Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbouthome-together-2026-year-2-update-062624-final-reportHOME TOGETHER 2026 COMMUNITY PLAN YEAR 2 PROGRESS UPDATE July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 ii Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update Contents Progress Update 1 Year 2 Key Takeaways 2 Takeaway 1: More people housed, yet housing opportunities are still needed 2 Takeaway 2: While some outcomes improved, racial disparities persist 4 Takeaway 3: More people served, yet funding decreased 6 Takeaway 4: Lack of investments stall key activities 7 Takeaway 5: Sustainable resources are still a critical need 9 Progress on Special Populations 10 Year 2 Actions on Home Together Goals 12 Goal 1: Prevent Homelessness 12 Goal 2: Connect People to Shelter and Needed Resources 13 Goal 3: Increase Housing Solutions 14 Goal 4: Strengthen Coordination, Communication and Capacity 15 Priorities for the Year Ahead 16 Conclusion 17 Appendices 18 Appendix A: Funding and Investments 18 Appendix B: System Inventory 26 Appendix C: Key Service and Outcome Measures 29 Without addressing the impact of racism in our society, homelessness will continue to disproportionately impact African Americans and other people of color. Creating a mix of housing and services in order to reduce these enormous racial disparities is a major focus of the Home Together Plan. All of the photographs of people and of housing featured in this report were generously provided by photographer Alain McLaughlin with Abode and by Bay Area Community Services (BACS). Every person and building featured is from Alameda County and individuals pictured provided their permission for the photograph to be used. 1 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update HOME TOGETHER YEAR 2 Progress Update The Home Together 2026 Community Plan guides local implementation of resources and strategies to reduce homelessness and racial disparities in Alameda County. FY 2022–2023 (July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023) marks the second year of implementation of the five-year plan. In this year, continued progress was made, and more people were housed than in past years. However, growth in new homelessness also continued, leaving significant gaps that require additional resources to fill. Progress on certain key system outcomes was made, including higher housing rates, and reductions in returns to homelessness and in some racial disparities, but overall, the system lost critical resources as demand continued to grow. Currently, though significant impacts have been made relative to current investment levels, the community is not on track to meet the Home Together goals without a significant influx of resources and housing.1 1 Data used to analyze progress during Year 2 (FY22–23) comes from a variety of sources. Information related to funding sources, changes to homelessness response system inventory and Home Together activities is compiled from reports provided by jurisdictions and partners in the community. Information about key systemwide service and outcome measures comes from the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS), which includes people who have engaged with the homelessness response system and enrolled in one or more of its programs. In May 2022 the Home Together 2026 Community Plan for Alameda County was released. This five- year plan was adopted by the Board of Supervisors, the Oakland, Berkeley/ Alameda County Continuum of Care and mayors and city councils throughout the county. TOG E T H E R 2 0 2 6 5-yea r p l a n t o e n d h o m e l e s s n e s s i n A l a m e d a C o u n t y 2 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update HOME TOGETHER YEAR 2 PROGRESS UPDATE TAKEAWAY #1 More people than ever gained housing, but more housing opportunities are still needed to bend the curve on homelessness In Year 2 of the Home Together Plan implementation, 4,084 people served by the homelessness response system gained housing. This achievement is a result of increased investments in previous fiscal years and demonstrates the impact of these investments. However, even though the number of people who gained housing increased by more than 1,000 since Year 1 of the Plan’s implementation, this outflow was still less than the 4,443 people who became newly homeless or re-entered the system (inflow) in Year 2. Figure 1 | Homelessness Response System Inflow and Outflow Year 2 Key Takeaways 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 4,164 3,884 4,043 4,443 4,084 2,671 3,474 2,915 