REPORT FROM OFFICE OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Date: April 16 2015 CAO File No. 15?0211 Council File No. 0220-05151-0000 Council District: All To: The Council (ft From: Miguel A. Santana, City Administrative Officer Reference: C.F. 15-0211 (Cedillo-Bonin); Various Requests and Actions from the Council and the Mayor Regarding Homelessness Subject: HOMELESSNESS AND THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES SUMMARY According to the most recent homeless count from 2013, approximately 23,000 homeless individuals may be found in the City of Los Angeles at any given time. The homeless face serious challenges including the availability of shelter, access to mental health and medical care, exposure to violence and diseases, lack of security for personal property, frequent interaction with law enforcement, and other critical matters. The homeless do not live in isolation and, therefore, many of their issues impact businesses, residents and visitors to Los Angeles. in addition, the City of Los Angeles intersects with homelessness in the delivery of its services to the public. Over the last year, elected representatives in the City have pressed for more thoughtful and tangible responses to homelessness. For example, C.F. 14-1057 (Bonin-Wesson) asks the City Attorney to find solutions to the issue of unregulated camping in residential neighborhoods by those living in their cars. Motions 14-1101 and 14-0655 (Hulzar?Bonin) request the City to look more closely at how the Coordinated Entry System (CES) may be incorporated into the City?s work regarding the homeless and to make recommendations about the appointment of a homeless coordinator for the City. In July 2014, the Mayor pledged to end veteran homelessness in Los Angeles by December 2015 and chronic homelessness by December 2016. The Mayor also incorporated a Priority Outcome to prevent and reduce homelessness in the 2015-16 Budget and Policy Goals. At the request of the Housing Committee (C.F. 15-0211, Cedillo-Bonin), and as a result of the focus on homelessness by the Council and the Mayor, the Office of the City Administrative Officer (CAO) undertook a study to review the City?s engagement with homelessness and the budgetary impact to the City. The study, which is presented in this report, documents instances where City departments interact with the homeless or with the impacts of homelessness, identifies costs arising from these interactions wherever possible, and identifies ways in which such interactions are currently being tracked or could be tracked in the future. CAO File No. PAGE 0220-05151-0000 2 Based in interviews with City departments, the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) and the Housing Authority for the City of Los Angeles (HACLA), this Office found that 15 departments, agencies and one program interact with the homeless regularly and that the annual estimated cost of those interactions exceeds $100 million. The findings in this report are not comprehensive because the study time was short with limited resources. In addition, most of the departments included in the study were being asked for the first time about their interactions with homelessness. However, the size of the fiscal impact indicates that how homelessness affects the City is a topic that deserves further study and coordination. BACKGROUND A Coordinated Approach The study found that many more departments across the City interact on a regular basis with the homeless or with the effects of homelessness than current budgetary allocations for this issue suggest. Nearly all of the departments in the study incur costs that have not been reflected in current planning processes for homelessness. Faced with challenges related to homelessness that may be outside of their core service area, some departments and individuals have come up with ad hoc responses, but the study found no consistent process across departments in interactions with homeless individuals, homeless encampments, or other issues related to homelessness, and no systematic efforts to connect the homeless with assessment and case management. The study also found that there was limited tracking of such interactions, resulting in an inability within the City to measure impacts or progress. Finally, the study found that many individuals, departments, and Council offices called Emergency Response Team regularly, but the ERT is not adequately funded to respond to all of these calls. Based on these findings, this Office recommends that a more coordinated approach should be taken towards addressing homelessness in the City. This approach should leverage the efforts currently underway across the County with the CES to create a system within the City that connects the homeless systematically with services and monitors progress with data that is being updated regularly. Such an approach will require a clear policy guideline that will enable departments to examine their own interactions with homelessness and will change processes to bring them in line with the City?s policy. Currently, the City?s processes in response to the homeless are focused on how departments manage property during cleanups. Additional steps could ask City employees who encounter the homeless to contact outreach workers who can assess homeless individuals and add them to the CES database where they can be prioritized for services and housing. Such an approach will also require increased funding for outreach and case management that can work in partnership with City departments. Ideally, such funding could also support the creation of hubs across affected Council districts and neighborhoods that can use the CES to coordinate action across service providers, relevant departments, and communities, and monitor CAO File No. PAGE 0220?05151-0000 3 progress on housing and providing services for individuals. Such hubs would enable Council Districts and neighborhoods to clearly identify obstacles to housing the homeless or getting them access to basic services. Implementation of the policy on homelessness is likely to require support from a City department or office that can dedicate staff and resources to this issue. This designated office should also prepare a collaborative budget that can bring together spending across departments on homelessness. The budget should be supported by improvements in tracking within departments for activities and expenditures on homelessness. Such tracking should be put into place carefully to ensure that it does not become overly demanding on departments, and it should be focused only on measures that can give us insight into the City?s progress on reducing homelessness and on meeting clear policy goals. Additional information about the study including best practices and observations may be found in the Findings section of this report and in Attachment A. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Council, subject to the approval of the Mayor: 1. instruct the City Administrative Officer (CAO) and the Housing and Community Investment Department (HCID) to develop a policy that states the City?s goals regarding homelessness. The policy should consider the following elements: a. Treatment of the homeless with dignity, and clarity on their rights; b. A commitment to end rather than manage homelessness, including measurable targets; 0. Strategies for achieving these goals; d. Coordination among all departments that engage with the issue; e. Eligibility criteria or possible priority populations (veterans, families, etc.); f. Measures against which progress would be monitored, including identifying data sources from all relevant stakeholders; g. Schedules for reporting to elected leadership on progress; h. Adoption of the Coordinated Entry System (CES) as the tool to track and manage the data related to homelessness and as the process for the community to connect the homeless with appropriate and available resources; .N CAO File No. PAGE 0220-05151-0000 4 Designate an office or department to monitor adherence to the policy, work in partnership with City departments and the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA), liaise with the County and other service providers, develop tracking mechanisms to measure the City?s actions and expenditures related to homelessness and regularly monitor this data, and report to the Mayor and Council on progress at least twice a year; 9? Instruct the CAD to work in collaboration with City departments to change responses across departments to homelessness to include systematic connections to outreach and services when appropriate and periodically report to the Mayor and Council; Instruct departments to implement changes in processes for interacting with the homeless as they are developed by the designated office and periodically report to the Mayor and Council; 9' Instruct the designated office to prepare and manage an annual collaborative budget for homelessness that supports the implementation of the City?s policy on homelessness and allows for regular monitoring. The office should consider the following to be included in the budget a. Salaries and expenses currently being spent on homelessness, including the City?s allocation to Recommendations for additional funding to meet goals identified in the policy; Coordinate with the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles (HACLA) to ensure federal funding for vouchers and housing units is aligned with the City?s goals and provide supplementary resources when required; Explore the need for consulting services for tracking, facilitation, metrics for performance; 6. Instruct the designated office to work with LAHSA to: a. Identify outcomes and results for the Emergency Response Team (ERT), especially how they may implement the City?s policy regarding homelessness; Determine where the need for ERT services is and how best to deploy the Train City departments how and when to use the Determine how the LAHSA ERT works with the County response teams to ensure collaboration and consistency; CAO File No. PAGE 0220-05151-0000 5 7. Instruct the designated office to work with the City Attorney to address the City?s responsibilities regarding privacy, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and other legal requirements related to homelessness; and, 8. Instruct the designated office to work with the Department of Transportation, the City Attorney, the Los Angeles Fire Department, and other departments as needed to develop policies regarding write-offs of citations, fees and other fines for the homeless. FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT The impact to the General Fund is unknown at this time. Based on the findings in this report, the estimated annual costs related to homelessness for the City and other agencies exceed $100 million in General Funds and Special Funds. If adopted, the recommendations in this report could potentially impact the General Fund and Special Funds. CAO File No. PAGE 0220-05151?0000 6 FINDINGS 1. Basis for Report On February 25, 2015, the Housing Committee instructed the City Administrative Officer (CAO) to conduct a review of and report on the resources being used by various departments on activities related to homelessness, and the budgetary impact on the City?s General Fund, including an analysis of the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) budget and/or any other relevant outside entity (C.F. 15-0211). This report is in response to C.F. 15-0211. 2. Background for Report Between October 2014 and January 2015, this Office spoke with representatives from City departments, LAHSA, HACLA, and the offices of elected officials. The LAHSA and HACLA are local agencies that provide housing and services for the homeless. They are not part of the City organization, so for the purposes of this report, they will be referred to as agencies. In addition, through the interviews, it became apparent that the Operation Healthy Streets (OHS) program should be included as a separate entity since the program crosses departmental and agency boundaries. We asked the departments and agencies three questions: 0 Where, if at all, did they interact with the homeless or with the effects of homelessness in their work, and what was the nature of these interactions? 0 How did they track these interactions, if at all? 0 How much did these interactions cost the departments? Although departments were not all able to provide precise answers to these questions because of lack of tracking or appropriate data, we have collated their best available answers in Attachment A. The answers we received from departments suggested that the City has an opportunity to make significant improvements in its response to homelessness. The study found at least 15 agencies and departments and the OHS program regularly interact with homelessness and do so across a wide range of activities including responding to constituent complaints, issuing library cards, reviewing cases filed against the homeless, cleaning homeless encampments, and much more. Where possible to estimate or track spending, our study found that some departments incur large costs related to these interactions. For example, the LAPD estimated that it Spent anywhere from $53.6 million to $87.3 million in one year on interactions with the homeless, not including costs incurred from patrol officers? time. In some departments, we were not able to estimate total costs, but were able to identify other measures that showed the intensity of their interactions with homelessness. For example, at least 6.6 percent of the Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) ambulance transports are for homeless patients, a number that is likely to be a significant underestimate of the actual number of CAO File No. PAGE 0220?05151-0000 7 homeless patients. Moreover, 14.23 percent of those arrested by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) are recorded as being ?transients? or provided the address of a known homeless shelter when they were arrested. The study also found that in many departments, responses to homelessness are ad hoc, designed to respond to a very specific challenge related to homelessness facing the department, rather than working toward ending homelessness as a whole. Most departments also do not track these interactions separately, so it is not possible to monitor the impacts of changes in homelessness over time on the City, nor is it possible now to get a full measure of the costs to the City from homelessness. These findings have important implications for planning for homelessness in the City of Los Angeles. Thus far, the Housing and Community Investment Department (HCID) and HACLA are the only City departments or agencies that have significantly engaged with recent County-wide efforts to reduce homelessness; however, the findings in this study suggest that a much larger number of departments need to be involved in a coordinated response to the issue to maximize the City?s impact, ideally supported by a clear policy on homelessness for the City which sets out metrics for progress and success. 