Category Archives: Individual Services Committee

Individual Services Meeting Minutes – 10/2/14

Individual Services Meeting Minutes
October 2, 2014

In Attendance: Erin Forbush, ServiceNet, Hwei-Ling Greeney, Amherst Community Connections, Mike Hagmaier, Soldier On, Peg Keller, City of Northampton, Jay Levy, Eliot CHS-Homeless Services, Patty McDonnell, SMOC, Katie Miernicki, ServiceNet, Bill Miller, Friends of the Homeless, Dave Modzelewski, Network, Donna Nadeau, DHCD, Claudia Phillips, Health Care for the Homeless, Lizzy Ortiz, City of Springfield, Pamela Schwartz, Network

VI-SPDAT Discussion:
Continued discussion of implementation of this assessment tool and various challenges, including:

  • How to hold information so it can “travel with the person” and does not have to be duplicated and can be updated. There is a need for an online tool.
  • How to account for confidentiality issues in the sharing of information among providers and within HMIS.
  • How to account for when an assessment “score” does not adequately reflect the person’s needs. Need to develop process for review for exceptions.
  • How to re-administer VI-SPDAT after 6 months and then 12 months of housing. We want to be able to measure the use of permanent supportive housing as a harm reduction model based on concrete outcomes, e.g., reduction in ER visits. Revisiting VI-SPDAT results after period of housing would be useful to that effect.

Soldier On, ServiceNet and Amherst Community Connections agreed to pilot the VI-SPDAT over the next 2 months and we will review the initial findings at our December meeting.

Hwei-Ling Greeney of Amherst Community Connections will check in with Andrea Miller re: integrating her data into HMIS.

Shelter update

Peg Keller shared that she received reports that numbers of homeless individuals were higher this summer in Northampton. She also heard that individuals were coming from Hampden County. Bill Miller of Friends of the Homeless shared his anecdotal information that more individuals were coming from Worcester to Springfield. Jay Levy reported that he is working with Worcester around their winter season shelter capacity in view of high demand.

Bill suggested that shelters look into their data and find out where people were residing before entering shelter. FOH and ServiceNet will do this, and compare it to previous years, and report back at the November meeting.

Next meeting: Thursday, 11/6, 10:30-noon, Friends of the Homeless, Springfield

Individual Services Meeting Minutes – 9/4/14

Individual Services Committee Meeting Minutes
September 4, 2014

In attendance: Deb Aloisi, Friends of the Homeless, Karen Dean, Hampden County Sheriff’s Department, Hwei-Ling Greeney, Amherst Community Connections, Janice Humason, Friends of the Homeless, Nichole King, Friends of the Homeless, Samantha Lambert, Friends of the Homeless, Jay Levy, Eliot CHS – Homeless Services; Sara Lopes, Friends of the Homeless, Betsaide Maldonado, Katie Miernecki, ServiceNet, Bill Miller, Friends of the Homeless, Dave Modzelewski, Network, Claudia Phillips, Mercy/Health Care for the Homeless, Lizzie Malave, City of Springfield, Tom Ray, Friends of the Homeless, Laura Saponare, Catholic Charities, Joe Schroeter, Samaritan Inn, Rebekah Wilder, Craigs Doors, Delphine Wray, Friends of the Homeless,

Continuing Discussion of Coordinated Assessment/VI-SPDAT tool:

Gerry reported back about last month’s meeting in Northampton where it was decided to recommend to the Hampden County CoC Board of Directors that they require all CoC funded programs to utilize the VI-SPDAT tool. She wanted to review and affirm that decision again since attendees vary between Northampton and Springfield meetings. Gerry clarified that this vote would be an adoption of the basic principle; that policies and procedures would still need to be developed around actual implementation.

Jay Levy underscored the importance of the process and capacity for an override of a VI-SPDAT score due to various limitations, e.g., interviewing people who are not verbal and not able to sit through the survey, thereby scoring without many answers. He also noted the challenge of having staff and support services currently in existence for people living in shelter or on the streets which may have them score lower (and therefore not be eligible for permanent supportive housing) but without those services would not be able to maintain housing, i.e., in fact should be eligible for PSH.

Gerry noted that these issues will be addressed in the procedural guidelines to be developed, as well as issues around how to incorporate the survey results into HMIS; guidelines around confidentiality, process for how referrals happen and grievance procedures.

Bill Miller noted that the CoC funds a wide range of housing at different levels for different resources, and asked whether all funded programs will be required to use this tool regardless of funding levels and types.

Gerry explained HUD’s increasing emphasis on use of this kind of screening tool and anticipates it will see an absolute requirement for EVERY CoC program to assess and prioritize PSH under the Housing First model with the use of a universal tool. In short: yes, regardless of level or type of funding, every CoC program that provides PSH will be required to use this tool. But where there are particular programmatic needs or barriers, the development of policies and procedures will address them. model.

