Santa Monica City Council
March 11, 2025

THIS REPORT IS INTENDED FOR THE INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA, AND MAY NOT BE PROVIDED TO, USED, OR RELIED UPON BY ANY THIRD PARTIES.

FINAL REPORT
City of Santa Monica

HOMELESSNESS STUDY
November 14, 2022
Moss Adams LLP
999 Third Avenue, Suite 2800
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 302-6500
Homelessness Study | i

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 1
A. Background, Scope, and Methodology 1
B. Themes and Priorities 2
C. Commendations 5
D. Summary of Observations and Recommendations 7
Implementation Plan 12
Introduction 15
A. Background 15
B. Scope and Methodology 16
Environment 19
A. Homelessness Trends 19
B. Community Priorities 21
C. Regulatory Framework 21
D. Federal, State, County, City, Agency, and Community Roles 23 E. Cost and Source of Funds 32
Observations and Recommendations 34
A. Strategy and Planning 34
B. Communication and Community Engagement 47
C. Organization Structure and Staffing 55
D. Homelessness Prevention and Response Program Analysis 62 Appendix A: Service Ecosystem Inventory 86
Appendix B: Community Group Forum Themes 97
Table of Contents – Continued
Homelessness Study | ii

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Appendix C: Peer Research Summary 99
Appendix D: City Homelessness Programs in Fiscal Year 2021 100 Appendix E: Strategic Plan and City Resources Crosswalk 106 Appendix F: Sample Performance Measurement Framework 108 Homelessness Study | 1

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Preventing and responding to homelessness is a persistent social challenge that has widespread impacts on individuals, communities, and governments across the country. Nationwide, the most recent Point-In-Time (PIT) count of unhoused individuals marked the fourth consecutive year of growth in the unhoused population.1
Within the City of Santa Monica (the City, Santa Monica), staff and stakeholders report that the homelessness crisis appears to be more visible and widespread in recent times—even as the total population of unsheltered individuals within the City has decreased almost 16% between 2018 and 2022, based on the official PIT count. While the City and its partners have invested significant resources into this area, over 90% of surveyed Santa Monicans reported that homelessness is a very urgent issue for the City to address.2
There is no singular approach that will guarantee success when responding to homelessness, as the conditions that can cause homelessness vary widely and the root causes are difficult to address.

While no single entity could reasonably be responsible for addressing homelessness in a community, the City has played and will continue to play a critical role in the solution.

In FY2020-21, the City is estimated to have spent a total of $42.5 million on direct program costs and other city service costs related to homelessness. The City is estimated to have invested $12.9 million on homelessness-related programming, the majority of which ($9 million) was funded through the general fund. In addition, the City also had indirect costs related to homelessness within its operating departments, including an estimated $4.2 million in related costs reported by the Public Works Department and $25.4 million in related costs (17.9% of all public safety costs) reported by the City’s Police and Fire Departments.

Within this context, the City engaged Moss Adams LLP (Moss Adams) to conduct a comprehensive study of its homelessness response and prevention efforts, focusing on three primary areas—the City’s planning, reporting, and communication environment; the federal, state, and local service ecosystem; and City-led interventions and resource utilization. The goal of this study is to gain a holistic understanding of the current state of, barriers to, and opportunities for, homelessness response and prevention initiatives in order to identify how the City can optimize its efforts in this critical area.

The Homelessness Study objectives for each of the three focus areas are as follows:
• Planning, Reporting, and Communication Analysis
○ Evaluate the planning and strategy of the City’s homelessness efforts ○ Assess available data sources, performance reporting, and outcomes 1 National Alliance to End Homelessness – State of Homelessness: 2021 Edition: https://endhomelessness.org/homelessnessin-america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness-2021/ 2 City of Santa Monica Community Survey, May 2022.

Homelessness Study | 2

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
○ Review communications with City Council and the community ○ Compare City practices to leading practices
• Ecosystem Analysis
○ Identify the role and service offerings of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, City of Santa Monica, and community organizations within the City ○ Document the current environment, including inventorying available service offerings from each agency type
○ Evaluate gaps and duplications within the service ecosystem • City Interventions and Resource Utilization Analysis
○ Evaluate the City’s organizational structure for delivering homelessness services ○ Document City interventions to homelessness, including expenditures, service descriptions, successes, and challenges for organizations that receive grant funding from the City, direct activities through the Community Services, Police, and Fire Departments, as well as indirect activities through other City departments (including the City Attorney’s Office and Public Works)
The study was conducted between April and October 2022 and consisted of four major phases:
project startup, fact-finding and data collection, analysis, and reporting results.

To complete this assessment, Moss Adams worked closely with City staff and representatives from over 30 service providers and community groups to gain an up-to-date understanding of the current environment. We also conducted a comprehensive document review, hosted a community group forum, performed research into evidence-based best practices, and evaluated the City’s efforts in relation to the practices of other cities in California including Berkeley, Pasadena, Palo Alto, West Hollywood, and Richmond. These cities were selected in collaboration with City staff and based on a variety of factors, including similar unhoused demographics and regulatory environments. We would like to express our profound gratitude for the individuals who contributed their time, experience, and vision to this study.

We grouped our observations and recommendations into four categories: 1) Strategy and Planning; 2) Communication and Community Engagement; 3) Organization Structure and Staffing; and 4) Homelessness Prevention and Response Program Analysis.

The recommendations provided in this report require significant investment of financial resources and staff time to accomplish (and some require extensive support or coordination from external parties).

While several upcoming ballot measures may provide some additional resources (see Cost and Source of Funds section for more details), they will not provide sufficient funding to substantially address many of the recommendations within this report. Therefore, we anticipate that the City’s ability to implement all or even many of the recommendations may be limited. As such, we recommend focusing on the critical and high-priority areas as resources become available.

These high-priority areas are described below.

Homelessness Study | 3

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Adequate levels of affordable housing and permanent supportive housing (PSH) are the most critical components to both homelessness prevention and resolution.

When there is a shortage of permanent housing (both affordable housing and PSH), stays in emergency and transitional housing are extended because there is nowhere else for people experiencing homelessness to go. When an individual cannot exit the system through permanent housing, it creates a backlog within temporary housing and other programs, which then reduces capacity for incoming participants. When all forms of shelter are full (including managed sites like safe parking programs, emergency shelters, transitional housing, and permanent supportive housing), people experiencing homelessness rely on outreach services to provide care on the street since there are no other viable options to provide them with assistance. The pathway to permanent housing is depicted in the graphic below.

Research indicates that developing PSH is highly effective in reducing homelessness and results in cost savings between an estimated $30,000 to $50,000 per person per year.3 Without sufficient levels of available and appropriate permanent housing options, the ecosystem of homelessness services will continue to be overwhelmed with need and have reduced efficacy in helping individuals and families exit homelessness. By developing housing, the capacity of service offerings can increase as the need for homelessness services declines.

For decades, the City has invested in affordable and inclusionary housing through a variety of regulations and incentives, including loans for affordable housing providers, inclusionary housing, rent control, and participation in federal and City-funded housing voucher programs. The City has also made several commitments to support the development of affordable housing within the community (which are subsequently implemented via partnerships with developers). However, there continue to be significant challenges to ensuring that there are adequate permanent housing options for people experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of becoming homeless.

Challenges and opportunities related to housing are detailed in Recommendations 11, 12, and 13. 3 United States Interagency Council on Homelessness – Ending Chronic Homelessness in 2017:
https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Ending_Chronic_Homelessness_in_2017.pdf Homelessness Study | 4

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
The City participates in many partnerships across the Los Angeles region in support of the fourth homelessness strategic pillar: Strengthening Regional Capacity to Address Homelessness. However, most regional coordination efforts are conducted by City staff (as opposed to City Council or executive management) and therefore sometimes garner less participation from other jurisdictions.

Because homelessness is a regional issue, comprehensively addressing the root causes and impacts will necessarily involve the other cities within the area. It is not realistic for the City to provide the majority of programming that prevents or responds to homelessness on the west side of Los Angeles.

The City lacks sufficient resources and authority to address a regional crisis alone; therefore, the City should cultivate stronger partnerships with other municipalities and the County of Los Angeles to infuse additional resources into the homelessness system. Ultimately, intergovernmental collaboration reduces duplication and provides opportunities to enhance and expand programming at a lower cost.
4 Collaboration across jurisdictions therefore enables all participating agencies to increase their impact.

To continue building on successes and overcome barriers to regional partnerships, City Council should participate in more robust regional partnership efforts with other jurisdictions to advance policy goals, address community needs, and encourage appropriate allocation of resources locally. City Council is well-positioned to advocate for the community at a regional level as local leaders in the community and representatives of residents.

Challenges and opportunities related to regional collaboration are detailed in Recommendations 3, 4, 14, 18, and 19.

Over the last several years, the City has experienced turnover in several leadership positions that have a significant impact on its homelessness response, including both staff and City Councilmembers. This can present shifting expectations, priorities, and philosophies in the City’s homelessness strategies, which in turn may undermine the efficacy of existing programs and services on an ongoing basis. Inconsistencies in approach, philosophy, and direction are further exacerbated by the cross-functional nature of homelessness response. This can create additional challenges in defining clear roles, responsibilities, authority, and accountability to a unified City approach to responding to homelessness.

Although the City established the Four Pillars, this framework does not provide specific objectives, comprehensive policy direction, or performance indicators, which are all commonly found in a strategic plan. Many policy questions, including the City’s regional proportional responsibility related to homelessness, approach to partnerships, role of enforcement, allocation of downstream versus upstream resources, and outcome targets, have not yet been answered. Developing an enterprisewide homelessness strategic plan can increase alignment and provide management and Council with 4 Homelessness Task Force Report: Partnering for Greater Impact: https://www.ca-ilg.org/sites/main/files/fileattachments/partnering_for_greater_impact.pdf?1519780169 Homelessness Study | 5

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
mid- to long-term focus in a local government environment that has inherent turnover in elected policy-setting roles.

Strategic plan implementation will require concerted coordination and collaboration across various City departments; therefore, it is critical that the City establish or identify a position with broad authority to oversee this work. In addition to ensuring progress toward newly developed goals, this position can also track and monitor results, have clear decision-making authority, clarify roles and responsibilities on cross-functional initiatives, and support enhanced communication across departments.

Challenges and opportunities related to internal alignment are detailed in Recommendations 1, 2, 6, 8, and 17.

The work to effectively prevent and respond to homelessness is politically charged, extremely complex, and emotionally taxing. The purpose of this section is to highlight the challenging work and continued efforts of City staff to enhance homelessness prevention and response in the community.

While the focus of the engagement was to evaluate the City’s response to homelessness within the community, it is critical to recognize the individuals who provided overwhelming support for this study, both within the City and among its partners. Throughout this engagement, staff and stakeholders were highly engaged, insightful, and contributed their deep knowledge and passion for ending homelessness. The following areas of strength are the foundation that will continue to amplify the City’s future initiatives:
• Resilient and dedicated staff: This study took place during a particularly busy time for the City, yet employees made time to participate in interviews and respond to questions and requests for information in a timely and thorough manner. City staff remained productive and collaborative for the duration of the engagement, across functions and levels within the City. Community partners were also quick to note the level of engagement and dedication of City staff with whom they collaborate.
• There were several instances where community partners remarked on the intentional efforts of the City to continuously improve its homelessness response, remain responsive to resident needs, and cultivate strategic partnerships.
• Diversified program portfolio: In alignment with best practices, the City provides a diversified approach to addressing homelessness offering programs, services, and funding that address:
○ Outreach
○ Housing
○ Employment
○ Emergency Response
○ Mental and Physical Health
○ Coordination or Case Management
○ Data and Analysis
○ Legal Aid
− Supportive Services
− Reunification
• Organizations that offer services locally—yet have a national presence and therefore interface with a variety of municipalities—commonly noted that the City is a leader in the diversity of its service offerings when compared to similarly situated cities. As cataloged in the ecosystem Homelessness Study | 6

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
inventory in Appendix A: Service Ecosystem Inventory, the City operates 26 programs and has leveraged a broad network of services providers at the local, county, and state level.

Furthermore, the City is known for its implementation of innovative programming. • Evidence-based homelessness services programs: The City has a history of implementing innovative homelessness services that align with evidence-based best practices. For example, the City was an early adopter of Housing First and one of the first communities on the West Coast to implement a by-name Service Registry and prioritization framework by vulnerability rather that a first come, first served approach. Another approach to addressing homelessness in Santa Monica is the City’s Homeless Multidisciplinary Street Team (HMST) program. A 2019 RAND study evaluated the HMST program’s success in achieving its goals5 and found that the HMST program had a positive impact on the clients it served and was viewed within the community as a valuable resource. The study estimated that the investment in the HMST yielded savings to the City that offset between 17% and 43% of the investment. Because it takes time to establish a relationship with persons experiencing homelessness (PEH), it also takes time to observe the impact of an intervention like the HMST program. The study found evidence that clients had significantly fewer encounters with the police department in the year following the first engagement with the HMST. After another six-month period of engagement, the decrease in police department encounters is even larger, and there is also evidence of a decrease in emergency room visits. This is one example of the City’s innovative, evidence-based programing; as noted previously, many other programs are also supported by evidence-based practices. • Reduction in the total number of people experiencing homelessness over the last 5 years:

According to annual point-in-time counts, the number of people experiencing homelessness in the City of Santa Monica declined by 11% (a reduction of 150 people). By contrast, the number of people experiencing homelessness between 2018 and 2022 in the County of Los Angeles increased by 38.4%. This suggests that the City’s approach to preventing and addressing homelessness is likely more effective than other regional efforts. • Strong front-line relationships: The City makes significant investments in establishing, building, and maintaining strong relationships with the network of front-line service providers operating in the area. The City uses a multi-pronged approach that consists of active program partnership in direct services, such as street outreach teams, funding of additional front-line services, and coordination and collaboration with providers inviting feedback to continuously adapt its approach. Additionally, the City convenes regular care coordination meetings, including weekly meetings between the Community Services Department, the City Attorney’s Office, and the Santa Monica Police Department’s Homeless Liaison Program (HLP) team, bi-weekly HLP team meetings with community partners, monthly Chronic Homeless Project case conferencing meetings, and monthly Senior Housing Task Force meetings to prevent vulnerable seniors from eviction and subsequent homelessness. The City also uses innovative technology solutions such as Akido Connect to facilitate information sharing across first responders and nonprofit service providers. The City’s ability to build strong and lasting relationships significantly improves outcomes.

We would like to express our deepest thanks to the City, its service providers, and its residents for their willingness to assist us throughout this study. These commendations, coupled with the 5 Evaluation of the Homeless Multidisciplinary Street Team for the City of Santa Monica; https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2848.html
Homelessness Study | 7

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
observations and recommendations, can help the City improve operations and—in turn—reach its goals of ending homelessness.

A summary of observations and recommendations are provided in the table below and are grouped into four focus areas: Strategy and Planning; Communication and Community Engagement; Organization Structure and Staffing; and Homelessness Prevention and Response Program Analysis.

Further detail for each observation and recommendation can be found in Section V.

OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

STRATEGY AND PLANNING

1. Observation
The City has adopted the Four Pillars framework to guide its homelessness response. However, the framework does not provide guidance around critical policy questions, define actionable objectives, or detail current City initiatives. In the absence of a comprehensive strategy, the City’s initiatives have been disrupted by differing philosophies related to roles and responsibilities, enforcement, and coordination with internal and external stakeholders Recommendation
Develop a comprehensive homelessness strategic plan that builds on the Four Pillars framework to set clear policy direction, promote alignment across City stakeholders, and support regional efforts.

In the short-term, if resources to create a full strategic plan are not available, develop specific objectives for each of the Four Pillars and align City workplans.

2. Observation
The City does not have a performance measurement framework to consistently track, compare, and communicate the impact of the City’s homelessness response efforts. As a result, the City is not yet able to comparatively assess program effectiveness or convey the outcomes of its work to internal and external stakeholders.

Recommendation
Develop community-level performance measures to track major outcomes and keep leadership, staff, and stakeholders informed of progress.

Continue efforts to develop consistent program-level performance measures to enable comparative monitoring and continuous improvement.

Take steps to ensure that program participant feedback is consistently collected, analyzed, and used to inform operational and strategic decisions.

Implement consistent monitoring and oversight processes over all City contracts for programs that directly serve people experiencing homelessness to enable consistent performance measurement and validation practices.

Develop a plan to restore key staff positions to support data collection, coordination, analysis, and reporting.

3. Observation
The City’s systems to collect data storage across City-funded programs and services are siloed. This limits the City’s ability to accurately assess performance in a timely and meaningful manner.

Recommendation In the short term, pursue options to integrate data from first responders and the Homelessness Management information System (HMIS) to enable Homelessness Study | 8

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
improved reporting and/or pursue mechanisms that support accuracy and expand communication across teams.

In the long term, evaluate the appropriate mechanism to integrate first responder data into the HMIS to enhance data accuracy, completeness, and performance reporting.

4. Observation
Most City partnership efforts are driven by staff participation in regional coordination activities. This suggests there are opportunities for City Council to expand and enhance collaboration with regional partners and governmental agencies.

Recommendation
City Council should enhance regional and intergovernmental partnerships by actively engaging other regional agencies to support coordination and access to services in that support people experiencing homelessness.

COMMUNICATION AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

5. Observation
Although the City’s municipal code requires an annual review of homelessness services by City Council, the City has not recently been able to provide reports on a consistent annual basis due to a variety of factors including COVID-19 emergencies. Instead, staff often respond to ongoing ad hoc requests for information.

Recommendation
Reinstitute a consistent timeline for the annual review of homelessness services and re-evaluate its format to articulate community-level and program-level data.

In alignment with the municipal code, adopt a methodology to track citywide costs related to homelessness for inclusion in the annual report.

Following the development of a Homelessness Strategic Plan, review the existing municipal code for consistency and necessity.

6. Observation Stakeholders expressed frustration in their ability to easily access current and historical homelessness-specific information.

Recommendation
Continue to develop the homelessness webpage to provide a centralized repository for community resources, key reports, and relevant articles.

To better communicate the outcomes of the City’s homelessness services, develop a dashboard to regularly report community-level performance measures.

7. Observation
Although residents overwhelmingly identify homelessness as a priority concern in the City, their ability to meaningfully support homelessness prevention and intervention is frequently stymied due to the complex local and regional system of agencies and services.

Recommendation
Continue to develop and strategically distribute community resources related to homelessness to enhance understanding of desired behaviors, opportunities to contribute, and appropriate referrals for needed services.

Homelessness Study | 9

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE AND STAFFING

8. Observation
The City has not selected a leader to oversee and coordinate the City’s homelessness response. In this environment, staff report significant challenges maintaining interdepartmental alignment, resolving conflicting needs or directions, and holistically tracking and communicating progress across the full spectrum of cross-functional homelessness initiatives.

Recommendation
Designate an executive sponsor of homelessness prevention and response with the requisite cross-departmental authority to drive programs forward, monitor success, lead collaboration efforts, and support enhanced communication.

9. Observation
City staff report that employee morale is low due to workload demands resulting from high expectations for responsiveness, program implementation, and administration of homelessness-related services as well as a perceived lack of support from City leadership.

Recommendation
Take meaningful steps to improve employee morale by:

Supporting employees through clear leadership direction, delegation of authority, and the ability to hold teams accountable to decisions.

Setting division-wide goals and celebrating successes in team meetings and community settings to provide meaningful employee recognition.

Appropriately matching staff capacity and resources with community expectations related to homelessness prevention and response.

10. Observation The Public Works Department maintenance, custodial, and groundskeeping staff do not have sufficient resources to perform higher-risk cleanup activities.

Recommendation Continue to explore staffing options that ensure City employees are provided appropriate resources and training to safely complete required work.

HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM ANALYSIS

11. Observation
Although the City has historically prioritized affordable housing development and retention within its community, the need for affordable housing continues to rise, as indicated by the 431% increase in the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation for 2021–2029.

Recommendation
To increase housing stock in the City and support achievement of the City’s Regional Housing Needs allocation over the next eight years, the City should continue implementing the Housing Element and evaluate potential obstacles to housing development.

12. Observation
Based on the January 2022 point-in-time (PIT) count, demand for temporary housing exceeds the current capacity of emergency and transitional beds in Santa Monica.

Recommendation
In partnership with other community organizations and service providers across the west side of Los Angeles, evaluate benefits/costs and identify potential shortterm solutions for emergency and transitional housing needs.

Homelessness Study | 10

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

13. Observation
The shortage of permanent supportive housing creates significant barriers in exiting people from homelessness and hinders the effectiveness of the homelessness response system.

Recommendation
Continue to prioritize the development of permanent housing, including permanent supportive housing, to enable service providers to institute rapid rehousing and provide appropriate supports, thereby increasing the costeffectiveness of services and the rate at which individuals can exit homelessness.

14. Observation
To focus its resources, City policy prioritizes supporting people experiencing homelessness who live or work in the City prior to other factors such as vulnerability, which appears to be a unique practice.

Recommendation
Evaluate the City’s Program Participant definition to ensure ongoing alignment with the homelessness strategic plan, best practices, and capacity of local programming.

15. Observation
Homelessness programs operating hours are generally limited to Monday through Friday during business hours, which may not reflect when services are needed most or align with community expectations.

Recommendation
In support of providing enhanced service hours to people experiencing homelessness, implement the City’s proposal to expand access to SAMOSHEL and expand the Homeless Liaison Program (HLP) team.

Using available data, evaluate trends in the demand for homelessnessrelated service requests and determine whether there is a need for expanded program operating hours. If data indicate that there is a need for expanded program operating hours, collaborate with service agencies to identify needs and resources to support this expansion.

16. Observation
Big Blue Bus historically collaborated with service agencies to provide people experiencing homelessness with access to public transportation. However, the existing program creates risks and inconveniences for users which results in low participation rates.

Recommendation
Continue efforts to adjust the Big Blue Bus’s free fare program to better support the transportation needs of people who are at risk of, experiencing, or exiting homelessness.

Communicate the County’s Low-Income Fare is Easy (LIFE) program as an interim solution to free fares for those who require access to public transportation but cannot afford it.

17. Observation
Due to recent turnover among City leadership, the Santa Monica Police Department (SMPD) lacks clear direction on where to focus resources and activities and how to approach enforcement.

Recommendation
As part of the City’s efforts to develop a homelessness strategic plan, the City and SMPD should clearly define SMPD’s role and the approach to enforcement that should be used when interacting with people experiencing homelessness. These efforts should be done in collaboration with the community.

Homelessness Study | 11

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
After the strategic plan has been developed, SMPD should evaluate its policies, programs, and services to ensure alignment with the strategic plan.

18. Observation
The City provides a diverse portfolio of services, yet stakeholders note opportunities to expand resources. Critical gaps and limitations include psychiatric beds, sobering center, and multidisciplinary outreach teams.

Recommendation
Continue efforts to evaluate benefits/costs and identify solutions for assessed resource gaps, including investing in infrastructure at the local level, advocacy with regional partners, public-private partnerships, and other opportunities.

19. Observation
The City has a strong referral network with its local homelessness service providers, yet stakeholders note challenges around sharing and gathering comprehensive and up-to-date information that results in an overreliance on personal service provider connections for coordination.

Recommendation
Continue pursuing technology solutions that provide up-to-date, comprehensive, consolidated, and integrated information with push and pull functionalities to enable the City and other service providers to receive notifications and enter data to optimize coordination and referrals.

Homelessness Study | 12

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
This report presents recommendations across a wide range of areas related to the City’s homelessness prevention and response efforts. To provide the City with guidance for selecting which recommendations to execute and prioritizing this work relative to other City efforts, we have prepared a high-level implementation plan below. This implementation plan should be viewed as a living document that leadership will discuss, organize, and adjust to create an actionable path forward to strengthen its response to homelessness. Recommendations are grouped by priority level (critical, high, medium, low). Within the priority level, recommendations are listed in numeric order. The Responsible Party identifies who is responsible for driving the work forward and coordinating work among stakeholder departments. Cost considerations have been identified to assist the City in developing estimates for the associated work. We have also included staff estimates for the general magnitude of potential expenditures associated with each recommendation. These are meant to be high-level indicators—specific costs associated with each recommendation will need to be researched and validated as part of the City’s standard budgeting process. • $ = Less than $100,000 or can be done with existing resources • $$ = $100,000-$500,000
• $$$ = $500,000-$1,000,000
• $$$$ = Over $1,000,000
Given that many of these recommendations will require significant investment of financial resources and staff time to accomplish (and some require extensive support or coordination from external parties), we anticipate that the City’s ability to implement many recommendations may be limited without significant trade-offs or additional staff. To be successful, the City will need to secure additional funding mechanisms to support adequate City resources (e.g., staffing, systems) to implement the recommendations and provide additional program funding. As such, we recommend that the City focuses on the critical and high-priority areas in the short-term.

REC
#

OBSERVATION

CATEGORY RECOMMENDATION PRIORITY RESPONSIBLE PARTY COST CONSIDERATIONS 1 Unifying
Strategic Plan
Develop a comprehensive homelessness strategic plan that builds on the Four Pillars framework to set clear policy direction, promote alignment across City stakeholders, and support regional efforts In the short-term, if resources to create a full strategic plan are not available, develop specific objectives for each of the Four Pillars and align City workplans.

Critical
City Manager’s Office (CMO),
Homelessness Executive Sponsor, All
Stakeholder Departments, City Council
Current staff time; potential to outsource facilitation/development of the plan; costs for system integration and/or system implementation (system cost, staffing or outsourcing costs for implementation) $-$$
4 Regional and
Policy-Level
Advocacy
City Council should enhance regional and intergovernmental partnerships by actively engaging other regional agencies to support coordination and access to services that support people experiencing homelessness.

Critical
City Council Current council and staff time
$
8 Authority and
Decision-Making
Designate an executive sponsor of homelessness prevention and response with the requisite crossdepartmental authority to drive programs forward, monitor success, lead collaboration efforts, and support enhanced communication.

Critical
CMO Increase in staffing costs
$
11 Affordable
Housing
To increase housing stock in the City and support achievement of the City’s Regional Housing Needs allocation over the next eight years, the City should continue implementing the Housing Element and evaluate potential obstacles to housing development.

Critical
Community Services Department – Health
and Human Services (CSD), Community
Development Department (CDD)
Current staff time; potential to outsource facilitation/development of the plan
$-$$
13 Permanent
Supportive
Housing
Continue to prioritize the development of permanent housing, including permanent supportive housing, to enable service providers to institute rapid re-housing and provide appropriate supports, thereby increasing the cost-effectiveness of services and the rate at which individuals can exit homelessness.

Critical
CSD, CDD Current staff time
$-$$$$
2 Performance
Measurement
Framework
Develop community-level performance measures to track major outcomes and keep leadership, staff, and stakeholders informed of progress.

Continue efforts to develop consistent program-level performance measures to enable comparative monitoring and continuous improvement.

Take steps to ensure that program participant feedback is consistently collected, analyzed, and used to inform operational and strategic decisions.