New Homelessness + Returns to Homelessness People Who Gained Housing FY 19–20 FY 20–21 FY 21–22 FY 22–23 3 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update There are still thousands of people who have been served by the homelessness response system but remain unhoused. In Year 2, 18,830 people received some type of homelessness service, far more than the number of people the system was able to rehouse. The scenario modeled in the Home Together 2026 Community Plan shows how homelessness in Alameda County can be dramatically reduced if significant new investments are allocated towards prevention to reduce inflow into homelessness, and new housing opportunities for those experiencing homelessness. Current data shows that our system is still not allocating enough resources towards prevention or housing placements, and we are therefore not able to achieve the reduction in homelessness modeled in the Home Together Plan.2 2 See Appendix A for detail on Funding and Investments and Appendix B for detail on System Inventory in Year 2. Figure 2 | Homelessness Response System Progress and Home Together Plan Scenario 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Current estimate of households experiencing homelessness (awaiting a housing resource) Scenario Modeled in Home Together 2026 (Prevention + New Investments) Year 0 FY 20–21 Year 1 FY 21–22 Year 2 FY 22–23 Year 3 FY 23–24 Year 4 FY 24–25 Year 5 FY 25–26 8,641 9,319 10,246 8,641 8,400 8,200 7,000 4,200 0 Figure 3 | Homelessness Response System Inflow, Outflow and People Served (Experiencing Homelessness), Year 2 4,084 Outflow People who gained housing 4,443 Inflow New Homelessness + Returns to Homelessness 18,830 People Served Experiencing Homelessness 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 4 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update HOME TOGETHER YEAR 2 PROGRESS UPDATE TAKEAWAY #2 While some systemwide outcomes show improvement, racial disparities persist A primary goal of Home Together is to address the vast racial disparities among people experiencing homelessness. Homelessness continues to disproportionately impact people of color in Alameda County, especially Black/African American people, who represent more than half of the homeless population (53%) while comprising just over 10% of the general population.3 While Black/African American people continue to be vastly over-represented among those experiencing homelessness, in Year 2 they comprised a higher proportion of people who gained housing (59.5%). 3 U.S. Census, 2020. Quick Facts. Alameda County, California. 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 Figure 4 | People Served (Experiencing Homelessness) by Race and Ethnicity, Year 2a Race Ethnicity White Non-Hispanic/Latinx Black/African American Asian Hispanic/Latinx American Indian/Alaskan Native Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Multiracial Doesn’t know/Refused/DNC Doesn’t know/Refused/DNC FY22–23 Et h n i c i t y Ra c e 25.8% 77.6% 53.0% 19.0% 6.4% 4.0%2.7%1.5% 6.6% 3.4% a) Represents only people in: Coordinated Entry, Emergency Shelter, Safe Haven, Street Outreach, Transitional Housing, Day Shelter, Services Only and Other. For people who are Latina/e/o, in Year 2 the proportion who gained housing (16.9%) was lower than the proportion of homeless people served (19%). This is an area where deeper analysis and coordinated approaches to identify contributing factors and strategic solutions within a racial equity framework has been identified as a priority. For more data on race and ethnicity of people enrolled in homelessness response system programs.4 4 See Appendix C, Key Performance Measures. 5 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update One of the improvement targets in Home Together is to reduce the rate at which people who have gained housing (after experiencing homelessness) later return to homelessness. Systemwide, rates of returns to homelessness have decreased since the launch of the Home Together Plan; from 18% in Year 1 to 15.1% in Year 2.5 This is a significant achievement, though still not yet to the Home Together 2026 goal of a 9% return rate. Between Year 1 and Year 2 of the Plan, the rate of returns to homelessness also decreased for some racial groups including people who are Black/African American (from 19.4% to 15.9%), people who are Native Hawaiian6 (15.6% to 9.5%) and people who are White (17.6% to 14.1%). The American Indian population had the highest rate of returns to homelessness in Year 2 (19.7%).7 This is also an area where deeper analysis and coordinated approaches to identify contributing factors and strategic solutions within a racial equity framework is needed. 