Denver briefed on All In Mile High progress; officials cite housing gains, contract changes and lost vouchers

Denver officials gave the Community Planning and Housing Committee a quarter‑two update Aug. 26 on the All In Mile High citywide homelessness initiative, saying the program has sheltered more than 1,400 people in 2025 and moved just over 700 into housing as of June 30.

Why it matters: Committee members and staff said those outcomes matter as the city heads into the 2026 budget process and faces the loss of several housing resources and the sunset of ARPA funds; council members pressed city staff for clearer cost and contract information ahead of budget deliberations.

At the briefing, Senior Advisor Cole Chandler and Department of Housing Stability staff reported a dip in housing exits in the second quarter that officials linked to the loss of roughly 180 housing resources. Polly Kyle said that loss reflected two sources: about 100 vouchers that Denver Housing Authority could no longer allocate to the city and an estimated 80 state housing vouchers pulled back after state budget cuts.

City staff said the All In Mile High system has seen a 45% reduction in unsheltered homelessness in Denver over two years, and that deaths among people experiencing homelessness have fallen compared with prior periods, based on data that includes the medical examiner’s records. The Urban Institute is conducting a longer-term evaluation of the All In Mile High effort; staff said that evaluation began in 2024 and that the institute released an initial article the day of the briefing.

Procurements and contracts: Staff said several contract actions are upcoming. The city issued an RFP for noncongregate shelter sites and micro-communities over the summer; new contractors were selected and negotiations are under way. The selected noncongregate shelter contracts are scheduled for committee review Oct. 14; housing services contracts are scheduled for Oct. 28; and street outreach components of the street‑engagement work will come to committee in November. Staff also said they expect to seek an extension of the physical/dental/behavioral services contract for All In Mile High and plan an amendment to the citywide security contract later this year.

Pay‑for‑performance shift: Officials described a planned change in contracting approach. “We are moving to more of a pay for performance based model,” staff said, replacing standard cost‑reimbursement arrangements with outcome payments tied to metrics such as nightly bed occupancy, completion of housing assessments and minimum case‑management touchpoints.

Funding picture: Kyle told committee members that HOST’s primary ongoing funding sources for 2026 will be the Affordable Housing Fund, the Homelessness Resolution Fund and the city general fund, along with some federal dollars; ARPA allocations that previously supported elements of the program are no longer available. Council members asked staff to provide detailed cost information — per‑night shelter costs, program-level spending and contract actuals — in advance of budget hearings.

RV resolution program: Staff described an RV outreach and resolution team funded in the 2025 budget. The team, officials said, has been hired and will begin work in September. The program will offer people living in vehicles a set of options when they engage with outreach: a) move into an All In Mile High site and keep their vehicle under rules set by the site; b) relinquish the vehicle and receive a modest incentive before the city disposes of it under abandoned-vehicle processes; or c) receive assistance to get the vehicle road-ready to continue to a destination outside Denver.

Site services and data: Officials said about 75–80% of households at noncongregate sites receive services each month, and that Many service contacts are happening at sites — site staff reported an average monthly pattern of service touchpoints and variable lengths of stay by site. Staff said they are close to receiving deidentified line‑level service data, which would allow more detailed analysis, and that identifiable data would require a data‑sharing agreement.

Council response: Council members repeatedly asked for clearer fiscal reporting tied to outcomes. “There are zero pieces of information on the slide deck that tell us anything about the cost of this,” Council Member Chris Sawyer said. Council President Sandoval and others said the council needs historic actuals and per‑unit cost information to evaluate 2026 budget requests.

What’s next: Staff will bring contract items to committee in October and November and said they will add budget and cost slides to future briefings to address council requests. Staff also said they will share site‑level dashboards on outcomes when feasible.