Archives for posts with tag: Permanent Independent Housing First for Homeless Veterans

More Vouchers for Homeless Veterans

by Military.com

PREFACE: The story below from Military.com confirms what everyone who interacts with homeless Veterans on a regular basis to find out what they want and don’t want… And what 80% of homeless Veterans want is to live in independent and affordable subsidized housing, NOT Veterans Homes on VA Property where they would be subjected to substance abuse testing, curfews, unable to have overnight guests, and other privacy issues. The Housing First Initiative of Independent Housing for homeless is a proven worldwide Paradigm as being the most effective way to end chronic homelessness…
Terry Richards, Columnist for Veterans News Service Los Angeles

The Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Veterans Affairs today announced the second round of HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) funding to local public housing agencies across the U.S. and Puerto Rico. The $7.8 million will provide housing and clinical services for 1,120 currently homeless veterans.  Click on link to read more.                                                                                       http://www.military.com/veterans-report/more-vouchers-for-homeless-veterans-?ESRC=vr.nl

The Housing First Checklist: A Practical Tool for Assessing Housing First in Practice

Sources

Mercer Story http://www.merceralliance.org/pdf/5_Yr_Plan.pdf

Nicholas Pleace and Joanne Bretherton “Will Paradigm Drift Stop Housing First
from Ending Homelessness? Categorising and Critically Assessing the Housing
First Movement from a Social Policy Perspective” Paper given at Social Policy
in an Unequal World: Joint Annual Conference of the East Asian Social Policy
Research Network (EASP) and the United Kingdom Social Policy Association (SPA)
University of York, United Kingdom, July 16th-18th 2012
http://www.york.ac.uk/media/chp/documents/2006/NPJB-EASP-SPA-2012.pdf

Housing First is a proven method of ending all types of homelessness and is the most effective approach to ending chronic homelessness. Housing First offers individuals and families experiencing homelessness immediate access to permanent affordable or supportive housing. Without clinical prerequisites like completion of a course of treatment or evidence of sobriety and with a low-threshold for entry, Housing First yields higher housing retention rates, lower returns to homelessness, and Mercer Story http://www.merceralliance.org/pdf/5_Yr_Plan.pdf

Nicholas Pleace and Joanne Bretherton “Will Paradigm Drift Stop Housing First
from Ending Homelessness? Categorising and Critically Assessing the Housing
First Movement from a Social Policy Perspective” Paper given at Social Policy
in an Unequal World: Joint Annual Conference of the East Asian Social Policy
Research Network (EASP) and the United Kingdom Social Policy Association (SPA)
University of York, United Kingdom, July 16th-18th 2012
http://www.york.ac.uk/media/chp/documents/2006/NPJB-EASP-SPA-2012.pdfsignificant reductions in the use of crisis service and institutions.1 Due its high degree of success, Housing First is identified as a core strategy for ending homelessness in Opening Doors: the Federal Strategic Plan to End Homelessness and has become widely adopted by national and community-based organizations as a best practice for solving homelessness. http://www.usich.gov/usich_resources/fact_sheets/the_housing_first_checklist_a_practical_tool_for_assessing_housing_first_in/


Deny Housing to Veterans who are Addicted to Drugs or Alcohol says Veterans Homes Advocate Robert Rosebrock

by Terry Richards

Photo above that of Robert Lea Rosebrock alias Robert Rosebrock alias Bob Rosebrock alias R. L. Rosebrock who feels that Veterans with Drug and Alcohol Addictions are not worthy of transitional or permanent housing, even if those addictions are service-connected from PTSD/Shell Shock, among other things. Also, except for  Rosebrock's Military Service, Rosebrock refuses to offer his readers in his online Biography his birth place, where he grew up, Post-Service employment history, etc... One wonders why???

Photo above that of Robert Lea Rosebrock alias Robert Rosebrock alias Bob Rosebrock alias R. L. Rosebrock who feels that Veterans with Drug and Alcohol Addictions are not worthy of transitional or permanent housing, even if those addictions are service-connected from PTSD/Shell Shock, among other things. Also, except for
Rosebrock’s Military Service, Rosebrock refuses to offer his readers in his online Biography his birth place, where he grew up, Post-Service employment history, etc… One wonders why???

In a Bogus written story of twisted truths and fabricated lies in words and photos published on June 21, 2013 about this Writer and an LA City Planning Commissioner, et al, and titled Who is Terry Richards? Robert Rosebrock writes in pertinent part: “Only a few months before the VA accommodated Mr. Richards with immediate housing, a homeless female Veteran was denied housing and forced to live on the sidewalk outside the VA because she was not addicted to drugs or alcohol.”             

Close-up Photo of Terry Richards taken while he was covering for his Blog the March 2012 Los Angeles Marathon at the 21-mile Marker located at West Los Angeles VA Medical Center... Robert Rosebrock tries to use this and other photos you will see in the full story below to make Terry Richards look like "A Thief in the Night and Vagabond" as Rosebrock states in his story...

Close-up Photo of Terry Richards taken while he was covering for his Blog the March 2012 Los Angeles Marathon at the 21-mile Marker located at West Los Angeles VA Medical Center… Robert Rosebrock tries to use this and other photos you will see in the full story below to make Terry Richards look like “A Thief in the Night and Vagabond” as Rosebrock states in his story…

In connection with the above close-up photo at the Marathon, this is the distant photo of Terry Richards covering the March 2012 Los  Angeles Marathon which Robert Rosebrock endeavors to distort in the close-up one...

In connection with the above close-up photo at the Marathon, this is the distant photo of Terry Richards covering the March 2012 Los Angeles Marathon which Robert Rosebrock endeavors to distort in the close-up one…

                                                                                             

It’s hard to believe ladies and gentlemen that so-called Veterans Advocate Robert Rosebrock who for the last 6-years has been Advocating for the building of Veterans Homes to be built on the land located at the West Los VA Medical Center could be not only so uninformed but so uncompassionate for his Fellow Veterans who are or were homeless and live on low-income poverty level income just like Rosebrock himself!!!

Terry Richards, Robert Rosebrock, et al Demonstrating with Veterans Homes Advocates during the Memorial Day Rally on Sunday May 29, 2012 just outside of Wilshire and San Vicente West Los Angeles VA Gate before I found out that 80% of homeless Veterans do not want to live in Veterans Homes on VA Property. They want to live in HUD-VA Section 8 Private Independent Housing… Looking at the photo I am second from the left and Robert Rosebrock who turned-out to be a very Demonic individual is third from the left next to me holding the black MIA Flag…

Terry Richards, Robert Rosebrock, et al Demonstrating with Veterans Homes Advocates during the Memorial Day Rally on Sunday May 29, 2012 just outside of Wilshire and San Vicente West Los Angeles VA Gate before I found out that 80% of homeless Veterans do not want to live in Veterans Homes on VA Property. They want to live in HUD-VA Section 8 Private Independent Housing… Looking at the photo I am second from the left and Robert Rosebrock who turned-out to be a very Demonic individual is third from the left next to me holding the black MIA Flag…

Obviously, Rosebrock has no clue that statistics reveal that as many as 76% of homeless Veterans alcohol, drug or mental health problems. Moreover, only 25% of homeless Veterans have used VA Homeless Services, which Lends Credence to mine and the VA’s and other’s Surveys that approximately 80% of homeless Veterans DO NOT want to live in Veterans Homes on VA Government Land where Rosebrock wants Veterans Homes built because they don’t want to be subject to regular Drug and Alcohol Testing, Curfews, among other things. If 75% of homeless Veterans won’t even come to the VA for Medical Services and also being aware that  they could be referred for Transitional Housing at the VA Dom and Grant Per Diems where there is also regular Drug and Alcohol Testing and Curfews, how are you going to get them to live in Veterans Homes where there would also be regular Drug and Alcohol Testing???

Photo above is Robert Rosebrock speaking at June 04, 2012 Flag Day Ceremonies only "talking-the-talk but never "walking-the-walk"... When Terry Richards suggested to Rosebrock that we go down to "skid-row" to see if we could get some of those homeless Veterans who live on the street to attend some of the Sunday Rallies, Rosebrock implied that he would be embarrassed to have them Rally because he did not want the Brentwood Residents to see what kind of Veterans would actually be residing in Veterans Homes on this VA Land next door to them... Rosebrock also appeared scared to travel down to "skid-row" even though Richards told him that he had been down there a number of times and never had any problems talking to homeless Vets located in that area...

Photo above is Robert Rosebrock speaking at June 04, 2012 Flag Day Ceremonies only “talking-the-talk but never “walking-the-walk”… When Terry Richards suggested to Rosebrock that we go down to “skid-row” to see if we could get some of those homeless Veterans who live on the street to attend some of the Sunday Rallies, Rosebrock implied that he would be embarrassed to have them Rally because he did not want the Brentwood Residents to see what kind of Veterans would actually be residing in Veterans Homes on this VA Land next door to them… Rosebrock also appeared scared to travel down to “skid-row” even though Richards told him that he had been down there a number of times and never had any problems talking to homeless Vets located in that area…

 The reason Rosebrock has no clues is that Rosebrock only “talks-the talk” – but does not “walk-the-walk”… Rosebrock is nothing but a Social-Butterfly who spends more time on planning picnics and ceremonies like the Veterans Summer Celebration & Picnic and fabricating stories about and against his former allies and volunteers far more than he spends on learning about and talking to homeless Veterans one-on-one who live on the streets such in Los Angeles’ like “skid-row” as this Writer does and has for years… See Hope Thrives for Homeless Veterans at Pinellas Hope’s Tent CityWho are the Homeless, Hungry, Needy in America??? Parts 1-3 http://vnsla.com/2013/08/01/paradigms/

“Local homeless female Veteran was denied shelter at the VA and forced to live outside while drifter Terry Richards was given immediate free room and board ” says Robert Rosebrock.

