City and county detail homelessness system, needs and funding request; HSAC to seek $1.2M from city and $1.2M from county for next fiscal year

City and county staff gave a detailed briefing on homelessness in Durham and on current gaps in shelter, rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing. City Community Development Director Reginald J. Johnson introduced the overview; Colin Davis, the city’s homeless manager, explained system definitions, program rules and local data; and Samantha Smith, special projects coordinator in the county manager’s office, summarized Durham County investments and supports.

Key data and system points presented

- Coordinated entry: Entry Point Durham (phone and in‑person at the Health and Human Services building) is the central intake that triages people into the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) and refers to diversion, emergency shelter, rapid rehousing or permanent supportive housing. - Current waits and point‑in‑time: Staff reported roughly 50 single adults and 51 families waiting for emergency shelter at a recent update (about 100 households seeking shelter). The community’s 2024 point‑in‑time count recorded about 72 unsheltered people on a single night and a little over 400 people experiencing homelessness overall. - Program rules: Permanent supportive housing (CoC/HUD funded) is limited to households meeting HUD’s chronic‑homeless definition and requires a documented disabling condition. Rapid rehousing is short‑to‑medium term assistance (up to 24 months in a 36‑month period by federal rule). Street outreach, diversion and rapid exit programs are used to keep people from entering or remaining unsheltered. - Inventory and trends: The city described reduced congregate shelter capacity since the pandemic (men’s beds increased to 62; women’s beds declined to 15 in one shelter provider) and limited family rooms (about 28 bedrooms for families across the system). Staff said shelter layout changes (wider beds and accessibility needs) reduced bed counts in some facilities.

Funding and program administration (selected amounts reported by staff)

City of Durham (administration and grants): - The city is the CoC lead agency and reported it administers federal grants and local investments; staff said the city “puts in just shy of $4,000,000” annually into homelessness programs (includes local and passthrough funds). - Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) entitlement funds: city received about $175,000 annually; combined with local matching created a rapid‑rehousing pool. - Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds: approximately $300,000 used for supportive services (subject to the 15% cap on public services). - HUD CoC awards (two‑year awards for the current round): staff reported CoC funding just over $2.0 million total for the Continuum, with approximately $929,000 directed to permanent supportive housing and just over $1 million to rapid rehousing; about $525,000 of the award was prioritized for domestic‑violence survivors. - City‑contracted nonprofit roles: Volunteers of America of the Carolinas runs coordinated entry; Housing for New Hope administers unsheltered coordination, landlord engagement, and rapid‑rehousing contracts are split with Project Access and Housing for New Hope; North Carolina Coalition to End Homelessness provides HMIS technical assistance.

Durham County investments summarized by county staff (Samantha Smith)

- The county leases the Urban Ministries shelter facility to the nonprofit for $1 per year and pays utilities/maintenance; operational support to Urban Ministries has exceeded $380,000 in recent fiscal years. - County and city combined investments include a county ARPA allocation of $2 million (for expanded unsheltered day services beginning in 2025–26) and a county capital placeholder of $18 million in the CIP for unsheltered‑housing infrastructure. - County provides more than $200,000 annually to Alliance Health for permanent supportive housing services and has committed $3,000,000 toward a future permanent supportive housing site (Carver Creek); combined city/county investments in that site equal $6,050,000. - The county funds eviction‑prevention and other indirect supports (energy assistance, tax relief, childcare subsidies, food programs) that staff said reduce housing instability.

Operational gaps and immediate resource shortfalls reported

- Coordinated‑entry diversion funds: city contract for coordinated entry/diversion was cited at $477,000 and staff said less than $50,000 remains in that contract at the time of the presentation. - Opening Doors (county program assisting move‑in costs): county staff said about $14,783 remained in that fund. - County eviction‑diversion funds: staff reported the county began the fiscal year with about $830,000; as of the morning update there was $451,847 remaining and spending was averaging about $85,000 per month, projecting depletion in the spring (around April). - Rapid rehousing and PSH waitlists: staff reported 87 people on the rapid‑rehousing wait list and 36 people waiting for permanent supportive housing units; clearing the PSH wait list would require a sizeable subsidy (staff estimated roughly $700,000 at minimum to clear the 36 names under current cost assumptions).

HSAC policy recommendation and timeline

Policy and planning subcommittee members recommended a funding request that the Homeless Services Advisory Committee would finalize and send to elected officials and management for the next fiscal cycle. Staff described the recommendation as: - Request to the City of Durham for $1,200,000 (proposal components discussed included: $200,000 to increase diversion/rapid‑exit funds; $300,000 to expand street outreach capacity; $700,000 for flexible housing subsidies and paired supportive services). - Request to Durham County for $1,200,000 (proposal components discussed included: up to $1,000,000 to expand emergency shelter capacity — which could include nontraditional shelter such as pallet homes, sanctioned safe‑parking or hotel/motel leasing — and up to $300,000 for a day services center providing showers, mail, laundry and on‑site case management). - The request is intended to take effect in the budget starting July 1, 2025. Policy and planning asked HSAC to vote on and adopt the recommendation; HSAC will then send a formal request letter to city and county managers during budget season.

Speakers and elected members in the meeting asked for more performance reporting (recidivism and long‑term outcomes for households who received eviction diversion or rapid rehousing) and for faster, interim solutions that can be stood up quickly (safe parking, pallet homes, portable/sanctioned non‑congregate shelter and a day services center). Several participants urged prioritizing the needs of people with severe behavioral‑health needs and aligning housing units with the level of supportive services required.

No formal appropriation occurred at this meeting; staff said the HSAC recommendation will be finalized in coming weeks and brought to elected officials as part of the normal FY26 budget process.