This past Monday, Councilmember Jim Graham held a public hearing on Bill 20-281 (“The Homeless Services Reform Amendment Act of 2013”), a piece of legislation that Mayor Gray had attempted to push through the Budget Support Act, and which Graham, with the rest of his colleagues on the Committee on Human Services, removed from the budget and introduced as stand-alone legislation in order to allow the public an opportunity for input. (You’ve read some of our criticism of this legislation on this blog before, and you can find our written testimony from the hearing on our website.)

The hearing lasted all day, and 88 witnesses were signed up to testify. A major provision of the proposed legislation that dominated much of the hearing was mandatory escrow. Current law requires that homeless services providers offer escrow to shelter residents but few providers do this.

The Mayor’s proposed amendments would authorize DC’s Department of Human Services (“DHS”) to require clients to contribute to a savings or escrow account “as a condition of receiving shelter or supportive housing services,” meaning that shelter residents could be terminated for failing to meet their escrow requirements.

Councilmember Graham expressed his skepticism about the wisdom of making escrow a condition of receiving shelter, “All of us would agree that saving is desirable, but that is different from it being a condition of shelter.” His opinion mirrored that of many witnesses who testified.

Among those who gave testimony against imposing a mandatory escrow requirement was Kate Coventry, who testified on behalf of the DC Fiscal Policy Institute that no other jurisdiction has a mandatory escrow program similar to the one being proposed here:

New York City only requires individuals with earned income, not those that receive only TANF or SSI payments, to contribute to escrow.  Massachusetts requires a mandatory contribution of $150 per month from their TANF families who are in shelter, but their TANF benefits are much more generous than the District’s, $618 per month for a family of three compared to $428 per month.  After paying escrow, Massachusetts families have more in remaining benefits than District families have to start with.  With more than 70 percent of DC General Shelter families receiving public benefits as their only income, the majority of families will not be able to pay escrow and pay for necessities.

Ms.Moss*, a mother who became homeless last October after she lost her job and consequently, her apartment, submitted testimony about how she would like the option of an escrow account, but that making it mandatory was not the answer:

I think it should be an option to pay escrow. If you are in the shelter then you should be able to save money. I would not mind having some way to save money. But if you make it mandatory then that might be an issue. I do not know if I will be able to cover it every month. Your kids may need medicine, soap powder and transportation and you have to pay for that. You also have to pay for your laundry. If you don’t have enough money to cover this, then what will happen?

Advocates also testified that mandatory escrow would violate federal law if applied to domestic violence programs. Tamaso Johnson, a policy law fellow with the DC Coalition Against Domestic Violence (“DCCADV”), explained this best:

Federal law mandates the use of a “voluntary services” model by domestic violence shelters receiving federal funds. The mandatory escrow requirement proposed by this bill would put these shelters out of compliance with federal grant requirements and it thus is very likely to conflict with federal law, absent an exception for domestic violence housing providers. Financial literacy and prudent, sustainable contributions to a savings account can be important aspects of long-term happiness and welfare for all District residents, including those who experience housing insecurity or homelessness. However, we strongly disagree with the approach outlined in this bill. Fundamentally, forcing victims to turn over income to an escrow account they do not control as a condition of shelter contradicts the survivor-centered, empowerment model of services delivery widely acknowledged as best practice in the domestic violence community.

Graham went on to question several witnesses who first expressed support for the escrow provision, but on further questioning, stated their positions more clearly that while they supported escrow as a service provided to shelter residents, they did not think it should be mandatory.

We agree. Personal responsibility is a good thing and most residents would welcome assistance in saving and financial planning.  The District should enforce the current law and offer escrow as a service to shelter residents while encouraging providers to make escrow contributions a part of every client’s individualized case management plan. To do this, DHS must build the capacity of shelter providers to connect clients to asset building strategies, something it has yet to do. These are all progressive steps that would actually help residents save money while they are in shelter.

Making escrow a condition of receiving services, on the other hand, is a punitive approach that not only disempowers shelter residents from making important decisions for their families, but could also lead to the breakdown of provider/client relationships, the loss of public benefits (TANF and SSI) for those who accumulate more than $2000 in assets, and ultimately to more people on the streets.

 *Ms. Moss’ name was changed to protect her privacy.

 

The following is cross-posted from the Fair Budget Coalition

 

Congratulations, everyone! We have HUGE victories to celebrate this week! On Wednesday, May 22nd the Council held their first vote on the budget, passing the Budget Request Act into law. We are thrilled to announce that we won $128 million for the programs that low income and no income DC residents need! (Including $108 million in NEW investments.) We also won important policy changes that strengthen human rights in DC.

