OHFA Annual Plan - Ohio Housing Finance Agency

Table 2PopulationsPersons whoexperiencehomelessnessPersons with mentalillnessPersons with alcohol& drug abuseYouth aging out offoster careOffenders exitingODRC institutionsYouth (18-21years) exiting DYSinstitutionsTotal UnmetNeedsSource of Information9 Continuum of Care 2007 applications- Point in Time numberonlyODMH (about 80 percent of those having an unmet housingneed per ODMH’s Recovery Boards 47/50 responding to survey)ODADAS (data on those clients identifying themselves ashomeless upon admission; 2007 MACSIS)ODJFS (emancipated youth annual average from SACQIS )ODRC ( annually persons under supervision who did not have ahousing placement upon release )There is anecdotal information that some Youth exitingDepartment of Youth Services institutions could benefit fromPSH. Data was not forthcoming from DYS in time for this reportto be included.Persons who mayneed PSH9,3013,3875,1391,30060019,727Geographic Differentiation of ProgrammingThere are a number of geographic implications at play when estimating the need for PSHthroughout the state. Regarding the need for PSH for homeless people, urban areas withhigher numbers/percentages of “literally homeless” individuals, tend to need more units.And, while rural areas do often have lower numbers/percentages of “literally” homelessindividuals, they tend to have a large number of individuals who make up the “hiddenhomeless”. 8One reason for this phenomenon is that rural areas often have fewer resources than theirurban counterparts. For instance, unlike urban areas, rural areas often do not have acontinuum of housing for homeless people to move through (i.e. shelters – transitionalhousing, permanent supportive housing/permanent housing). Communities withouthomeless shelters often produce a “hidden homeless” impact by forcing those people whomight have gone into the shelter to double-up with friends and family, often going fromplace to place, but not ever becoming “literally” homeless.Developing supportive housing, as noted on page four requires multiple funding sources.Developers can often maximize resources by building to scale (projects that have 30or more units). Utilizing tax credits is a prime example. In Ohio urban areas, where aconcentration of the population needing PSH reside, PSH projects developed over the lastfive years using tax credits have averaged 65 units per project. Rural communities facethe difficulty in creating projects of scale due to lack of density; yet new PSH is needed toaddress the populations that do reside there.Gaps in ProgrammingCapital financing for PSH is generally available as evidenced by the Inventory of Programs inAppendix A. There are clearly fewer resources available for operations and services. A recentproposal prepared by several community leaders and PSH providers identified operationsand service funding as the largest gap in financing PSH. According to this proposal:1138National Coalition for the Homeless, NCH Fact Sheet # 11. Available Internet: http://www.nationalhomeless.org/publications/facts/Rural.pdf