CHAPTER 8

Implementing an Effective Program to Address Homelessness

This chapter addresses the implementation of activities by transit agencies to respond to homelessness and provide inclusive and safe transit services for housed and unhoused passengers. Implementation activities should evolve over time as individual pilots grow into a suite of connected programs. To ensure support, internal and external stakeholders should receive clear communication and education on the goals of the programs. This communication can be guided by effective data collection, tracking, and reporting. Implementing and sustaining plans, policies, and programs require dedicated institutional support. Funding for new programs is often difficult to obtain. Some transit agencies mix internal funding with external grants and partner resources to launch programs to address homelessness on the transit system. However, ensuring sustained program delivery funding is a big challenge for transit agencies, and particularly for smaller transit agencies.

This chapter highlights lessons learned and best practices gathered through interviews, case studies, and literature review.

8.1 Launching and Developing Programs

8.1.1 Pilot Programs

Of the case study transit agencies with multiple programmatic activities, most agencies started with a pilot program. This allows a transit agency to set realistic goals, test different approaches, and determine the staffing and resources needed for successful operation. This approach can be effective given limited resources for new and innovative programs because it allows the transit agency to develop a proof of concept and gain support from leadership, external partners, and funders.

8.1.2 Comprehensive Approaches

Once a successful pilot has been implemented and proven to meet agency goals, transit agencies can seek funding and partnerships for broader or more comprehensive approaches. Transit agencies’ homelessness outreach programs often start out in their public safety and security departments. The authors observed that public transportation agencies are increasingly adopting a holistic or systems approach to addressing homelessness, making sure that many parts of the transit agency, as well as efforts that include outside partners, are coordinated and working toward clearly defined goals. Expanding programs to engage operations, maintenance, and facilities can provide a more comprehensive approach to addressing the issues and needs of people experiencing homelessness, riders, and employees.

Following are examples of comprehensive approaches from SEPTA and LA Metro:

• SEPTA is addressing homelessness holistically by employing a five-pronged SCOPE approach (see text box). This program increases outreach to people experiencing homelessness who seek refuge in the transit system (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority 2022a).
• In 2017, LA Metro developed a Homeless Action Plan that includes objectives related to safety, outreach and service coordination, quality service, teamwork, and partnership and that aligns with regional priorities (Communities in Motion n.d.).

8.2 Building Support

8.2.1 Agency Leadership

Transit agency leadership plays a critical role in responding to homelessness by setting agency direction, providing the financial and resource support needed, fostering collaborative partnerships, improving system accessibility, and engaging in outreach efforts. By working closely with local governments, social service organizations, and homeless service providers, transit agencies can develop comprehensive strategies that address the complex needs of people experiencing homelessness. Leadership can leverage their resources and infrastructure to provide safe and

convenient transportation options to essential services, shelters, and employment opportunities, ensuring that homeless individuals have reliable access to vital resources. Additionally, transit agency leaders can use their positions to advocate for policies and funding that address the root causes of homelessness, such as those related to affordable housing, mental health services, and supportive programs. Their active participation in policy discussions and advocacy efforts can influence local, regional, and national approaches to prevent and alleviate homelessness, creating a more supportive and inclusive society.

As important as top-level leadership is for these programs, leadership is needed at all levels to support programmatic activities, maintain funding, and keep work moving forward by managing and supporting teams, partners, employees, and practitioners and removing barriers to implementation.

• In San Francisco, BART program leaders provide annual updates to the BART board of directors on the implementation of the Strategic Homelessness Action Plan (Bay Area Rapid Transit n.d.b.). Leadership provides guidance and direction to address technical and adaptation challenges. BART has created a new senior manager of social services partnerships position that serves as the top adviser for the general manager and the board of directors on matters related to homelessness and the health and social welfare of BART riders (Bay Area Rapid Transit n.d.b.). By elevating the activities related to addressing homelessness, BART leadership sets the tone and generates buy-in for the rest of the agency.
• For GCRTA, as important as top leadership buy-in is, leadership needs to happen at multiple levels of the organization. Program, departmental, and operations management need to be integrated into the discussions of addressing homelessness since homelessness can touch many different facets of transit agency activities.

