Core Elements of a Strategy to Braid Funding

On the 4/18 HSPA group session, we offered a framework with the core elements that strategies to braid funding (see below) tend to have. In this discussion board, we're seeking state HSPA team members' input about this list. What resonates? What changes do you recommend? How can we make this useful to states? 

Core Elements of a Strategy to Braid Funding

A braiding strategy has:

  • A shared purpose/goal along with identification of the housing, tenancy services, and supportive services that individuals need for that goal. (For example, purpose is transition to the community from an institution, shelter, or unsheltered homelessness; types of assistance that individuals tend to need and want for a transition: housing, rental assistance, wraparound, assistive technology, transportation, etc. )

  • Funding sources for those housing, tenancy services, and supportive services . (Some funding goes to program(s) and others stay with the individual .)

  • Organizations that deliver the housing, tenancy services, and supportive services 

  • Apparatus(es)/infrastructure to support braiding operations across organizations and systems (e.g., billing, data, provider capacity, communications) 

  • Alignment of program and funding requirements, as possible and needed 

4 replies

null
    • HOM, Inc.
    • Michael_Shore
    • 7 days ago
    • Reported - view

    I think it would be helpful to more clearly distinguish between tenancy services and supportive services. What activities make up tenancy services?  Is that the housing program administration activities to determine eligibility, calculate subsidies, inspections, and other housing assistance tasks?  Or is it more specifically supporting households in maintaining tenancy? 

      • Gordon_M_Calkins
      • 6 days ago
      • Reported - view

       

      An interesting distinction that I hadn't considered before.  A good question!

      I've always thought of "tenancy services" not as establishing and sustaining eligibility activities, but instead things like landlord / tenant disagreement mitigation.   I've thought of that as a subset of supportive services which, of course, also includes things like behavioral health supports, connections to mainstream resources, weekly home visits, etc...

      I actually hadn’t really thought of eligibility determination, subsidy calculation, inspections, annual recertifications, etc as being part of supportive services, so there’s something to be said about the way you seem to have framed the question.

      It may be that I’ve backed into the way that I think of it because in Massachusetts, those activities are often done by entirely different entities.  Subsidy payment and inspections, etc.  are conducted by a regional administering agency under contract with the state housing agency, or by a local housing agency, and “supportive services” are provided by entirely different entities – most often nonprofits.

      • Michael_Shore
      • 6 days ago
      • Reported - view

       We’re seeing it the same way. I think it’s a question of what the assumption is around braided funding - is the housing subsidy program already accounted for, which will include the housing program administration activities? If a system is creating a new housing benefit, we just need to make sure these activities are accounted for in addition to the subsidy.

      • Gordon_M_Calkins
      • 6 days ago
      • Reported - view

       Yes!  This is the very thing we’re most hoping to get from all of this.  Subsidies are not all the same.  CoC assistance is wildly different (and likely comes with way more flexibility in what can be paid for) than a more standard HCV.  The trick is to understand all of that, map out those differences and then have a plan for how to fill the gaps for each specific person being housed.

Login to reply

Content aside

  • 1 Likes
  • 6 days agoLast active
  • 4Replies
  • 23Views
  • 3 Following