High
CMO, Homelessness Executive Sponsor,
All Stakeholder Departments
Current staff time; potential to outsource facilitation/development of the plan; costs for system integration and/or system implementation (system cost, staffing or outsourcing costs for implementation); increase in staffing costs
$-$$$
Homelessness Study | 13

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
REC
#

OBSERVATION

CATEGORY RECOMMENDATION PRIORITY RESPONSIBLE PARTY COST CONSIDERATIONS Implement consistent monitoring and oversight processes over all City contracts for programs that directly serve people experiencing homelessness to enable consistent performance measurement and validation practices.

Develop a plan to restore key staff positions to support data collection, coordination, analysis, and reporting.
9 Employee Morale Take meaningful steps to improve employee morale by:

Supporting employees through clear leadership direction, delegation of authority, and the ability to hold teams accountable to decisions.

Setting division-wide goals and celebrating successes in team meetings and community settings to provide meaningful employee recognition.

Appropriately matching staff capacity and resources with community expectations related to homelessness prevention and response.

High
City Council, CMO, and Department
Directors
Current staff time; increase in staffing costs
$-$$$$
18 Service Gaps
and Limitations
Continue efforts to evaluate benefits/costs and identify solutions for assessed resource gaps (psychiatric beds, sobering center, and multidisciplinary outreach teams), including investing in infrastructure at the local level, advocacy with regional partners, public-private partnerships, and other opportunities. High City Management Increase in direct program funding to support expanded service offerings; other costs pending city decision on how to address the issue
$$-$$$$
14 Program
Participant
Definition
Evaluate the City’s Program Participant definition to ensure ongoing alignment with the homelessness strategic plan, best practices, and capacity of local programming. High City Council, CSD Current staff time
$
15 Program
Operating Hours
In support of providing enhanced service hours to people experiencing homelessness, implement the City’s proposal to expand access to SAMOSHEL and expand the Homeless Liaison Program (HLP) team.

Using available data, evaluate trends in the demand for homelessness-related service requests and determine whether there is a need for expanded program operating hours. If data indicate that there is a need for expanded program operating hours, collaborate with service agencies to identify needs and resources to support this expansion.

High
CSD, Santa Monica Police Department
(SMPD), Santa Monica Fire Department
(SMFD), City Attorney’s Office (CAO)
Current staff time; potential for increased staffing costs and/or program funding
$$$-$$$$
10 Public Works Continue to explore staffing options that ensure City employees are provided appropriate resources and training to safely complete required work. High
Public Works Current staff time; potential to increase or decrease staff costs pending decision on service model
$$-$$$$
19 External
Coordination
Continue pursuing technology solutions that provide up-to-date, comprehensive, consolidated, and integrated information with push and pull functionalities to enable the City and other service providers to receive notifications and enter data to optimize coordination and referrals. High Homelessness Executive Sponsor, CSD,
SMPD, SMFD, CAO, Information Service
Department (ISD)
Costs for system integration and/or system implementation (system cost, staffing our outsourced cost for implementation)
$$-$$$$
3 Data-Collection
and Access
In the short term, pursue options to integrate data from first responders and the Homelessness Management information System (HMIS) to enable improved reporting and/or pursue mechanisms that support accuracy and expand communication across teams.

In the long term, evaluate the appropriate mechanism to integrate first responder data into the HMIS to enhance data accuracy, completeness, and performance reporting.

Medium
Homelessness Executive Sponsor, CSD,

SMPD, SMFD, CAO, ISD
Costs for system integration and/or system implementation (system cost, staffing our outsourced cost for implementation)
$$-$$$$
5 City Council
Annual Review
Reinstitute a consistent timeline for the annual review of homelessness services and re-evaluate its format to articulate community-level and program-level data.

In alignment with the municipal code, adopt a methodology to track citywide costs related to homelessness for inclusion in the annual report.

Medium
Homelessness Executive Sponsor, CSD,

SMPD, SMFD, CAO
Current staff time
$
Homelessness Study | 14

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
REC
#

OBSERVATION

CATEGORY RECOMMENDATION PRIORITY RESPONSIBLE PARTY COST CONSIDERATIONS Following the development of a Homelessness Strategic Plan, review the existing municipal code for consistency and necessity.
6 Community
Reporting
Continue to develop the homelessness webpage to provide a centralized repository for community resources, key reports, and relevant articles.

To better communicate the outcomes of the City’s homelessness services, develop a dashboard to regularly report community-level performance measures.

Medium
Communications, CSD Current staff time
$$-$$$
7 Community
Resources
Continue to develop and strategically distribute community resources related to homelessness to enhance understanding of desired behaviors, opportunities to contribute, and appropriate referrals for needed services.

Medium
Communications, CSD Current staff time
$-$$
12 Temporary
Housing
In partnership with other community organizations and service providers across the west side of Los Angeles, evaluate benefits/costs and identify potential short-term solutions for emergency and transitional housing needs. Medium
CSD Current staff time; there may be additional subsequent costs depending on which (if any) short-term housing solutions are selected for implementation
$-$$$$
16 Transportation Continue efforts to adjust the Big Blue Bus’s free fare program to better support the transportation needs of people who are at risk of, experiencing, or exiting homelessness.

Communicate the County’s Low-Income Fare is Easy (LIFE) program as an interim solution to free fares for those who require access to public transportation but cannot afford it.

Medium
Transportation, Communications Current staff time
$-$$
17 Public Safety As part of the City’s efforts to develop a homelessness strategic plan, the City and the Santa Monica Police Department (SMPD) should clearly define SMPD’s role and the approach to enforcement that should be used when interacting with people experiencing homelessness. These efforts should be done in collaboration with the community.

After the strategic plan has been developed, SMPD should evaluate its policies, programs, and services to ensure alignment with the strategic plan.

Medium
Homelessness Executive Sponsor, SMPD Current staff time $-$$
Homelessness Study | 15

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

INTRODUCTION
Preventing and responding to homelessness is a persistent social challenge that has widespread impacts on individuals, communities, and governments across the country. Nationwide, the most recent point in time (PIT) count of unhoused individuals marked the fourth consecutive year of unhoused population growth.
6 Within the City of Santa Monica (the City, Santa Monica), staff and stakeholders report that the homelessness crisis appears to be more visible and widespread in recent times. The COVID-19 pandemic had significant impacts on homelessness prevention and response, as shelters reduced capacity, indoor public spaces were closed, and access to services was reduced to protect against community transmission. While the City and its partners have invested significant resources into this area and the total population of unsheltered individuals within the City has decreased almost 16% between 2018 and 2022, over 90% of Santa Monicans surveyed in Spring 2022 reported homelessness as a very urgent issue for the City to address.7 The City of Santa Monica’s response to homelessness is guided by a Four Pillar strategy, which was adopted by City Council in March 2019:
8 • Prevent housed Santa Monicans from becoming homeless and increase affordable housing opportunities.
• Address the behavioral health needs of vulnerable residents. • Maintain equitable access to safe, fun, and healthy open spaces. • Strengthen regional capacity to address homelessness.

In FY2020-21, the City is estimated to have spent a total of $42.5 million on direct and indirect services related to homelessness.

The City’s ability to respond to homelessness within the community was reduced during the pandemic, not only due to service closures and limitations from public health guidance, but also due to the City’s financial position. In May 2020, the City underwent a restructure and eliminated 421.1 FTEs, around 20% of its total FTE, to address budget shortfalls. This reduction affected all City departments and subsequently impacted their ability to continue providing the same level of service with significantly reduced resources. Additionally, during the restructuring, three former departments (Housing and Economic Development, Planning and Community Development, and Community and Cultural Services) were combined into two new departments (Community Development and 6 National Alliance to End Homelessness – State of Homelessness: 2021 Edition: https://endhomelessness.org/homelessnessin-america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness-2021/ 7 City of Santa Monica Community Survey, May 2022.
8 Santa Monica’s Strategy to Address Homelessness: https://www.santamonica.gov/blog/santa-monica-s-strategy-to-addresshomelessness Homelessness Study | 16

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Community Services). This reorganization brought housing and human services together into one department, which presented opportunities for enhanced synergies and collaboration.

Within this context, the City engaged Moss Adams to conduct a comprehensive study of its homelessness response and prevention efforts.

The purpose of this study is to provide observations and actionable recommendations that identify opportunities to optimize the City’s homelessness service delivery model. The recommendations in this assessment are intentionally developed to fall within the City’s influence and ability to prevent and respond to homelessness-related issues in its community. This study focused on three primary areas—the City’s planning, reporting, and communication environment; the federal, state, and local service ecosystem; and City-led interventions and resource utilization. • Planning, Reporting, and Communication Analysis
○ Evaluate the planning and strategy of the City’s homelessness efforts ○ Assess available data sources, performance reporting, and outcomes ○ Review communications with City Council and the community ○ Compare City practices to leading practices
• Ecosystem Analysis
○ Identify the role and service offerings of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, City of Santa Monica, and community organizations within the City ○ Document the current environment, including inventorying service offerings from each agency ○ Evaluate gaps and duplications within the service ecosystem • City Interventions and Resource Utilization Analysis
○ Evaluate the City’s organizational structure for delivering homelessness services ○ Document City interventions to homelessness, including expenditures, service descriptions, successes, and challenges for organizations that receive grant funding from the City, direct activities through the Community Services, Police, and Fire Departments, as well as indirect activities through other City departments (including the City Attorney’s Office and Public Works)
The fieldwork and analysis of this study was informed by staff and local homelessness service provider interviews, focus groups, document reviews, and research on industry best practices and peer City data. The assessment was conducted between April and October 2022, and consisted of four major phases:
• Project Initiation and Management: This phase concentrated on comprehensive project planning and project management including scoping, identifying staff and stakeholders to interview, identifying documents to review, and developing a project plan. • Fact Finding: This phase included staff interviews, focus groups, document review, and research into industry standards. We worked with City staff to obtain the most currently available information and insights.

Homelessness Study | 17

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
○ Interviews and Focus Groups: We conducted interviews and focus groups with 56 individuals, including City staff, community partners, Councilmembers, Audit Subcommittee Members, and peer city representatives.
○ Document Review: We reviewed documents including historical reports on homelessness responses in the City, quarterly and annual County and joint powers authority reports, in addition to public reports provided by local homelessness service providers, performance reports, communications between City Council and the community, documented policies, and grant agreements for the Human Services Grant Program.
○ Community Group Forum: Community groups were invited to participate in a virtual forum to provide feedback on current City services and communication practices, as well as ideas for service changes or expansions. Invited community groups included Santa Monica neighborhood associations, business associations, medical providers, and direct service providers, as well as other Los Angeles County homelessness partners. Themes from the community group forum conversations are included in Appendix B: Community Group Forum Themes.
○ Industry Standards and Best Practice Research: Based on the opportunities for improvement identified, we conducted research to ascertain industry standards and best practices. Best practice research included a review of information provided by the following organizations, amongst others:
− RAND
− National Alliance to End Homelessness
− United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) − Homeless and Housing Strategies for California
− California Policy Lab
− Research has focused on identifying evidence-based solutions to homelessness to provide a framework for evaluating the existing service ecosystem. ○ Peer Benchmarking: In addition to general research on best practices nationwide, we compared Santa Monica’s practices to the practices of other cities in California including Berkeley, Pasadena, Palo Alto, West Hollywood, and Richmond by conducting interviews with nine individuals across these cities. We also invited Culver City, Alameda, Santa Cruz, Santa Barbara, and Laguna Beach to participate in benchmarking, but were unable to reach them. Peer cities were selected in coordination with City staff and based on a variety of factors, including similar unhoused demographics and regulatory environments. Peer benchmarking information is included in Appendix C: Peer Research Summary. ○ Program Participant Feedback: It is best practice to incorporate feedback from people experiencing homelessness as part of determining the success of a given homelessnessrelated initiative or intervention. While direct outreach to unsheltered individuals was outside the scope for this engagement, we reviewed how the City and its Human Services Grant Program partners solicit input from program participants and made related recommendations to ensure that the City can use feedback from unsheltered people to guide programmatic and strategic decisions.
• Analysis: This phase served as the assessment portion of the project. Based on the information gathered, we evaluated the importance, impact, and scope of our observations to develop actionable recommendations to optimize the City’s response to homelessness.

Homelessness Study | 18

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
• Reporting: This phase concluded the project. We reviewed draft observations and recommendations with the City and Department leadership to validate facts and confirm the practicality of recommendations.

Homelessness Study | 19

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

ENVIRONMENT
Since 2018, both the State of California and Los Angeles County have seen a steady increase in the number of people experiencing homelessness. Although homelessness has been a consistent challenge in southern California for decades, the crisis has become more visible and widespread in recent years. Communities across the region sit at the crux between a desire to assist people experiencing homelessness and impatience and disappointment with the government’s ability to effectively respond to the crisis.9
Over the last five years, the number of people experiencing homelessness in Service Planning Area 5: West10 (SPA 5) and Los Angeles County increased by 4.6% and 38.4%, respectively. Meanwhile, the number of people experiencing homelessness in Santa Monica has decreased by 15.7% over the last five years and 11% since the prior homeless count completed in 2020. At the last homeless count in 2022, 807 people experiencing homelessness were counted in Santa Monica, 608 of whom were unsheltered.

CITY OF SANTA MONICA PIT COUNT 2019-202211
9 L.A. voters angry, frustrated over homeless crisis, demand faster action, poll finds: https://www.latimes.com/homelesshousing/story/2021-12-01/la-voters-are-frustrated-impatient-over-persistent-homelessness-crisis 10 The County distributes public funding for homelessness services across eight geographic Service Planning Areas (SPAs).

These distinct regions allow the County to develop and provide more relevant services targeted to the specific needs of the residents in these different areas. The City of Santa Monica is located within SPA 5: West. 11 City of Santa Monica Staff Report “Update on Local Efforts Addressing the Regional Homelessness Crisis,” presented May 11, 2022.

Homelessness Study | 20

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
TOTAL COUNT OF HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS12
YEAR

CITY OF SANTA
MONICA

SERVICE

PLANNING
AREA 5

LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
2018 957 4,401 49,955
2019 985 5,262 56,257
2020 907 6,009 66,436
2021 - - -
2022 807 4,604 69,144
Percent change between 2020 and
2022
-11% -23.4% 4.1%
Percent change between 2018 and
2022
-15.7% 4.6% 38.4%
City service providers collect information regarding the demographics and last place of residence of people experiencing homelessness within the community during the client intake process. However, the City’s capacity to validate and assess this information was diminished when the Data Science Administrator position was eliminated following the Spring 2020 restructuring. Therefore, reliable data on this information is not currently available. However, service providers and City staff anecdotally report that the population of unsheltered individuals in the community is largely transient and fluctuates significantly over time. Frequent turnover in the population of people experiencing homelessness can create challenges for the City and other local service providers to effectively secure housing for individuals, since this process can be time-consuming and often requires multiple contacts.

Most studies of the last three decades suggest that about a third of people experiencing homelessness also experience problems related to drugs and alcohol, and up to two-thirds have a history of an alcohol or drug disorder. A substance use disorder can often develop as a result of the stress from experiencing homelessness and having a substance use disorder greatly increases the risk for homelessness. In 2022, the rate of people experiencing homelessness who were also experiencing a substance use disorder in SPA 5 (West) was 30%, an increase from 13% in 2021 (data that did not include unsheltered people experiencing homelessness) and 25% in 2020. 13 12 LA County Homelessness Count 2022 Data Summary: https://www.lahsa.org/documents?id=6515-lacounty-hc22-datasummary, SPA 5 Homelessness Count 2022 Data Summary: https://www.lahsa.org/documents?id=6510-spa-5-hc2022-datasummary 13 2021 Shelter Point-In-Time Count, SPA 5: https://www.lahsa.org/documents?id=5498-2021-hic-and-shelter-count-spa-5 Homelessness Study | 21

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
The City conducted a representative survey of residents in May 2022, 14 and 93% of survey
respondents noted that responding to homelessness was an urgent or very urgent problem for the City to address.

Anecdotally, many City staff and leadership reported that resident and business stakeholder concerns related to homelessness response and prevention have significantly increased over the past few years. COVID-19 exacerbated issues as shelters reduced capacity, indoor public spaces closed, and access to services was reduced to protect against community transmission. Council members also noted the perception that those experiencing homelessness in Santa Monica in recent years seem to be experiencing more serious mental health and addiction issues and that violence has increased. In the community survey, 80% of respondents identified Enhancing Public Safety as very important or somewhat important for the City to consider when prioritizing new policies or programs.

Regulations set by case law, the State of California, and Los Angeles County provide a framework to guide the way the City responds to homelessness. The City is obligated to operate within the existing regulatory system and framework, which can impact its ability to respond to homelessness within the community. Some of the key regulations are summarized below. • Martin vs. Boise: This case challenged the City of Boise’s enforcement of its Camping and Disorderly Conduct Ordinances against people experiencing homelessness who needed to sleep in public due to inadequate housing or shelter available. This ruling found that prosecuting individuals for sleeping outside when there is no available shelter violates the Eight Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. The ruling was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court on December 16, 2019. Within the City, this has resulted in limitations on its ability to prosecute 14 City of Santa Monica Resident Survey Results – May 24, 2022 Budget Study Session:
https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=4&ID=12875 Homelessness Study | 22

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
quality-of-life crimes to those that meet certain criteria (e.g., an additional crime beyond sleeping in a park when it is closed).
○ Unlike some other states such as New York, California laws do not specifically include a legal right to shelter, which indicates that the government is not required to provide a place to sleep for every individual who needs one.
○ John Logan v. City of Grants Pass (filed September 28, 2022) extended the reach of Martin v.

Boise by explaining that the definition of sleeping includes “sleeping with rudimentary forms of protection from the elements (e.g., a blanket, a pillow, or a cardboard box for protection from the elements)” and that Martin v. Boise applies to civil citations where criminal punishments result from violation of civil enforcement measures. • In re Humphrey: In 2021, the California Supreme Court ruled that trial courts must consider a defendant’s ability to pay when determining whether to set bail. Therefore, courts must find clear and convincing evidence that no restriction except detention will suffice to maintain community safety in order to set bail for a defendant. This has resulted in limitations in the City’s ability to keep violent or repeat offenders in custody while their case is pending as the law directs courts to emphasize the consideration of the defendant’s ability to pay bail rather than prior criminal history.
• Lanterman-Petris-Short Act: This Act provides guidelines for handling involuntary civil commitment of individuals in mental health institutions across the state of California. The intent of this legislation was to end the inappropriate, indefinite, and involuntary commitment of persons with mental health disorders, developmental disabilities, and chronic alcoholism. This guidance sets the standards for modern mental health commitment processes, including requirements that an individual needs to be a Danger to Self, Danger to Others, and/or Gravely Disabled due to a mental health disorder to be subject to involuntary detention in a mental health facility.

Municipalities across the State of California therefore must ensure individuals that appear to be experiencing a mental health crisis meet the regulatory criteria to place them in an involuntary three-day hold in a mental health facility.
○ Effective date: July 1, 1972
• Proposition 47 (“The Safe Neighborhood and Schools Act”): Proposition 47 implemented three broad changes to felony sentencing laws by reclassifying certain theft and drug possession offenses from felonies to misdemeanors. This included drug possession for the personal use of controlled substances. Since its implementation, municipalities have reported that people experiencing homelessness are less likely to seek or accept drug abuse treatment as it reduced the charges for drug-related crimes. Additionally, to take enforcement action, misdemeanors must be committed in the presence of a sworn officer, whereas felonies can be investigated using victim and witness reports.
○ Effective date: November 5, 2014
• Assembly Bill 210: AB 210 created section 18999.8 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. This bill permits multi-disciplinary personnel teams (MDTs) of Participating Agencies to share and exchange information made confidential by California State law to facilitate the expedited identification, assessment, and linkage of homeless adults and families to housing and supportive services within Los Angeles County. The City of Santa Monica was among the first municipalities to authorize multi-disciplinary access to sensitive information to help coordinate care for people experiencing homelessness.

Homelessness Study | 23

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
○ Effective date: January 1, 2019
• Assembly Bill 1950: AB 1950 created statutory caps on the length of probation periods for qualifying misdemeanors at one year (formerly three years) and qualifying felonies at two years (formerly five years).
○ Effective date: January 1, 2021
• Senate Bill 317: SB 317 amended Penal Code section 1370.01, resulting in the dismissal of misdemeanor cases against defendants who were not competent to stand trial. While the intent behind this revision was to reduce the time defendants spent in custody and increase the time spent in treatment, the law has instead released individuals from custody without the provision of consistent or comprehensive treatment.
○ Effective date: January 1, 2022
• Senate Bill 679: SB 679, also referred to as “the Los Angeles County Regional Housing Finance Act,” establishes the Los Angeles County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency, whose purpose is to increase the supply of affordable housing in the County by providing significantly enhanced funding and technical assistance at a regional level for renter protections, affordable housing preservation, and new affordable housing production. The bill requires the agency to be governed by a board of 21 voting members and one nonvoting member from the County; an oversight committee composed of 11 members and one nonvoting member will assist in the development of funding guidelines, implementation of agency programs, and approval of an expenditure plan.

The provisions proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal issue and therefore apply to all cities within Los Angeles County, including charter cities.
○ Effective date: January 1, 2023
• Emergency Bail Schedule: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Los Angeles County took an emergency action to modify the bail schedule to be set at zero dollars for all infractions, misdemeanor, and felony offenses with the exception of some offenses (e.g., domestic violence, carrying a concealed firearm, human trafficking, sexual assault).15 City staff report that this significantly impacted their ability to hold people accountable for violations, including people experiencing homelessness, which has also decreased participation in alternative justice programs such as Homeless Community Court, which would compel individuals to participate in services in lieu of prosecution. The Sherriff’s Department continues to exercise this authority to release those in custody early due to overcrowding or public health concerns without clearance from the court or the prosecution.
○ Effective date: March 20, 2020 through June 30, 2022
The complex issue of homelessness has precipitated multi-layered responses at the federal, state, county, and local levels. Jurisdictions across all levels are working to evaluate the issue of 15 Between April 10, 2020, and June 10, 2020, the State of California also enacted a similar emergency bail schedule for all counties to implement.

Homelessness Study | 24

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
homelessness and develop funding, programs, and strategies to prevent and end the experience of homelessness. Interagency collaborations strive to align housing, health, education, and human services, and establish a set of strategies that facilitate partnerships across industries (including the private sector, philanthropy, and state and local governments) to employ cost-effective and comprehensive solutions. The following graphic provides an overview of the roles each agency plays in addressing homelessness.

An historical assessment of where each agency has dedicated its resources to respond to homelessness is detailed in the subsequent section. As the complexity of homelessness response continues to grow, agency, roles, funding, and programs are subject to shift over time. A full list of homelessness-related organizations, programs, and services is provided in Appendix A: Service Ecosystem Inventory.

There are three primary federal agencies that establish policy and regulations, financially support, and coordinate homelessness response efforts.
• US Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH): The USICH coordinates the Federal response to homelessness by partnering with 19 federal agencies, state and local governments, advocates, service providers, and people experiencing homelessness. USICH drafts and implements the Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness.

Federal
State
County
City
Local
Federal programs and departments
provide funding, federal legislation,
national statistics, national standards,
and coordinate national initiatives that
respond to homelessness
State programs and departments also
provide funding, set state-wide policy,
track and monitor state trends, and
coordinate state-level programs
Counties often lead and organize
coalitions of community partners,
administer individual programs, and build
strategic initiatives that deploy
complementary interventions for
homelessness
Cities set local policy, administer funds,
provide enforcement, and offer a variety
of direct services that respond to
homelessness
Local agencies are providers of a range
of supportive services and networks of
support needed to tackle the many social
and economic drivers of homelessness
Homelessness Study | 25

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
• Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS): The DHHS is the federal government’s principal agency supporting the social and economic well-being of Americans, including those who experience homelessness. DHHS provides funding to state, local, and non-profit entities for health care for people experiencing homelessness, as well as for substance use disorder, mental health, and nutrition.
• Housing and Urban Development (HUD): In general, the federal government supports low-income people in affording housing through the HUD Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program and provides Homeless Assistance Grants, including grants for the Continuum of Care (CoC) program, and entitlement programs such as Community Development Block Grants and Emergency Services Grants, to communities that administer housing and homelessness services.

HUD funding is prevalent and is often used as leverage for other regional and local funding, therefore HUD definitions and regulations can often constrain programs, even if they are only partially funded by HUD. Most, but not all, of the City’s housing vouchers are funded through these federal programs.

Multiple state-run entities administer homeless services programs to provide housing, housing-related supports, outreach, and advocacy services. Lead agencies include the:
• Department of Housing and Community Development
• California Department of Social Services
• California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
Rather than providing direct services to individuals, these agencies typically provide funding to organizations that offer housing subsidies and other homelessness interventions.

In 2016, California passed a law requiring all City and County housing programs to adopt a Housing First model, which was adopted as one of the guiding principles by Santa Monica City Council in 2008. Housing First is an evidence-based service approach that prioritizes providing permanent housing to people experiencing homelessness as quickly as possible without being subject to restrictions, such as sobriety. This law also required the creation of the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council, which oversees implementation of the Housing First model and identifies resources, benefits, and services to better support homelessness throughout the state of California.

In 2021, Assembly Bill 1220 transitioned the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council to the State’s Interagency Council on Homelessness. The mission of this organization is to develop policies and identify resources, benefits, and services to prevent and work toward ending homelessness in California.

Typically, county governments provide the majority of direct services in support of homelessness prevention and response through their human service agencies. Los Angeles County’s Departments of Health Services, Public Health, and Mental Health play a key regional role in tracking, monitoring, and responding to the health and behavioral health needs of the community, including people experiencing homelessness.

Homelessness Study | 26

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
In 2015, Los Angeles County developed the Homeless Initiative, which serves as the central coordinating body for its ongoing efforts to enhance services for people at risk of or experiencing homelessness. The initiative is primarily funded through Measure H, a 1/4 cent sales tax that was approved by voters in May 2017 and is expected to raise over $355 million annually over 10 years.

The Homeless Initiative developed 51 strategies to end homelessness in the County and is currently in the process of re-evaluating strategies as Measure H approaches its mid-way point. The following County Departments are also involved in homelessness response:
• Department of Health Services
• Department of Mental Health
• Department of Public Health
• Department of Public Social Services
• Department of Children and Family Services
• Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department
• Workforce Development, Aging, and Community Services
• Los Angeles County Superior Court
• Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office
• Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office
The County distributes public funding for homelessness services across eight geographic Service Planning Areas (SPAs). These distinct regions allow the County to develop and provide more relevant services targeted to the specific needs of the residents in these different areas. The City of Santa Monica is located within SPA 5: West; which contains 9.4% of the County’s total unsheltered population according to the 2020 homeless count. By contrast, SPA 4: Metro has nearly three times as many people experiencing homelessness and therefore has a higher concentration of Countyfunded homelessness services. The Homeless Initiative allocates Measure H funding regionally to each SPA according to their percentage of the Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count wherever possible. Some Measure H funding, including funding for permanent supportive housing and interim/bridge housing, is utilized countywide rather than by SPA; therefore, a breakdown of Measure H funding by City is not available.

Los Angeles Homelessness Services Authority
In December of 1993, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and the Los Angeles mayor and City Council created the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) as an independent, joint powers authority. LAHSA is the Lead Agency in the Los Angeles Continuum of Care (CoC), which is the regional planning body that coordinates housing and services for homeless families and individuals in Los Angeles County—which includes the City of Santa Monica (and excludes the cities of Glendale, Pasadena, and Long Beach which operate their own CoCs).