• At SEPTA, operational support can serve a specific program or be integrated across the agency. As noted, SEPTA created an internal task force for its SCOPE initiative to allow it to be nimble and align resources and accountability. The task force is made up of leads for various departments across the agency and meets biweekly to provide updates and address issues seen on the system.

Leadership support is also essential to the external collaborations and partnerships that are needed to address the complex issue of homelessness. Public transportation agencies can work

with city government, businesses, social service organizations, and other community organizations to better support people experiencing homelessness,. Top-level executives can play a key role in initiating partnerships with a broad range of organizations and can bring the attention and resources needed to address the issue on a broader scale.

8.2.2 Promote Internal Buy-in

Support from employees at various levels within the transit agency can be crucial to success. This is particularly important regarding issues such as homelessness that are not core to the mission of a transit agency but cause disruptive impacts to service, operators, and other riders. In addition, homelessness is often conflated with issues such as mental health and substance abuse, and these may be hard to disentangle. Clear communication from leadership about the vision and goals is useful, as is sharing information about results. Staff member surveys and other opportunities to provide feedback and input can generate a sense of ownership and buy-in from employees.

• In 2016, LA Metro surveyed its employees on issues related to homelessness on the transit system and asked for suggestions related to a variety of issues such as education and training, giving back, housing, logistics, outreach services, and research (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2017). This information directly resulted in the development of the Metro Transit Homeless Action Plan, which focused on four areas (research, education, coordination, and outreach) that align with enhancing the ridership experience and maintaining a high level of public safety.

A wide range of staff across a transit agency, from frontline workers to executive directors, can play vital roles in the response to homelessness. Rather than relying on one department or program, transit agencies such as SEPTA and MARTA have learned that they must develop integrated and holistic approaches to maintain work across their organizations.

8.2.3 Rider Engagement and Education

Public transportation agencies can educate riders and the public about their efforts regarding homelessness and safety-related issues, including some of the constraints they face. This can take the form of posted information on websites, outreach material, and postings in transit facilities and vehicles to develop public campaigns with partners on demystifying homelessness and discussing how people in need can get help. Many transportation agencies conduct annual surveys of riders and the general public to collect information about services, safety, and experiences related to particular activities. These surveys can gauge riders’ experiences and their perception of safety issues but also provide feedback on attitudes toward unhoused riders and other

vulnerable populations and toward programs and activities the transit agency is using to address homelessness. Transit agencies can also provide a suggestion box or solicit feedback through mobile apps.

• SEPTA, like other transit agencies, uses the Elerts Corporation’s Transit Watch app to crowd-source a variety of issues related to cleanliness and safety. The app offers the public a quick and discreet method to send pictures, text messages, and locations for reporting suspicious activities or crisis situations directly to the transit agency. SEPTA has used this information to highlight locations in the system that need additional security or improvements. These data have directly informed the development of SCOPE programming as well as the allocation of resources. Following up with customer complaints can be an opportunity for the agency to provide context on the issues experienced by riders.

8.3 Accessing Funding

Public transportation agencies are not typically eligible to apply for government funding related to housing or homelessness services; funding for these areas tends to go to broader city programs or directly to social service organizations. Sometimes it is possible to explore opportunities and partner with organizations that can access other funding streams. Homelessness and housing service organizations are historically underfunded and understaffed, and the recent pandemic has put additional strain on their staff and resources, which makes it difficult to look to service providers to provide specific outreach services on transit systems (Institute of Medicine, Committee on Health Care for Homeless People 1988; Ward 2022; U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness 2022b).

