Solving Street Homelessness: The Experience of Columbia, SC
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
1 gostou•342 visualizações
Presentation for the Community Partnership for Homeless National Program Development Seminar (Friday, November 5, 2010) http://cphinational.org/
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (19)
Destaque
Destaque (16)
Semelhante a Solving Street Homelessness: The Experience of Columbia, SC
Semelhante a Solving Street Homelessness: The Experience of Columbia, SC (20)
Último
Último (20)
Solving Street Homelessness: The Experience of Columbia, SC
- 1. Mac Bennett President and CEO United Way of the Midlands
- 2. History of Columbia’s efforts to address downtown homelessness Background to successful effort: Midlands Housing Alliance Challenges Project Status Lessons Learned
- 3. The measure of success is not whether you have a tough problem to deal with, but whether it is the same problem you had last year. John Foster Dulles The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein
- 4. January 8, 1994 Co-locating for a Continuum of Care for the Homeless December 1995 Community Steering Committee on Homelessness April 3, 1997 Report to the Community Steering Committee on Homelessness March 1, 1998 Report to City Council: Columbia Committee in Conjunction with the Columbia Community Development Department and the Office of the Mayor March 14, 2001 Report and Recommendation of the Midlands Commission on Homelessness Task force on Emergency Services Homelessness in Columbia: Consensus on the Problem
- 5. September 2005 10 Year plan Research Community engagement ◦ Community Forums ◦ Stakeholder Meeting ◦ Intergovernmental Summit on Homelessness 10 key strategies including comprehensive housing and service center for people on the street September 2006: Site Selection Committee Report
- 6. City withdraws from process; supports other strategies ◦ NIMBY/Neighborhood resistance ◦ Lack of political will ◦ Breakdown of regional approach ◦ Neighborhood and race divisions ◦ Loss of public/private partnership
- 7. I couldn't wait for success, so I went ahead without it. Jonathan Winters
- 8. Fall 2006 Provider-Business group begins meeting soon after Site Selection Committee proposal rejected. Summer 2007 Opportunity emerges for Salvation Army property Fall 2007 through Spring 2008 Coalition led by MBLG, Chamber, UWM work on redevelopment plan for Salvation Army property •Bring in new partners including faith community MIHAC), neighborhoods, more providers, more business. •Negotiations with Knight Foundation •Assessment and TA provided by Community Partnership for the Homeless
- 9. June 2008 Midlands Housing Alliance announced Option to purchase Salvation Army property $5 million Knight Foundation Grant
- 10. November 2008 MHA meets $5M Knight Foundation Challenge Grant •$6.5M Local, primarily private dollars raised •$11.75M development budget DDRC approves architectural plans Board of Zoning Appeals approval; decision upheld in Circuit Court Property purchased January 2010 Project $2M budget when fully operating •$838,000 HUD Supportive Housing Grant •$625,000 from local governments •$500,000 Kresge Foundation grant To open May 2011
- 11. Community outreach workers Day Center – to serve 100-125 people daily with light meal, showers, laundry, case workers, service providers 52 Emergency beds 26 Respite beds 72 Program beds 64 Transitional housing beds
- 12. Life must be understood backwards; but... it must be lived forward. Soren Kierkegaard
- 13. NIMBY Neighborhood opposition Expressed in neighborhood meetings, city council and zoning meetings, letters, lawsuits, FOIA requests to HUD. Concerns regarding neighborhood traffic; criminal activity and sexual predators. Responded with trip to Miami, engagement on board, Good Neighbor Policy. City opposition Offered alternative site to appease neighborhoods. Considered but rejected as unfeasible and risking Knight commitment. Church opposition Expressed in meetings with MHA and conveyed to city council. Concerns focused on security issues and impact on new church property. Responded with security risk assessment and adoption of recommendations.
- 14. Environmental/regulatory issues • Ground contamination. Designated Brownfield site. • Licensing questions regarding level of care. Not deemed a Community Residential Care Facility. • Asbestos. Removed. Negotiation with Salvation Army • Challenges negotiating with distant decision makers. Persisted.
- 15. Politics • Neighborhood influence over city politics • Lack of regional cooperation • Poor financial situation, especially City of Columbia
- 16. $5M challenge grant coupled with local match Identifying property zoned for the purpose Consistent media support for effort Close collaboration between business and providers Inadequacy of previous public efforts Recent self organization of the homeless
- 17. Invited experts from other communities for advice. Homeless centers in Atlanta, Savannah, Charlotte, Raleigh, Greenville & Miami participated. Engagement of regional experts/investigation of other programs/support from Miami team Broad coalition of business, providers and faith community Leadership of strong intermediary in United Way Passionate leadership must emerge
- 18. What role will politics play? When should neighborhoods be engaged? How visible should effort be? How do you balance program goals while addressing neighborhood concerns?
Notas do Editor
- Overview of presentation—a little historyCurrent successful initiativeChallenges—how we were lucky or smart and what we have not figured out!
- Our community certainly failed by this measure
- NO need to review—just observe that there were six studies in 12 yearsnot lack for understanding the problem—lacked the will to implement the solutions
- The point is it was collaborative—City, UWM, CCCFBroad engagementBuy in from all quaters(Stakeholder Meeting with 54 Participants including, Service Providers, Public Officials, Community Stakeholders)
- City succumbs to NIMBY—set project back and probably community for invoking racism as problem
- Enough persistent concern among business community—work with provider community to build trustCouple of false starts with strategies when opportunity presented from problemKey element that SA property had zoning!Acknowledge CPH
- So what are we doing?—outline of programs—elements we do not or never have had in ColumbiaTarget homeless adults on the street—currently 1006—half of them on streets—1 out of 4 adults is a vet—very visible problem
- We did have to live it forward but looking back—here are some conclusions from our looking backward
- Basically the slide illustrates the source—the complaints and how we responded for better or worse
- Some Unanticipated problems—delayed progress
- Systemic issues—had to work through because our of scope to change
- No way to understate impact of $5M coupled with local match—raising virtually 100% of development cost is very persuasive—difficult for city to walk away fromMedia frequently weighed inPeople were frustrated, disappointed, disgusted with public/gov’t failure to address issueRecently the homeless have organized themselves and now regularly show up at neighborhood meetings, city council—they are working to change the image of homelessness—very valuable in community meetings
- Research and consultation helped a lot! Even helped us recognize that there are no obvious answers—handled problems differently (like security)Coalition was keyUWM contributions and capacity hard to overestimate
- Issues we could debate—have no conclusions forNeighborhoods complain about being left out but when you bring them in use information to undermine not improve effortVisibility—draws more furor but have to ensure donors stay confident and project sense of momentumWe had developed programs from best practices and demonstrated success—some community needs are irrational and meeting them can compromise the program—lots of issues about restricting the clients—yet designed to be a low barrier facility