1

REGIONAL CONTINUUM OF CARE COUNCIL

New Governance Model for the Continuum of Carefor Homeless Throughout the San Diego Region

2

RCCC Governance Structure Update

I. Governance Committee Membership and Process

II. Governance Structure Update

III. Strengths of the Model

IV. Community Review and Approval Process

V. Other Changes in the CoC

3

Governance Committee Members• Lila Fetherolf, Committee Chair, Interfaith

Community Services • Marva Bledsoe, Women’s Resource Center • Bill Bolstad, Father Joe's Villages • Karen Brailean, Volunteer/Sustainability Comm. • Camey Christenson, RCCC Staff• Dolores Diaz, RTFH• Jennifer Guthrie, St. Vincent de Paul Village • Michael McConnell, Business Owner• Megan O'Dowd, County of San Diego/HCD • Mathew Packard, SDHC • Martha Ranson, Catholic Charities • Dave Siegler, VVSD • Tom Theisen, RTFH Board Member• Henry Tarke, County of San Diego HHSA

Other Participants • April Balge, County of San Diego/HCD • Mary Case, Crisis House • Kelly Duffek, County of San Diego/HCD • Sr. Duvall, Catholic Charities • April Joy Galka, PATH • Vicky Joes, LeSar Development Consultants• Anne Kerr, Volunteer • Pat Leslie, RCCC • Kate Lyons, HUD TA • Marie McKensie, VOA • Joel John Roberts, PATH • Denise Shannon, VOA • Rosemary Stabrawa, PATH • Melanie Wilson, LeSar Development Consultants• Jessica Wishan, PATH

4

Governance Committee ProcessReviewed Local Submissions

• Discussed each model in depth; Identified pros, cons, questions for each submission• Consulted submissions at each step (Board size, Composition, Committees)

Reviewed Other Community Models across the nation• HUD Technical Assistance Consultants provided guidance • Reviewed 10+ other CoC examples across the nation

Developed Proposed Governance Structure based on multiple factors• HEARTH compliance and beyond – goal is to End Homelessness in San Diego• Expanding beyond “HUD CoC” to entire community – regional coordination• What is working today and what needs improvement • Opportunities for growth and increased cross-sector appeal• Agreed to by Joint Committee of Stakeholders – most by full consensus

5

Community Review and Approval Process

• Multiple presentations to RCCC members, Pivot group, Steering Committee, Executive Directors and Community Stakeholders. Community feedback incorporated into final recommendations.

• Other Prominent Stakeholder Tables• Downtown Leadership • Funders Together San Diego (combined SD Grantmakers former Homeless Working Group and United Way)

• Alliance for Regional Solutions

6

GovernanceBoard

Advisory Committee

Nominating/Selection

Infrastructure Organization

- HUD CoC Collaborative Applicant - Employ/Contract Infrastructure Staff - Fiscal Agent for Infrastructure Costs - Planning and Coordination

- Fundraising/Development - HMIS Lead

Advisory Committee

Data

Advisory Committee

Evaluation

Advisory Committee

Fundraising

Advisory Committee

Subpopulation/

Coordinated Intake

Full Membership

Inter-Governmental

Council

Community Stakeholders

7

GOVERNANCE BOARD

8

Governance

Board

Advisory Committee

Nominating/Selection

Community Stakeholders

Infrastructure Organization

- HUD CoC Collaborative Applicant - Employ/Contract Infrastructure Staff - Fiscal Agent for Infrastructure Costs

- Planning and Coordination - Fundraising/Development - HMIS Lead

Advisory Committee

Data

Advisory Committee

Evaluation

Advisory Committee

Fundraising

Advisory Committee

Subpopulation/

Coordinated Intake

Inter-Governmental

Council

9

Governance Board STRUCTURE

Seat designated by affiliation, community sector, subpopulation, and geography

Leadership - Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary, and Treasurer

2-year terms with half up for election each year; 10-year term limits

Proposed Board Size (min 17 – max 31)

Governance Board developed as an unincorporated association. Any change to formal legal structure would require amendment to the governance charter and full body approval.

10

Governance Board RESPONSIBILITIES

• Regional Planning – Set regional goals and priorities for ending homelessness in San Diego.

• Monitor Performance – Monitor community progress in ending homelessness in San Diego. Establish and monitor HUD CoC and ESG project performance targets. Evaluate Infrastructure Organization performance annually.

• Approve CoC Policies – Including HUD CoC and ESG funding recommendations and written standards for providing assistance.

• Approve Selection – HUD Collaborative Applicant, HMIS Lead, and Infrastructure Organization. Select Board Members annually and fill vacancies.

• Fundraise – Authorize grant applications. Raise and allocate funds. Approve sustainability plans.

11

Governance BoardCOMPOSITION

1. Homeless or Formerly Homeless Person2. Homeless Service Providers – 20% seats for providers

with geographic representation to include North, South, East, and Central

3. Homeless Service Provider4. Homeless Service Provider5. Homeless Service Provider 6. Homeless Service Provider7. Homeless Service Provider8. Public Housing Authority – City SDHC9. Public Housing Authority – County HCD10. Workforce Partnership11. Education Representative – e.g. County Office Ed.

