acknowledgements · 2015-04-09 · in 2013 and 25 unsheltered families with 58 children in 2015....

Acknowledgements

The San Bernardino County Homeless Partnership wishes to thank all of the individuals and organizations that contributed to the preparation, implementation and success of the 2015 Point-In-Time Count and Subpopulation Survey. Such an endeavor would not be possible without the collaboration and efforts of many volunteers, community groups, faith- and community-based organizations, county departments, city representatives and staff, homeless service providers, law enforcement and elected officials. Your hard work, time and dedication to ending homelessness are greatly appreciated.

Special thanks to the over 400 community volunteers from all across San Bernardino county who canvassed

areas identified as “green count zones” the morning of January 22th, to complete the 2015 Point-In-Time-Count and Subpopulation Survey.

Special thanks to the following agencies and community organizations that contributed staff time, support and resources, and office space for planning, training and development activities to help make the 2015 Point-In-Time Count and Subpopulation Survey a success:

211 - San Bernardino County Blessing Center - Redlands Cal State San Bernardino Re-Entry Initiative Church of Latter Day Saints - Redlands Church for Whosoever - Apple Valley City of Adelanto - Planning Department City of Chino Community Services City of Chino Police Department City of Chino Hills City of Colton - Lawrence Hutton Community Center City of Highland City of Loma Linda - CERT City of Needles City of Ontario City of Rancho Cucamonga

City of San Bernardino City of Upland Parks and Recreation Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Grand Terrace Chamber of Commerce

Life Community Development Mercy House - Ontario

Morongo Basin Haven New Hope Village San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors

San Bernardino County - Department of Behavioral Health

Set Free Church - Needles Victor Valley Family Resource Center Water of Life Community Church/ CityLink

Special thanks to all of the law enforcement agencies and officers throughout San Bernardino county for their

time, knowledge, and expertise:

Barstow Police Department Barstow Sheriff Station Big Bear Sheriff Station Central Sheriff Station Chino Hills Sheriff Station Chino Police Department City of Montclair Code Enforcement City of Rialto Code Enforcement Colorado River Sheriff Station Colton Police Department Fontana Police Department Fontana Sheriff Station Hesperia Sheriff Station Highland Sheriff Station

Morongo Basin Sheriff Station Ontario Police Department Rancho Cucamonga Police Department Redlands Police Department San Bernardino County -

Sheriff’s HOPE Team Probation Department San Bernardino Police Department Town of Apple Valley Sheriff Station Upland Police Department Victor Valley Sheriff Station Victorville Police Department Yucaipa Sheriff Station

1

Special thanks to the following individuals who went above and beyond to provide valuable coordination, guidance, deployment site support, reporting and training development:

Mark DeManicor Janis Rice

Lois Perkins Judy Conner Angela Pasco Kent Paxton

Thomas Grahn Desiree Lawson Karen Peterson

Allison Guerrero Officer Jana Kovensky Officer Jason Whitsell

Trish Gonzales Officer Gabe Fondario Christopher Rymer Officer David Hernandez

Sharon Green Gary Madden Ted Bistarkey

Claudia Benitez Joshua Munch

Sergeant Shauna Gates Officer Clint Walton Officer John DiMola

Deanna Luttrell Shelly Licata Alma Hernandez Elizabeth Kirkland

Pastor Marty Souter Wayne Hamilton Cindy Semione Sally McGuire

Katryna Gonzalez Lawrence Mainez Shannon Kendall Officer Jennifer Ramstad

Doug Story Janis Rice Judy Cannon Karen Bell

Rev. Father Pete Wright Elaine Zucco Officer Chris Condon Officer Cecil Smith Sergeant Rob McCoy Lieutenant Reggie Pahia Deputy Mike Jones Deputy Jeff Collins

Deputy Branden Davault Anna Ulibarri Lois Levitt

Special thanks to the San Bernardino County Information Services Department, Brent Rolf and staff, for your

hard work in creating and providing maps for the day of the count.

Special thanks to our research consultants, the Institute for Urban Initiatives, for their expertise and guidance through the entire Point-In-Time Count and Subpopulation Survey process, including methodology development and implementation, planning coordination and guidance, and production of the final report.

Joe Colletti, PhD, Executive Director Sofia Herrera, PhD, Research Director

Joshua Tan, Research Assistant Thelma Herrera, Graphic Designer

2

Table of Contents

Page

Executive Summary 4

Background Information 12

Methodology 15

Subpopulations summaries 22

Findings for Each Jurisdiction Concerning Unsheltered Adults and Families 24

Next Steps: Implementing Recommendations to End Homelessness 26

Appendix A: Subpopulation Summaries 29

Appendix B: Findings for Each Jurisdiction Concerning Unsheltered Adults 64

and Families

3

I. Executive Summary

There were 2,140 persons who were homeless on January 22, 2015 according to the San

Bernardino 2015 Homeless Count and Subpopulation Survey. The previous homeless count and

subpopulation survey was completed in 2013 during which 2,321 persons were counted. A

comparison of the last two counts reveals that 181 fewer persons were counted in 2015 which

represents a decrease of 8%.

Table 1. Comparison of 2013 and 2015 Homeless Counts

Sheltered Unsheltered Total

2013 Homeless Count 1,074 1,247 2,321

2015 Homeless Count 838 1,302 2,140

Variance: -236 +55 181

The following table provides a breakdown of the total number of sheltered and unsheltered

persons counted in 2015 by jurisdictions.

Table 2. Total Number of Sheltered and Unsheltered Persons by Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction Sheltered Unsheltered Total

Shelter Transitional Hg

Adelanto 0 0 3 3

Apple Valley 0 8 14 22

Barstow 29 0 49 78

Big Bear 12 0 0 12

Bloomington 0 0 0 0

Chino 0 0 47 47

Chino Hills 0 0 4 4

Colton 0 0 53 53

Fontana 29 0 96 125

Grand Terrace 0 0 0 0

Hesperia 11 26 5 42

Highland 0 0 24 24

Joshua Tree 0 0 20 20

Lenwood 0 0 0 0

Loma Linda 0 0 9 9

Lytle Creek 0 0 0 0

Montclair 0 0 7 7

4



Morongo Valley 0 0 6 6

Muscoy 0 0 11 11

Needles 0 0 8 8

Ontario 51 21 74 146

Rancho Cucamonga 0 0 15 15

Redlands 10 0 80 90

Rialto 5 0 14 19

San Bernardino 184 200 383 767

Twenty Nine Palms 0 0 35 35

Upland 0 83 83 166

Victorville 107 27 127 261

Yucaipa 0 0 9 9

Yucca Valley 30 5 126 161

Total: 387 336 971 1694

Table 3 notes that more than three-fourths (76%) or 1,626 homeless adults and children were

counted within six cities which include San Bernardino, Victorville, Upland, Yucca Valley, Ontario,

and Fontana. Also, these seven cities had more than two-thirds (68%) of the unsheltered

population and nearly 100% (88%) of persons counted in shelters and transitional housing.

Table 3. Jurisdictions with Largest Number of Homeless Persons



County 0 0 0 0

San Bernardino 184 200 383 767

Victorville 107 27 127 261

Upland 0 83 83 166

Yucca Valley 30 5 126 161

Ontario 51 21 74 146

Fontana 29 0 96 125

Total: 401 336 889 1626

5

Unsheltered Persons

Of the 2,140 persons in 2015, 1,302 or 61% were unsheltered which was defined by the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as

“An individual or family who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence, meaning: (i) An individual or family with a primary nighttime residence that is a public or private place not designed for or ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings.”