Continue reading

Minutes, Individual Services Committee, July 3, 2014

Present: Jerry Ray (MHA), Janice Humason (FOH), Laura Saponare (Catholic Charities), Dave Modzelewski (Network), Angel Middleton (HRU Lighthouse), Charlie Knight, Rebekah Wilder (Craig’s Doors), Dave Christopolis (Hilltown CDC, 3-County CoC), Bill Miller (FOH), Nicole King (FOH), Denise Rivera (FOH), Jo-Anne Ryan (HCH), Todd Koniezhny (HRU Lighthouse), Deb Aloisi (FOH), Delphine Ray (FOH), Rosemary Surdyka (HCH), Samantha Lambert (FOH), Claudia Phillips (HCH/Mercy), Patricia McDonnell (SMOC), and Gerry McCafferty (City of Springfield, Hampden County CoC).

In Pamela’s absence, the meeting was chaired by Gerry McCafferty. After everyone introduced themselves, Gerry reminded everyone that the agenda topic was coordinated assessment, a continuation of the conversation that the Individual Services committee has been having over several months of meetings. More specifically, the topic was the VI-SPDAT, an assessment tool that the committee has expressed interest in using for screening for permanent supportive housing. Continue reading

Individual Services Meeting Minutes 6/5; next meeting 7/3

Individual Services Committee
June 5, 2014

In attendance: Dave Christopolis, Hilltown CDC, Hwei-Ling Greeney, Amherst Community Connection, Nichole King, Friends of the Homeless, Jay Levy, Eliot CHS – Homeless Services, Samantha Lambert, Friends of the Homeless, Courtenay Loiselle, Money Follows the Person Strategic Housing Partnership, Jennifer Lucca, Samaritan Inn, Patty McDonnell, SMOC, Dave Modzelewski, Donna Nadeau, DHCD, Kevin Noon, Craig’s Doors, Lizzy Ortiz, City of Springfield, Jerry Ray, Mental Health Association, Laura Saponare, Catholic Charities, Joe Schroeter, Eliot CHS, Pamela Schwartz , Network, Betsy Shally-Jensen, A Positive Place – CDH, Rachel Taylor-Doward, ServiceNet, Rebekah Wilder, Craig’s Doors, Delphne Wray, Friends of the Homeless

Coordinated Intake Discussion Continued

Pamela provided an update on the online Housing Options Tool due to be initially launched by 7/1.  Andrea Miller (the tool creator) provided a sneak preview to Pamela and she reported that it is AMAZING and will clearly provide the foundation for our region’s coordinated assessment process.

Towards that end, today’s meeting focus was to review the pre-screening and application forms that will accessed through HOT and eventually used across all programs in the region.

Feedback on REACH and Initial Screening Forms currently in use:

(Note: Pamela accidentally provided an old REACH form as the basis for review so the group improvised on a more general conceptual level.)

Comments/suggestions included:

  • Prescreen form should include the question: “Have you ever served in the military?”
  • Prescreen form should include the question: “Do you have health insurance and if so, what?”
  • Note that “Contact Person” asked for on form could be a person other than the one from the referring agency (or there could be an additional contact person from outside the agency), so perhaps there should be an additional line there confirming the contact person’s agency and related information.
  • We should ask primary language/ethnicity/race on the pre-screening form as well.
  • On “income” question, provide a space to note whether an application is pending, e.g., for SSI or other benefits.  It can be misleading to have to state “zero” income because there is no income at the moment when an application may be pending.
  • Integrate the pre-screening questions on REACH/Initial screening as the front part of VI-SPDAT so there is only one name, one document, one link that covers the “pre-screen” process.
  • Must integrate the release form in this document for both local providers and to input data into the HMIS system – if the release is made general enough it  can cover both bases.
  • Discussion of access to HOT:  can anyone get to tool and complete forms?  Overall consensus that this would be hazardous to the administration of the system (at least to start); that while consumer empowerment is an important goal, we need to make sure the system is working among providers; that we don’t want to risk “jamming” up the system with inaccurate information if users are not sufficiently educated about the tool.  Instead, recommended that consumers have access to a page of HOT that informs them of this resource and directs them to an appropriate agency contact to learn more and to get help.
  • Question of “who will be getting these referrals once they are complete?”  Where are they going to?  Is it essentially an online version of REACH and would Dave M be vetting referrals via some entry point?  More to understand (or develop) there.
  • Overall agreement that we should launch the system incrementally; test it out with targeted providers, work out bugs, grow use from there.
  • Noted that the most important features to make HOT workable as a referral system are the vacancy and wait list tracking.  The utility of HOT depends on the buy-in of providers to enlist these features!
  • After discussion, agreed that the completion of the VI-SPDAT for ALL people entering the front door is relevant (and sometimes required) in order to ascertain whether the individual is suitable for “lesser” interventions as well, e.g., rapid re-housing and in recognition that there will be plenty of individuals who may not qualify as “chronically homeless” but rank high on the vulnerability index.

Next step on pre-screening:  Jay, Dave M, Jerry Ray will meet with Andrea ASAP to talk through these questions in more depth and make decisions!

Continue reading