REPORT TO THE UTAH LEGISLATURE Number 2017-11 A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives October 2017 Office of the LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR GENERAL State of Utah STATE OF UTAH Office of the Legislative Auditor General 315 HOUSE BUILDING • PO BOX 145315 • SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5315 (801) 538-1033 • FAX (801) 538-1063 Audit Subcommittee of the Legislative Management Committee President Wayne L. Niederhauser, Co–Chair • Speaker Gregory H. Hughes, Co–Chair Senator Gene Davis • Senator Ralph Okerlund • Representative Brian S. King • Representative Brad R. Wilson JOHN M. SCHAFF, CIA AUDITOR GENERAL October 2017 TO: THE UTAH STATE LEGISLATURE Transmitted herewith is our report, A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (Report #2017-11). A digest is found on the blue pages located at the front of the report. The objectives and scope of the audit are explained in the Introduction. We will be happy to meet with appropriate legislative committees, individual legislators, and other state officials to discuss any item contained in the report in order to facilitate the implementation of the recommendations. Sincerely, John M. Schaff, CIA Auditor General JMS/lm Digest of A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives This report examines what homeless services are provided in Utah, who pays for these services, and whether homeless spending is used efficiently. We looked at homeless funding streams originating at the federal, state, and local levels of government as well as from private donors. Chapter II Federal Sources Contribute Majority of Funds Spent on Homelessness Significant Funds Are Spent on Homeless Services and Programs in Utah. All levels of government participate financially in Utah homeless services and programs. The federal government is the largest government funder of homeless services and programs in Utah. Homeless Funding Has Many Sources, Can Pass Through Multiple Entities. Homeless funding comes from four sources— federal, state, local governments, and private donors. While the funding ultimately reaches service providers, the funding path can involve multiple levels of government. Each Funding Source Plays Role in Overall Homeless Service Delivery System. Federal, state, and local government funding that directly addresses homelessness is routed to nonprofit organizations who provide the actual services to the homeless population. Non-government donors also provide funding needed by service providers. Chapter III Salt Lake County Oversees Largest Portion of Local Homeless Distribution County Expenditures Dominated By Three Areas. A large majority of county distributions are going to three main categories: Housing and Community Development, behavioral health services, and jail costs. These three categories make up 87 percent of county distributions. Associated Costs Are Most of County Expenditures for Homelessness. Associated costs made up $8.9 million of the $12.2 million of Salt Lake County’s total homeless funding. Associated costs are spent on programs that would exist regardless of homeless populations. Some of the county’s largest distributions of federal and state funds are used Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General -i- for associated costs. Increased transparency in the presentation of county expenditures and distributions will help all stakeholders better understand homeless funding. Most County Homeless Funding Is Federal and State Dollars. Salt Lake County is responsible for distributing the largest share of homeless spending, even though the funding provided by the county is less than both federal and state governments’ contributions. Chapter IV Salt Lake City is Significantly Affected By Transient Homeless Population Most Salt Lake City Spending on Homelessness Is for Policing. As in Salt Lake County, most homeless expenditures in Salt Lake City are associated, rather than direct costs. In Salt Lake City, homeless spending is dominated by police services. Nearly threequarters of city expenditures were for police in fiscal year 2016. Significant Expenditures Are Directed to Rio Grande Area. Nearly all funding distributed by Salt Lake City for homelessness is directly tied to Rio Grande area service providers, police and fire dispatches, and cleanup in this area and others with similar concentrations of homeless individuals. Chapter V State and Federal Funds Appear to Be Distributed Appropriately, Will Continue to Grow State and Federal Funds Are Distributed According to Best Practices. The federal government allocates Continuum of Care (CoC) money according to a competitive scoring process overseen by three organizations in the state. According to HUD, the local CoCs have generally done well in their application processes. Likewise, the State Homelessness Coordinating Committee allocates state funds and some federal funds according to a competitive process. Funding for domestic violence shelters is provided to organizations around the state through an approved sole source procurement process. New Salt Lake County Shelter System Is Being Funded by New Legislative Appropriations. One-time and ongoing state funding for homeless programs have both increased to help pay for a new shelter system in Salt Lake County. The transformation of homeless services and shelters is due in large part to the work of state and local leaders and Salt Lake County’s Collective Impact Steering Committee. Salt Lake City played an important role by choosing new shelter sites through a multiyear public process. This coordination across levels of government and across service providers appears to be consistent with best practices and existing government programs. - ii - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) REPORT TO THE UTAH LEGISLATURE Report No. 2017-11 A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives October 2017 Audit Performed By: Audit Manager Brian Dean, CIA, CFE Audit Supervisor Benjamin Buys, CPA Audit Staff Christopher McClelland, CIA, CFE Table of Contents Chapter I Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 Utah’s Homeless Population Is Concentrated in Salt Lake County ............................ 1 Multiple Definitions Exist for Homelessness ............................................................. 2 Government and Donors Fund Many Homeless Services, Programs ......................... 3 Audit Scope and Objectives ....................................................................................... 3 Chapter II Federal Sources Contribute Majority of Funds Spent on Homelessness .............................. 5 Significant Funds Are Spent on Homeless Services and Programs in Utah ................ 5 Homeless Funding Has Many Sources, Can Pass Through Multiple Entities ............. 7 Each Funding Source Plays Role in Overall Homeless Service Delivery System ......... 8 Chapter III Salt Lake County Oversees Largest Portion of Local Homeless Distribution .................... 15 County Expenditures Dominated By Three Areas ................................................... 16 Associated Costs Are Most Of County Expenditures for Homelessness ................... 18 Most County Homeless Funding Is Federal and State Dollars ................................. 21 Recommendation .................................................................................................... 22 Chapter IV Salt Lake City Is Significantly Affected By Transient Homeless Population ...................... 23 Most Salt Lake City Spending on Homelessness Is for Policing ............................... 23 Significant Expenditures Are Directed to Rio Grande Area .................................... 26 Chapter V State and Federal Funds Appear to Be Distributed Appropriately, Will Continue to Grow ......................................................................................................................................... 29 State and Federal Funds Are Distributed According to Best Practices ...................... 29 New Salt Lake County Shelter System Is Being Funded by New Legislative Appropriations ........................................................................................................ 32 Recommendations................................................................................................... 35 Appendices ....................................................................................................................... 37 Appendix A Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2016 39 Appendix B Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2015. 45 Appendix C Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2014 51 Appendix D Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2016 ..... 57 Appendix E Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2015...... 61 Appendix F Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2014 ...... 65 Appendix G State Homeless Coordinating Committee Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Years 2015 and 2016 .................................................................... 69 Agency Responses ............................................................................................................ 75 Chapter I Introduction This report examines what homeless services are provided in Utah, who pays for these services, and whether homeless spending is used efficiently. The primary areas of focus are Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City because of their concentrated homeless populations and large financial involvement of these local governments. We looked at homeless funding streams originating at the federal, state, and local levels of government as well as from private donors. This report is a retrospective look at prior year's initiatives and does not include information related to the recent operations in the Rio Grande area. Utah’s Homeless Population Is Concentrated in Salt Lake County Homeless individuals and families constitute less than one percent of the state’s population. However, this percentage still amounts to a sizeable homeless population concentrated in Salt Lake County. A point-in-time count conducted in January 2016 determined there were 1,810 homeless individuals and an additional 979 persons in homeless families statewide. Of these, 67 percent, or 1,255 homeless individuals and 625 persons in homeless families, were in Salt Lake County. The rest of Utah’s homeless population is dispersed in the state. The second largest region, Weber and Morgan counties, has 12 percent of the state’s homeless population. Utah’s homeless population can be described according to subpopulations. For example, of the 2016 point-in-time numbers, 802 were survivors of domestic violence, 335 were homeless veterans, and 150 were unaccompanied youth.1 Most homelessness in Utah occurs in Salt Lake County. These categories do not appear to be mutually exclusive. Homeless individuals can fall under multiple categories. 1 Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General -1- Multiple Definitions Exist for Homelessness Homeless definitions differ across federal departments. HUD’s homeless definition includes individuals and families fleeing domestic violence. Federal agencies use definitions of homelessness to describe the programs’ service populations and eligibility qualifications. These definitions identify the groups targeted by each respective department’s homeless programs. Definitions differ across federal departments and agencies because of varying priorities and mandates. Homeless programs and funds target subpopulations of homeless individuals and families that fall under different homeless definitions. The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HUD focuses primarily on housing, and its institutional definition for homelessness reflects this. Under HUD’s definitions, individuals and families are considered homeless if they lack “fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residences” or will “imminently lose their primary nighttime residences.” HUD also includes unaccompanied youth and families with children that are considered homeless under other federal definitions. Individuals and families fleeing domestic or sexual violence or those staying in temporary homeless shelters are also considered homeless. The United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). HHS incorporates part of the HUD definition, but includes people who are “doubled up” or staying with a series of friends or family members for short periods of time. HHS also includes previously homeless individuals about to be released from prison or a hospital without stable housing. The HHS definition focuses primarily on the instability of living arrangements. The United States Department of Education (Education). Education defines homeless youth as those lacking a “fixed, regular, and nighttime residence” or staying in shelters, other temporary residences, or a “public or private place not meant for sleeping accommodation for human beings.” -2- A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) For the purposes of this report, we did not adopt a specific definition of homelessness, but documented and evaluated homeless programs and funding identified as such by different levels of government, both federal and those in Utah. These entities used preferred definitions to identify the homeless and the programs that help them. For example, the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness identified numerous federal programs that target homelessness. Likewise, Utah state government has multiple programs addressing homelessness. We do not adopt a specific definition of homelessness in this report. We rely on government entities to identify homeless programs and spending. Government and Donors Fund Many Homeless Services, Programs Many programs funded by government and private donations provide services to homeless individuals and families to satisfy basic needs. Federal homeless programs provide services to specific subpopulations like homeless children and youth as well as veterans. Federal programs focus on healthcare, food, shelter, and mental health. The state of Utah funds diverse direct homeless services, including emergency shelters, permanent supportive housing services, rapid re-housing assistance, street outreach, and transitional housing. Permanent supportive housing targets those with disabilities through a combination of affordable housing, health care, and supportive services. Rapid re-housing programs use financial assistance and various supportive services to quickly get homeless families and individuals into permanent housing. Homeless services are provided at locations throughout the state. Large homeless shelters are found in Ogden, Salt Lake City, Midvale, and St. George. Domestic violence shelters provide services around the state. In Salt Lake County, numerous service providers and nonprofit entities have provided a wide range of services to meet basic needs, such as prepared meals and food pantries, clothing and other necessities, and medical resources, to name a few. Homeless services are provided at locations throughout the state with large shelters found in Ogden, Salt Lake City, Midvale, and St. George. Audit Scope and Objectives We were asked to document and review sources of funding for homeless programs in the state, assess how those funds are used, and determine the efficiency of expenditures. The following outlines the issues addressed in this report in each chapter. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General -3- Chapter II – Documents homeless funding amounts and sources. It also provides information about the different parties involved in homeless funding and how funding reaches service providers. Chapter III – Provides a look at Salt Lake County’s involvement in homeless funding and services. Chapter IV – Provides a look at Salt Lake City’s involvement in homeless funding and services. Chapter V – Reviews how state and select federal homeless funds are awarded. The chapter also addresses changes to Utah’s homeless service delivery system. Appendices – Identifies funding distributed to service providers by Salt Lake County, Salt Lake City, and the state. -4- A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Chapter II Federal Sources Contribute Majority of Funds Spent on Homelessness The focus of this report is on funding provided to combat homelessness by the federal and state governments and Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City governments. We recognize that many counties and municipalities spend money that can be attributed to homelessness, however the concentration of homeless populations and homeless services in Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County has resulted in significant government spending by these localities. Utah has addressed and continues to address homelessness through government intervention. A large amount of government funding goes towards homeless programs. Funding for homeless programs comes from many sources and can pass through multiple levels of government. Federal, state, and local governments each play a role in funding and managing programs that benefit homeless populations. Private donors supplement this government funding with direct monetary donations and in-kind services. Funding for homeless programs comes from many sources and can pass through multiple levels of government. Significant Funds Are Spent on Homeless Services and Programs in Utah All levels of government participate financially in Utah homeless services and programs. Figure 2.1 shows how homeless funding compares across various levels of government. The federal government is the largest government funder of homeless services and programs in Utah. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General -5- Figure 2.1 Recent Federal, State, and Local Funding of Utah Homeless Programs and Services. Amounts are in millions of dollars.2 Fiscal Year* The federal government is the largest government funder of homeless services and programs in Utah. 2014 2015 2016 Cost Category Direct Associated Total Direct Associated Total Direct Associated Total Federal** State $27.0 6.9 33.9 27.1 8.6 35.7 28.4 13.5 41.9 $5.9 4.1 10.0 9.0 4.9 13.9 7.6 7.2 14.8 Salt Lake County $2.7 10.0 12.7 2.9 9.8 12.7 3.3 8.9 12.2 Salt Lake City $0.4 6.7 7.1 0.5 8.7 9.2 1.1 11.2 12.3 Total $36.0 27.6 63.6 39.5 31.9 71.5 40.4 40.8 81.2 Source: Individual federal program data, COBI 2017, Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County provided spending data; totals may not equal the sum of relevant columns and rows due to rounding *State, county, and city figures adhere to state fiscal year, July through June. Most federal dollars adhere to federal fiscal year, October through September. Remainder of federal dollars adhere to state fiscal year. **The US Department of Veterans Affairs provides many services for homeless veterans directly. The cost of these directly provided services in Utah are not included in this report due to the difficulty in acquiring this information from federal agencies. For the purposes of this report, we define direct and associated costs as follows. Direct costs are those related to the provision of homeless services or services that exist because there is a homeless population in Utah. Associated costs are those related to programs that would exist regardless of homeless populations. These programs are not directly attributable to homelessness, but funds are typically allocated to homeless populations. Associated costs also include costs for programs that help the homeless, not because they are homeless, but because they are indigent or have a disability. Government Direct Costs Fund Homeless Service Providers The state funds homeless services through the State Homeless Coordinating Committee and the state’s domestic violence program. As shown in Figure 2.1, in fiscal year 2016, the federal government provided $28.4 million (70 percent) in funding to cover $40.4 million in direct costs. As will be discussed in Chapter III of this report, most of this money is routed through Salt Lake County for distribution to homeless service providers. The state funded $7.6 million in direct costs for homeless services in fiscal year 2016, mostly through the State Homeless Coordinating Committee (SHCC) and the state’s domestic violence program, which includes shelters and Fiscal year 2016 is the most recent year for which we have complete data for all levels of government. 2 -6- A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) associated services. Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City have also directly addressed homelessness with $4.5 million combined funding of direct costs in fiscal year 2016. This funding focused on service providers and cleanup services. These expenditures will be discussed in further detail in Chapters III and IV of this report. Associated Costs Have Grown Rapidly Associated costs have grown much faster than direct costs from fiscal years 2014 to 2016. Associated spending was $40.8 million in fiscal year 2016, up 48 percent from the $27.6 million spent in fiscal year 2014. This increase resulted in associated costs surpassing direct spending. The increase in associated costs has likely been spurred, in part, by the rise in the number of homeless individuals receiving Medicaid along with increased police costs incurred in areas of the city with large numbers of transient populations. Associated costs made up the majority of Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City spending on homelessness, issues that will be discussed further in Chapters III and IV. Almost all of Salt Lake County’s fiscal year 2016 associated expenditures of $8.9 million were spent on behavioral health and criminal justice costs. In fiscal year 2016, Salt Lake City spent nearly 85 percent of its $11.2 million in associated costs on policing. Homeless associated costs have grown much faster than direct costs between fiscal years 2014 and 2016. Associated costs make up the majority of Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City spending on homelessness. Homeless Funding Has Many Sources, Can Pass Through Multiple Entities Homeless funding comes from four sources—federal, state, local governments, and private donors. While the funding ultimately reaches service providers, the funding path can involve multiple levels of government. Figure 2.2 is a diagram of various homeless funding paths. Each path has been observed for at least one homeless program or stream of money that was spent on homelessness in Utah. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General -7- Figure 2.2 All Levels of Government Participate in Funding Homeless Programs. Depending on the program, funding passed through more than one level of government before being used. State Govt. Federal Government Local Govt. Private Donors State Govt. Homeless funding comes from four sources— federal, state, local governments, and private donors. Local Govt. Local Govt. Local Govt. Service Providers Source: Auditor analysis At least one federal grant passed through state government, then through the county to service providers. Depending on the program or grant, funding can pass through multiple levels of government. For example, we found that at least one federal homeless grant passed through state government, then through the county to service providers. The multiple paths funding can take makes identifying all homeless funding difficult as it involves many entities and government agencies. A list of service providers that receive funds distributed by Salt Lake County, Salt Lake City, and state government is found in Appendix A through G. Each Funding Source Plays Role in Overall Homeless Service Delivery System Federal, state, and local government funding that directly addresses homelessness is routed to nonprofit organizations who provide the actual services to the homeless population. As shown in Figure 2.1, -8- A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) the federal government provides most of the direct service funding, with $28.4 million in fiscal year 2016. Utah state government is the next biggest government provider of direct service funding at $7.6 million, followed by Salt Lake County with $3.3 million and Salt Lake City with $1.1 million. Non-government donors also provide funding needed by service providers. Federal Programs Provide Most Direct Homeless Funding Six federal agencies administer programs targeting homelessness in Utah.3 These 18 programs may fund nonprofit service providers directly or provide grants to state and local governments, which then allocate the money. Figure 2.3 lists federal programs that target homelessness with their associated federal department or agency. Compiled by United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, the list has been modified to include only programs administered in Utah. Six federal agencies administer 18 programs targeting homelessness in Utah. Federal programs not present in Utah are not included in this number or in Figure 2.3. 3 Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General -9- Figure 2.3 Six Federal Departments and Agencies Administer 18 Programs That Target Homelessness. These programs provide many basic needs. Federal Department Education Health and Human Services Homeland Security Housing and Urban Development Justice Veterans Affairs Program Name Education for Homeless Children and Youth Grants for State and Local Activities Grants for the Benefit of Homeless Individuals Services in Supportive Housing Cooperative Agreements to Benefit Homeless Individuals for States Healthcare for the Homeless Program Programs for Runaway and Homeless Youth Projects for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness Family Violence Prevention and Services Formula Grants Emergency Food and Shelter Program Emergency Solutions Grant Program Continuum of Care Program HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Transitional Housing Assistance Grants for Victims of Sexual Assault, Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, and Stalking Program Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans Program Grant and Per Diem Program Health Care for Homeless Veterans Program Homeless Veterans Dental Program Supportive Services for Veterans Families Veteran Justice Outreach Initiative Source: USICH, FVPSA web site, VA representative Figure 2.1’s federal spending data include these programs under direct costs. The state, county, and city use semidiscretionary federal grants for homeless programs. - 10 - The Federal Government Also Provides Semi-Discretionary Grants to State and Local Governments. These grants and funding programs can be used for a variety of purposes, including homeless programs or homelessness in general. Semi-discretionary funds, which include Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Social Services Block Grant (SSBG), and the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, are spent on direct homeless services. The state has used TANF money to fund domestic violence shelters and will use it to fund homeless shelters in the future. Salt Lake County uses SSBG, CDBG, and HOME money for homeless shelter programs. These county programs are referenced in Chapter III. Salt Lake City has also used CDBG money for homeless programs, as described in Chapter IV of this report. A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Federal Programs Fund Significant Associated Costs. As mentioned earlier, associated costs are those related to programs that would exist regardless of homeless populations. Federal funds used for associated costs shown in Figure 2.1 primarily take the form of Medicaid payments for both physical and mental health treatment of homeless individuals and families. The mental health portion of Medicaid requires state and county funding participation while the physical health portion requires only state funding participation. The federal government likely also contributes money towards administrative and overhead costs. However, estimates for these costs, which would increase federal totals in Figure 2.1, are outside the scope of this audit. Similar overhead costs have been included by Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City in their associated costs, but are not reflected in federal expenditures. Federal funds used for associated costs primarily take the form of Medicaid payments. State of Utah Funds Homeless Shelters, Homeless Services, and Domestic Violence Centers The state of Utah has dedicated millions of dollars to homeless programs, as shown in Figure 2.1. State funds totaling $14.8 million were used for direct and associated homeless costs in relatively similar amounts in fiscal year 2016. State Funding for Direct Homeless Costs Comes from Two Programs. The Utah State Legislature appropriates money annually that is awarded by the SHCC to homeless service providers. The SHCC, staffed by the Department of Workforce Services (DWS), awards various state and federal monies including money from the Pamela Atkinson Homeless Trust Fund. The Legislature also appropriates funds to the domestic violence program at the Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) in the Department of Human Services. DCFS awards contracts to domestic violence shelters throughout the state. Figure 2.4 shows fiscal year 2016 state funding for direct costs. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General State funds totaling $14.8 million were used for direct and associated homeless costs in fiscal year 2016. - 11 - Figure 2.4 State Direct Homeless Funding Primarily Went to Shelters and Housing Programs Administered by SHCC and DCFS. Other spending includes dollars that helped fund Salt Lake County government homeless programs. Source: COBI 2017, Salt Lake County As will be discussed in Chapter V of this report, the state’s financial involvement in direct homeless services is poised to increase substantially. The state participates in Medicaid payments related to physical health, mental health, and substance abuse. The State Also Pays for Certain Associated Homeless Costs. As mentioned previously, the state pays a portion of all Medicaid spending, which includes spending on homeless individuals and families. This portion of their associated costs has increased from $2.2 million in fiscal year 2014 to $4.8 million in fiscal year 2016, making up 67 percent of the state’s associated expenditures on homelessness shown in Figure 2.1. The number of homeless individuals receiving physical Medicaid benefits has increased, likely driving a large part of this increase. The state also helps pay for substance abuse and criminal justice programs, some of which also receive funding by Salt Lake County. Three of these programs are the Justice Reinvestment Initiative, Drug Offender Reform Act, and the Family Drug Dependency Court. As with the federal government, other associated costs the state pays are not included in this analysis. As shown in Chapter III, one major Salt Lake County expense is the incarceration costs of homeless individuals. The state has similar costs at the state prison that are not reflected in state expenditures, though the amount of these is unclear. - 12 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) These incarceration costs, both at the county and state level, are considered associated costs because they would still exist if homelessness were eliminated. The state has other programs through which homeless individuals can benefit, such as Women, Infants, and Children nutrition program, cancer screening, childhood immunizations, and communicable disease screenings. DWS provides employment counseling services to homeless individuals and determines the eligibility of homeless individuals and families for government benefits. The direct and overhead costs associated with providing these programs to homeless individuals are not included in our analysis. Homeless individuals and families benefit from other state programs like WIC, cancer screening, childhood immunizations, and disease screening. Local Governments Fund Existing Homeless Programs and Services Both Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City have direct homeless costs, but most homelessness spending was related to associated costs. As shown in Figure 2.1, Salt Lake County has contributed on average about $3 million in each of the last three fiscal years in general funds to various housing programs, shelter operations, and shelter renovations. The city contributed close to $0.5 million to direct homeless costs in fiscal years 2014 and 2015, increasing to $1.1 million in 2016. These city funds were used for similar programs to the county’s, namely housing and shelter operation. Additionally, both the county and the city have been involved in cleanup efforts in downtown Salt Lake. Associated homeless costs make up a majority of total spending in both Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City. Seventy-three percent of Salt Lake County’s homeless expenditures cover associated costs, mostly on the mental health portion of Medicaid, substance abuse treatment, indigent legal defense, and the county jail. Salt Lake City spending is 91 percent associated costs, all for police and fire response in areas of the city most directly affected by homeless populations. County and city funding pays for direct costs related to housing assistance and shelters. Salt Lake City spending is 91 percent associated costs, all for police and fire response. Private Donations Provide Service-Provider Revenues In addition to federal, state, and local government funding, nonprofit service providers rely heavily on private donations to fund their operations. Quantifying these amounts, however, is difficult. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 13 - Quantifying total amount of private donations for homelessness across all service providers in the state is difficult. - 14 - Some of the biggest providers in the state receive a significant portion of their revenues from nongovernment sources. For example, the Road Home, one of the largest homeless shelter providers in the state, received $6.3 million in donations and in-kind work in fiscal year 2016. These contributions accounted for 37 percent of the Road Home’s revenues in 2016. However, quantifying the total amount of private donations for homelessness across all service providers in the state is difficult. Audited financial statements are generally available for nonprofit organizations. However, nonprofit service providers may provide services other than homeless services. This introduces difficulties because it is unclear what portion of donations is used for homeless services. The focus of this audit was on government funding for homelessness, but it is important to note that private donations are a key part of funding for service providers. A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Chapter III Salt Lake County Oversees Largest Portion of Local Homeless Distribution Salt Lake County distributes federal and state funds to homeless programs in addition to county funds. These distributions come mostly from three areas in the county: Housing and Community Development, behavioral health services, and jail costs. Most of the county funds that are distributed are associated costs, as they pay for homeless individuals in programs and services that are not designated only for addressing homelessness. Examining all distributions to homeless programs by the county, more dollars were from federal and state sources than from the county. Although the federal government contributes the largest share of funding directed at combatting homelessness, Salt Lake County distributes the largest portion of homeless expenditures in Utah. As shown in Figure 3.1, most of the money distributed by the county in fiscal year 2016 for homeless programs and services are federal and state dollars passed through Salt Lake County to be awarded. Salt Lake County also funds homeless programs with county dollars. These funds are typically spent on associated costs, such as jail, Medicaid, and public defender costs. Salt Lake County distributed over $30 million in homeless funding. Figure 3.1 Salt Lake County Distributed Over $30 Million of the $81.2 Million Spent on Homeless Programs in Fiscal Year 2016. Most of this money was federal and state funding that was passed through the county. Fiscal Year 2014 2015 2016 Federal $9,727,798 11,313,019 14,689,087 State $2,618,205 3,167,606 3,607,747 County Total $12,684,178 12,670,547 12,201,028 $25,030,181 27,151,172 30,497,862 Source: Salt Lake County As shown in Figure 2.1 in Chapter II, $81.2 million was spent by all levels of government in fiscal year 2016 for homeless programs. The $30.5 million distributed by Salt Lake County represents 38 percent of this total. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 15 - County Expenditures Dominated By Three Areas As shown in Figure 3.2, a large majority of county distributions are going to three main categories: Housing and Community Development, behavioral health services, and jail costs. These three categories make up 87 percent of county distributions. Figure 3.2 In Fiscal Year 2016, Salt Lake County Distributions Were Mostly for Homeless Programs, Behavioral Health, and Jail Costs. The county also pays for indigent legal defense. Most distributions from Salt Lake County were to service providers, behavioral health services, and the county jail. Source: Salt Lake County Housing and Community Development costs are direct costs spent on service providers for programs such as housing and shelter services and are made up of many smaller distributions. The seven providers who received over $200,000 in fiscal year 2016 are shown in Figure 3.3 below; a full list of providers, programs funded, and the sources of funding received for fiscal years 2014 to 2016 can be found in Appendices A through C. - 16 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Figure 3.3 Service Providers Received More Than $10 Million in Distributions from Salt Lake County in Fiscal Year 2016. The top seven recipients of funding shown below received over $9 million of this amount. Recipient Housing Authority of Salt Lake County The Road Home Volunteers of America Housing Authority of Salt Lake City AmeriCorps Department of Workforce Services Tooele County Housing Authority Amount $ 3,779,254 3,339,051 680,829 590,186 336,513 223,151 209,884 Source: Salt Lake County The distributions to service providers were often split among several different projects. For example, The Road Home received 13 different allocations of money for projects including shelter operations, rapid re-housing, and permanent supportive housing. The housing authorities received 20 allocations, mostly for permanent supportive housing. Volunteers of America received funding for similar programs, as well as money for a capital improvement. Funding for AmeriCorps paid for case management services and the Department of Workforce Services received funding for the state’s Homeless Management Information System. Salt Lake County distributed over $10 million to homeless service providers in fiscal year 2016. Behavioral health services shown in Figure 3.2 include Medicaid mental health and substance abuse treatments. Jail costs represent the total cost of incarcerating homeless individuals. In addition to the three large categories described above, the county spends over $2 million for legal representation of the homeless population by the Salt Lake Legal Defender Association. Over threequarters of “Other” expenditures are spent on case management and therapy, transient camp clean-ups, and a youth services housing program. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General Salt Lake County spent over $2 million for legal representation of homeless individuals. - 17 - Associated Costs Are Most Of County Expenditures for Homelessness Associated costs accounted for $8.9 million of the $12.2 million spent by Salt Lake County on homelessness. As shown in Chapter II, Figure 2.1, $8.9 million of the $12.2 million of Salt Lake County’s total homeless funding were spent on associated costs. While we feel the classification of these costs as homeless spending is appropriate, it is important to distinguish these costs from direct costs that are spent solely on homeless services. As discussed in Chapter II, associated costs are spent on programs that would exist regardless of homeless populations, so while some costs may be reduced, they will not be eliminated even if these populations are no longer homeless. For example, incarceration costs related to lawlessness would occur even if homelessness is reduced. Similarly, Medicaid program costs are due to indigence or health conditions, not just because an individual is homeless. Some of the county’s largest distributions of federal and state funds are used for these and other associated costs. County Homeless Expenditures Fund Behavioral Health, Criminal Justice Costs The county spends $1.8 million on behavioral health services and $5.4 million on jail costs for homeless individuals. As shown in Figure 3.1, the other two major categories of distributions besides Housing and Community Development are behavioral health services and jail costs. Both federal and state dollars fund these programs in addition to $7.2 million in county funds — $1.8 million in behavioral health services and $5.4 million in operating costs for the county jail. The other major county expense for homeless individuals is for criminal defense services for homeless offenders paid to the Salt Lake Legal Defender Association. This funding ensures that indigent persons can receive legal representation as Salt Lake County does not have its own public defenders. We have classified these costs as associated costs because the populations served by these programs extend beyond homeless individuals. The county has allocated costs for these programs based on the number of homeless individuals served. When individuals receive behavioral health services, they report their homelessness status. A similar method is used for individuals booked into the county jail where individuals self-identify as homeless or are classified as such if a shelter is listed as their home address. The Salt Lake Legal Defender Association also uses this information to estimate costs for providing services to homeless individuals. Although - 18 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) expenditures for homeless individuals were significant in these areas, they represent only a small portion of the budgets for these programs. Behavioral health services were provided to 7,214 individuals for substance abuse in calendar year 2016, and an additional 16,794 received mental health services. The county reported 1,129 homeless individuals received substance abuse treatment and 575 homeless individuals received mental health services in fiscal year 2016. Only a small portion of county budgets address homeless individuals. The County Sheriff’s Office had jail expenditures of over $75.6 million in calendar year 2016, compared to costs of just under $6.5 million for homeless individuals in fiscal year 2016. Additionally, the Sherriff’s Office reported that it was at maximum capacity in the jail, and had a 600 bed shortage. Even without the average daily 190 homeless individuals in the jail in fiscal year 2016, the jail would still have been at capacity and costs would not have decreased. Homeless individuals used 8 percent of the 2,271 beds in the county jail. The Salt Lake Legal Defender Association estimated $2.1 million, or 14 percent of its budget, is used for representing homeless individuals. Solving the homeless problem would not result in a significant reduction in most of these associated costs, and the total associated homeless expenditures are typically a small part of county program budgets. While homelessness may contribute to substance abuse, mental health, and criminal justice costs, there is not likely to be significant cost avoidance possible in these areas regardless of the housing status of currently homeless populations. Associated costs may not see significant reductions even if homelessness is reduced. Salt Lake County Funds Homeless Services The county directly funds many homeless programs that make up most of the county’s direct homelessness expenditures. Additionally, the county estimates spending $693,000 on transient cleanups in fiscal year 2016. The county spent $693,000 on transient cleanups in fiscal year 2016. Much of these direct costs are incurred by the county’s Division of Housing and Community Development for programs such as rental assistance and supporting nonprofit organizations like the Road Home and Weigand Center in the Rio Grande area of Salt Lake City, as shown in Appendices A through C. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 19 - Overhead costs related to homelessness were not consistently reported for different areas of Salt Lake County. Homeless spending reported by Salt Lake County was mostly federal funds. Cost Accounting Is Not Consistent. Homelessness is not typically a specific cost driver for county departments. As a result, costs specific to homelessness are not typically tracked. For this reason, cost data is not consistently represented across departments. For instance, the county calculated jail costs by taking the total budget of the jail and dividing by the number of jail days to get a total cost of $100.84 per day. All overhead costs of the jail are included in this number. For Medicaid mental health and substance abuse treatments, only the costs of payments to providers were included and no overhead was allocated. County Spending Has Not Been Clear. Salt Lake County has reported at different times that $52 million in government and private funds were provided for direct services. While the sources and expenditures of this entire amount were not clarified, $20 million in direct services were presented to the Collective Impact on Homelessness Steering Committee as funded or provided by the county. This same information was presented to the Senate Health and Humans Services Committee meeting on March 4, 2016 and the House Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Standing Committee on March 6, 2017. However, most of the funds were federal contributions that passed through the county, as will be discussed later in this chapter. We have classified other expenditures included in the $20 million, such as mental health treatment and substance use disorder treatment, as associated costs. Given the increased attention that has been given to homeless spending in recent years, it would be beneficial to the county and other stakeholders if a reliable, consistent method of allocating and reporting costs was developed. This would ensure that overhead costs are treated in a similar manner and the source of funds is made clear. Increased transparency in the presentation of county expenditures and distributions will help all stakeholders better understand homeless funding. Self-reporting of homeless status may cause the true number of homeless individuals to be underrepresented. - 20 - Identifying Homeless Individuals Is Difficult. Determining who is homeless can also be difficult. The Salt Lake Legal Defender Association believe its number of homeless clients underrepresents the true homeless count because some individuals who are arrested give fake addresses and some become homeless upon release from jail. This same problem could also affect reported homeless spending for behavioral health services. Direct costs spent on homeless programs A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) typically will not have the same sort of problems since most of these costs are payments directly to service providers. Because each associated cost has a different allocation method, costs may not be consistently represented. Most County Homeless Funding Is Federal and State Dollars Salt Lake County is responsible for distributing the largest share of homeless spending, even though the funding provided by the county is less than both federal and state governments’ contributions. Sixty percent ($18.3 million) of the $30.5 million in total distributions from the county in fiscal year 2016 were federal ($14.7 million) and state ($3.6 million) funds that the county passed through to service providers. This federal and state funding is usually allocated for specific purposes and the county does not have discretion on how it is spent. Sixty percent of the money distributed by Salt Lake County is federal and state funds. Salt Lake County Distributes $14.7 Million in Federal Spending Salt Lake County distributes over one-third of federal homelessness dollars spent in the state. While many homeless programs are funded with a combination of federal, state, and county dollars, over $7 million of the $14.7 million in federal funding the county distributed passed through the Continuum of Care (CoC) program which is 100 percent federally funded. The CoC takes applications from homeless service providers and then scores and awards money from the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. The county plays a key role in the application process for service providers, but does not actually receive the money provided directly by the federal government. CoCs are discussed in more detail in Chapter V of this report. Other major distributions of federal funds include the following: Federal funds accounted for $14.7 million of county distributions for homelessness. $3.9 million for Medicaid mental health payments $700,000 to serve the non-Medicaid homeless community with mental health and/or substance use disorder needs $700,000 for general substance use disorder treatment. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 21 - The county used discretionary federal grants to fund homeless programs. While most county distributions come from other branches of government and for specific purposes, the county does have limited discretion with how some federal funding is allocated. As discussed in Chapter II, some grants awarded from the federal government to Salt Lake County do not require that the funding be spent on homeless populations, but the county has chosen to fund these programs. These grants do not provide completely discretionary funding, but depending on the grant, the funds may be spent on programs that serve low or moderate-income persons or provide social services needs to children or adults. While Salt Lake County could have used these grants for other purposes, it is worth noting that they chose to fund numerous homeless programs with them. Salt Lake County Distributed $3.6 Million In State Expenditures During Fiscal Year 2016 The county distributed $3.6 million in state dollars for homelessness. The state of Utah provided 12 percent of the homeless funding that was distributed by the county in fiscal year 2016. Salt Lake County reported that over $3 million of this $3.6 million in state funds was used for three main programs— substance abuse disorder treatment, Medicaid, and jail costs. In addition to the $700,000 in federal funding for substance use disorder treatment, Salt Lake County distributed $850,000 in state funds to this program. The state also provided to the county $1.2 million for its portion of Medicaid mental health payments and over $1 million of the total county jail costs of $6.5 million. Recommendation 1. We recommend that Salt Lake County consider developing a transparent methodology for tracking and reporting costs for homeless spending that allocates overhead in a consistent manner and accurately reports the source of homeless funding distributions. - 22 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Chapter IV Salt Lake City Is Significantly Affected By Transient Homeless Population Salt Lake City spends most homeless funding on police services related to calls and investigations in areas with high concentrations of homeless people. The Rio Grande area is one location where Salt Lake City has deployed significant resources. The concentration of homeless services in the Rio Grande area has had a large effect on Salt Lake City expenditures. All but a small portion of city distributions related to homelessness were city funds, almost three-quarters of which were for police services in the Rio Grande area and other areas with concentrations of homeless populations. Other expenditures for homeless services and response were focused mostly on these areas of the city as well. As shown in Figure 4.1, almost all distributions by Salt Lake City were city funds, in contrast to Salt Lake County. While both Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County contributed roughly the same amount of money to homelessness, most distributions in Salt Lake County were federal and state dollars. Salt Lake City had comparably few distributions from these sources. Most homeless spending in Salt Lake City was for the Rio Grande and similar areas. Figure 4.1 Salt Lake City Expenditures Were Mostly City Dollars. Federal and state expenses are only those funds associated with reported city programs. Year Federal State City Total 2014 2015 $673,304 723,648 $10,507 16,038 $7,381,784 9,588,391 $8,062,594 10,328,078 2016 823,286 184,012 12,549,800 13,557,098 Source: Salt Lake City Most Salt Lake City Spending on Homelessness Is for Policing As in Salt Lake County, most homeless expenditures in Salt Lake City are associated, rather than direct costs. In Salt Lake City, homeless spending is dominated by police services. As shown in Figure 4.2, nearly three-quarters of city expenditures were for police in Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 23 - fiscal year 2016. The city also expends city resources on fire and court costs related to homelessness. Figure 4.2 Almost 75 Percent of Salt Lake City Homeless Spending Was on Police Response. Fire department and Housing and Neighborhood Development costs account for an additional 21 percent of expenses. Source: Salt Lake City Salt Lake City spent $9.7 million on policing areas with significant homeless populations. Salt Lake City has not added additional police officers or shifts to address homelessness. - 24 - Policing Homelessness Cost Salt Lake City Almost $10 Million Salt Lake City reported police expenditures of $9.7 million of $13.6 million in homeless distributions for fiscal year 2016. Of the $9.7 million, $9.5 million were paid with city funding. These expenditures include calls for service in areas such as Rio Grande with significant homeless populations, police investigations, and special assignment costs. These special assignment costs of $4.4 million include projects specific to the Rio Grande area and account for almost half of police expenditures related to homelessness reported by the city. Although total police expenditures for homelessness account for 16 percent of the city’s police budget, the city reports that no additional personnel or shifts were used to address homeless populations. Increased efforts in the Rio Grande area have come at the expense of heavier workloads for police officers and the quality of service and community policing efforts. Salt Lake City did, however, create the Community Connection Center (CCC) in the Rio Grande area. The operation of the CCC is to become the liaison between A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) police, the community, and individuals and families that are experiencing homelessness or are in crisis. The city also had court costs of $275,000 for homeless individuals. Fire Department Costs Were 12 Percent Of Salt Lake City Homeless Costs Fire department costs are the next largest area of Salt Lake City spending to address homelessness. The $1.6 million spent in this area was allocated in a similar manner as police expenditures, and is all city funded. Fire department overhead accounts for $483,000 (29 percent) of these costs. Fire department homeless spending makes up 4 percent of the department’s budget. The city reports that no additional shifts or personnel have been added to address these service calls, but fire personnel have been busier because of calls related to homeless populations. Fire department costs accounted for $1.6 million of Salt Lake City homeless expenditures. Salt Lake City Funds The Road Home Shelter and Other Direct Costs The remainder of fiscal year 2016 Salt Lake City homeless distributions were direct costs. The largest portion, $1.3 million from the Housing and Neighborhood Development Division (HAND), was two-thirds funded by the federal government and one-third by the city. These expenditures are similar to Salt Lake County’s Housing and Community Development costs discussed in Chapter III that support nonprofit organizations. The $100,000 in Other costs in figure 4.2 represent additional city funds sent to homeless service providers that were not channeled through a city department, bringing total distributions to service providers to $1.4 million. Salt Lake City distributed $1.4 million to homeless service providers. As shown in Figure 4.3, The Road Home received nearly half of the city’s distributions to homeless providers in fiscal year 2016, while the remainder was distributed to various other providers. Those receiving over $100,000 in fiscal year 2016 are shown in Figure 4.3. A complete list of organizations that received funding through the city, as well as the source and use of that money is shown in appendices D through F. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 25 - Figure 4.3 Salt Lake City Funded Homeless Service Providers. This figure lists providers receiving at least $100,000 in fiscal year 2016. Nearly half of the $1.4 million distributed by the city was for The Road Home. Recipient The Road Home Catholic Community Services Volunteers of America Advantage Services Amount $ 684,775 157,662 127,558 110,000 Source: Salt Lake City The Road Home received nearly half of Salt Lake City distributions to service providers. These funds were given to service providers for a variety of purposes, and some providers received multiple allocations of money for various activities. The Road Home received funding for building improvements, shelter operations, and rapid re-housing. Catholic Community Services operates the Weigand Homeless Resource Center, located across the street from The Road Home in the Rio Grande area, as well as a detoxification center. Volunteers of America was funded for detoxification beds, a youth resource center, and building improvements of a young women’s transition home. Advantage Services runs employment and transitional storage programs. Like the county, Salt Lake City funds homeless programs and services with federal grants that can be used for different purposes. These discretionary funds made up half of federal funding distributed though HAND in fiscal year 2016. Salt Lake City spent $562,000 for public toilets and cleanup efforts. The remainder of Salt Lake City’s expenditures for homelessness are in the Public Services Department. Of the $562,000 spent in fiscal year 2016, just over half was spent on Portland Loos, a type of public toilet. Cleanup of public areas make up most of the remaining costs. Significant Expenditures Are Directed to Rio Grande Area Salt Lake City spends 94 percent of homeless distributions on areas with significant homeless populations. - 26 - With the concentration of homeless individuals in the area, nearly all funding distributed by Salt Lake City for homelessness is directly tied to Rio Grande area service providers, police and fire dispatches, and cleanup in this area and others with similar concentrations of homeless individuals. In total, 94 percent of city homeless distributions can be tied to these areas. A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) To allocate costs to police and fire services, Salt Lake City looked at three areas where homelessness is most pervasive, one of which is the Rio Grande area. Police and fire costs made up 84 percent of city homeless distributions in fiscal year 2016. Public Service operations have focused on the Rio Grande area with the installation of Portland Loos and area cleanup efforts accounting for more than 78 percent of fiscal year 2016 homeless expenditures in this department. Over 60 percent of the city’s HAND disbursements for homelessness go to The Road Home, Weigand Center, and 4th Street Clinic, all service providers in the immediate vicinity of Rio Grande. Other service providers, including the YWCA and the Luisa E. Lema Food Pantry are within a few blocks of the area. Most homeless service providers who receive funding from Salt Lake City are located close to Rio Grande. Part of the long-term solution to homelessness planned for Utah is the closing of The Road Home shelter. Once this is done, it is hoped that the dispersal of the homeless individuals to multiple new shelters throughout Salt Lake County will reduce the concentration of homeless individuals and crime in the Rio Grande area, which could result in a decrease in Salt Lake City homeless expenditures in the area. However, as with Salt Lake County, many associated costs may be unavoidable even as homelessness is reduced. Salt Lake Police and Fire Departments, which are the main costs to Salt Lake City for homelessness, will still maintain presences in the downtown areas of the city. The city’s allocation of costs to homelessness may change, but without large decreases to police and fire expenditures. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General Most Salt Lake City homeless distributions are associated costs that may be unavoidable even if homelessness is reduced. - 27 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 28 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Chapter V State and Federal Funds Appear to Be Distributed Appropriately, Will Continue to Grow Unlike the expenditures shown in chapters III and IV, most funding addressed in this report from the federal government and the state of Utah are direct costs associated with providing funding to service providers. Our analysis of competitively distributed funds shows that best practices have been used in these expenditures. State funding of homeless initiatives has increased in the last two years with appropriations from the Utah State Legislature to fund a new shelter system in Salt Lake County. State and Federal Funds Are Distributed According to Best Practices The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) allocates Continuum of Care (CoC) money according to a competitive scoring process overseen by three organizations in the state—Salt Lake, Mountainland, and Balance of State CoCs. According to HUD, the CoC program is designed to “promote communitywide commitment to ending homelessness” and “quickly rehouse homeless individuals and families.” According to HUD, the local CoCs have generally done well in their application processes. Likewise, the State Homelessness Coordinating Committee (SHCC) allocates state funds and some federal funds according to a competitive process. Funding for domestic violence shelters is provided to organizations around the state through an approved sole source procurement process. Due to the nature of the funding and the results of past procurements, this sole source process appears to be appropriate. Continuum of Care Processes Have Generally Scored Well The Continuum of Care (CoC) program provides federal funding and is the biggest provider of direct homeless funding in the state of Utah. Overseen by HUD, the CoC program provided over $10 million to homeless service providers in the state. The funding is Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General The application processes used by Utah’s Continuum of Care organizations have scored well in HUD reviews. The Continuum of Care program provided over $10 million to Utah homeless service providers in fiscal year 2016. - 29 - Salt Lake County, United Way of Utah County, and DWS oversee the CoC program in Utah. distributed to three regions in Utah — Salt Lake County, Mountainland (consisting of Utah, Wasatch, and Summit Counties), and Utah Balance of State, which consists of local homeless coordinating councils around the state. The application process is overseen by Salt Lake County for that region, the United Way of Utah County for Mountainland, and the Department of Workforce Services for the Utah Balance of State. Each of these CoCs reviews and ranks service provider applications for HUD, which makes the ultimate award decisions. HUD then grades each continuum on their application process. This review process helps ensure that funding recipients are using money appropriately and effectively. There are 200 total points possible from HUD’s review in four different categories: CoC Structure and Governance, Data Collection and Quality, Performance and Strategic Planning, and Cross-Cutting Policies. The highest scoring CoC in the country received 187.75 out of 200 points with the median score being 154.5. Salt Lake and Mountainland CoCs scored above median, with scores of 179.25 and 167.75 respectively while Utah Balance of State scored slightly below at 149. All three CoCs scored well on their Structure and Governance section, indicating that the process for ranking and reviewing applications met HUD expectations. Continuum of Care Performance and Strategic Planning scores could be raised. - 30 - The lowest scoring area for all three CoCs was Performance and Strategic Planning. This category looks at how services result in quantifiable improvements in the number of homeless individuals and positive outcomes for the homeless, as well as how the providers target specific vulnerable populations. HUD places an emphasis on programs that serve the chronically homeless, families, and veterans. To improve scoring in this area, CoCs should confirm that providers serving targeted populations and experiencing positive program outcomes are measuring and capturing this information. CoCs should also encourage the service providers to focus on these subpopulations identified by HUD. We recommend the CoCs ensure the application processes adequately reward performance and serving targeted populations and work with service providers to address these issues. A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) SHCC Has Responsibly Distributed Funding The State Homeless Coordinating Committee (SHCC) distributes state and federal money to service providers in the state. The source of these funds includes federal grants as well as funding from the Pamela Atkinson Homeless Account, Homeless to Housing Account, and state general funds. The distributions by the SHCC appear to be appropriate. Applications for funding received by the committee are scored separately by three committee members on criteria such as applicant experience and capacity, community needs for the project, how funds are used, and the program outcomes. While most funding recipients are the same each year as SHCC wants to ensure the existing safety net is maintained, some new applicants have received funding. Figure 5.1 shows the service providers who received at least $100,000 in fiscal year 2016. A complete listing of distributions by the SHCC for fiscal years 2015 and 2016 is found in Appendix G. The State Homeless Coordination Committee competitively distributes state funds to service providers. Figure 5.1 SHCC Allocated $3.7 million to Service Providers in Fiscal Year 2016. The Road Home received the largest appropriation, accounting for 40 percent of total distributions. Recipient The Road Home Volunteers of America St. Anne's Center Salt Lake County Housing Authority Valley Mental Health Housing Assistance Management Enterprise Amount $1,488,855 388,458 296,550 233,400 170,000 113,704 Source: SHCC In fiscal year 2016, SHCC awarded funding to 33 different organizations totaling $3.7 million. Each organization received at least $10,000, with a median award of $35,100. Funding was provided for a variety of programs, with permanent housing receiving the most at $1.4 million, shelter operations receiving $1 million, and rapid rehousing receiving $653,000. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General SHCC distributed $3.7 million dollars to 33 different organizations. - 31 - Domestic Violence Shelter Contracts Follow State Procurement Law DCFS contracts with domestic violence shelters follow state procurement processes. DCFS reviews domestic violence operations to ensure required duties are performed. The Department of Human Services’ Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) has been given Limited Purchasing Delegation (LPD) by the Division of Purchasing for the purpose of contracting with domestic violence shelters throughout the state. This LPD allows DCFS to enter into contracts with shelters without the involvement of the Division of Purchasing. The contracting process appears to have followed state procurement law. DCFS has used a sole-source method of procuring contracts, which is allowed when there is only one source for a service. Although this process is used, DCFS also posts a solicitation through the state’s online procurement website. The purchasing employees in the Department of Human Services report that no other shelters have responded to posts for domestic violence shelters other than those currently under contract. To ensure that these shelters, which operate without direct competition, are performing the duties required by the contract, an annual review process is conducted. These reviews verify that contracted shelters are qualified, maintain proper documentation, and correctly bill DCFS. In our analysis of these compliance audits, it appears that shelters are responsive to findings issued. Although these audits often have some sort of finding, DCFS reports that they have not had to take adverse action against a shelter for failing to correct deficiencies, which are typically related to properly completing paperwork and not related to health or safety issues. New Salt Lake County Shelter System Is Being Funded by New Legislative Appropriations State funding for homeless programs have increased to help pay for a new, disbursed shelter system in Salt Lake County. - 32 - One-time and ongoing state funding for homeless programs have both increased to help pay for a new, disbursed shelter system in Salt Lake County. The transformation of homeless services and shelters is due in large part to the work of state and local leaders and Salt Lake County’s Collective Impact Steering Committee (Collective Impact). This committee’s work to bring stakeholders together and agree on shared goals and outcomes played a role in securing additional state funding for homelessness. Salt Lake City played an important role by choosing new shelter sites through a multiyear public process. This coordination across levels of government and across service providers A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) appears to be consistent with best practices and existing government programs. Legislature Began Setting Aside Money for Shelters Opening in 2019 In addition to existing homeless state funding, the State Legislature appropriated new money for the construction and operation of new shelters in Salt Lake County. These shelters are planned to open in 2019. New shelters are planned to open in 2019. Two principal pieces of legislation have laid out changes in the state’s involvement in homeless programs. House Bill (HB) 436, passed during the 2016 Legislative General Session, created the Homeless to Housing Reform Restricted account and appropriated $4.75 million onetime and $4.5 million ongoing into this account. The bill also mandated greater coordination with local government. The mayors of both Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City (no designee is allowed) are now on the SHCC. Two legislative bills in 2016 and 2017 appropriated $14.6 million onetime and $4.75 million ongoing in total for new shelters. The second bill, HB 441, was passed during the 2017 Legislative General Session. This bill appropriated $9.85 million in one-time and $0.25 million ongoing funding to the restricted account. The bill also required that the Salt Lake County mayor make a recommendation for a new homeless shelter location outside Salt Lake City. The selection of a South Salt Lake City site was ratified by the SHCC in April 2017 in response to this requirement. HB 441 also required recipients of new homeless funding to work toward closing the Salt Lake Community Center on Rio Grande Street by June 30, 2019. Taken together, these two pieces of legislation have provided the financial backing for major changes to homeless services in Salt Lake County. HB 441 required one of the new shelters be built outside of Salt Lake City but in Salt Lake County. Salt Lake County United Homeless Stakeholders, Helped Create Shared Goals for New System The Collective Impact Steering Committee, organized by Salt Lake County, brought together stakeholders from many different organizations, including service providers and relevant government agencies. Collective Impact identified deficiencies in the current homeless service system, and helped identify collective solutions. Their work, done over two years, led to the new state funding for dispersed homeless shelters. Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 33 - Collective Impact identified deficiencies in current homeless programs and made progress towards solutions. Collective Impact identified several problems with the existing homeless shelter system. Homeless funding is not coordinated across funding sources, and evaluation of funding is done primarily by individual funding sources, not for the homeless system as a whole. To address these problems, Collective Impact adopted shared, desired outcomes or goals and helped align funding from different sources. As an example, Salt Lake County states they are aligning Community Development Block Grant, Social Services Block Grant, and Emergency Solutions Grant funding according to the work of Collective Impact. Collective Impact appears to have played a role in establishing a field of interest fund at the Community Foundation of Utah to coordinate monetary contributions by private donors towards homeless programs. Salt Lake City’s Homeless Services Site Evaluation Commission worked closely with Collective Impact during this process. Salt Lake City Led Efforts to Find Sites for New Shelters Salt Lake City’s Homeless Services Site Evaluation Commission (commission) began meeting in 2014 to develop a new homeless services model. The commission worked closely with the county’s Collective Impact efforts. The commission also took on a more active role in finding possible new shelter locations after the 2016 Legislative General Session. Salt Lake City identified potential homeless shelter sites within city boundaries. According to Salt Lake City, potential sites within city boundaries were evaluated based on federal guidelines, city zoning and ordinance restrictions, and criteria developed by the commission that was prioritized by the public. Combining these factors helped identify geographic areas and properties that would be further evaluated and scored. A potential shelter site in Sugar House on Simpson Avenue was removed from consideration as the number of candidate sites was narrowed. Consequently, Salt Lake City reports to have lost $10,000 in non-refundable earnest money. Salt Lake City announced the two finalist shelter sites at 275 West High Avenue and 135 East 700 South in Salt Lake City on February 24, 2017. - 34 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Coordinated Homeless Efforts Should Continue The work by Collective Impact, the commission, and state officials to coordinate and improve homeless service delivery appears to be consistent with best practices and should continue. These coordinated efforts are also consistent with the intent of the CoC federal homeless program. Collective Impact identified a lack of funding coordination as a major barrier to implementing an effective homeless system. The National Alliance to End Homelessness states that gathering funding from multiple sources for select homeless projects can cause duplication of effort and can divert time and staff resources. Increasing coordination of funding sources has the potential to increase the efficiency of homeless dollars and appears to be a best practice. This coordination also includes common desired goals and outcomes. HUD implemented the CoC program in 1995 under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act. The purpose of the program is to encourage communities to coordinate the planning and provision of homeless housing services. A review by the Urban Institute determined that the program fulfilled this purpose in high performing areas of the country and helped more people receive more homeless services. Similarly, the Government Accountability Office found lack of coordination among multiple federal homeless programs may decrease their overall effectiveness. Homeless stakeholders in Utah, including state and local government representatives, should continue working towards a more coordinated approach to homeless service delivery. This coordination can help increase the efficiency and effectiveness of homeless spending and services in Utah. Efforts to coordinate homeless funding and services is consistent with best practices and existing federal programs. Homeless stakeholders in Utah should continue working towards a more coordinated approach to homeless services delivery. Recommendations 1. We recommend the Continua of Care (Salt Lake, Mountainland, and Balance of State) work with service providers to ensure adequate focus on targeted populations and performance metrics. Continua of Care should also ensure application processes reward high performance in these areas. 2. We recommend that efforts by the Utah State Legislature and state and local leaders to coordinate the delivery of homeless Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 35 - services and expenditures from various funding sources should continue. - 36 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Of?ce of the Utah Legislative Auditor General Appendices -37- This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 38 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Appendix A Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2016 Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 39 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 40 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Total Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Community Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2016 Service / Program / Service / Program / Federal State County Total Project Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding 4th Street Clinic Parking Lot and $83,000 $0 $0 $83,000 Drainage 4th Street Clinic Behavioral Health 40,000 0 0 40,000 Services AmeriCorps Case 260,943 75,570 0 336,513 Management/essential services Catholic Community Weigand Center 25,000 0 0 25,000 Services Men's Restrooms Catholic Community Weigand Center 0 0 100,000 100,000 Services Operations CGF Housing Various County 0 0 999,075 999,075 funded housing programs serving the homeless Department of Homeless 223,151 0 0 223,151 Workforce Services Management Information Systems Family Promise Salt Homeless Prevention 0 46,200 0 46,200 Lake and Case Management First Step House Fire Suppression 34,000 0 0 34,000 System House of Hope Treatment Center 41,000 0 0 41,000 Renovations Housing Authority of Shelter Plus Care 218,654 0 0 218,654 Salt Lake City PSH Housing Authority of Shelter Plus Care 215,294 0 0 215,294 Salt Lake City PSH Housing Authority of Shelter Plus Care 87,963 0 0 87,963 Salt Lake City PSH Housing Authority of Sunrise Metro - PSH 68,275 0 0 68,275 Salt Lake City Housing Authority of Shelter Plus Care 976,195 0 0 976,195 Salt Lake County PSH Housing Authority of Bonus - PSH 757,894 0 0 757,894 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Reallocated - PSH 247,806 0 0 247,806 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Tenant Based Rental 240,600 0 0 240,600 Salt Lake County Assistance Housing Authority of Chronic Shelter - PSH 235,743 0 0 235,743 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Grace Mary Manor 181,746 0 0 181,746 Salt Lake County PSH Housing Authority of Chronic - PSH 144,790 0 0 144,790 Salt Lake County Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 41 - Total Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Community Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2016 Service / Program / Service / Program / Federal State County Total Project Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding Housing Authority of Rental Assistance $115,908 $0 $0 $115,908 Salt Lake County PSH Housing Authority of Millcreek Families 106,627 0 0 106,627 Salt Lake County PSH Housing Authority of Millcreek Youth 96,946 0 0 96,946 Salt Lake County Shelter - PSH Housing Authority of Kelly Benson - PSH 87,100 0 0 87,100 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Sponsor based shelter 75,899 0 0 75,899 Salt Lake County - PSH Housing Authority of Housing Retention 65,000 0 0 65,000 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Tenant Based Rental 0 0 447,000 447,000 Salt Lake County Assistance Milestone Housing program for 200,000 29,400 135,662 365,062 Transitional Housing homeless young adult Program from ages 18-22 Salt Lake Tenant Based Rental 95,800 0 0 95,800 Community Action Assistance Program Salt Lake Case Management for 40,000 0 0 40,000 Community Action TBRA Clients Program Salt Lake Housing Provide short term, 0 0 86,246 86,246 Authority long term, and transitional housing for Mental Health Clients SLCO Contract #COC Planning Grant 34,686 0 8,672 43,358 CRD140448 SLCO Contract #COC Planning Grant 0 15,000 3,750 18,750 CRD15004 SLCO Contract #COC Planning Grant 36,507 0 9,127 45,633 CRD15006 South Valley Rapid Re-Housing 109,294 0 0 109,294 Sanctuary RRH South Valley Crisis Shelter 62,000 0 0 62,000 Services The Helping Residential Substance 45,018 0 0 45,018 Association - The Abuse Treatment & Haven Transition Housing Program The Road Home Rental Assistance 1,253,205 0 0 1,253,205 PSH The Road Home CHSH Leasing - PSH 449,292 0 0 449,292 The Road Home - 42 - Tenant Based Rental Assistance 269,850 0 0 269,850 A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Total Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Community Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2016 Service / Program / Service / Program / Federal State County Total Project Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding The Road Home Permanent Supportive $143,208 $0 $0 $143,208 Housing The Road Home Frontier Apartments 123,866 0 0 123,866 PSH The Road Home Rapid Re-Housing for 121,921 0 0 121,921 Families - RRH The Road Home Rapid Re-Housing 105,664 0 0 105,664 Expansion - RRH The Road Home Rapid Re-Housing 78,909 0 0 78,909 The Road Home Shelter Operation Costs Second West - PSH 48,983 0 0 48,983 16,715 0 0 16,715 0 0 200,000 200,000 0 0 400,000 400,000 0 0 127,438 127,438 Tooele County Housing Authority Valley Mental Health Midvale Family Shelter - Operations Shelter Operation Costs COG Homeless Services - Outreach Services Shelter Plus Care PSH Safe Haven - PSH 209,884 0 0 209,884 106,814 0 0 106,814 Valley Mental Health Homefront - PSH 50,301 0 0 50,301 Volunteers of America Volunteers of America Volunteers of America Volunteers of America Volunteers of America YWCA Supportive Housing for Youth - TH Rapid Re-Housing for Youth - RRH Homeless Youth Resource Center Detox Center Roof Replacement Homeless Outreach 290,967 0 0 290,967 247,862 0 0 247,862 60,000 0 0 60,000 42,000 0 0 42,000 40,000 0 0 40,000 Kathleen Robison Huntsman Residential Program - TH Family justice center for those who have been victims of domestic and sexual violence Women in Jeopardy 124,648 0 0 124,648 0 0 50,000 50,000 68,550 0 0 68,550 0 0 42,124 42,124 The Road Home The Road Home The Road Home The Road Home YWCA YWCA YWCA-Rape Recovery Operations Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 43 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 44 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Appendix B Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2015 Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 45 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 46 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Total Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Community Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2015 Service / Program / Service / Program / Federal State County Total Project Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding 4th Street Clinic Operations $30,000 $0 $0 $30,000 Alliance House Community Action Program Community Action Program Department of Workforce Services Family Promise Transitional Housing Remodel Case Management/essential services Weigand Center Floor Replacement Weigand Center services Weigand Center Operations Various County funded housing programs serving the homeless Homeless Prevention relocation and stabilization services Homeless Prevention rental assistance Landlord Tenant Mediation Homeless Management Information Systems Homeless Prevention Family Promise Services/shelter 10,000 0 0 10,000 Family Support Center Family Support Center Family Support Center Family Support Center HACSL in Partnership w/ County Behavioral Health House of Hope Life Start Village - TH 74,589 0 0 74,589 LifeStart Village Kitchen Improvements Tiffany Town - PSH 21,380 0 0 21,380 13,835 0 0 13,835 Operations 10,000 0 0 10,000 0 0 1,118,964 1,118,964 AmeriCorps Program Catholic Community Services Catholic Community Services Catholic Community Services CGF Housing Community Action Program Housing Authority of Salt Lake City Housing Authority of Salt Lake City Housing Authority of Salt Lake City Tenant Based Rental Assistance - Case Management Services 19,350 0 0 19,350 194,912 68,324 0 263,236 40,000 0 0 40,000 12,000 0 0 12,000 0 0 100,000 100,000 0 0 141,660 141,660 28,899 0 0 28,899 10,000 0 0 10,000 0 25,000 0 25,000 223,151 0 0 223,151 30,000 0 0 30,000 Electrical Upgrade Fencing Shelter Plus Care - PSH 30,116 0 0 30,116 414,424 0 0 414,424 Shelter Plus Care - PSH 207,254 0 0 207,254 67,236 0 0 67,236 Sunrise Metro - PSH Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 47 - Total Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Community Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2015 Service / Program / Service / Program / Federal State County Total Project Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding Housing Authority of Shelter Plus Care - PSH $29,597 $0 $0 $29,597 Salt Lake City Housing Authority of Shelter Plus Care - PSH 939,187 0 0 939,187 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Chronic Shelter - PSH 228,759 0 0 228,759 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Grace Mary Manor 178,013 0 0 178,013 Salt Lake County PSH Housing Authority of Chronic - PSH 139,390 0 0 139,390 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Rental Assistance - PSH 111,588 0 0 111,588 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Kelly Benson 83,860 0 0 83,860 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Case 0 40,000 0 40,000 Salt Lake County Management/essential services Housing Authority of Tenant Based Rental 210,600 0 0 210,600 Salt Lake County Assistance Milestone Housing program for 200,000 29,400 129,539 358,939 Transitional Housing homeless young adult Program from ages 18-22 Salt Lake Housing Provide short term, long 0 0 85,119 85,119 Authority term, and transitional housing for Mental Health Clients SLCO Contract #COC Planning Grant 0 55,000 13,750 68,750 CRD14000107 SLCO Contract #COC Planning Grant 34,686 0 8,672 43,358 CRD140448 SLCO Contract #COC Planning Grant 0 15,000 3,750 18,750 CRD15004 South Valley South Valley Sanctuary 105,838 0 0 105,838 Sanctuary South Valley Operations 40,000 0 0 40,000 Sanctuary South Valley Playground and Kitchen 31,636 0 0 31,636 Sanctuary The Haven Facility Improvements 35,607 0 0 35,607 The Road Home - 48 - 638,187 0 0 638,187 The Road Home Pathways Expansion PSH Family Leasing 592,935 0 0 592,935 The Road Home CHSH Leasing - PSH 436,645 0 0 436,645 The Road Home Tenant Based Rental Assistance 234,000 0 0 234,000 A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Total Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Community Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2015 Service / Program / Service / Program / Federal State County Total Project Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding The Road Home Permanent Support $140,904 $0 $0 $140,904 Housing - PSH The Road Home Frontier Apartments 119,387 0 0 119,387 PSH The Road Home Rapid Re-housing 118,177 0 0 118,177 Families RRH The Road Home Rapid Re-housing 102,100 0 0 102,100 Expansion RRH The Road Home Second West 16,084 0 0 16,084 The Road Home The Road Home The Road Home The Road Home Parking lot Gate and Fencing Transitional Housing Unit Improvements Shelter Operations 10,741 0 0 10,741 10,564 0 0 10,564 0 0 400,000 400,000 COG Homeless Services Fund Outreach Services Shelter Plus Care - PSH 0 0 200,000 200,000 191,860 0 0 191,860 Safe Haven 104,760 0 0 104,760 Valley Mental Health Homefront 49,346 0 0 49,346 Volunteers of America Volunteers of America Center for Women and Children - TH Chronic Homeless Substance Abuse Project - TH Street Outreach 113,297 0 0 113,297 94,866 0 0 94,866 33,000 0 0 33,000 25,000 0 0 25,000 Tooele County Housing Authority Valley Mental Health Volunteers of America Volunteers of America Volunteers of America West Valley Housing Authority West Valley Housing Authority YWCA YWCA YWCA Homeless Youth Resource Center Operations Young Men/Women Transition Home Shelter Plus Care - PSH 22,500 0 0 22,500 210,854 0 0 210,854 Shelter Plus Care - PSH 84,843 0 0 84,843 Kathleen Robison Huntsman Residential Program - TH Family justice center for those who have been victims of domestic and sexual violence WU LEP Client Services Operations 124,648 0 0 124,648 0 0 50,000 50,000 29,129 0 0 29,129 Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 