HUD also requires that the total number of unsheltered and sheltered adults be broken down by

various subpopulations. Of the 1,302 unsheltered persons count, 1,244 were adults and 58 were

children. The total number of unsheltered adults by required subpopulations for 2015 are

compared to the data for 2013 in the table below.

Table 4a. Comparison of Unsheltered Subpopulations: 2013 & 2015 Counts and Surveys

2013 2015 Variance

# % # % # % Chronically Homeless Adults 441 37 464 37 +23 0

Chronically Homeless Adults w/kids 42* 3 25** 2 -17 -1

Persons w/HIV/AIDS 15 1 21 2 +5 +1

Persons w/ Mental Health Problems 254 22 287 23 +23 +1

Substance Abusers 279 24 290 23 -4 -1

Veterans 133 11 145 12 +6 +1

Victims of Domestic Violence 202 17 176 14 -33 -3

Youth 18 – 24 80 7 107 9 +24 +2

Youth Under Age 18 17 1 7 1 -10 0

*included 18 adults and 24 children **included 7 adults and 18 children

The following table contains comparisons of unsheltered subpopulations that are not required

by HUD.

6

Table 4b. Comparison of Unsheltered Subpopulations: 2013 & 2015 Counts and Surveys (Con’t)

2013 2015 Variance

# % # % # % Men 882 75 848 72 -28 -3

Persons Released from Prisons & Jails 255 22 279 23 +11 +1

Persons w/ Chronic Health Conditions 340 29 350 28 -10 -1

Persons w/ Developmental Disabilities 144 12 116 9 -33 -3

Persons w/ Physical Disabilities 304 26 309 25 -8 -1

Seniors Age 62+ 72 6 90 7 +14 +1

Transgender 0 0 4 1 4 +1

Women 300 25 334 27 +23 +2

Families are not included in the tables above. There were 36 unsheltered families with 65 children

in 2013 and 25 unsheltered families with 58 children in 2015. These numbers include chronically

homeless families.

Sheltered Persons

Of the 2,140 persons in 2015, 838 persons or 39% were sheltered. Of these 838 persons, 468

were counted in shelters or received a motel voucher and 370 were counted in transitional

housing programs. HUD states that persons living in shelters or transitional housing programs on

the night of the count must be included in the homeless count and subpopulation survey.

As required by HUD, the sheltered count included the number of persons and households

sleeping in emergency shelters (including seasonal shelters), transitional housing, and Safe Haven

programs (of which the County has none) that were listed on the Housing Inventory Chart (HIC).

In addition, any persons staying in hotels or motels as a result of receiving a voucher from a social

service agency were included in the sheltered count per HUD’s instructions if the voucher

program was listed on the HIC.

HUD also requires that the total number of sheltered persons be broken down by pre-designated

subpopulations. The total number of sheltered persons by the pre-designated subpopulations for

2015 are compared to the data for 2013 in the table below.

The HIC was submitted by the Office of Homeless Services (OHS) staff to HUD in April 2014. Prior

to the homeless count, the HIC was specifically left undated to include any new programs or

exclude any programs no longer operational by OHS staff and Key Person Task Force members.

A few changes were made to the HIC prior to the count.

7

HUD encourages the use of Homeless Management Information Services (HMIS) data to generate

sheltered counts and subpopulation data for programs with 100% of beds participating in HMIS.

Thus, HMIS was used to gather the total number of occupied beds and the number of persons

for each subpopulation. A “Data Collection Instrument” was used to collect the total number of

occupied beds and the number of persons for each subpopulation for non-participating HMIS

programs and for HMIS participating agencies that do not have their HMIS data complete and

correct. The same questions used to collect subpopulation data through HMIS were used for the

data collection instrument. Thus, sheltered count data for all sheltered programs was gathered

either through a data collection sheet or HMIS.

The following table provides a breakdown of the sheltered population by subpopulations

required by HUD.

Table 5. Sheltered Population by Subpopulations

Subpopulation Number Percent

American Indian or Alaska Native 17 2%

Asian 23 3%

Black/African American 278 33%

Chronically Homeless Families (# of families) 13 2%

Chronically Homeless Families (total persons) 43 5%

Chronically Homeless Individuals 34 4%

Female 395 47%

Hispanic/Latino 276 33%

Households (total number) 468 *

Male 443 53%

Multiple Races 44 5%

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 9 1%

Non-Hispanic/Latino 562 67%

Number of Persons in Households 838 100%

Persons Over Age 24 440 53%

Persons with HIV/AIDS 4 <1%

Persons with Mental Health Problems 74 9%

Persons with Substance Abuse Problems 72 9%

Transgender 0 0

Veterans 31 4%

Victims of Domestic Violence 73 9%

White 467 56%

Youth Ages 18 - 24 116 14%

Youth Under Age 18-Households w/only children 15 2% *There were 468 households that were made up of the total number of sheltered persons which was 838.

8

Next Steps

Section VI, “Next Steps: Implementing Recommendations to End Homelessness,” outlines actions

that the County and each city should take to end homelessness within its jurisdictions. These

steps are aligned with the County of San Bernardino 10-Year Strategy to End Homelessness and

are also aligned with several evidence-based and best practices that have helped achieve

unprecedented decreases in the total number of homeless persons, particularly among families,

chronic homeless persons, and veterans, across the country since 2005.

Next steps include the following five recommendations:

Recommendation 1: end homelessness among veterans at the end of 2015

Homelessness among veterans has decreased significantly across the country because of the

following evidence-based and best practices

The HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program combines Housing

Choice Voucher (HCV) rental assistance for homeless Veterans with case management

and clinical services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). VA provides

these services for participating Veterans at VA medical centers (VAMCs) and community-

based outreach clinics;

The Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF)

Program is designed to assist homeless persons and very low-income households among

veterans. The VA awards grants to private nonprofit organizations and consumer

cooperatives in order to provide outreach, time-limited rental assistance, case

management, and assistance in obtaining VA and other benefits, which may include child

care, health care, housing counseling, legal, and transportation services in order to help

veterans and veteran families with obtaining and/or maintaining permanent housing.

As noted in this report, there were 145 unsheltered homeless veterans of which 83 or 57% were

chronically homeless. The HUD-VASH voucher program should be targeted for chronically

homeless veterans and their families and the SSVF Program for non-chronically homeless

veterans and their families.

Recommendation 2: Promote a zero tolerance policy for children living on the streets, in vehicles, and other places not meant for human habitation.

9

As noted in this report, there were 25 families with 58 children who were found living on the

streets on the day of the homeless count in the cities of Barstow (one family); Chino (two

families); Fontana (two families); Highland (one family); Joshua Tree (one family); Muscoy

(family); Ontario (six families); Redlands (three families); San Bernardino (six families); Victorville

(one family); and Yucca Valley (one family). Of these 25 families, five were chronically homeless1

with 18 children and living on the streets on the day of the homeless count in the cities of Barstow

(one family); Fontana (one family); San Bernardino (two families); and Victorville (one family).

A Rapid Re-housing Engagement Team (ET), with the support of various public and private

partners, will put into action a zero tolerance policy for children living on the streets or a place

not meant for human habitation such as vehicles by implementing a Housing First Approach for

chronically homeless families (see recommendation 4 below) and a Rapid Re-housing Approach

for non-chronically homeless families (see recommendation 5 below).

Recommendation 3: Coordinated Entry System

A coordinated entry system will prioritize assistance based on vulnerability and severity of service

needs to ensure that people who need assistance the most can receive it in a timely manner.

Components of the San Bernardino County Coordinated Entry System (CES) will consists of

various components of the following best practices concerning homelessness—Housing First and

Rapid Re-housing. They include: 1) outreach and engagement; 2) coordinated assessment

system; 3) bridge housing; 4) housing navigation and Housing Navigators; and 5) permanent

housing including permanent supportive housing with ongoing home-based case management

and rapid re-housing with temporary case management.

