Report: Modeling for Housing Stability for Youth Under 18 in Washington State — Housing Justice Collective
Summary
A 2024 report by the Housing Justice Collective (HJC), required by Chapter 408, Laws of 2023 (ESSB 5599) and mandated to Washington's Office of Homeless Youth Prevention & Protection (OHY) within the Department of Commerce, on modeling housing stability for unaccompanied homeless youth under 18. The report states that its recommendations come from a facilitated six-month system modeling process with young people who have experienced homelessness, state agency and provider representatives and legal advocates, in collaboration with Legal Counsel for Youth and Children (LCYC). Its funding recommendations include an immediate investment to fully scale up the Community Support Team intervention in the next state budget. Legislative recommendations include expanding the ability of youth under 18 to consent to shelter, housing and related services.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
- Issuer
- Congressional materials
- Document type
- Report
- Case
- 2024 Ohy Final Report 100A352C 3Bdb 4A09 962F Dd23Ca69D2A6
Cite this document
“Report: Modeling for Housing Stability for Youth Under 18 in Washington State — Housing Justice Collective.”
Original at app.leg.wa.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2024-ohy-final-report-100a352c-3bdb-4a09-962f-dd23ca69d2a6/
, SHA-256 b1fa4caca4beb027ecca455e3b7fbe8fb0c23532bab9653841dbb000ee6ae57b.Full text
MODELING FOR
HOUSING STABILITY
FOR YOUTH UNDER 18 IN
WASHINGTON STATE
A report required by Chapter 408, Laws of
2023 (Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill (ESSB) PREPARED BY:
5599) and mandated to the Office of
Homeless Youth Prevention & Protection
(OHY), within the Department of Commerce.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Housing Justice Collective would like to thank Allison Connor, Cassidy
Kropf, and Lucas Neuman for their insight, expertise and partnership during the
modeling design and workshop. We would also like to thank the workshop
participants from each region across the state, including those with
experiences of housing instability or homelessness, representatives from state
agencies and providers, and others whose thoughtfulness, experience and
tenacity helped create and refine the recommendations that were included. A
full list of workshop participants can be found in Appendix 2.
This modeling process and report would not have been possible without the
partnership of the Legal Counsel for Youth and Children (LCYC), including Erin
Shea McCann and team, and their continued investment in the interests, safety
and legal rights of youth under 18, and the financial support of the Raikes
Foundation.
Additionally we would like to thank the Office of Homeless Youth and the Raikes
Foundation for your partnership and financial support for efforts to end
homelessness among unaccompanied youth under 18 in Washington.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
2 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary 4
Report Background and Purpose 6
Modeling a Systemic Response 8
Overview 8
System Modeling Process 9
System Modeling Results 15
Recommendations 19
Appendix 1 - Modeling Process Stakeholders 31
Appendix 2 - Community Support Teams 32
Appendix 3 - Model Pathways 34
Modeling For Housing Stability for
3 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary 4
Report Background and Purpose 6
Modeling a Systemic Response 8
Overview 8
System Modeling Process 9
System Modeling Results 15
Recommendations 19
Appendix 1 - Modeling Process Stakeholders 31
Appendix 2 - Community Support Teams 32
Appendix 3 - Model Pathways 34
Modeling For Housing Stability for
3 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
For Washington to support unaccompanied homeless youth under age 18 in accordance
with Chapter 408, Laws of 2023 (ESSB 5599), the following recommendations have been
submitted to the Office of Homeless Youth by the Housing Justice Collective (HJC). This
work results from co-design in collaboration with three youth consultants with lived
experience and Legal Counsel for Youth and Children (LCYC), alongside system modeling
activities with young people who have experienced homelessness and who brought their
expertise, state agency representatives, youth provider representatives, and legal
advocates.
Funding Recommendations
1. Scale up public and private investments in housing and service
interventions for youth under 18.
2. Adequately fund the interventions being scaled up, including
additional administration and evaluation costs.
3. Make an immediate investment to fully scale up the Community
Support Team intervention in the next state budget (for details
about Community Support Teams, see Appendix 2).
Housing & Service Intervention Recommendations
1. Co-design the implementation of intervention investments with
regional teams.
2. Ensure that the implementation of intervention resources meets the
unique needs of youth seeking or receiving protected health care
services.
3. Design and equitably fund flexible, low-barrier resources that can
support culturally specific communities.
Legislative & Administrative Recommendations
1. Take immediate action to expand the ability for youth under 18 to
consent/self-authorize for shelter, housing and related services.
2. Design and implement an aligned system response across the
homeless response system, child welfare, juvenile courts, behavioral
health, and schools.
3. Adequately assess and respond to the legal needs of minors and
nonprofits engaging in a supportive leasing intervention.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
4 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
The information and recommendations included in this report are the result of a
facilitated six-month process to gather and analyze data on unaccompanied minors
experiencing homelessness using a system modeling process. Section 4 of Chapter 408,
Laws of 2023 (ESSB 5599) included a mandate to the Office of Homeless Youth Prevention
& Protection Programs (OHY), within the Department of Commerce, to:
(1) [C]ontract with an outside entity to: (a) Gather data regarding the number of
unsheltered homeless youth under age 18 in Washington state; and (b) Develop
recommendations for supporting unsheltered homeless youth under age 18 in
Washington state; and
(2) By July 1, 2024, and in compliance with RCW 43.01.036, the office of homeless youth
prevention and protection programs shall submit the information and
recommendations described in subsection (1) of this section to the appropriate
committees of the legislature.
OHY contracted with the HJC, and HJC used system modeling to create this report and
meet the mandate.
System modeling is both a data-based tool and facilitated process that helps
stakeholders make informed estimations on the types, amounts, and costs of
interventions that address the housing and service needs of a specific population.
HJC used the system modeling process to co-create a set of recommendations to the
state on addressing the needs of unaccompanied youth experiencing housing instability.
This included the following sources:
Gathered and used 2022 data sets from Office of the Superintendent of Public
Instruction, Department of Social and Health Services, The Homeless Management
Information System (HMIS), and The Point in Time (PIT) Count to estimate an annual
total of 5,372 unaccompanied minors experiencing homelessness across the state of
Washington.
Hosted a two-day system modeling workshop with 20 stakeholders representing
different geographic regions of Washington. Half of the participants were young
people who brought their expertise, including that associated with their lived
experience of housing instability or homelessness, and the other half included state
agency representatives, youth provider representatives, and legal advocates. Together
we designed the interventions needed, and estimated the number of youth who would
use the interventions and the length of time they may be needed.
Used the information gathered during the system modeling workshop and the best
intervention cost data available to offer estimates on the size of investments needed
across all intervention types to address the housing needs of all 5,372 young people.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
5 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
REPORT BACKGROUND
AND PURPOSE
In 2023, the Washington State Legislature passed ESSB 5599, which aimed to ensure that
1
minors seeking or receiving protected health care services could more easily access
youth shelters and host homes.