3. Departments, Agencies and Programs The following departments, agencies and programs were included in this study: Council Mayor City Attorney Economic and Workforce Development Department Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles Housing and Community Investment Department Los Angeles Fire Department Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority Los Angeles Police Department Los Angeles Public Library Bureau of Street Services Bureau of Sanitation Operation Healthy Streets Recreation and Parks Department Department of Transportation City Administrative Officer 4. Best Practices Regarding Homelessness - Coordinated Entry System Best practices in responding to homelessness have undergone important changes in the last decade, changes that have been consequently implemented locally. One example of an important CAO File No. PAGE 0220-05151?0000 8 change is the housing first approach, which means that those experiencing homelessness are provided permanent housing as quickly as possible, and then provided access to any services they may need without having to meet stringent sobriety or treatment requirements. Studies have shown that the housing first approach can both significantly reduce chronic homelessness and save money for governments. Programs such as Project 50, the Housing for Health program run by the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, and the Permanent Supportive Housing Program run by HCID have all supported the implementation of housing first approaches locally. In recent years, federal guidelines have also encouraged cities to adopt a systems-based approach to homelessness, including coordinated entry. Coordinated entry means that all those experiencing homelessness in a particularjurisdiction are assessed using the same tool and are provided referrals and services based on their need rather than on a first?come?first-served basis. Through the Home for Good campaign anchored by the United Way, a group of public and private partners from throughout the County of Los Angeles have been working together to end homelessness. After a series of successful pilots, the campaign has built a Coordinated Entry System (CES) which will enable service providers to assess homeless individuals, add them to a shared database, and then match them with available housing that meets their needs, thereby ensuring that the most vulnerable are prioritized for permanent supportive housing. Within the City, both HCID and HACLA have supported the creation of the CES by attending regular convenings of the Home for Good campaign and providing input into the development of the tool, and by mandating that a percentage of vouchers and housing units for the homeless must be filled using referrals from the CES database. The CES is now being integrated with Homeless Management information System (HMIS), meaning it will be much more widely used. The CES marks an important change in homeless services in Los Angeles. Using a shared assessment tool means that jurisdictions can target the most vulnerable among the homeless, rather than setting numerical goals for service providers which usually result in housing only those who are easiest to house. A common assessment tool also provides a way to ensure that those facing homelessness are directed towards the appropriate support, and that resource intensive permanent supportive housing is reserved only for those who need it. By providing a shared data platform around which service providers can collaborate, the CES can also facilitate better coordination in the neighborhood, Council District, or Service Planning Area (SPA). For example, in twice meetings, service providers who participated in the Hollywood 4WRD pilot of the CES were able to use it to ensure that different service providers were not approaching the same people on the streets and to ensure that individuals in the CES who resisted being housed were not forgotten and continued to be targets of outreach. The meetings also enabled the groups to share resources like transportation and access to mental health services and to strategize on how to house individuals in their area. Once it is widely used, the CES will also enable the City to better understand its own homeless population and to understand gaps in resources required to address homelessness. CAO File No. PAGE 0220?05151-0000 9 The adoption of the CES is likely to result in reductions in the number of homeless on the streets and in the more efficient use of resources County-wide. it also provides an opportunity for the City to ensure that its responses to homelessness take advantage of these systemic improvements. 5. Report Observations The following four observations or themes emerged from the study. Widespread Engagement with Homelessness First, a much larger number of departments and agencies within the City regularly engage with homelessness than is reflected in current budgetary allocations for the issue. Although the Economic and Workforce Development Department (EWDD), HACLA, and LAHSA all have programs explicitly designated for homeless clients or for addressing homelessness, at least 15 departments and agencies regularly interact with the homeless or with issues related to homelessness, as do a number of Council offices and the Office of the Mayor. The information gathered in this study may not be comprehensive due to limited time and resources. Other jurisdictions have undertaken similar studies using consultants to identify all interactions and costs associated with homelessness. Therefore, to develop a complete picture of the budgetary impact of homelessness in Los Angeles, the City would need more time and dedicated resources such as an external consultant. For example, the Los Angeles Public Libraries (LAPL) has a large number of homeless patrons who regularly use the libraries. A survey administered by LAHSA to librarians from across the 73 branches found that 92 percent of the branches had regular homeless patrons, and librarians estimated that there was an average of 680 to 780 homeless patrons every day across the branches. The LAPL leadership stated that they welcomed all library patrons, including the homeless, but had recently struggled with a perceived increase in violent or unruly incidents related to patrons who appeared to be both homeless and mentally ill, and an increase in complaints about homeless patrons from other library users. Unfortunately, the LAPL does not have documentation to show that there has been an increase in unruly incidents related to the homeless because library staff does not always file incident reports, especially after smaller disturbances. Even when an incident report is filed, librarians do not usually identify whether or not the patron involved in the incident is homeless, partly because they do not want to single out any one category of library patron. in response to the incidents, the LAPL has taken a number of steps. In Central Library, which has the largest number of homeless patrons, librarians have been provided referral information for homeless services, put together by the Skid Row Homeless Healthcare initiative, which they give to patrons who request information about resources for the homeless. However, no other branches use this information. The LAPL has also made it possible for service providers to do outreach to the homeless at the libraries. At ten branches, LAPL has provided space for the Weingart Center to staff resource desks for veterans. The Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health (DMH) also had a CAO File No. PAGE 0220-05151-0000 10 permanent resource desk at Central Library, but no longer provides staff for this purpose. However, outreach teams from both DMH and LAHSA have visited the library for intensive periods of outreach in the last six months. At three branches, the LAPL has also arranged for security from the LAPD or private security teams, in part as a result of violent incidents related to patrons who were thought to be homeless. In other words, while the LAPL does not currently have activities or expenditures explicitly delineated