CoCs are federal designations that are required to receive federal funding (primarily from HUD) for homelessness prevention and response. LAHSA coordinates and manages over $800 million annually in federal, state, county, and City of Los Angeles funds for programs that provide shelter, housing, and services to people experiencing homelessness. LAHSA also operates the majority of Homelessness Study | 27

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
outreach teams in addition to the County’s Homeless Management Information System (HMIS), Coordinated Entry System (CES), which is the centralized waitlist for housing, and the annual homeless PIT count.

The City of Santa Monica works in tandem with Los Angeles County to coordinate their response to homelessness. Specifically, the City partners with LAHSA to provide Los Angeles’s CoC and conduct the annual PIT count. The City and LAHSA also both operate street outreach teams; however, where the City’s street outreach teams operate exclusively in Santa Monica, outreach teams managed by LAHSA operate in Santa Monica, but are further deployed throughout Los Angeles County. The City and LAHSA overlap in their provision of an HMIS system. While LAHSA operates the County’s HMIS, the City operates and independent HMIS discussed further in Observation 3: Data Collection and Access.

In the coordination of federal, state, county, city, and local homelessness response programming, there is often confusion regarding the funding, authority, and role of LAHSA as a joint powers authority. Funding and role details are also at the center of conversations around concepts such as fair share of services at the city level. The below graphics provide high-level insight into the composition of LAHSA’s budget and entities that influence the direction of LAHSA programming.

LAHSA BUDGET OVERVIEW16
In 2015, Los Angeles County voters approved Measure H, which is a quarter-cent tax increase to address homelessness. Measure H funds support both LAHSA and the City. The City couples Measure H resources with its own to form the foundation for providing a wide range of care, from basic outreach to specialized health treatments administered directly to people experiencing 16 LAHSA Budget Resources: https://www.lahsa.org/budget Homelessness Study | 28

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
homelessness in Santa Monica. Both LAHSA and the City operate grant programs that distribute funds to local service providers who work to respond to homelessness in Santa Monica. Additionally, LAHSA funding for SPA 5 is channeled through the Westside Cities Council of Governments.

WHO OVERSEES LAHSA?17
LAHSA has a dedicated SPA 5 community relations coordinator who attends coordination meetings hosted by the Westside Cities Council of Governments, homelessness resource group, and Westside Coalition to engage Santa Monica community and government stakeholders in outreach and engagement activities.

The City of Santa Monica has a long history of enacting policies, programs, and services to prevent and respond to homelessness, many of which are noted throughout this report. The following is a list of City departments involved in this work, a summary of the services and programs they lead, and expenditures in FY2020-21. Expenditures are listed as either primary costs (e.g., cost of providing specific programs directly or through a service agency) or secondary costs (e.g., costs of general City services such as public safety and infrastructure maintenance that are attributed to the homeless population in the City).
17 What is LAHSA and How Does the Homeless System Really Work? https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php/neighborhoodpolitics-hidden/24390-what-is-lahsa-and-how-does-the-homeless-system-really-work Homelessness Study | 29

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

DEPARTMENT/

DIVISION SERVICE DESCRIPTION
CITY

EXPENDITURES IN
FY2020-21
Community
Services
Department -
Housing and
Human Services
Division
Human Services manages a broad portfolio of resources and services (both directly and City-funded grants) to vulnerable populations within the City of Santa Monica, including people experiencing homelessness, seniors, and families. This team also administers the Human Services Grant Program (HSGP), which provides approximately $8 million in annual funding for services offered by nonprofit organizations that respond to community needs. HSGP provides grants that support the
wellbeing and quality of life for a variety of underserved populations in the City, including people experiencing
homelessness.

Housing Services supports efforts to create new housing opportunities, preserve existing affordable housing, and assist residents in maintaining existing housing through regulatory enforcement, appropriate service provider referrals, and direct service offerings (e.g., City-funded Preserving Our Diversity basic income program). In addition, Housing Services staffs the operations of the Santa Monica Housing Authority, which provides direct rental assistance to vulnerable residents and families with the goal of enhancing their quality of life, in addition to preventing potential homelessness due to adverse events. Assistance includes rental subsidies for people who previously experienced homelessness.
$10,078,340 in
primary costs
(including HSGP)
City Attorney’s
Office
The Criminal Division of the City Attorney’s office supports homelessness programs, such as the Homeless Liaison
Program in the Police Department and the Alternatives to Incarceration (ATI) Program, to encourage diversion from the criminal justice system into appropriate support services and adherence to regulations that govern quality of life in the City.

The Criminal Division also encourages landlords to comply with regulations that preserve the quality and availability of housing opportunities in Santa Monica.

Additionally, the Consumer Protection Division of the City Attorney’s Office enforces tenant rights and protections within the City, which helps support homelessness prevention efforts. $168,213 in primary
costs
Fire Department The newly formed (September 2021) Community Response Unit (CRU) is a dedicated team that responds to calls for service from vulnerable community members. The CRU team works collaboratively with other City departments, regional agencies, and non-profits to help connect individuals with applicable services. The CRU engages with a variety of
populations within the community, including seniors that struggle with accessibility within their homes or people in need of medical services. The Los Angeles County Emergency
Medical Services Agency provided the CRU with approval to transport individuals to psychiatric urgent care centers when $8,035,017 in total
costs
$588,975 in primary
costs
$7,446,042 in
secondary costs*
Homelessness Study | 30

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

DEPARTMENT/

DIVISION SERVICE DESCRIPTION
CITY

EXPENDITURES IN
FY2020-21
applicable. The CRU is a pilot project that is currently only budgeted through June 30, 2023.

In addition to the programmatic work, the Fire Department also provides emergency response services in relation to 911 calls.

Library The Library provides Library Services Officers who help maintain equitable access to open public library spaces by consistently monitoring behaviors and serving as a connection to outreach workers for people experiencing homelessness. $275,602 in primary
costs
Police Department The Homeless Liaison Program (HLP) includes dedicated police officers and an embedded Department of Mental Health (DMH) clinician who connect with individuals experiencing homelessness throughout the City to build relationships and provide service referrals. The intent of HLP is to provide proactive outreach, enforcement, and connection to needed services.

In addition to the programmatic work, the Police Department also provides emergency response services in relation to 911 calls.
$19,791,110 in total
costs
$1,830,399 in
primary costs
$17,960,711 in
secondary costs
Public Works
Department
The Public Works Department operates a component of the Clean and Safe Program, which is an initiative to support maintenance of public spaces throughout the City, including the beach, parks, and downtown area. People experiencing homelessness tend to be present in these spaces and avail themselves of key amenities, such as public restrooms and showers, which is another touchpoint for the City with this vulnerable population.
$4,156,838 in
primary costs
* Note: These costs are pulled from the 2021-22 fiscal year estimates but are included here in lieu of 2020-2021 expenditures to present a more comprehensive cost total (as 2020-2021 costs did not span a full fiscal year).

Appendix D: City Homelessness Programs in Fiscal Year 2021 contains a full description of City provided and City-funded programs.

The City's efforts are informed by input from community members, service providers, regional partners, and various Council-appointed boards and commissions like the Housing Commission and the Human Services Commission.

Local community and nonprofit organizations hold a pivotal role in the landscape of homelessness response. They are often well positioned to take the leading role in human service networks because they tend to be focused locally and are likely to have established legitimacy and trust with the target population and other community organizations and municipalities. They are significant players in implementing policies and take a leadership role by coordinating local homelessness response Homelessness Study | 31

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
efforts. Santa Monica has a highly developed local network of homelessness service providers. This study reviewed 20 nonprofits operating in Santa Monica who collectively provide 77 unique programs that span 12 service categories. This list of community partners was developed in collaboration with City staff and partners. For the list of nonprofits, we have included the primary organizations that provide direct services or coordination of direct services to people experiencing homelessness within Santa Monica.

SANTA MONICA HOMELESSNESS SERVICES ECOSYSTEM18
18 See Appendix A: Service Ecosystem Inventory.

Homelessness Study | 32

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
In FY2020-21, the City spent a total of $42.5 million on homelessness-related services. For this analysis, costs were identified as either primary or secondary costs:
• Primary costs: Direct expenditures on homelessness services and programs, including HSGP and City-operated programs (e.g., HLP team, Project Homecoming, Community Response Unit, Homeless Community Court, Library Service Officers)
• Secondary costs: Expenditures of general City services (e.g., Police, Fire, park and infrastructure maintenance) that are attributed to the population of people experiencing homelessness in the City based on workload data.

FY 2020-21 CITY HOMELESSNESS COSTS
The City spent $12,941,529 on primary costs (direct homelessness services and programs), the majority of which ($9.1 million) was funded through the general fund (see Appendix D: City Homelessness Programs in Fiscal Year 2021 for complete details).

In addition to these costs which are directly attributable to homelessness-related programs, the City also had costs related to homelessness within its operating departments such as Police, Fire, and Public Works; these costs are referred to as Secondary Costs. Public Works estimates that $4,156,838 of its operating costs (3% of total operating costs of $135,671,794 in FY2020-21) are attributable to homelessness through cleaning, custodial, trash pick-up, and other maintenance of City facilities and infrastructure. This represents a general approximation of staff time completed in service of the City’s unhoused populations to maintain public open space, facilities, and other city infrastructure and assets. The allocation of public safety departmental operating costs in FY2020-21 equate to $25,406,767 as reflected in the table below.
$12.9 million
$29.6 million
Primary Costs Secondary Costs
Homelessness Study | 33

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

DEPARTMENT

OPERATING DATA EXPENDITURE DATA
Total
calls
for
service
# of calls for
service
attributed to
homelessness
% of calls
attributed to
homelessness
Department
expenditures
Expenditures
attributed to
homelessness
Police 93,847 17,831 19% $96,360,084 $17,960,711*
Fire 15,073 2,495 16.6% $45,572,620 $7,446,042**
*Costs attributed to homelessness do not include direct services (e.g., HLP Team, Alternatives to Incarceration Program, POP program, and a portion of the Project Homecoming costs) in its calculation. **Costs attributed to homelessness do not include direct services (e.g., expenditures for the West Coast Care contract and CRU) in its calculation.

There are also three local tax measures on the November 8, 2022 General Election ballot that could impact funding available for homelessness prevention and services to address homelessness. If voters approve Measure CS, an increase in the City’s transient occupancy tax, City Council has noted that the anticipated $4 million in additional annual revenues would be used to expand the hours of the HLP team, expand the City’s homeless multidisciplinary street teams’ work beyond the downtown and beach area, redesign the Samoshel interim housing program to accommodate 24/7 intakes, and expand the Police Department’s Downtown Services Unit and the Public Services Officer program. Two competing documentary transfer tax measures are also on the ballot: Measure GS, a citizen’s initiative, would impose an additional tax $56 per $1,000 of value for property transfers over $8 million, and specifically dedicate the estimated $50 million per year of incremental revenues to homelessness prevention, affordable housing, and schools. The competing Measure DT would impose an incremental tax of $25 per $1,000 of the value in excess of $8 million for property sales over $8 million, providing $12 to $25 million annually; this is an advisory measure that prioritizes the incremental revenues for homelessness services, behavioral health services, public safety and emergency response teams for City streets and parks, reopening public libraries, after school programs and crossing guards, and 30% of the revenue annually would be used for housing assistance.

Homelessness Study | 34

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the input gathered from interviews, document review, focus groups, and the community group forum as well as comparisons to peer and best practices, we prepared a comprehensive set of observations and recommendations, which are presented in four categories: 1) Strategy and Planning; 2) Communication and Community Engagement; 3) Organization Structure and Staffing; and 4) Homelessness Prevention and Response Program Analysis. The observations and recommendations for each category are detailed below.

1. Observation The City has adopted the Four Pillars framework to guide its homelessness response. However, the framework does not provide guidance around critical policy questions, define actionable objectives, or detail current City initiatives. In the absence of a comprehensive strategy, the City’s initiatives have been disrupted by differing philosophies related to roles and responsibilities, enforcement, and coordination with internal and external stakeholders.

Recommendations A. Develop a comprehensive homelessness strategic plan that builds on the Four Pillars framework to set clear policy direction, promote alignment across City stakeholders, and support regional efforts.

B. In the short-term, if resources to create a full strategic plan are not available, develop specific objectives for each of the Four Pillars and align City workplans.

Four Pillars Foundation
Following the homeless count in 2019, Santa Monica’s City Council identified Addressing Homelessness as a priority for its bi-annual budget process. In response to this direction, the Homeless Action Team, a cross-functional team of City staff, developed a Four Pillar approach to balance short and long-term strategies and guide the organization’s homelessness efforts for two years.

At the March 26, 2019, City Council meeting, the Council adopted the Four Pillars, which include:
• Prevent housed Santa Monicans from becoming homeless and increase affordable housing opportunities.
• Address the behavioral health needs of vulnerable residents • Maintain equitable access to safe, fun, and healthy open spaces • Strengthen regional capacity to address homelessness.

Homelessness Study | 35

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
For each of the Four Pillars, the City recently developed supplemental workplans that describe the programmatic work taking place in each area and set tactical activity measures. However, staff report that the workplans do not account for all current City activity in this area.

Overall, the Four Pillars structure generally align with approaches to addressing homelessness that are leveraged by other cities nationally and establish a constructive framework that can help the City direct initiatives, allocate resources, and measure performance. However, the Four Pillars framework does not provide specific objectives, measurable goals, or performance indicators which are commonly found in a strategic plan. These elements can increase alignment and provide management and Council mid- to long-term focus in a local government environment that has inherent turnover in elected, policy-setting roles.

In particular, the Four Pillars do not yet provide guidance around critical policy questions. Here is a sample of questions raised by interviewees:
• What is the City’s regional proportional responsibility around the issue of homelessness? How will the City define what level of services or resources are appropriate to provide? • What is the City’s advocacy strategy to ensure that other partners (including surrounding cities) are also contributing to resolve this issue?
• What is the appropriate role of enforcement? What is the City’s intended strategy for integrating the efforts to support people experiencing homelessness with the efforts to enforce city ordinances (e.g., restrictions on sleeping in a park that is closed)? • What is the City’s strategy around balancing resource allocation between upstream prevention efforts and immediate response efforts?
• Are the Four Pillars meant to incorporate efforts that focused on transitioning unsheltered people into temporary or permanent housing? While the City has many services in this area, these activities are not directly mentioned within the Four Pillars. • What are the City’s actual targets or measurable goals related to each of the Four Pillars? How does the City define success or failure for this type of regional issue? In the absence of a comprehensive strategy, the City’s initiatives are disrupted by differing philosophies related to roles and responsibilities, enforcement, and coordination within and outside of the organization. This is exacerbated by turnover in City leadership and management.

Strategic Plan Impact
Developing a cohesive homelessness-specific strategic plan is a common practice for municipalities and a best practice according to many industry leaders including the League of California Cities and California State Association of Counties’ Joint Homelessness Task Force. 19 According to the United
19 Homelessness Task Force Report – Tools and Resources for Cities and Counties: https://www.calcities.org/docs/defaultsource/advocacy/homelessness-task-force-report---tools-and-resources-for-cities-and-counties.pdf?sfvrsn=fe1cf8d0_3 Homelessness Study | 36

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
States Interagency Council on Homelessness, strategic planning has been shown to result in decreases in homelessness when the plans are well-crafted and implemented.20 Two of the five interviewed peer cities have homelessness strategic plans in place (Berkeley and West Hollywood) and two others (Pasadena and Richmond) reported they are in the process of developing strategic plans. Both cities with strategic plans in place reported benefits, including clearer direction overall, more informed decision-making, improved communication with stakeholders, and better coordination (peer data is provided in Appendix C: Peer Research Summary).

Establishing a comprehensive strategic plan to address homelessness could result in several Cityspecific benefits to overcome existing challenges including:
• Clarified direction and improved alignment among City leaders over time: Over the last two years, the City has experienced turnover in several leadership positions that have a significant impact on its homelessness response, including the City Manager’s Office, City Attorney’s Office, Community and Cultural Services Department (now Community Services Department), Police Department, and Fire Department. Additionally, City councilmembers are elected to staggered four-year terms which often results in turnover at each election cycle and shifting expectations, priorities, and philosophies in the City’s homelessness response. In the absence of an overarching mission, vision, and defined strategies to address homelessness within the community, stakeholders report challenges in perpetuating initiatives across these leadership changes. The City’s ability to steadfastly execute its efforts is also contingent upon formally defining authority over homelessness services and compelling stakeholder departments to support these efforts (see Recommendation 8: Authority and Decision-Making for more details).

Peer cities that clearly define philosophies and strategies for serving people experiencing 20 United States Interagency Council on Homelessness: Developing and Implementing Strategic Plans to End Homelessness:
https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/CommunityStrategicPlanning_February_2011.pdf Homelessness Study | 37

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
homelessness report they have created greater alignment amongst City departments and their initiatives, improved stability of services during periods of change, and overall elevated coordination and collaboration (peer data is available in Appendix C: Peer Research Summary). • Improved coordination with external stakeholders responding to homelessness in the community: Coordination with external stakeholders is a common challenge for cities responding to homelessness (see Recommendation 19: External Coordination). The City must coordinate with many stakeholders to effectively respond to homelessness, including service providers, law enforcement, judicial systems, officials across various levels of government, Continuum of Care (CoC) leads, and others. Establishing a strategic plan is an opportunity to bring together the numerous stakeholders responding to homelessness in the community to conceptualize priorities and needs.
• Aligned philosophy on the role of enforcement: Cities often struggle to balance enforcement of quality-of-life ordinances (e.g., restrictions on sleeping or sitting in public areas) with the desire to support people experiencing homelessness within the community. The City’s historical use of enforcement has fluctuated in connection with leadership changes in the Police Department over the past several years. Developing a consistent, unified philosophy that balances compassion and enforcement is a critical component to the City’s success in supporting the reduction of homelessness in the community. Stakeholders internal and external to the City noted that this balance does not appear to be agreed upon, which can contribute to an inconsistent response to community requests for service over time.
• Optimized use of limited City resources: Addressing homelessness is a clear priority for Santa Monica residents and the City. However, the City must also balance this initiative with its other core services to fulfill its obligations to residents. In fiscal year 2020, the City experienced significant financial impacts in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and is still working to recover revenue, primarily generated through tourism, parking, and business license taxes, that historically supported its budget. This has resulted in a resource-constrained environment and subsequent competition over limited resources to provide services to people experiencing homelessness and mitigate the impact of homelessness on the community. A comprehensive strategy defines unified goals and accompanying measures that can be used to strategically guide year-over-year resource allocations and planning in its absence, budget requests are sometimes driven by anecdotal information or capacity constraints within existing programs, rather than by performance data that is linked back to strategic goals (see Recommendation 2:

Performance Measurement).
• Improved communication with the public: Many community members report being unaware of the City’s initiatives related to its homelessness response and do not have clarity on the progress or effectiveness of these initiatives (see Recommendation 6: Community Reporting and Recommendation 7: Community Resources). A strategic plan that includes, or is accompanied by, a detailed communication plan that defines objectives and performance measures can be a highly effective tool for communicating the City’s direction, efforts, and outcomes with the public, especially when regular reporting on the plan’s progress is done. West Hollywood uses their strategic plan as a tool when conducting regular outreach and aims to ensure residents and the business community are aware of and regularly updated on the plan and its progress. West Hollywood staff reported this approach has helped them to significantly improve awareness of their efforts in the community.
• Opportunity to solicit meaningful input: Homelessness is a complex issue and there are often conflicting ideas around the best initiatives to launch within a community that will drive meaningful results. Developing a strategic plan would give the City the opportunity to involve the housed and Homelessness Study | 38

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
unhoused members of the community in their solution-building and planning efforts. In particular, unhoused community members have valuable and critically important input to contribute. • Defined indicators of success: Without clear and specific objectives, it is challenging to select appropriate performance indicators to track progress over time (for more details on performance indicators see Recommendation 2: Performance Measurement). • Clarified roles and responsibilities: Where collaboration between various City partners is required, defined roles and responsibilities can provide much needed clarity and expectation setting. The following table represents an example delineation of roles and responsibilities between the City Council, City Council Committees, and City staff.

CITY COUNCIL

COMMITTEE OR ADVISORY

BOARDS CITY STAFF
Govern, Guide, and Direct
Examine, Review,
Recommend Administer and Operate
● Decide what to implement
● Request information
● Consider issues
● Create, review, and adopt
strategic policy
● Monitor progress
● Represent public interests
● Operate ethically and with
integrity
● Advise on what to implement
● Assess information
● Investigate issues
● Examine and advise
strategic policy
● Evaluate progress
● Represent public interest
● Operate ethically and with
integrity
● Decide how to implement
● Seek and provide
information
● Develop recommendations
● Recommend and implement
policy
● Report on progress
● Act in public interest
● Operate ethically and with
integrity
The role of Council is NOT to:

The role of a Committee or
Advisory Board is NOT to:

The role of City staff is NOT
to:
● Carry out or decide how to
implement policies
● Set administrative policies
and procedures
● Direct any staff other than
the City Manager and
chartered officers
● Abdicate Council
responsibility
● Take binding action on
behalf of the City
● Set administrative policies
and procedures
● Direct any staff
● Set strategic policies
● Direct the Council
● Assume Council
responsibilities
● Circumvent City or Council
policies
Strategic Plan Development
The City should transform the Four Pillars framework into a comprehensive homelessness strategic plan—with clearly defined strategies and measurable indicators of success—to advance and improve homelessness efforts moving forward. The plan should be developed as a collaborative effort between City management and City Council.

The City has already developed many of the elements commonly found in strategic plans—including the Four Pillars, homelessness workplan, staff reports, and a new website which provides information Homelessness Study | 39

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
on the programs, performance measures, stakeholders, and efforts already underway within the City.

These elements can be used as a springboard to launch future efforts. An example of how the City’s current information can be integrated into a strategic plan framework is provided in Appendix E:

Strategic Plan and City Resources Crosswalk. The final plan should span three to five years and be adopted by City Council to provide stability on the direction of these efforts for the designated time period. Ideally, this plan would be aligned with regional efforts.

In the short-term, if resources to create a full strategic plan are not available, the City would greatly benefit from at least developing specific objectives for each of the Four Pillars. As part of the development process, the City would have an opportunity to review and potentially address some of the outstanding policy questions mentioned above.

Phase I: City Leadership and Council
Phase II: City Management
Phase III: City Staff

VISION,

MISSION,
& VALUES

STRATEGIC GOALS

ORGANIZATION-WIDE

OBJECTIVES/ACTIONS

ORGANIZATION-WIDE

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

DEPARTMENT/DIVISION

ANNUAL OPERATING
PLANS
Homelessness Study | 40

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

2. Observation The City does not have a performance measurement framework to consistently track, compare, and communicate the impact of the City’s homelessness response efforts. As a result, the City is not yet able to comparatively assess program effectiveness or convey the outcomes of its work to internal and external stakeholders.

Recommendations A. Develop community-level performance measures to track major outcomes and keep leadership, staff, and stakeholders informed of progress.

B. Continue efforts to develop consistent program-level performance measures to enable comparative monitoring and continuous improvement.

C. Take steps to ensure that program participant feedback is consistently collected, analyzed, and used to inform operational and strategic decisions.

D. Implement consistent monitoring and oversight processes over all City contracts for programs that directly serve people experiencing homelessness to enable consistent performance measurement and validation practices.

E. Develop a plan to restore key staff positions to support data collection, coordination, analysis, and reporting.

Performance measurement is a critical element of how the City can track the effectiveness and costbenefit of its homelessness programs and services. In alignment with best practice, the City should develop a comprehensive performance measurement framework to provide a more complete understanding of progress towards the City’s homelessness-related goals. Because homelessness indicates that a person is in need of assistance, this framework should incorporate metrics that focus on outcomes and effectiveness.

Current State
Although the City has attempted to develop enterprise-wide performance measures in the past, these efforts were largely unsuccessful. The City has also documented numerous performance measures related to specific homelessness programs over the past several years. However, these efforts have not culminated into a comprehensive reporting framework that can provide useful, comparable, yearover-year trend data to be able to track program impact and inform operational and strategic decision making.
• Limited Value: Due to the City’s lack of clearly defined objectives (see Recommendation 1:

Unifying Strategic Plan), management designed measures to reflect the important work being performed by their respective teams without clarity on the purpose and use of this information.

Within this context, collecting, analyzing, and reporting performance measures represented additional work with minimal value.

Homelessness Study | 41

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
• Irregular Data Collection Methods: Irregularities to the City’s measurement methodology—such as shifts in selected metrics, inconsistent time frames for reporting, and reliance on communicating through narrative staff reports to City Council—has presented challenges in relaying performance information to governing bodies and the community (see Recommendation 5: City Council Annual Review and Recommendation 6: Community Reporting for more details). • Data Attribution Limitations: Effectively responding to homelessness relies on a highly networked approach to providing services that address the unique, and varied, needs of the individual. As a result, it can be difficult to definitively attribute success to one program compared to another. For example, the City and County deploy a multi-pronged approach to engaging several outreach teams and case workers that often work together to build relationships with individuals experiencing homelessness and provide referrals to needed services as available.

Outreach teams may succeed in connecting with one unsheltered individual who, after several contacts by each team, may opt to participate in a mental health treatment program. The individual’s decision to participate in the program may be the result of interactions with one, two, or several outreach teams, or an event that occurred outside of service provider interactions. In this example, which program or service should count this towards their performance measure? If each program counts this engagement towards their performance measure, how is the data adapted to accurately reflect the impact to one individual? This type of collective effort is common in homelessness interventions and presents inherent challenges and unique considerations when using data to evaluate a program’s success and impact.
• Lack of Comparable Data: While all HSGP programs report data related to their programming, the performance measures across HSGP providers and direct City services to people experiencing homelessness have not been standardized (current performance indicators are included in Appendix F: Sample Performance Measurement Framework). As a result, it is difficult to make apples-to-apples comparisons or create summarized data. • Time Consuming: The City has begun the practice of posting grantee monitoring reports on the City’s website to provide program-specific data on active HSGP grantees. However, this posting requires significant time to redact sensitive client information and may not provide the type of information that is relevant to interested community members.

Community-Level Indicators
In alignment with a comprehensive homelessness strategic plan (see Recommendation 1: Unifying Strategic Plan) and relevant regional partner goals, the City should develop a small set of key performance measures that document top-line homelessness related outcomes. These metrics should be designed to show the impact of the complete service environment within the City.

Appendix F: Sample Performance Measurement Framework provides an example performance measurement framework for one of the City’s Four Pillars (Pillar 1). Commonly reported outcome indicators related to housing and homelessness include:
• Number of people experiencing homelessness (PIT count) • Number of households entering homelessness
• Number of households exiting homelessness into temporary or permanent housing • Number of households returning to homelessness
• Housing affordability
Homelessness Study | 42

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
• Number of available housing units by type (e.g., affordable housing, permanent supportive housing)
• Number of people prevented from becoming homeless or number of prevented evictions • Utilization rates of emergency and transitional housing • Racial and gender demographics of people experiencing homelessness and/or receiving services Ideally, performance indicators should be aligned with the Four Pillars and reported to the community using a dashboard (see Recommendation 6: Community Reporting for more details). These top-line indicators represent the information that is most important to community members—who are typically much less focused on the City’s specific activities and much more interested in the ultimate impact on homelessness.