Another thing Rosebrock has no idea about is that approximately 85% of the VA’s Domiciliary and Transitional Housing Programs Nationwide are for homeless Veterans who have Drug and Alcohol Addictions, the other 15% is for Veterans who need Medical Rest and Recuperation prior to and after surgery, and low-income non-chronically homeless Veterans who DO NOT have Drug or Alcohol Addictions.

Updated with Writer’s Note: This Writer Terry Richards has never had a drug or alcohol addiction which is Documented in  my VA Medical Records… But even if I had a drug or alcohol addiction it should not matter when it comes to offering and providing Permanent Housing for Veterans… Moreover, I am hardly a “drifter” as Rosebrock proclaims having spent 15-years in St. Petersburg before arriving in Los Angeles, and 15-years in Columbus, Ohio prior to St. Petersburg, Florida www.vnsla.com/about (About Terry Richards)…  However, this Writer is 64-years of age and does have several major medical conditions and major Depressive Disorder but can still take care of the household HUD-VA provided. There could be any number of reasons why this Female Veteran was not admitted to the Domiciliary or Grant Per Diem Transitional Housing if the story Rosebrock is telling is even true because he lies so much…

Turns-out that Robert Rosebrock is actually an Anti-Veteran Veterans Homes Advocate.

Turns-out that Robert Rosebrock is actually an Anti-Veteran Veterans Homes Advocate.

Should there be more Beds and Programs for both young and middle-age Veterans, and elderly Veterans 62- and over who do not have drug or alcohol addictions but have major medical and/or mental conditions and are non-chronically homeless or at risk of becoming homeless with poverty level incomes or no incomes like 71-year old Robert Rosebrock whose income from Social Security is only about $1,000 per month and virtually on $200 in savings Rosebrock told me??? The answer is of course, YES!!! I would like to see the VA Domiciliary and Grant Per Diem Homeless Rehab Programs at 70% for the most vulnerable chronically homeless Veterans with and without drug or alcohol addictions and/or mental illness and with and without income but can still take care of themselves and their household… Then I would like to see 30% for Veterans of all ages but especially for Elderly Veterans 62 and over who are non-chronically homeless or at risk of becoming homeless with and without major medical or mental health conditions….

Updated Writer’s Note: Rosebrock told me when I first arrived in Los Angeles that if he had not beguiled is way into sharing the Elderly Woman’s apartment for $300 he would not be able to live in Los Angeles. Rosebrock who once again lives in the Wealthy Brentwood Neighborhood where apartments/rental Condominiums like the one he lives rent for an average of $3,000 per month for 2-bedrooms, Rosebrock only pays $300 instead of $1500 on average for sharing a 2-bedroom. “Beguiled his way” in may not be a strong enough word to describe how he did it??? I did not need HUD-VASH Housing in St. Petersburg where one could get a decent apartments in the Downtown area for a low as $450 per month including utilities, although HUD Senior Housing was available to me for about $300 per month… But here in Los Angeles the Average Cost of a 1-bedroom apartment is $1650 per month according to the latest Demographics announced on KFI Radio Los Angeles… And HUD Senior Housing only has long-waiting lists, Veterans, especially Senior Veterans 62 and over living in Los Angeles with Poverty Level Incomes need more of a helping-hand in finding Affordable Housing, including Robert Rosebrock if he ever loses his current residence and can’t beguile his way into another good deal!!!

Finally, Robert Rosebrock says he want sthe Government to build Veterans Homes for 10,000 homeless Veterans in Los Angeles and another 10,000 homeless Veterans in the surrounding counties (Greater Los Angeles), a total of 20,000, but wants to DENY Housing to Veterans with drug or alcohol addictions. Obviously Rosebrock is Delusional!!! If only 70% of those 20,000 homeless Veterans had drug or alcohol addictions that would only leave 6,000 of the 20,000 homeless Veterans who would qualify for Veterans Homes Housing under “Rosebrock’s Rules”… And of those remaining 6,000 homeless Veterans without drug or alcohol addictions only about 20% or 1200 of them would be willing to live in Veterans Homes on VA Property… That’s why “The Housing First Initiative” a proven worldwide Paradigm that ends homelessness  with  HUD-VASH Section 8 Independent Supportive Housing where Veterans can live in their own Private Apartments and have the option of receiving drug or alcohol or mental health treatment on an outpatient basis is the only way to go for 80% of the homeless Veterans who want to get-off-the streets…

The Homeless Crisis

Veterans have been struggling to adjust since the beginning of time. It’s no secret that many of our servicemen and women return from service with multiple, serious issues, including financial, marital, work, mental health, and substance abuse issues. Because of these problems, many veterans have found themselves with nowhere to call home, or are on the verge of homelessness, even though many agencies exist to provide benefits and services to assist veterans in need. Helping Heroes is committed to assisting veterans who need the help.

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) says the nation’s homeless veterans are mostly males (four percent are females). The vast majority is single, most come from poor, disadvantaged communities, 45 percent suffer from mental illness, and half have substance abuse problems. America’s homeless veterans have served in World War II, Korean War, Cold War, Vietnam War, Grenada, Panama, Lebanon, Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan), Operation Iraqi Freedom, or the military’s anti-drug cultivation efforts in South America. 47 per cent of homeless veterans served during the Vietnam Era. More than 67 per cent served our country for at least three years and 33 per cent were stationed in a war zone.

  • 23% of homeless population are veterans
  • 33% of male homeless population are veterans
  • 47% Vietnam Era
  • 17% post-Vietnam
  • 15% pre-Vietnam
  • 67% served three or more years
  • 33% stationed in war zone
  • 25% have used VA Homeless Services
  • 85% completed high school/GED, compared to 56% of non-veterans
  • 89% received Honorable Discharge
  • 79% reside in central cities
  • 16% reside in suburban areas
  • 5% reside in rural areas
  • 76% experience alcohol, drug, or mental health problems
  • 46% white males compared to 34% non-veterans
  • 46% age 45 or older compared to 20% non-veterans

Far too many veterans are homeless in America—between 130,000 and 200,000 on any given night—representing between one fourth and one-fifth of all homeless people. Three times that many veterans are struggling with excessive rent burdens and thus at increased risk of homelessness.

To read more facts, visit the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans.

Sources

Mercer Story http://www.merceralliance.org/pdf/5_Yr_Plan.pdf

Nicholas Pleace and Joanne Bretherton “Will Paradigm Drift Stop Housing First
from Ending Homelessness? Categorising and Critically Assessing the Housing
First Movement from a Social Policy Perspective” Paper given at Social Policy
in an Unequal World: Joint Annual Conference of the East Asian Social Policy
Research Network (EASP) and the United Kingdom Social Policy Association (SPA)
University of York, United Kingdom, July 16th-18th 2012
http://www.york.ac.uk/media/chp/documents/2006/NPJB-EASP-SPA-2012.pdf

RELATED STORIES

Who is Terry Richards??? A Response to the character assassination against me by Bob Rosebrock, et al…  http://vnsla.com/2013/07/19/whoisterryrichards/

Veterans Summer Celebration & Picnic                                                                                                                                                                     http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/29/veterans-summer-celebration-picnic/

Paradigms that could End Homelessness in Los Angeles – What other Cities are doing!!!                                                                                  Paradigms that could End Homelessness in Los Angeles – What other Cities are doing!!!

Veterans Addicted to Drugs or Alcohol may be eligible for Secondary Service-Connected Disability Compensation                                                                                                                                          http://vnsla.com/2013/08/04/comp4addictedvets/


LA Democratic Party Adopts Permanent Independent Living Resolution for Homeless Veterans…

by Terry Richards

First, I want to thank Korean War Veteran, LA Planning Commissioner, and State of California Democratic Party Delegate Joe Halper for his commitment in Advocating to end homelessness among Veterans… Set forth below the photo in pertinent part is the Resolution for permanent independent living for Veterans.

Right to Left is Korean War Veteran, LA Planning Commissioner, and State of California Democratic Delegate Joe Halper and Vietnam Era Veteran and Columnist Terry Richards at the 2012  LA County Democratic Party Awards Dinner.

Right to Left is Korean War Veteran, LA Planning Commissioner, and State of California Democratic Delegate Joe Halper and Vietnam Era Veteran and Columnist Terry Richards at the 2012 LA County Democratic Party Awards Dinner.

“Provide Permanent Supportive Housing with robust individualized and comprehensive services to promote independent living leading to an early return to the community life, avoiding more expensive institutions such as jails, hospitals, and homeless shelters.”

Be it further resolved, that the Los Angeles County Democratic Party send a copy of this resolution to Congressmember Henry Waxman, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the Secretary of Defense and the California Democratic Party.              

