The Regional Homeless Profile (RHP) is biennial (every two years), broad-based analysis of homelessness in the San Diego region. Data in the RHP includes: the AHAR (Annual Homeless Assessment Report) and the Point-In-Time Count (PITC). The RHP also includes summary counts of the 18 incorporated cities in San Diego County.

1. REGIONAL HOMELESS PROFILE
An Analysis of San Diego County Homelessness - 2010
It
is
simply
unacceptable
for
individuals,
children,
families
and
our
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
na7on’s
Veterans
to
be
faced
with
homelessness
in
this
country. 4699
Murphy
Canyon
Road
San
Diego,
CA
92123
President
Barack
Obama www.RTFHSD.org

2. Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
–
Table
of
Contents
I.
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
...............................................................................................
2
About
the
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
...................................................................
3
Homeless
Management
Information
System
(HMIS)
.........................................................................
5
Regional
Continuum
of
Care
Council
(RCCC)
......................................................................................
6
National
Perspective
–
A
Snapshot
....................................................................................................
7
II.
SAN
DIEGO
COUNTY
REGIONAL
DATA
SUMMARY
-­‐
2010
..............................................
13
The
2009
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
(AHAR)
.................................................................
14
AHAR
–
San
Diego
Regional
Summary
-­‐
2009
..................................................................................
14
Local
Perspective
–
A
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
count
Snapshot
-­‐
2010
...................................................
23
Summary
By
City
I
-­‐
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
count
-­‐
2010
......................................................................
24
Summary
By
City
II
-­‐
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
count
-­‐
2010
.....................................................................
25
Demographics
–
San
Diego
Region
(Point-­‐In-­‐Time
count
-­‐
2010)
....................................................
26
Unmet
Needs
in
the
San
Diego
Region
-­‐
2010
.................................................................................
27
The
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
count
(PIT)
&
Street
Survey
-­‐
2010
.....................................................................
28
2010
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
‘Unsheltered
Survey’
Executive
Summary
...............................................
29
III.
COMMUNITY
&
REGIONAL
SUMMARIES
-­‐
2010
...........................................................
54
Summaries
By
City
-­‐
2010
.................................................................................................................
54
City
of
San
Diego
-­‐
City
Council
Districts
-­‐
2010
...............................................................................
75
San
Diego
County
Supervisorial
Districts
-­‐
2010
..............................................................................
77
San
Diego
County
Congressional
Districts
-­‐
2010
.............................................................................
79
IV.
INNOVATIONS
AND
INITIATIVES
IN
THE
SAN
DIEGO
REGION
............................................
81
Legal/Law
Enforcement
...................................................................................................................
81
Homeless
Data
and
Information
Systems
........................................................................................
83
Services
and
‘One-­‐Stop
Shops’
.........................................................................................................
85
Mental
Health
and
Housing
.............................................................................................................
87
Emergency
Shelter
Innovations
.......................................................................................................
88
Policy
................................................................................................................................................
88
Collaborative
Planning
Efforts
..........................................................................................................
89
Targeted
Initiatives
in
2010
..............................................................................................................
91
V.
CONCLUSION
........................................................................................................
92
VI.
APPENDIX
............................................................................................................
93
The
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
Process
......................................................................................................
93
Homelessness
Definition
................................................................................................................
100
The
HEARTH
Act
.............................................................................................................................
101
HPRP
–
Homeless
Prevention
and
Rapid
Re-­‐Housing
Program
......................................................
102
Registry
Week
–
Downtown
San
Diego
–
Results
...........................................................................
103
Resources
.......................................................................................................................................
107
Regional
Service
Providers
and
other
Stakeholders
.......................................................................
108
Acknowledgements
........................................................................................................................
110
Glossary
..........................................................................................................................................
110
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
1
of
114

3. I. Executive
Summary
San
Diego
County’s
2010
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
count
resulted
in
an
estimate
of
8,574
individuals
who
are
homeless
in
the
San
Diego
County
region
(both
sheltered
and
living
on
the
street).
This
represents
a
regional
increase
of
11.6%
since
the
PIT
count
in
2008.
According
to
the
2009
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
(AHAR),
there
are
643,067
people
experiencing
homelessness
on
any
given
night
in
the
United
States1.
In
the
coming
year,
it
is
estimated
that
approximately
3½
million
people
will
experience
homelessness.
In
the
San
Diego
region,
a
total
of
10,040
persons
spent
at
least
one
night
in
a
San
Diego
emergency
shelter
or
transitional
housing
program2.
About
two-­‐thirds
(64.5%)
of
persons
in
shelters
were
individuals
and
one-­‐third
(35.5%)
were
persons
in
families.
Overall,
the
number
of
persons
experiencing
homelessness
is
increasing
due
to
many
issues,
including
the
national
recession
and
high
unemployment.
In
San
Diego
County,
the
poverty
rate
rose
to
12.6%
in
2009
up
from
11.1%
in
2007.
In
the
city
of
San
Diego
The
rate
was
14.3%3.
Homelessness
takes
different
forms.
Some
individuals
seek
out
emergency
housing
only
for
a
short
time
because
of
a
temporary
crisis
like
a
job
loss,
eviction
or
an
episode
of
violence
in
their
home.
Americans
sleep
in
shelters
or
on
the
street,
under
freeway
bridges,
in
canyons
or
fields.
Others
may
spend
years
on
the
street
for
a
variety
of
reasons,
such
as
substance
abuse,
mental
illness,
disabilities,
and
chronic
“Homelessness cannot be solved by a
single agency, or a single level of
health
conditions.
government. Be reminded of the
intricacies of homelessness as a policy
area, and remember that preventing
Since
the
mid
1980’s,
the
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
and ending homelessness takes real
Homeless
(RTFH)
has
been
providing
homelessness
data
coordination, collaboration, and a
collection
and
analysis
to
support
the
San
Diego
County
constant exchange of ideas.”
region.
As
the
administrator
of
the
regional
HMIS
(Homeless
Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary
Management
Information
System)
and
the
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
U. S. Dept. of Health & Human Services
count
for
San
Diego
County,
the
data
gathered
and
shared
by
the
RTFH
helps
provide
a
fuller,
more
descriptive
picture
of
homelessness
in
the
San
Diego
region.
The
Regional
Homeless
Profile
(RHP)
reflects
data
from
‘Point-­‐in-­‐Time’
summary
as
well
as
annualized
data
as
reflected
in
the
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
(AHAR).
The
data
in
the
report
is
intended
to
help
monitor
and
understand
trends
in
homelessness
in
our
region,
to
provide
context
on
the
collaborative
efforts
in
our
region,
to
understand
demographic
profiles,
to
identify
needs,
and
to
help
craft
solutions.
Thank
you
for
your
interest.
We
welcome
your
questions,
suggestions
and
comments.
Peter
Callstrom,
Executive
Director
-­‐
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
Note, as you read the electronic version, there are various hyperlinks that will take you to the source of the reference -
either within the document, or on the internet.
1
National
Alliance
to
End
Homelessness
2
AHAR
reporting
period,
of
October
1,
2008
to
September
30,
2009
3
The
Center
on
Policy
Initiatives
(2010):
http://www.onlinecpi.org/article.php?list=type&type=379
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
2
of
114