5 See Appendix C, Key Performance Measures for more detailed data. 6 Note that the number of returns to homelessness used in this rate calculation for people who are Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander is small (7 in FY21–22 and 4 in FY22–23). See Appendix C. Key Performance Measures for more detail. 7 Note that the number of returns to homelessness used in this rate calculation for people who are American Indian, Alaska Native or Indigenous is small (15 in FY21–22 and 15 in FY22–23). See Appendix C. Key Performance Measures for more detail. Figure 5 | Proportion of People Served (Experiencing Homelessness) and those who Gained Housing, for Black/African Americans and Latina/e/o, Year 2 Figure 6 | Rates of Returns to Homelessness by Race and Ethnicity, Year 2a a) Data refers to the proportion of individuals who have experienced a return to homelessness relative to those who were permanently housed within each racial/ethnic group two years prior. 0 0% 10 5% 20 10% 30 15% 40 20% 50 60 70 80 90 100 59.5% 16.9% 53.0% 19.0% Black/African American Latina/o/e Served ServedGained Housing Gained Housing FY 21–22 FY 22–23 FY 22–23 Systemwide Average (15.1%) Black, African American, or African White Asian or Asian American American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander Multi-Racial Latinx 19.4% 15.9% 17.6% 14.1% 9.5% 11.8% 17.9% 19.7% 15.6% 9.5% 16.5%15.8%16.2%15.1% 6 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update HOME TOGETHER YEAR 2 PROGRESS UPDATE TAKEAWAY #3 More people were served, while funding to serve them decreased The total number of people enrolled in homelessness response system programs rose again, as people served in all programs grew by 14% in Year 2 (24,547) compared to Year 1 (21,511).8 However, funding in the system to meet their needs decreased by nearly $19M in Year 2 compared to Year 1.9 More than 1,100 permanent housing opportunities were added to the homelessness response system in Year 2. These additions reflect investments made in previous fiscal years. The lower amount of funding available in Year 2 will hinder the ability to further increase housing inventory and outcomes in subsequent years. Since the annual targets set in the Home Together Plan require inventory to increase every year, this represents a significant setback in the ability to achieve Home Together Plan goals. 8 The total population served by the homelessness response system includes people newly experiencing or returning to homelessness, people served in temporary and permanent housing programs, and people receiving other types of homeless services. 9 The consistent trend towards an increase in total people served can be attributed to increases in new homelessness, but also to improved system capacity to reach and serve people experiencing homelessness, as well as improvements in data collection and reporting. TAKEAWAY #4 Lack of new investment continues to stall key activities For almost all program activities, funding in Year 2 was less than in Year 1, which will impact homelessness response system inventory and overall program capacity in future years.10 Funding allocations for nearly all inventory types tracked as part of the Home Together Plan (“Housing and Shelter” programs in Figure 7) were below the targets set for the second year of the Plan. Funding for Shallow Subsidies and Dedicated Affordable Housing were furthest from the Year 2 targets (at 13% and 0% respectively). This gap highlights the need for dedicated funding for these program types, particularly given that adding subsidies for people with fixed incomes, and expansion of Dedicated Affordable Housing for people who do not need intensive services was identified by the community as critical both to reducing homelessness and addressing racial inequities. Although the homelessness response system is closer to meeting annual funding and inventory targets for shelter (achieving 85% of the Year 2 funding target and 93% of the inventory target), without sufficient expansion of housing opportunities, people who are sheltered cannot move out of homelessness, and the need for additional shelter will continue to increase. 10 See Appendix A for more detail on Year 2 Funding and Investments. 