Author: Joe Halper, 50″^ AD                                                                                                    

Passed LACDP Resolutions Committee 6/4/13                                                                     

DEM LACDP Veterans Resolution LACDP Adopted

Writer’s Note: All Americans and Veterans and their Family Members please tell Congress to Appropriate 70,000 HUD-VASH Section 8 Housing Vouchers to end homelessness for the estimated 70,000 homeless Veterans Nationwide… At only 7,000 to 10,000 Housing Vouchers currently being appropriated annually by Congress it will take 7 to 10 years/2020 to 2023 to end homelessness for Veterans which means that the Obama plan to end the homelessness for Veterans by 2015 cannot be met…

Left to Right is Joe Halper and his Beautiful Wife Arlene, and Mathew Millen, Commander of Jewish War Veterans Post 118 at the 2012 LA County Democratic Awards Dinner.

Left to Right is Joe Halper and his Beautiful Wife Arlene, and Mathew Millen, Commander of Jewish War Veterans Post 118 at the 2012 LA County Democratic Awards Dinner.

After reading my several stories on the “Housing First Initiative”, in mid-April of 2013, LA Planning Commissioner and Korean War Veteran Joe Halper who is also a Delegate to the State of California Democratic Party in an effort to Advocate for homeless Veterans was planning to bring forth a Resolution at the State Democratic Convention that month, asked me for my further advice on why HUD-VASH Section 8 Independent Housing rather than the building of Veterans Homes would do more to end homelessness among Veterans in Los Angeles and Nationwide… My response to Halper is set forth below.

From left to right is LA  Planning Commissioner, State Democratic Convention Delegate, and Veterans Advocate Joe Halper, and Veterans Rights Advocate and Columnist Terry Richards working at the Grand Opening of the 2012 Westside Democratic HDQ/Obama for America Presidential Campaign HDQ on the 3rd Street Promenade in Santa Monica.

From left to right is LA Planning Commissioner, State Democratic Convention Delegate, and Veterans Advocate Joe Halper, and Veterans Rights Advocate and Columnist Terry Richards working at the Grand Opening of the 2012 Westside Democratic HDQ/Obama for America Presidential Campaign HDQ on the 3rd Street Promenade in Santa Monica.

Also set forth below at the end of this story are the links to all my “Housing First Initiative” stories and why Permanent Independent Housing First rather than building Veterans Homes on VA or other Government Property, or shuffling homeless Veterans from “Grant Per Diems” transitional housing will end homelessness among Veterans…

____________________________________________________

Joe,

Housing First ends homelessness. It’s that simple. And I am not talking about Transitional Housing like VA Domiciliaries, New Directions, U.S. Vets, Vet to Vet, Salvation Army, etc., OR even Veterans Homes on any VA or other Government Property where Veterans are subjected to Curfews, Substance Abuse Tests, Inspections, unable to have overnight guests, sharing bathrooms or living rooms, or no doors to their sleeping areas… I am talking HUD-VASH Section 8 Affordable Permanent Housing with a year to year lease /30% of income or FREE for No income Veterans with a, Private Livingroom, No Inspections …

What does “Supportive Housing Mean??? “Supportive Housing” means that Substance Abuse and Mental Health Treatment Programs are Optional to the Veteran and available to the Veteran upon request on an Outpatient basis…

Housing First ends homelessness. It’s that simple. This level of success was unprecedented in the USA. Nothing could match the rate at which “Pathways Housing First” (PHF) ended enduring homelessness and promoted housing stability among people with severe mental illness and problematic drug and alcohol use. The founder of the PHF service in New York, Sam Tsemberis, described the key success of PHF in very simple terms:

 Services must respect the basic human need for privacy.

 Service users like HUD-VASH Section 8 must have their own rental contract/tenancy.

Permanent housing is the base that allows other problems to be solved.

 Allowance of alcohol consumption.

 Separation of housing and services.

 Individually tailored services based on needs assessment.

 An emphasis on permanent not temporary solutions.

Existing shelters and dormitories are inadequate and must be replaced by supported housing units.

Housing First ‘Light’ (HFL) services are those services which follow, or which reflect, the PHF model but which offer significantly less intensive support services and are more heavily reliant on case management. There is no requirement to stay in a hostel, staircase service or any other form of communal accommodation, or to be made ‘housing ready’, before being given access to housing.

HFL services give each individual service user a single key-worker, who may provide practical advice and some emotional support but whose main role is as a case manager, arranging access to the externally provided treatment and support that each homeless individual or household needs. HFL services do not directly provide medical, psychiatric or drug and alcohol services. As with PHF, housing and support are separated, there is no requirement for abstinence, no requirement for compliance with treatment and a harm reduction approach is followed. HFL services can be used for chronically homeless people, but it can also be employed for homeless people with lower support needs who need less assistance to sustain a tenancy.

Veterans Homes for the 10,000 Vets in LA County or 20,000 in Greater Los Angeles (GLA) would take several years to build and 80% of these Vets say they DO NOT WANT TO “PERMANENTLY RESIDE” IN VETERANS HOMES because of all the above said Rules that go with it… Having said that, although some of them may come to Veterans Homes just to get off the street for a while, in the long-term they will not stay if they do not see any light at the end of the tunnel for their own Private . Housing under Section 8 or Section 8 like circumstances and will return to the street rather then stay under those Rules…

I am pretty sure there are at least 20,000 vacant apartments in the GLA area… And if there are not, then find other areas of California where there are vacancies.

Congress needs to Appropriate Funds for HUD-VASH Vouchers for the remaining estimated 70,000 Homeless Veterans in the U.S., and stop playing games… The cost of Tranisitional Housing for about a third of these Vets is 2 to 3 times more than the cost for Permanent Housing under Section 8.

Table 1: A Taxonomy of ‘Housing First’ Services

Service offered Pathways Housing First Communal Housing First Housing First Light
Housing with security of tenure provided immediately or as soon as possible, scattered across the community Yes No Yes
Uses subleasing/sub-tenancies Yes No No
Apartments with security of tenure provided immediately in a shared/communal block No Yes No
Service users have to stop using drugs No No No
Service users have to stop drinking alcohol No No No
Service users have to use mental health services No No No
Harm reduction approach Yes Yes Yes
Uses mobile teams to provide services Yes No Yes
Directly provides drug and alcohol services Yes Yes No
Directly provides psychiatric and medical services Yes Yes No
Uses case management/service brokerage Yes Yes Yes

____________________________________________________

Housing First and related story Links

Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will End Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 1 of a Series                                        http://vnsla.com/2013/01/07/housingfirstpart1/

 Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will end Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 2 of a Series                                              http://vnsla.com/2013/01/08/housingfirstpart2/

Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will end Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 3 of a Series                                                                 http://vnsla.com/2013/01/27/va300m/

 Veterans in VA Homeless Programs being lied to about Housing Vouchers!!!                                       http://vnsla.com/2012/11/10/veteransliedto/

 940 homeless Veterans must suffer while nonprofits battle over housing voucher contract                                                      http://vnsla.com/2012/12/17/940homelessvetssuffer/

 “Sole VA Contract to Path is not acting in the best interest of most Chronically Vulnerable Disabled Homeless Veterans” says OPCC              http://vnsla.com/2013/03/23/opcconpathcontract/

Sources

Mercer Story http://www.merceralliance.org/pdf/5_Yr_Plan.pdf

Nicholas Pleace and Joanne Bretherton “Will Paradigm Drift Stop Housing First
from Ending Homelessness? Categorising and Critically Assessing the Housing
First Movement from a Social Policy Perspective” Paper given at Social Policy
in an Unequal World: Joint Annual Conference of the East Asian Social Policy
Research Network (EASP) and the United Kingdom Social Policy Association (SPA)
University of York, United Kingdom, July 16th-18th 2012
http://www.york.ac.uk/media/chp/documents/2006/NPJB-EASP-SPA-2012.pdf


by Terry Richards

hudvashpicuteofhouse

As of the date of this publication there were 1621 Housing Units available for Veterans under the HUD-VASH Section 8 Housing Program in Greater Los Angeles. Unfortunately, there were only 940 Vouchers Appropriated by Congress for Veterans in Greater Los Angeles…

Direct Link to Housing Authority City of Los Angeles (HACLA) Property Listings.                                                                                   http://www.socialserve.com/tenant/CA/Search.html?city_id=42665&ch=HACLA&type=rental&s8=t


More independent subsidized supported housing needed for Homeless Veterans Not Veterans Homes…