4. About
the
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)4
• In
1984
the
City
of
San
Diego
created
the
Mayor’s
Task
Force
on
Homelessness.
From
these
early
efforts,
the
RTFH
expanded
to
serve
the
full
region
as
a
community
collaborative.
In
2004,
the
RTFH
became
an
independent
501(c)3
nonprofit.
• The
RTFH
manages
a
countywide
Homeless
Information
System
(HMIS)
that
is
used
by
dozens
of
local
service
providers
who
manage
300+
distinct
programs.
• The
RTFH
supports
and
empowers
San
Diego
County’s
homeless
service
providers
with
key
data
and
reports:
regarding
homeless
counts,
locations,
beds,
services,
unmet
needs,
etc.
• The
RTFH
publishes
plans,
special
reports,
and
analysis
“The need has never been
on
a
variety
of
topics
relating
to
the
causes
and
greater for coordinated services
conditions
of,
and
the
responses
to
homelessness.
in our region. However, thanks
to our many agency partners,
• The
RTFH
manages
the
entire
process
for
the
annual
the commitment of our elected
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
count:
planning,
volunteer
coordination,
officials, and the passion of our
fellow San Diegans, we are well
mapping,
training,
conducting
‘street’
surveys,
and
prepared to proactively
collecting
and
analyzing
data.
respond to our shared goal of
ending homelessness.”
• The
RTFH
provides
technical
assistance,
help
desk,
ongoing
training,
and
critical
data
reporting
to:
service
Peter Callstrom
providers,
cities
in
San
Diego
county,
the
county
of
San
RTFH Executive Director
Diego,
elected
officials,
and
the
U.S.
Department
of
Housing
and
Urban
Development
(HUD).
• The
RTFH
also
collaborates
closely
with
community
groups,
local
agencies,
and
public
entities,
in
order
to
implement
plans
to
address
and
alleviate
homelessness.
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
4699
Murphy
Canyon
Road
•
San
Diego,
CA
92123
(858)
292-­‐7627
(phone)
•
(858)
292-­‐27989
(fax)
info@rtfhsd.org
www.rtfhsd.org
http://www.facebook.com/RTFHSD
http://twitter.com/RTFHSD
4
National
Alliance
to
End
Homelessness
-­‐
2009
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
3
of
114

5.
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
4
of
114

6. Homeless
Management
Information
System
(HMIS)
• The
HMIS5
is
an
electronic
system
designed
to
record
and
store
information
on
the
characteristics
and
service
needs
of
homeless
persons.
It
implements
and
complies
with
HUD
data
specifications.
The
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
(AHAR
-­‐
on
page
6)
uses
HMIS
data
for
the
most
recent,
one-­‐year
reporting
period
(October
-­‐
September)
and
compares
it
with
previous
HMIS-­‐based
findings.
Data
is
used
to
produce
counts
of
the
sheltered
homeless
population
over
a
full
year—that
is,
people
who
used
emergency
shelter
or
transitional
housing
programs
at
some
time
during
the
course
of
a
year.
• In
2000,
the
Regional
Continuum
of
Care
Council6
(RCCC
on
page
6)
selected
ServicePoint™
(Bowman
Systems)
as
the
primary
software
vendor
for
the
regional
HMIS
and
asked
the
RTFH
to
provide
the
implementation,
technical
and
training
support.
The
San
Diego
HMIS
allows
agencies
to
use
a
regional
web-­‐based
client
management
system
to
enter
client
information,
track
services,
referrals,
shelter
stays,
and
goals/outcomes.
Agencies
can
collaborate
with
other
providers
to
ensure
clients
are
receiving
all
available
services
and
not
obtaining
duplicate
services.
The
use
of
the
HMIS
is
mandated
by
the
U.S.
Department
of
Housing
and
Urban
Development
(HUD)
for
every
continuum
of
care
in
the
country
through
its
Supportive
Housing
Program
(SHP).
• The
San
Diego
County
HMIS
has
a
long-­‐held
reputation
with
HUD
as
being
one
of
the
top
HMIS
projects
in
the
nation.
At
a
HUD
conference
in
Denver
(September
2010)
the
RTFH
was
received
the
following
recognition:
“The
AHAR
Herculean
Effort
Award
honors
communities
that
go
above
and
beyond
data
collection
efforts
to
produce
high
quality
AHAR.
This
year
we
honor
the
RTFH
who
worked
tirelessly
to
submit
data
for
the
San
Diego
region.
The
RTFH
took
the
time
to
put
together
extra
data
to
confirm
data
quality.
This
extra
effort
led
to
a
greater
understanding
of
local
data
and
seasonal
bed
fluctuations.”
• The
RTFH
is
responsible
for
implementation
and
support
of
the
HMIS
for
45+
homelessness
service
agencies
and
300+
unique
programs,
including
the
data
warehouse.
The
RTFH
provides
technical
support,
training,
reporting
and
data
quality
assistance
to
400+
users.
• The
RTFH
has
been
very
fortunate
to
partner
with
Father
Joe’s
Villages
(FJV)
and
San
Diego
State
University’s
Institute
of
Public
Health
(IPH)
to
manage
our
regional
data
warehouse.
The
data
warehouse
is
designed
to
combine
data
from
disparate
systems
such
as
ServicePoint
and
CSTAR
(a
component
of
HMIS
created
and
customized
by
FJV)
which
allows
us
to
obtain
unduplicated
counts
of
clients
served
and
to
provide
regional
reports.
• Father
Joe’s
Villages
(FJV)
took
the
lead
to
create,
pilot,
and
fund
the
original
data
merge
and
AHAR
tools
which
has
made
participation
in
the
national
AHAR
possible.
5
http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/homeless/hmis/
6
http://www.co.san-­‐diego.ca.us/sdhcd/homeless/index_homeless.html
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
5
of
114