We want to recognize the very many different kinds of contributions each of you made in this budget season that resulted in all that we won. Thank you. Whether you sent emails, tweeted, made phone calls, helped us plan, painted props, lobbied Council members, participated in actions or helped in any other way, this victory is yours.

Below is the full scope of what, in collaboration with our members, supporters and allies, we fought for and won this year. As you well know, this budget does not end poverty, homelessness or hunger. There are many critical programs that remain badly damaged after the Recession and still need our advocacy and organizing, and at the end of this email we’ve outlined where we must continue the fight. But we have all earned a moment to recognize the incredible victories we’ve accomplished this year and to celebrate them.

 WHAT WE’VE WON

 RIGHT TO HOUSING:

• $63 million increase for the Housing Production Trust Fund (plus $20 million to end transfers from the Trust Fund to pay for the Local Rent Supplement program)
• $5 million for the project/sponsor-based Local Rent Supplement program to develop affordable housing for people with very low incomes
• $1.75 million for tenant-based Local Rent Supplement program, allowing 120 additional families to get affordable housing vouchers
• $2.6 million to help create a centralized affordable housing database
• $2.2 million for Permanent Supportive Housing
• $1 million for Emergency Rental Assistance plus $500,000 to start a pilot program for individuals
• $1 million for the Rapid Re-Housing program plus $400,000 to start a pilot program for individuals
• $1 million for the Home Purchase Assistance program
• $1.5 million for homeless youth shelter/housing programs
• $486,000 for shelter beds for homeless LGBTQ youth

RIGHT TO INCOME: 

• $752,000 to implement the Workplace Fraud Act, strengthening protections for workers
• $500,000 to give Interim Disability Assistance (IDA) to an additional 150 DC residents with disabilities
• $4 million to fund exemptions that give families a break from the 60-month time limit on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) benefits for issues including domestic violence, illness, enrollment in an education or job training program, and caring for a family member with a disability, among others.
• Slowed down the timing of TANF benefit reductions for families with barriers to work

RIGHT TO HEALTH:

• $9 million to strengthen mental health reimbursement rates, averting lay-offs and reductions in mental health services

RIGHT TO SAFETY:

• $3 million for housing for victims of domestic violence
• $5 million increase for services that support domestic violence victims and victims of crime
• $5 million increase to the Office on Aging, including $3.5 million in operating funds and $1.5 million in capital funds

FAIR TAXATION:

• Implemented the Schedule H Property Tax Relief Act of 2012

POLICY CHANGES:

• Amendments to the Homeless Services Reform Act (that would make it harder for people to get into shelters and easier to kick them out) were removed from the budget. The amendments will be given their own hearing which will allow public input and further examination of the amendments’ potential impact.
• Language was added to the Budget Support Act that strengthens wage and hour enforcement procedures.
• A requirement that when a family stops using an affordable housing voucher, that voucher will be re-issued to another family. (The Mayor’s administration had been allowing those vouchers to remain unused until this legislation.)

THE FIGHT CONTINUES:

 As we anticipate the revenue forecast in June that will reveal what new money DC has available, we must make sure the Council knows that we still need:

• $8.5 million for the Local Rent Supplement Program to move the 300 families out of DC General and help end homelessness for seniors and people living with HIV/AIDS
• $11.3 million for Permanent Supportive Housing to help end homelessness for chronically homeless seniors and people living with HIV/AIDS
• $20 million (over 4 years) for childcare subsidies
• $3.4 million for the Interim Disability Assistance program
• $5 million for “Opportunity Youth” program
• $4 million more for Adult and Family Education
• Restore the out-of-state bonds tax for bond holders with very high incomes in order to prevent using taxpayer money for what is effectively being used as a tax shelter for millionaires.
• Reform the income tax filing rules for two-income households to ensure that all DC households with income above $350,000 pay the new rate of 8.95%.
• Eliminate the 2015 sunset date for the 2011 income tax increase on income above $350,000 and make the 8.95% rate permanent.
• Paid sick leave for restaurant workers
• $5.1 million increase in youth homelessness funding
• $1.5 million to fully fund TANF time limit exemptions for parents with infants (under 1 year old)

 

Tomorrow, the DC Council’s Committee of the Whole will convene to vote on the FY14 Budget.Thanks to all of you who reached out to your Councilmembers, the Human Services Committee last Monday voted unanimously to pull the Homeless Services Reform Act amendments from the Budget Support Act! Councilmember Jim Graham introduced the amendments as a separate bill on May 7^th and a hearing on the amendments has been scheduled for early June. While this is certainly a victory for DC residents, the fight’s not over yet. Please continue to check this blog for updates regarding the amendments.

It remains to be seen if the other priorities highlighted by advocates and community members will get much needed funding in FY14.

