients) 1
Rental by client, no ongoing housing subsidy
Place not meant for habitation
Staying or living with friends, temporary tenure
Emergency shelter 7%
Rental by client, with other ongoing housing subsidy 7%
Staying or living with family, permanent tenure 6%
Staying or living with family, temporary tenure S%
Residential project 4%
No exit interview completed 4%
Hotel or motel paid for without emergency shelter -2%
Substance abuse treatment facility -2%
Other -2%
Client doesnt know -3%
0% 5%
1 Dest.in:u.inn upon bsr cxir from North County \'Vimcr Shdtt.:rs.
11%
10%
19%
20% 25%
Upon exiting their stay in the North County \'vinter Shelter, based on the housing status, 56% of clients
were still homeless while 25% were stably housed (Graph 34). \'vhile many clients exite9 to housing sihiations,
it is apparent that winter shelters alone are not enough to end homelessness for many ~dividuals.
Graph 34
'Housing Status'1 at Last Exit of Clients Sheltered2,
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=538)3•4
Category 1 -Homeless
Stably housed 25%
At-risk of homelessness -5%
Category 3 -Homeless only under other federal statutes -3%
Category 2 -At imminent risk of losing housing 1 1%
Category 4 -Fleeing domestic violence <1%
DKR/Missing 11%
0% 10%
1 "l-fousing St:uu:-' :-t:: rccordcc..I by project ~r:::iff.
'I lousing St:uus· upon b:-t exit from Nnrch County \\/inter Shelter~.
20% 30%
I
40%
~~s~on~c ~:l~l·w,:rics (]iL·nt Doesn't KnowjC!ir.:nr Rcfuscd/D~ra not Colkctl'0/:\Iissing were colbpscd to om: category,
DKH/Mis,mg .
" Pcrccnt:.1gc:; nl:1y ;1JJ up tv be greater than 100"" Jue to rounding.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
56%
50% 60%
19ll'a gc
28%
30%
Item #5 October 25, 2016 29 of 53
F. 2014-2015 Returning Clients
To get a more complete view of those being served by North San Diego \'(linter Sh lters, tl1e list of clients
receiving shelter service during the 2015-2016 season was compared to that from the pr~vious 2014-2015
season. In all; 9% of this season's 538 clients were also served during the prior 2014-20;15 season, 44 adults and
2 children (.Appendix B, Table 27). i
Sevenry-two percent (72%) of returning clients were male (Graph 35) and close to 1\alf were over the age of
50 (47%). Four percent (4%) of returning clients were children (Graph 37). ,\mong tl1eladu!ts, 9% identified as
military veterans (Graph 36). 1
I Graph 35 Graph 3fi
Gender of Returning Clients Sheltered, 2014-
2015 & 2015-2016
Military History of Returriing Adult Clients1
I Sheltered, 2014-2015:& 2015-2016
North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=46 clients)1
North San Diego Wi~ter Shelters
(n=46 adul~s)
Female ".
28%
Male
72%
Yes
91%
1 Clitnr:; with shl·ltt:r s~y(s) during the 2014-2015 St;a:,on n.:turning for
shelter stay(s) during the 2015-2016 season.
1 Clients with shcltcrstay(,) during the 21114-2015 season returning for
shclt~r stav(s' durin~ the 2015-2016 scafon. . , ., I
40%
3590
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
4%
5% • 0%
0%
Graph 37
Age Group1 of Returning Clients2 Sheltered,
2014-2015 & 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=46 clients)
35%
30%
7% 7%
II II
I
!
j
< 1 Year 1-17 Years 18-30 Years 31-40 Years 41-50 Years 51-60 Years 61-70 Years
' /\gc at first program entry Juring the 2015-21ll(, shelter season. I
Clients with shelter s1ay(s) during the 2014-2015 season returning for sheller stay(,) Juring the 2015-2016 shelter scas<r
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
I I I
4% • 71 + Years
20 IP a g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 30 of 53
There is a seventeen percent (17%) increase of clients who had a disabling condition in 201 5-2016 season
compared to the 2014-2015 season (63% versus 46% res pectively) (Graph 38). !\fore th~n 75% of these clients
\Vere identified as being chronical1y homeless in the 2015-2016 season compared to the 2014-2015 season (76%
versus 28% respectively) (Graph 39).
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
46%
Graph 38
Disabilty by Season,
Returning Clients Sheltered
2014-2015 & 2015-2016
North San Diego WinterShelters
(n=46 clients)1·2
63%
2014-2015 Shelter Season 2015-2016 Shelter Season
1 AJuhs with shelter sray(s) during the 21) 14-2015 season returning rnr shelter stny(s) during the
2015-2016 scasnn.
Porry-si.~ percent of tht..: rcturncr5 n.:poricd h~wing :1 Jis-abling conJitic ,n bst ye:i.r. while sL\'.ty-
threc percent rcportcJ h:ffing a. disabling condition rhis year.