by Terry Richards

80% of Homeless Veterans in the Greater Los Angeles living on-the-street in “Skid-Row” and other areas of Los Angeles, as well as those living in VA Grant Per Diem and Domiciliary Transitional Housing say they want more independent subsidized supported housing not Veterans Homes for their “Permanent Residence”… After taking the survey at one point, I met with William L. Daniels, Chief of Mental Health for the VA Healthcare System in Los Angeles and he advised me the VA came-up with the same 80% figure… The main reasons these Veterans ave me for wanting Independent Housing is because they do not want to be subjected to curfews, the inability to have overnight guests, drug and alcohol testing, room inspections, sharing rooms or sharing “so-called apartments”, and only having curtains rather then entry doors” to their room in some scenarios found in some Veterans Homes…
The “Housing First Initiative” of having Independent Supported Housing for Homeless with or without substance abuse addictions Transitioning from living on-the street is a proven and successful “Paradigm” Worldwide with only a 19% substance abuse or mental health recidivism rate resulting in eviction… Substance Abuse Treatment and Mental Health Programs are optional and are available to Veterans on an “Outpatient” basis, another working “Paradigm of the Housing First Supportive Housing Initiative… The VA signed onto and agreed to implement the “Housing First Supportive Housing Initiative” in order to end homelessness among the Veteran Population Nationwide, and the VA should “stick to their guns” (No pun intended)… And Congress needs to do their party by Appropriating more then 7,000-10,000 HUD-VASH Housing Vouchers each Fiscal Year.
Congress also needs to also look-into subsidizing Non-Profit Programs like the Salvation Army’s “Affordable Housing” Programs which now cost Veterans an average of about $650 per month rather than an average of $250 per month using the HUD-VASH 30% of income ration because Programs like this just find Landlords who have cheap rents… And more likely then not, cheap rents usually mean high crime neighborhoods and Apartments that do not me Housing Codes…   Moreover, at the $650 per month rate + utilities in some cases, there is a high recidivism of substance abuse resulting in eviction a representative at the Salvation Army’s “Haven” Program told me… This is probably due to Veterans having very little money left-over for diversions like Dating, Movies, Travel, cable TV, to visit family, etc., and also having to live in “Slumlord” like Apartments, all of  which results in them returning to substance abuse and/or substantially deteriorates there Mental Health resulting in eviction for many of these Veterans…
For those Homeless Veterans in Los Angeles and Nationwide whose Mental and/Physical Disabilities are so impaired that it prevents them from being able to take care of themselves or their household the VA should build Veterans Homes that provide Assisted Living and Nursing Care, much like the “Paradigm” of the State of the Art California Veterans Home located at and on the property of the West Los Angeles VA Medical Center…  How many Homeless or at risk of being homeless Veterans in the Greater Los Angeles area fit this Medical and/or Mental Health Profile is unknown to this Author at this time…  But whatever the amount, there is “nothing set in stone” that says all these Veterans Homes have to be built at the West Los Angeles VA Medical Center just because that Land was Deeded to build Veterans Homes, Veterans Homes can be build on or off VA or other Government Property to accommodate Veterans who fit the said above Profile…
Finally for those who have been Advocating that only or mostly Veterans Homes be built only or mostly at the West Los Angeles VA Medical Center are not in tune with what Homeless Veterans want… The vast majority of Homeless Veterans who I interviewed who meet independent living requirements told me that “If they build them – they won’t come”, meaning that they would rather stay homeless then live in Veterans Homes, especially Veterans Homes at the West Los Angeles VA Medical or on other VA Property…

WE SUGGEST THAT YOU READ THE RELATED STORIES BELOW IN THE ORDER THEY ARE LISTED

Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will End Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 1 of a Series            

http://vnsla.com/2013/01/07/housingfirstpart1/

 

Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will end Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 2 of a Series

http://vnsla.com/2013/01/08/housingfirstpart2/

Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will end Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 3 of a Series   

http://vnsla.com/2013/01/27/va300m/

Veterans in VA Homeless Programs being lied to about Housing Vouchers!!!                                       http://vnsla.com/2012/11/10/veteransliedto/

940 homeless Veterans must suffer while nonprofits battle over housing voucher contract                                                      http://vnsla.com/2012/12/17/940homelessvetssuffer/

“Sole VA Contract to Path is not acting in the best interest of most Chronically Vulnerable Disabled Homeless Veterans” says OPCC              http://vnsla.com/2013/03/23/opcconpathcontract/

Sources

Mercer Story http://www.merceralliance.org/pdf/5_Yr_Plan.pdf

Nicholas Pleace and Joanne Bretherton “Will Paradigm Drift Stop Housing First
from Ending Homelessness? Categorising and Critically Assessing the Housing
First Movement from a Social Policy Perspective” Paper given at Social Policy
in an Unequal World: Joint Annual Conference of the East Asian Social Policy
Research Network (EASP) and the United Kingdom Social Policy Association (SPA)
University of York, United Kingdom, July 16th-18th 2012
http://www.york.ac.uk/media/chp/documents/2006/NPJB-EASP-SPA-2012.pdf


CORRECTIONS:  Based on Comments I received about this story, I re-read the story twice and could not find one statement I wrote that expressed or implied that I hate PATH or Jeremy Sidell or that myself or John Maceri of OPCC were blaming PATH for being Awarded the Sold Contract… Perception being everything, it was obvious to me at least that the way I wrote the piece was that myself and John Maceri were blaming the Sole Contract Award on the VA and GAO not PATH… Moreover, there were no “off-the-record” requests made by John Maceri…  WHEREFORE, other then misspelled words and grammatical errors, there was no need to make any Corrections or Retractions to this story… Furthermore, I stand-by what I wrote including all the quotes about what John Maceri had stated to me during the phone interview at which time I took thorough notes about what he said…

This story is the result of a 6-month investigation requiring  Veterans News Service Los Angeles to request the information it needed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) because both PATH and the VA refused to offer the information any other way…

“Sole VA Contract Award to PATH is not acting in best interest of the Most Chronically Vulnerable Disabled Homeless Veterans” said OPCC Executive Director John Maceri portrayed in above photo…

9242dd17ff6840e29a84d14fbc43a609-0

By Terry Richards

LOS ANGELES, CA - The Battle over the Contract to Process 940 HUD-VASH Housing Vouchers for Homeless Veterans has ended and PATH (People Assisting The Homeless) is the Victor…… However 14-year OPCC (Ocean Park Community Center) Executive Director John Maceri, among other things, had this to say in a 52-minute phone interview with this Columnist on March 22, 2013: “Considering that PATH has not had a Mental Health Relationship with the Most Chronically Vulnerable Disabled Homeless Veterans, especially the most Vulnerable Severely Mentally Ill Veterans as OPCCStep up on Second and the St. Joseph’s Center has had, Awarding PATH the Sole VA Contract  because they were the lowest-bidder is not acting in best interest of these specifically Targeted Veterans… And if it does not work-out it with PATH it will be just another squandered opportunity by the VA to provide this group of Veterans with permanent housing. It also shows that there is no thought that goes into the Bureaucratic Process because no one Organization can process 940 Vouchers in the short period of time needed to get Vets off-the-street… The VA could not do it and that’s why they decided to outsource it… So I doubt PATH can do it either!!!”

Above photo is of Jeremy Sidell, Chief Development & Communications Officer PATH (People Assisting the Homeless)

Moreover, Maceri said that the VA’s and GAO’s Denial of splitting the Contract with OPCCStep up on Second and the St. Joseph’s Center has decimated its relationship with at least OPCC and possibly the other said Non-Profits…

Furthermore, Marceri stated that in his opinion  “it is bad policy to sole source to one organization” for a task as great as this one where at least 940 Vouchers or more has to be processed as well as all the other responsibilities and range of services the Contractor has to provide these Veterans as matter of Federal Public Law 104-262 and Title 38, U.S.C.M 8153. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/38/8153 both before and after they take occupancy in their HUD-VASH Section 8 Apartments…

PATH-Logo-with-People-Assisting-The-Homeless-300-dpi

In late September of 2012, OPCCStep up on Second and the St. Joseph’s Center Non-Profits Protested People Assisting the Homeless (PATH) being awarded the sole $5,781,600 VA 5-year VA Contract without any bids accepted by other Non-Profit Organizations to Process 940-HUD-VASH Housing Vouchers for Homeless Veterans. Then one December 28, 2012 PATH was again awarded the sole contract, this time by the General Administrative Office (GAO) who made the final decision in the matter. By the way, that breaks-down to $6,150 per Veteran, but in this Columnists mind from researching the matter and in talking with OPCC Executive Director John Maceri this amount is not excessive considering all the Responsibilities required in the Contract and Statement of Work attached to the Contract…  http://www.gao.gov/legal/bids/docket.html?openclosed=All&agency=All&snumber=&protestor=&filenum=B-407418&o=0&searched=1&now

Maceri stated that when OPCC received its Denial from the GAO, it simply said that the Decision to Award PATH the VA Contract “was in the best interest of the Government”… The Contracting Process is Flawed if this is the way VA Contracts are Awarded as this process is not acting in the best interest of Veterans Maceri went on to say…

WRITER’S NOTE #1:  Readers should Duly Note that there is actually a Federal Regulation that allows Federal Employees who are considered Management to receive as much as $62,000 or more per year Bonus in 2013 For Acting in the best interest of the (United States) Government which the Government calls A Performance or Merit Bonus http://www.app.com/article/20120514/NJNEWS/305140078/Feds-paid-employees-439M-in-bonuses?nclick_check=1  so it is quite possible those who were involved with approving this Contract to PATH could show that they saved the Government a Million Dollars for example by Awarding the Contract solely to PATH because they were “the lowest bidder”, they could become eligible to receive up to a very large Bonus. Want to find out how much Salary and Bonus Federal Employees you know earn??? Just click onto the link below…  http://php.app.com/fed_employees11/search.php

Maceri further explained that it is important to point-out that this Target Group of Homeless Veterans did not Trust the VA to provide services for them from their past experiences with the VA and so they did not seek any kind of services for themselves at the VA, especially for Mental Health Treatment, and that is why these 4-Non-Profits Targeted these specific Homeless Veterans….

Maceri also advised me that OPCC was promised a piece of the action by the VA because of their involvement in “Project 60″ in housing for a number of years “on their own dime” Targeting 60 of the Most Chronically Vulnerable Disabled Homeless Veterans with Severe Mental Health issues to whom they reached-out, but in fact they exceeded the 60 and housed 92 of this Target Group. 