as relating to homelessness, the staff regularly deals with the issue at work. In their response to homelessness, the LAPL staff has attempted to preserve the rights of the homeless to use City facilities and public spaces while responding to complaints related to the homeless from other users and also maintaining public safety for all patrons. Our study found that regular interactions with homelessness, like those of the LAPD, LAFD, Recreation and Parks, and the Bureau of Sanitation, are missed opportunities for better coordination with City-wide and County-wide efforts to end homelessness. The CAO study also found that City responses to homelessness have costs that are not being considered in our current budgets on homelessness. For example, last year, the City Attorney?s Office spent an estimated $2.9 million on reviewing cases related to the homeless, on liabilities from cases related to the homeless, on neighborhood prosecutors? time on issues related to the homeless, and other activities. The Bureau of Sanitation spent at least $547,000 on homeless encampment cleanups last year. The LAPL spent at least $309,000 on increased security, cleanups and trainings to better respond to challenges posed by some patrons who may be both mentally ill and experiencing homelessness. Where costs could not be clearly identified, some departments provided other measures of the impact that homelessness had on their work. Of the total number of LAFD ambulance transports, 6.6 percent are clearly identified as being for homeless patients, a figure that the LAFD says is likely an under-estimate. The LAPD stated that 14.23 percent of people arrested identified with the code ?1942 Transient,? which means that they provided no address and are very likely to be homeless, a number that officers also stated was likely to be an underestimate. A listing of department and agency interactions and estimated costs are included as Attachment A to this report. Inconsistent Process to Address Homelessness Second, there appears to be no consistent process across City departments for dealing with the homeless or with homeless encampments. For example, both the Recreation and Parks Department (RAP) and the Bureau of Sanitation undertake homeless encampment cleanups. Before a cleanup by the Bureau of Sanitation, the Bureau of Street Services inspects the site, requests LAHSA to do outreach, and receives an authorization to proceed with signatures from LAHSA, the Bureau of Street Services, and the Board of Public Works to do the cleanup. The RAP does not go through a similar authorization process. However, both departments do ensure that notices are clearly posted at encampments before cleanups take place and that abandoned property belonging to the homeless is bagged, tagged, and stored at a central location during a cleanup. CAD File No. PAGE 0220-05151-0000 11 More importantly, responses to homelessness by City departments are not designed to end homelessness by systematically connecting the homeless to assessment, services, and housing. For example, RAP staff regularly interacts with homeless individuals living in parks. If they see violations of relevant City ordinances, Park Rangers can request people to leave, issue citations, and, in very rare instances, arrest those who refuse to leave a park. The Department can also organize cleanups of homeless encampments using RAP maintenance staff. Although Park Rangers do regularly refer people to LAHSA and to the Winter Shelter Program, Rangers and maintenance staff are not actually required or trained to connect the homeless to assessment and services. Similarly, the LAFD regularly treats and transports homeless users of emergency medical services, but LAFD staff are not trained or required to connect them to assessment, outreach, or services. A citywide homelessness policy would unify department actions and responses to homelessness. Two experiments are currently undenrvay at the LAPD to help City staff to connect the homeless with services. In the Safer Cities Initiative in Skid Row, two County probation officers have been assigned to work with LAPD officers to identify homeless individuals who are on probation, and to work with them to connect them to housing and services. Based on early successes, the LAPD plans to expand the program by four more officers in the coming months, pending additional funding. The Mental Evaluation Unit within the LAPD is also launching a three-month pilot with A8109 funds to enable a team of two officers and one DMH clinician to proactively provide ?street transients? with information about services. Lessons from these experiments may be useful for the rest of the City in finding ways for outreach and social workers to work productively with City departments, and they should be studied closely as models. Various Approaches to Track Activities and Expenditures Related to Homelessness Third, this study revealed that activities and expenditures related to homelessness are not currently being tracked well, although tracking seems to be improving in some departments. For example, according to the Bureau of Sanitation, any homeless encampments that were cleaned last year outside of Operation Healthy Streets were not tracked but will now be tracked under the Clean Streets program. Similarly, the Mental Evaluation Unit did not earlier capture information about homelessness but has stated that they will capture such information in the future. The RAP has also added a field in their timekeeping software for ?encampment cleanups? which will be used from January 2015 onwards. For some departments, tracking interactions with the homeless will be extremely difficult. For example, many homeless individuals who are treated and transported to emergency rooms by the LAFD may not self-report as homeless because they provide older addresses or because they are unconscious or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The LAPL also stated that they were reluctant to collect information on homeless patrons, even in incident reports, because they did not want to target or penalize any one category of library patron. CAO File No. PAGE 0220?05151?0000 12 Tracking may also take some time to put into place. For example, Oklahoma City took nearly a year to compile costs across departments related to homelessness. Moreover, both in Oklahoma City and in Santa Monica, an external consultant worked closely with the cities to identify costs and appropriate measures. 0 Reliance on Emergency Response Team Fourth, this study found that many City departments currently rely on Emergency Response Team (ERT) for addressing issues related to homelessness. For example, Council of?ces faced with community complaints about homeless encampments report calling ERT regularly, as did staff from the LAPD, RAP, and LAPL. This same team is responsible for providing outreach before the Bureau of Street Services can authorize a homeless encampment cleanup, and the ERT reported that more than 660 such authorizations were required last year. The ERT is also responsible for outreach before every cleanup related to Operation Healthy Streets. Unfortunately, the ERT does not currently have the resources to meet all of these demands on their time effectively. In 2014?15, the ERT was allocated $330,000 from the City?s General Fund, and the team has 19 people to service the needs of the entire County. In part, the problem stems from the fact that the ERT responsibilities are not clearly defined by the City. A policy that articulates clear processes for City departments to interact with outreach workers would also enable the Cit appropriately and to define City expectations for the by: adeleine M. RackLe/V Senior Administrative Analyst II APPROVED: Assistant City Administrative Officer Attachment Attachment A Homelessness and the City of Los Angeles Department and Agency Interactions with the Homeless and Estimated Costs Department I Agency I Program Program, Activity, or Interaction Description Costs or other measures Source of Funds (where applicable) Staff Tracking Notes I Summary Council Council District 1: Staff regularly interact with issues related to homelessness, either in response to constituent complaints or proactively to collaborate with local partners on planning for homelessness and homeless services. An estimated $150,000 - $175,000 is spent annually on responses to homelessness. Council Council District 9: A31290 funds have been used to fund homeless services. Between 2010-11 through 2015-16, $250,000 has been allocated annually to support the provision of homeless services at LAHSA in the City Center East community (C.F. 11-0329?51, Perry-Huizar). However, there have been other signi?cant expenditures which need more explanation. 