Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Coordinated Entry Ces topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City committee presses LAHSA, HACLA and LAHD for clearer roles in CES lease-up process
Summary
The committee reviewed a Chief Legislative Analyst report on the coordinated entry system (CES), approved recommendations to improve lease-up timelines and asked HACLA, LAHSA and LAHD to increase coordination and reporting. The committee approved the CLA report as amended.
A Los Angeles City Council Housing and Homelessness Committee meeting on May 21 considered a Chief Legislative Analyst report on the Coordinated Entry System (CES) and voted to approve the report with amendments that create clearer timelines, require kickoff meetings and ask HACLA to examine whether income and unit inspection timelines can be extended.
The CLA presentation said the report "covers a general overview of the PSH lease up process and identifies areas of concerns in the process that caused delay in move ins and general bottleneck in the system," and recommended a single point of accountability within the city to oversee lease-up from start to finish, recommending the Los Angeles Housing Department (LAHD) as that lead.
The report described roles now played by LAHSA, LAHD, the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles (HACLA), the county and service providers; it said CES matches people from a community queue fed by HMIS records and that the system has moved from one-on-one matching to batch matching and from tools such as VI-SPDAT to a new assessment. The CLA noted LAHSA does not publish specific efficiency metrics tied to those changes and that the universal housing application (UHA) and documentation requirements often slow move-ins.
Committee members pressed CLA staff on three operational issues: (1) whether CES is mandatory for PSH, (2) how geographic prioritization is set, and (3) how the community queue and matcher process actually filter large lists of eligible people. CLA staff and LAHSA representatives said CES itself is not separately required by HUD for every funding stream, but the countys Integrated Case Management Services (ICMS) ties the citys receipt of ICMS slots to placements through CES. LAHSA told committee members that geographic prioritization can operate at the SPA level but that smaller radii may raise fair-housing concerns.
The committee adopted several amendments before voting to approve the CLA recommendations. The amendments, carried in the final motion, instruct LAHD, LAHSA, HACLA and developers to hold a kickoff meeting four months prior to a PSH building opening (committee language also referenced six months in earlier discussion and committees ultimately added clarifying language to inform local council offices), and to coordinate with the local council office. Committee members also asked HACLA to report back on whether income verification and unit inspection timelines (currently valid for 60 days) can be extended to better align with lease-up timelines.
Members additionally instructed the CLA, with assistance from LAHD and the City Attorney, to: review fair housing law and produce placement-policy recommendations that would allow the city to set placement priorities; and review contracts with LAHSA and the county and provide recommendations to allow the city to establish placement policy for city-funded PSH while requiring that the county provide supportive services to PSH in the city.
The committee approved the item as amended by roll call (Council Member Grama: yes; Council Member Gerardo: yes; Council Member Blumenfield: aye).
Committee discussion repeatedly underlined that LAHSA currently operates the community queue and matchers and that the CLA report recommends stronger city-side accountability, metrics and a single point of contact to track progress, collect data and report to Council on lease-up performance.
The committee also debated the merits of one-on-one versus batch matching; CLA staff said one-on-one is typically used for turnover units while batch matching is used for new buildings to provide alternatives when matches are unresponsive. Some members urged batch matching for vacancies as well, citing turnover and case manager churn as practical obstacles to one-on-one matching working reliably.
The committee requested follow-up reporting on: LAHSAs training and resources for the universal housing application; HACLA timeline options for income verification and inspections; clarification on how the matcher portal filters community queue lists; and a CLA/LAHD/City Attorney memo on contracting and fair-housing implications of any city-led placement policy.