Recommendation 4: continue to implement a Housing First approach primarily for

chronically homeless persons and families

1 Chronically Homeless is defined as an individual who 1) is homeless and lives in a place not meant for human habitation, a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter; 2) has been homeless and living or residing in a place not meant for human habitation, a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter continuously for at least one year or on at least four separate occasions in the last 3 years; 3) can be diagnosed with one or more of the following conditions: substance use disorder, serious mental illness, developmental disability (as defined in section 102 of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance Bill of Rights Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 15002)), posttraumatic stress disorder, cognitive impairments resulting from brain injury, or chronic physical illness or disability; 4) has been residing in an institutional care facility, including a jail, substance abuse or mental health treatment facility, hospital, or other similar facility, for fewer than 90 days and met all of the criteria in paragraph (1) of this definition, before entering that facility; or 5) a family with an adult head of household (or if there is no adult in the family, a minor head of household) who meets all of the criteria in paragraph (1) of this definition, including a family whose composition has fluctuated while the head of household has been homeless.

10

A Housing First approach will continue to provide homeless people with housing quickly and then providing services as needed. By providing housing assistance, case management and supportive services responsive to individual or family needs (time-limited or long-term) after an individual or family is housed, communities can significantly reduce the time people experience homelessness and prevent further episodes of homelessness. A central tenet of the Housing First approach is that social services to enhance individual and family well-being can be more effective when people are in their own home.

Recommendation 5: continue to implement a Rapid Rehousing approach primarily for

non-chronically homeless persons and families

Rapid re-housing is an approach that focuses resources on helping families and individuals quickly

move out of homelessness and into permanent housing, which is usually affordable housing in

the private market. Priority is placed on helping individuals and families move into permanent

housing as rapidly as possible and providing services to help them maintain housing. Services to

support rapid re-housing include housing search and landlord negotiation, short-term financial

and rental assistance, and the delivery of home-based housing stabilization services, as needed.

11

II. Background Information

HUD, as part of its requirements for local jurisdictions to continue to receive continuum of care

funding for homeless persons, asks local jurisdictional applicants to conduct a “one day point-in-

time” homeless count every other year during the last 10 days of January. The County of San

Bernardino is one of more than 400 jurisdictions that submit an annual application to HUD for

continuum of care funding. For the last three (3) years, several agencies in the County have

received more than $21 million dollars as applicants.

When was the count conducted?

The homeless count was conducted on the streets during the hours of 6 a.m. and 10 a.m. on

January 22, 2015. The count was also conducted on the same day in shelters and transitional

housing programs throughout the county.

There were two exceptions to the time period noted above that are allowed by HUD. Service-

based counts were allowed up to seven days after January 22 and youth counts were allowed

throughout the day on January 22.

HUD states that “Service-based counts can extend beyond 1 day, since it is likely that homeless

people will not access these services on a daily basis. Service-based counts must not extend

beyond 7 days after the CoC’s designated count night.” HUD also notes that

“The major difference between a night of the count approach and a service-based approach is that it cannot be assumed that everyone encountered is homeless. Some people who use services targeted for homeless people and most people who use mainstream social services are not homeless or were not homeless and unsheltered on the night of the count, according to HUD’s definition. To gather information necessary to determine homeless status, it is essential to ask detailed questions related to living situation on the night of the count of everyone contacted during a service-based count. In addition to determining homeless status, the use of this method requires the ability to determine whether the individual or family has already been counted by another organization, or at an earlier date. To de-duplicate the count, CoCs must collect enough information about the homeless persons during the interview process to ensure the same person was not interviewed and counted twice. HUD requires that the survey instruments used in service-based allow for deduplication.”

12

Counting youth outside of the timeframe noted above was encouraged by HUD as long as an

approved method of deduplication by HUD was approved which is noted in Section III below. This

same method of deduplication allows for service-based counts for up to seven days after the

designated day of the count.

Who was counted?

Per HUD’s instructions, a person was considered homeless, and thus counted, only when he/she fell within the HUD-based definition by residing in one of the places described below:

In places not meant for human habitation, such as cars, parks, sidewalks, and abandoned buildings;

In an emergency shelter; and

In transitional housing for homeless persons. Who was not counted? Per HUD’s instructions, a person was not considered homeless if the person resided in one of the following places noted below

Medical facilities, such as hospitals, psychiatric facilities, and nursing homes;

Jails, prisons or juvenile detention facilities;

Chemical dependency facilities, such as substance abuse treatment facilities and detox centers;

Foster care homes or foster care group homes.

Also, per HUD’s instructions, children identified by McKinney-Vento Homeless Coordinators at schools as homeless should not be counted. Children may be counted during the count if they live in an emergency shelter or transitional housing program, or if they are unsheltered.

Lastly, HUD does not consider the following persons to be homeless—persons who are “doubled up,” or persons who are “near homelessness”—but considers them to be at risk of becoming homeless. Thus, such persons were not included in the homeless count.

The County of San Bernardino, like many other counties, has a substantial number of households that are at risk of becoming homeless. The Census Bureau noted that 19 percent or nearly 133,000 households consisting of about 400,000 residents in San Bernardino County were living below poverty level as reported in the 2013 American Community Survey. Also, according to the U.S. Census Bureau there were more than 120,000 households consisting of about 400,000 persons (nearly one of every five residents) in San Bernardino County who were members of a household whose annual income was less than $25,000 in 2013. There were approximately 65,000 households consisting of approximately 200,000 persons whose annual income was less than $15,000 a year.

13

Many of these persons can become homeless because of social structural issues such as increases in rent, loss of job, and rising health care costs. In addition, personal experiences such as domestic violence, physical disabilities, mental illness, and substance abuse can cause members of a low income household or an entire household to become homeless. Often, one or more of these experiences factor into a household’s homeless experience.

Who carried out the count?

The homeless count and subpopulation survey was a joint effort between the San Bernardino County Homeless Partnership, the San Bernardino County Office of Homeless Services, and the Institute for Urban Initiatives who recruited over 400 community volunteers to implement the count and subpopulation survey. As noted in the Acknowledgements, there were nearly 30 agencies that contributed staff time and office space for training and deployment of counters and there were 24 law enforcement agencies that provided their time, knowledge, and expertise concerning locations of homeless persons. In addition, there were nearly another 30 agencies that helped with the planning process including the San Bernardino County Information Services Department which created maps to guide counters.

The San Bernardino County Homeless Partnership (SBCHP) was formed to provide a more focused approach to issues of homelessness within the County. Its primary purpose is to develop a countywide public and private partnership and to coordinate services and resources to end homelessness in San Bernardino County. The Partnership consists of community and faith-based organizations, educational institutions, non-profit organizations, private industry, and federal, state, and local governments. SBCHP was developed to promote a strong collaboration between agencies to direct the planning, development, and implementation of the County’s 10-year Strategy to end chronic homelessness. The Partnership provides leadership in creating a comprehensive countywide network of service delivery to the homeless and near homeless families and individuals through facilitating better communication, planning, coordination, and cooperation among all entities that provide services and/or resources to relieve homelessness.

The San Bernardino County Office of Homeless Services (OHS) serves as a “clearing house” of

homeless issues for all County departments. Any homeless issue encountered by County staff can

be referred to this office for resolution. OHS staff plays a vital role in the San Bernardino County

Homeless Partnership as the administrative support unit to the organization. OHS insures that

the vision, mission and goals of the Partnership are carried into effect.