7. Regional
Continuum
of
Care
Council
(RCCC)7
Since
the
early
1990s,
the
U.S.
Dept.
of
Housing
and
Urban
Development
(HUD)
has
required
communities
to
assess
homeless
“According to the latest San
Diego County grand jury report, a
needs
as
part
of
the
McKinney-­‐Vento
Act
Continuum
of
Care
(CoC)
regional solution is needed to
competitive
funding
process.
Each
CoC
is
required
to
undertake
a
reduce the number of homeless
comprehensive
public-­‐private
planning
process
that
assesses
local
on San Diego-area streets.
services;
takes
inventories
of
emergency,
transitional,
and
permanent
Plans should include year-round
supportive
housing
for
homeless
persons;
and
determines
homeless
shelters.”
needs
through
counts
of
persons
in
shelters
and
on
the
street.
San Diego Union-Tribune
MAY 22, 2010
The
San
Diego
region
has
developed
a
system
of
coordinated
services
to
address
the
needs
of
persons
who
are
homeless.
The
mission
of
the
RCCC
is
to
engage
organizations
in
a
community-­‐based
process
that
works
to
address
the
underlying
causes
of
homelessness
and
to
lessen
the
negative
impact
on
individuals,
families
and
communities.
The
RCCC
is
comprised
of
representatives
of
local
jurisdictions,
community-­‐based
organizations,
local
housing
authorities,
government,
academia,
health
service
agencies,
homeless
advocates,
consumers,
the
faith
community,
and
research,
policy
and
planning
groups.
This
countywide
organization
develops
and
implements
strategies,
disseminates
information,
and
provides
a
comprehensive
vision
for
entities
seeking
to
prevent
and
alleviate
homelessness.
RCCC
representatives
serve
an
immense
geographic
area
and
a
diverse
homeless
population.
To
be
effective,
the
CoC
delivery
system
must
meet
the
challenges
this
geography
and
population
pose.
To
this
end,
the
system
provides
for
the
particular
demands
of
the
City
of
San
Diego
and
the
larger
cities
with
high
concentrations
of
homeless
persons.
STRATEGIC
GOALS
• Ensure
access
for
homeless
persons
to
quality
services
and
facilities
in
all
phases
of
the
Continuum
of
Care
system
(from
street
outreach
to
permanent
housing.)
• Coordinate
services
throughout
the
region
to
ensure
that
each
special
needs
population
has
access
to
services
in
each
geographic
sub-­‐region
(evidence-­‐based
distribution
of
resources
to
ensure
care
for
all
groups.)
• Provide
a
seamless
system
of
care
for
the
homeless
to
transition
from
the
streets
to
permanent
housing
(“no
wrong
door”.)
• Support
development
of
a
strategic
plan
to
address
homelessness
in
San
Diego
County.
• Foster
the
plan
for
a
permanent
system
focused
on
solving
the
root
causes
of
homelessness
7
http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/sdhcd/homeless/supportive_housing_program.html
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
6
of
114

8. National
Perspective
–
A
Snapshot8
• The
2009
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
(AHAR)
(on
page
14)
reported
643,067
persons
who
were
homeless
throughout
the
United
States.
• Cities
with
populations
exceeding
500,000
people
account
for
51%
of
the
homeless
population
counted
in
urban
areas
• The
rate
of
homelessness
in
urban
areas
is
three
times
higher
than
the
rates
of
homelessness
in
rural
areas.
• The
next
several
pages,
outlines
a
national
and
local
perspective
regarding…
o Family
Homelessness
on
page
8
o Youth
Homelessness
on
page
9
o Veteran
Homelessness
on
page
10
o Chronic
Homelessness
on
page
11
8
National
Alliance
to
End
Homelessness
-­‐
2009
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
7
of
114

9. FAMILY
HOMELESSNESS9
• Throughout
the
United
States,
approximately
238,100
persons
in
families
are
homeless
and
75,518
households
are
homeless
on
any
given
night10.
• The
majority
of
families
experiencing
homelessness
are
able
to
bounce
back
quickly,
with
relatively
little
public
assistance.
• Often,
families
experiencing
homelessness
require
rental
assistance,
housing
placement
services,
job
assistance,
and
other
short-­‐term,
one-­‐time
services
before
being
able
to
return
to
independence.
• Families
experiencing
homelessness
are
under
considerable
stress.
They
move
frequently
and
many
are
doubled-­‐up
in
overcrowded
apartments
with
relatives
or
friends.
Others
sleep
in
cars
and
campgrounds,
or
send
their
children
to
stay
with
relatives
to
avoid
shelter
life.
Homelessness
increases
the
likelihood
that
families
will
separate
or
dissolve,
which
may
compound
the
stress
that
the
family
feels.
• Homeless
mothers
have
three
times
the
rate
of
Post
Traumatic
Stress
Disorder
(PTSD).
• They
have
ulcers
at
four
times
the
rate
of
other
women.
• In
the
San
Diego
region
(persons
in
shelters):
o 38%
are
family
members
§ approximately
3
in
4
of
children
in
these
families
are
elementary
age
o 61%
are
individuals
9
The
National
Center
on
Family
Homelessness
-­‐
2009
10
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
(AHAR)–
2009.
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
8
of
114