2011-12: $500,000; 2012-13: $436,609; 2013?14: $250,000; 2014 - 15: $37,500 and $250,000 still pending Detailed information on AB1290 expenditures does not seem to be available. Council Council District 9: Staff has meetings to address District concerns and issues related to homeless encampments come up regularly. However, staff was not able to provide an estimate for the percentage of their time spent on addressing these issues. Council Council District 11: They drew up a contract with PATH to provide outreach and linkages with CES for chronically of staff time of the Deputy Chief of Staff, the District Director, and at least two ?eld staff is spent on homelessness, and they interface regularly with the City Attorney, Recreation and Parks, Public Works Bureau of Sanitation, and Public Works Bureau of Street Services to ensure that issues related to homelessness are quickly resolved. GCP Funds have also been used to cover permit costs for a storage unit to be provided in the neighborhood, for which space is being provided free of cost. homeless people in the Venice area. Additionally, a percentage $100,000 for PATH's outreach services GCP Funds used for permitting process 2 Fult time employees. Council Council District 13: The of?ce has a two-year contract with PATH for street outreach, emergency response, assistance in discharge planning, housing and supportive services to those who are experiencing homelessness in the District. District Of?ce staff also spend time taking in and responding to complaints, visiting encampments, joining outreach workers, coordinating cleanups and so on. Two year contract with PATH is for $75,000, and the of?ce estimates 10 to 15 hours of time spent weekly on responding to homelessness related issues. Council Council District 15: At least two CD15 staff members report spending 5 to 10 hours a week each dealing with complaints from constituents about homelessness, either through phone calls or in community meetings. Responses to these complaints generally include liaising with LAHSA, LAPD (especially the Senior Lead Of?cers), Public Works Bureau of Street Services, and Public Works Bureau of Sanitation for organi ing regular cleanups. If encampments are found on private properties, the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety is also involved, and the process can take months. Each clean-up can involve site visits from CD 15 staff as well as numerous emails and phone calls. Department} Agency I Program Program, Activity, or interaction Description Costs or other measures Source of Funds (where applicable) Staff Tracking Notes [Summary Mayor The Of?ce has a full time Homelessness Policy Director who works with Council of?ces. the United Way?s Home for Good campaign. the Veterans Administration. LAHSA. HACLA. and local stakeholders to end veteran and chronic homelessness. In addition, staff who work on the Consolidated Plan recommend funding for homelessness related activities. The Veterans Affairs Coordinator who participates in planning meetings on homelessness and collaborates with local agencies on ending veteran homelessness. The Planning team develops the affordable housing plan. participates in the Consolidated Plan development process. and is involved in negotiations over new developments where homelessness is an ancillary issue. Total costs for staff time related to homelessness are estimated to be $222,343 annually. City Attorney The Neighborhood Prosecutors (NP) Program is designed to address neighborhood level problems that can grow into larger threats. Problems can be proactively identi?ed by the prosecutors themselves. through complaints from residents, through direct referrals from the LAPD or from Council of?ces, or through internal referrals of cases within the City Attorney?s Of?ce related to particular problematic individuals. locations. or issues. While NPs are not focused on homelessness. for a number of neighborhoods, a large percentage of the NP's time is taken up by homelessness (as much as if a case is ?led against a homeless defendant. and depending on the severity of the crime. neighborhood prosecutors will usually provide an opportunity for defendants to enter rehab. housing. or accept services in lieu of jail time. Services are identi?ed in an ad hoc manner: either the NPs or the public defender will identify these services. and NPs will call LAHSA staff or local service providers to do so. If a neighborhood problem involves a homeless person or a homeless encampment, the NP is likely to call both a LAHSA outreach worker and the Bureau of Sanitation to arrange for the cleanup of the encampment. $1 ?50,000 The Neighborhood Prosecutor Program tracks staff time by "problem," and all activities such as arrests and cases are Ilinked to that problem in the database. It may be possible in the future to ?ag "problems" as having to do with homelessness Iin the future if required. City Attorney Criminal Division - Branch operations: The division reviews misdemeanor and felony referral cases to decide whether to ?le the case and press criminal charges. Individuals who do not provide a home address may be given the classi?cation "1942 Transient." Some kinds of charges are also often associated with individuals experiencing homelessness like possession of a shopping cart. sleeping or lying on a sidewalk, illegal entry on railroad lands. and others. Cases that are reviewed but not ?led take up less of the department's time. Cases that are ?led take up more of staff time. 571 9,487 City Attorney Civil Branch - Civil Liability Appeals $172,000 City Attorney Civil Branch - Business and Complex Litigation $60,000 City Attorney Executive Branch $92.000 City Attorney IMunicipal Branch - General Counsel $45,000 City Attorney Liability Payouts $725.000 Department I Agency I Program Program, Activity, or Interaction Description Source of Funds (where Costs or other measures applicable) Staff Tracking Notes 1 Summary EWDD The Department received a $6 million grant from the US Department of Labor (Employment and Training Administration) to support the Los Angeles Regional Initiative Ifor Social Enterprise with a grant term of 60 months! (1011/2014 - 9/30/1201 9) that will target 1,000 formerly homeless andlor incarcerated and place 500 of them in jobs. $6 million total to be spent over ?ve years between October 1, 2014 to September 30, 2019 serving exclusively homeless clients. US Department of Labor Total estimated annual costs: $2,121,875 EWDD The Department is working with the Skid Row Development Corporation to ?nd employment for homeless or formerly homeless residents through a program called Living Independently Through Employment (LITE). Users can access job databases, trainings and certi?cations, workshops on employment ski s, and staff assistance at a center on San Julian or can be connected to the program through outreach workers who go to the LA County Jail. $201,875 was allocated last year to the program, and in 2013?14, approximately 5,000 users accessed the portal. and 114 were placed into jobs. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) EWDD The Department serves homeless and formerly homeless clients as part of the clientele served through its adult workforce development program run through 17 WorkSource centers and af?liated programs. $18 million allocated to the program in total; Of 7,100 people who received intensive services from the program in 2012-13, 4% of them or 284 were listed as being homeless or formerly homeless, and 140 people Were placed intojobs with an average hourly wage of $13lhr. Workforce investment Act (er) It is dif?cult to identify the amount of money spent on serving homeless clients using the percentage of total clients who are homeless because such clients are likely to require more intensive services and more staff hours. EWDD The Department serves homeless and formerly homeless youth through its youth employment program, run through 13 YouthSource centers. $12m on is allocated to the program annually, but less than 2% of the youth served are homeless or formerly homeless. WIA HACLA Section 8 Waiting List Limited Preference Homeless Program: 4,111 vouchers allocated; 2014?15 costs $39,685,932 14 Total estimated annual costs: $80,225,570 $843,786 one time cost for timely lease-up for homeless veterans. HACLA Section 8 Waiting List Limited Preference Tenant Based Supportive Housing Program: 800 vouchers allocated; 2014?15 costs $2,687,579 HACLA PSHP Project Based Voucher Program 1,965 vouchers allocated; 2014-15 costs $12,520,860 14 HACLA HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) 3,179 vouchers allocated; 2014?15 costs $17,896,433 22 HACLA Shelter Plus Care 3,180 vouchers allocated; 2014-15 costs $14,572,133 21 HACLA [Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy Program 1,107 vouchers allocated; 2014-15 costs $7,434,766 HACLA New allocation of 500 vouchers Vouchers will be funded by federal government, but support staff for lease-up will require a one-time allocation. $843,736 is requested from the City to support a staff of 9 for timely lease-up. Department I Agency I Program Program. Activity, or Interaction Description Costs or other measures Source of Funds (where applicable) Staff Tracking Notes I Summary HCID Family Source Centers: Centers provide a comprehensive array of social services including after-school care, counseling. and others. to low-income city residents. Some clients who use lthis program self-identify as homeless. The program funds 19 Centers throughout the City, 3 of which are City managed. and 16 of which are managed by non-pro?ts. million from CDBG, General Fund, and Community Service Block Grant (0586) State Funding is the total program funding for 2014-15; 4% of clients, or a total of 1,166 individuals, are self-reported to be homeless. Approximately $528,000 of total funding is used for serving homeless clients. CDBG, GF. 0356 State Funding At this time. whether a client is homeless or not is not a required data collection element, and there is no de?nition of homelessness used. A client is only recorded as homeless if they self-identify as such. A clear de?nition could be used in the future, and this could become a required data collection element. Total estimated annual cost (not including outlays to LAHSA): $21,857,240 HCID Domestic Violence Centers: Under federal dmons, individuals or families ?eeing domestic violence are deemed homeless. The program funds emergency and transitional housing and supportive services for victims of domestic violence. $2,244,240 (from CDBG and General Funds) to serve a total of 1,633 individuals (640 families} all of whom are homeless under the federal de?nition. CDBG, GF HCID HOPWA (Housing Opportunities far Persons with AIDS) is a federally funded program managed by the City for the entire County. The program funds emergency I transitional and permanent housing, supportive services, long-term subsidized housing, permanent supportive housing development, and move-in costs. HOPWA targets very low-income clients (less than 30% of the median income) and is able to serve undocumented clients as well. It also funds a website called that lists affordable housing units. $19.2 million {$15.9 million HOPWA grant $3.3 million rollover), of which an estimated $10 to $12 million went to serve homeless clients. The program will serve an estimated 1,300 homeless individuals in 2014?15, of which an estimated 73.4%. or 954 individuals, live in the City. HCID Permanent Supportive Housing Program. which started in 2005. has funded a total of 2,931 units. some of which have already been built, and others which are currently in the pipeline. has also created a joint Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) process in partnership with HACLA and other public agencies. which has made it signi?cantly easier for private developers to apply for public funding for affordable housing projects. Based on 2014 projects, an average of $11 million per year spent on projects for the homeless. and 222 units constructed annually. A total of $154,188,496 has been spent on the program between 2003 and March 2014 in a total of 49 projects. HCID has an Occupancy Monitoring unit. but does not currently track how many homeless people are served through the housing that is constructed through the PSHP and does not track information about turnover or vacancy rates. HCID has not mandated that developers use the CES to ?ll units in the past, but is doing so for a percentage of all new units, and is exploring ways of lintegrating CES into older properties as well. HCID Affordable Housing Trust Fund Special Needs Program Constructed a total of 735 units between 2003 and March 2014. at a cost of $22,714,096 under 17 projects. LAFD The Department responds to a number of calls for service for homeless users, some of which result in transports and others that do not. In addition to costs for the transports and treatments, transports may also result in costs from LAFD paramedics waiting at hospitals until emergency room beds become available. Ambulance transports form the largest percentage of unrecovered fees for the City. Of $233 million in transports in 2011-12, $162.5 million cannot be collected or are doubtful collections because of those users without insurance being unable to pay and because Medi-Cai and Medicare users are only covered for a fraction of the total ambulance costs. Of a total of 356.756 LAFD EMS incidents in 2013-14, 4.7% were recorded with homeless I transient patients. Of these, 211,374 resulted in transports, of which 6.6% or 13,872 were for homeless l' transient patients. Both Ithe total number and percentage of homeless transports has increased between 2011 and 2014 by 3.007. or 1.3% of the total. as has the total number of incidents. Costs for these transports have not yet been provided by LAFD. Department I Agency I Program Program, Activity, or Interaction Description Costs or other measures Source of Funds (where applicable) Staff Tracking Notes I Summary LAHSA Acti 'ties funded from the General Fund include LAHSA Administration costs, the Crisis Housing I Year Round Emergency Shelter Program, the Vl?nter Shelter Program, the Downtown Drop-in Center, the Homeless Count, and money for the Homeless Management Information System. The $10,737,000 allocated for LAHSA from the General fund for 2014-15 does not include $250,000 allocated from the funds (see below under Council allocations for more information), and