Section 4 of Chapter 408, Laws of 2023 (ESSB 5599) required the Office of Homeless Youth
Prevention & Protection Programs (OHY), within the Department of Commerce, to:
(1) [C]ontract with an outside entity to: (a) Gather data regarding the number of
unsheltered homeless youth under age 18 in Washington state; and (b) Develop
recommendations for supporting unsheltered homeless youth under age 18 in
Washington state; and
(2) By July 1, 2024, and in compliance with RCW 43.01.036, the office of homeless
youth prevention and protection programs shall submit the information and
recommendations described in subsection (1) of this section to the appropriate
committees of the legislature.
OHY contracted with Housing Justice Collective (HJC) to complete this report, and asked
HJC to include:
Data regarding the number of youth under 18 experiencing unsheltered homelessness
and the number experiencing housing instability in Washington;
Recommendations for supporting youth experiencing homelessness; and,
Recommendations specific to the needs of LGBTQIA2S+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender and trans, queer and questioning, intersex, asexual or agender, and two-
spirit; plus-sign signifies additional identity terms) youth/youth accessing protected
health care services.
This work builds off HJC’s previous work in the state on unaccompanied youth
homelessness. Between 2021-2022, HJC partnered with teams of youth, providers,
government agencies, and advocates in King and Snohomish counties to make statewide
recommendations on addressing the needs of unaccompanied youth experiencing
homelessness.
1
"Protected health care services" means gender affirming treatment as defined in RCW 74.09.675 and reproductive health
care services as defined in RCW 74.09.875.” Sec. 2(2)(d). https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-
24/Pdf/Bills/Session%20Laws/Senate/5599-S.SL.pdf?q=20240419100604
Modeling For Housing Stability for
6 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
The recommendations can be found in the report Building a Better Future for Minors
Experiencing a Housing Crisis and are organized around three major themes:
1. Addressing the need for housing and service interventions of youth under 18 who
return to living with a parent or guardian and those who are moving towards
independence;
2. Addressing the legal consent barriers for youth under 18 with a legal guardian
who is unwilling or unable to consent to housing services; and,
3. Addressing the responsibility of government system leadership to meet the
housing needs of youth under the age of 18 in partnership with youth action
boards.2
These recommendations were used to create the model of resources and
interventions needed that are highlighted in this report, including the governmental
system responsible for implementing the recommendations for the model and
recommendations that ensure youth can access interventions through self-
consent/self-authorization.
This report is organized into three sections:
1. System Model Overview: This section offers an overview of the data analysis and
system modeling workshop used to create the estimates of the amounts and
types of resources needed to address the housing and services needs of all
unaccompanied homeless youth under 18 in Washington (those who are
unsheltered and those who are unstably housed apart from their family).
2. System Model Results: This section offers a summary of the intervention types
and costs for an ideal system for unaccompanied homeless youth under 18 in
Washington.
3. Recommendations: This section offers recommendations to the Washington
State Legislature and state agencies for the investments needed and the
implementation considerations for those investments to ensure that the needs of
all unaccompanied homeless youth under 18 can be met, including
recommendations that are specific to the needs of LGBTQIA2S+ youth/youth
accessing protected health care services.
2 A youth action board is a decision-making entity made up of youth and young adults who have experienced or are experiencing homelessness or
housing instability and has spread nationwide largely through HUD’s Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
7 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
MODELING A SYSTEMIC
RESPONSE
Overview
System modeling is a data-based tool and facilitated process that helps
stakeholders make informed estimations on the types, amounts, and costs of
interventions that address the housing and service needs of a specific
population.
HJC’s process of system modeling consists of five core components:
1. Root in a set of collective values about how the system should function and
what is included in response to youth under 18;
2. Use the best available data to create an estimate of the annual population
of youth under 18 experiencing unaccompanied homelessness;
3. Describe the key characteristics of the housing and service interventions
that will be included in the model and the average length of time a young
person will need each housing and service intervention;
4. Develop pathways for housing and services interventions to prevent
homelessness and/or gain housing stability; and
5. Use current intervention cost data to suggest recommended investments.
Components 2-5 are then inputted into a modeling tool to create an average
statewide estimate of the types, amounts, and cost ranges of resources needed.
The modeling for this report is specific to unaccompanied homeless youth under
the age of 18 across Washington.
The system modeling process and tool are meant to:
Combine lived and professional experience with the best available data to
make resources estimation and public investment decisions; and,
Be used in combination with recommendations to ensure the resources are
implemented with specific consideration for specialized populations, differing
regions of the state, and with the legal rights of minors in mind.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
8 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
System Modeling Process
HJC, Legal Counsel for Youth and Children (LCYC), and three youth consultants
with lived experience who were connected to the work through the OHY Youth 4
Youth Board partnered to design and facilitate a system modeling workshop for
Washington stakeholders. The planning team met weekly from January to March
2024 to analyze data and organize information to support all four components of
system modeling. At the end of March, the team hosted a two-day workshop with
20 stakeholders — half youth with lived experience and half representing state
agencies (Commerce, DCYF, and the Health Care Authority), youth housing
providers, and legal advocates. The list of participating stakeholders can be
found in Appendix 1.
Below is a summary of how the planning team and workshop participants worked
through the four components of system modeling.
1. Root in a set of collective values.
HJC, LCYC, and three youth consultants developed a set of values in which to root the
system modeling process. Many of these values are consistent with the mandate of
OHY, common to other youth homelessness processes, like the Youth Homelessness
Demonstration Program (YHDP), and were articulated through other processes HJC
has facilitated with Washington stakeholders regarding unaccompanied minors
experiencing homelessness. They were used throughout the planning process and
workshop for components 2-5 when estimating population, creating pathways, and
estimating costs.
The following is a summary of the collective values:
The ideal system response should provide comprehensive housing and services that:
Offer youth options and choices;
Are available for as long as a youth may need them instead of with arbitrary time
limits;
Are offered equitably across the entire state — in rural and urban areas;
Are inclusive of gender affirming care and behavioral health supports (mental
health and substance use);
Include a clear grievance process to ensure youth’s concerns are addressed and
youth-serving programs are held accountable;
Include well-compensated lived experience positions that offer people with lived
expertise an alternative to academic training as it pertains to job qualifications;
Modeling For Housing Stability for
9 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Support youth under the age of 18 who have reached a point of crisis and are,
therefore, interacting with the crisis response system to legally consent into
their own housing and related services; and ensure they have agency over
how their parents are notified and engaged;
Provide safe and affirming housing and services for LGBTQIA2S+ youth
throughout the state; all staff should be trained in best practices in working
with LGBTQIA2S+ youth;
Are tailored to the needs of BIPOC youth, particularly Black, Indigenous, and
undocumented youth; equitable access to resources should be a protected
right.
2. Use the best available data to create an estimate of the annual
population.
HJC, LCYC, and the three youth consultants, with the assistance of Commerce’s
Data and Performance Unit, reviewed multiple sets of population data on
unaccompanied youth under age 18 experiencing homelessness or housing
instability. The planning team reviewed the data to understand what it tells us
about the overall population across Washington, what limitations the data
sources may have, and the best way to combine data to make an annual
estimate of unaccompanied youth under 18 experiencing homelessness or
housing instability. This estimate was examined and used throughout the
system modeling workshop and provides an input into the modeling tool.