80%
60%
40%
20%
Do, 70
Graph 39
Chronic Homelessness by Season,
Returning Clients Sheltered
2014-2015 & 2015-2016
North San Diego WinterShelters
(n=46 clients)1•2•3•4
28% -
76%
2014-2015 Shelter Season 7.015-2016 Shelter Season
1 Adulrs with shelter stoy(s) during the 2014-2015 season returning for shclrcr stay(s) c.luring the
20 I 5-2tl 16 ;season. I HUD Chrunic I !omdcssncss Definition: an indiYidu,11 (1) "·ith a Jisabling condition or c,pcc1eJ Hi be or
long-continued :m<l im.lcfinitc duration an<l sub.:-tanti:1Jly imp:'..ll".5 :lbility w lin: inJcpL:ndcntly of pf1ysical
disability. dc,·elopmcnt,I disability. chronic hc,lrh condition, Ill\'/ ,\IDS, mental health prc?b!cm,
substance abuse, and (2) who enter from srrccts, emergency :;helter or safe h:-l\'cn, and (3) ha~ been
continuously homdt.:ss for a ~Tar or more, or has haJ nt k-a.··-t four episode~ of homdcs:,;ness in the past
three yc:trs. OR (·I) a houschnld mcmbsr of a head of houschn!d (who m,y be a chilJ) or any aJu!t in the
housclmlJ n1ci.;ting 1hc pre,·ious di:;ability & homdessm.:ss criteria outlined in 1, 2 :1ml .'t (Hi\flS Sdncbrd
Rcponing Terminology Glos-sary, October 2015. \"1:rsion 2.2).
"i\vcnty-eight percent (28° U) of rhc n.:1urners were chronically homch.::,;s lasr yc:i.r, whik: 7611 o of
the rt·1urncrs classified :1s chronically lmnu:lcs:; this year.
2015-2016 J\RS North County Winter Shelter Report 2lj Page
Item #5 October 25, 2016 31 of 53
f
A revie\v of the primary reason for homelessness among returning clients showed ,!ery little variation
between reasons cited upon entry in 2014-2015 compared to entry in 2015-2016 (GrapH 40). Most clients in
the 2014-2015 season and 2015-2016 season cited the primary reason for homelessness 1as the inability to pay
rent or mortgage (24% and 28% respectively). The top three primary reasons for hornelbssness in both seasons
for returners was inability to pay rent/mortgage, unemployment, and underemployment/low income. Two
percent (2%) cited eviction and physical/mental disabilities as the primary reason, comJ ared to none in the last
season. Four percent (4%) cited family issues and divorce as the primary reason, compa~ed to 2% last season.
Graph 40
Primary Reason for Homelessness by Season,
Returning Adult Clients1 Sheltered,
2014-2015 & 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=44 Adult Clients p.2.3
Physical/Mental Disabilities .,.. 2%
Jail/Prison (Release from Institution} -~~
Additiction 4% 7%
Evicted 'To 2%
Domestic Violence -'li. 2%
Medical Condition E 0% 7%
Mental Health 2% 7%
No Affordable Housing m 2% 4%
Moved to seek work (or new to area} .A 2%
Natural Disaster To 2%
Personal choice ~ 2%
Family/Personal Illness .A 2%
Divorce 4%
Substance Abuse -~~
Family Issues 2% 4%
Under-employment {Low Income) ... -,.. -,-_ -,r--.r__ ---... --~ ----
Unemployment (loss of Job}
Unable to Pay Rent/Mortgage
0% 5% 10% 15%
• 2015-2016 • 2014-2015
20%
I i I I i
I 22%
I
' i\Jult clients with ,helter sray(s) Juring the 2014-2015 season returning for shelter ,tay(s) during the 2015-201(, season\
.P.crcc1~ragcs m3Jr add up to be grca:cr th~n or lcs: than 100°-'U Jue _10 rounding. . . j
I he lhffcrcnc~ 111 the number of client~ 111 graph .>9 and gr.1ph 40 1:--because rwo ch1l<lrcn arc nut counted m graph 40.!
f i
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
24%
28%
25% 30%
22 IP a g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 32 of 53
' I
I i
There was variation in responses for destination after exiting the shelter (Graph 41 r The same percentage
of the returning clients (35%) this season and lasr season exited to a place nor meant for human habiration.
Twenty percent (20%) of the returned clients exited to live in emergency shelter last season and 9% in this
season. Nine percent (9%) of the clients who returned this year exited to live with friends (permanent tenure)
last season, however, none exited to that destination this season. Four percent (4%) mote clients ex.ired to a
rental without a subsidy this year compared to last year (13% and 9%, respectively). !
Graph 41
Destination Upon Leaving Shelter by Season, Returning Clients1 Sheltere~,
2014-2015 & 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=46 clients)2
Permanent Housing 9lt1o 2%
Rental by client, with other ongoing housing subsidy 8~
Staying or living with family, permanent tenure ..,lo 4%
Staying or living with friends, permanent tenure 0%
Safe Haven ,JJ;~ 2%
Hospital (non psychiatric) ,,f(o 2%
Psychiatric Hospital/Facility 8~
Hotel/Motel Without Emergency Voucher
Substance abuse treatment facility or detox center 8~
Staying with Friends, temporarily Ii 7%
Transistional Housing for Homeless • ~~
Staying with Family, temporarily • ~~
7a, /0
9%
Rental by Client {No Subsidy) 13%
Emergency Shelter 20%
Places Not Meant for Habitation ~~~
No exit interview completed -j~
Client Doesn't Know/Missing 15%
Other 9%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
• 2015-2016 • 2014-2015
' I
i
25%!
1 Clicnrs with shelter sray(s) during th:; 201-i-2015 season n.:tun1ing ror .:;helter st:iy(s) during the.! 2tJl5<!01(> season.