Maceri further stated that OPCC only wanted 44 of those 940 Vouchers, and that Step Up on Second, the St. Joseph’s Center, and San Fernando Valley Mental Health had requested another 181 Vouchers combined for a total of only 225 Vouchers for these other 3-Non-Profits… These new HUD-VASH Housing Vouchers were to be the “mechanism to expand the pilot” Maceri went on to say…

Maceri also pointed out that since PATH has never been involved providing Mental Health Treatment and Shelter or Housing for this Target Group of Veterans and because of that he was deeply concerned that PATH may not know how to reach-out to the Most Chronically Vulnerable Disabled Homeless Veterans, especially the most Vulnerable Severely Mentally Ill Veterans … Maceri also advised me that he told other Homeless Veterans waiting for Permanent Housing that help was on the way from the VA in the form of these Housing Vouchers and that they could now Trust the VA(???)… This Writer agrees with everything Maceri has stated about Path in this Paragraph as well as everything else he has stated in this story.

WRITER’S NOTE #2:  It is important to Duly Note that currently the “VA Central Office” Mandates and the STATEMENT OF WORK issued to PATH that a minimum of 65% of the HUD-VASH Housing Vouchers be issued and provided to “Chronically Homeless” Veterans. However, this Mandate is subject to change every year. The primary Target Populations for HUD-VASH include Chronically Homeless, Chronically Mentally Ill, Veterans; Veteran Families with minor children, and returning Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans… To be eligible for the HUD-VASH Program Veterans shall be eligible for VA Health Care, and be assessed to have ongoing medical, mental health, substance abuse, or other serious psychosocial conditions or stressors that prevent the Veteran from obtaining or maintaining permanent housing on his/her own…

WRITER’S NOTE #3:  This Writer was not aware that San Fernando Valley Mental Health was involved in this matter until John Maceri advised me of same… Also, this Writer called and spoke to Todd Lipka, CEO of Step Up On Second  for a statement but Lipka said that he “Declined to comment”… Several messages were also left with the St. Joseph’s Center but they did not return my call by the time this story was Published… Furthermore, this Writer did not call Jeremy Sidell for any comment due to fact that Sidell had recently advised me that the VA told him to refer all questions to them which they did not answer until I filed under the Freedom of Information Act in order to get those answers…

Q–HUD VASH CASE MANAGEMENT AND HOUSING PLACEMENT SERVICES

Solicitation Number: VA26212R0287
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs Office: Long Beach VANLO Location: Department of Veterans Affairs                                              https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=53abd034eb7e8226445047f8cf065219
QUESTIONS WE ASKED THE VA TO ANSWER
1. According to Jeremy Sidell, on or about December 28, 2012, PATH was notified that they were awarded the Contract for the 940 Vouchers. Since that time, can you tell me how many homeless Veterans have started the process to obtain their HUD-VASH Vouchers?

The number of Veterans who have started the process since December 28, 2012 and February 22, 2013 which was the date of Our FOIA request to the VA is as follows: Greater Los Angeles = 147,  Long Beach = 9, for a Total of 156 processed. That’s about 78 homeless Veterans being processed per month… At that rate it would take about 12-months to process 940 Veterans for the 940 Section 8 Housing Vouchers… Is that acceptable??? 

2. PATH received from the VA $5,781,600.00 (Five Million Seven Hundred and Eighty-One Thousand Six Hundred Dollars) to initiate (?) the process for 940 homeless Veterans to obtain 940 HUD-VASH Housing Vouchers. This breaks-down in round numbers to $6,150 per Voucher. How does the VA justify awarding this amount? For example:
A. What are the total number of employee hours is it going to take to process each Veteran until they get their VASH Voucher from HUD? Or you can provide me with a “break-down” on how PATH justified being awarded the above amount. Copies of PATH’s application for this Award if available?
and/or
B. Does this award amount include the costs for PATH employed or contracted Supported Housing Counseling by Social Workers visiting the Veteran in the home once a month for the first 6-months like VA Social Worker currently do, and then for the next 18-months Veterans just checking-in with their Social Worker once a month by e-mail or telephone? If so, what are the total anticipated employee hours and costs.
C. Any other information that JUSTIFIES the above $6,150 COST PER VETERAN/VASH VOUCHER?
VA’s answer to all of the above
We do not have the number of employee hours to process Veterans due to the contract being awarded on a unit basis per veteran and not on employee hours. Included with the letter, is the Statement of Work detailing the work and responsibilities of the contractor. There is no separate “break-down” regarding justification. In addition, there is no copy of PATH’s application; PATH submitted a proposal based on the requirements of the contract. Their proposal and the agreement of duties and responsibilities between the Department of Veterans Affairs and PATH are formalized in the Statement of Work.
The Statement of Work detailing the work and responsibilities of PATH are included with this letter. Employee hours and costs are not tracked as the contract was awarded on a unit basis per veteran.
3. What was the Name or Names of the other Non-Profit or Non-Profits that CONTESTED the Contract Award to PATH? And, why did they Contest it? Copies of their reasons for Contesting said PATH Award if available?

THIS STORY TO BE CONTINUED IN ANOTHER EDITION

WE SUGGEST THAT YOU READ THE RELATED STORIES BELOW IN THE ORDER THEY ARE LISTED

Veterans in VA Homeless Programs being lied to about Housing Vouchers!!!http://vnsla.com/2012/11/10/veteransliedto/

940 homeless Veterans must suffer while nonprofits battle over housing voucher contract                                                      http://vnsla.com/2012/12/17/940homelessvetssuffer/

Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will End Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 1 of a Series             http://vnsla.com/2013/01/07/housingfirstpart1/

Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will end Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 2 of a Series

http://vnsla.com/2013/01/08/housingfirstpart2/

Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will end Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 3 of a Series            http://vnsla.com/2013/01/27/va300m/

Mercer Story http://www.merceralliance.org/pdf/5_Yr_Plan.pdf

Nicholas Pleace and Joanne Bretherton “Will Paradigm Drift Stop Housing First
from Ending Homelessness? Categorising and Critically Assessing the Housing
First Movement from a Social Policy Perspective” Paper given at Social Policy
in an Unequal World: Joint Annual Conference of the East Asian Social Policy
Research Network (EASP) and the United Kingdom Social Policy Association (SPA)
University of York, United Kingdom, July 16th-18th 2012
http://www.york.ac.uk/media/chp/documents/2006/NPJB-EASP-SPA-2012.pdf


Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will end Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 3 of a Series

by Terry Richards

SOURCES

Mercer Story http://www.merceralliance.org/pdf/5_Yr_Plan.pdf

Nicholas Pleace and Joanne Bretherton “Will Paradigm Drift Stop Housing First from Ending Homelessness? Categorising and Critically Assessing the Housing First Movement from a Social Policy Perspective” Paper given at Social Policy in an Unequal World: Joint Annual Conference of the East Asian Social Policy Research Network (EASP) and the United Kingdom Social Policy Association (SPA) University of York, United Kingdom, July 16th-18th 2012 http://www.york.ac.uk/media/chp/documents/2006/NPJB-EASP-SPA-2012.pdf

It is suggested that you read Parts 1 and 2 before reading Part 3 of this story. Just click onto the links set forth:

Read Part 1:  http://vnsla.com/2013/01/07/housingfirstpart1/

Read Part 2:   http://vnsla.com/2013/01/08/housingfirstpart2/

PART 3 STARTS HERE

December 10, 2012 Printable Version Need Viewer Software? VA Also Announces $300 Million to Expand Homeless Prevention Program WASHINGTON – The Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) today announced that a new national report shows that homelessness among Veterans has been reduced by approximately 7 percent between January 2011 and January 2012. The decline keeps the Obama Administration on track to meet the goal of ending Veteran homelessness in 2015.

“This report continues a trend that clearly indicates we are on the right track in the fight to end homelessness among Veterans. While this is encouraging news, we have more work to do and will not be satisfied until no Veteran has to sleep on the street,” said Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric K. Shinseki. “The success we have achieved is directly attributable to the hard work by all of our staff, and the federal, state, and community partners who are committed to ending Veteran homelessness.” HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan added, “This decline tells us that the Obama Administration is on the right path, working together across agencies to target Federal resources to produce a measurable reduction in Veteran homelessness.

Key to this success has been VA and HUD’s implementation of the Housing First approach endorsed by the Administration’s strategic plan to prevent and end homelessness. As our nation’s economic recovery takes hold, we will make certain that our homeless veterans find stable housing so they can get on their path to recovery.” The 2012 Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) to Congress, prepared by HUD, estimates there were 62,619 homeless Veterans on a single night in January in the United States, a 7.2 percent decline since 2011 and a 17.2 percent decline since 2009.

The AHAR reports on the extent and nature of homelessness in America. Included in the report is the annual Point-in-Time (PIT) count, which measures the number of homeless persons in the U.S. on a single night in January 2012, including the number of homeless Veterans. VA has made ending Veteran homelessness by the end of 2015 a top priority, undertaking an unprecedented campaign to dramatically increase awareness of VA services available for homeless Veterans and Veterans at risk of becoming homeless. While the number of homeless people in the U.S. dropped by less than 1 percent, according to the 2012 AHAR, Veteran homelessness has shown a more robust decline.