The Institute for Urban Initiatives consists of several community-based and faith-based institutes that respond to the economic, housing, and social needs of neighborhoods, cities, and counties from local community, regional, national, international, and faith-based perspectives and has completed over 50 assessments for local government and private organizations throughout Southern California that have focused on affordable housing, business development and education for micro-businesses, fair housing, homelessness, migrant farming, and street vending. For more information visit www.urban-initiatives.org.

http://www.urban-initiatives.org/

14

III. Methodology

Unsheltered Count and Subpopulation Survey

In order to complete the unsheltered count and subpopulation survey, the following activities

were conducted: 1) organizing the count and subpopulation survey; 2) coordinating the count

and subpopulation survey; and 3) implementing the count and subpopulation survey.

1. Organizing the Count and Subpopulation Survey

Organizing the count consisted of the following four activities: a) the county was divided into

organizational regions; b) the organizational regions were divided into planning communities; c)

the planning communities were divided into implementation areas; and d) the implementation

areas were divided into count zones.

a. County was Divided into Organizational Regions The County was divided into the following organizational regions:

West Valley which consisted of the area west of the City of San Bernardino including the cities of Chino, Chino Hills, Colton, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Rialto, Upland and the surrounding unincorporated areas.

East Valley which consisted of the City of San Bernardino and all areas south and east including the cities of Grand Terrace, Highland, Loma Linda, Redlands, Twenty-nine Palms, Yucaipa, Yucca Valley and the surrounding unincorporated communities along with the San Bernardino Mountain communities.

High Desert which consisted of the area north of the San Bernardino Mountains including the cities of Adelanto, Apple Valley, Barstow, Hesperia, Needles, Victorville and the surrounding unincorporated communities.

b. Organizational Regions were Divided into Planning Communities

Each of the three Organizational Regions was divided into 20 planning communities of

incorporated cities and/or unincorporated jurisdictions in order to plan and implement the

activities below. The County consists of 24 incorporated cities and over three dozen

unincorporated communities. However, not all of these cities and counties were included in the

20 planning communities because they were determined by key persons as not having any

homeless persons who live, congregate, or receive services. The table below lists the

15

incorporated cities and unincorporated communities within each of the 20 planning

communities.

# Community Planning Area

Incorporated Cities & Unincorporated Communities

1 Barstow City of Barstow and the unincorporated communities of Baker, Fort Irwin, Lenwood, Searles Valley, and Yermo.

2 Big Bear Region City of Big Bear Lake and the unincorporated communities of Big Bear City, Crestline, Lake Arrowhead, and Running Springs.

3 Chino City of Chino

4 Chino Hills City of Chino Hills

5 Colton City of Colton

6 Fontana City of Fontana and the unincorporated communities of Bloomington and Lytle Creek.

7 Grand Terrace City of Grand Terrace

8 High Desert Cities of Adelanto, Apple Valley, Hesperia, Victorville, and the unincorporated communities of Lucerne Valley, Mountain View Acres, Oak Hills, Phelan, Pinon Hills, Silver Lake, Spring Valley Lake, and Wrightwood.

9 Highland City of Highland

10 Loma Linda City of Loma Linda

11 Montclair City of Montclair

12 Morongo Basin Cities of Twentynine Palms and Yucca Valley and the unincorporated communities of Homestead Valley, Joshua Tree, and Morongo Valley.

13 Needles City of Needles and the unincorporated communities of Big River and Bluewater.

14 Ontario City of Ontario

15 Rancho Cucamonga City of Rancho Cucamonga

16 Redlands City of Redlands and the unincorporated community of Mentone.

17 Rialto City of Rialto

18 San Bernardino City of San Bernardino and the unincorporated community of Muscoy.

19 Upland City of Upland and the unincorporated community of San Antonio Heights.

20 Yucaipa City of Yucaipa and the unincorporated community of Oak Glen.

c. Planning Communities were Divided into Implementation Areas Each of the Planning Communities was divided into Implementation Areas which were designated as Red, Yellow, or Green Areas according to the definitions below.

16

Red Areas were defined as implementation areas where there are no homeless persons as determined by local community representatives and stakeholders;

The Big Bear Region, which consisted of the City of Big Bear Lake and the unincorporated communities of Big Bear City, Crestline, Lake Arrowhead, and Running Springs, was identified by key persons in the region as a Red Area because of the freezing weather and accumulation of snow during January. In addition, most of the small rural communities spread throughout the desert and mountain regions of the vast county were identified by key persons as Red Areas.

Yellow Areas were defined as implementation areas where only professional outreach workers might go. These areas may prove too difficult to cover and/or unsafe for volunteer counters, such as community representatives or stakeholders, in their effort to count and survey homeless persons. Immediately prior to, or immediately after the count, local professional representatives involved in the homeless count such as law enforcement or street outreach workers verified if homeless persons lived in these areas and determined the number of homeless persons who were included in the count;

Green Areas were defined as implementation areas where homeless persons can be found as determined by local community representatives.

All of the incorporated cities in the county, with the exception of Big Bear Lake, along with significant areas within their surrounding unincorporated territory, were identified by local key person teams as Green Areas.

d. Implementation Areas were Divided into Count Zones

Implementation Areas that were designated as Green Areas were divided into Count Zones.

Teams of Counters were deployed to designated count zones within each of the Green Areas.

Teams of Counters were not deployed to Yellow or Red Areas.

2. Coordinating the Count and Subpopulation Survey

Coordinating the count and subpopulation survey included implementing the following activities in each local Planning Community: 1) establishing a key person team; 2) distinguishing areas within the planning community where homeless people live; 3) identifying places where homeless people live within the identified areas; 4) identifying places where homeless people receive social services; 5) raising public awareness and community involvement; and Implementing the Count and Subpopulation Survey.

17

a. Establishing a Community Key Person Team A Community Key Person Team was established for each planning community and consisted of

representatives from public and private organizations who were knowledgeable about

homelessness and where homeless persons live. Such key persons included representation from

business, civic, educational, faith-based, law enforcement, local government, neighborhood, and

nonprofit organizations. Homeless and formerly homeless persons were also encouraged to join.

b. Distinguishing Implementation Areas within the Planning Community

Each Community Key Person Team distinguished implementation areas within their planning community where homeless people could be found. Such areas included a quadrant or section of a city or unincorporated area or an entire neighborhood. Those sections of the planning community where homeless persons could be found were designated as Green Areas. Conversely, those sections where homeless persons are known not to live or spend time were designated Red Areas.

c. Identifying Verifiable Places where Homeless People Live/Congregate Each Community Key Person Team also identified specific locations where homeless people live and/or congregate within their designated Green Areas. Such places included abandoned buildings, commercial areas, parks, sidewalks, vacant lots and vehicles. Known encampments were also specifically identified within Green Areas. Other places included a whole neighborhood or a specific length of a street. Such information remains confidential.

d. Identifying Places where Homeless People Receive Social Services Each Community Key Person Team also identified non-residential locations where homeless people go to receive social services and other forms of assistance. Such programs included locations that distributed packaged food and/or clothing, serve meals, and provide shower or laundry services including those operated by faith-based organizations. Other program sites included those that were known to provide domestic violence, health care, mental health care, substance abuse, transportation, and veteran services for homeless persons.

e. Raising Public Awareness and Community Involvement The primary purpose of raising public awareness and community involvement was to recruit volunteers to help implement the count in each planning community. Volunteers were recruited both locally and countywide from a wide-range of sources including city and county employees, homeless service providers, other social service agencies, non-profit organizations, faith-based institutions, local businesses, civic organizations, educational institutions, currently and formerly homeless individuals and other interested community stakeholders.