Dc:H.inatlnn upon b::a exit from Nonh <:oumy \Vinrer Shclra:-.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
30% 35% 40%
23 JP age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 33 of 53
Summary
The North San Diego ARS Winter Shelters provided shelter service to 538 unique dividuals during the
2015-2016 winter shelter season, most of whom also reported that their most recent p ent residence was
in the North San Diego County area. Shelter recipients were more often white than an other race, more often
male, more often non-Hispanic, and more often not part of a family. The most comm nly sheltered age group
was 51-60 years, with almost three out of every eight clients being 51 years or older. M y clients reported
having at least one disabling condition, such as mental illness, physical disability, or ale ol and/ or drug abuse
among others. In addition, nearly half of the women reported being a domestic violen victim/ survivor. An
inability to pay rent/mortgage, family issues, and underemployment ranked highly as a t clients' primary
reasons for homelessness.
Most of the sheltered clients reported leaving the program for housing or another pportunity that
included housing (such as emergency shelter or transitional housing), even if temporary in nature. Given that
these winter shelters are emergency in nature with limited periods of operation, and oft serve clients for very
short times, these results show that two out of five (40%) of the clients exit with a plan d have accomplished
some goals that may help prevent homelessness in the future.
The large majority of clients (91 %) served in the 2015-2016 season had not beens ed at a North San
Diego ARS Winter Shelter the prior year, and almost three-quarters of the adults (76%) are not chronically
homeless. This suggests that the winter shelters and associated services meet an impo t need -assisting the
newly homeless, not just the long term, repeat homeless client. Similarly, this finding o implies that the
persons who needed these shelters in the previous year were either not in the area, or d not need the service
in the current year. Among the 9% of clients served in the 2015-2016 season that has een sheltered the
previous year in the North San Diego ARS Winter shelter system, clients were most oft n male, adult, and not
part of a family. One-half of returning clients were over the age of 50. Returning client were more likely to
have been identified as chronically homeless persons in the second season compared to the prior year. Further
research such as tracking clients after exit would be necessary to correctly analyze pot · trends over time.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 241 Page
Item #5 October 25, 2016 34 of 53
References
National Alliance to End Homelessness, "Chronic Homelessness Brief' (March 2007),
http://www.endhomelessness.org/content/article I detail/ 1060 accessed 5-2-09.
US Department of Housing and Urban Development, "HMIS Standard Reporting T rminology Glossary"
(October 2015), version 2.2.
Alliance for Regional Solutions, "Services Provided to the Homeless in North County inter Shelters 2013-
2014", Guly 2014).
US Department of Housing and Urban Development, "2014 HMIS Data Standards D 'A MANUAL"
(September 2015), version 3.1.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 251 P a g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 35 of 53
Appendix A-Data Tables
A. 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelter Clients
Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016 North S~ Diego Winter
Shelters (n=538 clients) ··
Demographic Characteristic
Gender
Male
Female
Transgender male to female
Primary Race
White
Black/ African American
American Indian/ Alaskan Native
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
Asian
Don't Know/Refused
Miss in
Ethnicity
Non-Hispanic/Latino
Hispanic/Latino
Don't Know /Refused
rvlissin
Age Group
< 1 Year
1 -17 Years
18-30 Years
31-40 Years
41-50 Years
51 -60 Years
61-70Years
71 +Years
Don't Know /Refused
Mis sin
Age -Adult versus Child
Adult (18+ years)
Child (1-17 years)
Don't Know /Refused
Not Recorded
Entered with Family2
No
Yes
Total
1 Perccnt:1gcs may add up to be icss than or greater than 100° 0 due to rounding.
1 Family is defined as two or more person$ cntl!ting the shelter together.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
Number
167
370
1
402
89
26
8
6
3
4
373
152
9
4
2
77
84
79
106
128
44
18
0
0
459
79
0
0
399
139
538
1;'ercent1
' j 31%
; 69%
i<1%
j 15%
. 17%
5'%
1%
1%
1%
1%
169% ' i 28%
2%
1%
I <1%
14%
16%
15%
20%
24%
8%
3%
85%
15%
74%
26%
26 IP <1 g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 36 of 53
Table 2. Characteristics of Families with Children Sheltered, 2015-2016 North S~n Diego Winter
Shelters (n=45 families) 1
Head of Household
Single Mother2
Two r\dults3
Single Father
Family Size
TotaF
2 people
3 people
4 people
5 people
6 people
8 eo le
1 f-runily is <lcfinl'.d :1:-. rwo or more person:-r.;Jllcring th,: shdtcr together.
One adult frmok per household with chikl(rcn).
3 One adult rcmalc and one adult male per household with cb.ild(rcn).
' One aduh male per hou,ehoid with child(rcn).