Funding is a crucial component to launching any new program or pilot to support people experiencing homelessness. Since addressing issues related to homelessness is not core to the operations of transit agencies, agencies reviewed for this project have had to repurpose funding toward specific programs and activities, such as ambassador programs and hiring social service personnel. Some transit agencies have been able to augment existing public safety programs and training to add homelessness outreach awareness and de-escalation training without large investments. Some larger transit agencies built their initiatives and programs with additional funding from city or regional governments.

In a 2020 survey of transit agencies, lack of funding was found to be a major challenge in addressing homelessness, especially for small agencies (Loukaitou-Sideris et al. 2020). Most transit agencies responding to the survey did not have a dedicated budget line item or did not know the specific allocation of funding. Of the transit agencies with programs or efforts, 41% used general operating funds. California transit agencies indicated that they used local, state, or federal sources to fund programs. But only New York City Transit (New York MTA), LA Metro, and TriMet reported spending more than $1 million on homelessness response programs (Loukaitou-Sideris et al. 2020). Varying local conditions, size of the systems, type of programs administered, and amount of resources allocated make it difficult to compare budget information from one agency to another.

In 2021, the FTA launched the Enhanced Transit Safety and Crime Prevention Initiative to provide information and resources to help transit agencies address and prevent crime on their transit systems and provide a safe environment for transit workers and riders (Federal Transit Administration 2021). The Urbanized Area Formula Grants program (49 U.S.C. Section 5307), which supports public transportation in urbanized areas, allows a range of funding to improve safety and security on transit systems, particularly for urbanized areas with a population of less than 200,000. These resources can be used for overtime pay for enhanced security personnel presence as well as mental health and crisis intervention specialists.

Transit agencies included in the case studies of this report were able to secure a range of funding—some short term, and some more sustainable. Transit agencies such as LA Metro, BART, and SEPTA have been working for years to establish programs that obtain funds through city partnerships, operating funds, or dedicated regional or local funding.

More cities are recognizing the need for dedicated funding to address homelessness. For example:

• Denver established the Homelessness Resolution Fund, which provides critical resources to increase access to housing and appropriate supportive services and to ensure that people have the resources they need to regain and retain housing. This funding includes residential sheltering and support for people experiencing unsheltered homelessness. It also provides flexible dollars to allow Denver to pursue innovative approaches and catalytic projects, as well as to serve those who may be excluded by other funding streams (City of Denver n.d.). These funds benefit the overall approach to reduce homelessness and provide resources and support for the city, which RTD can use to fund partnerships and additional external support. RTD has been able to contract with MHCD to fund mental health clinicians through a series of grants and Medicaid funds. Four full-time clinicians cost approximately $250,000 per year. In 2020, RTD was awarded a federal grant that funded the agency’s efforts to provide essential services to metro residents experiencing homelessness and better coordinate ridership needs with nonprofits and other assistance providers. A $180,000 Helping Obtain Prosperity for Everyone (HOPE) grant from the U.S. DOT/FTA will allow RTD to hire a full-time community outreach coordinator for issues affecting homeless residents. The funds will also be used to study how transit services could be improved to better serve people in persistent poverty in the Denver metro area (Regional Transportation District 2020).
• In Los Angeles, LA Metro has partnered with the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services for multidisciplinary street-based engagement service. The agreement covers county-city-community (C3) Homeless Outreach Teams, staff, and funding for emergency housing. The monthly cost of LA Metro’s four outreach team programs ranges from $45,000 for the Long Beach Police Department team, which only employs two officers, to $408,000 for the PATH program, which employs 25 staff members and plans to grow to 35. Despite its higher total cost, the civilian PATH program has the lowest cost (including overhead) per staff member of LA Metro’s four sets of outreach teams. In Northern California, each HOT team of two outreach workers costs around $250,000 per year. Unlike LA Metro’s costs, these costs are shared between BART and its municipal/county partners (Ding et al. 2021).
• In Portland, OR, at a smaller scale, the streetcar system received $175,000 as part of a 1-year pilot to start a rider ambassador program funded by a COVID-19 demonstration grant from the FTA.