The following data sets were reviewed:
Unaccompanied Homeless Student Data from the Office of the
Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) - 2021-2022 School Year: An
annual report of the number of students experiencing unaccompanied
homelessness, as defined by the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless
Assistance Act, who are enrolled in schools (Pre K-12) and includes a
breakdown of enrollment by nighttime residence type.
Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS): Research and Data
Analysis Division’s Data on Youth Exiting Systems of Care January 1, 2021, to
December 31, 2021: Administrative information on housing status of youth
exiting public systems of care at six months and 12 months of
discharge/release from foster care (aging out); inpatient behavioral health
(publicly funded inpatient mental health or substance use disorder
treatment); and criminal legal systems (DCYF-Juvenile Rehabilitation
institutions or Department of Corrections facilities).
Modeling For Housing Stability for
10 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Point In Time (PIT) Count Data & PIT Snapshot Report - 2022 Calendar Year, Two
points in time: A statewide count of all persons/households staying in temporary
housing programs and places not meant for human habitation, alongside a
snapshot report that combines client information from several state agency data
systems to provide a comprehensive estimate of the homeless and unstably
housed population in the state at a point in time.
Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) for 2022 Calendar Year: All
youth ages 12-17 enrolled in programs in HMIS through programs funded by OHY,
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Family Youth and
Service Bureau (within the U.S. Department of Health & Human Service). Data
includes prior living situations and exit destinations.
“Yes to Yes” Washington State: Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adult
Homelessness Landscape Scan: A data analysis report that found in 2022, of the
15,338 unaccompanied young people who accessed the homelessness system,
19% (or 2,914) were youth under the age of 18.
Using these data sets and understanding that each of the data sets have limitations
in telling the full story of the population, the planning team made the following
assumptions to create an annualized population:
Start with the Unaccompanied Homeless Student Data from the OSPI - 2021-2022
School Year, because it is the most comprehensive count of youth in the state:
5,187;
Add in youth from the HMIS for 2022 who identified their prior living situations as
institutional settings that included hospital or other residential non-psychiatric
medical, jail, prison, or juvenile detention facility, long-term care facility or nursing
home, psychiatric hospital or other psychiatric facility, substance abuse treatment
facility or detox center. This data is used to capture youth who may not be
counted by the schools, specifically those that are exiting institutions and may be
disconnected from school: 185.
These data sets and assumptions make for an estimated annual population of 5,372
youth under 18 experiencing unsheltered homelessness or housing instability in
Washington.
In addition to the statewide totals presented above, the planning team reviewed and
compiled the data across four geographic regions across the state. The regions were
created based on the HMIS data request to Commerce. For this report, counties were
grouped into four regional zones.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
11 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
This helped ensure that there was
enough data available to analyze and Graphic 1. System Modeling Regional Map
not fall under Commerce’s HMIS Data
Suppression Policies,3 which exist to
obfuscate personally identifiable
information. The regional zone
approach invites conversations about
the particular experiences and needs of
young people that vary across parts of
the state, particularly in reference to
service abundance and scarcity.
Zones are grouped based on proximity:
Region 1 (green in Graphic 1): Island, King, Pierce, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish
and Whatcom counties
Region 2 (blue): Clallam, Clark, Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Jefferson, Kitsap, Lewis,
Mason, Pacific, Skamania, Thurston and Wahkiakum counties
Region 3 (yellow): Chelan, Douglas, Grant, Kittitas, Klickitat, Okanogan and
Yakima counties
Region 4 (orange): Adams, Asotin, Benton, Columbia, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield,
Lincoln, Pend Oreille, Spokane, Stevens, Walla Walla and Whitman counties
In these areas, agencies that served communities across multiple counties are
grouped together – for example, agencies in north-central Washington often
serve both Chelan and Douglas Counties, so those counties were grouped.
Table 1 presents the estimated annual population by region and by data source.
Table 1. Total Population of Unaccompanied Homeless Youth by Region
Data Set Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Total
Unaccompanied Student School
2,724 1,321 617 525 5,187
Count*
Exits from Institutional Settings
95 41 0 49 185
into Homelessness**
Total 2,819 1,362 617 574 5,372
*Data from Unaccompanied Student Data from the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction - 2021-2022 School Year
**HMIS 2022 Dataset provided by Department of Commerce Data Team
3
Washington State Department of Commerce HMIS Data Suppression Guidance
Modeling For Housing Stability for
12 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
3. Describe the key characteristics of the housing and service interventions
System modeling requires participant decision makers to describe each of the interventions
that they believe are needed to prevent and end youth homelessness and to describe the
key characteristics of those interventions, including the flexibilities and types of services
included. Some of the intervention types identified exist already, however the system
modeling participants discussed what they thought were key characteristics to those
existing and/or new interventions. Table 2 is a summary of the interventions identified by the
participants in the system modeling process and the desired key characteristics of each.
Table 2. Modeling Results Intervention Types - Key Characteristics
Housing Component Services Component
Intervention Type Key General Characteristics
Characteristics Characteristics
Flexible funds that lead to a housing
solution or divert someone from entering
One-time Flexible
the homeless crisis response system, such
Prevention/Diversio None None
as paying for work like refinishing a room or
n Funds a basement, or purchasing a trailer or
paying a utility bill, as needed.
Longer-term unconditional financial
4
Flexible Financial assistance (a year or two) provided directly
Typically services are offered but
Assistance or Direct to the person/family over a regular and None
voluntary.
Cash Over Time predictable period of time; can be direct
cash or guaranteed income.
Essential services include, but
A service team paired with flexible funds to Can include a connection to rental are not limited to legal services,
Community Support support a young person in housing options assistance, especially for youth to be housing navigation and
Teams of their choice. (See Appendix 2 for more stabilized within a family of origin also assistance, voluntary
detail about Community Support Teams) experiencing instability or homelessness. therapeutic services, voluntary
case management.
Transitional Living Case management with
Should be designed to help prepare youth referrals to critical services, life
Program/ Usually a congregate housing setting over a
for independent living (for youth ages 16-17 skills development, mental
Transitional 5 longer term.
and up to 21) health supports, and legal
Housing services.
Can function like a family time-out/break
where a youth can return home, when paired
with Community Support Team; or be used in
crisis situations with youth exiting from
Case management with
Emergency/Crisis Can be respite-type (planned) or crisis- hospitals, incarceration, etc., with nowhere
referrals to critical services and
Shelter type. else to go; or be used in limited situations
family reunification supports.
where Community Support Team services
can support and a youth usually exits to a
longer term stay in a transitional program or
does not ever go home.
Supports include direct cash (to
youth and/or to host), services
similar to Community Support
Can be a known or unknown (to the youth) Supportive, family-based living situation,
Host Homes Team to hosts and to youth. Can
host. though need not be family of origin.
be paired with Community
Support Teams for deeper
services.