During committee mark-ups, Councilmember Cheh identified money in her Committee on Transportation and the Environment to transfer to Human Services, specifically $500,000 to expand the caseload of the Interim Disability Assistance Program, $486,000 to the Permanent Supportive Housing program to help fund housing assistance for chronically homeless seniors, and $486,000 to assist LGBTQ homeless youth.

We commend Councilmember Cheh for identifying these funds! Unfortunately, they fall far short of the current need. With the healthiest budget it has had in years, the District is in a prime position to make much needed investments in housing programs like the tenant-based Local Rent Supplement program and the Permanent Supportive Housing program, in order to end homelessness for seniors, for people with HIV/AIDS, and for a significant number of youth and homeless families. This would enable the Department of Human Services to serve homeless families year-round rather than just on hypothermic nights as is currently the policy.

We also look to the Council to find modest additional funding to create time limit exemptions for certain families who receive Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (“TANF”).

We want to thank Councilmember Jim Graham and the Committee on Human Services for identifying $4.09 million to fund the three largest categories of exemptions from TANF time limits for families facing particular hardships. The exemptions the Committee funded include the following categories of families who have special challenges to finding and maintaining employment: 1) domestic violence survivors; 2) grandparents caring for grandchildren; and 3) parents caring for a child under 12 months.

However, several hardship exemptions that passed the Council last year but were not funded in FY 13 still require funding. Just $1.5 is needed to fund crucial hardship exemptions for: 1) parents caring for a child or other family member with a disability; 2) teen parents enrolled in high school or a GED program; and 2) parents enrolled in postsecondary education or DOES-approved job training program.

Now is the time to do the right thing and protect vulnerable families by funding all of the TANF exemptions the Council passed last year. The enactment of hardship exemptions from time limits would align DC with the vast majority of other states and will better match DC’s work requirement exemptions with our time limit policy. By having the clock run only when a parent is expected to be in training or looking for work, the District can give families the time they need to successfully address personal hardships and transition into self-sufficiency. We all support families moving from welfare to work – let’s ensure that when they do so, they are able to support themselves and their children.

We encourage the Council to identify the $1.5 million necessary to give all DC families a fighting chance.

Please join us at the Budget Vote tomorrow morning at 10am in the Wilson Building (1350 Pennsylvania Ave NW). Let’s pack the room and show our city leaders we’re invested in their decisions.

Update, 10:30 pm: The Council’s budget office released the latest budget draft earlier this evening, which includes, in addition to the funds for housing mentioned above: $1.75 million for the Permanent Supportive Housing Program, $1.75 million for the tenant-based Local Rent Supplement Program, $500,000 for the Emergency Rental Assistance Program to serve individuals, and $400, 000 to the Rapid-Rehousing program to serve homeless individuals.

The draft budget also includes funding for six of the seven TANF exemptions.

In a standing room only auditorium at the District’s All Souls Unitarian Church Saturday, District residents met with DC housing agencies, legal service providers and non-profit organizations for the 6^th Annual Tenant Town Hall, where residents voiced their demands for affordable, safe and healthy housing.

At the top of the priority list: No more mold! Residents expressed outrage for the lack of responsiveness on the part of both landlords and the DC government to ensure mold-free living. Currently, District housing inspectors, and surprisingly inspectors across the country, cannot cite landlords for mold, only “dampness,” which does not trigger the appropriate remedy for the problem. Residents claimed that when they reported mold issues in the past, property managers simply masked the spores with a fresh coat of paint. And because management is not resolving the issue at its root, the mold reappears within weeks.

In response to the residents’ claims, the DC Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs clarified that it is not certified to deal with mold and “can only regulate within the confines of the law.” Nonetheless, a department representative confirmed that the agency is “always willing to sit down and collaborate [with other agencies to combat the problem].”

DC residents and advocates demanded more of the government’s leaders and agencies and encouraged them to act now to implement effective programs that do not just fix the aesthetics, but get to the underlying problems that feed the mold. Left untreated, some molds can cause serious health problems, especially for children, the elderly and those with other respiratory conditions.

Attendees also discussed the importance of affordable housing in the District and encouraged DC councilmembers to continue to fund these important programs in its upcoming FY 2014 budget vote this week.  And while residents are aware of the Mayor’s long-term plan to increase the number of affordable housing units, they also highlighted the critical importance of housing strategies that place families and individuals in homes now.

DC Councilmembers and agency leaders in attendance included: Ward 1 Councilmember Jim Graham, Housing Authority Executive Director Adrianne Todman, DC Department of Housing and Community Development Director Michael Kelly and the DC Office of the Tenant Advocate Chief Johanna Shreve.

The Latino Economic Development Center and the Housing for All Campaign organized the Town Hall with several participating organizations.