Transit agencies can explore how they can support the ongoing homelessness efforts of service providers and government agencies. Finding funding sources outside of streams set aside for housing and homelessness, and then partnering with homeless services entities, can demonstrate a transit agency’s commitment supporting people experiencing homelessness.

During conversations with transit agency staff for the case studies, it was found that developing and investing in homeless outreach and response staff can be an effective use of resources. Although investments in these programs can be high, the cost is often less than hiring additional police officers, the cost of cleaning and maintenance of facilities and vehicles, or the associated loss of revenue from the impacts on ridership. In its fiscal 2023 budget, SEPTA allocated $14.8 million for maintenance custodians, which is nearly triple the amount it spent in the previous year (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority 2022b). Focusing on upstream solutions can help minimize the cost of dealing with the impacts of the problem.

8.4 Utilizing Data, Performance Measures, and Evaluation

Transit agencies will want to track their progress to determine whether a policy, program, or project is working as intended and is effective in mitigating issues and supporting riders’ needs while also supporting the needs of people experiencing homelessness. Data and other sources of information can be used to inform the selection and development of programs and other activities. Tracking performance measures and conducting evaluations can help improve programs and generate support for these activities from within the transit agency as well as with funders and the general public.

Desired outcomes may include helping people experiencing homelessness live more dignified lives, be safer on transit property, and make vital connections to social services that can help them transition to living inside, as well as mitigating impacts on transit agency employees and other riders. In general, transit agencies are beginning to track data related to homelessness efforts, but there is a need for additional guidance and more standardized practice.

Since transit agencies are on the front line of engaging with people experiencing homelessness, when possible, they should track the progress of their programs based on available data and by comparing their progress against their program objectives, using qualitative assessments where necessary. External partners can help transit agencies evaluate their programs by providing input on evaluation metrics and data that can shed light on the program’s impact. Local service providers and homeless advocates can help evaluate whether the transit agency programs are sufficiently integrating lived experience perspectives and can help establish human-centered evaluation metrics.

Measuring only the outcome of fewer people experiencing homelessness riding transit vehicles for non-destination travel and living on transit facilities does not explain what aspects of a program are successful. It is important to track a comprehensive set of measures, including performance, processes, and outcomes. For some measures, transit agencies may want to collect general case management data (such as numbers of individuals referred for treatment and housing outcomes) from external partners to determine the effectiveness of partnerships and services provided.

Reliable data are essential for demonstrating a homelessness program’s activities and performance, as well as for ensuring that limited resources are effectively managed, demonstrating to leadership that the program is meeting its goals, requesting funding through annual budgets or grants, and garnering the support of partners, such as social service, behavioral and mental health, and housing providers and other community stakeholders. An inability to collect data inhibits the ability of agencies to measure performance.

Transit agencies should determine the specific goals and objectives that will guide the data collection process. The transit agency and its partners can identify what information is needed to demonstrate whether progress toward these goals has been made and determine the best method to collect these data.

For example, a goal of providing supporting social and health services to unhoused riders might be linked to mobile outreach or ambassadors’ programs. Data collected could focus on the number of engagements and referrals for those services. Examples of performance measures include:

• Process measures, such as the number of transit staff trained and the effectiveness of the training; and
• Operational measures, such as the number of interactions, number of people referred to housing shelters and resources, and funds spent on custodial cleaning.

8.4.1 CapMetro (Austin)

To help with program evaluation, CapMetro created a program logic model to link goals to outcomes and impacts (Table 17). The project team tracks the number of outreach encounters (including refused or declined offers of assistance), the number of referrals, and successful referrals. This effort requires partnership with service providers and shelters to assist with case management and provide data and information on the referrals.