Program-Level Indicators
The City should continue its efforts to establish a standardized set of comparable performance measures that can be used for each type of homelessness-related program or service provided or funded by the City.

The City is currently in the process of making changes to the HSGP reporting framework. As part of developing the request for proposals for the 2023-2027 HSGP cycle, the City is revising its expectations for grantees. For each program, the City intends to incorporate an output measure (aka an indicator related to the activities of a program, like the number of events held) and outcome measures (aka an indicator related to the ultimate impact of a service, like the number of individuals placed into permanent housing) for each program. This combination of output and outcome reporting for HSGP grantees aligns with best practice and should be expanded to all City-operated homelessness programs and services (e.g., CRU, HLP, Homeless Court).

As the City established program-level indicators, several considerations should be kept top of mind:
• Data should be comparable across similar types of programs or services. • Capabilities of technology systems and capacity of front-line workers to track data • The City should be thoughtful about making changes to data collection methodologies, as each change limits the ability to consistently track year-over-year data and accurately identify trends. • Programs should measure both outputs and outcomes.
• Program participant feedback should be considered and incorporated as part of this process. • To understand the complete picture of homelessness services in the community, it is imperative that both City-funded and City-operated programs follow the same data collection and reporting processes.

Once City leadership has comparable, year-over-year performance data, it will be much better situated to use this information to make programmatic, budgetary, and strategic decisions. Sample Homelessness Study | 43

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
performance measures by program adapted from the Homelessness Research Institute21 are included in Appendix F: Sample Performance Measurement Framework.

Program Participant Feedback
It is best practice to incorporate feedback from program participants as part of determining the success of a given initiative or intervention.

Within that context, each of the HSGP partners has been given leeway to determine the best way to collect feedback from program participants. The table below includes a summary of how each of the HSGP programs provided in fiscal year 2020-21 collected feedback from program participants about their experience receiving services and/or level of satisfaction with services.

PROGRAM PARTICIPANT FEEDBACK MECHANISMS22

GRIEVANCE

FORMS MEETINGS

SCHEDULED

CHECK-INS/
VISITS

SUGGESTION

BOX SURVEYS OTHER
Legal Aid of
Los Angeles X
St. Joseph
Center X X
Step Up on
Second X
The People
Concern X X X X X
Venice Family
Clinic X X X X
The City should take steps to ensure that program participant feedback is consistently collected, analyzed, and used to inform operational and strategic decisions. While it may not be practical to require standardized program feedback mechanisms (as different programs serve different unsheltered populations with various needs and interest in providing input), at minimum the City should be analyzing program participant input as part of determining the efficacy of individual programs and services.

Contract Administration
Expectations around performance measurement and monitoring for City-funded programs are incorporated into the contracts that are created between the City and the various service providers. 21 What Gets Measured, Gets Done – A Toolkit on Performance Measurement for Ending Homelessness:
https://endhomelessness.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/what-gets-measured-what-gets-done.pdf 22 This information was reported by HSGP partners.

Homelessness Study | 44

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
HSGP is the primary administrator of homelessness-related vendor contracts for the City; however, the City also operates two homelessness-related contracts through other departments. During the FY2020-21 cycle reviewed, the Right to Counsel program (administered by the City Attorney’s Office) and West Coast Care (administered by the Fire Department) were both operating outside of the HSGP, even though these programs provide homelessness-related services.

Under the HSGP, grantees are subject to robust ongoing monitoring activities including financial and performance reporting every six months, annual site visits and desk audits on a sample of expenditures and case files, and an evaluation of key contract requirements such as facilities and grievances. However, the contracts operating outside of this program have different contract terms.

For example, the HMST and C3 teams are administered outside of HSGP but those contracts include monthly activity reporting requirements and annual program and fiscal reports. Because of the partnerships involved with these two projects, they are subject to ongoing monitoring and oversight.

However, there are two contracts—West Coast Care and the Right to Counsel program—that lack rigorous monitoring and oversight practices. Staff report concerns regarding the accuracy of data and overall program performance reporting contracts operating outside of HSGP given that they are not subject to the same level of ongoing monitoring practices and self-report data without validation by the City.

To promote accountability and parity with City contracts related to homelessness services, the City should require all homelessness-related contracts to be subject to consistent monitoring and oversight practices regardless of which Department oversees the contract. This will prove critical to ensuring that the information reported by grantees is accurate for performance reporting and evaluation purposes in addition to supporting consistent accountability expectations across service providers.

Data and Analysis Staffing Support
With the elimination of the data analyst positions and the City’s focus on local economic recovery, the capacity and ability for the HHSD to respond to the homelessness crisis was reduced. Staff report that they often decide between actively completing service-oriented work or reporting/analytics on service work, which can limit the ability to effectively record, monitor, and report progress. Typically, data analysis and reporting are performed by analysts, ten of which were eliminated from this newly formed department (see Recommendation 9: Employee Morale and Capacity section for more details on restored positions). Additionally, the Department eliminated its Data Science Administrator position which was intended to support a more robust performance management framework.

The Department currently relies on outside contractors, rather than the City’s Information Services Department, for software support due to the technical and sensitive nature of the HMIS. The HMIS includes significant person-level information and has some reporting capabilities that could be strengthened to support the City’s performance reporting needs. To adequately address these reporting needs, the City should consider restoring the following positions, which are listed in priority order:
• Data Science Administrator
• Senior Administrative Analyst – Human Services/Fiscal Homelessness Study | 45

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
These positions are critical to supporting work on the City’s homelessness priority by enabling existing staff to focus on completing the necessary service work while these roles focus on performance management and data.

Access to strong performance information will not independently result in reduced homelessness within the Santa Monica community. However, this information is imperative to understanding the reach and efficacy of programs to facilitate discussion around evolving needs, continuous improvement, and resource distribution.

3. Observation The City’s systems to collect data storage across City-funded programs and services are siloed. This limits the City’s ability to accurately assess performance in a timely and meaningful manner.

Recommendation A. In the short term, pursue options to integrate data from first responders and the Homelessness Management information System (HMIS) to enable improved reporting and/or pursue mechanisms that support accuracy and expand communication across teams.

B. In the long term, evaluate the appropriate mechanism to integrate first responder data into the HMIS to enhance data accuracy, completeness, and performance reporting.

Across the Los Angeles County region, there are several different systems used to track, monitor, and report on homelessness. As the Continuum of Care (CoC) Program Administrator, the County operates a Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) called Clarity. Additionally, the City operates its own HMIS called Wellsky Community Services. The purpose of a HMIS is to log interactions with and service referrals to people experiencing homelessness within a community.

Assembly Bill 210, which was passed in 2017, authorized counties to “establish homeless adult and family multidisciplinary personnel teams to facilitate identification, assessment, and linkage of homeless individuals to housing and supporting services as well as allow provider agencies to share confidential information for the purpose of coordinating housing and supporting services to ensure continuity of care.” The law specifically identifies police officers, probation officers, and other law enforcement agents as potential members of the multidisciplinary team that could have access to confidential information, provided that access to that information is appropriately safeguarded.

However, in 2020, Los Angeles County reported concerns with first responders having access to the level of personal information included in an HMIS, since the database includes sensitive health information. Therefore, the City is unable to implement sharing of information to first responders without also considering the level of information shared with law enforcement and gaining County approval.

The City requires all HSGP grantee service providers to enter client information into their HMIS, Wellsky Community Services, including detailed case file records and notes. The HMIS then creates a centralized location to track interactions by person, show program-level data for Santa Monica Program Participants, calculate HUD cash match for service transitions, and update the service Homelessness Study | 46

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
registry that identifies highly vulnerable individuals. Because agencies are often busy with clients, staff report that information is typically updated in the system at least weekly. In addition to capacity constraints, stakeholders reported additional barriers to reporting information consistently and accurately, including:
• The need to record information regarding the same individual into multiple systems (e.g., agency recordkeeping system, Clarity, and Wellsky Community Services). • Receipt of incomplete information from an individual, which can result in duplicate entries for the same person or case file notes on the incorrect individual for those with common names. • Individuals that do not want to provide information, resulting in missing data.

To mitigate these concerns, the HHSD has incorporated missing data reports and a process to spotcheck paper and electronic files for accuracy and completeness. Overall, the HMIS appears to be an effective tracking and reporting tool for City-funded service providers that can be easily leveraged to support community-level and program-specific performance measures.

Despite the proliferation of this tool, all City departments that conduct outreach activities do not have access to or use Wellsky Community Services. Departments that contact people experiencing homelessness record these interactions within their own individual systems, or not at all. Both SMPD and SMFD report data from their systems to an analyst in HHSD on a monthly basis, but in practice, these two first responder agencies also lack access to one another’s data. As a result, the ability for the CRU, HLP team, and other service providers to collaborate, and the City’s ability to accurately report on metrics by person or program is limited.

In 2019, the City helped develop an application in collaboration with Akido Labs called Santa MonicaConnect that connects with data from the SMPD, and SMFD and triggers a message to the case management team assigned through the app if police or fire interacted with one of the preidentified high-users of first responder services. Currently, approximately 100 people experiencing homelessness are in the system, which presents opportunities to expand its use to other individuals in the community.

In the absence of a strong data management structure and due to the need to leverage multiple independent databases, there are significant challenges for the City to access and report on information from multiple departments on a regular basis. Additionally, because there is no integration of data across Wellsky Community Services, Police, and Fire, the data that can be reported is likely to be duplicated, which in turn impacts the accuracy of performance reporting and monitoring. This results in difficulty capturing interactions, service referrals, acceptance of services, service availability, and the progress of an individual through the system up to securing permanent housing.

To support enhanced data access and integrity, the City should consider the following short- and long-term options.

In the short term, the City should evaluate whether the clinicians accompanying the HLP team can or would like to be granted permissions-restricted access to the HMIS. As medical professionals that are not a sworn officer, these individuals should be able to have access to the information contained within the HMIS and to log interactions for the HLP team to support continuity of care. This information sharing will be particularly important as the City hopes to expand the HLP team and add a Homelessness Study | 47

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Department of Mental Health therapeutic van program in FY 2023; otherwise, the integrity of the existing data will further diminish and impact the reported performance of a new pilot program.

Additionally, the City should evaluate opportunities to funnel CRU and HMIS data into a repository for reporting and analysis purposes. To be effective, SMFD would need to increase the frequency of information sharing from monthly to weekly and ensure accurate reporting on which CRU calls are related to homelessness versus other individuals needing additional support (e.g., elderly or disabled residents). While this information would still not be integrated into the HMIS for two-way access, it could reduce the number of duplicated records reported. Finally, the City should consider expanding the use of Santa Monica Connect by increasing the number of people experiencing homelessness in the application to support information transfer to case workers, to enhance their visibility to significant events and movements of clients.

In the long term, the City should work to either a) evaluate potential impacts of granting access to sensitive personal data to law enforcement and, depending on the findings, potentially secure approval from the County or establish supportive regulatory safeguards to provide HMIS access to all members of multidisciplinary teams, or b) work with a software consultant to manage information access to enable input of information without access to sensitive information for first responders. Both of these options would enhance the accuracy and completeness of the data stored across HMIS systems and present significant opportunities for improved data analytics to assess programs over time. Both initiatives are likely to require significant time, resources, and collaboration to achieve.

4. Observation Most City partnership efforts are driven by staff participation in regional coordination activities. This suggests there are opportunities for City Council to expand and enhance collaboration with regional partners and governmental agencies.

Recommendation City Council should enhance regional and intergovernmental partnerships by actively engaging other regional agencies to support coordination and access to services that support people experiencing homelessness.

The City participates in many partnerships across the Los Angeles region in support of Pillar 4:

Strengthening Regional Capacity to Address Homelessness. These regional efforts include, but are not limited to, partnerships with the following organizations:
• HUD
• Los Angeles County
• LAHSA
• Local service providers, such as Step Up on Second, TPC, and Providence St. John’s • State of California
Homelessness Study | 48

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
• Supervisorial District 3
• U.S. Congress
• United States Interagency Council on Homelessness Western Region • Veteran’s Administration of West Los Angeles
• Westside Cities Council of Government
Despite success in many of these efforts—such as securing funding for the development of a behavioral health strategy in Santa Monica—ongoing efforts to strengthen regional partnerships and advocate for additional resources remain. The majority of regional coordination efforts are conducted by City staff who are on the front lines of homelessness services and therefore have relationships with local service providers. However, staff noted that other governmental agencies such as the Westside Cities Council of Government and LAHSA have inconsistently participated in developing and sustaining regional partnerships. Ultimately, intergovernmental collaboration reduces duplication and provides opportunities to enhance and expand programming in a lower-cost way. 23 Collaboration
across jurisdictions therefore enables all participating agencies to increase their impact.

To continue building on successes and overcome barriers to regional partnerships, City Council should participate in more robust regional partnership efforts with other jurisdictions to advance policy goals, address community needs, and encourage appropriate allocation of resources locally. City Council is well-positioned to advocate for the community at a regional level as local leaders in the community and representatives of residents.

According to the National League of Cities, one of the roles of Council is to represent their community to other levels of government, including the County, State, and Federal agencies. 24 Given the
regional nature of homelessness and ongoing concerns that the City provides services beyond its proportional regional share, City Council should be actively involved with other agencies in the area to advocate for additional resources and support coordination efforts. For example, because LAHSA distributes Measure H funding based on the proportion of people experiencing homelessness within each SPA and there is significant need throughout the County, there is a perception that SPA 5 (Westside of Los Angeles, including Santa Monica) receives inadequate resources to address concerns in this geographic region. City staff host regular meetings with local service providers and the SPA 5 LAHSA representative; however, its regional coordination efforts would likely be more powerful with enhanced leadership and political support.

Best practices indicate that effective government bodies recognize that they must coordinate with local community entities as well as county, state, and federal entities. 25 Community relations includes
interactions with constituencies and other jurisdictions/agencies to build partnerships that can better serve the local area. City Council has not yet been integrated into robust partnership efforts related to homelessness and should use its influence to actively engage powerful community groups in support 23 Homelessness Task Force Report: Partnering for Greater Impact: https://www.ca-ilg.org/sites/main/files/fileattachments/partnering_for_greater_impact.pdf?1519780169 24 National League of Cities – City Councils: https://www.nlc.org/city-councils/ 25 10 Habits of Highly Effective Councils: https://mrsc.org/getmedia/5df44c35-56f5-4790-8eaf1ab8ea927120/cc10habitshegb.aspx Homelessness Study | 49

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
of Santa Monica’s needs. Homelessness is a complex regional issue and therefore the response by the City, from staff to City Council, should reflect the importance of partnerships with other governmental agencies.

5. Observation Although the City’s municipal code requires an annual review of homelessness services by City Council, the City has not recently been able to provide reports on a consistent annual basis due to a variety of factors including COVID-19 emergencies. Instead, staff often respond to ongoing ad hoc requests for information.

Recommendation A. Reinstitute a consistent timeline for the annual review of homeless services and re-evaluate its format to articulate community-level and program-level data.

B. In alignment with the municipal code, adopt a uniform methodology to track citywide costs related to homelessness for inclusion in the annual report.

C. Following the development of a Homelessness Strategic Plan, review the existing municipal code for consistency and necessity.

City municipal code Chapter 2.69 requires City Council to adopt a plan for the coordination of services provided to the homeless by the City and by social service organizations receiving City funding. Section 2.69.020 states that “At least once during every twelve-month period after adoption of the coordinated plan … the City Council shall assess the effectiveness of the plan in accomplishing its primary goal and various objectives, and shall evaluate the effectiveness, efficiency, and cost of services to the homeless provided by the City and each social service agency receiving City funding.” Based on a review of historical staff reports related to homelessness, the City has experienced disruptions in providing City Council with regularly scheduled annual reports on local homelessness efforts. Most recently, the 2020 Annual Report was interrupted by COVID-19 and the subsequent City reorganization, staffing reductions, and emergent efforts to respond to the pandemic. In both 2021 and 2022, staff presented updates on homelessness strategies and services twice during each year due to its status as a community priority. However, the timing of these reports is not consistent, which can contribute to confusion around the data reported and ability to identify trends.

Multiple cities or regions throughout the US conduct annual reports on homelessness services (see table below), such as King County Regional Homeless Authority’s annual evaluation (KCRHA) or New York City’s Department of Homeless Services annual Financial Plan overview. These reports are commonly conducted by an internal audit, performance and evaluation units, or the controller’s office. It is important to note that these annual reviews are either a combination of cost studies, program services evaluation, or each focus individually. These annual reviews often cover effectiveness of existing programs, new needs, and programmatic changes.

Homelessness Study | 50

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

CITY/REGION ANNUAL REPORTING STRUCTURE
New York New York City’s DHS conducts an annual Management and Fiscal Plan, highlighting budgets by program area, costs, and program effectiveness.

Los Angeles County The Los Angeles Department of Auditor-Controller conducts an annual audit of Measure H, in addition to annual performance reports on Measure HHH King County, WA King County’s Performance Measurement and Evaluation Unit prepares an annual evaluation for KCRHA, evaluating program services for its Coordinated Entry for All Program. KCRHA also conducts annual research reports and a live dashboard for performance evaluation.

Seattle The City of Seattle occasionally conducts an analysis of the City’s investment into homelessness services. The focus of the report varies year to year based on city leadership.

San Francisco The City of San Francisco’s Department of Homelessness and Supportive conducts occasional homelessness system reviews, and is part of San Francisco City/County’s Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) The City currently lacks a methodology to calculate and report on citywide costs related to homelessness, including direct cost of service and other city service costs (e.g., park and beach clean-up, first responder calls). Appendix D: City Homelessness Programs in Fiscal Year 2021 includes an analysis of City costs related to homelessness in FY 2020–21, which amounts to $42.5M.

To remain consistent in providing cost information, the City should document a methodology for calculating homelessness related costs and ensure departments apply this methodology to incorporate total costs into the annual homelessness report. This methodology may emulate the expenditure analysis conducted for this engagement and should consider both direct costs (e.g., provision of services, use of dedicated teams) and other city service costs. Other city service costs should be estimated based on tracking what proportion of a team or department’s resources are spent responding to homelessness in the community. Within the calculation performed for this engagement, departments either provided estimates or workload data (e.g., number of service calls that responded to a homelessness-related concern) which were then used to estimate the total cost of other city services based on actual department costs.

To be most impactful, the City should reinstate annual reporting that occurs at approximately the same time each year, potentially by setting a deadline of March 31 (which would align with the January PIT count) or September 30 to align with the budgeting process or fiscal year end, respectively. By providing the report at approximately the same time each year, the City is better able to evaluate year-over-year progress and understand trends in service demands and offerings. The City should also consider adjusting its annual review format to incorporate an appendix complete with community and program-level performance measures, including a comparison over time. Where applicable, the appendix should also include City expenditures relating to homelessness services by program or function, as required in the municipal code. The narrative accompanying the annual report can then focus on key data metrics and communicate the evolving environment as it relates to homelessness locally, regionally, and nationally.

Homelessness Study | 51

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
After the City has developed a Homelessness Strategic Plan, it should evaluate the existing municipal code and make changes as needed. The current code incorporates policy decision elements, such as defining the purpose and goals of the Homeless Coordination Plan. Over time, these factors may not align with the City’s practices and should be removed from the code to enable greater flexibility within strategic and operating plans in alignment with best practices.

6. Observation Stakeholders expressed frustration in their ability to easily access current and historical homelessness-specific information.

Recommendation A. Continue to develop the homelessness webpage to provide a centralized repository for community resources, key reports, and relevant articles.

B. To better communicate the outcomes of the City’s homelessness services, develop a dashboard to regularly report community-level performance measures.

The City communicates its efforts related to homelessness in a variety of different formats, including staff reports, publishing grantee monitoring reports, public meetings (including the social services and homeless services commissions), press releases, blog posts, and community newsletters such as Seascape and SaMoNews. Stakeholders reported challenges in learning more about how the City responds to this critical community concern. In particular, some stakeholders noted that they review the information that is available but may have lingering questions or difficulty navigating the available materials to learn more about a specific topic. Given the volume of City, regional, state, and national initiatives that support homelessness prevention and intervention, it can be challenging to fully grasp the extent of City services, as well as their costs and impact, in a complex environment.

To support enhanced understanding and better leverage historical and new reports related to homelessness, the City recently developed a singular landing page that is dedicated to homelessness (www.santamonica.gov/topic-explainers/homelessness). This webpage includes resources such as housing resources, homelessness toolkits, options to connect with services, articles on recent events, and results from the 2022 point in time count.

To further enhance this webpage, the following materials should be displayed or linked:
• Community resources, including appropriate phone numbers to call • Homelessness strategic plan
• Annual reports on homelessness
• Community-level performance measure dashboard
• Quarterly program-level key performance indicator reports • Links to historical staff reports
• Links to recent press releases, blog posts, and community newsletter articles Homelessness Study | 52

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
• Links to other relevant webpages, such as LAHSA and community partners By continuing to develop a centralized location for all homelessness reports and communications, the City can support an improved understanding of its many programs and partnerships in this space.

In addition to centralizing communication resources, the City should consider leveraging a performance measurement dashboard that is updated on a regular basis. The dashboard should be able to automatically pull relevant data from a repository (see Recommendation 3: Data Collection and Access) to reduce staff time dedicated to these routine updates. The dashboard should be placed on the homelessness-related City webpage for members of governing bodies and the public to easily access at any given time.

The following dashboard is one example of how to visualize this data.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY HOMELESS INITIATIVE DASHBOARD26
26 Los Angeles County Homeless Initiative Dashboard: https://homeless.lacounty.gov/impact-dashboard/ Homelessness Study | 53

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
In addition to presenting regularly updated point in time data, the City can use dashboards to show data trends over time, which is a practice some cities are moving toward. For example, King County in Washington state has developed a homeless response system dashboard27 presents a variety of metrics and trends as a way to measure results, monitor performance, increase transparency, and build accountability.

Although clear reporting of performance measures will not directly address homelessness, consistent and transparent data reporting can help inform stakeholders about the efficacy of existing services, identify opportunities to support continuous improvement, and track progress over time.

7. Observation Although residents overwhelmingly identify homelessness as a priority concern in the City, their ability to meaningfully support homelessness prevention and intervention is frequently stymied due to the complex local and regional system of agencies and services.

Recommendation Continue to develop and strategically distribute community resources related to homelessness to enhance understanding of desired behaviors, opportunities to contribute, and appropriate referrals for needed services.

The Santa Monica community has expressed considerable interest in homelessness. Within the latest representative survey of City of Santa Monica residents that was conducted in May 2022, over 93% of survey respondents selected homelessness as an urgent or very urgent priority. Based on a review of community meetings, Councilmember feedback, and feedback gathered through the community group forum, the most commonly cited concern for service providers and community members responding to homelessness is the lack of understanding of where and how to access help. This presents opportunities for the City to strengthen solution-oriented community resources.

The City has developed several toolkits, postcards, webpages, blog posts, social media posts, and reports designed to share information on resources, progress, and planning. As documented in the FY21/22 Q4 report, the City has launched the following communication and outreach efforts:
• A postcard sent to 60,000 Santa Monica addresses to continue to inform the community about local efforts to address homelessness
• The santamonica.gov Homelessness webpage is regularly updated to provide timely information and access to resources. Additional web content is being developed and will be added this fall. • Media Mentions since May 2022 include:
○ Homeless Count Results
○ Council Actions
○ Behavioral Health
27 King County’s Homeless Response System dashboard: https://kcrha.org/regional-homelessness-data/ Homelessness Study | 54

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
• Weekly social media posts on City channels highlight timely updates, including homeless count results, the work that local non-profits are doing to aid those experiencing homelessness in our community, and who to contact
Although the City has developed several toolkits and information pieces, this information can reportedly be difficult to find and keep updated. There are frequent requests for clear, concise, and streamlined information regarding:
• Appropriate contact information: Community members frequently experience the need to call for assistance to either aid a person experiencing homelessness or receive help interacting with an unsheltered person in order to go about their day-to-day business. However, community members report difficulties understanding the appropriate agency to contact to remediate the situation. For example, a store employee who arrives to open a local business may encounter an unsheltered individual sleeping on their doorstep or a community member may witness a person having a potential mental health crisis in a park. Both of these situations require attention, but neither qualify for traditional 911 calls. Community members also expressed reluctance to leverage County contacts due to a perception of non-responsiveness and a reluctance to use 911 for behavior that is not clearly a health emergency or posing physical danger due to concerns about police response.

In the May 2022 staff report, the City included the following list of contact information:

CONTACT REASON TO REACH OUT
911 If someone is experiencing a medical emergency or if there’s an immediate threat to someone’s life or safety
211 or LA-HOP.org Submit a request for homelessness outreach assistance using the LA Homeless Outreach Portal
(800) 854-7771 Contact the Department of Mental Health number if someone is experiencing a psychiatric/mental health crisis
(310) 458-8491 For non-emergency police response in Santa Monica 311 or [email protected] Submit a Santa Monica-specific request for service like trash pickup Additionally, the City has developed and provided brochures and business cards to local businesses that detail contact information for other local providers (e.g., the Salvation Army, The People Concern, Venice Family Clinic), which is common practice. However, these materials do not indicate the anticipated response time for each potential provider, which can also contribute to confusion and frustration about the appropriate referral. Community members have also reported that individual staff members who support these various lines do not appear to be coordinated with each other and are sometimes unaware of other contact numbers or response groups (for additional information on community feedback, please refer to Appendix B: Community Group Forum Themes).
• Preferred behaviors: As community members and groups desire to assist people experiencing homelessness with meeting basic needs, they may provide food, water, money, blankets, clothing, and other goods. These contributions have sometimes resulted in pushback from other facets of the community and may be perceived to deter people from accessing services. To help promote alignment across the community, the City should work with service providers to develop Homelessness Study | 55

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
materials that outline helpful and unhelpful behaviors to support people experiencing homelessness.
• Homelessness toolkits: Prior to the pandemic, the City developed homelessness toolkits that were translated into both English and Spanish. The toolkits provided general information, contact information for services for people at risk of losing housing, and volunteer opportunities.

Additionally, the City developed and distributed posters for businesses on what to do or not do to de-escalate the situation and provide safe support when a customer displayed antisocial behavior. These tools were useful reference guides that extended beyond City-specific services and incorporated information for local partner agencies to serve as a comprehensive guide. • Ways to contribute: There are numerous ways that interested community members can help support local efforts to prevent and address homelessness. To help channel this momentum and energy, the City should work with partner agencies to identify needs (e.g., charitable donations of cash or goods, volunteer opportunities) and advertise them. This information could include links to partner agencies on the City’s homelessness webpage to reduce reliance on continuous updates.

Many of the materials noted here have been developed over the last 3 to 5 years and were actively distributed out to community members. However, due to competing priorities and elevated workloads with reduced staffing, materials may not be up-to-date and have not yet been added to the City’s new homeless-specific website. To proactively address community member questions and harness interest in helping support people experiencing homelessness, these materials should be updated, distributed to the community, and stored in an easily accessible location for future access.

8. Observation The City has not selected a leader to oversee and coordinate the City’s homelessness response. In this environment, staff report significant challenges maintaining interdepartmental alignment, resolving conflicting needs or directions, and holistically tracking and communicating progress across the full spectrum of cross-functional homelessness initiatives.