VA also announced the availability of $300 million in grants for community organizations, estimated to serve approximately 70,000 Veterans and their family members facing homelessness. The deadline for applying to the Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) program, a homelessness prevention and rapid re-housing program, is Feb. 1, 2013. “Homeless prevention grants provide community partners with the opportunity to help prevent and end homelessness on the local level,” said Secretary Shinseki. “This is a crucial tool in getting at-risk Veterans and their families on the road to stable, secure lives. ”

SSVF grants promote housing stability among homeless and at-risk Veterans and their families. The grants can have an immediate impact, helping lift Veterans out of homelessness or providing aid in emergency situations that put Veterans and their families at risk of homelessness. Through September 2012, SSVF has aided approximately 21,500 Veterans and over 35,000 individuals. Since SSVF is able to help the Veteran’s family, 8,826 children were also assisted, helping Veterans keep their families housed and together. Grantees provide a range of supportive services to very low-income Veteran families living in or transitioning to permanent housing, including case management, legal assistance, financial counseling, transportation, child care, rent, utilities and other services aimed at preventing homelessness. The availability of SSVF funds was announced in a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) posted in the Federal Register and on VA’s SSVF website at www.va.gov/homeless/ssvf.asp.


Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will end Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 2 of a Series

by Terry Richards

SOURCES

Mercer Story http://www.merceralliance.org/pdf/5_Yr_Plan.pdf

Nicholas Pleace and Joanne Bretherton “Will Paradigm Drift Stop Housing First
from Ending Homelessness? Categorising and Critically Assessing the Housing
First Movement from a Social Policy Perspective” Paper given at Social Policy
in an Unequal World: Joint Annual Conference of the East Asian Social Policy
Research Network (EASP) and the United Kingdom Social Policy Association (SPA)
University of York, United Kingdom, July 16th-18th 2012
http://www.york.ac.uk/media/chp/documents/2006/NPJB-EASP-SPA-2012.pdf

Writer’s Note: Surveys have revealed that 80% of Veterans do not want to live in Veterans Homes whether on or off VA or other Government Property because they don’t have their total privacy, and because they are subjected to substance abuse testing, curfews, not being able to have overnight guests, and other Rules that are part of this kind of housing. Most of these Veterans say they would rather be homeless than live in this kind of housing…

It is suggested that you read Part 1 before reading Part 2 of this story. Just click onto the link: http://vnsla.com/2013/01/07/housingfirstpart1/

graphhousingfirst

Housing First ends homelessness.  It’s that simple. It’s a no-brainer. This level of success was unprecedented in the USA. Nothing could match the rate at which PHF ended enduring homelessness and promoted housing stability among people with severe mental illness and problematic drug and alcohol use. The founder of the PHF service in housingfirstsamt New York, Sam Tsemberis, described the key success of PHF in very simple terms:

Housing First ends homelessness. It’s that simple. The rest of the story  of ‘Housing First’ is relatively recent history.

 

The Housing First approach was accepted as ‘evidence based’ policy by US Federal Government and appeared in homelessness policies and service provision in Australia, Canada, Finland, France, Ireland and  the Netherlands. ‘Housing First’ services also started to be piloted in Austria, Hungary, Japan, Portugal and the UK. ‘Housing First’ has become more and more prominent as a focus for academic and research and is appearing in local and regional strategies and in the plans of service providers as well as in national level strategies. A major evaluation of Housing First pilot projects is currently underway across the EU, echoing Federal funded evaluation of Housing First pilots conducted in the USA.

On the surface, the Housing First concept appears to be the most globally important and influential policy innovation that has yet occurred in homelessness service provision. However, when the detail of what is being done and contemplated in the name of ‘Housing First’ is looked at, differences between the PHF model and much of the ‘Housing First’ practice being developed elsewhere become apparent. As ‘Housing First’ has permeated the thinking of policymakers and service providers across the US and the wider world, the core ideas of PHF have been simplified, diluted and in many instances, subjected to change. The PHF paradigm often only has a partial relationship with the wide range of new and remodelled homelessness services that have been given the ‘Housing First’ label.

The Many Faces of Housing First As has been widely noted, differences exist between PHF and what services that are referred to as ‘Housing First’ both elsewhere in the USA and in parts of the EU 6. Projects described as ‘Housing First’ in the USA include services that use one block of accommodation with on-site staffing, and a floating support services that does not directly provide or arrange any housing. There are also ‘Housing First’ services that offer both staffed specialist communal accommodation for homeless people and scattered apartments with mobile support services.

A recent editorial discussion of ‘Housing First’ in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) referred to two studies of ‘Housing First’ published by JAMA. One study was about a ‘Housing First’ service that offered only transitional housing and the other was about a ‘Housing First’ service that used specially built communal housing unit with on-site staffing following a harm reduction approach. Another recent study looking at 11 services that had sought US Federal grant to develop ‘Housing First’ services concluded from reviewing the grant submissions that only two of the 11 showed fidelity with the PHF model. Pathways itself has reacted to the increasing diversity of ‘Housing First’ service provision in the USA by issuing a ‘fidelity scale’.

A similar inconsistency in how ‘Housing First’ is being interpreted is present across Europe. ‘Housing First’ in Finland is not the same as what is meant by ‘Housing First’ in France. In 2011, the Jury of the EU Consensus Conference, looking towards the development of an EU homelessness strategy, drew a distinction between a ‘housing-led’ response to homelessness and a ‘Housing First’ response: Given the history and specificity of the term ‘Housing First’, the jury follows the Preparatory Committee in using ‘housing-led’ as a broader, differentiated concept encompassing approaches that aim to provide housing, with support as required, as the initial step in addressing all forms of homelessness. ‘Housing-led’ thus encompasses the ‘Housing First’ model as part of a broader group of policy approaches…

The distinction summarises one of the reasons why an ambiguity has appeared around the term ‘Housing First’. The term ‘Housing First’ is being used to describe not only services following the PHF model, but also a wider range of ‘Housing-Led’ homelessness services.

In addition, ‘Housing First’ is also being used as a term to describe the adaptation of core aspects of the PHF philosophy to communal, fixed site homelessness services, i.e. blocks of apartments with on-site staffing that are only lived in by service users.

The Risks of Ambiguity There are three main risks associated with the ambiguity that now surrounds the term ‘Housing First’. The first risk is that a range of services calling themselves ‘Housing First’ are being deployed, these are services that have not been precisely defined. This is partially a question of assessing outcomes and partially a question of assessing service cost effectiveness, but it is also a question of understanding what homeless people want and need from services. What is very important is that the gains made by PHF - sustainably ending sustained homelessness for most of the homeless people with severe mental illness it works with – do not become associated with any relative failure by ‘Housing First’ services that do not closely reflect the PHF model. This risk might be summarised as a risk of damage by false association.

The second risk is that the core message about PHF - the capacity to end homelessness for most people with severe mental illness – may become ‘lost’ within an amorphous mass of ill-defined ‘Housing First’ services, a loss of key message risk. This can be illustrated by some of the responses to PHF in the UK. The UK has seen mobile resettlement services that were used to close down traditional homeless hostels in the 1980s develop into widely used ‘tenancy sustainment service’ model that uses ordinary, scattered, housing and mobile workers providing case management to both prevent homelessness and resettle vulnerable homeless people within a harm reduction framework (Pleace, 1997; Franklin, 1999; Pleace and Quilgars, 2003). Tenancy sustainment services have both a superficial resemblance to and, to varying extents, a common set of operational approaches with PHF. In this context, an often imprecise presentation of ‘Housing First’ has made PHF appear to be ‘just another’ floating support service. In the UK, this has led some policymakers and service providers react to ‘Housing First’ as if it were offering no significant innovation.

The third risk is essentially the danger that debate around Housing First may descend into argument about what is and what is not Housing First. This is potentially unproductive, as energy would be better directed at trying to understand and explore the reality of varied ‘Housing First’ services that have come into being. This might be termed definitional dispute risk.

In a situation where more precision is needed about what Housing First is, to assess and then to replicate those variants of Housing First that are successful, the question arises as to how to think clearly about Housing First. This is a process that must begin by defining what the reality of ‘Housing First’ now is.

Categorizing Housing First ‘Housing First’ services can be categorized into one of three broad groups. The first group is made up of PHF services, which adhere to the Pathways model, the second group is made up of Communal Housing First services and the third group is made up of Housing First ‘Light’ services. This broad taxonomy is a description of ‘Housing First’ services as they exist, it is not a prescription of what ‘Housing First’ is, instead the intention is to classify those services that draw heavily upon, or closely reflect, the PHF ethos.

Communal Housing First services (CHF) are focused on chronically homeless people. These services are delivered in communal accommodation that is only lived in by people using the CHF service. Accommodation takes the form of individual self-contained flats or apartments in a block or blocks. The accommodation has often been modified, or specifically designed, to provide a service for chronically homeless people. There is often an emphasis on targeting chronically homeless people with the highest needs, i.e. the most acutely problematic use of drug and alcohol, severe mental illness and poor physical health. Support and medical services are situated in the same building or are very nearby.

The Housing First elements in CHF services, which are sometimes referred to as ‘project based’ Housing First are threefold. First, accommodationwith security of tenure is provided immediately. Second, the provision of this accommodation and support are administratively separate, reflecting the separation of housing and support which is a key principle of the PHF approach. Service users do not have to engage with treatment or show abstinence from drugs and alcohol in order to access and retain their accommodation. CHF services also follow a harm reduction approach with a recovery orientation and emphasise consumer choice and control. Psychiatric, drug and alcohol services are directly provided and a CHF service may also use case management to connect service users with external services. However, a CHF services may not necessarily use the combination of ACT and ICM teams used by PHF.

