Homeless Response Team: Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Procedures and Better Track Outcomes
35 Neighborhood Services has 3 dedicated FTE (one Community Services Specialist III, the unit lead and supervisor, and two Social Services Specialists). It also receives analytical support from 1 FTE Homeless Services Coordinator, but this classification also supports data analysis and budget strategy work for the entire homeless system. With the adoption of the FY2026 Mid-biennial budget, the City Council added a third Social Services Specialist FTE to the team, bringing the total FTE to 4.
Therefore, right-sizing the Berkeley Homeless Response Team to better meet the intensive demands of the work and the administrative, legal, and analytical work it engenders would require more dedicated staff both in Neighborhood Services and its various partner departments, and a blueprint for doing so has already been provided by this third-party consultant report. However, adding more authorized positions to the City’s budget during a time of ongoing structural deficit would require tradeoffs without new dedicated revenues, opportunities for which have not been identified given the State’s budget deficit and the Federal administration’s ongoing efforts to drastically downsize, not increase, the public sector’s workforce.
Homeless Response Team: Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Procedures and Better Track Outcomes 36 Methodology and Statement of Compliance
We audited the Homeless Response Team’s (HRT) operations for fiscal years (FY) 2022 through 2024. We performed a risk assessment of the HRT’s practices and procedures to identify potential internal control weaknesses, including fraud risks, within the context of our audit objectives. This included a review of selected policies and procedures, as well as interviews with internal staff.
To gain an understanding of the HRT’s operations and internal controls and to achieve our audit objectives, we used the following methodology:
We reviewed internal policies and procedures, meeting notes, email communications, and other documentation related to HRT operations, interagency coordination, and encampment response efforts.
We analyzed HRT data related to encampment activities, service connections, and outreach outcomes.
We evaluated the quality and consistency of data collection practices and assessed how the HRT used data to measure progress toward its goals. We also reviewed how outcomes were reported to the public, including through City Council materials, performance reports, and public communications.
We evaluated the clarity, completeness, and accessibility of HRT’s public reporting against best practices in transparency and accountability. While we were unable to verify the accuracy of the HRT’s internal data, we analyzed their data reporting in our audit in order to understand how they communicate information to the public and make recommendations for improvement. We compared HRT practices against published best practices and guidance from organizations such as the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH), as well as models used in other jurisdictions with similar encampment response challenges.
We reviewed documents and sources that shaped the operating context for the HRT, including:
o Biennial city budgets to understand HRT funding and staffing resources. o Berkeley Municipal Code and Administrative Regulations related to encampments, homelessness response, and interdepartmental coordination. o Local and federal court cases that influenced encampment policy, including Prado v.
City of Berkeley, Johnson v. Grants Pass, and Martin v. Boise. o City Council materials and reports that documented policy decisions and legal considerations relevant to HRT operations.
Homeless Response Team: Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Procedures and Better Track Outcomes 37 We interviewed a wide range of stakeholders to understand how the HRT coordinates with others and uses data in its work. This included HRT staff and staff from other city departments involved in homelessness response, Alameda County officials, and contracted outreach and service providers. We also spoke with members of the Homeless Services Panel of Experts, city leadership, and homeless advocates. These interviews provided insight into coordination challenges, service delivery gaps, and differing perspectives on the City’s approach to encampments. We attended community meetings held by city leadership regarding homeless encampment response to better understand how information was shared with the public and how community concerns and feedback were addressed. These meetings provided additional context for assessing the City’s communication practices and stakeholder engagement.
Data Reliability
We assessed the reliability of encampment data by interviewing data system managers and owners and examining the data for completeness, consistency, and appropriateness. We determined that the data are sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our audit.
Though we found the encampment data to be inconsistent and incomplete, we used encampment data to understand the type of data HRT collects and the data they present to the public, and therefore any inconsistencies in the data did not affect our audit findings. When cross-checking the data to additional sources, we could not independently verify certain data fields including the number offered and accepted shelter, the number of tents or structures, and the number of notices given. Therefore, we did not use the data for analysis or measurement. Our audit includes recommendations for improving management of encampment data to increase data system reliability.
Statement of Compliance
We conducted this performance audit in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Mission Statement
Promoting transparency and accountability in Berkeley government.
Project Contributors
Erin Mullin, Audit Manager
Caitlin Palmer, Audit Manager
Kendle Kuechle, Auditor II
Pauline Miller, Auditor II
Katie Wysong, Auditor I
City Auditor
Jenny Wong
Office of the City Auditor
Phone: (510) 981-6750
Email: [email protected]
Website: https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-audits
Copies of our audit reports are available at
https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-audits/city-auditor-reports
Cover photograph provided by the City of Berkeley