A Continuum Divided: Breaking Down Silos and Setting Up Tables Between Homelessness and Domestic Violence Services in HEARTH Act Implemenation

Abstract

In 2009, Congress passed the HEARTH Act calling for greater coordination among housing and homelessness programs. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grantees are now required to apply and operate within localized Continuums of Care (CoCs). CoCs must also develop a coordinated assessment (CA)1 process which seeks to create a process in which an appropriate match is made between programs and people in an efficient manner with the ultimate outcome of ending homelessness within communities. Each CoC has great latitude in how they implement CA, but many of these processes have involved the collection and sharing of data – an element which has caused great concern on the part of domestic violence (DV) advocates and victim service providers (VSPs). In the past decade, DV advocates and VSPs have increasingly moved their focus from simply removing victims from crisis situations to also ensuring victim have access to the socioeconomic resources needed to maintain their safety over time. This shift has led more and more VSPs to provide not just emergency shelter but also various housing assistance programs – programs that have not historically been funded through the DV system – leading VSPs to seek funding in the homeless housing system. However, the move of agencies like HUD toward system-wide collection of data conflicts with policies like within the DV system, such as the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), that prohibit sharing of personally-identifying information by VSPs. Although, these data are ostensibly used only by system administrators for the purpose of measuring outcomes and efficiencies, there is great concern by DV systems that system administrators with access to personal data might also be the same individuals that victims are trying to escape. With the passage and implementation of the HEARTH Act, DV shelter and housing providers increasingly found themselves trying to comply with two contradictory policy mandates and state and federal DV policy advocates were tasked with understanding and explaining housing and homelessness policies and regulations.