CHF is used in the USA and is a significant part of the Finnish National Homelessness Strategy which describes itself as following a ‘Housing First’ approach. The Finnish ‘Name on the Door’ Programme, includes extensive remodelling of existing, dormitory homeless hostels, with self contained flats and also changing the operational ethos of former hostels to reflect ‘Housing First’ principles. The goals are ambitious and centre on halving long term homelessness by 2011 and effectively ending it by 2015. The key features of the Finnish approach have been summarised as follow: The Finnish Programme also includes ‘Housing First’ services that use scattered site housing. Services must respect the basic human need for privacy. Service users must have their own rental contract/tenancy. Permanent housing is the base that allows other problems to be solved. Allowance of alcohol consumption. Separation of housing and services. Individually tailored services based on needs assessment. An emphasis on permanent not temporary solutions.  Existing shelters and dormitories are inadequate and must be replaced by supported housing units.

There has been considerable expenditure and a marked shift in homelessness service provision in Finland. The country saw a reduction from 3,665 places in homeless shelters (emergency accommodation) in 1985 to just 144 places in 2011. During the same period, provision of independent flats for homeless people increased from 65 to 2,296.

The parallels between CHF with PHF are considerable, but a key – very significant – difference centres on the provision of shared accommodation blocks with on-site staffing rather than using scattered housing. Yet CHF services in the US define themselves in relation to the PHF model and its principles and derive their own operational models from PHF. In Finland, the development and use of the CHF model initially evolved separately from PHF. As the Finns became aware of PHF, they began to define their National Strategy and their CHF services in reference to PHF and be influenced by the model. The Finns even asked the chief architect of PHF, Tsemberis, to review their services, eliciting a not uncritical assessment of their use of CHF, which Tsemberis saw as undermining the potential for community reintegration among service users. Nevertheless, the influence of PHF is very strongly evident in CHF services, even if those services are not PHF services, and this is perhaps the ultimate argument for regarding them as a form of ‘Housing First’. Housing First ‘Light’ (HFL) services are those services which follow, or which reflect, the PHF model but which offer significantly less intensive support services and are more heavily reliant on case management. HFL services can sometimes be described as reflecting the PHF paradigm because some of these services developed separately, though they share many elements of the PHF ethos and also resemble PHF in how they operate. Many of the principles of PHF are adopted, including immediate or ‘rapid as possible’ provision of adequate, secure and permanent housing that is scattered throughout a community. There is no requirement to stay in a hostel, staircase service or any other form of communal accommodation, or to be made ‘housing ready’, before being given access to housing.

HFL services give each individual service user a single key-worker, who may provide practical advice and some emotional support but whose main role is as a case manager, arranging access to the externally provided treatment and support that each homeless individual or household needs. HFL services do not directly provide medical, psychiatric or drug and alcohol services. As with PHF, housing and support are separated, there is no requirement for abstinence, no requirement for compliance with treatment and a harm reduction approach is followed. HFL services can be used for chronically homeless people, but it can also be employed for homeless people with lower support needs who need less assistance to sustain a tenancy.

There is an argument for using the term ‘Housing-Led’ to describe HFL services. However, there are two reasons for using the term ‘Housing First Light’ to describe these services. First, even though they quite often developed with reference to the PHF paradigm, HFL services do nevertheless mirror PHF in multiple respects. Second, as the terminology of ‘Housing First’ continues to spread throughout homelessness strategies and among homelessness service providers, it seems very likely that such services, even if not doing so already, will start to refer to themselves as ‘Housing First’ models. Clearly, the key difference between PHF and HFL service – the low intensity of support and heavy reliance on case management – is significant. Yet, as with CHF, there are considerable arguments in favour of regarding these services as another form of ‘Housing First’ because of the extent of the parallels in operation and shared ethos. The key differences between PHF, CHF and HFL services are summarised in Table 1. Table 1: A Taxonomy of ‘Housing First’ Services Service offered  Pathways Housing First  Communal Housing First  Housing First Light Housing with security of tenure provided immediately or as soon as possible, scattered across the community  Yes  No  Yes Uses subleasing/sub-tenancies  Yes  No  No Apartments with security of tenure provided immediately in a shared/communal block  No  Yes  No Service users have to stop using drugs  No  No  No Service users have to stop drinking alcohol  No  No  No Service users have to use mental health services  No  No  No Harm reduction approach  Yes  Yes  Yes Uses mobile teams to provide services  Yes  No  Yes Directly provides drug and alcohol services  Yes  Yes  No Directly provides psychiatric and medical services  Yes  Yes  No Uses case management/service brokerage  Yes  Yes  Yes It’s the beginning of the year, and resolutions are fresh. Exercise more. Lose weight. Spend less. Reduce stress. Gym memberships jump in January, and so do hopes that weight-loss programs and yoga classes will reshape our bodies and minds. But New Year’s resolutions don’t come cheap. According to market research corporation Marketdata Enterprises, Americans spent $62 billion in 2011 on “health club memberships, weight-loss programs, exercise tapes, diet sodas and the like,” despite the fact that many of these products don’t work. And even though Americans spend close to $19 billion a year on gym memberships alone, four out of five of those memberships are not used regularly. It’s clear that we’ve got a fairly large gap between resolutions and reality. Certainly, losing weight and getting fit are admirable goals, but there are cheaper ways to do it — and there are better ways to spend our money. So here’s an idea, one that avoids false promises and fulfills another top New Year’s resolution: to help others. Let’s take some of those dollars that we pay out on fake science and so-called miracle weight-loss products and spend them on a worthwhile alternative. Let’s tackle a big problem — say, homelessness in America. To many, homelessness is an impossible problem — too unwieldy and expensive. But ending homelessness has a price tag, just like those gizmos purporting to shed pounds and gym memberships. According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, it would cost $20 billion to end homelessness. That’s less than half of what we spend each year on weight loss and self-improvement. Seriously, ending homelessness is not an impossible task. One of the first steps in solving any problem is to actually believe it can be solved. The second step is to break it down into manageable tasks. Third, get started. Fourth, keep at it. The good news is that the number of people living on America’s streets has dropped by 17 percent since 2007. The number of homeless veterans has dropped by 17 percent since 2009 as well. These decreases are partly because of the outstanding work of service providers who know that not all homeless people are the same. Some are severely disabled and need long-term housing and good medical care, but many of those who become homeless lost their job in the Great Recession of 2007-2009 or got sick and fell behind on rent or house payments. What they need is help getting back on their feet. Local service agencies provide them with rapid “rehousing” so they don’t end up on the street, help with security deposits and a few months’ rent, and job assistance if needed. Such targeted aid is usually enough to bring folks back to a place where they’re self-sufficient and can take care of themselves. Much of the progress that’s been made in communities is due to federal funding — including $1.5 billion in stimulus money for homeless prevention and rapid rehousing programs. That effort, along with funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Veterans Administration, rebuts the myth that government programs do little if any good because they encourage dependency and a victim mentality in recipients. In truth, these are our fellow citizens who pay taxes and work hard but have hit a rough patch and need a temporary hand to get back on their feet. Steve Berg, vice president for programs and policy at the National Alliance to End Homelessness, suggests ways that all of us can help. “Pay your taxes and don’t complain,” he said in an interview. The money is going to programs that work. “Volunteer,” he added. “Make a donation. Talk to the influential people in your community to see if you’ve got a coordinated approach to homelessness. Find out if the numbers are going down. And don’t stop asking questions until you get good answers.” Remember, Berg says, we are the richest country in the world. Nobody should have to live on the street. Not only is it morally wrong but it ends up costing us more in the long run. Speaking of costs, I’d like to add that the $20 billion price tag for ending homelessness comes to less than half of what we spend each year on our pets. To me it’s a no-brainer. Happy New Year.

All Sources for Par 2 can be found at the bottom of the page in Part 1 of this story. Just click onto the link: http://vnsla.com/2013/01/07/housingfirstpart1/


by Terry Richards

SOURCES

Mercer Story http://www.merceralliance.org/pdf/5_Yr_Plan.pdf

Nicholas Pleace and Joanne Bretherton “Will Paradigm Drift Stop Housing First
from Ending Homelessness? Categorising and Critically Assessing the Housing
First Movement from a Social Policy Perspective” Paper given at Social Policy
in an Unequal World: Joint Annual Conference of the East Asian Social Policy
Research Network (EASP) and the United Kingdom Social Policy Association (SPA)
University of York, United Kingdom, July 16th-18th 2012
http://www.york.ac.uk/media/chp/documents/2006/NPJB-EASP-SPA-2012.pdf

housingfirstretentiongraph

Proof Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach will End Veteran Homelessness, Not Building Veterans Homes!!! – Part 1 of a Series

Writer’s Note: Surveys have revealed that 80% of Veterans do not want to live in Veterans Homes whether on or off VA or other Government Property because they don’t have their total privacy, and because they are subjected to substance abuse testing, curfews, not being able to have overnight guests, and other Rules that are part of this kind of housing. Most of these Veterans say they would rather be homeless than live in this kind of housing…

LOS ANGELES, CA - The information provided in this story and the continuing series of stories will prove that the “Independent Private ‘supported housing’ approach (‘Housing First’) through HUD-VASH (VA Supported Housing) for about 80% of Homeless Veterans in Los Angeles and housingfirst10tipsforsuccessNationwide will end homelessness among Veterans, Not the building of Veterans Homes!!!