Recommendation Designate an executive sponsor of homelessness prevention and response with the requisite cross-departmental authority to drive programs forward, monitor success, lead collaboration efforts, and support enhanced communication.

By its nature homelessness is a cross-functional concern, both in terms of what contributes to increasing houselessness in a community as a well as the appropriate response(s) to support individuals experiencing homelessness. This creates challenges in defining roles and responsibilities across agencies, departments, and workgroups. Currently, the City currently lacks clear, centralized authority for decision-making on homelessness prevention and response services—which has been exacerbated by a lack of a comprehensive strategic plan (see Recommendation 1: Unifying Strategic Plan). Between 2018 and 2020, the City had a Senior Advisor to the City Manager on Homelessness Homelessness Study | 56

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
within the City Manager’s Office. According to staff, this position was not effective due to a lack of authority and leadership support to appropriately manage homelessness prevention and intervention efforts. Since this position was eliminated in 2020, the City has not formally identified a key leader over this community priority, and interdepartmental coordination has suffered as a result. Informally, HHSD is perceived to be the primary responsible party over homelessness initiatives; however, this division lacks the authority and direction to be effective in leading a complex, multifaceted suite of cross-functional initiatives. For example, HHSD does not have the ability to direct services in other departments, including Police, Fire, Public Works, Library, or the City Attorney’s Office.

While this report was being developed, the City implemented quarterly Quality of Life meetings for department and CMO leadership to increase coordination around homelessness prevention and response activities.

In the absence of a defined leader with adequate support and authority, City staff report several challenges, including:
• Lack of cross-functional authority to request information and direct tasks • Limited alignment and responsibility for goals, programs, and data sharing • Lack of coordinated and comparable data tracking and monitoring • Insufficient decision-making and accountability
• Unclear roles and responsibilities in drafting citywide communications materials, including articles and comprehensive staff reports
• Employee morale concerns
Given its cross-functional nature, it is a common practice nationwide for cities to have a point person or department for homelessness initiatives. For example, Houston, Seattle, and San Francisco all have departments specifically responsible for homelessness. Additionally, three peer cities, Berkeley, Pasadena, and West Hollywood, all have departments/department directors who have been identified as the point person for homelessness (research information provided in Appendix C: Peer Research Summary). The table below details how homelessness authority is structured in a sampling of other cities. This list is not exhaustive but includes possibilities the City could consider in establishing their authority and decision-making.

CITY STRUCTURAL AUTHORITY FOR HOMELESSNESS
Berkeley The Neighborhood Services Team within the City Manager’s Office is assigned responsibility for homelessness. Being in the City Manager’s Office gives the team the ability and authority to direct activities that involve other City departments.

Pasadena The Housing Department is assigned to lead homelessness initiatives in the City.

The City reports that due to camaraderie between the departments, this structure is effective.

West Hollywood The Strategic Initiatives Division is responsible for homelessness initiatives, as well as other key City priorities like poverty and aging. The team started in the City Manager’s Office but grew into its own division.

Homelessness Study | 57

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

CITY STRUCTURAL AUTHORITY FOR HOMELESSNESS
Houston The Mayor’s Office for Homeless Initiatives manages the City of Houston’s response to homelessness by coordinating the efforts of various City agencies.

Seattle The Homeless Strategy and Investment Division within the Human Services Department is responsible for homelessness initiatives and focuses on prevention, emergency response, and housing.

San Francisco The Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing combines key homeless serving programs and contracts from the various departments in San Francisco serving people experiencing homelessness (PEH).

The City should assign an executive-level champion with cross-departmental authority to support effective leadership on homelessness. Options for this role include 1) selecting and elevating a current department director; 2) creating a new position within the CMO; or 3) establishing a new department (and thus department director) with a sole focus on homelessness response and prevention. The City could consider developing a similar approach to its recent economic recovery efforts, during which it assigned a clear project sponsor, leadership team, and budget that was allocated to this work but flexible enough to be able to respond as needs evolved. This model was reported to be successful for the City.

Regardless of which structural model is chosen, the most critical key for the City is to establish a position with broad authority to coordinate the various departments involved in preventing and reducing homelessness. For this role to be successful, they will also need the full support of the CMO. The primary purpose of the position is to support the expansion and continued implementation of the City’s Four Pillars strategy. In this capacity, the position would conduct the following activities:
• Oversee the implementation and monitoring of the expanded homelessness strategic plan • Champion cross-functional initiatives and communications • Identify and advocate for appropriate resource needs to achieve strategic plan goals • Lead interdepartmental meetings to discuss performance measures, resources, successes, and ongoing or emerging challenges
• Enforce accountability with the mission, vision, and values of the strategic plan across all City departments
• Assign roles and responsibilities as appropriate to departments and other stakeholders • Support external reporting and communications
By establishing centralized authority and oversight of homelessness services across the City under the guidance of a homelessness strategic plan, the City can more effectively leverage its myriad of services and community resources to address homelessness.

Homelessness Study | 58

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

9. Observation City staff report that employee morale is low due to workload demands resulting from high expectations for responsiveness, program implementation, and administration of homelessness-related services as well as a perceived lack of support from City leadership.

Recommendation Take meaningful steps to improve employee morale by:

A. Supporting employees through clear leadership direction, delegation of authority, and the ability to hold teams accountable to decisions.

B. Setting division-wide goals and celebrating successes in team meetings and community settings to provide meaningful employee recognition.

C. Appropriately matching staff capacity and resources with community expectations related to homelessness prevention and response.

During the past two years, City employees' work environment exhibited negativity due to a variety of contributing factors, including the City’s restructuring, personnel cuts, leadership turnover, public perception, and increasing demands with fewer resources. During this time, the perception of the homelessness crisis in the community continued to rise as shelters reduced capacity, indoor public spaces closed, and access to services was reduced to protect against community transmission of COVID-19. Additionally, there was a significant influx of homelessness prevention needs and available resources through federal and state programs, this resulted in additional attention and demands on the team by residents, businesses, and governing bodies. Concurrently, leadership turnover occurred that also impacted the direction and demands placed on frontline staff. As a result, employees that actively work on the frontlines of homelessness prevention and response—including those in HHSD, Police, Fire, and Public Works—report low employee morale and sense of a lack of support among City leadership including governing bodies.

During the May 2020 restructuring, CSD was formed from two prior departments and eliminated 10 FTE in positions that specifically worked on housing and human services initiatives. Although several positions have been restored, including a Senior Administrative Analyst for Homeless Services, CSD continues to lack adequate staffing support. The table below reflects the eliminated and restored positions related to analysis in the Division of Housing and Human Services.

POSITION TITLE FTE ELIMINATED FTE RESTORED
Administrative Analyst-Homeless Services 1 -
Data Science Administrator 1 -
Senior Administrative Analyst-Human Services/Fiscal 1 - Senior Human Services Analyst 1 2
Homelessness Study | 59

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

POSITION TITLE FTE ELIMINATED FTE RESTORED
Housing Authority Administrator 1 -
Housing Manager 1 -
Housing Specialist 1 1
Policy and Performance Analyst 1 1
Senior Development Analyst 2 1
Total 10 5
Workers in the homeless-serving sector face many challenges relating to their work environment, such as facing complex and challenging issues, continually working with traumatized individuals or within traumatic situations, and frequently lacking sufficient resources or compensation. These challenges can result in high levels of burnout, secondary traumatic stress, compassion fatigue, staff turnover, and difficulty recruiting new employees. Due to the demanding nature of the work and potential for early burn out, human services positions are often difficult to recruit and retain, which was a phenomenon that persisted across public sector organizations prior to the Great Resignation and negatively impacts morale among existing employees.

To support employee morale, and thereby boost recruitment and retention efforts among employees who actively work in the homelessness space, the City should consider the following strategies:
• Clarify leadership and direction: Employees have felt the impact of leadership changes at the City through variations in priority activities, working relationships with other teams, and expectations for the application of City services. By developing a homelessness strategic plan that aligns the City’s philosophy and goals, staff will be better able to understand how their work fits into the City’s strategy and creates impact. Additionally, the ability to funnel information, questions, and concerns through one executive-level employee with the ability to help solve problems through budget authority or direction to other departments will help them complete their work more efficiently and effectively. To be successful, City leadership at all levels should use the strategic plan as a decision-making framework as evolving ideas and challenges emerge. • Set goals and celebrate successes: As part of the City’s performance measure reporting, department partners should convene on a quarterly basis to review the results of the communitylevel and program-specific performance reports. This should serve as an opportunity to celebrate successes and recognize the individual and collective efforts to assisting people experiencing homelessness. Executive support and recognition can make these events particularly meaningful to employees.
• Designate adequate resources to achieve expected results: As noted previously, employees across the City have experienced increased workloads following the May 2020 restructuring. Due to its designation as a community priority, the City should support homelessness prevention and services with adequate resources to achieve strategic plan goals. Existing staff lack capacity to take on additional work and are often asked to pivot priorities due to urgent requests from the community. To reduce burnout among the team, the City must ensure adequate resources are applied to homelessness initiatives, including prevention through housing. Given that many of the Homelessness Study | 60

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
recommendations included in this report will require significant investment of financial resources and staff time to accomplish (and some require extensive support or coordination from external parties), we anticipate that the City’s ability to implement all recommendations may be limited without significant trade-offs or additional staff.

There are many free and low-cost ways to boost morale. Sharing positive feedback from community members and elected officials, taking time in staff meetings to recognize employees for great work, and empowering employees to take responsibility for their accomplishments are all steps that the City can take to improve working conditions.

10. Observation The Public Works Department maintenance, custodial, and groundskeeping staff do not have sufficient resources to perform higherrisk cleanup activities.

Recommendation Continue to explore staffing options that ensure City employees are provided appropriate resources and training to safely complete required work.

The Public Works Department operates a component of the Clean and Safe Program, which is an initiative to support maintenance of public spaces throughout the City, including the beach, parks, and downtown area. People experiencing homelessness tend to be present in these spaces and use key amenities, such as public restrooms and showers. Public Works estimates that $4.2 million of its operating costs (3.1% of total departmental operating costs in FY2020-21) are attributable to homelessness response through cleaning, custodial, trash pick-up, and other maintenance of City facilities.

The Public Works Department utilizes a variety of positions across its operational divisions (including Beach Maintenance, Custodial, Public Landscape Groundskeepers, Resource Recovery and Recycling, and Promenade Maintenance) to maintain clean outdoor spaces and public amenities, including:
• Beach Maintenance Crew Leader
• Beach/Pier Maintenance Supervisor
• Collections Staff
• Custodian
• Groundskeepers
• Labor Trainee
• Maintenance Assistant
• Maintenance Workers
• Park Maintenance Crew Leader
• Park Maintenance Supervisor
Homelessness Study | 61

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Staff report that this work includes daily removal of debris and waste generated by people experiencing homelessness—which can include hazardous materials. Given the time intensive nature of this type of cleaning, staff note that these situations often require standby pay, call back pay, or overtime pay.

Depending on the specific role, interviewees noted that City staff do not necessarily have the training, background, or protective gear to safely handle certain types of biohazardous waste and/or dangerous items like weapons or narcotics. In addition, this staff group is routinely in contact with unsheltered people despite limited training about how best to work with this vulnerable population.

Interviewees reported that this has created a challenging work environment for staff.

The City’s Risk Management Division issued a Job Safety Hazard/Standard Operating Procedures report in September 2022, that limits Public Works’ ability to perform cleanup work in certain higherrisk situations, such as the removal of a tent in a public space or the removal of certain types of items from public spaces and facilities. The primary concern is staff exposure to chemicals, drugs, or disease.

As a result, Public Works is in the process of identifying short- and long-term solutions for addressing these higher-risk situations. Options include outsourcing this function, developing a specialized inhouse team that will be provided with appropriate training and resources, or implementing a hybrid model. There are a variety of considerations that the City should consider when determining the most appropriate staffing structure for this function, as seen in the following table.

INSOURCING OUTSOURCING
Pros ● High degree of control over team training
and performance (for example, if the City
would like to ensure that all relevant staff
receive trauma-informed training, that may
only be guaranteed within an insourced
setting)
● Potential for strong coordination between
City Departments and alignment around
priorities
● Staffing and recruitment handled externally
● Shifts safety liability to an external party
● Potential for cost savings
Cons ● Staffing and recruitment activities may be
time consuming or costly if positions are
difficult to fill
● Potentially more expensive to hire and train
an internal team
● Retains safety liability with the City
● Less control over team training and
performance
● Potential for weak coordination with City
Departments and lack of alignment around
priorities
● Creates staff work to administer and
coordinate contract for outsourced work
Currently, the Public Works leadership team is considering the following short- and long-term options:
• Immediate Time Frame: Public Works will identify a contractor to provide direct response to cleanups of unhoused encampments, debris fields larger than 5 feet by 5 feet, and any suspicious conditions in which drug paraphernalia or disease may be present. Budget for an environmental contractor will be identified to support this action.

Homelessness Study | 62

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
• Long-Term Time Frame: If data supports that these conditions are at a scale to merit an in-house homeless clean up team with advanced training and equipment, the City may take the following actions:
○ Evaluate and create new job specifications that include the appropriate duties necessary to safely clean homeless encampments, debris fields, and other conditions larger than 5 feet by 5 feet where human waste, drug paraphernalia, and potential airborne or contact-transmitted disease may be present.
○ Identify the composition of the in-house team and number of personnel necessary to service these conditions within Santa Monica’s parks, beach, and public space areas. ○ Identify budget for training, new FTE, and equipment and supplies.

These options are aligned with common industry practice. In addition to the actions described above, we recommend that the City also explores a hybrid method where external contractors are used for complex cleanup projects and in complement to a specialized internal team, which is an approach commonly used by other cities (as shown in the following table).

EXAMPLES OF HYBRID APPROACHES TO CLEANUP SERVICES
Santa Cruz Santa Cruz City Council recently approved creating a homelessness response field division in Public Works, which will include field workers responsible for homelessness-related cleanup and refuse management. Additionally, Council approved funding for contractors to assist staff with encampment and abandoned vehicle cleanup.

Austin The City of Austin recently launched a Homeless Encampment Management Team responsible for working together on homelessness encampments throughout the City, including cleanup activities. The City contracts out the majority of these cleanup activities, with some staff support.

Seattle The City of Seattle historically has contracted with multiple private organizations to assist staff in cleanup of biohazards and general debris removal from homeless encampments.

Long Beach Long Beach’s Parks, Recreation, and Marine Department recently issued a request for proposal, seeking contractors to assist staff in cleanup of homeless encampments on public property.

There are myriad causes of homelessness including the lack of affordable housing, poverty, unemployment, lack of support network, relationship breakdowns, mental or physical health problems, or substance misuse or other addictive behaviors. Consequently, there is no singular approach that will guarantee success when responding to homelessness. Addressing the symptoms of homelessness can be beneficial, however, it cannot always resolve the root cause of an individual’s circumstance. For example, someone without a supportive network may find themselves repeatedly homeless if laid off from work, returning from military service, or recently separated from their partner. Furthermore, where this may be a leading cause of homelessness in one community, it Homelessness Study | 63

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
may not be a top cause in another. This makes it extremely difficult for communities to replicate programs and achieve consistent levels of success nationally.

No single entity, or actor could reasonably be responsible for ending homelessness in a community.

Agencies across all jurisdictions, federal, state, county, and local hold a piece of the solution. The following section describes the City’s efforts at responding to homelessness.

Affordable Housing

11. Observation Although the City has historically prioritized affordable housing development and retention within its community, the need for affordable housing continues to rise, as indicated by the 431% increase in the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation for 2021–2029.

Recommendation To increase housing stock in the City and support achievement of the City’s Regional Housing Needs allocation over the next eight years, the City should continue implementing the Housing Element and evaluate potential obstacles to housing development.

One of the primary ways to prevent homelessness is through the production of affordable housing, particularly as the cost of housing in the Los Angeles region escalates. Affordable housing is defined by HUD as housing which the occupant pays no more than 30% of their gross income for housing costs, including utilities.
28 The link between housing affordability, renters, and homelessness is welldocumented. In 2020, the U.S. Government Accountability Office estimated that for every $100 increase in median rent, there is an associated 9% increase in the estimated homelessness rate.29 As documented in the May 2022 Santa Monica resident representative survey, 54% of survey respondents were renters and 73% of respondents cited “Affordability” as a very important or somewhat important priority for the City’s policies and programs. 28 US Department of Housing and Urban Development – Glossary of Terms to Affordable Housing:
https://archives.hud.gov/local/nv/goodstories/2006-04-06glos.cfm 29 U.S. Government Accountability Office – Better HUD Oversight of Data Collection Could Improve Estimates of Homeless Population: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-20-433.pdf
Homelessness Study | 64

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
For decades, the City has invested in affordable and inclusionary housing within its community through a variety of regulations and incentives. While not an exhaustive list, the City has three primary methods of supporting affordable housing opportunities within its limits:
• Loans for affordable housing providers: Through its Housing Trust Funds, the City provides loans to housing providers to develop, own, and operate affordable housing in the community.

Housing Trust Funds derive primarily from one-time Redevelopment Loan repayments and ongoing revenue provided by Measure GSH/GS, which was approved by Santa Monica voters in 2016. These funds provide financial assistance to support housing providers with acquisition, rehabilitation, and new construction of properties to preserve and increase affordable rental housing opportunities through deferred loan payments and/or grants to help bridge financial gaps that may otherwise prevent affordable housing development. • Inclusionary Housing: In 1990, Santa Monica voters approved Proposition R, which created the Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP). Proposition R required that at least 30% of newly constructed multifamily housing be affordable to low- and moderate-income households for at least 55 years. This program has been codified in Chapter 9.64 of the City’s municipal code, which is enforced and monitored by HHSD. According to the May 2022 staff report to City Council, 134 new affordable residences opened between January and May 2022 and approximately 191 additional units are in development.
• Rent Control: In 1979, Santa Monica voters adopted a Rental Control Law that covered all rental units in existence at that time and established a Rent Control Board to implement the law. At that time, the Board required property owners to register the 1978 rent levels and amenities for all controlled rental units (27,429 total rent-controlled units). Each year, the Board has authorized a Homelessness Study | 65

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
general rent increase for controlled units to ensure that rents remain reasonable and to guarantee owners receive a fair return.
○ In 1995, the State legislature passed the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act that allowed owners to implement up to two 15% rent increases upon vacancies between October 1995 and December 1988. As of January 1999, landlords have been able to increase initial rents to market rates upon new tenancies. Annual rent increases during the term of the tenancy are controlled by the Rent Control Board’s annual general adjustment. Rent-controlled rates to market rates after a vacancy; therefore, the number of rent-controlled units in the City are declining. Approximately 7,493 rent-controlled units remain occupied by tenants who moved in before 1999 (37.6% of the original total).
30 All 27,249 units remain subject to rent control
and annual rent increases as determined by the Rent Control Board. • Housing vouchers: Through the Santa Monica Housing Authority, the City helps facilitate the provision of rental housing vouchers. The Santa Monica Housing Authority administers Housing Choice Vouchers to assist low-income and very low-income households by subsidizing their rent with a federally funded voucher paid directly to the property owner; tenants are responsible for paying at least 30% of their adjusted income for rent. The SMHA also administers project-based vouchers, such as the Continuum of Care (CoC) program, HOME voucher program, and POD program. As the cost of rents in the Los Angeles region continue to rise, staff report that voucher recipients often struggle to find an affordable unit since they are responsible for paying the difference between the voucher amount and market rent if an affordable unit is not available.

The City currently has 4,578 affordable housing units,
approximately 2,600 of which receive referrals from the Citymanaged Below Market Housing (BMH) program. This represents 8.9% of the City’s housing stock (52,269 housing units).
31 The City’s policy provides the following priority
levels for referrals from the BMH program.
32 • First Priority (1A): Persons who have been permanently displaced or face permanent displacement from their
housing residences in Santa Monica as a result of any
of the following:
○ Ellis Act, owner-occupancy, or removal permit
eviction
○ Earthquake, fire, flood, or other natural disaster
○ Funding reductions in Santa Monica housing
voucher assistance programs
○ Governmental Action, such as Code enforcement
○ Closure of a mobile home park
30 Housing Needs Assessment, 2022
31 City of Santa Monica 2019-2029 Housing Element:
https://santamonica.gov/media/Document%20Library/Project/6th%20Cycle%20Housing%20Element%20(2021- 2029)/September%202022%20HE%20Final%20Draft.pdf
32 Affordable Housing Production Program Administrative Guidelines City of Santa Monica:
https://santamonica.gov/media/HED/Housing/AHPP_Administrative_Guidelines_2022.pdf Homelessness Study | 66

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
• First Priority (1B): Emergency Housing Voucher participants • First Priority (1C): Right to Return/Historically Displaced approved applicants • Second Priority: Persons who are residents of Santa Monica or working in Santa Monica at least 25 hours per week
• Third Priority: All other applicants
As of June 30, 2022, the City had 8,931 active applications for affordable housing. The table below shows the total number of applications by priority and time spent on the affordable housing waitlist.

Overall, Priority 1 and Priority 2 applicants tend to spend approximately 180 days on the waitlist, while other priority levels are subject to longer wait times based on the availability of affordable housing units.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING APPLICATIONS AS OF 6/30/2022

APPLICATIONS

APPLICANT

HOUSEHOLD

TYPE TIME ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING LIST
Status
# of
Applications Individual Family
0-180
Days
181-360
Days
361-540
Days
541-720
Days
721-790
Days
Priority 1A 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
Priority 1B 29 15 14 27 2 0 0 0
Priority 1C* 7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Priority 2 2,232 1,097 1,135 152 306 324 391 1059
Priority 3 6,122 3,029 3,093 1,147 1,538 973 1,019 1,445 Total 8,931 4,141 4,243 1,327 1,846 1,297 1,410 2,504
*One hundred thirty-four Historically Displaced applications received. Review in progress with seven approved so far.

Maximum of 100 allowed.

According to the California Department of Housing and Community Development, the state must add 180,000 units of housing annually through 2025 to keep up with housing demand, which amounts to more than 70,000 units of affordable housing needed annually. 33 Additionally, the Southern California
Association of Governments adopted its RHNA Allocation Plan in July 2021, which included the need for 812,060 housing units in Los Angeles County; 340,295 of these units must be for low or very-low income residents.34 The following table illustrates how Santa Monica’s current affordable housing stock compares to the affordable housing stock of peer cities. 33 California State Auditor Report 2020-108: https://www.auditor.ca.gov/reports/2020-108/summary.html 34 Southern California Association of Government RHAN Allocation for the 6th Cycle Housing Element:
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/6th_cycle_final_rhna_allocation_plan_070121.pdf?1646938785 Homelessness Study | 67

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS IN PEER CITIES
CITY
# OF AFFORDABLE

HOUSING UNITS
# OF ALL

HOUSING UNITS
% OF HOUSING STOCK

THAT ARE AFFORDABLE

HOUSING UNITS
Santa Monica 4,578 52,269 8.9%
Berkeley 1,450 52,300 2.8%
Pasadena 3,700 62,753 5.9%
Palo Alto 2,300 28,904 8.0%
West Hollywood 1,776 23,538 7.5%
Richmond 4,590 40,375 11.4%
There is a particular need for affordable housing for families. According to the most recent Assessment of Fair Housing, approved by Council in April 2020, there are 10,225 households in Santa Monica experiencing severe housing cost burden (defined as a household paying more than 50% of income on rent), 2,930 of which are households with families. However, there are only 436 multi-bedroom units capable of housing families with children. The following table shows the City’s affordable housing stock and indicates the need for variety in unit types to accommodate households of different sizes.
2020 AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK UNIT TYPES35
UNIT TYPE # OF HOMES % OF TOTAL
Studio 1,203 26%
1 Bedroom 1,716 37%
2 Bedroom 1,069 23%
3+ Bedroom 590 14%
Total 4,578 100%
According to the State of California’s Department of Housing and Community Development, the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) is 8,895 units for the 6th Cycle Housing Element planning period of 2021-2029, with 69% of units allocated for households earning less than 120% of Area Median Income (AMI). This allocation is over 400% higher than the previous RHNA allocation during 2013–2021. The table below shows this comparison by income category and percent change. 35 City of Santa Monica 2020 Assessment of Fair Housing: https://lawyerscommittee.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SantaMonica-Final-AFH-w.o-Appendix-A.pdf Homelessness Study | 68

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
COMPARISON OF CURRENT AND HISTORICAL RHNA ALLOCATIONS BY INCOME CATEGORY36 INCOME CATEGORY 2014-2021 RHNA 2021-2019 RHNA % CHANGE
Very Low Income 428 2,786 550.9%
Low Income 263 1,668 534.2%
Moderate Income 283 1,698 500%
Above Moderate 700 2,721 288.7
Total 1,674 8,895 431.3%
In response to this significant increase, the City is committed to implementing programs in the certified Housing Element to both preserve existing housing and occupants in addition to exploring programs to incentivize the production of housing opportunities for each income level. Some of these include:
• Amend the zoning ordinance and other City plans to enable greater development of affordable housing and develop policies to implement streamlined review processes for eligible projects • Expedite design review processes to reduce timelines and increase certainty for housing providers
• Adopt standards that incentivize housing production on surface parking lots • Reduce parking minimum requirements for all housing projects • Incentivize the development of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) through an ADU Accelerator Program
• Incentivize the adaptive reuse of existing commercial buildings for permanent residential use • Update the City’s Affordable Housing Production Program to increase the number of affordable housing units at all income levels
• Commit to the production of affordable housing on City-owned or publicly-owned land • Implement new affordable housing finance programs to enable continued provision of technical and financial assistance for housing production
Although the City has historically contributed significantly to affordable housing above and beyond State standards, the City will need to strategically prioritize its efforts to incentivize housing production. The 2021-2029 Housing Element was adopted in October 2022 and provides policy guidance, goals, and commitments through Housing Element programs for staff to leverage as part of this implementation process. Pursuant to State Housing Element law, the City is required to implement the programs in the Housing Element in accordance with the adopted timelines. 36 City of Santa Monica 2019-2029 Housing Element:
https://santamonica.gov/media/Document%20Library/Project/6th%20Cycle%20Housing%20Element%20(2021- 2029)/September%202022%20HE%20Final%20Draft.pdf
Homelessness Study | 69

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
To support the efficiency and effectiveness of the Housing Element, the City is required to implement the programs in the Housing Element in accordance with the stated timelines. The efforts of the City in this space should be to serve as a key partner with housing providers, whether private or nonprofit, in support of housing development. Given the limited availability of land that can be developed, the City will need to be strategic in evaluating its potential housing options and has already completed a constraints analysis in the Housing Element.

Temporary Housing

12. Observation Based on the January 2022 Point-In-Time (PIT) count, demand for temporary housing exceeds the current capacity of emergency and transitional beds in Santa Monica.

Recommendation In partnership with other community organizations and service providers across the west side of Los Angeles, evaluate benefits/costs and identify potential short-term solutions for emergency and transitional housing needs.