49 - Total Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Community Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2015 Service / Program / Service / Program / Federal State County Total Project Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding YWCA WU Shelter Operations $23,500 $0 $0 $23,500 YWCA YWCA - 50 - RSS Program Operations Family Justice Center Operations 14,725 0 0 14,725 0 0 42,124 42,124 A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Appendix C Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2014 Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 51 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 52 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Total Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Community Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2014 Service / Program / Service / Program / Federal State County Total Project Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding 4th Street Clinic Operations $22,500 $0 $0 $22,500 Alliance House Kitchen Remodel AmeriCorps Program Family Promise Case Management/Essential Services Weigand Center Operations Weigand Center Operations St. Vincent DePaul/Weigand Center HVAC Various County funded housing programs serving the homeless Landlord Tenant Mediation Homeless Prevention Relocation and Stabilization Homeless Prevention Rental Assistance Tenant Based Rental Assistance Homeless Management Information Systems Case Management/Essential Services Rapid Re-Housing Family Promise Family Support Center Family Support Center Family Support Center HACSL in Partnership w/ County Behavioral Health House of Hope Catholic Community Services Catholic Community Services Catholic Community Services CGF Housing Community Action Program Community Action Program Community Action Program Community Action Program Department of Workforce Services Family Promise Housing Authority of Salt Lake City 8,625 0 0 8,625 194,933 103,070 0 298,003 0 0 100,000 100,000 0 0 100,000 100,000 22,000 0 0 22,000 0 0 141,413 141,413 0 25,000 0 25,000 12,880 0 0 12,880 15,120 0 0 15,120 100,000 0 0 100,000 223,151 0 0 223,151 0 20,000 0 20,000 8,000 0 0 8,000 Operations 21,800 0 0 21,800 Life Start Village Operations Tiffany Town - PSH 10,000 0 0 10,000 13,891 0 0 13,891 Life Start Village - TH 81,966 0 0 81,966 Tenant Based Rental Assistance - Case management services 0 0 1,118,964 1,118,964 8,461 0 0 8,461 29,885 0 0 29,885 Fencing and Emergency crash bars for exit doors Shelter Plus Care - PSH Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 53 - Total Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Community Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2014 Service / Program / Service / Program / Federal State County Total Project Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding Housing Authority of Shelter Plus Care - PSH $201,854 $0 $0 $201,854 Salt Lake City Housing Authority of Shelter Plus Care - PSH 403,648 0 0 403,648 Salt Lake City Housing Authority of Sunrise Metro - PSH 66,479 0 0 66,479 Salt Lake City Housing Authority of Wendell Apartments 109,917 0 0 109,917 Salt Lake County Shelter Plus Care - PSH Housing Authority of Grace Mary Manor 173,333 0 0 173,333 Salt Lake County PSH Housing Authority of Shelter Plus Care - PSH 194,200 0 0 194,200 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Chronic Shelter Plus 222,735 0 0 222,735 Salt Lake County Care - PSH Housing Authority of Shelter Plus Care - PSH 914,683 0 0 914,683 Salt Lake County Housing Authority of Tenant Based Rental 270,000 0 0 270,000 Salt Lake County Assistance Housing Authority of Case 0 50,000 0 50,000 Salt Lake County Management/Essential Services Milestone Housing program for 240,324 21,100 115,286 376,710 Transitional Housing homeless young adult Program from ages 18-22 Salt Lake Housing Provide short term, long 0 0 87,090 87,090 Authority term, and transitional housing for Mental Health Clients South Valley Kitchen Cabinets 5,000 0 0 5,000 Sanctuary South Valley Operations 35,000 0 0 35,000 Sanctuary The Helping Boiler System 41,360 0 0 41,360 Association - The Replacement Haven The Road Home Shelter Operations 0 0 400,000 400,000 The Road Home Operations 10,000 0 0 10,000 The Road Home Second West - PSH 15,916 0 0 15,916 The Road Home Housing Relocation & Stabilization Transitional Housing roof replacement Rapid Re-Housing 20,000 0 0 20,000 34,681 0 0 34,681 58,809 0 0 58,809 Frontier Apartments PSH 118,086 0 0 118,086 The Road Home The Road Home The Road Home - 54 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Total Salt Lake County Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Community Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2014 Service / Program / Service / Program / Federal State County Total Project Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding The Road Home Tenant Based Rental $300,000 $0 $0 $300,000 Assistance The Road Home CHSH Leasing - PSH 427,435 0 0 427,435 The Road Home Family Leasing - PSH 580,381 0 0 580,381 The Road Home Pathways Expansion Leasing - PSH PSH 624,700 0 0 624,700 70,468 0 0 70,468 Homefront - PSH 53,461 0 0 53,461 Safe Haven - SH 116,400 0 0 116,400 Street Outreach 15,000 0 0 15,000 CWC-Bathroom remodel 23,200 0 0 23,200 Homeless Youth Resource Center - SSO Chronic Homeless Substance Abuse Project - TH Center for Women and Children - TH Shelter Plus Care - PSH 28,808 0 0 28,808 94,866 0 0 94,866 124,502 0 0 124,502 225,582 0 0 225,582 124,648 0 0 124,648 0 0 50,000 50,000 14,725 0 0 14,725 21,236 0 0 21,236 0 0 42,124 42,124 Tooele County Relief Services Valley Behavioral Health Valley Behavioral Health Volunteers of America Volunteers of America Volunteers of America Volunteers of America Volunteers of America West Valley Housing Authority YWCA YWCA Kathleen Robison Huntsman Residential Program - TH Family justice center for those who have been victims of domestic and sexual violence Operations YWCA Operations YWCA/Rape Recovery Center Family Justice Center Operations YWCA Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 55 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 56 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Appendix D Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2016 Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 57 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 58 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Total Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Neighborhood Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2016 Service / Program / Service / Program / Project Federal State City Total Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding Advantage Services Program which provides $80,000 $0 $0 $80,000 - Provisional supportive employment for Supportive homeless individuals Employment Program Advantage Services Operational Support for A 0 0 30,000 30,000 - Transitional Place For Your Stuff, the Storage Program transitional storage program Catholic Community Operational Support for an 10,000 0 0 10,000 Services - St. Mary's adult detoxification center Center for Recovery Catholic Community Operational Support for the 0 0 62,000 62,000 Services - Weigand Weigand Center Center Catholic Community Operational Support for the 18,000 0 0 18,000 Services - Weigand Weigand Day Center Center Catholic Community Operational Support for the 20,000 0 0 20,000 Services - Weigand Weigand Day Center Center Catholic Community Additional funding to provide 0 0 30,000 30,000 Services - Weigand services on the Weekends Center Weekend during the Winter Hours Crossroads Urban Operational support for a 13,500 0 0 13,500 Center - Luisa E. food pantry for homeless Lema Food Pantry invidivuals Fourth Street Clinic - Operational Support for 20,792 0 0 20,792 Mobile Outreach mobile health services and Service Team homeless outreach Fourth Street Clinic - Operational Support for 21,208 0 0 21,208 Mobile Outreach mobile health services and Service Team homeless outreach Housing Authority No description given 0 0 83,063 83,063 Transitional Housing The Road Home Building improvements for 51,081 0 0 51,081 Building homes that are used to house Improvements homeless individuals The Road Home Operational Support for the 0 0 30,000 30,000 Emergency Shelter Downtown Emergency Shelter The Road Home Operational Support for the 76,265 0 0 76,265 Emergency Shelter Downtown Emergency Shelter The Road Home Operational Support for the 70,089 0 0 70,089 Emergency Shelter Downtown Emergency Shelter Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 59 - Total Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Neighborhood Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2016 Service / Program / Service / Program / Project Federal State City Total Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding The Road Home Program that provides case $0 $0 $128,000 $128,000 House 20 management and housing for the highest emergency service users in the City The Road Home Operational Support for the 0 0 91,200 91,200 Midvale Family Midvale Family Shelter Shelter The Road Home Tenant based rental 87,695 0 0 87,695 Rapid Re Housing assistance for families experiencing homelessness The Road Home Tenant based rental 150,445 0 0 150,445 Rapid Re Housing assistance for families experiencing homelessness Utah Community Funding for a program that 22,000 0 0 22,000 Action - Homeless provides case management Prevention Program and rental assistance Utah Community Program which provides 70,000 0 0 70,000 Action - Tenant housing vouchers for Based Rental individuals experiencing Assistance homelessness Volunteers of Funding for two detox beds at 0 0 84,000 84,000 America - Detox the VOA facility Beds Volunteers of Building improvements for 19,500 0 0 19,500 America - Young transitional housing for Women's Transition homeless women Home Volunteers of Operational Support for the 24,058 0 0 24,058 America - Youth Youth Resource Center, a Resource Center drop-in center for homeless youth Weigand Homeless No description given 0 0 17,662 17,662 Shelter YWCA - Residential Program that provides 23,000 0 0 23,000 Self Sufficiency transitional housing and Program services for women fleeing domestic violence YWCA - Women in Operational support for 34,000 0 0 34,000 Jeopardy Program emergency shelter for women fleeing domestic violence - 60 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Appendix E Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2015 Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 61 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 62 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Total Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Neighborhood Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2015 Service / Program / Service / Program / Project Federal State City Total Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding Catholic Community Additional funding to extend $0 $0 $30,000 $30,000 Services - Extended the hours of the Weigand Hours Center to 9:00pm in the Winter Catholic Community Operational Support for an 9,000 0 0 9,000 Services - St. Mary's adult addiction treatment Recovery Center facility Catholic Community Operational Support for the 18,000 0 0 18,000 Services - Weigand Weigand Center Center Catholic Community Operational Support for the 20,000 0 0 20,000 Services - Weigand Weigand Center Center Catholic Community Operational Support for the 0 0 62,000 62,000 Services - Weigand Weigand Center Center Community No description given 0 0 86,857 86,857 Emergency Winter Housing Crossroads Urban Operational Support for an 13,500 0 0 13,500 Center - Luisa E. emergency food pantry Lema Food Pantry Fourth Street Clinic - Operational Support for 35,100 0 0 35,100 Mobile Outreach mobile health services and Service Team homeless outreach Homeless No description given 0 0 24,778 24,778 Employment Pilot Program Housing Authority No description given 0 0 84,338 84,338 Transitional Housing The Road Home Operational Support for the 98,120 0 0 98,120 Emergency Shelter Downtown Community Shelter The Road Home Operational Support for the 76,265 0 0 76,265 Emergency Shelter Downtown Community Shelter The Road Home Operational Support for the 0 0 91,200 91,200 Midvale Family Midvale Family Shelter Shelter The Road Home Tenant based rental 110,000 0 0 110,000 Rapid Re Housing assistance for families experiencing homelessness The Road Home Tenant based rental 93,014 0 0 93,014 Rapid Re-Housing assistance for families experiencing homelessness Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 63 - Total Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Neighborhood Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2015 Service / Program / Service / Program / Project Federal State City Total Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding Utah Community Rental assistance and $11,000 $0 $0 $11,000 Action housing relocation and Homelessness stabilization Prevention Utah Community Provides rental assistance 20,000 0 0 20,000 Action - Housing and housing location Outreach Rental services Program Utah Community Program which provides 70,000 0 0 70,000 Action - Tenant housing vouchers for Based Rental individuals experiencing Assistance homelessness Valley Mental Health Operational Support for 8,000 0 0 8,000 - Safe Haven Save Haven Volunteers of Building Improvements for 22,163 0 0 22,163 America - Young transitional housing Men's Transition Home Volunteers of Operational Support for the 24,058 0 0 24,058 America - Youth Youth Resource Center Resource Center Weigand Homeless No description given 0 0 74,339 74,339 Shelter YWCA - Residential Program that provides 23,000 0 0 23,000 Self Sufficiency transitional housing and Program services for women fleeing domestic violence YWCA - Women in Operational support for 34,000 0 0 34,000 Jeopardy emergency shelter for women fleeing domestic violence - 64 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Appendix F Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Year 2014 Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 65 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 66 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Total Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Neighborhood Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2014 Service / Program / Service / Program / Project Federal State City Total Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding Catholic Community Operational Support for an $10,000 $0 $0 $10,000 Services - St. Mary's adult addiction treatment facility Catholic Community Operational Support for the 20,000 0 0 20,000 Services - Weigand Weigand Center Center Catholic Community Operational Support for the 20,000 0 0 20,000 Services - Weigand Weigand Center Center Community No description given 0 0 82,721 82,721 Emergency Winter Housing Crossroads Urban Operational Support for an 15,000 0 0 15,000 Center - Luisa E. emergency food pantry Lema Food Pantry Fourth Street Clinic - Operational Support for 39,000 0 0 39,000 Mobile Outreach mobile health services and Service Team homeless