does not include $1,949,881 allocated under the Operation Healthy Streets program (see below under Operation Healthy Streets for more information). GF Total estimated annual costs: $20,327,941 (not iincluding A31290 and OHS) LAHSA Activities funded under the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) include HCID Admin costs of $129,911, funding for Crisis Housing I Shelter and Services, the Winter Shelter Program, the Emergency Response Teams the Downtown Drop-In Center, the Homeless Management Information wide effort at addressing the needs of families. System, and the Homeless Family Solutions System, a County- $4,460,268 Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) LAHSA Activities funded from the CDBG include Crisis Housing I Emergency Shelter and Services, 0090 Special Activities, Central City East Sanitation, Technical Assistance, Crisis Housing I Year-Round Programs in both Downtown and Hollywood, and the Crisis Housing Access Centers. $5,130,673 CDBG LAPD The Mental Evaluation Unit (MEU), which operates days/wk. 20 hours a day, is the largest law enforcement response speci?c to mental illness in the nation. The MEU is comprised of teams of mental health professionals and police of?cers that respond to calls for service from LAPD of?cers. Of?cers in the LAPD receive training on when they should call the MEU, and the number of cells has been increasing every year. A system called the Case Assessment and Management Program follows up on repeat users of the MEU and attempts to connect individuals to services. Additionally, the MEU staffs a Triage Unit that answers questions from patrol of?cers related to mental illness. MEU leadership is unable to estimate the percentage of calls that involve the homeless. $6,267,389.50 is allocated for the MEU annually, an unknown percentage of which is spent responding to calls related to the homeless. General Fund (GF) 63 total LAPD staff 38 co- deployed Department of Mental Health personnel. See Sheet titled MEU Staf?ng Details" for a detailed breakdown of staf?ng for the various teams. MEU will ?mplement changes that will allow them to identify homeless individuals in their database. Beginning in January 2015, the Total estimated annual costs (based on an estimated 10% of MEU spending): $536 million - $87.3 million LAPD The Safer Cities Initiative (SCI), launched in 2005, is a team of 59 of?cers focused on the Skid Row area and a team of 12 of?cers focused on the Mission area. Unlike regular patrols, these teams do not respond to radio calls and are able to proactively address problems in their areas. Of?cers report that many of the individuals they encounter repeatedly are both homeless and mentally ill and require proactive outreach and case management support. $5,625,533.45 is allocated for the SCI in Central, and $1,168,734 in Mission annually. SCI leadership does not collect statistics speci?cally related to the homeless, but estimates that 80% of the team's time is spent responding to issues involving the homeless. GF 59 in Skid Row 12 total staff in Mission 10 Department I Agency I Program Program, Activity, or Interaction Description Costs or other measures Source of Funds (where applicable) Staff Tracking Notes lSummary LAPD Patrol of?cers regularly interact with the homeless. either in response to calls or complaints or during their rounds. Responding to complaints involves Senior Lead Of?cers (SLOs). one of whom is assigned to each Basic Car. who are responsible for liaising with the community. SLO's receive complaints from the public. from Council of?ces. and from other City departments like LAPL or Rec and Parks on issues related to the homeless, and work with their patrol of?cers to address the issues. Unclear and wi differ greatly by bureau and neighborhood. GF Materials provided to the Countywide Criminal Justice Coordination Committee Task Force on Crimes Against the Homeless suggest that, based on COMPSTAT records of police responses. very few reports currently include an assessment of whether the suspect or victim is homeless. One means of estimating time spent by patrol of?cers could be through a pilot across select stations which asks of?cers to mark interactions with the homeless in Field Interview Reports for one reporting period. LAPD The MEU is rolling out a new pilot called the Homeless Engagement Linkages Project (HELP) which will have one team of two of?ces and one Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health clinician deployed during the day from Monday to Friday. The purpose of the team will be to provide information about services to "street transients" rig to .accept information and to connect them with social service providers. The team will not be conducting mental health assessments or engaging in any criminal enforcement. The existing MEU team will provide administrative support. including data capture and analysis. 1440 Hours of overtime will be used, and the project will be funded from A8109 funds for a three month pilot to be conducted in 2015 in the Central area. A3109 Metrics for evaluation of the program are yet to be developed. LAPD Along with other individuals who are alleged to have committed crimes, homeless individuals are arrested and placed into LAPD jails for anywhere between 24 to 48 hours before seeing judges. According to the LAPD. a total of 14,838 people were identi?ed as homeless when they were arrested, meaning 14.23% of a total of 104,255 people who were arrested were homeless in 2013. which cost the LAPD $1,630,029 for medical, food, and county costs. Labor costs for these arrests was estimated to be between $45.9 million and $79.6 million. Of these 14,838 homeless bookings, 11,002 were unique. and 3.036 arrestees were identi?ed to have multiple bookings. SF The numbers from the Jail Division were calculated by identifying all arrestees that were identi?ed as "1942 Transient" or provided the address of a known homeless shelter. Although the numbers provided by the jail division appear to be robust, a de?nition that could be compared across departments in the City and across divisions in the LAPD would be useful to implement. LAPL Courtesy Cards. valid for six months. are extended to library patrons who do not have proof of address. many of whom are homeless. 8.305 valid courtesy cards. and 13,393 expired courtesy card holders (no costs available) Total estimated annual costs: $309,000 LAPL A haz?mat team is called whenever there are intensive cleanings required in libraries; the majority of cleanings are related to patrons likely to be homeless. Since July 2014. LAPL has called the haz-mat team 34? times at a cost of $117 per call. a total of $40,599 for half year. and an estimated $81,000 for the whole year. LAPL LAPL has instituted increased trainings for staff on how to respond to mentally patrons. So far. all trainings have been free. Estimated staff costs for attending trainings and substitute staff to replace staff being trained is $120,000. Department Agency I Program Program, Activity. or Interaction Description Costs or other measures Source of Funds (where applicable) Staff Tracking Notes! Summary LAPL Private security has been hired at two branches in part because of incidents related to patrons who appear to be homeless. LAPL reported November costs for security were $9,000. Additional costs may arise from LAPD presence at Central. Annual cost for private security is estimated at $108,000. signed with the LAPD states that they will also provide 880 weekly hours plus supervision and overtime at the Central Library Facility 24.7. Costs for additional security from the LAPD are not available in the LAPL There have been incidents where homeless patrons have become disruptive or violent resulting