Organizers are planning a July 1 meeting to kick off a new campaign to combat mold issues in the District.  The Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless plans to participate in this effort and continue advocating for stronger health and housing code protections for D.C. tenants.  We’ll keep you posted as the details unfold.

Yesterday, over 100 DC residents gathered at the Wilson Building for the Fair Budget Coalition’s “One City Needs” Action.  Dozens of residents living in poverty, service providers, and advocates stood together outside the closed-door budget negotiations being held by the DC Council to deliver one clear message to city leaders: “Prioritize funding for programs that address human needs!”

Chairman Phil Mendelson, Councilmember Jim Graham (who also co-sponsored the event), and Councilmember Muriel Bowser all left the budget meeting to address the crowd. They affirmed the urgent need for affordable housing, financial assistance for needy families and people with disabilities, and other critically underfunded programs. Speaking on affordable housing programs, Councilmember Bowser told the crowd, “If we want to maintain diversity in our city, we have to protect that.”

Fair Budget members didn’t show up empty handed. Councilmembers were presented with bowls of granola bars, bananas, and apples that sported stickers with phrases like, “Invest in ‘Core’ Needs,” (on the apples) and “Final Ap‘peel.’ Invest in Human Needs.” (on the bananas). Chan Sinclair, a mother currently staying in the DC General shelter, hand-delivered Mother’s Day cards that children at the shelter had made for each of their city leaders, along with letters from some of the older children asking Councilmembers to help them get housing. Councilmembers were also given small hand-painted houses that were decorated by the kids at the shelter, a reminder to city leaders that many DC children are desperately in need of homes. (Click here to send Councilmembers a message if you agree!)

The purpose of the action was to highlight the needs of DC residents who are still struggling to recover from the recession, even as the District finds itself flush with money. Members of the Coalition also visited Councilmember offices to educate staff members on the issues facing impoverished residents and to ask for their bosses’ support in helping to remove the barriers that led DC to have the widest income gap in the nation. 

Among the needs highlighted were investments in housing programs to serve families, youth, seniors, and residents with HIV/AIDS; investments in adult education programs that would lead to livable wages; increases to TANF to implement reasonable and customary exemptions from time limits for families facing hardships; money for childcare subsidies that would allow parents the opportunity to get back to work; increases in funding to the Interim Disability Assistance Program to provide income for hundreds of disabled residents; and increases to emergency rental assistance to prevent homelessness for hundreds of more households. 

The fight’s not over yet, but we’re hopeful that Councilmembers heard their constituents loud and clear and that they will invest in the programs that offer residents a chance at stabilizing and sharing in the District’s growing wealth.

The first vote on the FY2014 Budget will take place on May 22^nd. For more information on ways you can get involved, please contact Janelle Treibitz at Janelle@fairbudget.org or 202-328-5513.

*Cross-posted from the Fair Budget Coalition’s blog

Mother’s Day reminds us of how important safe, stable housing is for the healthy and happy development of children. Enjoy the following gallery of Mother’s Day cards that kids who live in DC General Shelter made for their city leaders through the Homeless Children’s Playtime Project, and please take a moment to ask your city leaders  to invest in affordable housing so that kids in DC shelters will finally have homes. All it takes is one click!

We wish you and yours a safe and happy Mother’s Day.

Join the Fair Budget Coalition and TAKE ACTION to 1) end homelessness for DC residents and 2) support Councilmember Graham’s efforts to remove HSRA amendments from the Budget Support Act.

As part of the FY 2014 Budget Support Act (BSA), DC Mayor Vincent C. Gray has proposed significant changes to the Homeless Services Reform Act (HSRA), the law governing homeless services in DC. Not only will the proposed changes do little to resolve the crisis of family homelessness, but if enacted, could cause significant harm to homeless residents. Nearly 200 DC organizations signed on to a letter to the Mayor asking him to withdraw these amendments from the BSA because they had not been vetted by stakeholders and because such significant changes deserve their own legislative process.

Councilmember Graham is now leading the effort to remove these amendments (Subtitle D, The Homeless Services Reform Amendment Act of 2013) from the BSA and has introduced them as stand-alone legislation, which will give the public and stakeholders an opportunity for meaningful input.

As Fair Budget members, we know the best way to address homelessness is to ensure that housing is provided right now to DC residents experiencing homelessness, not by implementing changes in the law that could negatively impact both families and individuals.

That’s why we want to tell the DC Council to invest in the programs that will end homelessness and to support Councilmember Graham’s efforts.

The solution is housing! With a total investment of $8.5 million in the Housing First Program, $10.3 million in tenant-based Local Rent Supplement Program vouchers, we can end homelessness for 300 homeless families, for every DC senior, and for every resident with HIV/AIDS. And an investment of $5.1 million in supportive housing, shelter beds, and wrap-around services will help end homelessness for over 100 chronically homeless youth.