Housing assistance similar to rental
assistance, but with the contractual Includes case management with
Rental assistance and supportive services
Supportive Leasing relationship between the landlord and the referrals to critical services and
for youth.
funded housing agency, instead of the damage mitigation funds.
between the landlord and the youth-tenant.
4
Maximizing the Impact of Direct Cash Transfers to Young People
5
Findings from the Transitional Living Program Youth Outcomes Study September 2021 OPRE Report 2021-191
Modeling For Housing Stability for
13 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
After describing each intervention, the modeling participants used research and
local available information on outcomes, paired with lived expertise and
professional experience, to determine the average length of time a young person
will need support from the intervention. Table 3 is a summary of the average
lengths of support and key considerations used to determine them.
Table 3: Modeling Results by Intervention Type and Length of Support
Ideal Lengths of Intervention
Intervention Type Discussion
(Average)
Accounts for one-time assistance that can offer
One-time Flexible
stability and can be paired with a Community Support
Prevention/Diversion One-time (Equivalent of 1 month)
Team intervention with a longer length of support
Funds
when needed.
Flexible Financial Aligns with long-term housing lengths of assistance
6
Assistance or Direct 12 months and takes into consideration the longer length of time
Cash Over Time a minor may need support.
Accounts for ongoing aftercare support and the ability
Community Support to come in and out of the intervention while a minor.
24 months
Teams Paired with housing interventions so that service
assistance can continue.
Aligns with other long-term housing intervention
Transitional Living
lengths of assistance and accounts for some youth
Program/Transitional 12 months
needing shorter and some youth needing longer,
Housing
potentially until the end of high school.
Respite is paired with a Community Support Team
intervention and allows for an average of 15 non-
Emergency/Crisis consecutive days as a form of rest. Though some
15 days respite, 30 days crisis
Shelter allow for 90 days stay, in the ideal model, crisis shelter
length of stay is 30 days to account for time needed to
move to long-term housing.
Aligns with other long-term housing intervention
lengths of assistance and accounts for some youth
Host Homes 12 months
needing shorter and some youth needing longer,
potentially until the end of high school.
Aligns with other long-term housing intervention
lengths of assistance and accounts for some youth
Supportive Leasing 12 months
needing shorter and some youth needing longer,
potentially until the end of high school.
4. Develop pathways for housing and service interventions.
System modeling requires the creation of pathways out of homelessness.
Pathways are a way of combining interventions that could end a young person’s
housing instability. Pathways must be designed intentionally based on estimates
of successful outcomes. An average length of stay must also be added for each
intervention within the pathway to estimate the average length of time a youth
will need the intervention to successfully end their housing insecurity.
6
Direct Cash Transfer pilots currently occurring are not conclusive on the cash amount or duration of cash assistance, but according to Point Source Youth, 24 months is a standard
length of assistance. During modeling, participants offered an ideal length of stay of 12 months, and this was the average length used in the model.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
14 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
The planning team created possible pathways and workshop participants, then
worked in teams across the four regions to finalize the pathways, estimate the
percentage of the total population of youth in each region that could successfully
use each pathway, and the average length of time a youth would need support in
each intervention of the pathway. Each region’s pathways are described in
Appendix 3.
5. Use current intervention cost data to suggest recommended
investments.
For the purposes of system modeling, the average cost per day for the identified
project types reported in the Homeless in Washington 2023 Annual Report was
used to determine pathway and regional estimates for the identified
interventions within each pathway. To create this report, Commerce combines
annual expenditures data (funding sources include federal, state and local) with
HMIS data for homeless housing projects in each county.
The 2023 Homeless Housing Project Expenditure Report provided a small (3)
cohort of existing host home programs of which average cost data were
developed to be used for modeling and included in the chart below.
System Modeling Results
The system model uses the following data elements to offer investment
recommendations:
The population estimate of youth under 18 experiencing homelessness and
housing instability in each region
The percentage of youth each region predicted would need each intervention
The average length of stay each youth needs within each intervention
The best available cost data per month for each intervention type
Graphic 2. System Model Elements
Population Estimate Proportion Length of Stay Intervention Cost
The results of the system modeling process are shown in Tables 4, 5 and 6.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
15 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
In Table 4, the first column names the interventions types workshop participants
identified as part of the pathway activity. The next five columns of Table 4 report
how many youth per region and across the state would benefit from the
intervention. The last three columns of Table 4 report the average (mean) cost
per person using two different sources of cost information. The ranges indicated
in the right hand column of Table 4 vary, as they are based on actual costs of
projects and some are large ranges. In many cases, these large ranges represent
differences providers experience while maintaining a project/program or a
building when costs are stable but the number of youth served fluctuates.
Table 4: Modeling Results by Intervention Type, Number of Youth to be Served and Cost Information
Estimated Range of
Average Cost Average Cost
Intervention Number of Current
Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Per Person Per Person
type Youth Monthly Costs
Per Day7 Per Month 8
Statewide Per Person9
One-time
Flexible
282 272 432 144 1,130 $0.69 $20.99 $4.91 - $98.98
Prevention/
Diversion Funds
Flexible
Financial
Assistance or 620 408 309 144 1,481 Not Included $20.9910 $4.91 - $98.98
Direct Cash
Over Time
Community
1,917 680 495 316 3,408 $32.49 $988.24 $30.17 - $50.25
Support Teams
Transitional
Living Program/ $14.07 -
648 204 0 144 996 $3.82 $116.19
Transitional $1,853.91
Housing
Emergency/ $9.79 -
423 204 62 57 746 $53.95 $1,640.98
Crisis Shelter $1,436.60
11 $143.96 -
Host Homes 282 204 62 144 692 Not Included $2,398.96
$1,055.36
Supportive
846 68 62 29 1,005 $43.21 $1,314.30 $30.17 - $339.06
Leasing
7 This information is compiled in the Homeless in Washington 2023 Annual Report.
8
Except where noted, this calculation is multiplying the daily rate in the prior column by 365 and dividing by 12.
9
This information is analyzed using the SFY2023 Department of Commerce Golden Report.
10
This cost uses the one-time flexible prevention/diversion funds calculation.
11
This calculation is based on the average cost per day for the Host Home project type from three existing host home programs found in the 2023 Homeless
Housing Project Expenditure Report.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
16 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Table 5 represents the output estimates in the model of the projected
investments needed to operate the system at start-up. It represents the universe
of interventions and costs and does not reflect any current investments in these
interventions or within regions. Current investment information is not easily
separated to be able to account for funding dedicated to youth under 18 and will
require a baseline assessment of investments that were beyond the scope of this
report.