18

Flyers and other materials were developed for distribution at community meetings and forums,

media outlets and various public facilities, service locations, churches, college campuses and

other public locations. A project website was established with general project information and

volunteer outreach materials. Volunteer registration was also promoted through the web site

during the months leading up to the day of the count.

Community involvement included creating teams of volunteers to count homeless persons in

designated Green zones. Teams included persons who were involved in community service or

interested in community service. Teams also included persons who had considerable exposure

as well as little exposure to homelessness.

3. Implementing the Count and Subpopulation Survey

A homeless count and subpopulation survey instrument was used to gather data by counters.

The instrument focused on gathering answers that were used to create an identifier and to

determine the number of persons for each subpopulation required by HUD. All information

gathered through this instrument remains confidential. Appendix A includes the instrument.

During the count, volunteers were required to collect the following information concerning every

homeless person counted: first initial of first name, first initial of last name, gender, race2,

ethnicity3, age by code4, and state born. The information for each encounter was inputted into a

data base. The information was used to create an identifier for each person. For example, a

homeless person may have the following code of "WTMW6CA.” This means that this person's

first name began with "W", last name began with "T", he was male "M", he was White "5", in the

age range of 50-61, and born in California. Ethnicity was not included in the identifier.

First Initial

Last Initial

Gender Race Age State Born

W T M 5 6 CA

2 The code for race was 1=African American or Black; 2=American Indian or Alaskan Native;

3=Asian; 4=Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; 5=White; 6=Multiple Races or Other, 7=

Don’t Know; and 8= Refused to Answer. 3 Ethnicity, as required by HUD, included a “yes” or “no” answer to “Are you Hispanic or Latino?” 4 The code for age included: 1=under age 18; 2=18-24; 3=25-29; 4=30-39; 5=40-49;

6=50-61; 7=62-69; 8=70-79; and 9=80+.

19

If the same identifier appeared more than once, it was assumed that this was the same person

and the person would only be counted once. An example to illustrate how this process worked is

noted in the table below. Numbers 6 and 7 (shaded in gray) would be considered the same

person. If for some reason there was doubt that numbers 6 and 7 were the same person, other

data collected on the same two people would be used to address the doubt.

Number of Person

First Initial

Last Initial

Gender Race Age State Born

1 J H F 5 6 CA

2 H T M 4 7 CA

3 R K F 4 5 TX

4 K N M 1 4 CA

5 F A M 3 3 CA

6 J F M 5 5 CA

7 J F M 5 5 CA

8 S G F 4 2 NY

9 D T M 5 6 CA

10 O R M 5 7 CA

The obtained data also provided the opportunity to break down the number of homeless persons

counted by gender, ethnicity, age range, and state born. Thus, the questions served two

purposes—basic demographic information and the prevention of duplication.

The instrument also focused on gathering answers to determine the number of persons for each

of the eight subpopulations required by HUD which include:

Chronically Homeless Individuals;

Chronically Homeless Families;

Persons with HIV/AIDS;

Persons with Chronic Substance Abuse;

Persons with Severe Mental Illness;

Unaccompanied Youth under Age 18;

Veterans; and

Victims of Domestic Violence. Other subpopulation data was also collected for

Persons released from a Correctional Institution during past 12 months after serving a

court-ordered sentence;

Persons with a Physical Disability;

20

Persons with a Developmental Disability;

Persons with Chronic Health Conditions;

Seniors age 62+;

Youth Ages 18 to 24.

Sheltered Count and Subpopulation Survey

As required by HUD, the sheltered count included the number of persons and households

sleeping in emergency shelters (including seasonal shelters), transitional housing, and Safe Haven

programs (of which the County has none) that were listed on the Housing Inventory Chart (HIC).

In addition, any persons staying in hotels or motels as a result of receiving a voucher from a social

service agency were included in the sheltered count per HUD’s instructions if the voucher

program was listed on the HIC.

The HIC was submitted by the Office of Homeless Services (OHS) staff to HUD in April 2012. Prior

to the homeless count, the HIC was specifically left undated to include any new programs or

exclude any programs no longer operational by OHS staff and Key Person Task Force members.

A few changes were made to the HIC prior to the count.

HUD encourages the use of Homeless Management Information Services (HMIS) data to generate

sheltered counts and subpopulation data for programs with 100% of beds participating in HMIS.

Thus, HMIS was used to gather the total number of occupied beds and the number of persons

for each subpopulation. A “Data Collection Instrument” was used to collect the total number of

occupied beds and the number of persons for each subpopulation for non-participating HMIS

programs and for HMIS participating agencies that do not have their HMIS data complete and

correct. The same questions used to collect subpopulation data through HMIS were used for the

data collection instrument. Thus, sheltered count data for all sheltered programs was gathered

either through a data collection sheet or HMIS.

21

IV. Subpopulation Summaries

Appendix A includes subpopulations summaries (see pages 29 – 63). The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires Continuum of Care communities to collect and report counts of specific subpopulations as part of the Point-in-Time count. Thus, survey questions were compiled that asked questions in order to ensure that accurate data would be collected for each of the following homeless subpopulations:



Families;


Persons with Mental Illness;

Substance Abusers;

Unaccompanied Youth Under Age 18;

Veterans;

Victims of Domestic Violence;

Youth ages 18 – 24. Survey questions were also compiled that asked questions in order to ensure that accurate data would be collected for each of the following HUD required homeless subpopulations:

Ethnicity: o Hispanic or Latino.

Race : o African American/Black; o American Indian/Alaskan Native; o Asian; o Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; o White; o Multiple Races or Other.

Gender: o Men; o Women; o Transgender male to female; o Transgender female to male.

Age

Persons with Chronic Illness;

Persons with Developmental Disabilities;

Persons with Physical Disabilities.

22

Survey questions were also compiled that asked questions in order to ensure that accurate data would be collected for each of the following non-HUD required homeless subpopulations:

Persons Released from Correctional Institutions;

Seniors age 62+.

23

V. Findings for Each Jurisdiction Concerning Unsheltered Adults and Families Appendix B provides homeless count and subpopulation findings for unsheltered adults and families by jurisdiction (see pages 64 - 114). Findings include the total number of persons counted and a breakdown by various subpopulations. HUD requires information about the following homeless subpopulations as noted above but does not require such information to be broken down by jurisdictions. Such information is provided so jurisdictions can plan to end local homelessness among various subpopulations that would be consistent with the recommendations noted in the following section.



Families;


Persons with Mental Illness;

Substance Abusers;

Unaccompanied Youth Under Age 18;

Veterans;

Victims of Domestic Violence;

Youth ages 18 – 24. Thus, survey questions were compiled that asked questions in order to ensure that accurate data would be collected for each subpopulation. In addition to the subpopulations noted above, other questions were asked to collect demographic data and other subpopulation data as follows:

Ethnicity: o Hispanic or Latino.

Race : o African American/Black; o American Indian/Alaskan Native; o Asian; o Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; o White; o Multiple Races or Other.

Gender: o Men; o Women; o Transgender male to female; o Transgender female to male.

Age

Persons with Chronic Illness;

Persons with Developmental Disabilities;

24

Persons with Physical Disabilities;

Persons Released from Correctional Institutions;

Seniors age 62+.

25

VI. Next Steps: Implementing Recommendations to End Homelessness

This section outlines next steps that the County and each city should take to end homelessness

within its jurisdictions. These steps are aligned with the County of San Bernardino 10-Year

Strategy to End Homelessness and are also aligned with several evidence-based and best

practices that have helped achieve unprecedented decreases in the total number of homeless

persons, particularly among families, chronic homeless persons, and veterans, across the country

since 2005.