Number
31
10
4
Number
19
12
6
7
1
45
I
Percent2
69%
22%
9%
Percent
42%
27%
13%
16%
2%
Table 3. Marital Status of Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=459 adults) I
Family Size Number Percent
Married 33 7%
Co-Habitating 7 2%
Widowed 19 4%
Separated -43 9%
Divorced 100 22%
Single 236 51 %
Client doesn't know /Client refused/1'Iissing 21 5%
Total 459
I
l
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 271 Pa g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 37 of 53
Table 4. Demographic Characteristics of Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016 N;orth San Diego
Winter Shelters (n=459 adults) j
Demographic Characteristic Number
Chronically Homeless2
No 333
126
0
0
Yes
Client doesn't know /Client refused
Miss in
Military V cteran
No 393
59
3
Yes
Client doesn't know/Client refused
lvfissin 4
Domestic Violence Victim/Survivor
~ 3~
Yes 89
Client doesn't know/Client refused 14
l'vfissin 1
If Female, Domestic Violence Victim/Survivor (n=133 adult females)
No 71
Yes 62
Client doesn't know/ Client refused 0
l'vfissin 0
If Male, Domestic Violence Victim/Survivor (n=326 adult males)
No 285
Yes 26
Client doesn't know /Client refused 12
J'vfissing 3
If Female, Pregnant? (n=133 adult females)
No 119
~s 4
Client doesn't know/ Client refused 1
!vfissin 9
Disabled (Has a Disabling Condition)
Total
No 244
Yes
Client doesn't know/ Client refused
l\lissing
210
1
4
459
: Percent1
73%
27%
86%
13%
<1%
< 1'%
77%
19%
3%
< 1%
53%
47%
87%
8%
4%
1%
89%
3%
1%,
7%
53%
46%
<1%
1 o;;>
1 Pcrccntngc!\ m::iy ~H.h.i up t(, be less than or greater than l Oft o due to .rounding. :
HUD Chronic l lomdcssness Definition: an imli\'idual (1) with a disabling con,lition or expected to be of long---<:ont1nued and imldinite
duration and substantially impairs ability to live independently of physical disobility, Jcyclopmental disability, clmm!c health condition,
HIV/ AIDS, mental health problem, substance abuse, and (2) who enter from streets, cmc'rgency shelter or sate h,wqn, and (3) has been
continuously homeless for a year or more, or has had at least four episodes of homelessness in the past three years, 4)R (4) a household
member of a head ofhou:schold (who may be a chikl) or any adult in the household meeting the pre,·ious disability</< homelessness
criteria outlined in 1, 2 amJ 3. (Hi\lIS Standard Reporting Terminology Glossary, October 2015, V crsion 2.2). i
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 28 IP age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 38 of 53
i
Table 5. Disability Type of Disabled Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter
Shelters (n=210 adults with a disabling condition) 1 I
Disability Type Entered Number Percent2
Mental Health Problem 117 56%
Physical 117 56%
Chronic Health Condition 96 46%
Both Alcohol and Drng Abuse 37 18%
Drug Abuse 35 17%
Alcohol Abuse 34 16%
Developmental Disability 26 12%
HIV/ 1\IDS 3 1%
Other < 1%
TotaP 466
1 Total unJuplicatcJ pcrwns who responded 'YES' they had a disabling condition. ,
Perccm:1gc rc~pon<ling to L;.1Ch dis:ibiliry type among rho:;c who rcsponJi.:J. I 3 Tota.I number is grc.:ttcr thJn the number of :1<lult·5 wirh :1 disabling cnnJition (n=2Hl) bec:iu~L'. clients could chose rnofi.: th:m one disabiliry 1ypc.
Table 6. Number of Disability Types Recorded for Disabled Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016
North San Diego Winter Shelters (n=210 adults with a disabling cond{tion) I
Number of Disability Types per Client Number I Percent2
One Type
Two Types
Three Types
Four Types
Five Types
Six Types
Seven Types
Total1
73
66
39
22
5
4
1
210
1 Total uncluplicatcd persons who responded 'YES' they had a clisabling c<>ndition and spccificcl at lcas1 one disability tfpc.
Pcrcl'ntagcs m:iy or mny not add up robe I ll{Yrn due 10 rounJing. !
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
35%
31 %
19%
10%
2%
2%
< 1%
29 IP n g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 39 of 53
Table 7. Highest Education Level Attained by Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016 North San
Diego Winter Shelters (n=459 adults)
Education Level Number
Master's Degree or higher 16
Bachelor's Degree 22
College Degree 8
Associate's Degree 26
Some College 121
Post-secondary school 5
Some vocation/trade school 3
Vocational/Trade school graduate 5
Technical school certification 13
High School Diploma 75
GED 41
12th grade, No diploma 37
11th grade 21
10th grade 14
9th grade 5
7th grade or 8th grade 6
5th grade or 6th grade 7
Nursery school to 4th grade 5
Other 4
No school completed
Client doesn't know/ Client refused 3
Miss in 21
Total1 408
Percent
3%
5%
2%
5%
26%
1%
<1%
1%
3%
16%
9%
8%
5%
3%
1%
1%
1%
<1%
<1%
< 1%
1%
6%
Collapsed
Percent2
7%
33%
16%
9%
13%
4%
1%
1%
< 1%
1 Total number may not add up to total number of adults (n=:459) and total percentage may or may not add up to I00"1j due to clients
having two or more project entries and the response category differed bcP.vccn project entries. ,
Percentages may add up to be lc:;;s than or greatt•r than 1 oon.'.-, due to rnunJing.
Table 8. Income Received as ofDate of First Entry of Adult Clients Sheltered, iolS-2016 North San
Diego Winter Shelters (n=459 adults)
Income Received Number Pcrcent2
No 246 54%
Yes 208 45%
Client doesn't know/Client refused 3 < 1%
tviissin 2 <1%
Total 459
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 30 IP age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 40 of 53
I Table 9. Income Source Received as of Date of First Entry of Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016
North San Diego Winter Shelters (n=208 adults receiving income fro~ any source)
Income Type Entered Number Percent
Earned Income 99 48%
SSI 73 35%
SSDI 43 21 %
G eneral Assistance 26 13%
Retirement Income from Social Security 24 12%
TANF 19 9%
Other 13 6%
Child support 13 6%
Unemployment 12 6%
VA Service Connected Disability Compensation 10 5%
VA Non-Service Connected Disability Pension 9 4%
Pension or Retirement from another job 8 4%
Private Disability Insurance 4 2%
Alimony or Other Spousal Support Insurance 1 <1 %
Self-employment wages 1 <1 %
TotaP 419
1 Total number sums to greater than the number of :idults answering (n=208) and wwl pcrccnr sums to grc:.ucr tlun 1(10 because clients cnuld choose
more than one income source. .
