Task force recommends broader eligibility, coordinated-entry fixes and funding changes for Vermont emergency housing program

Montpelier — Legislators on the House Human Services Committee and the Senate Health and Welfare Committee heard the General Assistance Emergency Housing Task Force report on Jan. 15, 2025 and were briefed on a set of recommendations aimed at reshaping Vermont’s General Assistance (GA) Emergency Housing program, which task force members said is now a primary statewide tool for helping people who lack housing.

The report, presented by Representative Jubilee McGill, a task force member appointed as someone with lived experience of homelessness, recommends expanding eligibility categories, reducing some administrative requirements, requiring broader participation in a unified coordinated entry system, funding lead agencies and local service providers more fully, and creating on-site AHS (Agency of Human Services) liaisons at motel and hotel locations that house program participants.

Why it matters: Task force members said the state’s shelter capacity and service system are far short of need. McGill told the committees that Vermont has roughly 500 shelter beds and an estimated 3,500 people experiencing homelessness based on the most recent point-in-time count cited in the report, and said the GA Emergency Housing benefit became a primary shelter tool after the COVID-19 pandemic. The report’s recommendations aim to reduce reliance on motels, speed access to permanent housing, and address staffing and funding shortfalls among providers.

The recommendations follow eight task force meetings held from September to December and were developed from votes on discrete recommendations. The task force voted to approve a package of eligibility changes (reported tallies noted below) and a set of operational recommendations that the task force said should be implemented in statute and by AHS policy.

Key recommendations and details

- Eligibility: The task force recommends clarifying and expanding eligibility criteria to include households with members 60 or older, people who are pregnant, survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, human trafficking or hate violence while unsheltered or while in GA-funded motel or non-congregate shelter, children under age 19, youth exiting foster care ages 19–24, people with disabilities as defined by ADA and verified in specified ways, people who become homeless following a natural disaster, death of a household member, or a constructive eviction. The report recommends removing a current “resource test” that counts applicants’ savings when determining eligibility so households can preserve funds for move-in costs.

- Maximum length of stay: The task force recommended that the maximum length of GA-funded motel or shelter stay be tied to the HUD system-performance measure equivalent of average length of stay (the report notes that measure currently exceeds one year) and that eligibility continue while a household remains eligible and engaged with coordinated entry or case management.

- Application, notices and appeals: The task force recommended written denial notices that state reasons for denial, clearly explain appeal rights, and include contact information for legal services and reasonable-accommodation procedures. The group recommended application options in person, by phone and through a virtual portal (the pandemic-era system was cited as proof of concept).

- Coordinated entry and data: The report calls for a single statewide unified coordinated entry system with consistent benchmarks, expanded field-based services, reduced wait times (task force members reported coordinated-entry wait lists of up to six months in some areas), better training and workforce development for case managers, and full use of HMIS for timely data entry.

- Roles and on-site coordination: The task force recommended that AHS act as the shelter provider for GA-funded placements and develop contracts with motel and hotel owners addressing participant conduct, habitability standards and owner responsibilities. It recommended AHS designate staff to be assigned on-site at motels/hotels (not as overnight shelter but as liaisons and service coordinators) to connect households, owners and case management.

- Cold-weather policy and seasonal shelters: The report recommends relaxed eligibility during adverse-weather periods (citing Oct. 15–April 15 as the State Parks closure window) and increased funding for seasonal low-barrier shelter to prevent exposure-related harm.

- Conduct and exclusions: The task force recommended removing blanket periods of ineligibility for conduct-related exits and instead applying Housing-First principles and individualized interventions while preserving owners’ ability to seek no-trespass orders or decline to renew arrangements.

- Savings/self-pay options: The task force discussed but did not finalize a single approach to household contributions or savings; options passed to the legislature included (1) no income contribution for most participants because of low incomes; (2) contributions placed into savings for return to the household upon exit; (3) contributions calculated like Section 8 formulas; or (4) scaled contributions for households above certain poverty thresholds.

- Systems and regulatory barriers to housing: The report deferred much of the land-use and regulatory reform work to the Affordable Housing Development Regulatory Incentive Study Committee (Act 181, Section 37) but recommended expedited appeals, measures to preserve capacity when repurposing motels into shelter, and review of zoning/regulatory obstacles to tiny homes, SROs and other nontraditional models.

Quotes from presenters

Representative Jubilee McGill, task force member: “These are people, these are Vermonters. These are community members, our neighbors, our constituents.”

On youth eligibility: “The data shows that when you provide youth with the resources they need to thrive, they succeed. They thrive,” McGill said in response to a question about youth ages 19–24 exiting foster care.

Process and limitations

McGill told legislators the task force met eight times, sometimes for six to seven hours, and accepted written and oral public comment. She said limited meeting time and the breadth of the charge constrained the group’s ability to develop final recommendations on some issues (for example, detailed options for savings/self-pay mechanics). She also raised compensation concerns for lived-experience members, noting per diems of about $50 did not reflect the hours or value of participants’ work.

Votes and formal task force tallies (as reported in the hearing)

- Household eligibility and related elements: reported as two counts during the presentation (first part: 6 yes, 0 no, 2 abstain, 5 absent; second part: 9 yes, 0 no, 2 abstain, 2 absent) (task force recorded tallies reported by McGill). - Application, notice and appeals recommendations: reported tally 8 yes, 0 no, 2 abstain, 3 absent. - Reporting, roles and several operational recommendations (including designation of on-site AHS staff and participation in coordinated entry): multiple recommendations reported with votes recorded as 7 yes, 3 abstain, 3 absent. - Cold-weather/adverse-weather eligibility and seasonal shelter funding: reported tally 7 yes, 3 abstain, 3 absent. - Conduct and ineligibility policy (Housing First approach): reported tally 7 yes, 3 abstain, 3 absent.

The presentation noted that minority reports were allowed for members who disagreed and that some appendices of public comment were still being finalized and would be made available on the task force web page.

What legislators asked and next steps

Committee members asked for clarifications about absentee voting on the task force, how expanded eligibility would interact with program requirements, the administrative burden of frequent income recertification (the task force recommended moving from frequent recertification to every 90 days as a compromise), and the capacity of lead agencies. McGill and other presenters repeatedly emphasized the need for additional funding to stabilize providers, invest in workforce development and expand clinical and disability supports.

The report and its recommendations will inform bill drafting in the House this session and further hearings where details — including fiscal impacts and mechanics for savings/self-pay proposals — will be debated and refined.