7 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update Including the capital funding for housing development and other uses not included in the system modeling fiscal projections (which focused solely on operating costs), between Year 1 and Year 2 total funding for programs within the homelessness response system decreased by more than $228M. A significant portion of this difference ($198M) is attributable to the infusion of one-time capital development funds associated with pandemic-related programs that were awarded in Year 1.11 11 Note that Capital funding needs were not included in the Home Together system modeling or reflected in the 5-year estimate of funding needed in the Home Together Plan, however, data about funding investments for capital development is collected annually as part of Home Together progress tracking. Table 1 | Investments in Homelessness Response System Operations Relative to Projected Need, Year 2 Inventory Type Year 2 Actual Investments Year 2 Investment Target % of Investment Target Achieved in Year 2 Year 2 Funding Gap (Actual– Target) Housing Problem Solving/ Rapid Resolution $5.2M $3M 173% $2.2M Crisis Response (shelter/interim) $93.2M $109.1M 85% –$15.9M Transitional Housing for Youth $2.1M $4.5M 47% –$2.4M Rapid Re-Housing $8.6Ma $31.4M 27% –$22.8M Supportive Housing (PSH) $122.5Mb $150.8M 81% –$28.3M Dedicated Affordable Housing N/A $72M 0% –$72M Shallow Subsidies $2.6M $19.7M 13% –$17.1M TOTAL $234.3M $390.5M 60% –$156.2M a) Includes $6.4M in RRH rental assistance subsidies and $2.3M in RRH supportive services. b) Includes $49.2M in PSH tenant-based rental subsidies, $35.5M in project-based operation costs, and $37.7M in PSH case management/supportive services. Figure 7 | Year 2 Home Together Funding: Total Investments by Program Type Total Investments: $349.8M Diversion/Rapid Resolution — $5.2M Crisis Response — $93.2M Rapid Re-Housing — $8.6M Supportive Housing (PSH) — $122.5M Shallow Subsidy — $2.6M Transitional Housing for Youth — $2.1M Crisis Response — $24.6M Dedicated Affordable Housing — $5.1M Supportive Housing (PSH) — $26.7M Street Outreach — $11.4M Admin/Sys Infrastructure — $17.1M Health Care Services — $9.8M Homelessness Prevention — $5.3M Unknown — $15.5M Housing and Shelter Programs $234.3M Capital Investments $56.4M Other Programs $59.2M 8 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update HOME TOGETHER YEAR 2 PROGRESS UPDATE TAKEAWAY #5 Sustainable resources are still a critical need As highlighted in Year 1, a significant amount of the funding used to address homelessness is either one-time or short term. In Year 2, close to 40% of the funding allocated to the homelessness response system was nonrecurring.12 The need for reliable recurring/ renewable funding is critical to both maintain the existing inventory (including for people housed in prior years), and to significantly grow the inventory over time, especially adding more permanent housing that allows people to exit homelessness. 12 Nonrecurring funding refers to funds that are either one-time or short-term with no guarantee of continuation or renewal. Figure 8 | Recurring/Renewable vs. Nonrecurring Funds for Key System Programs, Year 2 More than half of the funding investments in Alameda County’s homelessness response system in Year 2 came from the State of California, and 60% of these state funds were nonrecurring (one-time). This means future awards must be used largely to backfill prior year funding to sustain existing programs and services and can’t be used to grow the system’s capacity to serve more people. In contrast, while a smaller proportion of the funding comes from local and federal sources, a higher percentage of funding from these sources is ongoing (recurring/renewable). Recurring/renewable funding represented a larger portion of the total Year 2 system investments (60% in Year 2 compared to 47% in Year 1). This change is attributable to the depletion of one-time COVID-19 pandemic related funding (from both the State and Federal government) in Year 1. The ratio of recurring/renewable vs nonrecurring funding in Year 2 is likely more representative of the funding picture we can expect to see in coming years unless there is a significant shift in funding sources. $2.1M Health Care Services $8.6MRapid Re-Housing Transitional Housing for Youth $9.8M Admin & System Infrastructure $17.1M Shallow Subsidies $122.5MPermanent Supportive Housing $2.6M Street Outreach $11.4M Crisis Response Beds $93.2M Housing Problem Solving/ Rapid Resolution $5.3MHomelessness Prevention $5.2M Recurring/Renewable Funds Nonrecurring Funds Y2 Investments TOTAL FUNDING $277.9M39% 74% 69% 52% 42% 38% 34% 25% 16% 61% 26% 31% 48% 58% 62% 66% 75% 84% 98% 100% 2% Figure 9 | Nonrecurring and Recurring/ Renewable Funding by Source, Year 2 $50M $100M $150M $200M $0M Total Funding Nonrecurring Funding Recurring/Renewable Funding State Local Federal $179.2M 60% 40% 40% 40% 60%60% $72.5M $98M 9 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update The Home Together Plan draws attention to the specific needs of several special populations13 who experience homelessness, including Transition Age Youth (Ages 18–24), Veterans, Older Adults (Age 55+), people impacted by intimate partner violence, people with behavioral health needs, and people impacted by the criminal legal system. Part of the Home Together Plan implementation includes tracking and monitoring data about these populations. The data below highlights outcomes for the following subset of special populations: Veterans, Youth (ages 18–24) and Older Adults (age 55+). 13 See Appendix C. Key Performance Measures for more detail on Home Together Special Populations. HOME TOGETHER YEAR 2 Progress on Special Populations Proportion of All Served (Experiencing Homelessness) Who Are Veterans Rate of Veteran Population Exited to Positive Housing Destinations Rate of Veteran Population Returning to Homelessness within 2 Years 3.6% (670) 43.2% (226) 16.3% (27) Systemwide Rate 24.8%15.1% Table 2 | Outcomes for Veterans, Year 2 Veterans • Veterans comprise 3% of the general population in Alameda County14 and represent 3.5% of the population experiencing homelessness. • Currently, the number of housing opportunities for homeless Veterans allows for swifter housing placements than for the general homeless population.15 14 Unites States Census. QuickFacts. Alameda County, California. Population Estimates, July 1, 2023. Veterans, 2018–2022. 15 In Year 2, there were 249 veterans in the housing queue, and 314 Veterans were housed. • Veterans are exiting the homelessness response system to positive housing destinations at nearly double the overall systemwide rate (43.2% compared to 24.8%) but returning to homelessness at a rate slightly higher than the systemwide average (16.3% compared to 15.1%). This is an area where deeper analysis and coordinated approaches to identify contributing factors and strategic solutions is needed and underway. 10 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update Youth (ages 18–24) • Youth ages 18–24 represent just over 9% of the total homeless population. • In Year 2, youth ages 18–24 exited the homelessness response system to positive housing destinations at a rate that was higher (29.5%) than the systemwide average (24.8%), and had a lower rate of returns to homelessness (10.2%) than the systemwide average (15.1%). Older adults (ages 55+) A recent study on homelessness in California found that California’s homeless population is aging, with the proportion of older adults in the state’s homeless population increasing. The study found that, among single homeless adults, 48% were 50 and older and that among these adults 41% became homeless for the first time at age 50 or older.16 • In Alameda County, people age 55+ comprise one-quarter of the total homeless population. • While older adults (age 55+) are exiting the homelessness response system to positive housing destinations at a higher rate than for all populations systemwide (27.7% compared to 24.8%), older adults are also returning to homelessness at higher than the systemwide rate (21.6% compared to 15.1%). 16 Kushel, M., Moore, T., et al. (2023). Toward a New Understanding: The California Statewide Study of People Experiencing Homelessness. UCSF Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative. Proportion of All Served (Experiencing Homelessness) Who Are Youth Rate of Youth (18–24) Exited to Positive Housing Destinations Rate of Youth (18–24) Returning to Homelessness within 2 Years 9.1% (1,713) 29.5% (243) 10.2% (22) Systemwide Rate 24.8%15.1% Table 3 | Outcomes for Youth (Ages 18–24), Year 2 Proportion of All Served (Experiencing Homelessness) Who Are Older Adults (55+) Rate of Older Adult Population Exited to Positive Housing Destinations Rate of Older Adults Returning to Homelessness within 2 Years 25.0% (4,689) 27.7% (715) 21.6% (199) Systemwide Rate, Year 2 24.8%15.1% Table 4 | Outcomes for Older Adults (Ages 55+), Year 2 This is an area where further analysis and responsive system design work is needed to ensure that the unique factors and needs affecting housing retention among older adults are being addressed with a focus on the intersection of race, age, and accessibility equity issues. 