Table 5: Modeling Investment Estimates12
Modeled
Statewide
Intervention type Lengths of Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4
Totals
Assitance
One-time One-time
Flexible Diversion (Equivalent $5,916 $5,717 $2,590 $3,012 $17,235
Funds of 1 month)
Flexible Financial
Assistance or
12 months $156,192 $102,906 $77,696 $36,140 $372,934
Direct Cash over
time
Community
24 months $45,464,933 $13,728,991 $11,707,057 $7,487,678 $78,388,659
Support Team
Transitional
Living Program/
12 months $904,022 $284,855 $0 $80,033 $1,268,910
Transitional
Housing
15 days
Emergency/
respite, 30 $578,240 $335,252 $101,248 $94,192 $1,108,932
Crisis Shelter
days crisis
Host Homes 12 months $8,115,210 $5,881,296 $1,776,192 $4,131,013 $19,903,711
Supportive
12 months $13,338,084 $1,074,049 $973,111 $452,646 $15,837,890
Leasing
Totals $68,562,597 $21,413,066 $14,637,894 $12,284,714 $116,898,271
12
These totals reflect estimates based on cost information used in the average cost per person per month in Table 5 above.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
17 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
The model uses monthly average costs across each intervention type for
consistency's sake, though one-time prevention/diversion costs could be
reflected differently in future modeling versions/exercises, should there be an
opportunity to drill further into those costs. For comparison purposes, Table 6
presents other ways to consider calculating prevention/diversion one-time costs
in future decision-making about funding and administration of these
interventions.
Table 6: One-Time Prevention/Diversion Funds Cost Alternative
Per Person Alternative Statewide
Cost Description Cost Source
Average Cost Cost Estimates
Commerce’s Homeless in
Homeless Prevention: Cost per
Washington 2023 Annual $2,397.61 $2,709,299
successful exit per household
Report
Homeless Prevention: Cost per Commerce’s SFY2023 Golden
$7,825.89 $8,843,256
average project stay Report
A Way Home Washington’s
Homelessness Prevention and Homelessness Prevention
$1,926.00 $2,176,380
Diversion Fund: Average cost and Diversion Fund Report -
October 2022
Modeling For Housing Stability for
18 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
RECOMMENDATIONS
Funding
Recommendations
Recommendations follow for the investments needed to build a holistic response
system for people under age 18 experiencing homelessness and the
considerations needed in allocating funding across Washington.
1. Use the modeling results, in combination with a baseline
assessment of current investments, to establish a holistic response
by scaling up local, state, federal, and private investments across
Washington in the interventions outlined in the model.
The system modeling results offer the start of a blueprint for current intervention
investments needed both statewide and specific to the characteristics of each of
the four regions. It must be paired with a comprehensive scan of current local,
state, federal and private investments for young people under 18 in the homeless
response system. The current data on investments is not easily separated by
investments in under 18 programs and will require a future study to best
understand the baseline investments across the state.
The modeling results, in combination with a baseline assessment of current
investments, can be used by the Legislature and state agencies to engage a
broader group of stakeholders across state and local government, nonprofits,
education, philanthropy, and youth action boards to make informed intervention
investment decisions driven by the collective knowledge of the community. Some
considerations in continuing to use the system model for informed investment
decisions:
It should be treated as a living tool that can be adjusted with new data on
population, lengths of stay, and costs, and with expanded knowledge of the
professional and lived experiences of stakeholders engaging with the system
model.
The modeling tool can be further developed with the best data available to
plan for multi-year investments and projected savings over time based on
the success of the system in preventing and ending unaccompanied youth
homelessness by:
Determining the rates of attempted access (demand without entry) and
inflow (entries) into current identified interventions; and
Modeling For Housing Stability for
19 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Determining rates of outflow (exits) from identified interventions to safe
and stable housing placements including returns to family of origin,
transitions to other identified interventions determined as positive, and
returns to unstable housing or homelessness.
The modeling information compiled here represents the ideal system when all
intervention types are fully funded and implemented. State agencies and
legislative decision-makers, in partnership with regionally representative
teams of people with professional experience and people with lived
experience, or both, will need to make decisions on what areas to scale up
resources first and how that will impact the overall model. For example, the
amount of crisis shelters across the state is proportionally smaller in the ideal
system because the system is adequately investing in longer-term solutions.
If the state, or a region, is not able to fully invest in all the longer-term
solutions up front, then it may be necessary to increase investment in crisis
shelters in the short term to ensure that youth have a safe space to stay.
2. When scaling up interventions with legislative investments, ensure
that interventions are adequately funded, supported in
implementation, and evaluated.
As Washington legislative and administrative leaders make decisions about the
order and priorities for scaling up these interventions, it is critical that the
interventions be fully resourced; underfunding would result in an inadequate
implementation or fractured response. Youth providers in the system modeling
workshop spoke of the challenge of meeting youth needs with piecemeal public
investments, which can lead to inequitable statewide distribution and under-
resourced interventions in the areas of the state that do receive funds. The
system modeling results offer a more holistic and realistic tool to estimate the
resources needed to prevent and end homelessness for unaccompanied youth
under the age of 18 across every region of the state.
Specific considerations on adequately funding interventions include:
Legislative investments allocated to the state agencies tasked with
administering funds to the community should be sustained (not one-time
allocations, which require advocacy time and resources to reallocate) and
incorporate adequate administrative funds to community providers — a
minimum of 10% of the overall investment, which increases alongside rising
inflation and labor costs.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
20 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Legislative investments should account for the administrative capacity of the
state agency tasked with administering the funds and should include
infrastructure to support training and technical assistance, continuous
community engagement, data and evaluation, financial and compliance
monitoring, and system capacity building needs as scaling of programs and
services occur.
State agencies and programs, including the Office of Homeless Youth, should
ensure that investments are equitably allocated across regions and account
for regional cost differences in building and sustaining interventions that
result in positive outcomes. This should include:
13
Use of regional planning teams to help state offices develop regional cost
models for the major interventions outlined in the system model and
integration of the regional cost models into state funding applications;
Requiring regional coordination amongst the housing and services
providers in the region in grant application processes to help ensure an
aligned and geographically represented response and use of state
investments, similar to prior processes used for the Youth Homelessness
Demonstration Program;
Assessment of regional costs and needs once every two years to help
guide the next funding cycle and improve upon regional cost models; and
Use of regional planning teams to review outcome data of funded
interventions to track and discuss youth population disparities specific to
the region in relation to investment levels. Regional discussions should
inform recommendations regarding investment levels.
Funding awards must ensure that contractors have adequate time to build up
programs, accounting for licensing timelines, hiring staff, and providing
education and outreach to the community so that youth and families are
connected to resources as soon as the program is ready to launch.
Contracted allocations must reflect their actual proposed budgets so the
program meets the needs of the youth it intends to serve — more trust must
be given to community providers who work with youth and families and know
what a fully funded program actually costs.
Finally, administrative funds should be allowed to be used to support regional
planning team costs and technical assistance, discussed in Housing and
Services Recommendation #1, to ensure the best use of the resources.
13
See Housing & Services Recommendation #1 for further explanation of regional planning teams
Modeling For Housing Stability for
21 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
3. Make an immediate investment
in the next state budget to scale
up Community Support Teams
across all four regions, and co-
IMMEDIATE
design the implementation with OPPORTUNITY!
regional teams.