Next steps include the following five recommendations:

Recommendation 1: end homelessness among veterans at the end of 2015

In 2010, the White House and the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) issued a plan to end

Veteran homelessness by the end of 2015. Together with partners and supporters nationwide,

VA launched the Ending Veteran Homelessness initiative, an unprecedented effort to make sure

Veterans are able to obtain permanent housing and that Veterans at risk of homelessness remain

housed. As a result, homelessness among veterans has decreased by one-third in recent years.

Homelessness among veterans has decreased significantly because of the following evidence-

based and best practices

The HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program combines Housing

Choice Voucher (HCV) rental assistance for homeless Veterans with case management

and clinical services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). VA provides

these services for participating Veterans at VA medical centers (VAMCs) and community-

based outreach clinics;

The Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF)

Program is designed to assist homeless persons and very low-income households among

veterans. The VA awards grants to private nonprofit organizations and consumer

cooperatives in order to provide outreach, time-limited rental assistance, case

management, and assistance in obtaining VA and other benefits, which may include child

care, health care, housing counseling, legal, and transportation services in order to help

veterans and veteran families with obtaining and/or maintaining permanent housing.

26

As noted in this report, there were 145 unsheltered homeless veterans of which 83 or 57% were

chronically homeless. The HUD-VASH voucher program should be targeted for chronically

homeless veterans and their families and the SSVF Program for non-chronically homeless

veterans and their families.

Recommendation 2: Promote a zero tolerance policy for children living on the streets, in vehicles, and other places not meant for human habitation.

A Rapid Re-housing Engagement Team (ET), with the support of various public and private

partners, will put into action a zero tolerance policy for children living on the streets or a place

not meant for human habitation such as vehicles by implementing a Housing First Approach for

chronically homeless families (see recommendation 4 below) and a Rapid Re-housing Approach

for non-chronically homeless families (see recommendation 5 below).

As noted in this report, there were 25 families with 58 children who were found living on the

streets on the day of the homeless count in the cities of Barstow (one family); Chino (two

families); Fontana (two families); Highland (one family); Joshua Tree (one family); Muscoy

(family); Ontario (six families); Redlands (three families); San Bernardino (six families); Victorville

(one family); and Yucca Valley (one family). Of these 25 families, five were chronically homeless5

with 18 children and living on the streets on the day of the homeless count in the cities of Barstow

(one family); Fontana (one family); San Bernardino (two families); and Victorville (one family).

Recommendation 3: Coordinated Entry System

A coordinated entry system will prioritize assistance based on vulnerability and severity of service

needs to ensure that people who need assistance the most can receive it in a timely manner.

Components of the San Bernardino County Coordinated Entry System (CES) will consists of

various components of the following best practices concerning homelessness—Housing First and

Rapid Re-housing. They include: 1) outreach and engagement; 2) coordinated assessment

5 Chronically Homeless is defined as an individual who 1) is homeless and lives in a place not meant for human habitation, a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter; 2) has been homeless and living or residing in a place not meant for human habitation, a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter continuously for at least one year or on at least four separate occasions in the last 3 years; 3) can be diagnosed with one or more of the following conditions: substance use disorder, serious mental illness, developmental disability (as defined in section 102 of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance Bill of Rights Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 15002)), posttraumatic stress disorder, cognitive impairments resulting from brain injury, or chronic physical illness or disability; 4) has been residing in an institutional care facility, including a jail, substance abuse or mental health treatment facility, hospital, or other similar facility, for fewer than 90 days and met all of the criteria in paragraph (1) of this definition, before entering that facility; or 5) a family with an adult head of household (or if there is no adult in the family, a minor head of household) who meets all of the criteria in paragraph (1) of this definition, including a family whose composition has fluctuated while the head of household has been homeless.

27

system; 3) bridge housing; 4) housing navigation and Housing Navigators; and 5) permanent

housing including permanent supportive housing with ongoing home-based case management

and rapid re-housing with temporary case management.

Recommendation 4: continue to implement a Housing First approach primarily for

chronically homeless persons and families

A Housing First approach will continue to provide homeless people with housing quickly and then providing services as needed. By providing housing assistance, case management and supportive services responsive to individual or family needs (time-limited or long-term) after an individual or family is housed, communities can significantly reduce the time people experience homelessness and prevent further episodes of homelessness. A central tenet of the Housing First approach is that social services to enhance individual and family well-being can be more effective when people are in their own home.

Recommendation 5: continue to implement a Rapid Rehousing approach primarily for

non-chronically homeless persons and families

Rapid re-housing is an approach that focuses resources on helping families and individuals quickly

move out of homelessness and into permanent housing, which is usually affordable housing in

the private market. Priority is placed on helping individuals and families move into permanent

housing as rapidly as possible and providing services to help them maintain housing. Services to

support rapid re-housing include housing search and landlord negotiation, short-term financial

and rental assistance, and the delivery of home-based housing stabilization services, as needed.

28

Appendix A: Subpopulation Summaries

29

Chronically Homeless Adults* Total Unsheltered Number: 464

Gender

72% or 332 were men;

27% or 125 were women;

0.2% or 1 were transgender (male to female);

1% or 6 persons did not have a recorded answer. Ethnicity

28% or 130 were Hispanic/Latino.** Race

15% or 69 were African American/Black;

3% or 13 were American Indian/Alaskan Native;

2% or 7 were Asian;

Hispanic/Latino are included in other categories of race;

1% or 3 were Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander;

53% or 246 were White;

7% or 32 were multiple races or other;

2% or 7 stated “don’t know;”

19% or 87 did not have a recorded answer. Persons with Chronic Health Conditions

44% or 203 had a chronic illness such as diabetes, heart trouble, high blood pressure, seizures, hepatitis, respiratory problems, epilepsy, tuberculosis, or arthritis.

______________ *An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS. **HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race.

30

Persons with HIV/AIDS

3% or 14 had been diagnosed with AIDS or had tested positive for HIV. Persons with Physical Disabilities

49% or 226 had a physical disability. Persons with Developmental Disabilities

19% or 87 had a developmental disability. Persons with Mental Health Problems

47% or 217 had a mental health problem. Substance Abusers

50% or 233 had a problem with drugs or alcohol. Veterans

18% or 83 served on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces or called into active duty as a member of the National Guard or as a Reservist.

Victims of Domestic Violence

24% or 110 had been a victim of domestic or intimate partner violence. Youth

10% or 44 were youth ages 18 to 24;

1% or 3 were unaccompanied youth under age 18.

Seniors age 62+

7% or 32 were age 62+.

Persons Released from Correctional Institutions

33% or 155 were released from a correctional institution such as a jail or prison after serving a court-ordered sentence during the past 12 months.

31

Families Total Unsheltered Number: 25

(note: 12 or 48% of the 25 families were headed by a female with no other adult present)

Families

There were 25 families with 58 children. Chronically Homeless Families*

There were five Chronically Homeless Families with 18 children. Ethnicity**

36% or 9 were Hispanic/Latino. Race



0% or 0 were Asian;





40% or 10 did not have a recorded answer. (Hispanics/Latinos are included in several categories of race)

Persons with Chronic Health Conditions

28% or 7 had at least one adult with a chronic illness such as diabetes, heart trouble, high blood pressure, seizures, hepatitis, respiratory problems, epilepsy, tuberculosis, or arthritis.

______________ *A family was considered chronically homeless if, according to HUD, there was at least one adult that met the definition of chronic homelessness described as such: An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS. **HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race.

32


0% or 0 had at least one adult who had been diagnosed with AIDS or had tested positive for HIV.

Persons with Physical Disabilities

24% or 6 had at least one adult with a physical disability. Persons with Developmental Disabilities

12% or 3 had at least one adult with a developmental disability. Persons with Mental Health Problems

24% or 6 had at least one adult with a mental health problem. Substance Abusers

8% or 2 had at least one adult with a problem with drugs or alcohol. Veterans



12% or 3 had at least one adult with who was a victim of domestic or intimate partner violence.