A logic model is a program evaluation tool that helps identify and link the desired program outcomes with the resources (inputs) and activities (outputs) necessary to create and implement a program. By clearly identifying the specific program’s expected and desired outcomes, transit staff can better ensure that they identify the right resources (inputs) to create and the right activities (outputs) to track the program. Outcomes will sometimes include short-, medium-, and long-term outcomes. Creating outcome metrics informs transit staff on whether programs are working and helps track changes in behavior, knowledge, and actions driven by the activities.

8.4.2 SEPTA (Philadelphia)

A key component of SEPTA’s SCOPE program is the evaluation of key performance measures to ensure that its activities are yielding desired results. SEPTA tracks the following measures:

• Decreasing incidents and assaults of employees
• Increasing number of placements into housing and treatment centers
• Decreasing number of vulnerable populations
• Increasing rider satisfaction survey scores
• Increasing employee engagement and satisfaction
• Increasing customer satisfaction scores of station cleanliness
• Decreasing incidents of loitering by vulnerable individuals and those selling illegal substances on SEPTA property
• Decreasing number of administrative enforcement notices issued by transit police
• Decreasing number of customer service complaints centered on quality-of-life violations

SEPTA partners with Drexel University’s Center for Public Policy and Temple University to review the SCOPE and SAVE programs and determine which strategies work and which do not.

Table 17. CapMetro program logic model.

Source: CapMetro.

8.4.3 LA Metro (Los Angeles)

LA Metro works with the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority and the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health Homeless Outreach & Mobile Engagement (HOME) program to collect a range of data on program efforts and outreach, including data on service providers as well as the annual homeless count on the transit system. This information is used by the homeless task force for project management and has been presented to LA Metro’s board as part of the monthly update on transit safety and security performance. LA Metro also collects monthly statistics on contacts, referrals, and housing placements (Table 18).

In 2021, LA Metro performed homeless counts on its rail and bus systems. These one-day counts in January and August established a baseline number. The intent of the counts was to find hotspots and identify daily movement patterns (time of day and service lines). These counts were used to determine higher-use locations and lines so that resources could be focused on those areas (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2017).

8.4.4 RTD (Denver)

RTD has created a data collection and electronic dashboard system to record encounters by RTD police officers and mental health clinicians. The dashboard tracks the following categories:

• Demographics (age, race, language, health diagnoses, gender, veteran status)
• Encounter (type of call, housing status, location, responding officer)
• MHCD enrollment and services
• Nature of the encounter (primary concern, suspected co-occurring substance, stage of change, responder intervention)
• Encounter outcomes (co-responder interventions, connection to mental health and substance use services, medical transport, hospital, time until discharge, arrest/citation) (personal communication, Denver RTD staff).

Transit agencies can involve homeless service providers in the creation of metrics. What do they consider a positive engagement? How would they quantify it? What do they think people experiencing homelessness would appreciate from the transit agency? People experiencing homelessness can also participate in a user assessment of a public transportation agency’s activities related to homelessness.

Transit agencies may opt to collect data and share them with the area’s social service providers and CoCs. However, the reverse may not be true and may depend on how the region’s data systems and agreements are set up. A social service agency or CoC may be able to share program-level aggregate data; however, sharing client-level data will almost certainly violate privacy

Table 18. Example of metrics used by LA Metro for providing support to people experiencing homelessness.

policies and regulations. Social service agencies may report some or all of the data for various programs to the CoC. These data are stored in the HMIS database. The CoC aggregates the reported data elements across programs and organizations in the homelessness response system.

Some transit agencies participate in (bi)annual point-in-time counts run by area CoCs. These counts are critical for planning, securing funding and resources, and promoting effective planning and performance management toward the goal of ending homelessness. Some transit agencies track the number of low-income riders, including those using reduced-fare passes, and the number of people experiencing homelessness in their service territory to understand the state of need in the system. Tracking the type of arrangements people are using for shelter (e.g., alone or in camps) and their locations (parking lots, terminals, rights-of-way) can help transit agencies identify how to best respond to and support people experiencing homelessness.