The modeling workshop participants across the four identified regions of
Washington identified well-resourced Community Support Teams as the most
needed intervention for unaccompanied youth under 18 (for more detail about
Community Support Teams, see Appendix 2). Workshop participants
recommended that Community Support Teams be available to youth actively
experiencing homelessness (for example, who are already in a shelter) and to
those who are not yet experiencing homelessness, but may experience family
conflict and where a Community Support Team could provide support to prevent
homelessness. To be effective, this intervention must be fully resourced to include
case management, flexible funds, housing navigation, mental health resources,
family mediation, and access to legal services.
The Legislature made an initial investment in Community Support Teams during
the 2023 session through Chapter 151, Laws of 2023 (Substitute House Bill (SHB)
1406), but that model was specifically connected to “any youth who enters a
licensed overnight youth shelter, or another licensed organization with a stated
mission to provide services to homeless or runaway youth and their families.”
Washington must also ensure that the Community Support Team model is
funded beyond the initial 2023 investment. The Community Support Teams
funded through SHB 1406 were modeled after existing Youth Engagement Teams
(YET), which several communities have built using federal and private funding
and, through evaluations, have proven to be an effective and efficient model in
ensuring that homelessness among unaccompanied minors is rare, brief, and
14
one-time.
14
The Growing Impact of Youth Engagement Teams
Modeling For Housing Stability for
22 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Washington should use the system modeling information as a tool to make an
informed decision on the scale of investment needed across the state to ensure
any young person who needs it has access to a Community Support Team. A
robust statewide investment in Community Support Teams would help ensure all
unaccompanied youth under 18 in the state had immediate access to a
community-based, multidisciplinary team with flexible resources to address their
needs and connect them to longer-term interventions such as host homes,
transitional living or supportive leasing, if needed.
OHY should convene regional teams composed of youth, advocates, and
representatives from state agencies, nonprofits, and education to design a
regional approach and implementation of Community Support Team resources.
The system modeling workshop teams identified unique needs within their region
that must be addressed to ensure that Community Support Teams appropriately
meet the needs of specialized populations, including LGBTQIA2S+ youth. A
regional implementation approach facilitated by OHY would help ensure the
Community Support Team resources are being implemented in the most flexible
and responsive manner for each region.
Housing and Service Intervention
Recommendations
Below is a set of recommendations for designing and implementing the
interventions discussed in the system model in order to create a holistic response.
1. Co-design the implementation of intervention investments with
regional teams.
OHY and any other state program or agency tasked with distributing intervention
resources for unaccompanied youth experiencing homelessness should
designate administrative funds to co-design the implementation of the
resources with regional teams consisting of local and state government,
nonprofits, education, philanthropy, and Youth Action Boards
Modeling For Housing Stability for
23 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Different regions of the state see differences in needs, costs, current resources
available, populations and cultures served, and access to transportation,
employment, and social services. It is critical that these regional teams localize
the statewide response to ensure it plans for these differences in a way that
centers young people and their families in the region.
The regional teams should address the following implementation considerations:
Flexibility in public and private funding requirements to ensure:
Resources, such as diversion funds, can be used further upstream to
prevent homelessness and can be accessed without needing to formally
enter the homeless response system;
Eligibility requirements and funding allow for youth to come in and out of
crisis shelter for short respite stays, as needed, when families are
experiencing conflict;
Eligibility requirements and funding allow for youth to come in and out of
Community Support Team engagement, as needed;
Mechanisms exist to provide direct cash assistance to both youth and
family members; and
Mechanisms exist to support youth accessing non-traditional housing
options, such as trailers, shared housing, and renovations to existing
structures.
The design of a comprehensive regional “front door” to crisis intervention
resources, specifically designed for youth under 18, that:
Holistically assess youth’s assets and needs and connects them to the
best resources of their choice;
Successfully diverts youth from experiencing homelessness when possible;
Connects youth to family resources when needed; and,
Communicates across other youth-serving systems to ensure cross-
system connections.
Adequate funds and technical assistance for capacity building and start-up
of new resources.
Inter- and intra-regional differences in cost and need, including
transportation supports and differing housing types, especially for more rural
communities.
Accountability at a regional level (see Legislative and Administrative
Recommendation #2).
Modeling For Housing Stability for
24 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
2. Ensure that the implementation of intervention resources meets
the unique needs of youth seeking or receiving protected health care
services, which includes gender affirming and reproductive health
care services.
The modeling workshop was designed to consider the needs of youth who
identify as LGBTQIA2S+ and who are youth of color. The modeling exercise
aimed to ensure the interventions and pathways out of homelessness in the
model consider the needs of queer youth and youth of color.
This approach aligns with the concept of targeted universalism — in this case,
designing a system that creates belonging for and meets the needs of those
who currently are or who have been historically marginalized by the
government and government programs in a way that can benefit all
unaccompanied youth experiencing homelessness or housing instability.
The system and the interventions within it must ensure access to safe and
affirming housing and services that can flexibly meet the needs of youth under
the age of 18 who are seeking gender affirming care and other protected health
care services. Specific considerations for to doing so include:
Requiring Community Support Teams be trained in helping transgender,
gender non-conforming, and non-binary youth navigate gender affirming
treatment and other protected health care services, including
understanding their legal rights around consent and access to care and
knowledge to connect youth to legal services;
Ensuring access to flexible cash assistance across all service interventions
that can be used for transportation, personal health care costs, and other
needs that may not be covered by existing resources;
Creating a network of qualified mental health supports that youth and their
families can access for gender affirming treatment and other protected
health care services, and ensuring service dollars across the interventions
can be used to pay for and assist with transportation or other needs in
accessing mental health care that is gender affirming, particularly for youth
in rural areas;
Modeling For Housing Stability for
25 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Creating flexibility and expertise within crisis housing options, such as shelter,
that allow for respite — short stays that do not need to be consecutive — from
any family conflict that may result from a youth needing to access gender
affirming care or other protected health care services; and
Developing clear legal guidance to/build legal literacy among all youth
housing and service providers in Washington to ensure they are aware of
youth’s legal rights.
3. Design and equitably fund flexible, low-barrier resources that
can support culturally specific communities.
Each region identified different, culturally specific communities — including
communities of color, indigenous communities, and LGBTQIA2S+ communities —
that have been marginalized by governmental systems, resulting in youth
choosing to not access even the most robust programs and services and
community leaders and organizations finding solutions for themselves and their
community outside of governmental structures and opportunities.
To address this, Washington should design a flexible, low-barrier grant program
specifically designed to serve historically marginalized communities that
allocates resources and community support services directly to those
communities.
A state-funded flexible grant program could be modeled after or include
learnings from the challenges of existing federal culturally specific block grant
programs, such as the Indian Community Development and Housing Block
Grants. Block grants tied directly to culturally specific communities allow for
greater flexibility and more tailored direct funding requested by and allocated to
the communities that rely on more informal, less government-based support.