Youth

20% or 5 had at least one adult who was a youth ages 18 to 24;

4% or 1 had at least one adult who was an unaccompanied youth under age 18.


16% or 4 had at least one adult who was released from a correctional institution such as a jail or prison after serving a court-ordered sentence during the past 12 months.

Seniors age 62+

0% or 0 had at least one adult age 62+.

33

Chronically Homeless Families Total Unsheltered Number: 5

Chronically Homeless Families*

Of 25 families with 58 children, five or 20% were Chronically Homeless Families with 18 children;*

Gender

20% or 1 family was a single-female headed; Ethnicity**


0% or 0 families were African American/Black;

0% or 0 families were American Indian/Alaskan Native;

0% or 0 families were Asian;


20% or 1 was White;



80% or 4 did not have a recorded answer. (Hispanics/Latinos are included in several categories of race)

____________ *A family was considered chronically homeless if, according to HUD, there was at least one adult that met the definition of chronic homelessness described as such: An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS. **HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race.

34


40% or 2 had at least one adult with a chronic illness such as diabetes, heart trouble, high blood pressure, seizures, hepatitis, respiratory problems, epilepsy, tuberculosis, or arthritis.


0% or 0 had at least one adult who had been diagnosed with AIDS or had tested positive for HIV.


60% or 3 had at least one adult with a physical disability. Persons with Developmental Disabilities

20% or 1 had at least one adult with a developmental disability. Persons with Mental Health Problems

60% or 3 had at least one adult with a mental health problem. Substance Abusers

20% or 1 had at least one adult with a problem with drugs or alcohol. Veterans

0% or 0 adults served on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces or called into active duty as a member of the National Guard or as a Reservist.


0% or 0 adults was a victim of domestic or intimate partner violence. Youth

0% or 0 had at least one adult who was a youth ages 18 to 24;

20% or 1 had at least one adult who was an unaccompanied youth under age 18.

Seniors age 62+

0% or 0 had at least one adult age 62+. Persons Released from Correctional Institutions

20% or 1 had at least one adult who was released from a correctional institution such as a jail or prison after serving a court-ordered sentence during the past 12 months.

35

Men Total Unsheltered Number: 848

Ethnicity*

26% or 219 were Hispanic/Latino.

Race



2% or 13 were Asian;






23% or 198 did not have a recorded answer. Persons who were Chronically Homeless**

39% or 332 were Chronically Homeless Individuals. Persons with Chronic Health Conditions




25% or 215 had a physical disability. ______________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

36

Persons with Developmental Disabilities









Seniors age 62+

8% or 66 were age 62+. Persons Released from Correctional Institutions


37

Persons with Chronic Health Conditions Total Unsheltered Number: 350

Gender



0% or 0 were transgender;

1% or 5 did not have a recorded answer.

Ethnicity*




2% or 8 were Asian;





22% or 76 did not have a recorded answer. Persons who were Chronically Homeless**

58% or 203 were Chronically Homeless Individuals. Persons with Physical Disabilities

59% or 206 had a physical disability. _____________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

38


17% or 61 had a developmental disability. Persons with HIV/AIDS

2% or 6 had been diagnosed with AIDS or had tested positive for HIV. Persons with Mental Health Problems







0.3% or 1 was an unaccompanied youth under age 18.

Seniors age 62+

10% or 36 were age 62+.



39

Persons with Developmental Disabilities Total Unsheltered Number: 116

Gender

68% or 79 were men;


1% or 1 was transgender (male to female);

1% or 1 did not have a recorded answer. Ethnicity*




2% or 2 were Asian;





16% or 19 did not have a recorded answer. Persons who are Chronically Homeless**



______________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

40


7% or 8 had been diagnosed with AIDS or had tested positive for HIV.


54% or 63 had a physical disability.

Persons with Mental Health Problems







1% or 1 was an unaccompanied youth under age 18. Seniors age 62+



41

Persons with HIV/AIDS Total Unsheltered Number: 21

Gender

67% or 14 were men;




Ethnicity*




0% or 0 were Asian;









42




38% or 8 had a mental health problem. Seniors age 62+

10% or 2 were age 62+. Substance Abusers






0% or 0 were unaccompanied youth under age 18. Persons Released from Correctional Institutions


43

Persons with Mental Health Problems Total Unsheltered Number: 287

Gender



0.3% or 1 was transgender (male to female);





2% or 6 were Asian;

0.3% or 1 were Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander;








44




25% or 71 had a developmental disability. Substance Abusers







Seniors age 62+




45

Persons with Physical Disabilities Total Unsheltered Number: 309

Gender






Race



2% or 5 were Asian;









46


3% or 10 had been diagnosed with AIDS or had tested positive for HIV. Persons with Developmental Disabilities









Seniors age 62+

13% or 39 were age 62+.



47

Persons Released from Correctional Institutions Total Unsheltered Number: 279

Gender








1% or 7 were Asian;









48












Seniors age 62+


49

Seniors Total Unsheltered Number: 90

Gender

77% or 69 were men;







3% or 3 were Asian;

1% or 1 was Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander;




16% or 14 did not have a recorded answer. Persons who are chronically homeless**




50














51

Substance Abusers Total Unsheltered Number: 290

Gender








1% or 4 were Asian;








_____________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

52





37% or 107 had a mental health problem. Veterans






Seniors age 62+



53

Veterans Total Unsheltered Number: 145

Gender



1% or 1 were transgender (male to female);





0% or 0 were Asian;

1% or12 was Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander;








51% or 74 had a physical disability. ______________ *An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS. ** HUD only required Hispanic or Latino in ethnicity category. All other persons are recorded under race. Hispanics or Latinos are recorded under the various categories of race per HUD’s instructions.

54

Substance Abusers

35% or 50 had a problem with drugs or alcohol. Victims of Domestic Violence




Seniors age 62+

16% or 23 were age 62+.



55

Victims of Domestic Violence Total Unsheltered Number: 176

Gender

40% or 70 were men;


1% or 1 was transgender (male to female);





2% or 3 were Asian;









56









Youth



Seniors age 62+




57

Women Total Unsheltered Number: 334

Ethnicity*




2% or 7 were Asian;










27% or 88 had a physical disability. ______________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

58










Seniors age 62+




59

Youth Ages 18 - 24 Total Unsheltered Number: 107

Gender

64% or 68 were men;





Race


1% or 1 was American Indian/Alaskan Native;

0% or 0 were Asian;









60










19% or 20 had been a victim of domestic or intimate partner violence. Seniors age 62+




61

Unaccompanied Youth under Age 18 Total Unsheltered Number: 7

Gender

71% or 5 were male;

29% or 2 were female;






0% or 0 were Asian;









62









29% or 2 had been a victim of domestic or intimate partner violence.

Youth



Seniors age 62+



14% or 1 was released from a correctional institution such as a jail or prison after serving a court-ordered sentence during the past 12 months.

63

Appendix B: Findings for Each Jurisdiction

Concerning Unsheltered Adults and Families

64

Adelanto Total Unsheltered Number: 3

Gender

33% or 1 was a man;




0% or 0 were Hispanic/Latino; Race



0% or 0 were Asian;






33% or 1 did not have a recorded answer. Families

There were no families. Chronically Homeless Individuals**

43% or 3 were Chronically Homeless Individuals. ____________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

65














Seniors age 62+



66

Apple Valley Total Unsheltered Number: 14

Gender

71% or 10 were men;


0% or 0 was transgender;


7% or 1 was Hispanic/Latino. Race



0% or 0 were Asian;







36% or 5 were Chronically Homeless Individuals. ______________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

67














Seniors age 62+

7% or 1 was age 62+.



