Youth shelter, outreach and housing providers outline services and capacity; providers say demand exceeds current funding

Janus-affiliated youth service providers presented program operations and capacity to the Clark County Community Action Board on March 23, detailing shelter intake criteria, outreach and housing interventions and areas where community coordination is needed.

Alair DeSalvo, shelter and outreach director (Alair identifies she/her pronouns) with Janus youth programs, described Oakbridge Youth Shelter, opened in Clark County in 1996, and licensed to serve youth generally ages 9–17 (most contracts focus on 12–17). Alair said Oakbridge is contracted to serve up to eight youth at a time and provides 24/7 shelter access, crisis intervention, basic needs (meals, hygiene), transportation to school and appointments, ongoing case management and family mediation aimed at reunification when safe. Intake pathways include youth self-referral, law enforcement and DCYF/CPS placements, she said.

"We are licensed to serve youth between the ages of 9 and 17... our goal is always to get young people back home, if it's safe and possible to do so," Alair said.

She described outreach and a low-barrier drop-in center called the Perch (address: 1501 Columbia Street), which offers hot meals, laundry, showers, device charging, computer access and case-management connections. Street outreach work serves youth and young adults aged 12–24, providing supplies and relationship-based case management to help young people obtain IDs, Social Security cards and housing applications.

Scott Conger, who runs housing programs with the same provider network, summarized housing components including the NEST rapid rehousing program (for 18–24-year-olds living unsheltered or fleeing domestic violence), Unidos eviction-prevention services, and permanent-supportive housing partnerships with the VHA. Scott said the programs served roughly 50 households per year per program in prior years and reported an overall long-term success rate historically of about 85–90%, but he cautioned that the rental market and employment challenges have lengthened stays and made exits to stable housing harder in recent years.

Board members pressed for clearer capacity numbers and waiting-list data; Scott said referrals come from the Housing Solutions Center and the organization does not hold a single public waiting list for all programs. The provider group asked the board to keep funding support for these services, noting local demand outstrips current capacity.

The board posed operational questions—where youth who are turned away for behavioral or disability reasons are placed and whether McKinney-Vento school liaisons are used for transportation; Alair and Scott said higher-level psychiatric placements often fall to the child-welfare system and that McKinney-Vento liaisons in Clark County typically help set up school transportation.

The board took no immediate funding action but will consider these program updates in upcoming RFA and funding discussions.