Email the DC Council today. All it takes is ONE CLICK!

And there’s one more action we want you to take: Join us at Fair Budget’s “One City Needs” Lobby Day action on Wed, May 15th from 10am-12pm at the Wilson Building (1350 Pennsylvania Ave NW)!  To find out more about the action, visit Fair Budget’s event page on facebook. For more information please email: janelle@fairbudget.org or call 202-328-5513

For the last few weeks we have been at odds with the Mayor and the Department of Human Services (DHS) over the amendments to the Homeless Services Reform Act that were put into the Budget Support Act (BSA). Our position is that the changes are significant and far-reaching and that the thousands of DC residents who will be affected by them deserve to have their voices heard. Nearly 200 organizations signed on to a letter to the Mayor asking him to withdraw the amendments and introduce them as separate legislation so that the community has an opportunity for input via a public hearing. At the Legal Clinic, we’ve been openly critical of what feels like a very punitive approach to the crisis of family homelessness.

Meanwhile, the Mayor has not agreed to withdraw the amendments. Instead, he has responded that this law is necessary to reduce families’ time in shelter and move them into housing faster, thus clearing the space to serve families year-round. His spokespeople say we’re exaggerating the impact of the changes. We say we’re reading and analyzing the plain language of the proposed law. (For instance, the Mayor says they have no intent to kick people out of housing when they’re in the hospital, but the proposal allows terminations when a resident has left the unit due to “incarceration or institutionalization” for 60 days or more.) They say they don’t really intend to implement it that way, so we shouldn’t worry. We say that laws shouldn’t be dependent on how a current agency staff or the Mayor says they’ll use them —laws needs to be written clearly so that their proper interpretation is not dependent on who is in power.

Then the Mayor escalated the conflict, claiming that the amendments will save DHS $5.3 million and that if the Council doesn’t pass them right away as part of the BSA, DHS will close three shelters for singles on October 1^st.

Let’s break this down.

1. Are the amendments necessary to move families into rapid rehousing or other housing programs? No. Current law authorizes placements in rapid rehousing and other housing programs, and it even authorizes providers to terminate shelter residents if they turn down more than two offers of appropriate permanent or supportive housing (of which rapid rehousing is a subset). The amendments do not create a guarantee of housing, nor do they remove any of the barriers to rapid rehousing that families assert make the program challenging to benefit from.
2. Is authorizing mandatory escrow necessary to allow shelter residents to save money and exit shelter more quickly? No. First, escrow is authorized under current law, it is just voluntary. Very few providers offer it now, but more certainly should, and they don’t need a legal change to do so. Second, escrow will not significantly impact the length of time in shelter. According to DHS, a family’s average length of stay in DC General is three months, nine months for temporary shelters. For families living in shelter between 2007 and 2012, the average monthly income was $430. That means that a family putting 30% of its income into savings would place $129 per month in the account. Not only would that make it difficult to meet the needs of their children each month, but it would take 22 months to save enough for a security deposit and first month’s rent on a two bedroom apartment. That’s significantly longer than the average length of stay for either DC General or temporary shelters.
3. Is this provisional placement scheme the key to “preventing long-term shelter” and critical to being able to offer year-round shelter?  No. Current law permits DHS to place a family in shelter pending a final eligibility and prioritization decision. In fact, a recent administrative court case held that DHS could even terminate a family from shelter without the right to a prior hearing where the family was determined to be ineligible after placement. The amendments, however, would go much further than this. They would allow DHS to deny due process to a provisionally placed family appealing a regular termination of benefits – e.g., for breaking program rules or failing to cooperate with the assessment process. A family could challenge the decision (for example by proving they didn’t violate program rules), but they’d be on the streets during the appeal period. This is contrary to current law, which ensures families are safely housed or sheltered pending appeal unless there is an allegation of violence. We think the Mayor’s changes would lead to more, not fewer, families on the streets. 
4. Is there really a fiscal savings from these amendments and will DHS have to close shelters if the amendments are removed from the BSA? No and no. The homeless services budget for FY14 is the same as it was in FY13, and the Mayor is not committing to increasing services by creating a right to shelter for families year-round, nor has he suggested that demand will increase in FY 14. If the Mayor had included a right to shelter or housing in the amendments, he could then argue that he would have a commitment to a higher level of services this year and that commitment would have a certifiable fiscal impact. Not so here. Moreover, Councilmember Jim Graham has committed to introducing the amendments as stand-alone legislation and finalizing the legislation prior to October 1, so even if there were an uncertified fiscal impact, the Councilmember’s commitment negates it. Finally, several of the amendments could cause a negative fiscal impact by cycling singles and families, especially vulnerable populations, out of housing and into more expensive emergency shelters.