10. YOUTH
HOMELESSNESS
• An
estimated
50,000
youth
experience
long-­‐term
Homeless youth engage
homelessness
in
the
United
States.
The
large
majority
of
in risky behaviors, such as
young
people
experience
short-­‐term
homelessness.
unprotected sex, sex with
multiple partners,
• Youth
presents
a
particular
challenge
for
several
reasons;
intravenous drug use and
needle sharing, that
there
is
little
definitive
data,
and
often
they
don’t
interact
place them at high risk
with
standard
homeless
assistance
programs
or
government
for contracting HIV/AIDS.
agencies.
Also,
some
services
are
often
not
applicable
to
(Wagner, L.S., 2001)
minors
(e.g.,
ineligible
to
rent
an
apartment).
• The
McKinney-­‐Vento
Act
supports
the
rights
to
education
for
homeless
children
and
mandates
that
all
school
districts
identify
a
liaison
to
help
homeless
children
to
continue
their
education.
The
San
Diego
region
has
also
worked
to
ensure
that
homeless
youth
have
acccess
to
educational
programs
specific
to
their
needs.
• In
2008,
the
California
Dept.
of
Justice
reported
7,587
youth
as
runaways
in
San
Diego
County.
There
are
only
85
beds
targeted
to
homeless
youth
on
their
own
in
the
San
Diego
regional
Continuum
of
Care.
CHILD
HOMELESSNESS
IN
CALIFORNIA11
• Number
of
homeless
children
(292,624)
o California
Rank
-­‐
49TH
(1st
is
best,
50th
worst)
• 3.08%
are
homeless
-­‐
out
of
all
children
• 13%
homeless
among
children
living
in
poverty
o Under
6
years
122,902
o Grades
K-­‐8
(enrolled)
135,766
o Grades
9-­‐12
(enrolled)
33,956
o TOTAL
292,624
11
The
National
Center
on
Family
Homelessness
-­‐
http://www.homelesschildrenamerica.org/pdf/report_cards/short/ca_short.pdf
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
9
of
114

11. VETERAN
HOMELESSNESS12
• The
Department
of
Veterans
Affairs
estimates
that
there
are
131,000
homeless
veterans
throughout
the
country,
which
accounts
for
20%
of
the
entire
homeless
population
(13%
of
whom
are
sheltered
at
any
point
in
time.)13
• 8%
of
the
overall
U.S.
population
can
claim
veteran
status.
• San
Diego’s
2010
PIT
count
estimated
22.9%
of
persons
on
the
street
were
veterans,
higher
than
the
national
average.
• Veterans
often
become
homeless
due
to
war-­‐related
disability
(e.g.,
physical
disability,
mental
anguish,
post-­‐traumatic
stress,
etc.)
• Roughly
56%
of
all
homeless
veterans
are
African
American
or
Hispanic,
despite
only
accounting
for
12.8%
and
15.4%
of
the
U.S.
population
respectively.
• About
1.5
million
other
veterans
are
considered
at
risk
of
homelessness
due
to
poverty,
lack
of
support
networks,
and
dismal
living
conditions
in
overcrowded
or
substandard
housing.
• In
addition
to
the
myriad
factors
influencing
homelessness
for
anyone,
the
crisis
related
to
the
shortage
of
affordable
housing,
livable
income
and
affordable
health
care
–
many
displaced
and
at-­‐risk
veterans
live
with
post-­‐traumatic
stress
disorder
(PTSD)
and
substance
abuse,
which
are
magnified
by
a
lack
of
family
and
social
support
networks.
• San
Diego
County
is
home
to
more
recently
separated
veterans
than
anywhere
else
in
the
country14
o San
Diego
County:
27,080
(48.3%
higher
than
L.A.
County)
o Los
Angeles
County:
14,000
(next
highest
in
the
country)
• Stand
Down
is
an
annual
week-­‐end
community-­‐
based
intervention
program
that
helps
homeless
veterans
combat
life
on
the
streets.
Started
in
San
Diego
in
1988,
it
is
now
a
national
program
that
has
been
replicated
throughout
the
country.
• A
“hand
up,
not
a
handout”
philosophy
is
carried
out
through
the
work
of
thousands
of
volunteers
throughout
the
nation.
In
2010,
Stand
Down
San
Diego
served
947
homeless
veterans,
up
from
928
served
in
2009.
12
National
Coalition
for
Homeless
Veterans
13
HUD
–
AHAR
2009
14
http://www1.va.gov/homeless/
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
10
of
114

12. CHRONIC
HOMELESSNESS
• Chronic
homelessness
involves
either
long-­‐term
and/or
repeated
homelessness
coupled
with
a
disability
(mental
or
physical).
• There
are
approximately
110,917
chronically
homeless
individuals
nationwide
on
any
given
night15.
Persons
who
are
chronically
homeless
consume
a
disproportionate
amount
of
publically
funded
services.
• An
estimated
63%
of
people
who
experience
homelessness
at
any
given
point
in
time
are
single
adults.
Most
enter
and
exit
the
homeless
system
fairly
quickly.
The
remainder
live
in
the
homeless
assistance
system;
shelters,
hospitals,
jails,
and
prisons;
or
on
the
streets.
• An
overwhelming
majority
(80%)
of
single
adult
shelter
users
enter
the
homeless
system
only
once
or
twice,
stay
just
over
a
month,
and
do
not
return.
• Approximately
9%
enter
nearly
five
times
a
year
and
stay
nearly
two
months
each
time.
This
group
utilizes
18%
of
the
system’s
resources.
• The
remaining
10%
enter
the
system
just
over
twice
a
year
and
spend
an
average
of
nine
months
per
stay—
virtually
living
in
the
system
and
utilizing
nearly
half
its
resources.
Many
of
these
individuals
are
defined
by
HUD
as
chronically
homeless.
They
often
cycle
between
homelessness,
hospitals,
jails,
and
other
institutional
care
and
often
have
a
complex
medical
problem,
a
serious
mental
illness
like
schizophrenia,
and/or
alcohol
or
drug
addiction.
• Despite
the
difficulties
in
serving
chronically
homeless
people,
many
cities
have
launched
initiatives
to
end
chronic
homelessness,
including
San
Diego.
The
San
Diego
HMIS
is
an
advanced
data
system
that
is
able
to
track
reductions
for
people
who
are
living
in
shelters.
• Many
cities
are
also
documenting
the
cost
effectiveness
of
ending
chronic
homelessness.
Portland
found
that
35
chronically
homeless
individuals
each
utilized
over
$42,000
in
public
resources
per
year.
After
entering
permanent
supportive
housing,
those
individuals
each
used
less
than
$26,000,
(including
the
cost
of
housing).
• The
successes
provide
insight
to
effective
strategies
in
ending
chronic
homelessness.
Ending
chronic
homelessness
requires
permanent
housing
with
supportive
services,
and
implementing
policies
to
prevent
high-­‐risk
people
from
becoming
chronically
homeless.
15
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
(AHAR)–
2009
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
11
of
114