In the 2022 PIT Homeless Count, the City and volunteers counted 197 people experiencing homelessness in shelters and emergency motels, whereas 473 people were homeless on the street without a car or makeshift shelter. According to the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element, there are only 95 emergency beds and 321 transitional beds within city limits, as shown in the table below. In accordance with County of Los Angeles orders, shelters were operating at reduced capacity, which may have contributed to the relatively low count of people experiencing homelessness in shelters versus on the street. In addition, some service providers reported that when people are turned away for a shelter bed, their return rate when a bed becomes available can be very low which can also contribute to increases in street counts and lower shelter counts.

Temporary housing available in the City primarily includes:
• Emergency Housing: Residence for a few months, where people experiencing an economic shock are first placed to access a range of services. SAMOSHEL, the City-owned shelter, provides this type of emergency housing as capacity allows. • Transitional Housing: Residence of up to 24 months which includes wrap-around services to help support stability. For example, the Salvation Army Adult Recovery Center includes 55 transitional beds that are dedicated to helping people experiencing homelessness with addiction disorders.

The number of beds and housing units are shown in the table below.

Homelessness Study | 70

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
CURRENT EMERGENCY, TRANSITIONAL, AND PERMANENT HOUSING UNITS IN SANTA MONICA37

SHELTER, REHABILITATION, AND

TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROGRAMS

EMERGENCY
BEDS

TRANSITIONAL
BEDS

PERMANENT

HOUSING
UNITS
The People Concern (SAMOSHEL, Turning
Pointe, Cloverfield-Daybreak and Safe Haven,
Sojourn)
95 85 -
CLARE/Matrix - 116 -
Upward Bound House - 65 -
Salvation Army Adult Recovery Center - 55 -
Step Up on 2nd (Step Up on 2nd, Step Up on
5th, and Daniel’s Village) YWCA
- - 134
Santa Monica Housing Authority Vouchers
(shelter + care, HOME, Serial Inebriate
Program, RDA)
- - 324
Total 95 321 458
In order to effectively provide support services to people experiencing homelessness, it is imperative that these individuals have a safe location to go immediately, during recovery (if applicable), and on a long-term basis. Based on the information above, there are 416 total beds in the City that provide temporary shelter of some kind, which is insufficient to meet the community’s current level of demand based on the most recent homeless count.

In 2016, LAHSA determined the optimal distribution of unit types necessary to combat homelessness in Los Angeles.
38 The following table shows the optimal distribution compared to the distribution in Santa Monica.

OPTIMAL AND CURRENT DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSING UNITS

TYPE OF HOUSING
OPTIMAL % OF ALL UNITS
(LAHSA RECOMMENDATION)
CURRENT % OF ALL UNITS
(SANTA MONICA)
Emergency Shelter and
Prevention
19% 11%
Transitional and Rapid Re-housing 24% 37%
37 City of Santa Monica 2021-2029 Housing Element: Appendix B:
https://santamonica.gov/media/Document%20Library/Project/6th%20Cycle%20Housing%20Element%20(2021- 2029)/September%202022%20HE%20Final%20Draft.pdf
38 LAHSA Report on Homeless Housing Gaps in the County of Los Angeles: https://homeless.lacounty.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2019/02/Report-on-Homeless-Housing-Gaps-in-the-County-of-Los-Angeles-1-2016-1....pdf Homelessness Study | 71

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

TYPE OF HOUSING
OPTIMAL % OF ALL UNITS
(LAHSA RECOMMENDATION)
CURRENT % OF ALL UNITS
(SANTA MONICA)
Permanent Supportive Housing 57% 52%
To meet the current demand for temporary housing as outlined by LAHSA, the City will need to increase the number of emergency beds available. Adding 40 units of emergency housing not only addresses the current gap in housing, but it also would bring Santa Monica significantly closer to the optimal distribution of units.

Most temporary shelters are privately owned and operated, primarily by non-profit service agencies.

The City owns one homeless shelter structure, SAMOSHEL, which is leased to The People Concern (TPC) as the operator and includes 70 beds. This structure was constructed in 1994 when the City passed an ordinance to prohibit sleeping in public spaces and was never intended to be a permanent structure. Prior to the pandemic, TPC and the City were collaborating on community-informed efforts to reimagine SAMOSHEL to better serve the needs of the current homeless population. However, the City’s approach has since shifted to focus on providing behavioral health supports to residents; the City is actively seeking a consultant to support the community visioning for additional behavioral health support (potentially including one or more facilities) to serve the community.

With an increase in affordable housing within the City and the region, there may eventually be a reduced need for emergency shelter. The City, in partnership with TPC, should continue evaluate the evolving needs of people experiencing homelessness to better address them over time. The City should also collaborate with other community groups and service providers to identify other potential short-term solutions to house individuals living on the street on a temporary basis while additional housing is built.

Permanent Supportive Housing

13. Observation The shortage of permanent supportive housing creates significant barriers in exiting people from homelessness and hinders the effectiveness of the homelessness response system.

Recommendation Continue to prioritize the development of permanent housing, including permanent supportive housing, to enable service providers to institute rapid re-housing and provide appropriate supports, thereby increasing the cost-effectiveness of services and the rate at which individuals can exit homelessness.

Permanent supportive housing (PSH) is a key component to both homelessness prevention and resolution. PSH is a form of affordable housing in which housing assistance (e.g. rental assistance) and supportive services are provided to help households achieve housing stability. These units service individuals who experience chronic homelessness as well as community members with developmental disabilities. PSH offers safe and stable housing environments with voluntary and flexible supports and services to help people manage serious, chronic issues such as mental and substance use disorders. Research indicates that developing permanent supportive housing is highly Homelessness Study | 72

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
effective in reducing homelessness and will result in cost savings between an estimated $30,000 to $50,000 per person per year.39
In addition to the temporary housing shortage in the community, service providers report that stays in emergency and transitional housing have been extended due to shortages in permanent housing (affordable housing units and PSH units). When an individual cannot exit the system through permanent housing, it creates a backlog within the temporary housing options which reduces capacity for incoming participants. According to LAHSA, “a balanced homeless rehousing system has an average of five housing exit options for every shelter bed.”40 Exit options refer to a stable housing unit that is affordable and appropriately meets the individual or families’ need. Currently, the County’s ratio is close to 1:1, which results in people experiencing homelessness having very few options except the street or shelter beds. As detailed in Recommendation 12: Temporary Housing, The City’s ratio of emergency and interim housing to permanent housing (affordable housing and PSH) is 416:458, which is also nearly 1:1. However, to match the 1:5 ratio, the City needs to increase affordable housing resources by 841 units.

The shortage of permanent housing has multiple impacts on the homelessness service environment.

First, it creates the perception that there are insufficient emergency and transitional beds by restricting the ability for individuals to successfully exit chronic homelessness, creating longer stays in temporary housing and creating a backlog at the front end of services. Second, it creates a potentially competitive environment among people experiencing homelessness for limited units among a population that already faces significant trauma and barriers to access services. Third, being denied housing due to a shortage can perpetuate the distress experienced by people experiencing homelessness, which can result in relapses of substance use or mental health disorders over time.

The current situation is not only a disservice to the individuals within the community that require services and support to exit a dire situation, but also presents barriers to effectively understanding the success of homeless interventions. If someone is unable to readily transition into permanent housing after completing a program, securing financial assistance or employment, and/or benefitting from other medical services, staff and stakeholders report that they are more likely to return to the street.

Often, these outcomes reflect poorly on the program that served the individual rather than showing the insufficient capacity of permanent housing to help the individual regain independence.

Finally, PSH has generally been shown to increase the success rate of people exiting homelessness and reducing taxpayer costs associated with homelessness services. One meta-analysis, which assessed 72 studies of PSH, concluded that this service was effective in reducing homelessness and achieving housing stability while also resulting in cost offsets. 41 For example, TPC reports that 93% of
program participants supported in permanent housing never experience homelessness again—a very high success rate.
39 United States Interagency Council on Homelessness – Ending Chronic Homelessness in 2017:
https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Ending_Chronic_Homelessness_in_2017.pdf 40 LAHSA Releases 2021 Housing Inventory Count and Shelter Count Results: https://www.lahsa.org/news?article=849-lahsareleases-2021-housing-inventory-count-and-shelter-count-results 41 Effectiveness of Permanent Supporting Housing and Income Assistance Interventions for Homeless Individuals in HighIncome Countries: A Systemic Review (The Lancet, 2020): https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2468- 2667%2820%2930055-4
Homelessness Study | 73

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Homelessness is a regional concern in the Los Angeles area and the City cannot feasibly be responsible for developing housing for all individuals in need. However, in 2018, City Council approved a Housing Trust Fund Plan42 that indicates the City aims to provide permanent supportive housing for the number of persons on the Santa Monica Homeless Registry, which includes the most vulnerable people experiencing homelessness in the community. As of August 3, 2022, there were 471 individuals on the Santa Monica Homeless Registry; 306 of those individuals (64.9%) were placed in permanent supportive housing. This indicates the need for 165 additional permanent supportive housing units to achieve this goal, although it should be noted that the number of individuals on the Homeless Registry fluctuates as individuals move or new individuals qualify to be included.

To support cost-effective programs, enable accurate performance monitoring, and best support people experiencing homelessness in the community, the City should continue to prioritize the scouting for and development of permanent housing units (affordable housing and PSH) as part of the Housing Element implementation. As noted previously, the City has committed to releasing requests for proposals for developments on City-owned land to increase the number of affordable housing and permanent supportive housing units within the City; two PSH projects are currently in process.

As noted previously, the City itself does not build affordable housing or PSH; instead, it relies on partnerships with developers to bring these resources into the community. Therefore, the partnerships created between the City and housing providers is also critical to filling this need within the community.

Program Participant Definition

14. Observation To focus its resources, City policy prioritizes supporting people experiencing homelessness who live or work in the City prior to other factors such as vulnerability, which appears to be a unique practice.

Recommendation Evaluate the City’s Program Participant definition to ensure ongoing alignment with the homelessness strategic plan, best practices, and capacity of local programming.

City resources are not able to keep pace with the needs of every individual experiencing homelessness in Santa Monica. Therefore, City-funded services are directed to a subset of the population identified as Santa Monica Program Participants (SMPP), a definition which has been cultivated over approximately 20 years. According to the HSGP Policy, eligible SMPP meet any of the following criteria:
42 City of Santa Monica Housing Division Trust Fund Plan:
https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/HED/Housing_and_Redevelopment/Housing/Housing_Trust_Funds/HTF% 20Plan%20-%20Final%202014-2021.pdf
Homelessness Study | 74

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
• Homeless households whose last permanent address is in Santa Monica; or • Individuals that have been documented as homeless in Santa Monica for five or more years; or • Vulnerable members of Santa Monica’s workforce (homeless individuals and families with a household member who has worked full-time within the City of Santa Monica); or • Homeless individuals on the Santa Monica Service Registry or identified by Human Services Division staff as high users of City resources and services; or • Formerly homeless individuals and families who are participating in supportive housing in Santa Monica.

Within this participant population, those who are identified as highly vulnerable based on the City’s universal assessment tool are placed on the City’s Service Registry. The list of the most vulnerable individuals among City program participants are prioritized for local housing and services and are the focus of monthly coordinated case conferencing meetings to ensure agencies are working together to house and support individuals. Prioritization of highly vulnerable individuals aligns with best practices and works to reduce additional City costs related to homelessness within the community by moderating the need for intervention by first responders.

Among peer cities and other localities tackling homelessness, there are generally varying requirements for individuals to qualify for assistance from government sources. Some cities require individuals to demonstrate their residency through a variety of documentation requirements; others accept all individuals without need for proof of residency. Oftentimes, cities end up with an in-between on the spectrum: not completely excluding non-residents by prioritizing service based on a combination of factors such as vulnerability index, residency status, and previous interactions with homeless services.

Additionally, there is often discussion related to who benefits from limited public resources at the local level—are programs and services going towards helping city residents experiencing homelessness, or are resources applied to homeless migrants from surrounding cities or localities? The table below shows samples of residency requirements for city-funded services and demonstrates the broad variation that exists across municipalities.

CITY RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR CITY-FUNDED SERVICES
Santa Monica Human Services Grant Program has criteria prioritizing service based on a combination of residency, vulnerability, and previous history with the city. Residency must be established.

Boulder Homeless Solutions for Boulder County required participants to have stayed in Boulder for at least six months before being able to access shelters; attempts to access before this period would result in blocked shelter referral and other services for at least two years. This residency requirement was recently reversed.

Washington DC Washington DC’s CoC prioritizes service towards applicants or families who can establish proof of residency.

San Francisco The Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing does not require specific residency requirements but does prioritize populations through criteria such as Homelessness Study | 75

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

CITY RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR CITY-FUNDED SERVICES
vulnerability and past history. For CoC funded programs, US lawful residence is required.

Within Santa Monica, service providers report that the local preference set forth in this policy is somewhat unique regionally—most agencies appear to prioritize program participations solely based on vulnerability factors rather than on residency. While the need to focus limited resources on members of its own community has historically been an accepted practice at the City, it may restrict the ability of service providers to provide support to the most vulnerable people living on the streets in Santa Monica if that individual is not yet on the City’s Service Registry.

Ultimately, determining how to distribute its limited resources is a policy decision for City leadership to make and each potential model includes pros and cons. For example, a benefit of focusing on providing services to Santa Monicans is that it may help the City better define it’s “fair share” of a regional issue. Alternatively, restricting services to Santa Monicans may not ultimately result in outcomes that are acceptable to City leadership or residents (for instance, the City could successfully house all Santa Monicans in need and still experience community issues and service costs associated with a large number of unsheltered people residing within the City). As the City develops a homelessness strategic plan, it should evaluate how the strategies, philosophies, and goals within the plan align with the SMPP definition. Ultimately, the prioritization framework for limited services is a policy determination that should be approved by City Council.

Program Operating Hours

15. Observation Homelessness programs operating hours are generally limited to Monday through Friday during business hours, which may not reflect when services are needed most or align with community expectations.

Recommendation A. In support of providing enhanced service hours to people experiencing homelessness, implement the City’s proposal to expand access to SAMOSHEL and expand the Homeless Liaison Program (HLP) team.

B. Using available data, evaluate trends in the demand for homelessness-related service requests and determine whether there is a need for expanded program operating hours. If data indicate that there is a need for expanded program operating hours, collaborate with service agencies to identify needs and resources to support this expansion.

As the City considers how to effectively deploy its available resources and influence the service environment within its community, it should consider assessing the operating hours of various programs. Throughout this assessment, it is important to understand the City’s limited ability to influence the operating environment of service agencies if those requests for additional services or operating hours are not supported by the offer of commensurate resources to enable these expansions.

Homelessness Study | 76

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Most City-operated programs, such as the CRU and the HLP team, operate Monday through Thursday during the day shift. Similarly, most intake centers for social service agencies operate Monday through Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. In Spring 2022, the City identified three priority investments;
43 one of which included 24/7 access to SAMOSHEL and an expansion of the HLP team to operate seven days a week; however, most social service agencies that operate in the City are not currently open on the weekends. Both of these proposed investments align with the need to expand the days and hours that services are accessible to people experiencing homelessness.

To better serve the community of people experiencing homelessness, the City should conduct an assessment to determine whether the hours of operation for additional City-operated and City-funded programs align with the time of need. Additionally, the assessment should evaluate the practicality of staggering operating hours between the City and local service providers to expand the overall operating hours. This would require a high level of coordination and significant improvements to the accessibility of each organization’s operating hours information. Because both Police and Fire track data on calls that relate to homelessness, this data could be a starting point for the assessment.

Local service providers, including the emergency room, may also have data that indicates when the need for interventions is elevated throughout the week and time of day.

The City should determine the most common day(s) and hour(s) for homelessness services to understand when the demand for services is highest. This should then be used to help inform the potential need for service offering expansions with service agencies. For example, there may be elevated needs on the weekends or between the hours of 5:00 pm to 8:00 pm during the week.

Extending operating hours would require additional financial investment to be feasible.

Transportation

16. Observation Big Blue Bus historically collaborated with service agencies to provide people experiencing homelessness with access to public transportation.

However, the existing program creates risks and inconveniences for users which results in low participation rates.

Recommendation A. Continue efforts to adjust the Big Blue Bus’s free fare program to better support the transportation needs of people who are at risk of, experiencing, or exiting homelessness.

B. Communicate the County’s Low-Income Fare is Easy (LIFE) program as an interim solution to free fares for those who require access to public transportation but cannot afford it.

In staff and stakeholder interviews, a common theme related to the challenges of effectively housing individuals and encouraging program participation is when services are not offered in a convenient location. Homelessness services tend to be concentrated in downtown areas to reduce physical access restrictions. However, affordable housing units that become available may be located in an 43 City of Santa Monica – Summary of Possible FY2022-23 Budget Proposals:
https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=4&ID=12743 Homelessness Study | 77

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
area that is farther away from downtown services and the community built by that individual. When coupled with challenges in securing safe access to affordable public transportation, location can present a barrier to effectively supporting people in interim or permanent housing. Access to public transportation can serve as a critical lynchpin of transitioning an individual from homelessness, as they need access to their home, service agencies, medical facilities, and the place of their employment to maintain stability.

The Big Blue Bus (BBB) previously had a program in which it provided tokens to social service agencies to administer to participants that needed access to public transportation. In 2017, with an update to the fareboxes on buses, BBB transitioned the program from tokens to paper tickets, including packs of three tickets. With this change, staff report that utilization of the program reduced significantly from approximately 100,000 tokens to 5,000 tickets annually. When BB reached out to social service providers to better understand this reduction, the primary reason given for changes in ticket demand was that the tickets contained a hard coded expiration date, which significantly hampered bulk purchase, distribution, and ease of use. Additionally, the expiration date was printed on the delivery box rather than the tickets, which further hampered efforts to have them fulfill their desired function. Anecdotally, program participants also reported safety concerns as the tickets were viewed as a valuable commodity that risked threat of theft. Tickets were also easily lost or damaged, rendering them less effective than the previous token method for free fares.

During the pandemic, this concern was alleviated since BBB was fare-free between March 2020 and February 2021. However, as fares were reinstituted, low participation rates in the ticket program did not resolve. BBB is currently working on a potential solution to develop a safe, secure, non-expiring transportation ticketing option for program participants that could be operational as soon as the beginning of next fiscal year (FY2023-2024).

In the interim, City staff should ensure service providers are aware of the County-run program called Low-Income Fare is Easy (LIFE) to support access to transportation services among those who are experiencing or exiting homelessness. The Program offers heavily discounted fares and up to 20 rides per month at no cost to qualifying participants, which could support the transportation needs of low-income households that are at risk of, experiencing, or exiting homelessness.

Public Safety

17. Observation Due to recent leadership turnover, the Santa Monica Police Department (SMPD) lacks clear direction on where to focus resources and activities and how to approach enforcement.

Recommendation A. As part of the City’s efforts to develop a homelessness strategic plan, the City and SMPD should clearly define SMPD’s role and the approach to enforcement that should be used when interacting with people experiencing homelessness. These efforts should be done in collaboration with the community.

B. After the strategic plan has been developed, SMPD should evaluate its policies, programs, and services to ensure alignment with the strategic plan.

Homelessness Study | 78

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Due to their role in responding to 911 calls, police officers tend to frequently interact with unsheltered individuals and are often seen by local community members as responsible for responding to homelessness. In FY2020-21, 19% of police calls for service in the City were related to homelessness, though staff believe this number may be higher. While police officers often respond to homelessness concerns, they have historically had limited options in their response, such as issuing fines or taking people to jail.

As police departments across the country have realized enforcement options like citations or arrests are not effective responses to homelessness, it has become a best practice for law enforcement to partner with homelessness service providers to increase options when responding to people experiencing homelessness.44 These partnerships allow police departments to balance enforcement with compassion and service provision. The City and SMPD have moved in this direction with the development of programs such as the Homelessness Liaison Program (HLP), Alternatives to Incarceration (ATI), and People, Outreach, Providers (POP) Citation Clearing Events. These types of partnerships have created alternatives to enforcement for people experiencing homelessness, which is aligned with best practices and the direction of several cities nationwide.45 • HLP is a collaborative program between SMPD, the City Attorney’s Office (CAO), SMFD, the City’s Human Services Division (HSD), and the Los Angeles Department of Mental Health (DMH).

The program connects people experiencing homelessness with social service providers and support to ensure that alternatives to incarceration occur where appropriate. • ATI is a collaboration between SMPD, CAO, and the service provider Exodus. The program is intended to break cycles of incarceration by offering individuals who self-report experiencing homelessness, substance use disorders, or mental health issues, the opportunity to have their criminal filings dismissed in exchange for committing to a treatment program. • POP events are collaborative events between SMPD, CAO, the Community Services Department (CSD), and local service providers. The events offer services to people who have received certain qualifying non-violent misdemeanor citations. In return for meaningful participation in services, the CAO agrees not to file charges.

While these programs are promising, the overall role of SMPD in responding to homelessness remains unclear. SMPD lacks clear direction from City management and Council on where to focus resources and activities and how to approach enforcement. Best practices state effective partnership approaches require law enforcement and others involved in the homelessness services system to clearly understand their shared goals, roles, and responsibilities.46 As noted in Recommendation 1:

Unifying Strategic Plan, the City needs to build on its Four Pillars framework and homelessness workplan to build a comprehensive vision and mission for its homelessness work and enable City departments to align their efforts with formalized City goals and objectives. As part of these efforts, 44 Police Executive Research Forum, The Police Response to Homelessness:
https://www.policeforum.org/assets/PoliceResponsetoHomelessness.pdf 45 U.S. Department of Justice, Best Practices for Effective Outreach and Care Connections, Examples of Outreach in Action:
https://bja.ojp.gov/program/pmhc/responding-homelessness#examples-of-outreach-in-action 46 U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, Strengthening Partnerships Between Law Enforcement and Homelessness Services Systems: https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Law-Enforcement-and-Homelessness-ServicePartnership-2019.pdf Homelessness Study | 79

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
the City and SMPD can clearly define SMPD’s role and the approach to enforcement that should be used when interacting with people experiencing homelessness.

Without clear alignment between SMPD goals and other City goals related to homelessness, enforcement activities may conflict with other City efforts to serve people experiencing homelessness.

Involvement in the justice system has been shown to increase negative outcomes for people experiencing homelessness, such as creating difficulty in securing housing.47 Additionally, local ordinances can inadvertently contribute to high rates of law enforcement contacts and arrests among people experiencing homelessness and may do little to connect people experiencing homelessness to meaningful services. The ongoing contacts with minimal ability to connect people with services was a driver for the development of the HLP team, which supports proactive approaches to both enforce quality of life ordinances and provide services. By establishing clear alignment between SMPD goals and other City goals related to homelessness, the City and SMPD can then evaluate SMPD practices to ensure they are supporting Citywide goals related to homelessness.

It’s important for these efforts to be done in partnership with the community. Community perceptions on the role of SMPD in responding to homelessness appear to be split, with some community members looking to the police to respond to homelessness and other community members wanting the police to be less involved. By involving the community in efforts to clarify SMPD’s role, the City and the police department can align approaches with community perspectives. Additionally, once the strategy is formalized, the City and SMPD will have something to point to if community members raise concerns about approaches used in the future.

Service Gaps, Duplications, and Limitations

18. Observation The City provides a diverse portfolio of services, yet stakeholders note opportunities to expand resources. Critical gaps and limitations include psychiatric beds, sobering center, and multidisciplinary outreach teams.

Recommendation Continue efforts to evaluate benefits/costs and identify solutions for assessed resource gaps, including investing in infrastructure at the local level, advocacy with regional partners, public-private partnerships, and other opportunities.

The US Interagency Council on Homelessness proposes eight core solutions to ending homelessness: housing, integrated healthcare, career pathways, education, crisis response, criminal reduction, partnerships, and prevention. Within Santa Monica, federal, state, local agencies offer several programs and services that connect with each of these eight core solutions. As noted previously, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to ending homelessness. The City’s task, and challenge, is to tune the volume of programs and services across these core areas to meet the unique needs of the community to make progress towards ending homelessness in Santa Monica. 47 U.S. Department of Justice, The Cycle of Homelessness and Justice Involvement:
https://bja.ojp.gov/program/pmhc/responding-homelessness#the-cycle-of-homelessness-and-justice-involvement Homelessness Study | 80

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
As mentioned, it is not realistic for the City to exclusively provide programming that responds to homelessness. Therefore, the following opportunities to address service gaps should be considered in collaboration with service providers across all jurisdictions operating within Santa Monica.

Throughout discussions with staff and stakeholders, a review of the Service Ecosystem Inventory (see Appendix A: Service Ecosystem Inventory), and analysis of best practice research, we identified the following opportunities to increase the volume or type of support to further the City’s response to homelessness. While this is not an exhaustive list, it does highlight some of the most critical community needs. These services, if added within the City, would help support long-term efforts to address homelessness in the community.
• Psychiatric Beds: According to LAHSA, 41% of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness in the County report substance use disorders and/or serious mental illness. Although behavioral health conditions may contribute to an individual becoming homeless, others may develop these conditions due to the trauma of being chronically homeless. According to a May 2021 study, the estimated cost savings for each chronically mentally ill person who has stable housing is approximately $21,000 per year due to a reduction in emergency room visits, police interactions, and incarceration.48 Currently, there are zero inpatient mental health beds within the City’s limits to address the behavioral health needs of residents (both housed and unhoused). Staff, service providers, and community group forum participants all expressed this as an urgent need— especially in the wake of Providence Saint John’s decision not to include any inpatient mental health beds in its upcoming remodel. In response to this need, the City secured funding to explore the development of a behavioral health strategy (which may include the development of one or more facilities in the local area) to serve all Santa Monicans in need. This visioning process began in September 2022. At the County level, Los Angeles County is reported to have a shortage of 5.2 subacute beds per 100,000 people and a shortage of 11.5 residential beds per 100,000 people.49
• Sobering Center: Sobering centers are facilities that provide a safe, supportive environment for intoxicated individuals, typically those who are homeless or marginally housed, to become sober.

They provide services for intoxicated individuals that may have secondary problems such as substance abuse/dependence, mental illness, and/or medical issues. The intent of a sobering center is to provide better care for intoxicated unsheltered persons and improve health outcomes, decrease the number of inappropriate ambulance trips to the emergency department, and create an alternative to booking individuals arrested for public intoxication. They typically operate seven days per week, and some operate 24 hours a day.50 Although there are substance abuse treatment centers within the City, there is not currently a sobering center that provides a safe space for unsheltered individuals who are intoxicated. This can limit the ability for outreach teams to respond to events and result in transportation to emergency rooms. • Expanded Multidisciplinary Outreach Teams: Multi-disciplinary outreach teams are distinct from other forms of outreach since they provide proactive medical and behavioral health services in the field, whereas other outreach programs typically provide referrals to service providers. 48 Housing is Health Care – The Impact of Supportive Housing on the Costs of Chronic Mental Illness:
https://morrisoninstitute.asu.edu/sites/default/files/housing_is_health_care_report_2021.pdf 49 RAND: Adult Psychiatric Bed Capacity, Need, and Shortage Estimates in California-2021:
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1824-1-v2.html 50 American College of Emergency Physicians – Sobering Centers: https://www.acep.org/by-medical-focus/mental-health-andsubstanc-use-disorders/sobering-centers/ Homelessness Study | 81

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Given the shortages in emergency, transitional, and permanent housing, multidisciplinary outreach teams provide people experiencing homelessness with medical care and resources where they are since other locations to seek assistance may be at capacity. The City currently funds three multidisciplinary outreach teams. The City’s FY2022-23 budget proposals proposed adding one multidisciplinary street team with capacity to delivery street-based behavioral health services to expand this service offering to unsheltered individuals, but it has not yet been funded.