I
Table 10. Income Amount of Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016 North San Diegb Winter Shelters
(n=208 adults with income amounts reported) 1 I
Summary of Income Amounts Reported
Minimum Ma.ximum Median Average
$2.00 $2,258 $147 $218
1 Income amounts from all sourcc:-lotalcd.
Table 11. Non-Cash Benefit Received as of Date of First Entry of Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016
North San Diego Winter Shelters (n=459 adults) · I
I
Non Cash Benefit Received Number ! Percent1
No
Yes
Client doesn't know /Client refused
Miss in
Total
1 Pcrcemagrs m:!y or mny nor add up w be 1()()41 fl due ro rounding.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
245
208
3
3
459
53%
45%
1%
1%
31 I P ;i g c
Item #5 October 25, 2016 41 of 53
Table 12. Non-Cash Benefits as of Date of First Entry of Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016
North San Diego Winter Shelters (n=208 adults receiving non-cash b~nefit from any
source)
Non Cash Benefits Entered
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance (Food Stamps)
L\NF Child Care Services
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for WIC
Other Source
Temporary rental assistance
T ANF Transportation Services
Other TANF-Funded Services
No Benefit Listed
Section 8, Public Housing or rental assistance
TotaP
Number Percent
206 99%
2 <1%
1 <1%
1 < 1~10
1 <1%
211
1 Total number sums to 6,rcatcr th:m the number of adults answering (n=208) and total percent sums to greater than 100 because clients rnuld choose
more th::in one $Ourcc of non-cash bcndit~. · ,
Table 13. Employment Status of Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=459 adults)
Currently Employed
No
Yes
Client doesn't know/ Client refused
Mis sin
Total
1 Percent-ages may ::i.dd up to be grcntcr than 1 O{Y' n due to rounding.
Number
356
83
1
19
459
Percent1
78%
18%
<1%
4%
Table 14. Employment Tenure of Employed Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016 I'lforth San Diego
Winter Shelters (n=83 adults currently employed) 1
Employment Tenure
Temporary
Seasonal
Permanent
Client doesn't know/Client refused
Missing
Total
1 Toul clients represent those who fl.':$ponJcd iT::.s· currently employed.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
Number
16
4
34
3
26
83
Percent
19%
5%
41%
4%
31%
32 IP a g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 42 of 53
Table 15. Employment Search of Unemployed Adult Clients Sheltered, 2015-2016 North San Diego
Winter Shelters (n=356 adults not currently employed) 1 I
Looking for Work
No
Yes
Client doesn't know/Client refused
l'vlissing
Total
1 Total clients represent those whu responded other th:in "l: l:':S' currently employed.
Number
95
218
8
35
356
I
Percent
27%
61 %
2%
10%
Table 16. Living Situation the Night Before the First North County Winter Shelter Stay, Adult
Clients Sheltered in the 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters (n~459 adults)
!
Prior Living Situation Number Percent
Pbce Not l'vfeant for Habitarion 164 36%
Emergency Shelter or Hotel/Motel with Voucher 70 15%
Living With Family 49 11 %
Living With Friends 48 10%
Hotel/ Motel without Emergency Voucher 35 8%
Other 23 5%
Hospital 15 3%
Rental House/ Apa.ttment (no subsidy) 12 3%
Psychiatric hospital or facility 8 2%
Substance Abuse Treatment Center 8 2%
Safe Haven 6 1%
Transitional Housing for Homeless s 1%
Jail, Prison or Juvenile Facility 4 1%
Residential project or halfway house with no homeless
criteria. 3 1%
Long-term care facility or nursing home 2 < 1%
Pennanent Homing for Formerly Homeless 2 < 1%
Owned by Client (no subsidy) < 10/0
Client Doesn't Know/Not Recorded 4 1%
Total 459
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 33 I P a g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 43 of 53
Table 17. San Diego (SD) Region of Last Permanent Residence (based on Zip Code Provided by
Client), Adult Clients Sheltered in the 2015-2016 North San Diego Win'ter Shelters (n=459
~aj .
Region
North Coastal SD County
North Inland SD County
Central SD County
East SD County
South SD County
Outside SD County, but in CA
Outside California
Client doesn't know /Client refused
Total1
1 Percentages may Jdd up to be less than or gn:~ter than 100° (1 due to rounding.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
Number
207
101
100
5
4
9
11
22
459
Percent
45%
22%
22%
1%
1%
2%
2%
5%
34 IP age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 44 of 53
I Table 18. City of Last Pemrnnent Residence (based on Zip Code Provided by cµent), Adult Clients
Sheltered in the 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters (n=459 aj ults)
I San Diego Region Community Num~er Percent1
North Coastal
North Inland
Central
North Coastal.