13. • One
model
for
housing
people
who
experience
chronic
homelessness
is
permanent
supportive
housing
(PSH)
which
combines
affordable
rental
housing
with
supportive
services:
case
management,
mental
health
and
substance
abuse
services,
health
care,
and
employment.
• Another
model,
‘Housing
First’,
provides
immediate
access
to
an
apartment
without
requiring
participation
in
psychiatric
treatment
or
treatment
for
sobriety.
After
settling
into
housing,
clients
are
offered
a
wide
range
of
supportive
services
that
focus
primarily
on
helping
them
maintain
their
housing.
• New
initiatives
focus
on
people
who
are
leaving
hospitals,
psychiatric
facilities,
substance
abuse
treatment
programs,
prisons,
and
jails
(see:
Innovations
and
Initiatives
in
The
San
Diego
Region
-­‐
on
page
81)
• In
the
San
Diego
region
(on
page
37):
o In
the
2010
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
count,
24.3%
were
“To be homeless literally means that
you have no home to live in, that you
considered
to
be
chronically
homeless.
are deprived of your sense of place
o The
majority
were
male
94.4%
and privacy, your sense of
belonging – all essential elements of
identity, of self-worth.”
New England Journal of Public Policy
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
12
of
114

14. II. San Diego County Regional Data Summary - 2010
The
Regional
Homeless
Profile
summary
data
is
addressed
in
the
following
sections:
The
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
(AHAR)
-­‐
on
page
14
• The
AHAR
is
an
annual
report
to
Congress
(mandated
by
McKinney-­‐Vento
-­‐
on
page
101)
about
the
number
and
characteristics
of
people
who
use
homeless
residential
services,
and
their
patterns
of
use.
The
AHAR
includes
data
on
emergency
shelters,
transitional
housing,
and
homeless
veterans
from
two
primary
sources:
the
HMIS
and
the
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT).
Summary
By
City
I
-­‐
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
count
–
2010
-­‐
on
page
24
• Summarizes
homeless
counts
by
each
city
in
San
Diego
County.
Summary
By
City
II
-­‐
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
count
–
2010
-­‐
on
page
25
• Summarizes
homeless
counts
by
each
city
along
with
population
and
income
levels.
Demographics
–
San
Diego
County
-­‐
on
page
26
• Approximate
aggregate
summaries
of
primary
demographic
data
(e.g.,
age,
ethnicity,
etc.)
by
different
populations:
unsheltered,
emergency
shelter,
transitional
housing.
Unmet
Needs
in
the
San
Diego
Region
-­‐
on
page
27
• Summary
data
regarding
shelter
bed
usage,
capacity,
overlow.
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
‘Unsheltered
Survey’
Executive
Summary
-­‐
on
page
29
• The
Unsheltered
Survey
(on
page
97)
detail
is
summarized.
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
Survey
Results
-­‐
on
page
30
• On
January
29,
2010,
the
RTFH
coordinated
the
work
of
hundreds
of
volunteers
in
order
to
conduct
our
annual
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
count
(PIT).
• In
February,
2010,
the
RTFH
and
volunteers
completed
an
‘Unsheltered
Street
Characteristic
Survey
(on
page
97).
Results
from
that
survey
begin
on
page
31.
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
13
of
114

15. The
2009
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
(AHAR)16
• The
AHAR
is
an
annual
report
to
Congress
about
the
number
and
characteristics
of
people
who
use
homeless
residential
services,
and
their
patterns
of
use.
Congress
mandated
this
report
in
legislation
for
McKinney-­‐Vento
funding.
• The
AHAR
includes
data
on
emergency
shelters,
transitional
housing
programs,
and
homeless
veterans
from
two
primary
sources:
the
HMIS
and
the
Point-­‐In-­‐Time
(PIT)
counts
for
the
reporting
period,
October
1
–
September
30.
• Data
to
be
included
AHAR
is
specified
by
HUD’s
“universal
data
elements”
(e.g.,
demographics,
veteran
status,
disability
status,
previous
housing,
length
of
stay,
etc.)
• One
goal
of
the
AHAR
is
to
produce
an
“unduplicated”17
count
of
all
homeless
persons
in
the
United
States
and,
on
the
basis
of
that
information,
develop
a
descriptive
profile
of
the
homeless
population
that
uses
these
types
of
services
throughout
the
nation.
• The
AHAR
provides
counts
of
homelessness
nationwide—including
counts
of
individuals,
families,
and
demographics
such
as
veterans
and
those
who
are
chronically
homeless.
• The
report
also
covers
the
types
of
locations
where
people
use
emergency
shelters
and
transitional
housing;
prior
living
conditions
just
before
they
entered
a
residential
program;
how
much
time
they
spent
in
shelters
over
the
course
of
a
year;
and
the
size
and
use
of
the
U.S
inventory
of
residential
programs
for
homeless
people.
DATA
FROM
THE
2009
AHAR
• While
overall
homelessness
has
increased
in
the
past
year,
the
national
January
2009
Point-­‐
In-­‐Time
(PIT)
estimate
of
chronic
homelessness
is
110,917,
more
than
a
10%
drop
from
the
PIT
count
of
124,135
chronically
homeless
people
in
2008.
• All
of
the
decrease
occurred
among
unsheltered
chronically
homeless
people.
While
measuring
the
scope
remains
challenging,
a
majority
of
Continuums
of
Care
(53%)
reported
a
decrease
in
chronic
homelessness
between
2008
and
2009.
• Homelessness
is
heavily
concentrated
in
large
coastal
states,
with
California,
New
York,
and
Florida
accounting
for
39%
of
the
PIT
count
in
2009.
• On
a
single
night
in
January
2009,
the
states
with
the
highest
concentrations
of
homeless
people
were
Nevada,
where
.85%
of
the
total
population
was
homeless,
followed
by
Oregon,
Hawaii,
California,
and
Washington.
• Kansas,
South
Dakota,
and
West
Virginia
had
the
lowest
concentrations
of
homelessness.
AHAR
–
San
Diego
Regional
Summary
-­‐
200918
16
HUD
–
AHAR
2009
17
Individuals
are
only
counted
once
regardless
of
the
number
of
programs
they
enter.
Records
in
the
HMIS
are
unduplicated
by
using
an
algorithm
(provided
by
HUD)
to
compare
the
First
Name,
Last
Name,
SSN,
DOB,
and
Gender.
Clients
with
matching
identifiers
are
assumed
to
be
the
same
client.
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
14
of
114