We’re in agreement with many of the policies that the Mayor says are motivating these changes. We agree that housing is better than shelter. (In fact, we’re asking the Council to find money to house 300 additional families in FY14.) We agree that families should have access to shelter year-round when they have no safe place to go. (We’d like to see a legal right to shelter or housing.) We agree that shelter is no place for a kid to grow up. (Although it’s certainly better than the street, or an abuser’s home, or a bus station…)

Sadly, we don’t think these amendments accomplish these goals. They have some consequences that we assume were unintended as well. For instance, the proposed law removes the ability of any site-based shelter or supportive housing provider to terminate residents who possess weapons, possess or sell illegal drugs, or assault other residents at the shelter, among other things. (It does this by adding a definition of “provider’s premises” that is limited to “a publicly or privately-owned house or apartment unit in which a client resides and receives a rental subsidy or other services under a shelter or supportive housing program.”) That’s a pretty significant “oops,” one that could have been avoided by having a more open community process.

That’s why the legislative process is so important. We can work these kinks out if given an opportunity. What’s the downside? The Mayor cannot be so entrenched in his position that he is willing to allow a bill to become law that would allow guns, drugs, and violence in shelters with no consequences. If he is, the Council will have to stand up to his pressure and support Councilmember Graham’s efforts to remove the amendments from the BSA and reintroduce it as stand-alone legislation.

* This post was updated on May 7, 2013.

Dear Mayor Gray:

Nearly 200 organizations write to request that you withdraw Subtitle D, The Homeless Services Reform Amendment Act of 2013, from the 2014 Budget Support Act and allow the proposed changes to the Homeless Services Reform Act (“HSRA”) contained therein to go through stakeholder review and the normal legislative process. Councilmember Graham, chairman of the Committee on Human Services, is willing to hold a regular legislative hearing on the bill. He feels – as we do – that such significant changes to the rights of our neighbors without homes deserve serious consideration that will be difficult to devote via the budget process.

Despite the fact that the proposed HSRA amendments significantly impact the rights of shelter applicants, shelter residents, Rapid Rehousing participants and Supportive Housing participants, they were not vetted with the Interagency Council on Homelessness (“ICH”) or any other community process. The HSRA of 2005 was the outcome of a community process involving government officials, shelter and service providers, homeless advocates, and homeless individuals. The “HSRA workgroup” convened dozens of meetings during a multi-year process where every issue, from adverse actions to client responsibilities and rights to provider standards, were discussed and fleshed out. In fact, many of the very issues contained in the amendment package, such as mandatory escrow, were discussed, best practices researched, and a public policy developed. The undersigned organizations object to the Department of Human Services significantly amending this law without any community process, input from the ICH, or even a regular legislative hearing. In addition, the proposed changes have no fiscal impact according to the Chief Financial Office and therefore the proposed change is not germane to the budget

For these reasons, we respectfully request that you withdraw the amendments and reintroduce them through the normal legislative process. This will allow the community, the ICH, the Council’s Committee on Human Services, service providers, and your constituents who will be directly affected by the significant changes contained in the amendments to have the opportunity for input.

Thank you for your consideration. Please feel free to contact Patty Mullahy Fugere at the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless (patty@legalclinic.org, (202) 328-5504), or Kate Coventry at the DC Fiscal Policy Institute (coventry@dcfpi.org, (202) 325-8861) with any questions.

Sincerely,

Patricia Mullahy Fugere, Executive Director, Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless

On behalf of:

Academy of Hope

Advocates for Justice and Education

Afterschool Alliance

Arts for DC Kids

Asian Pacific Islander Domestic Violence Resource Project

Beacon House

Blessed Haven Inc.

Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater Washington

Brainfood

Brave Heart Entrepreneurial Youth Camp

Bread for the City

Break the Cycle

BUILD

Capital Area Food Bank

Care for Kids Foundation

Carpe Diem Project, Inc.

Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington

Chess Challenge in DC

Children’s Law Center

Children’s National Medical Center

CitiWide Computer and Nursing Assistant Center

City at Peace

City Kids Wilderness Project

College and Career Connections

College Bound

Common Threads

Communities In Schools of the Nation’s Capital

Community Council for the Homeless at Friendship Place

Community Services Agency of the Metropolitan Washington Council, AFL-CIO

Connect to Protect (C2P)

Cornerstone

Countdown to College and Careers, Inc.