Even as investments through government-funded programs can better reach
into culturally specific communities, some organizations, communities, families
and individuals may prefer to abstain from receiving government support, as
historically government support has not been trustworthy. The Legislature should
create and support opportunities that can inspire and incentivize private
investments in these communities, such as tax credits or incentives that spur
increased charitable contributions. Investing in youth, their families and
communities is a form of upstream housing instability prevention.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
26 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Legislative & Administrative
Recommendations
Below is a set of recommendations requiring legislative policy change or
administrative action to ensure young people have the legal rights needed to
access housing and services, and that state and local government offices are
mandated to create a more coordinated response across state-funded systems.
1. Take immediate action to expand
the ability for youth under 18 to
consent/self-authorize for housing
IMMEDIATE
and services. OPPORTUNITY!
Current state laws limit minors’ ability to consent/self-authorize to housing and
certain services. These limitations leave youth under 18 with only one option — to
sleep outside or in unsafe circumstances when their guardians do not consent to
services on the youth’s behalf. These youth do not feel safe or welcome to return
home.
Meaningful financial investments and statewide access to interventions are
critical to prevent and end youth homelessness; Washington must do more to
ensure that unaccompanied youth under 18 can actually access and receive
those resources. This means that the Legislature must address parental
notification and consent to shelter/housing/services or these youth continue to
be at risk of homelessness.
During the 2023 legislative session, SHB 1406 expanded minors’ ability to consent
to shelter under certain circumstances — if a licensed overnight youth shelter is
unable to reach a parent/legal guardian or when the parent/legal guardian does
not provide consent, but also does not request that the youth return home.
Chapter 408, Laws of 2023 (ESSB 5599) addressed parental notification, requiring
shelters to notify DCYF instead of a parent/legal guardian when there is a
compelling reason to not contact them, including when a youth is seeking or
receiving protected health care services or when notifying the parent/legal
guardian will subject the youth to abuse or neglect.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
27 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Washington must revisit the progress made in SHB 1406 and ESSB 5599 to ensure
that youth have the legal right to consent to all types of housing and related
services and to ensure they have this right any time a parent/guardian cannot
be reached, a parent refuses to allow them to return home, or a young person
believes that returning to a parent is unsafe. It is also critical to ensure that
prospective caregivers who are willing to provide safe shelter to a youth at risk of
homelessness and who does not feel safe or welcome returning home are
shielded from criminal prosecution under the existing unlawful harboring a minor
statute.15
Until these consent/self-authorization gaps are filled, youth will continue to be
pushed out of shelters and onto the street when a parent refuses to let youth
access housing, even when significant family conflict and unsafe conditions led
the youth to seek shelter out of the home in the first place.
Additionally, the consent to shelter gap-filling work should ensure that
Community Support Teams built through the passage of SHB 1406 are broadly
available to youth under 18. While SHB 1406 does not prohibit serving youth who
are not actively staying in a shelter or other licensed organization, advocates
should determine whether a statutory change should be made to clearly state
that CSTs are available to all youth under 18 who feel unsafe or unwelcome at
home or are experiencing family conflict and, therefore, at risk of homelessness,
not just those youth who have already left home for those reasons.
2. Design and implement an aligned system response across the
homeless response system, child welfare, juvenile courts, behavioral
health and schools
Building on the lessons learned and progress of the multi agency Youth and
16
Young Adult Housing Response Team (YYAHRT); the Legislature should require a
statewide system alignment plan for unaccompanied youth under 18 who are
experiencing homelessness or unstable housing. The system alignment plan
should be co-developed alongside OHY, DCYF, OSPI, HCA, and local juvenile court
representatives.
15
16
RCW 13.32A.080.
https://www.dcyf.wa.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/reports/RapidResponseTeam2023.pdf
Modeling For Housing Stability for
28 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Furthermore, the Legislature must adequately and equitably resource the system
alignment plan every biennial budget to ensure state and local partners have the
capacity to implement and sustain cross-system coordination and collaboration.
The system alignment plan should design a statewide, unified approach to
outreach, identification, and resource matching across all major systems serving
minors, including:
Fully resourced outreach programs that can better identify youth across each
system;
Data sharing agreements across systems that ensure privacy, while also
sharing need-service data to best assist youth and families; and
A regional “front door” that works across systems to ensure youth have choice
in being matched to the system and resources that best meet their needs.
The system alignment plan should also ensure equitable resources and access
across systems, including:
An assessment of what local, state, and federal funds can be brought
together across systems to meet the resource needs outlined in the system
model; and
The creation of a regional accountability structure that includes state
agencies, juvenile courts, Continuums of Care, school districts/schools, youth
with lived experience, and advocates, to ensure ongoing, equitable resources
and access to resources across systems in each region.
3. Adequately assess and respond to the legal needs of minors and
nonprofits engaging in a supportive leasing intervention.
Every region at the system modeling workshop identified the need for a
supportive leasing intervention for older minor youth (ages 16-17) who need
longer-term independent housing assistance and the support of a nonprofit
to secure and stay safely housed in the rental market.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
29 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
Supportive leasing allows for a nonprofit to enter into a lease in the private
rental market and to include a young person as a third party to the lease.
Supportive leasing includes providing comprehensive services to youth,
including case management, life skills training, mental health supports, and
education and employment supports.
In order for this to be an effective model for serving youth under the age of 18,
Washington State needs to adequately assess and respond, with appropriate
legislative changes and funding, to the legal needs of the nonprofits and youth
engaging in Supportive Leasing interventions. These needs may include, but not
limited to:
A minor's legal ability to be a third-party on a lease;
A minor’s ability to consent to rental housing and public utilities;
Legal liability protection for a nonprofit lease holder;
Better access to the legal emancipation process (and access to legal
services to support youth in pursuing emancipation); and,
Adequate and flexible funding for landlord incentives, support, and
mitigation to increase the likelihood that landlords will engage in Supportive
Leasing agreements with nonprofit lease holders.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
30 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
APPENDIX 1
Stakeholders Present at System Modeling Workshop
on March 27-28, 2024
Name Pronouns Affiliation(s)
Allison Connor she/her Youth 4 Youth Board
Youth 4 Youth Board; Point Source
Milo Edwards he/him
Youth
Cassidy Kropf she/her Youth 4 Youth Board
Kahran LaTourette he/they Youth 4 Youth Board
Lucas Neuman they/them Youth 4 Youth Board
Youth 4 Youth Board; The Mockingbird
Mayauna Renae she/her
Society
Youth 4 Youth Board; The Mockingbird
Tai Tave she/they
Society
Youth Representative Youth 4 Youth Board
Youth Representative Youth 4 Youth Board
Sheala Anderson she/her Seattle Y-Social Impact Center
WA State Health Care Authority -
Rachel Baxter she/her Division of Behavioral Health &
Recovery
Bridget Cannon she/her Volunteers of America - Spokane
Nicolas Guzman he/him The Mockingbird Society
WA State Department of Commerce -
Christopher Hanson he/him
Office of Homeless Youth
WA State Department of Commerce -
Johnathan Hemphill he/him
Office of Homeless Youth
Jason McGill he/him Northwest Youth Services
WA State Department of Children,
Hannah Merley she/they
Youth, and Families
WA State Department of Commerce -
Ellie Parrish she/her
Data and Performance Unit
Karen Pillar she/her TeamChild
Legal Counsel for Youth and Children
Rhea Yo she/her
(LCYC)
Modeling For Housing Stability for
31 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
APPENDIX 2
What are Community Support Teams?