16. The
San
Diego
Regional
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
(SD-­‐AHAR)
provides
information
about
the
sheltered
homeless
population
based
on
data
collected
in
the
HMIS.
The
main
objective
of
the
SD-­‐AHAR
is
to
report
the
number
and
demographic
characteristics
of
people
who
use
homeless
residential
services
in
the
San
Diego
County
Region
using
methodology
consistent
with
the
Continuum
of
Care-­‐specific
AHAR
reports
submitted
to
HUD.
The
San
Diego
Region
includes
both
the
San
Diego
City
Continuum
of
Care
and
the
San
Diego
County
Continuum
of
Care.
DATA
INCLUDED
IN
THIS
AHAR
The
2009
SD-­‐AHAR
includes
data
from
October
1,
2008
through
September
30,
2009.
All
homeless
shelter
providers
with
good
quality
HMIS
data
from
this
time
period
were
included
(“participating”
providers).
Data
in
the
AHAR
includes
HUD
Universal
Data
Elements
(UDE)
from
ServicePoint
HMIS
(Bowman
Systems)
merged
with
CSTAR
HMIS
(Father
Joe’s
Villages).
This
merge
allows
for
unduplicated
counts
of
persons
entered
into
HMIS
within
the
entire
San
Diego
Region.
WHO
IS
COUNTED
IN
THE
AHAR
Included:
data
describing
persons
who
were
sheltered
in
“participating”
emergency
shelters
or
transitional
housing
in
the
San
Diego
Region
during
the
reporting
period
are
in
the
AHAR.
Not
included:
Data
obtained
from
stays
in
permanent
supportive
housing,
safe
havens,
youth
and
domestic
violence
programs,
shelters
not
using
HMIS
or
shelters
with
poor
quality
HMIS
data19.
REPORTING
CATEGORIES
Data
is
presented
according
to
four
AHAR
reporting
categories
organized
by
shelter
type
and
whether
or
not
shelter
was
obtained
as
part
of
a
family.
• Persons
in
Families
in
Emergency
Shelters
(ES-­‐FAM)
• Persons
in
Families
in
Transitional
Housing
(TH-­‐FAM)
• Individuals
in
Emergency
Shelters
(ES-­‐IND)
• Individuals
in
Transitional
Housing
(TH-­‐IND)
For
AHAR
purposes,
HUD
defines
persons
in
families
as
persons
in
households
with
at
least
one
child,
aged
17
or
younger,
and
at
least
one
adult,
aged
18
or
older.
All
persons
not
in
a
family
are
considered
individuals
–
this
includes
single
adults,
unaccompanied
youth,
persons
in
multi-­‐adult
households
and
persons
in
multi-­‐child
households.
Persons
are
counted
only
once
in
each
category,
but
may
be
represented
in
two
or
more
categories
if
they
changed
family
status
or
were
present
in
both
shelter
types.
Demographic
data
and
data
collected
at
program
entry
is
presented
by
category
and
cannot
be
summed
into
regional
totals
without
double-­‐
or
triple-­‐counting
persons
present
in
more
than
one
category.
18
The
SD-­‐AHAR
section
was
prepared
by
SDSU’s
Institute
for
Public
Health
-­‐
http://iph.sdsu.edu/
19
Data
from
very
few
HMIS
“participating”
shelters
was
excluded
–
reasons
for
inadequate
data
included
programs
undergoing
site
closure
(one
ES-­‐IND
program
and
one
TH-­‐FAM
program),
misunderstanding
of
family/household
data
entry
(one
ES
serving
both
FAM
and
IND)
and
a
seasonal
program
(ES)
with
prior
years’
end-­‐date
issues
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
15
of
114

17. DATA
LIMITATIONS
Not
all
programs
serving
homeless
in
San
Diego
are
included
in
the
2009
SD-­‐AHAR,
and
not
all
persons
accessing
homeless
services
in
San
Diego
are
counted
in
the
AHAR.
Therefore,
the
numbers
reflected
here
are
representative
of
the
majority
of
persons
sheltered
during
the
time
period,
but
may
not
be
applicable
to
persons
in
populations
sheltered
by
programs
not
included
in
the
report.
SELECT
HIGHLIGHTS
FROM
THE
2009
SD
REGIONAL
AHAR
A
total
of
10,040
persons
spent
at
least
one
night
in
a
“participating”
San
Diego
emergency
shelter
(ES)
or
transitional
housing
(TH)
program
during
the
AHAR
reporting
period,
of
October
1,
2008
to
September
30,
2009.
It
is
estimated
that
92%
of
the
region’s
year-­‐round-­‐equivalent
beds20
were
available
at
AHAR
“participating”
providers.
About
two-­‐thirds
(64.5%)
of
sheltered
persons
were
individuals
and
one-­‐third
(35.5%)
were
persons
in
families.
This
proportion
matches
that
reported
for
the
nation
in
the
2009
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
to
Congress21
Persons
Sheltered
at
AHAR
Participating
Providers
During
a
One-­‐Year-­‐Period
in
the
San
Diego
Region
(October
1,
2008
to
September
30,
2009;
HMIS
data)
Persons
in
Persons
in
Individuals
in
Individuals
in
Families
in
Families
in
Emergency
Transitional
Total
Emergency
Transitional
Shelters
Housing
Shelters
Housing
22 23
Total
Unduplicated
Counts
1172
2288
3704
4411
10040
Persons
on
an
Average
Night
85
959
329
1569
2942
Age24
• Children
represented
61%
of
persons
sheltered
as
part
of
a
family
in
both
Emergency
Shelters
and
Transitional
Housings
o 705
(61%)
in
ES-­‐FAM
were
children,
aged
17
or
less
o 1389
(61%)
in
TH-­‐FAM
were
children,
aged
17
or
less
• A
large
proportion
of
children
sheltered
as
part
of
a
family
were
under
the
age
of
6.
o 322
(46%)
of
children
in
families
at
ES
were
under
age
6
o 692
(50%)
of
children
in
families
at
TH
were
under
age
6
• Less
than
one-­‐tenth
of
adults
sheltered
as
part
of
a
family
were
over
the
age
of
50
while
nearly
one-­‐third
of
persons
sheltered
as
individuals
were
over
50
years
old.
o 30
(7%)
of
adults
in
families
at
ES
were
aged
51
or
greater
o 36
(4%)
of
adults
in
families
at
TH
were
aged
51
or
greater
o 1233
(34%)
of
adult
individuals
at
ES
were
aged
51
or
greater
o 1355
(31%)
of
adult
individuals
at
TH
were
aged
51
or
greater
• Nearly
all
sheltered
individuals
were
adults
(98%
in
ES-­‐IND;
99%
in
TH-­‐IND).
Individuals
under
18
include
unaccompanied
youth
or
multi-­‐child
households
–
siblings
or
juvenile
parents
with
children.
2020
Year-­‐round-­‐equivalent
beds
are
calculated
based
on
the
amount
of
time
a
bed
is
available
for
use
during
the
year.
Hotel-­‐Motel
Voucher
program
“beds”
are
calculated
based
the
number
of
beds
required,
assuming
a
person
used
their
voucher
for
the
all
dates
issued.
21
The
2009
Annual
Homeless
Assessment
Report
to
Congress,
HUD,
Office
of
Community
Planning
and
Development,
June
2010
22
A
subset
of
persons
are
represented
in
more
than
one
reporting
category.
Category
totals
cannot
be
summed
together
to
arrive
at
a
grand
total.
23
Total
unduplicated
count
of
persons
sheltered
at
one
or
both
of
the
program
types,
as
an
Individual,
a
member
of
a
Family
or
Both.
24
Age
is
calculated
at
First
Program
Entry
or
October
1,
2008
First
Program
Entry
was
prior
to
that
date
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
16
of
114