12. Health – e.g. Hospital Association

13. Health – e.g. Clinic Representation

14. Law Enforcement – e.g. Department of Probation, HOT

15. Business – e.g. San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce/Tourism

16. Business – e.g. Marketing Firm

17. Business – e.g. Bank (Reinvestment Taskforce)

18. Elected Official 19. Elected Official 20. County HHSA – e.g. Social Services

21. County HHSA – e.g. Public Health/Behavioral Health

22. Veterans Administration23. Funder Representative 24. Funder Representative 25. United Way of San Diego26. Faith Community Representative (non-direct

provider) – e.g. Downtown Fellowship, Ecumenical Council

27. Technology – e.g. Qualcomm

28. Advocate29. Flex seat – e.g. 211, Housing Fed., Developer, Individual

30. Flex seat31. Flex seat

12

Governance Board Affiliation

Homeless Service Providers 20%

Public/Government 16%

Elected Officials 6%

Business 13%

Funders/Philanthropy 10%

Health 7%

Education 3%

Faith Comm Rep 3%

Homeless Person 3%

Workforce Partnership 3%

Law Enforcement 3%

Advocate 3%

Flexible Seats 10%Homeless Service Providers-6 seats

Public/Government-5 seats

Elected Officials-2 seats

Business-4 seats

Funders/Philanthropy-3 seats

Health-2 seats

Education-1 seat

Faith Comm Rep-1 seat

Homeless Person-1 seat

Workforce Partnership- 1 seat

Law Enforcement-1 seat

Advocate-1 seat

Flexible Seats-3 seats

13

Governance Board SELECTION PROCESS

• Nomination for Governance Board Members accepted from all members.

• Nominations reviewed by Nominating Committee to ensure adequate representation.

• Nominating Committee will reach out to candidates to confirm willingness to serve and verify qualifications. Nominating Committee may not nominate themselves.

• The Board will select membership annually and fill vacancies as needed. The Full Membership Body will ratify the slate of new Board Members in its entirety at the annual meeting.

• Seating First Board: The RCCC Steering Committee will create an inaugural Nominating Committee to seat the first Board. This committee will include RCCC members and non-RCCC members. The Inaugural Nominating Committee will have important role outreaching to identify and invite potential Board Members. The RCCC will ratify full slate of Board Members.

14

INTERGOVERNMENTAL COUNCIL

15

Intergovernmental CouncilCurrent Elected Officials representing various levels of

government (cities, county, state, federal)

Advisory to the Governance Board

2 Intergovernmental Council members will fill the “Elected Official” Governance Board seats

16

INFRASTRUCTURE ORGANIZATION

17

Infrastructure/Backbone Organization:

•  Centralized infrastructure with dedicated staff and a structured process that leads to a common agenda, shared measurement, continuous communication, and mutually reinforcing activities among all participants.

18

Advisory CommitteesNominations/Selection Committee Review Board Member nominations; Review solicitation responses and provide recommendations to the Board; Review Governance Charter and provide recommendations to the Full Membership Body

Evaluation CommitteeProvide project and community evaluation information and support

Fundraising CommitteeProvide sustainability recommendations and support

Data CommitteeReview data analysis, systems mapping, Point in Time Count, etc.

Sub-Populations / Coordinated IntakeProvide information and planning for subpopulations, and plan for local implementation of Coordinated Intake and Assessment

19

Infrastructure Organization

• Infrastructure Organization to assume operational responsibilities for HUD CoC grant and beyond

• The Infrastructure Organization will be selected using a formal selection process

• A single organization to assume all responsibilities is preferred but not required

• Legal structure of the Infrastructure Organization is not being identified or recommended, rather the formal selection process will be open

20

Infrastructure Organization RESPONSIBILITIES

• HUD Collaborative Applicant • CoC Application to HUD• Other Funding Applications• Contract or Hire Staff • Project Monitoring & Reports to Full Membership Body and Governing Board• Supports Governing Board and Advisory Committees• Performance Monitoring• Expand and Maintain Membership• Fiscal Agent for Infrastructure Financial Support• HMIS Lead

• PITC• Operate HMIS System and Ensure Compliance• Monitor Data Quality• Data Reports (HIC, AHAR, Publications, Performance reports)• Follow HMIS Policies & Procedures

• Point of Contact for the Community (along with Board Chair)

21

Infrastructure OrganizationSELECTION PROCESS

• Selection Committee comprised of Full Membership and Board Members to use a solicitation process to identify and evaluate candidates. Submissions may include proposals from the Full Membership Body.

• The Selection Committee will submit recommendations to the Board.

• The Board can accept one of the recommendations, or reject all of the recommendations and instruct the Selection Committee to continue the search. Final selection and approval rests with the Board.

• If suitable candidates are not identified through the solicitation process, the Selection Committee may recommend the Full Membership or Board create its own entity.

• Formal performance evaluation by the Board to occur each year.

22

Overall Strengths of Governance Model• Broadens membership and reach• Establishes cross sector Governing Board• Meets HEARTH requirements and beyond• Establishes foundation while allowing flexibility and expansion• Harnesses regional resources and builds upon existing strengths• Ensures transparency• Allows for checks and balances• Attractive to diverse funding streams• Reflective of the diligent work of diverse committee (blood, sweat, and tears)

23

Other System Changes Collaborative Assessment and Coordinated Entry

• Pilot Projects• VI- SPDAT / Dayton Model / COMPAS & GAIN• ESG,.CoC, and SSVF Recipients regionwide• AB 109 and Community Transition Center Pilot• Downtown Leadership Pilot

Data Sharing and Analysis• HMIS (Regional Task Force on Homeless – Homelessness )• CIE (Alliance Healthcare – Community Information Exchange) • KIP (County - Knowledge Integration Project) • Cost Study (FBEI – Downtown Leadership, County -Cost of Homelessness)