Balance of State Q & A by eric samuels
March 2007

Texas Homeless Network’s Balance of State Manager, Eric Samuels, will include a question an answer column each issue of the Homeless Network News to keep us all up to date on the project. The Balance of State Project refers to the grassroots community organizing the Texas Homeless Network is encouraging in mostly rural areas of the state that are not covered by established Continuums of Care (CoCs). Through this process, participating communities have the opportunity to work with THN staff on the CoC planning process which ultimately allows them the potential to apply for Continuum of Care funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) through the statewide application submitted by THN.

 

Q: Since our last issue what have you been up to?

A: Throughout the months of November, December, and January, I continued to travel and meet with representatives of local continuums of care about the January 25 th, 2007 point-in-time survey. I visited fifteen different communities over that time frame and met many hard working people dedicated to alleviating homelessness in their communities. Whether it was in Harlingen, Big Spring, or Tyler, I knew I was surrounded by people who found this situation important enough to take time away from the work they do on a daily basis so that they may have a chance to develop a project that would significantly alleviate homelessness in their community.

 

Q: What did you discuss with the local coalitions regarding the point-in-time survey?

A: Basically I reviewed the methodology or plan for carrying out the survey and we discussed each of the survey instruments that would be used to gather information from people experiencing homelessness, people very near homelessness, and those who work with each or both of those populations. I think, in the end, I learned more from the people I met with than they did from me during these meetings. For instance, the survey instrument we ultimately used was created largely from the input of participants throughout the state. It’s remarkable the level of scrutiny you get when you present a document to hundreds of service providers across the state with insight on how questions will be read and interpreted. I believe that that scrutiny really improved the quality of the survey – and yet, even after the administration, I learned of further adjustments that we will need to make before next time around.

 

Q: How did the survey go, do you have results?

A: The participation in the survey increased from last year in terms of the number of communities participating and the numbers of people counted and surveyed so in that regard I believe we were successful. I’ve received over 750 homeless characteristic surveys so far, and I’m still expecting more from some of our larger communities so that number will increase before we finish with the analysis. In addition to the numbers increasing, I believe the quality of data also improved. The people coordinating and administering the survey in each participating communities are the reasons this year’s survey was a success.

 

Q: Any news on the status of 2006’s CoC application?

A: Yes, we recently received notification of the CoC grant awards and, unfortunately, we were only awarded funding for one year of the Balance of State HMIS project that THN applied for. None of the other 20 applications were awarded. It was disappointing news to get after waiting so long for the notification; the awards were released over a month later than they typically are.

 

Q: Do you know why only one proposal was funded?

A: Not specifically, but we do know that our overall score was not far from the threshold for funding. We have asked HUD for a debriefing, and only after that will we know specifically what the problems were with our application. The reason only one year of the HMIS project was funded is because of a HUD policy that states if an application does not meet threshold but scores above a 65 and includes a project that would implement a new HMIS, that particular project would be funded.

 

Q: What was the response of the representatives of the 20 proposals upon learning they did not receive funding?

A: Not surprisingly, people initially were frustrated and wanted an explanation of the reason behind HUD’s response to our application. However, to my surprise, that reaction was usually followed by, “okay, what do we do this year to improve” type of comments. Here I was calling people up with bad news for them, and by the end of the conversation, it’s them encouraging me to get ready to go for funding in 2007! With that type of encouragement and support , I like our chances on the upcoming CoC application.

 

Q: Where do you go from here?

A: First of all, I think that again we need to push forward, find out what areas of our application we can shore up and encourage service providers to submit quality applications, as many did last year. Then, I think we need to do a little more research on what has made other states successful at the BoS process. Earlier today I called Shirley Deville, the Mississippi BoS lead contact, and we talked about their progress over the past six years. We spoke about the ever-increasing competition within the CoC application process, and she shared with me that they have had to continuously modify how they approach their application so that they remain competitive. “You cannot get complacent,” she told me. We agreed we would talk some more, and when I had specific questions, I should feel free to call her up for her input but before she hung up she said, “you know, the only reason we have success is because we have a strong core of service providers who have bought into this process and make it work.” I like to believe we have a similarly strong group of people working on the Texas Balance of State project, and I believe that, like the BoS in Mississippi, we will have success in this process next year.

 

Go to Balance of State page

Go to March 2007 Newsletter