Covenant House Washington

Dance Institute of Washington

DC Alliance of Youth Advocates

DC Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy

DC Catholic Conference

DC Center for the LGBT Community

DC Coalition Against Domestic Violence

DC Community Coalition

DC Fiscal Policy Institute

DC for Reasonable Development

DC Hunger Solutions

DC Jobs Council

DC Lawyers for Youth

DC Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program

DC Rape Crisis Center

DC Scores

DC Statehood Green Party

DC Tenants’ Advocacy Coalition (TENAC)

DC Tenants’ Rights Center

DC Youth Advisory Council

Defeat Poverty DC

District Alliance for Safe Housing (DASH)

Donald Brooks, ICH Member

Dream City

Dreams for Kids

DV LEAP

Edgewood/Brookland Family Support Collaborative

Emergence Community Arts Collective

The Episcopal Center for Children

Fair Budget Coalition

Fair Chance

FAN (Fihankra Akoma Ntoaso)

Far Southeast Family Strengthening Collaborative

Foster & Adoptive Parent Advocacy Center (FAPAC)

Free Minds Book Club and Writing Workshop

Girl Scouts of the Nation’s Capital

Global Kids Inc.

Good Faith Communities Coalition

Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Council

Helping Inner City Kids Succeed

Higher Achievement Program

Homeless Children’s Playtime Project

Hope and a Home

Horizons at Maret

Horton’s Kids Inc.

Housing Works

Hung Tao Choy Mei Leadership Institute

Institute for Behavioral Change

Institute for Global Communication

Interfaith Child Advocacy Network of Metro Washington

International Community Corrections Association

International Labor Rights Forum

Interstages, Inc

Iona Senior Services

Jews United for Justice

Jobs Have Priority

Jubilee Housing

Jubilee Jumpstart

Juma Ventures

Junior Achievement

Justice for Youth DC

Kid Power-DC, Inc.

Latin American Youth Center (LAYC)

Latino Economic Development Center
Learning Communities Initiative

Legal Aid Society of DC

Legal Counsel for the Elderly

Life Pieces To Masterpieces, Inc.

LifeSTARTS

Limitless Possibility

Little Lights Urban Ministries

Live It Learn It

Living Classrooms

Lydia’s House

Mary’s Center

Mentors Inc.

Metro TeenAIDS

Metropolitan Washington Council AFL-CIO

Miriam’s Kitchen

Multicultural Intern Program

Multi-Media Training Institute

My Sister’s Place

National Center for Housing and Child Welfare

National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty

National Nurses United

National Organization of Concerned Black Men

Network for Teaching Entrepreneurship

New Community for Children

New Destiny, LLC

Northwest Settlement House (NWSH)

One DC

Operation HOPE – Banking on Our Future

Parklands Community Center

Peer Health Exchange

People Animals Love

Perry School Community Services Center, Inc.

Pin Points

Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington, DC

Polaris Project

The Posse Foundation

Professor Jeffrey S. Gutman, Professor of Clinical Law, GWU Law

Professor Jessica K. Steinberg, Director, Neighborhood Law & Policy Clinic, GWU Law

Professor Matt Fraidin, Director, HIV/AIDS Legal Clinic, UDC School of Law

Project Create

Public Allies DC

Public Defender Service

Quality Trust for Individuals with Disabilities

Ramona’s Way

Raising Expectations Inc.

RCM of Washington, Inc.

Reach 4 Success

Resilient Kids LLC

RestartEDU

Revolution Hunger

Sadiki Educational Safari

Safety Network for Abused Animals & People (SNAAP)

Sasha Bruce Youthworks, Inc

Saturday Environmental Academy

See Forever Foundation: New Beginnings

Sexual Minority Youth Assistance League (SMYAL)

Shakespeare Theatre Company

Sitar Arts Center

SOME, Inc. (So Others Might Eat)

Southeast Ministry

StandUp For Kids – DC

Stigma

Street Law

Student Conservation Association

Survivors and Advocates for Empowerment

Transgender Health Empowerment, Inc. (T.H.E.)

Turning the Page

UDC David A. Clarke School of Law

United Planning Organization

University Legal Services

Up2Us

Urban Alliance Foundation

Urban Housing Alliance

Urban Mind

Vietnamese-American Community Service Center (VACSC)

Vision to Peace Project

Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs

Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless

Washington Peace Center

Washington Tennis & Education Foundation

We Are Family

Wider Opportunities for Women

Wilderness Leadership & Learning, Inc.

William Kellibrew Foundation

The Women’s Collective

YearUp

Young Ladies of Tomorrow

Young Playwrights’ Theater

Young Women’s Drumming Empowerment Project

Young Women’s Project

Youth Education Alliance (YEA)

Youth Lab

Youth Leadership Support Network

YWCA of the National Capital Area

 

The following testimony was delivered by Amber W. Harding before the DC Council’s Committee on Human Services at its Budget Hearing on the Department of Human Services earlier today.