11 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update YEAR 2 PROGRESS TOWARDS GOAL 1 Prevent homelessness for our residents GOAL 1 Key Ongoing/Launched Activities, Year 2 • A diverse group of stakeholders collaborated to develop a Homelessness Prevention Framework for Alameda County. This Framework includes a detailed set of recommendations to improve prevention efforts and estimates the cost of implementing prevention strategies at a scale needed to reduce inflow into homelessness. • Cities throughout the county, including Hayward, Alameda, Dublin, Pleasanton, San Leandro, and Berkeley, allocated funding towards eviction prevention (to prevent homelessness), including for special populations such as victims of gender-based violence. • The Cities of Hayward, Berkeley and Oakland continue to operate Shallow Subsidy programs with the goal of preventing at-risk households from becoming homeless. • The City of Alameda is preparing to launch a Guaranteed Income Pilot program. • Through the Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program grant, Alameda County launched a Peer Navigation project to help transition age youth (ages 18–24) access resources to help prevent or resolve their homelessness. Key Activities Pending Funding, Year 2 • Prevention of new (or recurring) homelessness is critical to achieving the Home Together goal of dramatically reducing homelessness in Alameda County. Lack of funding has stalled the implementation of strategies including targeted homelessness prevention, expansion of prevention programs, and coordination of efforts to reduce inflow and address racially disproportionate inflow into homelessness and returns to homelessness. Year 2 Actions on Home Together Goals Many new and ongoing activities to support the goals of the Home Together Plan were launched or continued in Year 2; however, additional activities critical to achieving the goals of the Plan were stalled due to a lack of funding. 12 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update YEAR 2 PROGRESS TOWARDS GOAL 2 Connect people to shelter and needed resources GOAL 2 Key Ongoing/Launched Activities, Year 2 • An estimated 3,163 crisis response/shelter beds were operated throughout the county (93% of the Year 2 Home Together target), with an anticipated 370+ additional shelter units coming online in the next 1–2 years. • New tiny homes and shelter units were launched in the Cities of Dublin and Alameda, and a new Navigation Center was opened in the City of Livermore. • The City of Berkeley established new non-congregate shelter units at the former Berkeley Inn motel, launched new shelter (and PSH) at the Hope Center, and used Encampment Resolution as well as UC Berkeley funding to launch an interim shelter program at the Rodeway Inn. • Capacity at the access point for transition age youth was expanded with additional staff and resources. • Through the Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program, 10 new transitional housing beds were added for transition age youth. Key Activities Pending Funding, Year 2 • Despite achieving 93% of the Home Together target for interim housing and shelter inventory and 85% of the funding target for shelter and interim housing investments, additional shelter will be necessary to meet existing and future need, as permanent housing opportunities were not brought on at these same ratios. 13 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update YEAR 2 PROGRESS TOWARDS GOAL 3 Increase housing solutions GOAL 3 Key Ongoing/Launched Activities, Year 2 • Over 1,100 permanent housing opportunities were added to the homelessness response system in Year 2, and an additional 1,300 units of permanent supportive housing and 100+ Dedicated Affordable Housing units are anticipated to come online in the next 1–2 years. • The City of Livermore increased resources for Tiny Homes. • Through the Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program, Alameda County added 40 Rapid Re-Housing slots designated for transition age youth. • Development and implementation of the Local Housing Support Program that will initially provide over 250 set-aside units for households experiencing homelessness. Key Activities Pending Funding, Year 2 • There remains an enormous gap in dedicated affordable housing and shallow subsidies that help formerly homeless and people at risk of homelessness to maintain their housing. Both program types were far below their inventory targets for Year 2 of the Plan, at 27% and 17% respectively. • Additional progress is needed to create permanent supportive housing units for older/medically frail adults. • More resources are needed to achieve the Home Together Year 2 goal for Rapid Re-Housing (current RRH inventory is at 60% of the target for Year 2). 