in calls to the LAPD. Both the LAPD and LAPL are supposed to ?le incident reports of all such cases, but these are not always created in practice. Although LAPL staff mentioned there may be workers' compensation paid out in such cases, their Human Resources Department does not keep a record of such payouts nor would incidents be linked explicitly to homelessness. Incident reports could be used for tracking, but LAPL staff is reluctant to do so because they do not want to target one class of patron. LAPL The Library provides space at 10 branches for the Weingart Center to staff resource desks, earlier had a resource desk at Central branch staffed by the Department of Mental Health, and invited both LAHSA and DMH to Central for short-term engagements. LAHSA staff reported that they encountered more than 100 unique homeless individuals on a single day during their engagement, but more than 250 unique individuals over the course of their engagement. LAPL Librarians at Central have booklets about resources for the homeless that they use for referrals provided to them by the Skid Row Homeless Healthcare Initiative. No measures available. LAPL Homeless individuals regularly use the library. Although the LAPL welcomes all patrons, including the homeless, library leadership anecdotally report increases in incidents of violence and complaints from other library users. Survey of library branches reports homeless patrons at 92% of all branches and an average of 683 to 782 homeless patrons per day across all branches. Public Works Bureau of Sanitation The Bureau is now primarily responsible for homeless encampment clean-ups. After doing clean?ups on an ad-hoc basis, clean?ups have been consolidated into three programs: Operation Healthy Streets in Skid Row, Operation Healthy Streets in Venice, and the Clean Streets program. The ?rst two provide set days of service for areas with large concentrations of the homeless, along with other issues that may lead to large amounts of street waste. These days of service are preceded by periods of outreach by LAHSA. The Clean Streets program provides a set number of days of service to all council districts for cleanups, not all of which are related to homeless encampments. Cleanups related to homeless encampments must have an authorization before they can be cleaned. $574,000 for 2013?1 4 forjust Operation Healthy Streets. Encampment cleanups elsewhere were not signi?cant and are not possible to be tracked. No records of total numbers of encampments cleaned up have been maintained so far, but they will be tracked going fonivard under the Clean Streets program. Public Works Bureau of Street Services Conducts investigations for authorizing homeless encampment cleanups. These investigations require coordination between Public Works Bureau of Sanitation which undertakes the cleanups, LAHSA which does outreach before the cleanups, and the Board of Public Works which provides one of three signatures to authorize the cleanup. Authorizations are valid for 90 days, and some expire before they are cleaned up due to a lack of resources for cleaning. From January 2013 - June 2013, there were 69 authorizations. From 2013 to 2014, there were 456 authorizations. From 2014 to the present, there were 343 authorizations, suggesting that there will be nearly 700 by the end of 2014-15. Each authorization costs approximately $310 in direct costs, meaning a total of $21,390 in 2013, $141 ,360 in 201 3-14, and $106,330 so far in 2014?15 in direct costs. Department I Agency I Program Program, Activity, or interaction Description Costs or other measures Source of Funds (where applicable) Staff Tracking Notes I Summary Operation Healthy Streets Skid 13 Row Operation Healthy Streets: In response to a Notice of Violation by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health on unsanitary conditions in Skid Row, this program was developed to increase outreach and street cleaning and to provide additional services for the homeless in the area. The program includes the following components: 4 to 6 cleanings quarterly and equipment, 8 to 12 spot cleanings on alternate months, LAHSA Emergency Response Teams (ERTs), hazardous waste cleaning contracts, a storage program for property belonging to the homeless including voluntary 7-day and short-term storage and mandatory storage to be moved from another site, and an increase in the availability of showers and toilets in the Skid Row area. $3 was provided for this program from the General City Purposes in 2014-15. GF Total estimated annual costs: $3.5 Operation Healthy Streets - Venice Similar to the effort in Skid Row, the City is funding a clean-up along the Venice Boardwalk, Third Ave, Rose Ave, and Hampton on occasion. $500,000 allocated to this from the Unappropriated Balance. Each cleanup costs approximately $9,000 daily including costs for Sanitation and the contractorI Clean Harbors. Recreation and Parks Staff regularly interact with the homeless who live in parks, classi?ed as illegal camping by the Department. Staff respond by requesting in iduals to leave if there is a violation by citing them for violating relevant City ordinances, or, on very rare occasions. arresting those who refuse to leave, and working with the LAPD and the City Attorney. Staff have also linked up the homeless with services whenever possible through individual connections with LAHSA and the Cold Wet Weather Sheltering Program, and they call LAFD paramedics to assist the homeless when required. Staff also organize clean?ups of homeless encampments and work with the City Attorney (if required) and LAPD to ensure that the ?ghts of the homeless are protected. Clean-ups are limited by the lack of availability of park maintenance staff and staff from other departments. The Department has not provided information on expenditures or extent of impact. However, regular clean~ups and interactions with the homeless take place. One person, Chief Albert Torres, has been appointed to lead all homeless encampment cleanups, but a number of Park Rangers and park maintenance staff also respond to issues arising from homeless encampments on a regular basis. LADOT Parking tickets given out to homeless individuals or families living out of their cars may never be paid, and there may be costs to the City in collection fees. No information is available about the number or percentage of parking tickets issued to homeless residents, whether these parking tickets are ever paid, and the costs for collections on these tickets, if any. LADOT enforcement teams could be asked to record numbers of cars in which they suspect owners may be homeless for a prescribed period of time. A policy could also be developed that establishes a waiter or partial waiver of payment for those who receive tickets who are homeless and/or low-income. City Administrative 15' Of?ce The of?ce has costs related to administering the Operation Healthy Streets initiative, providing analyst support to budgets for HACLA, LAHSA, and HCID, as well as management time spent on special projects related to homelessness. Costs estimated at 1 Senior Administrative Analyst ll FTE. Legend: EWDD Economic and Workforce Development Department HACLA Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles HCID Housing and Community Investment Department LAFD Los Angeies Fire Department LAHSA L05 Angetes Homeless Services Authority Department I Agency I Program, Activity, or Interaction Description Costs or other measures Staff Tracking Notes I Summary Program LAPD Los Angeles Police Department LAPL Los Angeles Public Library LADOT Department of Transportation The information provided in this Attachment was compiled through interviews, e-mails, reports, and the City's budget documents.