20,000 reads under the sea Homeless programs put to test
CITY HALL — After nearly 20 years of providing services to the homeless, City Hall has agreed to pay an outside agency to evaluate the effectiveness of these services and give recommendations on where officials need to focus their efforts over the next five years.
The evaluation — the first since the city’s homeless services delivery system was created in the 1980s — will be conducted by The Urban Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based social policy and research organization that has conducted similar evaluations in Los Angeles and for the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
City Hall is expected to pay the institute up to $126,000 for a roughly nine-month evaluation, in which researchers will interview elected officials, city staff, service providers, community activists, law enforcement and the homeless, as well as review financial records to determine the success rates of service providers.
Recommendations are expected by January 2007, when the council will be considering grant funding for the coming year.
“We’re doing this evaluation to get a better idea of what the system currently does and how the city can better manage our resources,” said Mona Miyasato, City Hall’s acting human resources manager, addressing the council on Tuesday during a study session on homelessness. “We hope it will measure our successes, find out what our strengths are so we can build upon them … and find out what we can add or discontinue, and what new things can be tried.”
The evaluation comes as the political will and public interest in homelessness grows along with the call for accountability. Elected officials included funding for the evaluation during last year’s budget, labeling it a community priority.
“We heard last night how our service providers are doing such a wonderful job, but I don’t know that,” said Mayor Bob Holbrook, who voted in favor of the evaluation along with his council colleagues. “I know they are working hard, but I have to see results … If we are being so effective in helping the homeless, then why do we still see so many here? If it’s because people are continually coming in from other parts of the county, then we need to know that so we can identify our clients and draw the line.
“Santa Monica cannot solve this problem ourselves.”
Miyasato said the institute will try to answer these questions: What programs are working? What needs improvement? Are clients getting what they need? Are there gaps in service? What does the city expect? What is our experience compared to other cities?
Martha Burt, a researcher with the institute who is currently evaluating housing and employment programs for the homeless in Los Angeles, said the institute will not advocate funding one program over another, but she said elected officials here will be able to tell which of the nine service providers and 21 programs are the most effective. “This is definitely not an audit,” Burt said. “It’s really a look at how city agencies are working together, or not, with providers.”
Burt said the institute will not do any independent research and will rely mostly on data provided by city staff and service providers, along with interviews with homeless and others.
“The way you sort of know things are right in something like this … is when you talk to 50 or 60 people and you either get a convergence of opinion or you get non-convergence,” Burt said.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on April 27, 2006. Read the original PDF.