Last September, I sent an email to Mayor Gray pleading for his help for a family. Here is an excerpt, with names changed:

John is 14 years old and has cerebral palsy and significant other disabilities, including a developmental delay. John is paralyzed on his right side. He is nonverbal. He needs help eating and caring for himself.

His mom is Loretta James. She worked hard as a licensed childcare provider for more than 20 years until her lupus, rheumatoid arthritis and fibromyalgia caused her so much pain that she couldn’t care for the kids at work and at home like she needed to. She lost her job– and then she lost her apartment in Ward 8 after her savings ran out. She spent Monday and Tuesday night in a car with John and her 11 year old son, Nathan, because she was told there’s no shelter or housing for her family.

 Loretta suffers from Raynaud’s phenomenon, which means that stress or cold can cause her to lose feeling in her fingers and toes, and can even lead to gangrene or necrosis—permanent harm from having to sleep in a car.

Mayor Gray never responded to this email. The James family was one of hundreds of families left in unsafe places because the Mayor refused to authorize their placement, even when there were as many as 100 vacant rooms at DC General.

Even this winter, our lawyers fought for about 50 families or roughly 100 kids who had no safe place to sleep when they were turned away on freezing nights—that’s about 1/5 of the families placed in shelter this winter. DHS dismissed our concerns about these families as not “statistically significant.” 100 DC kids in danger of dying of hypothermia in one winter is significant, statistically and otherwise.

When Mayor Gray asked DHS what it needed to serve homeless families better, Director Berns did not say housing—even when he knew the Mayor was going to commit $100 million to affordable housing and even when DHS admits that the primary reason for the sharp increase in family homelessness is “the decreasing supply of affordable housing.” Instead, Director Berns decided the best way to help homeless families is to strip their legal protections so DHS can kick more families out.

We disagree. We think the more direct and humane answer is to provide homeless families with affordable housing. The Mayor devoted the bulk of his $100 million commitment to affordable housing to long-term housing production. 2-3 years to wait for a chance, but no guarantee, at housing is a too long in the life of a child. We, along with the Fair Budget Coalition, are asking the Council to invest $1.5 million in the Housing First program to serve 60 homeless families $3.5 million in LRSP tenant vouchers to serve 240 families. An investment in housing that ends homelessness quickly will save DHS much more than the $2.3 million they claim to need.

The only housing increase for homeless families in the Mayor’s FY14 budget is in the Rapid Rehousing program, but the program has faced serious criticism from youth, domestic violence and housing advocates, as well as families themselves, and needs both regulatory changes and objective data and performance measures to be a more effective program. DHS has good reason to believe that families have to be strong-armed into accepting rapid rehousing, but not because they don’t know what’s good for them. Rather, families quite rationally fear re-traumatizing their children with another eviction if they accept a placement where they could lose all assistance at the end of four months whether they can afford the rent or not. Until policy changes are instituted, and because there is already $11 million in the FY14 budget for rapid rehousing, we would not support any further increase in funding.

DHS tries to justify using the Budget Support Act to propose a major overhaul of the philosophy and management of homeless services by claiming that kicking more families out of shelter and housing will save the agency almost $2.3 million, a hole they would otherwise be unable to fill. This claim, quite frankly, lacks credibility. Why didn’t the CFO certify these savings in the budget? How can it be that they haven’t decided which part of the continuum will be affected by some of the proposals, yet they know, to the dollar, what the savings will be? How can it be that kicking more families out of housing will save money when those families are likely to end up back in shelter, which everyone agrees is far more expensive than housing? Or is DHS literally banking on all those kids living on the street without any safe shelter?

Those aren’t the only problems with the proposal or the agency’s justifications, but they should be enough to call this surreptitious placement in the Budget Support Act the sham it is. We ask you to remove these punitive and poorly drafted provisions from the Budget Support Act. We, along with the affected community, would appreciate an opportunity to provide extensive input on the potential harm of this proposal– input we will have no opportunity to provide in the abbreviated budget process.

The Mayor’s so-called solution to family homelessness is to punish DC parents and children for their poverty and their desperation. We ask the Council to solve family homelessness with housing, not by forcing more children to live on the street.

Summary of recommendations for homeless families:

1. Pull Homeless Services Reform Act amendments from Budget Support Act (BSA).
2. Engage community in policy-making process around any legitimate concerns from DHS and introduce resulting legislation after the budget process is over.
3. DHS should rewrite rapid rehousing regulations to meet community’s concerns and better protect participants before FY14 begins.
4. Propose language for BSA to collect data on outcomes and institute performance measures for rapid rehousing.
5. Fund 300 housing vouchers for homeless families ($1.5 million in Housing First and $3.5 million in tenant vouchers through the Local Rent Supplement Program (LRSP)).
6. Legislate a right to shelter or housing year-round for all families with no safe place to sleep.