Will Paradigm Drift To Veterans Homes Stop Housing First Approach from Ending Veteran Homelessness? housingfirstdoingmorewithlessbldgs

Abstract
Housing First is at the centre of policy responses to chronic homelessness in Finland, France, Ireland, the Netherlands and the USA. Services following a ‘Housing First’ approach have also appeared in Austria, Australia, Denmark, France, Hungary, the Netherlands, Japan, Portugal and the UK. Recent  hudvashcommittmentsignresearch has noted growing diversity in ‘Housing First’ services and that many services have ‘drifted’ significantly from the service design established by the Tsemberis ‘Pathways’ service. The Housing First movement is now at risk of losing focus, with discussion and implementation of what are nominally ‘Housing First’ approaches now encompassing a range of diverse ideas and hudvashpicuteofhouseservice models. This paper argues that there is a need to construct a clear and accurate taxonomy of Housing First services. Creating this taxonomy is a first step in refocusing attention on the effectiveness of the original Pathways model in producing sustained exits from homelessness for vulnerable people and may also serve as a means to look critically at the housingfirstVeterans-First-logoeffectiveness of emergent forms of ‘Housing First’ service.

The housing sustainment rates reported by the Pathways (PHF) ‘Housing First’ ‘supported housing’ approach, with 88% of formerly chronically homeless people still in housing at five years being reported by one study and 74% still in housing at four years by another, were close to double the rate of housing sustainment achieved by LRT (linear residential treatment model) sometimes called the ‘staircase model’ in Europe) Although the term ‘Housing First’ had already been used elsewhere, the homelessness service with which ‘Housing First’ is synonymous was established by Pathways in New York in 1992.

HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan: “The Obama Administration is on the right path, working together across agencies to target Federal resources to produce a measurable reduction in Veteran homelessness. Key to this success has been VA and HUD’s implementation of the Housing First approach endorsed by the Administration’s strategic plan to prevent and end homelessness. As our nation’s economic recovery takes hold, we will make certain that our homeless veterans find stable housing so they can get on their path to recovery.”

Although the term ‘Housing First’ had already been used elsewhere, the homelessness service with which ‘Housing First’ is synonymous was established by Pathways in New York in 1992. Pathways Housing First (PHF) is based on the ‘supported housing’ approach which was originally developed for former psychiatric patients being discharged from long stay hospitals. PHF is targeted on people experiencing, or at risk of, sustained homelessness who have a severe mental illness and also works with people with severe mental illness who present with problematic drug and/or alcohol use.

As is extensively documented elsewhere, PHF was developed in reaction to the continuum or linear residential treatment model (LRT) (sometimes called the ‘staircase model’ in Europe). The LRT approach was treatment-led and aimed to resettle homeless people with severe mental illness and/or problematic drug and alcohol use by using a series of ‘steps’, beginning with highly supportive, highly regulated communal accommodation, progressing into more home-like 3 environments and ending with independent housing. These services required conformity with treatment and abstinence from drugs and alcohol. They sought to treat severe mental illness and end problematic drug and alcohol use before, eventually, addressing housing need. The LRT model was widely criticised, both because these services often used a relatively harsh regime that required both abstinence and treatment compliance and because LRT services were frequently abandoned by homeless people. LRT services often lost a majority of their service users before the process of treatment and resettlement was complete.  

 The advocates of PHF argued that LRT services required service users to comply with psychiatric treatment and show sobriety because it was assumed they will ‘value’ independent housing that they have ‘earned’. By contrast, PHF was described as grounded in the following operating principles: Housing is a basic human right. There should be: o respect, warmth and compassion for service users; o a commitment to working with service users for as long as they need; scattered site housing using independent apartments (i.e. homeless people should not be housed within dedicated buildings but within ordinary housing); separation of housing from mental health, and drug and alcohol services (i.e. housing provision is not conditional on compliance with psychiatric treatment or sobriety); consumer choice and self-determination (i.e. delivering mental health and drug and alcohol services with an emphasis on service user choice and control; basing treatment plans around service users’ own goals); a recovery orientation (conveying a positive message that recovery is possible for service users); a harm reduction approach (i.e. supporting the minimisation of problematic drug/alcohol use but not insisting on total abstinence).

Homeless people using PHF have a severe mental illness, this is the group for whom the service is designed and, in addition, the funding for PHF partly relies on Federal welfare benefits for which only people with severe mental illness are eligible PHF places formerly chronically homeless people in furnished 4 apartments provided via the private rented sector. Housing must be of reasonable quality and service users must sign a lease agreement, usually with PHF (i.e. the tenancy is held by PHF and the service user is sub-letting). This approach reduces any private landlord concerns about letting to formerly homeless people as the tenancy agreement is between PHF and the landlord, but while it arguably somewhat reduces the housing rights of service users, it also creates flexibility, because PHF can relatively easily move service users between housing if there is a problem, without needing to evict them. There is no requirement for compliance with psychiatric treatment or for abstinence from drugs or alcohol in order to access and retain housing. Access to housing is however not entirely unconditional, as service users must agree to a weekly visit from a PHF support worker and also to paying 30% of their monthly income towards rent, alongside agreeing with the requirements of their lease.

The PHF interdisciplinary team combines Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) and Intensive Case Management (ICM) services. The ACT element concentrating on people with the severest forms of mental illness, while the ICM team supports those service users with relatively lower levels of need. The interdisciplinary team can include a psychiatrist, a peer specialist (i.e. a former service user providing support), a health worker, a family specialist (centred on enhancing social support), a drug and alcohol worker, a supported employment specialist, as well as a housing specialist. Quasi-experimental and control studies have shown that PHF in New York had much better resettlement and housing sustainment outcomes than LRT services.

The housing sustainment rates reported by PHF, with 88% of formerly chronically homeless people still in housing at five years being reported by one study and 74% still in housing at four years by another, were close to double the rate of housing sustainment achieved by LRT services. There is also evidence of cost effectiveness. PHF costs less than staircase models because no specialist accommodation has to be built. PHF service users also make less use of emergency shelters, less use of emergency medical services, and are less likely to get arrested than when they were homeless, all of which produce savings for the US Taxpayer.

Writer’s Note:  In my entire life I have never seen so much grandstanding, debating, bickering, whining, greed, drama, improper political maneuvers, back-stabbing, excuses, stalling-tactics, red-tape, lack of staying informed and lack of knowledge and research in endeavoring to understand the “mind-set” of homeless Veterans, and just plain old bull-crap by Veterans Advocates, especially Bob Rosebrock and his Old Veterans Guard and Veterans Revolution Group, Members of Congress, The Democratic and Republican Parties, and Los Angeles City and County Members of Government, et al, over endeavoring to solve the homeless Veterans plight in Los Angeles, when the ‘Housing First” Paradigm solution has already been ascertained and tested, already part of The Obama Administrations’ the VA’s strategy because it’s the most successful Worldwide of any other Paradigms… So all of the above mal-behavior needs to cease and desist and for them and Congress and everyone else to foucs on the Solution, which is for Congress to Legislate and Appropriate Funds for 70,000 HUD-VASH Section 8 Housing Vouchers for all of the estimated 70,000 homeless Veterans or for as many as there actually are that want Independent Private Housing using the ‘housing first’ - ‘supported housing’ approach as opposed to Veterans Homes… 

Just click onto the link to read Part 2 of this story: http://vnsla.com/2013/01/08/housingfirstpart2/ 

Sources

Mercer Story http://www.merceralliance.org/pdf/5_Yr_Plan.pdf
Nicholas Pleace Centre for Housing Policy, University of York www.york.ac.uk/chp/

European Observatory on Homelessness www.feantsaresearch.org/
nicholas.pleace@york.ac.uk (Corresponding author)

Joanne Bretherton Centre for Housing Policy, University of York www.york.ac.uk/chp/Joanne.bretherton@york.ac.uk 2


by Terry Richards

PATH-Logo-with-People-Assisting-The-Homeless-300-dpi

LOS ANGELES – The Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) decision for whatever reason that Veterans would be better served and money saved if it outsourced their HUD-VASH Housing Voucher Program to one well-known Nonprofit in the Los Angeles area has backfired after they exclusively awarded People Assisting The Homeless (PATH) the contract to issue the 940 HUD-VASH Housing Vouchers that were made available to Los Angeles County October 01, 2012.
However, in an exclusive e-mail interview with Jeremy Seidel, Communications etc for PATH, Seidel told me that they were geared up and ready to issue those voucher to homeless Veterans but several other Nonprofits in the area wanted “a piece of the action” because of financial rewards that go along with this contract, and so they filed a Complaint with the General Services Administration (GSA) in Washington, D.C., asking that they too get part of that contract. Seidel also advised me that it won’t be until at least January of 2013 before GSA makes a decision on the entire matter.
So instead of the VA continuing to process these housing vouchers as they had been until the dispute was settled by the GSA in order to provide homeless Veterans with permanent housing, the VA did nothing!!! So now 940 homeless Veterans who either live on the street and in VA transitional housing must suffer because of the disputing Nonprofits’ greedy actions to get a “piece of the action”, and because of the VA’s inactions!!! The VA and America can do better than this for its Veterans…

RELATED STORIES

http://vnsla.com/2012/11/10/veteransliedto/

http://vnsla.com/2012/11/12/evictedhudvets/

http://vnsla.com/2012/12/02/building209/

Who are the Homeless, Hungry, Needy in America? A series of stories written by Columnist Terry Richards originally on www.veteranstoday.com/author/Richards

To read this series click onto the link below.                         http://www.veteranstoday.com/?s=who+are+the+homeless%2C+hungry%2C+needy+in+america%3F&x=0&y=0

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.