outreach Homeless No description given 0 0 55,222 55,222 Employment Pilot Program Housing Authority No description given 0 0 76,054 76,054 Transitional Housing The Road Home Operational Support for the 109,022 0 0 109,022 Emergency Shelter Downtown Community Shelter The Road Home Operational Support for the 44,000 0 0 44,000 Emergency Shelter Downtown Community Shelter The Road Home No description given 0 0 91,200 91,200 Midvale Family Shelter The Road Home Tenant based rental 110,000 0 0 110,000 Rapid Re Housing assistance for families experiencing homelessness The Road Home Tenant based rental 95,500 0 0 95,500 Rapid Re-Housing assistance for families experiencing homelessness Utah Community Program that provides 20,000 0 0 20,000 Action - Homeless outreach, housing location Outreach Rental and rental assistance Program Utah Community Rental assistance and 11,000 0 0 11,000 Action housing relocation and Homelessness stabilization Prevention Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 67 - Total Salt Lake City Distributions to Service Providers Through Housing and Neighborhood Development and Other Programs, Fiscal Year 2014 Service / Program / Service / Program / Project Federal State City Total Project Description Funding Funding Funding Funding Utah Community Program which provides $70,000 $0 $0 $70,000 Action - Tenant housing vouchers for Based Rental individuals experiencing Assistance homelessness Valley Mental Health Operational Support for 8,000 0 0 8,000 - Safe Haven Save Haven Volunteers of Operational Support for the 18,923 0 0 18,923 America - Youth Youth Resource Center Resource Center Weigand Homeless No description given 0 0 60,000 60,000 Shelter YWCA - Residential Program that provides 23,000 0 0 23,000 Self Sufficiency transitional housing and Program services for women fleeing domestic violence YWCA - Women in Operational support for 34,000 0 0 34,000 Jeopardy emergency shelter for women fleeing domestic violence - 68 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Appendix G State Homeless Coordinating Committee Distributions to Service Providers, Fiscal Years 2015 and 2016 Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 69 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 70 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Total State Homeless Coordinating Committee Distributions to Service Providers Organization Bear River Association of Governments Bear River Association of Governments Bear River Association of Governments Bear River Association of Governments Program Service Rapid Re-housing Assistance Rapid Re-housing Assistance Other Fiscal Year 2016 $7,860 Fiscal Year 2015 $0 2,880 0 300 300 2,800 2,800 7,200 7,200 Canyon Creek Women’s Crisis Center Rapid Re-housing Assistance Rapid Re-housing Assistance Emergency Shelter 10,000 10,000 Catholic Community Services of Utah Street Outreach 10,000 10,000 Center for Women and Children In Crisis Emergency Shelter 10,450 11,000 Citizens Against Physical and Sexual Abuse Emergency Shelter 24,568 25,108 Citizens Against Physical and Sexual Abuse Emergency Shelter 39,511 41,590 Citizens Against Physical and Sexual Abuse Permanent Housing Services Rapid Re-housing Assistance Rapid Re-housing Assistance Emergency Shelter 8,707 8,707 30,000 2,323 5,000 500 10,000 10,000 45,000 70,000 17,500 17,500 Family Promise Salt Lake Rapid Re-housing Assistance Rapid Re-housing Assistance Emergency Shelter 18,658 17,000 Family Promise Salt Lake Emergency Shelter 16,492 20,000 Family Promise Salt Lake 15,000 24,000 24,700 24,700 5,000 2,758 21,242 17,242 Friends of The Coalition Rapid Re-housing Assistance Permanent Housing Services Rapid Re-housing Assistance Rapid Re-housing Assistance Emergency Shelter 7,000 15,000 Friends of The Coalition Other 24,000 24,000 Golden Spike Outreach Permanent Housing Services Permanent Housing Services Permanent Housing Services 20,000 20,000 12,000 8,000 22,100 12,100 Bear River Association of Governments Community Action Services & Food Bank, Inc. Community Action Services & Food Bank, Inc. DOVE Center Family Connection Center of Davis Support Center Family Connection Center of Davis Support Center First Step House Five County Association of Governments Five County Association of Governments Homeless Veterans Fellowship Homeless Veterans Fellowship Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 71 - Total State Homeless Coordinating Committee Distributions to Service Providers Fiscal Year 2016 $1,000 Fiscal Year 2015 $0 100,000 100,000 13,704 13,704 Permanent Housing Services Emergency Shelter 233,400 233,400 42,275 44,500 30,000 30,000 Iron County Care and Share Inc. Rapid Re-housing Assistance Emergency Shelter 2,565 2,700 Iron County Care and Share Inc. Emergency Shelter 11,875 12,500 Iron County Care and Share Inc. 8,000 8,000 Mountainlands Community Housing Trust Rapid Re-housing Assistance Transitional Housing 10,000 10,000 New Horizons Crisis Center Emergency Shelter 10,450 11,000 Salt Lake Co on behalf of Division of Community Resources & Development Salt Lake Community Action Program Permanent Housing Services Other 75,570 75,570 50,000 0 South Valley Sanctuary Emergency Shelter 7,225 7,605 South Valley Sanctuary Emergency Shelter 13,300 14,000 St. Anne's Center 100,000 65,000 St. Anne's Center Rapid Re-housing Assistance Emergency Shelter 65,550 40,000 St. Anne's Center Emergency Shelter 76,000 65,000 St. Anne's Center 35,000 35,000 20,000 20,000 St. George City Rapid Re-housing Assistance Permanent Housing Services Emergency Shelter 76,000 80,000 The Road Home Emergency Shelter 441,019 464,231 The Road Home 772,613 772,613 54,421 54,421 15,000 25,000 105,802 105,802 100,000 100,000 Uintah Basin Association of Governments Permanent Housing Services Rapid Re-housing Assistance Permanent Housing Services Rapid Re-housing Assistance Rapid Re-housing Assistance Emergency Shelter 3,000 3,000 Uintah Basin Association of Governments Emergency Shelter 2,000 2,000 Organization Homeless Veterans Fellowship Housing Assistance Management Enterprise Housing Assistance Management Enterprise Housing Authority of the County of Salt Lake Iron County Care and Share Inc. Iron County Care and Share Inc. St. Anne's Center The Road Home The Road Home The Road Home The Road Home - 72 - Program Service Permanent Housing Services Permanent Housing Services Other A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Total State Homeless Coordinating Committee Distributions to Service Providers Uintah Basin Association of Governments Transitional Housing Fiscal Year 2016 $2,500 Uintah Basin Association of Governments Transitional Housing 2,500 2,500 Valley Mental Health Street Outreach 80,000 121,000 Valley Mental Health 60,000 80,000 Valley Mental Health Rapid Re-housing Assistance Street Outreach 30,000 62,000 Volunteers of America Emergency Shelter 39,238 41,303 Volunteers of America Street Outreach 50,000 50,000 Volunteers of America Street Outreach 60,000 60,000 Volunteers of America Street Outreach 40,050 40,050 Volunteers of America Street Outreach 21,431 21,431 Volunteers of America Street Outreach 90,000 90,000 Volunteers of America Street Outreach 45,000 45,000 Volunteers of America 21,945 21,945 Volunteers of America Permanent Housing Services Transitional Housing 20,794 20,794 Wasatch Homeless Health Care, Inc. Other 4,000 3,797 Wasatch Homeless Health Care, Inc. Other 34,000 36,203 Wasatch Mental Health Services SSD Emergency Shelter 21,850 23,000 Wasatch Mental Health Services SSD Street Outreach 12,750 12,750 Weber Housing Authority Permanent Housing Services Street Outreach 50,000 50,000 10,000 10,000 5,000 0 5,000 10,000 YWCA Permanent Housing Services Permanent Housing Services Transitional Housing 22,000 22,000 YWCA Emergency Shelter 4,708 16,947 YWCA Emergency Shelter 63,454 70,000 $3,765,594 $3,689,957 Organization Weber Housing Authority Your Community Connection Your Community Connection Program Service Total Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General Fiscal Year 2015 $2,500 - 73 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 74 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Agency Responses Of?ce of the Utah Legislative Auditor General -75- This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 76 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) SALT LAKE COUNTY OFFICE Ben McAdams Salt Lake County Mayor Erin Litvack Deputy Mayor, C0unty Services Rick Graham Deputy Mayor, Operations Karen Hale Deputy Mayor, Community External Affairs Darrin Casper Deputy Mayor, Finance 8: Administration Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General 2001 South State Street, Suite N2-100 October 9, 2017 John M. Schaff, CIA Auditor General Office ofthe Legislative Auditor General W315 Utah State Capitol Complex PO Box 145315 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Dear Mr. Schaff: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to A Limited Review ofSources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (Report #201 7-1 1). Salt Lake County concurs with your findings that significant amounts of money are spent on homeless services and programs in Utah and that the State of Utah is a funder ofdirect costs. We also concur with the conclusion that each source offunding plays a role in the overall homeless service delivery system. We agree with the recommendation to develop a transparent methodology for tracking and reporting costs that allocates overhead in a consistent manner and reports the source ofdistributed funds accurately. We have already begun that effort. As you note, Salt Lake County oversees the largest portion oflocal homeless distribution. That fact prompted the county three years ago to launch a Collective Impact Committee with stakeholders who undertook a comprehensive review ofthe homeless services system and what outcomes were achieved after substantial expenditures of public dollars. That work led to what you correctly state as ?uniting the homeless stakeholders and helping create shared goals for a new system.? With respect to the Chapter (Salt Lake County Oversees the Largest Portion of Local Homeless Distribution we would note that the county believes the crisis in homelessness is caused in large part due to failure to provide sufficient treatment options for substance abuse, mental health and criminal justice. We agree that simply providing more options for shelter will not reduce the need for treatment, exacerbated when the Justice Reinvestment Initiative released many individuals from custody at the state prison without the promised reinvestment. However, ifthe promised funding for behavioral health treatment becomes available, this will ease demands on our criminal justice and homeless services system. Salt Lake County Government Center PO Box 144575 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4575 Tel:385.468.7000 Fax: 385.468.7001 -77- - 78 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) JACQUELINE M. BISKUPSKI OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor .xn A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives SALT LAKE CITY RESPONSES Salt Lake City would first like to thank everyone for their time and effort on this audit. The audit portrays a simple yet informative understanding of a very complex homeless issue. Salt Lake City does not have any response as it pertains to the write?up itself. Salt Lake City does have three areas of interest that it would like to share: 1. Although the hope is for a reduction in homelessness in the Rio Grande area, Salt Lake City?s Public Safety Personnel (those dealing with homelessness) will be relocated to the new homeless resource center locations. 2. This report is only reporting expenditures through Salt Lake City?s 2016 fiscal year. Since this time Salt Lake City increased the funding for homeless services in fiscal year 2017 and an additional amount in fiscal year 2018. 3. Salt Lake City is creating a new tracking system for projects such as homelessness. With this new tracking system Salt Lake City hopes to have a better understanding of the expenditures and the resources behind those expenditures. w. .i David Litvack, Deputy Chief of Staff PO. BOX 145474 45l SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SA LT LAKE CITY, UT 84l 14-5474 TEL 801?535-7704 Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 79 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 80 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017) Department of Workforce Services JON S. PIERPONT State of Utah Executive Director GARY R. HERBERT CASEY R. CAMERON Governor SPENCER J. COX Lieutenant Governor Deputy Director GREG PARAS Deputy Director October 4, 2017 John M. Schaff Office of the Legislative Auditor General W315 Utah State Capitol Complex PO Box 145315 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-5315 Mr. Schaff, Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the recommendations set forth in, A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (Report #2017-11). We appreciate the chance to meet with your staff over the last several months to discuss our efforts and those of other with whom we coordinate. We offer the following responses to your recommendations: Recommendation #1: We recommend the Continua of Care (Salt Lake, Mountainland, and Balance of State) work with service providers to ensure adequate focus on targeted populations and performance metrics. Continua of Care should also ensure application processes reward high performance in these areas. Response: We concur with this recommendation. To the extent we are able to participate with this process, we will look to support their efforts. This includes helping to utilize the Homeless Management Information System as directed to support these efforts. In addition, as our Housing and Community Development Division serves as the Collaborative Applicant and coordinator of these items for the Balance of State Continuum of Care, we will work to incorporate these recommendations into their planning process. Recommendation #2: We recommend the continued efforts on the part of the Legislature, state, and local leaders to coordinate the delivery of homeless services and expenditures of various funding sources. Response: We concur with the recommendation. The Department of Workforce Services is committed to our continual efforts of collaboration with these other entities, funding and services to ensure the most efficient delivery of program objectives. If you have any comments, questions or concerns, please feel free to direct them to our HCD Director, Jonathan Hardy at (801) 468-0137 or via email at jhardy@utah.gov. Sincerely, Jon Pierpont DWS Executive Director 140 East 300 South, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 • Telephone 801-526-9207 Relay Utah 711 • Spanish Relay Utah 1-888-346-3162 Fax 801-363-0818 • jobs.utah.gov • Equal Opportunity Employer/Programs Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General - 81 - This Page Left Blank Intentionally - 82 - A Limited Review of Sources of Funding and Expenditures for Homeless Initiatives (October 2017)