Nonh Coastal
North Coastal
Other without C\
Other within CA
North Inland
Central
East
Central
South
North Coastal
South
South
East
North Inland
East
East
East
North Inland
North Inhnd
North Inhnd
North Inland
North Inland
South
Soutl1
South
North Coastal
East
East
Total
Oceanside
Escondido
San Diego
Vista
Encinitas
Carlsbad
Other, outside CA
Outside SD County, but in CA
San Marcos
Downtown
El Cajon
Clairemont
Imperial Beach
DelMa.r
Coronado
Chula Vista
La Mesa
Poway
Spring Valley
Alpine
Lakeside
Fallbrook
Rancho Bernardo
Bonsall
Panma Valley
\-X!arner Springs
San Ysidrn
Dnlzura
National City
Cardiff
Spring Valley
Alpine
Client doesn't know/Client refused/ i\tlissing
1 Pt:rccnt:igc:s may :idd up tn bt.: gn::ucr rh:m I 00° ;1 Jue m .rounding.
2015-2016 ARS Nmi:h County Winter Shelter Report
135
93
93 j
26 j
24 [
21 I
11
3 I
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22
459 '
29%
20%
20%
6%
5%
5°/o
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
5°/o
35 I P age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 45 of 53
Table 19. Client-Reported Primary Reason for Homelessness, First Shelter Stayiin North County
Winter Shelters, Clients Sheltered in the 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters
(n=459 adults) ·
Reason for Homelessness
Unable to Pay Rent/Mortgage
Family Issues
Unemployment (loss of job)
Underemployment/low income
Addiction
Other
No Affordable Housing
Domestic Violence Victim/Survivor
Moved to Seek Work (or new to area)
Evicted
Medical Condition
Mental Health
Divorce
Substance .Abuse
Jail/Prison (Release from Institution)
Health/Safety
Physical/Mental Disabilities
Personal Choice
Family/Personal Illness
Loss of Public Assistance
Unknown
l\fortgage Foreclosure
Not Applicable
Criminal Activity
Loss of Child Care
Unknown
Total
1 Percentage:; may add up to be kss or greater thun 100° \) due to rounding.
Number
66
63
59
46
25
22
21
18
15
13
13
13
10
10
7
6
6
5
4
4
3
2
2
1
1
22
459
Percent I
14%
14%
13%
10%
5%
5%
5%
4%
3%
3%
3%
3o/o
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
<1°/o
<lo/o
<1%
<1%
5%
Table 20. Client-Reported Economic Reason for Homelessness, First Shelter Stay in North County
Winter Shelters, Clients Sheltered in the 2015-2016 North San Diego WHiter Shelters (n=459 I adults) ·
Economic Reason for Homelessness1 Number Percent
No 223 49%
Yes 211 46%
UnknO\vn 22 5%
Total 459
1 Economic reason for homdc:ssrn:s:s-defined a:;: unempioymcnr 011:,;.s of job), um.krcmploymcnr/lo\\' income, unablt: rotpay n.>:nt/mortgagc'i no
affordable housing, mortgage foreclosure, evicted, or loss of Public ;\:;sistancc.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 36 IP age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 46 of 53
Table 21. Client-Reported Economic Reason for Homelessness by Presentation With vs Without
Children, First Shelter Stay in North County Winter Shelters, Clients Sheltered in the
2015-2016 North San Diego Winter Shelters (n=459 adults)
Economic Reason for
Homelessness3
Single or In Adult-Only
Family
(n=406 adult clients in families
without children)
Number Percentl
196 48%
In Family with Childrei
(n=53 adult clients in famili< s
with children)
Number Percent2
15 28%
Percentages of the total number of adult clients with infonnation presenting without children.
Percentages of the total number of adult clients with information entering a program with at least one family membe 17 years old or younger.
Table 22. Client-Reported Economic Reason for Homelessness by Family TYJ e, First Shelter Stay
in North County Winter Shelters, Clients Sheltered in the 2015-2016 :r~orth San Diego
Winter Shelters (n=45 families with children)
Family Type Sample Size'
Single Fal;her 4
· Two Adults 10
l ·slfutld:MJJ:h~t/'. . _ -, ....... ,.
-·· .<3J. ---
Total 45
Economic Reason, Any Family Member
Number 1Percent2
0
7
_ ;s {·t> :.:.
15
-li
70% . ,)j~fc;[i--/ ••.. ]
Total number may not add up to total number of families (n=45) due to clients ha,·ing two or more project entries a, d the head of
household designation differed between project entries.
Percentages calculated out of the total number of families in each family type.
---2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 371 Page
Item #5 October 25, 2016 47 of 53
Table 23. Reason for Leaving Shelter, Last Shelter Visit, Clients Sheltered in the 2015-2016 North
San Diego Winter Shelters (n=538 clients)! ·
Reason for Leaving Shelter
Left for housing opp. before completing program
Completed program
Reached maximum time allowed
Unknown/Disappeared
Non-compliance with program
Disagreement with rnles/persons
Other
Needs could not be met
Criminal activity /violence
Client doesn't knm.v/Client refused
:Missing
Total
1 Rea.son for Iea\~im~ j,t bsr exit from North Counrv \Vintcr Shdrcrs.
Percentages may ;dd up to be less than or 1,,rcatc~ than 1 Otl'!'o due lo rounding.
Number
170
118
58
49
39
22
19
11
1
0
51
538
'Perccnt2
32%
22%
11%
9%
7%
4%
4%.
2%
<1%
9%
Table 24. Destination When Leaving Shelter, Last Shelter Visit, Clients Shelterchd in the 2015-2016
North San Diego Winter Shelters (n=538 clients)!