With the passage of SHB 1406 in 2023, OHY was required to fund and assist the
development of “Community Support Teams” (CSTs)--contracted youth service
providers that convene “to help identify supports for a youth focused on resolving
family conflict and obtaining or maintaining long-term and stable housing.”
Community Support Teams are “required to prioritize reunification between the
youth and the youth's family to the extent possible without endangering the health,
safety, or welfare of the child.”
SHB 1406 mandates that the Community Support Team must include:
The youth; and
Supportive adults identified by the youth, which may include:
Licensed shelter staff;
A case manager;
Individuals from the youth's school;
Juvenile court staff;
The youth's attorney;
Behavioral health providers;
Community support providers;
Family members;
Mentors;
Peer support;
Housing navigation;
Legal assistance; or
Other community members.
Community Support Teams are required to coordinate efforts, if appropriate, with
DCYF-Family Reconciliation Services (FRS) or FRS-contracted providers, Crisis
Residential Center (CRC) multidisciplinary teams, and other youth homelessness
programs that may support the youth. SHB 1406 prohibits Community Support
Teams from engaging with a family member other than the youth if the parent,
guardian, or legal custodian objects to the support or assistance that is offered or
provided.
Modeling For Housing Stability for
32 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
How are Youth Engagement Teams and Community Support Teams
Related?
Young people and advocates modeled the CSTs on an existing youth-led, multi-
disciplinary multi-agency team to support and house unaccompanied minors, 12-
17 years old who are experiencing or are at imminent risk of homelessness—the
Youth Engagement Team (YET). One example, the King County YET (funded HUD), is
a partnership between three agencies: the YMCA and Friends of Youth provide
housing navigation and counseling, and LCYC provides legal services. CSTs in SHB
1406 aimed to allow communities to determine what multi-disciplinary elements
to include in their model, based on what resources exist in the community and how
to leverage multi-agency partnerships, all with the goal of working with young
people and families/relatives to ensure youth have access to a safe and stable
housing option of their choice.
SHB 1406 Related Links:
SHB 1406- Legislative Text
SHB 1405- Final Bill Report
Modeling For Housing Stability for
33 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
APPENDIX 3
The information represented in text in Table 7 is also graphically represented in
the following four images in this appendix.
Table 7: Ideal Pathways of Homelessness Prevention and to Housing Stability
Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4
Pathway 1: 22% Pathway 1: 10% Pathway 1: 5%
Prevention/Diversion/ Prevention/Diversion/ Prevention/Diversion/
n/a
Flexible cash support over Flexible cash support over Flexible cash support over
time time time
Pathway 1: 50%
Pathway 2: 20% Pathway 2: 20%
Prevention/Diversion/
Direct Cash Assistance + Direct Cash Assistance +
Flexible cash support over
Community Support Community Support
time + Community
Team Team
Support Team (virtual)
Pathway 2: 10% Pathway 3: 20% Pathway 2: 20% Pathway 3: 25%
One-time Flexible One-time Flexible One-time Flexible One-time Flexible
Diversion Funds Diversion Funds Diversion Funds Diversion Funds
Pathway 3: 10%:
Emergency/Crisis Shelter
+ Longer Term Housing +
Community Support
Team
Pathway 4: 15% Pathway 4: 10%
TLP/Continuous Stay TLP/Continuous Stay
Pathway 4: 13%
TLP + Community Support
Team
Pathway 5: 5% Pathway 5: 15% Pathway 3: 10% Pathway 5: 10%
Respite-type Shelter + Crisis Shelter + Respite-type Shelter + Crisis Shelter +
Community Support Community Support Community Support community support
Team Team Team team
Pathway 6: 10% Pathway 6: 10% Pathway 4: 10% Pathway 6: 20%
Host Homes + Host Homes + Host Homes + Host Homes +
Community Support Community Support Community Support Community Support
Team Team Team Team
Pathway 7: 5% Pathway 7: 5%
Host Homes Only Host Homes Only
Pathway 7: 30% Pathway 8: 5% Pathway 5: 10% Pathway 8: 5%
Supportive Leasing + Supportive Leasing + Supportive Leasing + Supportive Leasing +
Community Support Community Support Community Support Community Support
Team Team Team Team
Modeling For Housing Stability for
34 2024
Youth Under 18 in Washington State
How to read these pathways
Region 1
Each horizontal row below represents a pathway
that includes the percentage of youth across the
region estimated to achieve housing stability using
a distinct package of interventions.
1 22%
2 10%
3 10%
4 13%
5 5%
6 10%
7 30%
KEY
One-Time Flexible Prevention/Diversion Funds
Flexible Financial Assistance or Direct Cash Over Time
Transitional Living Program/Transitional Housing
Community Support Team (YET-like Supports and Services)
Emergency/Crisis Shelter
Host Homes
Supportive Leasing
How to read these pathways
Region 2
Each horizontal row below represents a pathway
that includes the percentage of youth across the
region estimated to achieve housing stability
using a distinct package of interventions.
1 10%
2 20%
3 20%
4 10%
5 15%
6 10%
7 5%
8 5%
KEY
One-Time Flexible Prevention/Diversion Funds
Flexible Financial Assistance or Direct Cash Over Time
Transitional Living Program/Transitional Housing
Community Support Team (YET-like Supports and Services)
Emergency/Crisis Shelter
Host Homes
Supportive Leasing
How to read these pathways
Region 3
Each horizontal row below represents a pathway
that includes the percentage of youth across the
region estimated to achieve housing stability
using a distinct package of interventions.
1 50%
2 20%
3 10%
4 10%
5 10%
KEY
One-Time Flexible Prevention/Diversion Funds
Flexible Financial Assistance or Direct Cash Over Time
Transitional Living Program/Transitional Housing
Community Support Team (YET-like Supports and Services)
Emergency/Crisis Shelter
Host Homes
Supportive Leasing
How to read these pathways
Region 4
Each horizontal row below represents a pathway
that includes the percentage of youth across the
region estimated to achieve housing stability
using a distinct package of interventions.
1 5%
2 20%
3 25%
4 10%
5 10%
6 20%
7 5%
8 5%
KEY
One-Time Flexible Prevention/Diversion Funds
Flexible Financial Assistance or Direct Cash Over Time
Transitional Living Program/Transitional Housing
Community Support Team (YET-like Supports and Services)
Emergency/Crisis Shelter
Host Homes
Supportive Leasing
File and source
- File
- 2024_ohy-final-report-100a352c-3bdb-4a09-962f-dd23ca69d2a6.pdf
- Size
- 1,579,069 bytes
- SHA-256
- b1fa4caca4beb027ecca455e3b7fbe8fb0c23532bab9653841dbb000ee6ae57b
- Original
- app.leg.wa.gov