This approach is both data-driven and provides an interim solution to the lack of other shelter availability.

To support service growth and amplify the impact of the City’s overall response to homelessness, the City should continue to explore creative solutions and partnerships. For example, the City is already developing a behavioral health strategy and would likely need to partner with other regional and service agencies to operate one or more related facilities. Similarly, the reimagining process related to SAMOSHEL could provide an opportunity to address one or both other service gaps noted above.

These partnerships are an opportunity for the City to combine, optimize, and build momentum in its response to homelessness.

City should continue to cultivate relationships with local service agencies to communicate needs and support the provision of services within the community. Recognizing that the solutions to homelessness cut across federal, state, and local jurisdictions, it will continue to be advantageous for the City to cultivate robust interagency, cross-sector approaches and partnerships to preventing and ending homelessness.

Service Duplications
In the City’s effort to optimize and streamline its services, Moss Adams was asked to assess the service ecosystem in Santa Monica to uncover areas where duplicate services exist. The Ecosystem Inventory shows that there are multiple programs and departments across jurisdictions providing the same or similar services in Santa Monica. Whether these duplicate programs are generating inefficiencies cannot be determined due to the following considerations:
• National research and best practices have determined the unfeasibility of a single-sourced solution to homelessness. Partnerships and networked programs are required to meet the needs of the community while also alleviating the resource burden for any one agency. • The City lacks a consistent evaluative framework to accurately assess program efficacy. As explored in Recommendation 2: Performance Measurement, until the City develops a unifying set of performance measures and consistent methodology for tracking performance, it cannot definitively determine which program duplications are ineffective.

Once the City can consistently track and measure program metrics and connect them to the impact the City has on homelessness, it will be able to make data-driven decisions to further curate its approach, refine its service environment, and maximize impact.

Homelessness Study | 82

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
External Coordination

19. Observation The City has a strong referral network with its local homelessness service providers, yet stakeholders note challenges around sharing and gathering comprehensive and up-to-date information that results in an overreliance on personal service provider connections for coordination.

Recommendation Continue pursuing technology solutions that provide up-to-date, comprehensive, consolidated, and integrated information with push and pull functionalities to enable the City and other service providers to receive notifications and enter data to optimize coordination and referrals.

Over the past decades, care coordination models have emerged as important tools for organizations working to better serve the needs of people experiencing homelessness. Historically, homeless care services have been siloed, meaning that a person seeking support related to housing, health, food, hygiene, legal aid, or employment would have to go to different organizations at different sites to meet their needs. This service acquisition process is daunting for anyone, but it is compounded for people experiencing homelessness.

There are over 30 organizations across all levels (federal, state, county, city, and local community) operating 144 unique programs that span 12 service areas. The full inventory of programs captured for this study is provided in Appendix A: Service Ecosystem Inventory.

Homelessness Study | 83

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
SANTA MONICA HOMELESSNESS SERVICES PARTNERSHIPS51
People who are experiencing homelessness—particularly those with trauma history, mental illnesses, and co-occurring substance use disorders—have substantially greater difficulty navigating complex service systems. Poor prior experiences building trust with a mix of multiple care providers—who may or may not be able to meet a person’s needs—often inhibits persons from seeking care. Additionally, the impact of psychosocial factors on the body is even greater for people experiencing poverty.

Populations of low-income people are less likely than the general public to accept a mental health definition of their problem.52 If they do accept a referral for services, they often encounter much greater difficulty negotiating travel and scheduling due to socioeconomic factors.

In response to these difficulties, a referral network of care coordination has emerged as a method for increasing access to comprehensive services, particularly for vulnerable populations such as people without homes. As represented in the tables above, there is a comprehensive foundation of referral services available in the City. However, stakeholders noted challenges around sharing and gathering 51 See Appendix A: Service Ecosystem Inventory.
52 Improving Mental Health Access for Low-Income Children and Families in the Primary Care Setting:
https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2015-1175
Homelessness Study | 84

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
comprehensive and up-to-date information, which results in an overreliance on personal service provider connections for coordination.

For example, when the City provides outreach services to a homeless individual and then needs to refer that individual to a partner organization for housing, there is no comprehensive centralized source of information that can indicate the housing type, capacity, bed availability, location, and contact information to make a warm transition. When the City is able to make a referral or coordinate services with a partner organization, the City may enter the individual’s information into the City’s HMIS. This then requires the partner organization to know where that individual’s updated information is stored, which will not include any information about that same individual that was entered into the County’s HMIS. Additionally, the City and homelessness service providers utilize the Coordinated Entry System (CES) to assist homeless individuals with the service acquisition process. CES serves as a mechanism by which people experiencing or at risk of experiencing homelessness can access the crisis response system quickly to connect with appropriate, tailored resources that fit their needs.

Standardized assessment tools and practices are used to identify the best options to address the individual or family’s unique needs. The CES entry to referral flow is depicted below.

The intent of CES is to transform a CoC into a fully integrated crisis response system by leveraging data that can be used for system and project planning as well as resource allocation. This system is yet another important data gathering and information tool that the City and service providers must navigate in order to coordinate services for one individual. However, as mentioned this is one database of several HMIS systems active in Santa Monica that are used for the collection of data to catalog and coordinate care. Furthermore, as depicted above there is no defined referral path per organization or service. Therefore, case managers or coordinators must reach out to each organization to determine the availability of services. This does not capture the potential services that may be available just outside of Santa Monica which could potentially be taken advantage of.

To overcome the initial barrier of knowing what’s available and from whom, service providers may often call several organizations and individuals to make one referral, which is a highly inefficient and often frustrating exercise.

Homelessness Study | 85

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
As noted throughout this report, the City is known for its philosophy of innovation when assessing and testing technology solutions to address homelessness. Therefore, we recommend the City continue pursuing technology solutions that provide up-to-date, comprehensive, consolidated, and integrated information with push and pull functionalities to enable the City and other service providers to receive notifications and enter data to optimize coordination and referrals. For example, although the City funds and operates a variety of outreach teams, each of these teams could incorporate a standardized assessment into street outreach activities to ensure their information is input into the HMIS or CES for identification of needs and subsequent service referrals integrating Los Angeles County’s CES concepts into City-funded and City-operated programs.

Homelessness Study | 86

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
APPENDIX A: SERVICE ECOSYSTEM INVENTORY
The ecosystem inventory catalogs the active programs, administering organization, collaborating agency, and service category within Santa Monica. This list is representative of programs occurring in Santa Monica, or serving Santa Monica residents, and includes both programs funded by the City and programs not funded by the City. Due to the nature of homelessness, it is possible that there are agencies outside of Santa Monica who provide services to Santa Monicans. For example, The Salvation Army is a national agency with locations across California. If the Salvation Army in Santa Monica receives a request to place an individual or family in emergency or temporary housing, they will not restrict their search for a bed to Santa Monica and may reach out to nearby locations to house that individual. The challenge of homelessness is that it is often unbounded by location. For the purposes of this study, agencies contacted for input and validation of information in the table were asked to restrict, to the best of their ability, the programs listed below to those actively operating in Santa Monica.

Organizations and programs are listed along in the left column of the table and the service category is provided across the top. Definitions of each service area are also included below. • Case Management: Services, organizations, or roles that offer multi-visit, relationship building, long-term and more in-depth effort than coordination. • Coordination: Services, organizations, or roles that offer referral services to connect homeless individuals with various services. This is not case management; these are individuals or programs that are primarily informational and do not extend past referral or coordination.
• Data and Analysis: Services, programs, or technology for the collection, storage, and use of data related to homelessness. • Emergency Response: Includes first responders, or emergency room staff. • Employment: Services related to employment acquisition, retention, skill building or training, or support such as job search or temporary services. • Food: Food or meal support related services.
• Generalist Outreach: Multidisciplinary street-based services typified by outreach teams to engage homeless individuals where they are. • Housing: Services related to housing retention, placement, rental or mortgage assistance, or voucher programs. • Legal Aid: Services related to legal support including alternate incarceration, landlord and tenant legal services, or legal assistance related to employment. • Mental and Physical Health: Services related to behavioral, mental, or physical health including addiction treatment. • Reunification: Services related to supporting reuniting homeless individuals with family/friends who provide stable housing. • Supportive Services: Services, programs, or organizations that interface with a significant percent of the homeless population (for example, showers and washing machines, or homeless stores for clothing or hygiene items).

City Government
17%
County
20%
Federal
3%
Hospital
2%
Joint Powers
Authority
4%
Nonprofit
52%
State
2%
Program Breakdown by Agency Type
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Emergency Response
Legal Aid
Reunification
Employment
Data and Analysis
Food
Generalist Outreach
Coordination
Supportive Services
Mental and Physical Health
Case Management
Housing
Program County by Service Category
Homelessness Study | 87

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

JURISDICTION ORGANIZATION
CASE

MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
DATA
AND

ANALYSIS

EMERGENCY

RESPONSE EMPLOYMENT FOOD

GENERALIST

OUTREACH HOUSING LEGAL AID
MENTAL
AND

PHYSICAL

HEALTH REUNIFICATION

SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES
Federal US Department of Housing and Urban Development
Emergency Housing Voucher
(EHV) Program x
Veterans Affairs Supportive
Housing Program (VASH) x
Housing Choice (Section 8)
Voucher Program x
HOME Tenant-Based Rental
Assistance x
Community Development Block
Grant x
Emergency Solutions Grant
(ESG) program x x x
Continuum of Care (CoC) x
US Department of Homeland Security
Emergency Funding x
US Interagency Council on Homelessness
End Homelessness x
State California Department of Housing and Community Development Project Homekey x
California Emergency Solutions
and Housing (CESH) x
California Department of Social Services
Project Roomkey x
California Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency Homeless Housing, Assistance,
and Prevention Program
(HHAP)
x

x

x
California Interagency Council
on Homelessness x x
Homelessness Study | 88

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

JURISDICTION ORGANIZATION
CASE

MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
DATA
AND

ANALYSIS

EMERGENCY

RESPONSE EMPLOYMENT FOOD

GENERALIST

OUTREACH HOUSING LEGAL AID
MENTAL
AND

PHYSICAL

HEALTH REUNIFICATION

SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES
County LA County Department of Mental Health (DMH)
Homeless Outreach and Mobile
Engagement (HOME) Teams x x x x x x x x x
Therapeutic Transport Van x x
Psychiatric Mobile Response
Teams (PMRT) x
Interim Housing Program x
Full-Service Partnership x x x x x x x x
Outpatient Mental Health
Service x x x
Capital Investments Public
Supportive Housing (PSH) x x x x
Housing Supportive Services
Program (HSSP) x x x x x
LA County Homeless Initiative
Affordable Housing x
Homeless Prevention x
Interim Housing x
Permanent Housing x
Street Outreach x
Supportive Services –
Partnered with LA:Rise x x
E6 Street-Based Outreach
Team x x x
LA County Department of Health Services
Benefits Assistance x x x x x x x x
Capital Improvement
Intermediary Program (CIIP) x
Contracted Partner Clinical
Services x x
Homelessness Study | 89

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

JURISDICTION ORGANIZATION
CASE

MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
DATA
AND

ANALYSIS

EMERGENCY

RESPONSE EMPLOYMENT FOOD

GENERALIST

OUTREACH HOUSING LEGAL AID
MENTAL
AND

PHYSICAL

HEALTH REUNIFICATION

SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES
Direct Clinical Services x x x x x
Enriched Residential Care x x
Flexible Housing Subsidy Pool
(FHSP) x
Homelessness Prevention Unit
(HPU) x
Hospice Pilot x
Housing Stabilization Team x
In-Home Care Giving x
Interim Housing x
Multi-disciplinary Teams &
Public Spaces Teams x x x
Permanent Supportive Housing
(PSH) x
Joint Powers
Authority
Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority
Capacity Building x
Continuum of Care x
Coordinated Entry System x
Emergency Housing Voucher
(EHV) Program x
Homeless Count x
Homeless Engagement Teams
(HET) & Coordinated Entry
Teams (CET)
x

x

Homeless Management
Information System (HMIS) x
Homeless Outreach Services
Teams (HOST) x
LA-HOP Homeless Outreach
Portal x
Homelessness Study | 90

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

JURISDICTION ORGANIZATION
CASE

MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
DATA
AND

ANALYSIS

EMERGENCY

RESPONSE EMPLOYMENT FOOD

GENERALIST

OUTREACH HOUSING LEGAL AID
MENTAL
AND

PHYSICAL

HEALTH REUNIFICATION

SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES
Project Roomkey x
Westside Cities Council of Governments
COG Homelessness Grant x
Los Angeles Measure H x
City
Government
City of Santa Monica
Alternatives to Incarceration
(ATI) Program x
COVID Emergency Rental
Assistance Program (ERAP) x
Emergency Housing Voucher
(EHV) Program x
Homeless Multidisciplinary
Street Team (HMST) x x x x x x
Human Services Grant
Program x x x x x x x x x
Library Services Officers x
Outreach Team x
People, Outreach, Providers
(POP) Citation Clearing Events x
Preserving Our Diversity (POD)
Program x
Project Homecoming x x
Santa Monica C3 x x x x x x
Therapeutic Transport Van x x
Veterans Affairs Supportive
Housing Program (VASH) x
Housing Choice (Section 8)
Voucher Program x
Community Response Unit
(CRU) x x x
Homelessness Study | 91

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

JURISDICTION ORGANIZATION
CASE

MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
DATA
AND

ANALYSIS

EMERGENCY

RESPONSE EMPLOYMENT FOOD

GENERALIST

OUTREACH HOUSING LEGAL AID
MENTAL
AND

PHYSICAL

HEALTH REUNIFICATION

SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES
Homeless Liaison Program
(HLP) x x x x x x x x x
Below Market Housing (BMH)
Program x
Housing Trust Fund (HTF) x
100 Home Initiative x
HOME Tenant-Based Rental
Assistance x
Community Development Block
Grant x x x x
Homeless Community Court x
Public Bathroom Cleaning and
Sanitization x
Clean Drinking Water in Public
Spaces x
Abandoned Encampment
Cleanup x
Public Space/Facilities
Maintenance x
Hospital Providence St. John’s Hospital
Community Care Coordination x
Community Health Services x
Emergency Room x
UCLA Medical Center
Emergency Room x
Homeless Coordinator x
Mobile Clinic Project x
Homelessness Study | 92

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

JURISDICTION ORGANIZATION
CASE

MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
DATA
AND

ANALYSIS

EMERGENCY

RESPONSE EMPLOYMENT FOOD

GENERALIST

OUTREACH HOUSING LEGAL AID
MENTAL
AND

PHYSICAL

HEALTH REUNIFICATION

SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES
Nonprofit Chrysalis
Job-Readiness Program x x x
LA:Rise x x x
Breaking Barriers x x x x
SECTOR x x x
CLARE/Matrix
Addiction Treatment x
Disability Community Resource Center
DCRC’s Housing Specialists x
Information and Referral x
Housing Access Program x
Downtown Santa Monica (DTSM), Inc.

Dolphin Change Program x
Quality of Life Ambassadors x
Reed Park Ambassador
Program x
Safety Ambassador Program x
Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles
Housing and Homelessness x
Right to Council Program x
Meals on Wheels West
Meals x
Food & Shelter Program x
Community Connections
Friendly Calling x x x
Safe Place for Youth
Education and Employment x
Homelessness Study | 93

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

JURISDICTION ORGANIZATION
CASE

MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
DATA
AND

ANALYSIS

EMERGENCY

RESPONSE EMPLOYMENT FOOD

GENERALIST

OUTREACH HOUSING LEGAL AID
MENTAL
AND

PHYSICAL

HEALTH REUNIFICATION

SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES
Health and Wellness x
Safe Place for Youth CES
Access Center x x x x
Street Outreach x
Salvation Army (Santa Monica Corps)
Adult Rehabilitation Center x
Disaster Help Program x
Food Pantries x
Hot Meals x
Silvercrest Senior Center x
Street Outreach x x x
Employment Assistance
Programs x
Saint Monica Catholic Community
Hope at the Door x x
Justice and Peace x x
St. Joseph Center
Benefits Assistance x
COVID Emergency Rental
Assistance Program (ERAP) x
Mental Health-Focused
Housing Programs x x
Multi-disciplinary Teams &
Public Spaces Teams x
Permanent Supportive Housing
(PSH) x x
Rapid Re-Housing x
Santa Monica Youth Resource
Team x
Homelessness Study | 94

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

JURISDICTION ORGANIZATION
CASE

MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
DATA
AND

ANALYSIS

EMERGENCY

RESPONSE EMPLOYMENT FOOD

GENERALIST

OUTREACH HOUSING LEGAL AID
MENTAL
AND

PHYSICAL

HEALTH REUNIFICATION

SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES
St Joseph Center Homeless
Service Center (HSC) CES
Access Center
x x

Step Up
Client Run Center (CRC) x
Housing First Permanent
Supportive Housing (PSH) x
Rapid Workforce Job
Development x
Transition-Age Youth (TAY) x x x x
Veterans Affairs Supportive
Housing Program (VASH) x
Step Up on Second x x x
Daniel's Village x x x
Step Up on Fifth x x
Step Up on Colorado x x
Step Up on 26th x x x
The People Concern
Cloverfield Services Center x x x x x x
Homeless Multidisciplinary
Street Team (HMST) x x x x x
Homeless Prevention Program x x x x
Permanent Supportive Housing
(PSH) x x
Samoshel x x x x x
Shwashlock Program x x
The People Concern's
Annenberg Access Center x x x x x x x
Turning Point in Santa Monica x x x x x
Homelessness Study | 95

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

JURISDICTION ORGANIZATION
CASE

MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
DATA
AND

ANALYSIS

EMERGENCY

RESPONSE EMPLOYMENT FOOD

GENERALIST

OUTREACH HOUSING LEGAL AID
MENTAL
AND

PHYSICAL

HEALTH REUNIFICATION

SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES
Narcan Program x x x
Money Management x x x
Wellness Connect x x x
Sojourn Domestic Violence
Services x x x x x x x x x x
Stipend Program x
K-9 Connect x x x x x
Health & Wellness x x x x x x x x x
Interim Housing and Wellness x x x x x x
Upward Bound House
Aftercare x x x x
Health and Wellness x x x
Pantry x x x x
Permanent Housing x
Temporary Housing x x x x x
Venice Family Clinic
Common Ground x x
Mobile Health/Street Medicine
Teams x x
Primary Health x
SAMOHI Wellness Clinic x
Street Medicine Curriculum x
West Coast Care
Getting the Homeless Home x
Outreach Team x
Westside Coalition
Coalition Meeting x
Homelessness Study | 96

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

JURISDICTION ORGANIZATION
CASE

MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
DATA
AND

ANALYSIS

EMERGENCY

RESPONSE EMPLOYMENT FOOD

GENERALIST

OUTREACH HOUSING LEGAL AID
MENTAL
AND

PHYSICAL

HEALTH REUNIFICATION

SUPPORTIVE

SERVICES
Westside Food Bank
Food Distribution x
Homelessness Study | 97

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
APPENDIX B: COMMUNITY GROUP FORUM
THEMES
Moss Adams held a community group forum on June 29, 2022. The purpose of the forum was to provide a space for members of key community groups (including neighborhood associations, direct service providers, county partners, and business community members) to provide feedback and ideas on how the City could improve its homelessness prevention and response efforts in the Santa Monica community. Three discussion questions were asked:

1. How might we change or expand current homelessness prevention or response services provided by the City?
What are ideas for new services that are not currently provided by the City or other partners? How might the City improve communication with the community about homelessness prevention and response services and resources?
The themes of the community group conversations are summarized below. It is important to note that while over 30 community groups were invited to attend, a relatively small number of individuals chose to participate. Within this context, the conversation themes are not necessarily representative of the broader community views. However, they do provide valuable insight into areas of concern voiced by the forum attendees.

Programs and Services
• Residents expressed the need for improvements related to housing, including more permanent housing, more permanent supportive housing, and the need to prevent evictions. • Residents shared concerns about how homelessness has changed and/or intensified over time in Santa Monica. Challenges related to mental health, substance use, and aggressive behaviors seem to be worse. Residents expressed dissatisfaction with the City’s efforts in this area and shared a desire for more support for services.
• Residents emphasized an urgent need for mental health beds in the community. • Residents suggested the City consider a Safe Parking program. These types of programs provide dedicated parking spots for individuals or families living out of their cars. • Service providers reported challenges in connecting people experiencing homelessness with other programs and understanding the availability that may exist at other providers. The lack of a centralized location to triage program participants presents potential inefficiencies within the ecosystem of services.
• Service providers noted that the City’s strategic efforts and investments in affordable housing and homelessness efforts make it a leader in the region; their resources are augmented with those that exist from other organizations as well.
• Service providers also noted challenges attaining access to sufficient substance recovery, or psychiatric beds to respond to emergent and on-going needs. • Service providers noted challenges in operating hours for some homeless services, such as shelters and treatment centers, which can contribute to service barriers but would require significant additional resources to overcome. As a result, emergency service providers available 24/7 such as hospital ERs or 911, are the sole responders during off hours which can overburden the system.

Homelessness Study | 98

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Reporting
• Residents voiced frustration over the lack of accountability around homelessness. Residents would like to see more regular reporting of performance data and summaries of what kinds of interventions are or are not effective. Residents also recommended an external audit of the City’s homelessness efforts to determine effectiveness.

Outreach and Communication
• Residents emphasized the need for better communication around who to contact to help someone experiencing homelessness. Residents appreciated the City’s outreach efforts but expressed the desire for more impactful communication and outreach in this area. • Residents suggested a centralized website for homelessness resources and services. • Residents expressed a desire for outreach teams to be staffed 24/7. • Service providers reported the need for a two-way reporting system so that residents know their report was received and is actively being managed without divulging sensitive information. • Service providers also noted a need for education on the appropriate contact for specific homeless-related concerns and the anticipated response times for reports of varying natures. • Service providers expressed challenges participating in the wide variety of coordination, coalitions, and associations that provide inter-agency collaboration opportunities. There is a desire to have a more consolidated coordination effort that is directly tied to support for broader initiatives.
• Service providers positively remarked on the efforts on behalf of the City to develop informational materials on the organizations, services, locations, and contact information for agencies responding to homelessness. The volume of services provided presents challenges for the ease of use of these materials.

Homelessness Study | 99

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
APPENDIX C: PEER RESEARCH SUMMARY
CITY POPULATION*

MOST RECENT

POINT-IN-TIME
COUNT

HOMELESS

POPULATION

TRAJECTORY

HOMELESSNESS
PLAN? PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND REPORTING

LEAD DEPARTMENT OR POINT
PERSON FOR HOMELESSNESS?
Santa Monica 91,105 807 Decreasing No Santa Monica reports on its homelessness initiatives at least annually but does not have overarching performance measures that guide and communicate the impact of its activities.

No
Berkeley 117,145 1,057 Fluctuating Yes Berkeley has identified three overarching outcomes, with performance measures associated with each outcome.

City staff report on progress quarterly and are working on creating a dashboard that would be constantly updated.

Outcome 1: People are Sheltered
● Number of clients sheltered
● Shelter offered compared to shelter accepted (to demonstrate outreach) ● Emergency shelter capacity
Outcome 2: Dangerous Encampments are not Inevitable
● Number and types of notices given to tent encampments ● Number of encampments resolved
Outcome 3: Our City is Clean
● Total pounds of debris removed by month
● Number of stored belongings notices
Yes – The Neighborhood Services Team
within the City Manager’s Office is
responsible for homelessness initiatives.

Pasadena 135,732 512 Decreasing In progress Pasadena reports annually on several homelessness performance metrics. ● Number of homeless households housed through City funded programs ● Number of households prevented from falling into homelessness ● Number of job training participants who secured permanent jobs at sustainable wages ● Number of quarterly programs, including increased homeless outreach and encampment cleanups to assist in reducing homeless population
● Percentage of PEH in Pasadena who are receiving services by the Pasadena Outreach Response Team Yes – The Housing Department is
responsible for homelessness initiatives.

Palo Alto 66,680 313 Increasing No None No
West Hollywood 34,938 112 Fluctuating Yes West Hollywood’s homelessness plan includes goals and related action items for homelessness. The City does not appear to have a set list of overarching performance measures, but City staff report on plan progress annually using a variety of qualitative and quantitative methods specific to each plan goal.

Yes – The Strategic Initiatives Division
housed in the City’s Human Services
and Rent Stabilization Department is
responsible for homelessness and other
key City priorities, including poverty and
aging in place.

Richmond 115,639 Unknown** Unknown** In progress None No * U.S. Census Population Estimate, July 2021
** Richmond’s homelessness efforts are new.

Homelessness Study | 100

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
APPENDIX D: CITY HOMELESSNESS PROGRAMS IN FISCAL YEAR 2021 The tables below summarize the programs that are funded or operated, in whole or in part, by the City and are presented in alignment with the existing Four Pillars strategy. Included are the program name, a short description, the program operator, the total program budget, and funding source(s) that were provided by the City (either through general fund, special revenue funds, or pass-through funding), and performance measures for FY2020-2021.

PROGRAM NAME PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

PROGRAM

OPERATOR
FY2020-2021
Budget Actual Expenditures Funding Source Current Performance Measures Emergency Housing Voucher
(EHV) Program
EHVs are allocated to the City of Santa Monica to
be issued to people experiencing or at risk of
homelessness.

CSD $657,155*
*FY 2021-22 budget represents Year 1
Start Up; Note that FY 2022-23 budget
of $1.419 million represents the
program at full utilization
$57,977**
**Note that expenditures
represent payments
made from March 1,
2022 through June 30,
2022 and are therefore
not reflective of a full
year.

HUD/Federal GovernmentAmerican Rescue Plan
● As of February 2022, 54 EHVs have
been issued
● 6 participants ended their experience of
homelessness in Santa Monica
Below Market Housing (BMH)
Program
Offers housing opportunities for households that
meet income requirements, which provides a
consolidated application for affordable housing
opportunities across the City.

CSD Program does not have an annual
budget; BMH is supported by staff time
captured in the Program Oversight and
Administration table.

N/A N/A
(Housing Trust Funds have
funded the creation of the
majority of the 2600 BMH units)
Matches eligible households on the BMH
waitlist with a pool of resources including
2600 affordable housing units
Housing Trust Funds (HTF)
Program
Provides funding to non-profit affordable housing
organizations for the creation of affordable housing
CSD Program does not have an annual
budget; loan commitments are made
from available Fund balances.