18. Select
Highlights
from
the
2009
SD
Regional
AHAR,
continued…
Gender
• A
large
majority
of
adults
sheltered
as
part
of
a
family
were
female
o 362
(81%)
in
ES-­‐FAM
were
female
o 707
(79%)
in
TH-­‐FAM
were
female
• The
majority
of
adults
sheltered
as
individuals
were
male
o 2444
(67%)
in
ES-­‐IND
were
male
o 3347
(77%)
in
TH-­‐IND
were
male
• The
gender
of
children
in
families
was
close
to
a
50-­‐50
male-­‐female
split
for
both
shelter
types
Race
• Over
half
(54%)
of
persons
in
families
at
Emergency
Shelters
were
identified
as
“White,”
while
two-­‐thirds
(64-­‐67%)
of
persons
in
each
of
the
other
reporting
categories
were
identified
as
“White”
• No
more
than
5%
of
persons
in
each
reporting
category
were
identified
as
either
“Asian”,
or
“American
Indian
or
Alaska
Native”,
or
“Native
Hawaiian
or
other
Pacific
Islander”
Veteran
Status
• Very
few
adults
sheltered
as
part
of
a
family
were
identified
in
HMIS
as
military
veterans,
while
over
one-­‐
fifth
of
adults
accessing
Emergency
Shelters
as
individuals
and
nearly
one-­‐third
of
adults
accessing
Transitional
Housing
as
individuals
were
identified
as
military
veterans
o 13
(3%)
of
adults
in
families
in
ES
were
veterans
o 40
(4%)
of
adults
in
families
in
TH
were
veterans
o 791
(22%)
of
adults
not
in
families
in
ES
were
veterans
o 1334
(31%)
of
adults
not
in
families
in
TH
were
veterans
o 26%
of
total
sheltered
adults
not
in
families
were
veterans
o 22%
of
total
adults
were
veterans
Disabling
Condition25
• Over
three-­‐quarters
of
adults
accessing
Transitional
Housing
as
individuals
were
identified
as
having
a
disabling
condition.
o 3337
(77%)
of
adults
not
in
families
in
TH-­‐IND
had
a
disabling
condition
• Over
half
of
adults
accessing
Emergency
Shelters
as
individuals
were
identified
as
having
a
disabling
condition
o 2071
(57%)
of
adults
not
in
families
in
ES-­‐IND
had
a
disabling
condition
• Less
than
one-­‐third
of
adults
in
families
accessing
Emergency
Shelters
were
identified
as
having
a
disabling
condition
in
HMIS
while
for
adults
in
families
accessing
Transitional
Housing
nearly
half
were
identified
as
having
a
disabling
condition
in
HMIS
o 135
(30%)
of
adults
in
families
in
ES-­‐FAM
had
a
disabling
condition
o 430
(48%)
of
adults
in
families
in
TH-­‐FAM
had
a
disabling
condition
25
Disabling
Condition
is
a
specific
disability
of
long
term
duration
which
significantly
impedes
a
person’s
ability
to
live
independently;
Persons
were
counted
as
having
a
disabling
condition
if
the
HMIS
response
value
“Yes”
was
recorded
at
any
program
stay
within
the
reporting
year.
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
17
of
114

19. Select
Highlights
from
the
2009
SD
Regional
AHAR,
continued…
Previous
Living
Situation
for
adults
the
night
before
shelter
program
entry26
• One
half
of
adult
individuals
spent
the
night
before
program
entry
in
a
place
not
meant
for
human
habitation
(on
the
street,
in
a
car,
etc)
o Adult
individuals
the
night
before
entry
into
an
Emergency
Shelter
§ Place
not
meant
for
human
habitation
–
1854
(50%)
o Adult
individuals
the
night
before
entry
into
a
Transitional
Housing
program
§ Place
not
meant
for
human
habitation
–
2267
(51%)
• Adults
in
families
spent
night
before
program
entry
in
a
variety
of
places:
o Adults
the
night
before
entry
into
an
Emergency
Shelter
as
part
of
a
family
§ Emergency
Shelter
–
67
(15%)
§ Staying
with
Family
–
58
(13%)
§ Rented
Housing
–
57
(13%)
§ Staying
with
Friends
–
51
(11%)
§ Place
not
meant
for
human
habitation
–
48
(11%)
o Adults
the
night
before
entry
into
a
Transitional
Housing
program
as
part
of
a
family
§ Emergency
Shelter
–
199
(22%)
§ Staying
with
Family
–
133
(15%)
§ Place
not
meant
for
human
habitation
–
137
(15%)
§ Transitional
Housing
–
123
(14%)
26
If
a
person
had
more
than
one
program
entry
during
the
reporting
year,
the
value
reported
represents
data
collected
at
the
first
program
entry
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
18
of
114