Destination After Leaving Shelter
Emergency shelter
Place not meant for habitation
Rental by client, no ongoing housing subsidy
Other
Staying or living witl1 family, temporary tenure
No exit interview completed
Staying or living with friends, temporary tenure
Hotel/Motel, no emergency shelter voucher
Staying or living with fan1ily, permanent tenure
Rental by client, with other ongoing housing subsidy
Transitional housing for homeless persons
Substance abuse treatment facility or detox center
Residential project or halfway house with no homeless
criteria
Staying or living with friends, permanent tenure
Hospital or other residential non-psychiatric medical
facility
Permanent housing for formerly homeless persons
Psychiatric hospital or other psychiatric facility
Safe Haven
Owned by client, with ongoing housing subsidy
Long-term care facility or nursing home
Client doesn't know/Client refused/Other unknown
l'vlissing
Total
1 Rc:a$on for leaving at last exit" from Nflrth County \\'/inter Shelters.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
Number
130
78
68
47
26
26
20
17
15
15
12
5
5
4
3
2
2
1
1
1
7
52
538
Percent
24%
14%
13%
9%
5%
5%
4%
3%
3%
3%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
1%
10%
38 IP age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 48 of 53
f
I
I Table 25. Destination of Persons in Families ·with Children When Leaving Shelter, Last Shelter
Visit, Clients Sheltered in the 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter She~ters (n=130 clients
sheltered as part of a family with children)1
Destination After Leaving Shelter2 Number I Percent3
Rental by client, no ongoing housing subsidy
Place not meant for habitation
Staying or living ,vith friends, temporary tenure
Rental by client, ,vith other ongoing housing subsidy
Emergency shelter
Staying or living with family, pennancnt tenure
Staying or living with family, temporary tenure
No e..,it interview completed
Residential project
Hotel or motel paid for without emergency shelter
Other
Substance abuse
Total
1 He:t$Oll fi)r le:t\'ing :1t 1ast L'x.it-from North Counn· \Vint er Shcltcr5.
Otht.:r t.k:~tinat.ion~s had zero cli,.:nr L'Xits :i.nd \i.'ere., not ch:trtcJ.
Perccnt:1g1.:s m:l.y nd<l up to be less 1h:m or' greater rhan I{}{)'' i1 JuL:-to rounding.
37 I 28%
?" _::, i 19%
14 I 11 %
9 7%
9 7%
8 6%
7 5%
5 40,'o
5 4%
2 2%
2 2%
2 2%
130 100%
I Table 26. Housing Status at last exit, Clients Sheltered in the 2015-2016 North San Diego Winter
Shelters (n=538 clients) l
Housing Status1 Number \Percent2
Category 1 -Homeless 299 56%
Category 2 -At imrninent risk of losing housing 7 1 %
Category 3 -Homeless onlyw1der other federal statutes 18 3%
Category 4 -Fleeing domestic violence 1 < I%
At-risk of homelessness 25 5%
Stably housed 133 25%
Client doesn't know/Client refused/Data not collected 14 3%
Missing 41 8%
Total 538
1 'Housing S1~1us' as rl'cordcd by project :-;raff
Percentages may :idd up to be gn:atc.:r th:m 100°'u due LO rounding.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 39 I P age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 49 of 53
B. 2014-2015 North San Diego Winter Shelter Returning Client~
Clients Sheltered Du.ting both 2014-2015 & 2015-2016 Seasons ·
Table 27. Demographic Characteristics of Returning Clients Sheltered 2014-2015 & 2015-2016
Seasons, North San Diego Winter Shelters (11=46 clients) ,
Demographic Characteristic
Gender
Male
Female
AgeGroup1
< 1 Year
1-17 Years
18-30 Years
31-40 Years
41-50 Years
51-60 Years
61-70Years
71 + Years
Total
Military Veteran (11=46 adult clients)
No
Yes
Total
:\ge at first entry during the 2015-2016 shelter season.
Number
33
13
0
2
3
3
16
14
6
2
46
42
4
46
l
Percent
72%
28%
0%
4%
7%
7%
35%
30%
13%
4%
91%
9%
Table 28. Disability Status by Season of Returning Adult Clients Sheltered 2014f2015 & 2015-2016
Shelter Seasons, North San Diego Winter Shelters (n=46 adults) ·
Disabled (Has a Disabling Condition)
2014-2015 Shelter Season
No
Yes
Client Doesn't Know/ Client Refused
Mis sin
2015-2016 Shelter Season
No
Total
Yes
Client Doesn't Know/ Client Refused
Mis sin
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
Number
25
21
0
0
17
29
0
0
46
: Percent
54%
46°/o
37%
63%
40IPage
Item #5 October 25, 2016 50 of 53
I
Table 29. Chronic Homelessness by Season of Returning Adult Clients Shelterbd 2014-2015 &
2015-2016 Shelter Seasons, North San Diego Winter Shelters (n=46 adults) I
Chronically Homeless1 Number Percent
2014-2015 Shelter Season
No 33 72%
Yes 13 ?8%
2015-2016 Shelter Season
No 11 24°io
Yes 35 76%
Total 46
1 11 UD Chronic l lDmelcssness Definition: an individual (I) with a disabling condition or expected to be of long-co,hinueJ and indefinite dttrntion
ond subsmnti:illy impairs ability 10 li,-c indcpcmkntlv of physid disability, dcvclopmemol disability, chronic health condition, 111\'/MOS, mcnral
ht::ihh problem .. :-ubstancc abuse, ~nd (2) who enter from street:-, 1..:mcrgcncy ~hdrcr or s:1fc ha,'t:n, ~md (3) has.been concinuous1y homdi:ss for a yc:u
or more, or hos had at least four episodes of homelessness in the past three years, OR (4) a household member of a h ·ad of household (who may be
a child) or any adult in the household meeting the pre,-inus disability & hmndessncss criteria outlined in I, 2 arid lr3_ (I lt\!IS Standard Reporting
Tcrminok>t,1)· Glo%ary. O ctober 2015, Version 2.2).