N/A Housing Trust Funds (e.g.,
GHS tax revenue, developer inlieu fees)
$17.4M in loan commitments for two
supportive housing developments
COVID Emergency Rental
Assistance Program (ERAP)
Provided households economically impacted by
COVID with 3 months’ rent up to $5,000
St. Joseph Center $3,121,514 $3,121,514 Total ● 1,106 applications were submitted ● 104 households did not qualify
● 362 households were denied assistance
due to lack of funding
● 640 households were provided rent
assistance
$2,649,979 $2,649,979 HUD/Federal GovernmentCommunity Development Block Grant (CDBG/CDBG-CV)
$220,000 $220,000 Misc. Grants – Economic
Recovery Task Force (ERTF);
Westside Cities Council of
Governments (WSCCOG)
$251,535 $251,535 City General Fund
Preserving Our Diversity (POD)
Program
Cash-based program to help low-income rent
burdened seniors retain their housing
CSD $2,000,000 $1,164,615 Special RevenueRedevelopment Replacement Housing Trust Funds
197 Low-income seniors enrolled in program
with an average of $500/month in
assistance
Right to Counsel Program Attorneys represent tenants in court and provide eviction services to support residents in
maintaining housing
Legal Aid Foundation
of Los Angeles
(LAFLA)
$120,000 $120,000 General Fund Because Right to Counsel operates outside of the HSGP, the following performance
measures are self-reported and not
validated by the City:
● 93 cases opened
Homelessness Study | 101

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

PROGRAM NAME PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

PROGRAM

OPERATOR
FY2020-2021
Budget Actual Expenditures Funding Source Current Performance Measures HSGP – Homeless Prevention The Human Services Grants Program funds programs assisting low-income households at risk
of homelessness through General Legal Services,
Housing Retention, and Sanctuary legal aid.

LAFLA
SJC
Step Up on Second
$1,192,830 $1,192,830 Total ● 590 residents received legal counseling and advocacy
● 153 residents received extended legal
services (representation)
● 121 of 122 vulnerable renters remained
housed (99%)
● 73 of 75 Step Up residents retained
housing (97%)
$1,031,273 $1,046,534 City General Fund
$15,261 $0 Special Revenue-Proposition A
$124,624 $124,624 HUD/Federal GovernmentCommunity Development Block Grant (CDBG/CDBG-CV)
$21,672 $21,672 HUD/Federal Government
Project Homecoming Provides one-time assistance to reunite participants with friends or family who agree to
provide permanent housing and necessary
supports in their communities of origin.

CSD, SMPD $70,000 $16,379*
*$4,677 represents costs
from the SMPD
City- General Fund ● 103 participants utilized the program ● Average cost of $320 per participant
Housing Subsidies (Section 8,
CoC, HOME-TBRA, VASH)
Federal housing subsidies make housing
affordable for low-income households by paying a
portion of rent.

CSD $23,721,823 $24,219,334 HUD ● 1,663 participants as of June 2022. ● Average per unit cost of $1,200

PROGRAM NAME PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

PROGRAM

OPERATOR
FY 2020-2021
Budget Actual Expenditures Funding Source Current Performance Measures Homeless Multidisciplinary
Street Team (HMST)
Provision of ongoing intensive case management
services through multidisciplinary teams to high
utilizers of local emergency, medical, and police
systems
The People Concern $600,000 $600,000 City-General Fund Cohort of 25 chronically homeless individuals served
In FY20-21, HMST made 964 contacts,
provided 186 direct medical services, 107
direct psychiatric services, placed 8
participants into interim housing, and placed
9 participants into permanent housing.

C3 Teams Multidisciplinary teams (MSTs) are deployed
proactively to the areas of Santa Monica with the
highest concentration of unsheltered homelessness.

One C3 team serves the Downtown Santa Monica
area and the second focuses on the south beach.

LA County $800,000 $762,802 City-General Fund In FY20-21, the C3 MDTs made more than 7,000 contacts with people experiencing
homelessness, provided 264 direct medical
services, 112 direct psychiatric services,
placed 43 participants into interim housing,
and placed 10 participants into permanent
housing. During this period, the C3 teams
also operated the COVID emergency motel
program, which provided a total of 1,567
bed nights to 26 COVID-vulnerable
participants. 69% of participants exited to
destinations other than the streets.

Homelessness Study | 102

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

PROGRAM NAME PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

PROGRAM

OPERATOR
FY 2020-2021
Budget Actual Expenditures Funding Source Current Performance Measures Community Response Unit
(CRU)
Improves the safety, health, and wellbeing of the
community’s vulnerable populations by serving as a
force multiplier among the City’s network of service
providers. Leverages 911 interactions as
opportunities to better assist and navigate our
community’s vulnerable populations to the services
they need.

SMFD $523,786 with supplies includedprogram began FY 21-22$378,975 City-General Fund ● Since launch on September 13, 2022, responded to 300 calls for service; 196
of which involved PEH
● 118 service referrals provided
● Transported 10 patients to Exodus
Psychiatric Urgent Care Center
Alternatives to Incarceration
(ATI) Program
Connects those arrested who self-report
experiencing homelessness, substance use
disorders, or mental health issues with an
alternative to a criminal filing by immediately
connecting them with an onsite service provider.

CAO, SMPD,
(Exodus Recovery)
$154,012 $154,012*
*$105,779 represents
costs from the SMPD
City General Fund ● Over 200 arrestees screened by SMPD, 53 qualified for the ATI program
● 7 individuals successfully graduated
from the program
Homeless Community Court
(HCC)
Connects misdemeanor offenders experiencing
homelessness with social services, housing, and
treatment to resolve their citations and avoid
custody and fines.

CSD, CAO N/A; costs are incorporated into staff
time and reflected in the Program
Oversight and Administration table.

N/A City General Funds ● 5 HCC sessions (via teleconference due to COVID restrictions);
● 7 HCC participants served in FY20-21;
● All 7 participants graduated HCC (5
graduates exited HCC to permanent
housing and 2 graduates exited to
interim housing pending placement in
permanent housing).

HSGP – Substance Use
Disorder Treatment
The Human Services Grants Program funds
CLARE/Matrix for substance use disorder treatment
services to homeless and low-income Santa
Monicans
CLARE/Matrix $30,000 allocated (fee for service) $0 City General Funds CLARE/Matrix did not bill for any eligible SMPP during FY20-21, therefore there are
no expenditures or performance data to
report.

Upcoming Programs
Therapeutic Transport Program: The City, in partnership with the Department of Mental Health at the County of Los Angeles, is launching a pilot program for those experiencing mental health crises. The Program will be dedicated exclusively to the City of Santa Monica and deployed to de-escalate mental health crises occurring on the streets, provide services, and transport a person to the hospital if needed. The Program is intended to operate 24/7 and planned for implementation as soon as the Department of Mental Health is able to fill positions allocated to this program.

PROGRAM NAME PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

PROGRAM

OPERATOR
FY 2020-2021
Budget Actual Expenditures Funding Source Current Performance Measures Homeless Liaison Program
(HLP)
Contacts and connects persons experiencing
homelessness with social services providers, with
the intent to change individual behavior through
enforcement, mental health assistance, and
diversion programs.

SMPD
2 DMH clinicians
$2,067,064 $1,704,644 City-General Fund
(City does not pay for
Clinicians)
● Completed 284 crisis evaluations
● 170 linkages to psychiatric urgent care of
hospitalization
People, Outreach, Providers
(POP) Citation Clearing Events
Offers services to people who have received certain
qualifying non-violent misdemeanor citations; in
return for meaningful participation in services, the
CAO agrees not to file charges.

CAO, SMPD, CSD,
regional service
providers
$15,279 (SMPD)
CAO considers this part of regular
work duties.
$15,279 City-General Fund ● 120 POP-eligible citations were issued by SMPD
● More than 40 citations were dismissed
for 40 participants who connected with
regional services
Homelessness Study | 103

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

PROGRAM NAME PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

PROGRAM

OPERATOR
FY 2020-2021
Budget Actual Expenditures Funding Source Current Performance Measures Downtown Santa Monica
(DTSM) Parks Ambassadors
Provide hospitality services at Tongva and Palisades
Parks and at Reed Park. Ambassadors are not
specifically homeless-based, but receive training on
de-escalation, engaging people experiencing
homelessness, and providing referral information to
service agencies.

DTSM $1,257,243 $1,241,517 City-General Fund Provided more than 1,100 social services Library Services Officers Maintains equitable access to open public library spaces by consistently monitoring behaviors and
serving as a connection to outreach workers for
people experiencing homelessness.

SMPL $275,602 $275,602 City-General Fund Approximately 35 incidents per month involve PEH; however, this does not
represent constant engagement with PEH.

West Coast Care Provide direct homeless outreach services at the beach and Pier, case management and follow up
services, and homeless engagement training to
SMFD personnel.

West Coast Care $210,000 $210,000 Total Because West Coast Care operates outside of the HSGP, the following performance
measures are self-reported and not
validated by the City:
● 931 homeless outreach contacts made
● 931 action plans developed
● 208 case management/follow up
services provided
● 2 persons temporarily/transitionally
sheltered
● 66 family reunifications
● 92 permanently housed
$150,000 $150,000 City-General Fund
$60,000 $60,000 City one-time funds including
CARES funding, Economic
Recovery Funding
Interim Housing and Wellness The Human Services Grants Program provides funding to support the operation of local interim
housing programs (SAMOSHEL, Turning Point).

The People Concern $809,927 $809,927 Total ● 176 Santa Monica Program Participants served (61 in shelter, 123 receiving
supportive services in perm housing)
● 17 exited to permanent housing
● 121 of 123 (98%) of housed clients
retained housing.
$798,677 $809,927 City-General Fund
$11,250 $0 Special Revenue-Proposition
A
Cloverfield Service Center The Human Services Grants Program provides funding to support the operation of local interim
housing programs for women at Cloverfield Service
Center.

The People Concern $336,792 $336,792 City-General Fund ● 228 SMPP served (101 in shelter, 127 receiving supportive services in perm
housing)
● 17 exited to permanent housing
● 118 of 127 (93%) retained their housing
Access Center The Human Services Grants Program provides funding to support the operation of local daytime
access centers for people experiencing
homelessness.

The People Concern $211,398 $211,398 Total ● 85 SMPP served ● 8 placed in interim housing
● 12 placed in permanent housing
● 36 of 38 clients in permanent housing
retained housing (95%)
● 16 people reunited with family/friends
through Project Homecoming
$203,998 $211,398 City-General Fund
$7,400
$0
Special Revenue-Proposition
A
Upcoming Projects
• Expanding the HLP Team
• Redesigning the SAMOSHEL program scope to facilitate after-hours intakes for City referrals Homelessness Study | 104

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
Staffing and supplies budgeted in the Homeless Initiatives and Housing/Housing Authority units of the Housing and Human Services Division.

BUSINESS UNIT RESOURCE NAME RESOURCE DESCRIPTION
FY 2021–2022
FTE Budget
Actual
Expenditures Funding Source
Homeless
Initiatives
Budgeted Staff Positions:

1.0 FTE Human Services Administrator

4.0 FTE Sr. Human Service Analysts
Staffing and non-staffing resources to administer and support the City’s homeless initiatives and programs, including: HMST, C3, Project Homecoming, the Homeless PIT Count, Homeless Community Court (HCC), COVID Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP), and the Substance Abuse, Homeless Prevention, Intake, and Interim Housing programs funded through the HSGP. Staff also performs a number of supports, including responding to 311 issues, evaluating requests for emergency flex funds, connecting vulnerable SMPP to services, coordinating system navigation/resource coordination for high-need SMPP PEH, seniors, and people with disabilities to house or keep people housed, and conducting special projects with local and regional partners (e.g. PD ops, WSCCOG working group, housing needs survey, SSP)

5.0 FTE $797,159 $704,721 City-General Fund
Homeless
Initiatives
Budgeted Supplies & Other Expenses HMIS Administration, Emergency Flex Funds, Homeless Count - $249,510 $217,983 Housing Budgeted Staff Positions:

1.0 FTE Housing Program Manager

3.0 FTE Policy & Performance Analyst

3.0 FTE Sr. Admin Analyst – Housing Authority

1.0 FTE Sr. Admin Analyst – Financial

2.0 FTE Sr. Development Analyst

2.0 FTE Staff Assistant II

1.0 FTE Staff Assistant III

6.0 FTE Housing Specialist

1.0 FTE Housing Inspector

1.0 FTE Data Analyst

1.0 FTE Admin Analyst
Staffing and non-staffing resources to support the City’s affordable housing programs, including: administering several rental housing voucher programs serving 1,600+ households, a direct cash assistance program for qualifying seniors serving ~ 200 households, and a waitlist matching low- and moderate-income households to below market housing opportunities; conducting compliance monitoring of several thousand deed-restricted affordable housing residences located throughout the city; providing housing trust fund loans to nonprofit housing providers for the preservation and production of affordable housing; and implementing pilot programs such as priority placement in below market housing for historically displaced households.

22.0 FTE $2,821,216 $2,401,826 City-General Fund (Actuals Reimbursed Annually by
Housing Trust Fund)
Housing Authority
Housing Budgeted Supplies & Other Expenses Software Licenses and Maintenance, Professional Services, Marketing, Advertising, & Communications, etc.
- $599,651 $259,011
The following table summarizes the City’s budgeted and actual expenditures on direct service costs during FY2020-21. The City total is comprised of general fund dollars and other special revenue sources. Pass-through revenue represents any external funding (e.g., grant funding awarded to the City) that is passed onto providers by the City to financially support program operations.

Homelessness Study | 105

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

PROGRAM OR SERVICE NAME

BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ACTUAL EXPENDITURES
General Fund Special Revenue City Total Pass-Through Revenue Program Total General Fund Special Revenue City Total Pass-Through Revenue Program Total Emergency Voucher Program - - - $657,155.00 $657,155.00 $57,977.00 - $57,977.00 - $57,977.00 COVID Emergency Rental Assistance Program $251,535.00 - $251,535.00 $2,869,979.00 $3,121,514.00 $251,535.00 - $251,535.00 $2,869,979.00 $3,121,514.00 POD Program - $2,000,000.00 $2,000,000.00 - $2,000,000.00 - $1,164,615.00 $1,164,615.00 - $1,164,615.00 Right to Counsel Program $120,000.00 - $120,000.00 - $120,000.00 $120,000.00 - $120,000.00 - $120,000.00 HSGP – Homeless Prevention $1,031,273.00 $15,261.00 $1,046,534.00 $146,296.00 $1,192,830.00 $1,046,534.00 - $1,046,534.00 $146,296.00 $1,192,830.00 Project Homecoming $70,000.00 - $70,000.00 - $70,000.00 $16,379.00 - $16,379.00 - $16,379.00 Housing Subsidies - - - $23,721,823.00 $23,721,823.00 - - - $24,219,334.00 $24,219,334.00 HMST $600,000.00 - $600,000.00 - $600,000.00 $600,000.00 - $600,000.00 - $600,000.00 C3 Teams $800,000.00 - $800,000.00 - $800,000.00 $762,802.00 - $762,802.00 - $762,802.00 CRU $523,786.00 - $523,786.00 - $523,786.00 $378,975.00 - $378,975.00 - $378,975.00 ATI Program $154,012.00 - $154,012.00 - $154,012.00 $154,012.00 - $154,012.00 - $154,012.00 HSGP – Substance Use Disorder Treatment $30,000.00 - $30,000.00 - $30,000.00 - - - - - HLP $2,067,064.00 - $2,067,064.00 - $2,067,064.00 $1,704,644.00 - $1,704,644.00 - $1,704,644.00 POP Citation Clearing Events $15,279.00 - $15,279.00 - $15,279.00 $15,279.00 - $15,279.00 - $15,279.00 DTSM Parks Ambassadors $1,257,243.00 - $1,257,243.00 - $1,257,243.00 $1,241,517.00 - $1,241,517.00 - $1,241,517.00 Library Services Officers $275,602.00 - $275,602.00 - $275,602.00 $275,602.00 - $ 275,602.00 - $275,602.00 West Coast Care $150,000.00 $60,000.00 $210,000.00 - $210,000.00 $150,000.00 $60,000.00 $210,000.00 - $210,000.00 Interim Housing and Wellness $798,677.00 $11,250.00 $809,927.00 - $809,927.00 $809,927.00 - $809,927.00 - $809,927.00 Cloverfield Service Center $336,792.00 - $336,792.00 - $336,792.00 $336,792.00 - $336,792.00 - $336,792.00 Access Center $203,998.00 $7,400.00 $211,398.00 - $211,398.00 $211,398.00 - $211,398.00 - $211,398.00 Homeless Initiatives $797,159.00 - $797,159.00 - $797,159.00 $704,721.00 - $704,721.00 - $704,721.00 Homeless Initiatives-Supplies $249,510.00 - $249,510.00 - $249,510.00 $217,983.00 - $217,983.00 - $217,983.00 Housing - $2,821,216.00 $2,821,216.00 - $2,821,216.00 - $2,401,826.00 $2,401,826.00 - $2,401,826.00 Housing Supplies - $599,651.00 $599,651.00 - $599,651.00 - $259,011.00 $259,011.00 - $259,011.00 Totals $9,731,930.00 $5,514,778.00 $15,246,708.00 $27,395,253.00 $42,641,961.00 $9,0056,077.00 $3,885,452.00 $12,941,529.00 $27,235,609.00 $40,177,138.00 Homelessness Study | 106

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
APPENDIX E: STRATEGIC PLAN AND CITY RESOURCES CROSSWALK The City has several of elements of a strategic plan already developed. By weaving these elements into the framework of a strategic plan, the City can take advantage of the benefits provided through a long-term vision and aligned resources. The following table provides an example of how the City’s current work can be integrated into the framework of a strategic plan.

STRATEGIC PLAN COMPONENT APPLICABLE CITY INFORMATION CONSIDERATIONS Vision
The vision statement is a declaration of the ideal state of the City’s response to homelessness in the future. It
answers the questions of: “What problem are we trying
to solve?” “Where are we headed?” and “What do we
want to look like in 10 years?” The vision statement is aspirational, inspirational, ambitious, clear, and easy to understand.

City does not have an overarching vision to ground and guide its response to homelessness consistently over time. As detailed in Recommendation 1: Unifying Strategic Plan of the report, this presents challenges when leadership turnover introduces changes to the City’s response philosophy.

A vision statement declares the ideal future state of homelessness in Santa Monica. The following are vision statements from peer cities who have an established homelessness strategic plan
● A future in which homelessness in California is rare, because it is prevented whenever possible; brief, ended quickly whenever it does occur, through a focus on Housing First approaches and housing outcomes; and a one-time experience, ended
successfully the first time, so that no Californians experience homelessness repeatedly. – California Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council
● We envision a community in which everyone has a stable home and the resources needed to maintain it. - Strategies to End Homelessness
Mission
The mission statement reflects how the City intends to
reach its vision. The mission statement describes who is being served, and how goals will be achieved.

While the City has not designated a specific mission statement, they have shared some language on the Addressing Homelessness website that may fulfill the purpose: “Santa Monica’s goal is to create permanent solutions for housing and prevention of homelessness as well as identify new resources to support behavioral health while responding to immediate public health and quality-of-life issues.” - City of Santa Monica Addressing Homelessness Though not a formal mission, this statement strongly represents the “How” Santa Monica will move towards a desired future state. It should be evolved to tie directly to the achievement of a future vision and should be supported through its goal areas.

Values
Values are the beliefs that guide the conduct, activities and goals of the City that influence the attitudes and
behaviors of the City. Values should be a grounding
element to the strategic plan and are unlikely to change over time.

The City does not have a set of overarching values that it applies to all facets of its operations. The following is a list of sample values drawn from other City documents.
● Code of Ethics: Fairness, Integrity, Transparency, Accountability ● Equity and Inclusion: Accountability, Equity, Inclusion, Innovation, Resilience, Safety, and Stewardship While the City does not have a singular set of overarching values.

Similar values appear across the value sets listed. To develop a set of values for homelessness, the City can:
● Develop a unique set of values that are grounded in the vision, mission, and work of the team and are specific to the City’s approach to homelessness. This is the more straightforward option. Or;
● Develop an overarching set of values for the entire City that builds on the value sets already established across departments. This would require more engagement from stakeholders across the City and occur over a longer time frame.

Goals
Goals are a statement of a desired long-term outcome.

Goal Area 1
Prevent housed Santa
Monicans from becoming
homeless and increase
affordable housing
opportunities.

Goal Area 2
Address the behavioral health
needs of vulnerable residents
Goal Area 3
Maintain equitable access to
safe, fun, and healthy open
spaces
Goal Area 4
Strengthen regional capacity
to address homelessness
If the City uses the Four Pillars as goal areas for a strategic plan.

There are no modifications necessary to the goal areas; however, the City should ensure that the goals directly tie back to the future vision, mission, and values.

The City also administers the Human Services Grant Program (HSGP) which has its own set of goal areas. Some of the recipients of HSGP grant funds provide homelessness response services, however, not all recipients provide homelessness services. The City should ensure that funds distributed to recipients that provide homelessness response services are aligned with goals that are part of both the HSGP program and the homelessness strategic plan.

Objectives The City does not have short-term, measurable objectives that are tied to strategic goals. The list below are initiatives, teams, agencies, and departments that conduct activities that relate to each of the Four Pillars.

Homelessness Study | 107

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

STRATEGIC PLAN COMPONENT APPLICABLE CITY INFORMATION CONSIDERATIONS Objectives are shorter term, measurable actions that are performed to achieve a goal.
● Emergency Housing
Vouchers
● Affordable Housing and
Permanent Supportive
Housing Developments
● Eviction Prevention Efforts
● Senior Homelessness
Prevention Programs
● Multidisciplinary teams
● Santa Monica Fire
Department Community
Response Unit
● Department of Mental Health
Therapeutic Transport
Program
● Alternatives to Incarceration
● Behavioral Health Center
Feasibility Study
● Development Agreement
with Community Benefits
● SMPD Homeless Liaison
● People, Outreach,
Providers Citation
Clearing Events
● DTSM Parks
Ambassadors
● Public Works Efforts
● Project Roomkey and
Homekey
● Blue Ribbon
Commission on
Homelessness
● Westside Cities Council
of Governments
To develop strategic objectives, the City should assess what actions these various groups are performing that help to achieve the goal area then create an objective statement that is measurable and more clearly tied to that goal area.

For example, using the initiative of “Eviction Prevention Efforts,” to turn this into an object, consider evolving this into a statement that defines a measurable action such as: Provide services to reduce the number of evictions in Santa Monica by 15% annually.

This objective statement directly connects to the larger goal area of preventing housed Santa Monicans from becoming homeless.

Performance Measures
Performance measures provide regular measurement of
outcomes and results, which generates reliable data to
support the effectiveness and cost-benefit of programs
or initiatives.

Performance measures are discussed further in Appendix F: Sample Performance Measurement Framework.

Homelessness Study | 108

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
APPENDIX F: SAMPLE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT FRAMEWORK

GOAL SAMPLE OBJECTIVE SAMPLE COMMUNITY-LEVEL MEASURE

SAMPLE PROGRAM-LEVEL

MEASURE
DATA
SOURCE

REPORTING

CADENCE RESPONSIBILITY REPORTING
Goal Area 1
Prevent housed Santa Monicans
from becoming homeless and
increase affordable housing
opportunities.

Reduce the number of individuals
who live in Santa Monica and
become homeless
● Number of households who enter the homeless response
system
● % of households diverted from shelter
due to prevention assistance
● % whose eviction is prevented or who
are otherwise diverted from shelter due
to legal assistance
● Number of City-run housing assistance
programs
● HMIS (City
and County)
● CES
● Street
outreach
Annually ● LAHSA
● CSD
● Staff
Report
● City
Dashboard
Increase the number of unsheltered
individuals and families transitioning
into temporary or permanent housing
● Number of households exiting into temporary housing
● Number of households exiting into permanent housing
● Counts of people in each year staying
in emergency shelters (ES), safe
havens (SH), and transitional housing
(TH) projects according to HMIS
● Number of transitional beds across all
categories
● Ratio of transitional beds to homeless
population
● HMIS (City
and County)
● CES
Annually ● LAHSA
● CSD
● Staff
Report
● City
Dashboard
Reduce the rate at which individuals
and families who leave
homelessness experience additional
spells of homelessness
● Homelessness re-entry rate (Number of exits to permanent housing (denominator) and returns to outreach, shelter, transitional housing, safe havens, and select permanent housing projects (numerator) as recorded in HMIS)
● % remained housed for at least 6
months
● % remained housed for at least 12
months
● % remained housed for at least 24
months
● HMIS (City
and County)
● CES
● Street
Outreach
Annually ● LAHSA
● CSD
● Staff
Report
● City
Dashboard
Increase affordable housing ● Housing affordability ● Number of available housing units by type
● Number of households waiting for
housing vouchers
● HMIS
● CSDHousing
Division
Annually ● CSD ● Staff
Report
● City
Dashboard
Homelessness Study | 109

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY
The following indicates sample performance measures by program adapted from the Homelessness Research Institute. 53 PROGRAM TYPE DESCRIPTION SAMPLE INDICATOR
Prevention Supportive services, financial assistance, advocacy, and mediation to mitigate factors leading to imminent
homelessness.
% diverted from shelter (i.e., they would have become
homeless otherwise) due to prevention assistance
Central Intake Center that functions as the central point of intake for persons accessing the homelessness system. Includes
prevention assistance, assessment, housing counseling,
and placement into appropriate housing.
% assessed and placed into appropriate housing within 1, 3, and 5 days
Mobile Outreach Street-based, mobile outreach teams that address basic needs and seek to move people off the streets.
% placed into housing (ES, TH, Safe Haven, or PH) as a
result of the program’s efforts
% linked to appropriate community services
Drop-in Center Site-based engagement center that provides basic services and assists clients in accessing services.
% placed into housing (ES, TH, Safe Haven, or PH) as a
result of the program’s efforts
% linked to appropriate community services
Emergency Shelter (ES) Safe, clean place to stay for persons in need of shelter with a strong focus on immediate placement into housing and
linkage to services.
% exited to PH < 30 days (and do not present for shelter again within 12 or 24 months)
% with histories of living on the streets who remained in ES or other housing
% (who stay longer than 3 days) connected with a primary case manager
% applied for mainstream benefits for which they appeared eligible
53 What Gets Measured, Gets Done – A Toolkit on Performance Measurement for Ending Homelessness: https://endhomelessness.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/what-getsmeasured-what-gets-done.pdf Homelessness Study | 110

FOR INTERNAL USE OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ONLY

PROGRAM TYPE DESCRIPTION SAMPLE INDICATOR
Rapid Re-housing Immediate housing assessments and housing placement and retention support, including: housing referrals; onetime relocation assistance and/or partial or full rent subsidies; landlord support; co-signing assistance; credit counseling; retention-focused case management and/or
property management.
% placed in PH < 7 or 30 days (may be shared outcome with ES)
% remained housed for at least 6 months
% remained housed for at least 12 months
% remained housed for at least 24 months
Transitional Housing Project-based, time-limited housing with supportive services. Projects are often targeted to specific
subpopulations.
% exited to PH (within specified time frame)
% increased earned income (or obtained and/or retained
employment)
% increased their self-sufficiency
Permanent Supportive
Housing
Scattered-site permanent housing linked with supportive services to help residents maintain housing.
% remained in PSH > 1 year or exited to other PH
% improved mental health or substance addictions
% secured entitlement benefits
Employment Training
Program
Job search assistance program that provides a wide range of employment services from basic resume writing to job training programs and childcare.
% maintained or increased employment income
Legal Services to Prevent
Homelessness Program
Legal rights education, legal representation, and education for shelter staff and other service providers.
% whose eviction is prevented or who are otherwise diverted from shelter (i.e., they would have become homeless
otherwise) due to legal assistance