20. Select
Highlights
from
the
2009
SD
Regional
AHAR,
continued…
Program
Use
• Point-­‐in-­‐Time
counts
of
HMIS
data
in
October
2008,
January,
April
and
July
2009
showed
stable
levels
of
sheltered
persons
in
Transitional
Housing
(TH),
while
Emergency
Shelters
(ES)
were
accessed
at
a
greater
number
in
January
compared
to
the
other
PIT
dates.
o Persons
in
families
in
ES
§ 1.3
to
1.7
times
as
many
sheltered
on
a
single
night
in
January
compared
to
a
single
night
in
October,
April
or
July
o Individuals
in
ES
§ 3
to
4
times
as
many
sheltered
on
a
single
night
in
January
compared
to
a
single
night
in
October,
April
or
July
• Of
the
10,040
persons
counted
during
the
year,
a
large
percentage
(85%)
was
counted
within
single
reporting
categories.
Nonetheless,
a
significant
number
of
persons
were
served
by
both
Emergency
Shelters
(ES)
and
Transitional
Housing
(TH)
programs
at
some
point
in
the
year.
o 8543
(85%)
were
counted
in
only
one
reporting
category
o 1462
(15%)
were
counted
in
two
reporting
categories,
e.g.:
§ 343
persons
were
counted
in
both
ES-­‐FAM
and
TH-­‐FAM
only
§ 1010
persons
were
counted
in
both
ES-­‐IND
and
TH-­‐IND
only
o 35
(<1%)
were
counted
in
three
or
four
reporting
categories,
e.g.:
§ 21
persons
were
counted
in
ES-­‐FAM,
TH-­‐FAM
and
ES-­‐IND
• Persons
Sheltered
as
part
of
a
Family
vs.
Persons
Sheltered
as
Individuals
o Individuals:
6949
(69%
of
10,040)
of
persons
served
were
sheltered
as
an
individual
only
–
never
part
of
a
family
§ Of
the
6949
persons
served
as
individuals
never
in
a
family,
• 1010
(15%)
of
spent
time
in
BOTH
Emergency
Shelters
and
Transitional
Housing
at
some
time
during
the
reporting
year
• 2608
(38%)
stayed
in
Emergency
Shelter
only
• 3331
(48%)
stayed
in
Transitional
Housing
only
o Persons
in
Families:
2947
(29%
of
10,040)
of
persons
served
were
sheltered
as
a
member
of
a
family
only
–
never
an
individual
§ Of
the
2947
persons
served
only
as
part
of
a
family,
• 343
(12%)
of
spent
time
in
BOTH
Emergency
Shelters
and
Transitional
Housing
at
some
time
during
the
reporting
year
• 778
(26%)
stayed
in
Emergency
Shelter
only
• 1826
(62%)
stayed
in
Transitional
Housing
only
o Both:
only
144
(1%
of
10,040)
of
those
sheltered
during
the
year
were
identified
as
both
a
member
of
a
sheltered
family
and
a
person
sheltered
as
an
individual
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
19
of
114

21. SELECT
DETAILS
FROM
THE
2009
SAN
DIEGO
REGIONAL
AHAR
Persons
Sheltered
-­‐
2009
SD-­‐AHAR
(October
1,
2008
to
September
30,
2009;
HMIS
data)
Persons
in
Persons
in
Individuals
Individuals
Families
in
Families
in
in
Emergency
in
Transitional
Total
Emergency
Transitional
Shelters
Housing
Shelters
Housing
Total
28
Unduplicated
1172
2288
3704
4411
10040
27
Counts
Persons
on
an
85
959
329
1569
2942
Average
Night
Point-­‐in-­‐Time
Counts
–
2009
SD-­‐AHAR
(October
1,
2008
to
September
30,
2009;
HMIS
data)
Persons
in
Persons
in
Individuals
Individuals
On
a
Families
in
Families
in
in
Emergency
in
Transitional
Total
single
night
in…
Emergency
Transitional
Shelters
Housing
Shelters
Housing
October
2008
73
917
155
1512
2657
January
2009
105
930
637
1563
3235
April
2009
62
902
208
1545
2717
July
2009
82
913
155
1565
2715
Age29
–
2009
SD-­‐AHAR
(October
1,
2008
to
September
30,
2009;
HMIS
data)
Persons
in
Families
in
Persons
in
Families
Individuals
Individuals
Emergency
in
Transitional
in
Emergency
in
Transitional
Shelters
Housing
Shelters
Housing
Under
1
69
(6%)
195
(9%)
9
(0%)
8
(0%)
1
to
5
253
(22%)
497
(22%)
20
(1%)
6
(0%)
6
to
12
261
(22%)
452
(20%)
13
(0%)
1
(0%)
13
to
17
122
(10%)
245
(11%)
15
(0%)
35
(1%)
18
to
30
170
(15%)
409
(18%)
558
(15%)
701
(16%)
31
to
50
245
(21%)
449
(20%)
1856
(50%)
2305
(52%)
51
to
61
26
(2%)
34
(1%)
1006
(27%)
1159
(26%)
62
and
older
4
(0%)
2
(0%)
227
(6%)
196
(4%)
Unknown
22
(2%)
5
(0%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
27
A
subset
of
persons
are
represented
in
more
than
one
reporting
category.
Category
totals
cannot
be
summed
together
to
arrive
at
a
grand
total.
28
Total
unduplicated
count
of
persons
sheltered
at
one
or
both
of
the
program
types,
as
an
Individual,
a
member
of
a
Family
or
Both.
29
Age
is
calculated
at
First
Program
Entry
or
October
1,
2008
if
first
program
entry
was
prior
to
that
date
Regional
Task
Force
on
the
Homeless
(RTFH)
Regional
Homeless
Profile
2010
Page
20
of
114