14 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update YEAR 2 PROGRESS TOWARDS GOAL 4 Strengthen coordination, communication and capacity GOAL 4 Key Ongoing/Launched Activities, Year 2 • The Oakland/Berkeley, Alameda County Continuum of Care (CoC) implemented a new governance structure and seated several committees to focus on specific Home Together goals in the coming year. • The CalAIM Housing Community Supports program expanded to 19 provider agencies, with plans to onboard more agencies in the coming year. Housing Community Supports currently serves more than 2,300 individuals with housing navigation and tenancy sustaining services. • Alameda County was awarded renewable funding from HUD to assist people experiencing domestic violence, survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking. • Alameda County established a Homeless Mortality Review Team (HMRT) comprised of County agency leads, homeless services providers, health care providers, people with lived experience and community members to evaluate the causes of mortality among people experiencing homelessness that are most preventable, and potential programming that could be deployed or expanded to prevent future mortality. • The City of Fremont launched a Homelessness Response Strategic Planning Process that will align with Home Together 2026. • The Cities of Union City and Livermore are expanding capacity to address homelessness by creating new staff positions and enhancing homeless services. • The Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) redesigned and published a new website to improve user accessibility, and continues to provide on-demand training and support. Key Activities Pending Funding, Year 2 • Expanded access to resources is needed in order for homeless service providers and other critical organizations to increase capacity to operate programs and services. • More resources and effort are needed improve HMIS data tracking at the city level, and to geographically map homelessness system inventory. 15 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update In the coming year, implementation of the Home Together 2026 Community Plan will continue to prioritize adding new programs and activities that reduce racial inequities, decrease first time homelessness and returns to homelessness, accelerate the process of people gaining housing, expand housing availability, improve the quality of data about people experiencing homelessness, and expand crisis response inventory to reduce unsheltered homelessness. HOME TOGETHER YEAR 2 Priorities for the Year Ahead Specific steps identified for the next year of implementation include: • Fund and launch coordinated strategies to prevent new homelessness, with a focus on addressing racial inequities among those experiencing homelessness for the first time. • Target strategies to address racial inequities among returns to homelessness • Identify dedicated funding sources to expand the availability of permanent housing solutions to accelerate the number and rate at which people are able to gain housing and to decrease racial inequities among people experiencing homelessness. • Advocate for recurring/renewable sources of funding to ensure that programs and services can continue uninterrupted, and that new funding can be used to expand needed aspects of the homelessness response system. • Continue to build capacity and strengthen coordination among key partners throughout Alameda County in order to expand the infrastructure for a system that can expand to meet current and future needs. 16 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update The second year of action on the Home Together 2026 Community Plan resulted in expansion of programs and resources, but only in certain program areas, and to serve a growing homeless population. Community partners have made extraordinary efforts to expand the homelessness response system using available resources, but the rate of growth in homelessness, the challenges associated with piecing together funding and the lack of ongoing funding continues to pose major roadblocks to achieving the vision of Home Together. The outlook for Year 3 looks similar at this time, potentially setting the community back further in its efforts toward a dramatic reduction in homelessness. HOME TOGETHER YEAR 2 Conclusion 35 Home Together 2026 — Year 2 Progress Update © 2024 Alameda County. All rights reserved. (06-24)