Table 30. Client-Reported Primary Reason for Homelessness, First Shelter StaJ per Season in North
County Winter Shelters, Returning Adult Clients Sheltered 2014-2015 & 2015-2016 Shelter
Seasons, North San Diego Winter Shelters (u=44 adults)
Reason for Homelessness 2014-2015 I 201s-2016
Number Pcrccnt1 Number Percent2
Unable to Pay Rent/Mortgage 13 28% 1 24%
Unemployment (Loss of Job) 10 22% 9%
Under-employment (Low Income) 8 17% 24%
Addiction 3 7% ~ 4%
No Affordable Housing 2 4% ~ 2%
Family Issues 1 2% 2 4%
Substance .Abuse l 2% 2%
Divorce 1 2% 2 4%
Family /Personal Illi1ess l 2% d 0%
Moved to seek work (or new to area) I 2% q 0%
Domestic Violence 1 2% ~ 0%
Jail/Prison (Release from Institution) 1 2% 2%
Personal choice 0 0% 11 2%
Natural Disaster 0 0% 1 2%
Medical Condition 0 0% 3 7%
Evicted 0 0% 2%
Physical/Mental Disabilities 0 0% 1 2%
Total 44 4~
1 J>ucc.:ntagc of the toral numbl;r of diem:;; lir:-it shelter ~tay nf the 2014-2015 sca:-:un.
Pc.:rccnt:1gc of the total numbt.:r of clicnrs; fir:,t :-:helter ::r:1y of rhc 2015~2016 season.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 41 I 1' a g e
Item #5 October 25, 2016 51 of 53
Table 31. Destination When Leaving Shelter, Last Shelter Visit each Season, Returning Clients
Sheltered 2014-2015 & 2015-2016 Shelter Seasons, North San Diego Winter Shelters (n=46
clients)
Destination After Leaving Shelter
Each Season
Place Not Meant for Habitation
Emergency shelter
Rental by Client (No Subsidy)
Staying with friends, permanent tenure
Staying with Friends, Temporarily
Hotel/Motel w/o Emergency Voucher
No exit interview completed
Staying with Family (fcmporary)
Transitional Housing for Homeless
Hospital (non-psychiatric)
Safe Haven
Staying with family, permanent tenure
Other
Permanent Housing
Client doesn't know/ Client refused
Nfissin
Total
2014-20151
Number Percent3
16
9
4
4
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
46
35%
20%
9%
9%
7%
4%
4%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
0%
0%
2%
0%
1 Destination upon leaving at last cxir 2014-2015 :;.c3sm1 from North County \Xlinrer Shelters.
Destination upon lea,·ing at last exit 2015-2016 season from North County \Vinter$bcltcrs.
Percentage of the total number of clients; 2014-2015 season.
~ Percentage of the trnnl n.u..111bi.:r of client~; 2015-1016 season.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report
12015-20162
Number
0
o! i 2
4
1 '
1 I
6 '
46'
Percent4
35%
9%
13%
0%
2%
2%
4%
2%
2%
0%
0%
4%
9%
2%
2%
13%
42 IP age
Item #5 October 25, 2016 52 of 53
Appendix B -Recommendation
The ARS North County Winter Shelters did an impressive job at consistently colle ting data at both
program entry and program exit. The amount of missing data is very low, which shows eat care in both
completing the intake/ assessment forms and performing the data entry into ServicePo' t. We offer the
following recommendations if feasible:
• Improve data collection and data entry by:
.o Continuing to make sure all client entry and exit information are enter d promptly
throughout the season rather than post program closure;
o Reviewing the entire data entry screen after saving the entry record to nsure data responses
are stored in the database properly;
o Working with RTFH staff to learn when it is appropriate to add incom end-dates, both for
one-time income sources, as well as when an income amount changes
o Continuing to ensure that staff who collect and/ or record "chronically omeless" responses
are aware of the new HUD definition and trained to collect and record · ability status when
appropriate;
o Ensuring that staff are aware that the responses of 'Don't know', and
client's perspective, not from staffs perspective ('client doesn't know' d 'client refused to
respond');
o Have the RTFH review intake/assessment forms prior to the beginnin
next program year;
o Administer these forms to every adult client;
• Utilize a ServicePoint report that program staff can run, print and use themselv to look for any
missing clients, missing exit dates or other missing responses and make necess corrections as soon
as possible.
• Consider performing rigorous analysis assessing changes in client profiles of tho served over time
or comparing returning clients to non-returning clients.
• Consider adding analysis of services provided during clients' program stays.
• Continue to congratulate those who collect and enter the data for making this e of analysis
possible.
2015-2016 ARS North County Winter Shelter Report 43IPage
Item #5 October 25, 2016 53 of 53