68

Barstow Total Unsheltered Number: 43

Gender

81% or 35 were men;


2% or 1 was transgender;





5% or 2 were Asian;






There was one family with six children. Chronically Homeless Families**

There was one Chronically Homeless Family with six children. Chronically Homeless Individuals***

51% or 22 were Chronically Homeless Individuals. ____________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **A family was considered chronically homeless if, according to HUD, there was at least one adult that met the definition of chronic homelessness described in the footnote below. ***An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

69














Seniors age 62+




70

Chino Hills Total Unsheltered Number: 4

Gender

75% or 3 were men;

25% or 1 was a woman;




25% or 1 was African American/Black;


0% or 0 were Asian;


0% or 0 were White;




There were no families. Chronically Homeless Individuals **


71












25% or 1 was a youth age 18 to 24;


Seniors age 62+



72

Chino Total Unsheltered Number: 44

Gender

66% or 29 were men;







0% or 0 were Asian;






There were two families with three children. Chronically Homeless Families

There were no Chronically Homeless Families.** Chronically Homeless Individuals***

34% or 15 were Chronically Homeless Individuals. ______________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **A family was considered chronically homeless if, according to HUD, there was at least one adult that met the definition of chronic homelessness described in the footnote below. ***An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

73














Seniors age 62+



74

Colton Total Unsheltered Number: 53

Gender

68% or 36 were men;




Ethnicity*




0% or 0 were Asian;






There were no families. Chronically Homeless Individuals **


75














Seniors age 62+



76

Fontana Total Unsheltered Number: 90

Gender

71% or 64 were men;







2% or 2 were Asian;






There were two families with six children. Chronically Homeless Families**

There was one Chronically Homeless Family with five children. Chronically Homeless Individuals ***

41% or 37 were Chronically Homeless Individuals. ______________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS. ***A family was considered chronically homeless if, according to HUD, there was at least one adult that met the definition of chronic homelessness described in the footnote above.

77




7% or 6 had been diagnosed with AIDS or had tested positive for HIV. Persons with Mental Health Problems

24% or 22 had a mental health problem. Persons with Physical Disabilities


17% or 15 had a developmental disability. Substance Abusers







Seniors age 62+



78

Hesperia Total Unsheltered Number: 5

Gender

100% or 5 were men;

0% or 0 were women;






0% or 0 were Asian;







20% or 1 was Chronically Homeless Individuals. ______________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

79














Seniors age 62+



80

Highland Total Unsheltered Number: 21

Gender

81% or 17 were men;







0% or 0 were Asian;






There was one family with three children. Chronically Homeless Families**

There were no Chronically Homeless Families. Chronically Homeless Individuals***

29% or 6 were Chronically Homeless Individuals. ______________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **A family was considered chronically homeless if, according to HUD, there was at least one adult that met the definition of chronic homelessness described in the footnote above. ***An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

81














Seniors age 62+

5% or 1 was age 62+. Persons Released from Correctional Institutions


82

Joshua Tree Total Unsheltered Number: 19

Gender

79% or 15 were men;







0% or 0 were Asian;






There was one family with one child. Chronically Homeless Families**

There were no Chronically Homeless Families.** Chronically Homeless Individuals*** (see definition at bottom of the page above)


83











21% or 4 had been a victim of domestic or intimate partner violence. Seniors age 62+

11% or 2 were age 62+. Youth





84

Loma Linda Total Unsheltered Number: 9

Gender

100% or 9 were men;

0% or 0 were women;






0% or 0 were Asian;








85














Seniors age 62+




86

Montclair Total Unsheltered Number: 7

Gender

86% or 6 were men;




Ethnicity*




0% or 0 were Asian;










87












Seniors age 62+




88

Morongo Valley Total Unsheltered Number: 6

Gender

67% or 4 were men;

33% or 2 were woman;



17% or 1 was Hispanic/Latino. Race



0% or 0 were Asian;







17% or 1 was Chronically Homeless Individuals. ______________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

89














Seniors age 62+




90

Muscoy Total Unsheltered Number: 10

Gender

80% or 8 were men;

20% or 2 were woman;






0% or 0 were Asian;









91














Seniors age 62+




92

Needles Total Unsheltered Number: 8

Gender

88% or 7 were men;







0% or 0 were Asian;










93












Seniors age 62+



94

Ontario Total Unsheltered Number: 62

Gender

53% or 33 were men;







0% or 0 were Asian;



2% or 1 was multiple races or other;



There were six families with 12 children. Chronically Homeless Families**


42% or 26 were Chronically Homeless Individuals. __________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **A family was considered chronically homeless if, according to HUD, there was at least one adult that met the definition of chronic homelessness described in the footnote above. ***An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

95













2% or 1 was an unaccompanied youth under age 18.

Seniors age 62+



96

Rancho Cucamonga Total Unsheltered Number: 15

Gender

87% or 13 were men;







0% or 0 were Asian;










97












Seniors age 62+



98

Redlands Total Unsheltered Number: 76

Gender

63% or 48 were men;







0% or 0 were Asian;






There were three families with four children. Chronically Homeless Families**



99














Seniors age 62+



100

Rialto Total Unsheltered Number: 14

Gender

71% or 10 were men;







0% or 0 were Asian;










101












Seniors age 62+



102

San Bernardino Total Unsheltered Number: 364

Gender



1% or 2 were transgender (male to female);





4% or 13 were Asian;






There were six families with 19 children. Chronically Homeless Families**

There were two Chronically Homeless Families with five children. Chronically Homeless Individuals***


103














Seniors age 62+




104

Twenty-nine Palms Total Unsheltered Number: 35

Gender

71% or 25 were men;







0% or 0 were Asian;



3% or 1 was multiple races or other;




46% or 16 were Chronically Homeless Individuals. ________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

105





23% or 8 had a physical disability.










Seniors age 62+

3% or 1 was age 62+.



106

Upland Total Unsheltered Number: 83

Gender

69% or 57 were men;







1% or 1 was Asian;










107











0% or 0 were unaccompanied youth under age 18. Seniors age 62+



108

Victorville Total Unsheltered Number: 125

Gender

66% or 82 were men;







0% or 0 were Asian;







There was one Chronically Homeless Family with one child. Chronically Homeless Individuals***


109














Seniors age 62+



110

Yucaipa Total Unsheltered Number: 9

Gender

78% or 7 were men;







0% or 0 were Asian;







33% or 3 were Chronically Homeless Individuals. _____________ *HUD only required Hispanic or Latino to be listed in the ethnicity category. Persons who answered “yes” when asked “Are you Hispanic or Latino” were then asked “What is your race?” per HUD’s instructions and their answers were included under the various categories of race. All other persons were asked “What is your race?” and their answers were also recorded under race. **An unsheltered adult was considered chronically homeless according to HUD’s definition of chronic homelessness, which includes persons living in emergency shelters and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings for the past year or more, and/or persons living in an emergency shelter and/or on the streets or in abandoned buildings four times or more during the last three years. In addition, according to HUD, the person must have a disabling condition, which for the purposes of this survey included mental health problems, drug or alcohol problem, physical disability, developmental disability, and/or HIV/AIDS.

111














Seniors age 62+



112

Yucca Valley Total Unsheltered Number: 125

Gender

66% or 82 were men;







2% or 2 were Asian;









113













1% or 1 was an unaccompanied youth under age 18.

Seniors age 62+



acknowledgements · 2015-04-09 · in 2013 and 25 unsheltered families with 58 children in 2015....

Documents