Supervisors hear SOGI reports; departments report progress and persistent gaps in serving LGBTQ residents

The Audit & Oversight Committee held a hearing on the city’s collection and analysis of sexual-orientation and gender-identity (SOGI) data for fiscal year 2018–19, hearing presentations from the Office of Transgender Initiatives (OTI) and six departments. Supervisors, department staff and advocates stressed that better data is essential to identify disparities in who receives services and to target outreach and training.

Supervisor Rafael Mandelmann, who called the hearing, said SOGI reporting helps document service disparities and supports resource allocation. He cited California’s AB 959 and San Francisco’s 2016 SOGI ordinance (Chapter 104 of the Administrative Code), which require covered departments and contractors to seek, collect and report SOGI data annually.

Claire Farley of the Office of Transgender Initiatives outlined OTI’s role in coordinating guidance and training for covered departments and recommended a coordinated, citywide evaluation of SOGI collection and reporting. She said early results show programs explicitly designed to serve LGBTQ people record higher representation, while many general programs undercount or under-serve those populations.

Department of Public Health (DPH) reported progress despite an EPIC electronic health record rollout that consumed staff resources. Ashley Scarborough (DPH SOGI steering committee) said DPH collected SOGI data for nearly 19,000 primary-care patients (about 60% of primary care), roughly 11,000 behavioral-health clients (~45%), and SOGI-complete records for about 31,000 ZSFG patients (~33%). DPH added name/pronoun fields, expanded training and instituted grievance review processes for affirming care. Scarborough said the department aims for higher completion rates over time.

The Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing (HSH) reported that, as of Nov. 2019, 11 of 12 HSH systems were SOGI-compliant after a rapid rollout; coordinated entry currently shows the highest share of LGBTQ clients. HSH noted a data error in its original report that, once corrected, produced a small increase in LGBTQ representation across direct services. Abigail Stewart Khan (HSH) said roughly 16% of people accessing coordinated entry self-identified as LGBTQ+, a figure HSH intends to raise through targeted outreach, partnerships with community organizations and new training for contractors and shelter staff.

The Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) said SOGI collection expanded in mid‑2017 across client-facing housing programs and that targeted programs show much higher LGBTQ representation (examples ranged from under 2% to 75% depending on program type). MOHCD flagged outreach challenges to long-term existing residents and described a transgender rental subsidy pilot funded with ERAF dollars.

The Department of Children, Youth and Families (DCYF) said it served about 2,800 disconnected transitional‑age youth in FY18–19; of ~1,370 youth who reported sexual-orientation data, 17% identified as bisexual/gay/lesbian/questioning and 10% declined to state. DCYF stressed the field is non-mandatory and described plans for additional training to improve response rates.

The Human Services Agency (HSA) said it now reports SOGI data across more than 80 programs and 11 database systems, including Medi‑Cal, CalFresh, CalWORKS and IHSS; HSA reported that contractor compliance improved and that DAS (Dignity and Aging Services) programs have relatively high reporting and tailored services for LGBTQ older adults. HSA discussed steps to remove gendered language from forms, convert single-use bathrooms to all-gender facilities, mandate cultural competency training for staff, and to partner with the Controller to develop SOGI performance metrics.

Advocates and community representatives urged departments to go beyond process measures and set clear outcome targets. Open House and others pressed HSH and MOHCD on the 95 Laguna senior housing project, asking why only three of 15 placements were identified as LGBTQ seniors; HSH responded that available LGBTQ-identified, documented applicants in coordinated entry were limited at the time, and described outreach and prioritization steps now underway.

Supervisor Mandelmann asked the committee to file the hearing for follow-up; the committee filed the matter. Members suggested forming a cross-departmental working group to track implementation between annual hearings.

What the hearing means now: departments reported rapid progress in adding SOGI fields and training, but they also made clear that data-system fragmentation, uneven contractor compliance and community trust barriers still limit the ability to draw firm conclusions about underrepresentation. Departments committed to monthly targets, additional training and targeted outreach; the committee requested continued reporting and cross-agency coordination.