1 / 12

Analysis of Recurrence of Homelessness in Hampden County (FY2011 - FY2013)

This report examines the recurrence of homelessness in Hampden County from FY2011 to FY2013, focusing on the effectiveness of interventions as measured by returns to homelessness within two years. Key findings indicate that under 5% of individuals should ideally return to homelessness, with a goal of a more than 20% decrease in return rates compared to the previous year. The study tracks a cohort of individuals who exited the service system and analyzes return rates based on program and household types. Limitations include missing data and variability in definitions of exiters.

olinda
Télécharger la présentation

Analysis of Recurrence of Homelessness in Hampden County (FY2011 - FY2013)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Hampden County CoC Recurrence of Homelessness FY2011 – FY2013

  2. HEARTH Measure Reduction in returns to homelessness as measured by… • Less than 5% of persons return to homelessness within 2 years following their exit -or- • Decrease of > 20% in rate of return compared to previous year

  3. Method • Defined the FY2011 cohort of Exiters • Prospectively followed the cohort for 2 years to determine whoreturned and towhere • Calculated Rate of Return

  4. Method FY2013 FY2012 FY2011 Baseline Indicator 1 = Exited Service System Follow up Indicator 2 = Returned to Service System Rate of Return = Number who returned x 100 Number who exited

  5. Results • Return to the CoC Service System • Return to Homelessness • Return by program and household type

  6. Return to the CoC System 16.3% of Exiters returned to the CoC Service System

  7. Return to Homelessness 14.5% of Exiters returned to homelessness

  8. Return Rates by Program Type

  9. Return Rates by Household Type

  10. Limitations • Missing programs  may lead to inaccurate rate of return • Missing data  limits some findings • No standard definition of Exiters from HUD

  11. Summary • Rate of return to the service system was calculated based on all Exiters in FY2011 • Rate varies by household and program type • Rate should be calculated based on Exiters-to- PH, once <Destination> data is useable

More Related