Tuesday, April 1, 2014: Nonprofit Housing Developers and Autism Housing
Summary Notes
Location: Support for Families, San Francisco Part of the Facing the Housing Dilemma series
Guest Speaker: Bill Pickel, Executive Director, West Bay Housing Corporation
Location: Support for Families, San Francisco Part of the Facing the Housing Dilemma series
Guest Speaker: Bill Pickel, Executive Director, West Bay Housing Corporation
Background
The mission of WBHC, based in San Francisco, is to create affordable, community-based housing for underserved populations with an emphasis on people with developmental disabilities. Bill became WBHC’s executive director in 2007. Under his leadership, WBHC has grown from a staff of 2 to 50 full-time employees, from 3 to 90 properties, and from one government funding partner to 15, including 10 Regional Centers.
Today, WBHC is California’s leading developer, owner, and manager of licensed residential care facilities permanently deed restricted for persons with developmental disabilities. WBHC developed, owns and manages housing for individuals who have transitioned from: Agnews, Lanterman, Porterville, Sierra Vista, Fairview, and Sonoma Developmental Centers; Laguna Honda Hospital; and several other private institutional settings. WBHC also provides on-on-one Housing Services by Regional Center referral.
WBHC is also leading provider of scattered-site supportive housing for homeless Veterans, other homeless individuals and families, and people transitioning from long-term care.
The Need for More Supported Housing for People with Autism and Developmental Disabilities
There are few housing options for adults with autism in SF. The state’s “Community Placement Plan,” which provides funding for new housing for adults with developmental disabilities, funds new community based housing, but primarily for people transitioning out of the state-run institutions.
Everyone knows the demand for affordable, community-based housing for ASD adults is surging. But the plans are not in place to provide it. The Regional Centers do not create new housing and are not empowered to do so through current funding mechanisms.
Regional Centers fund services, but except in the case of group homes, largely do not pay the rent for housing. And in San Francisco there are virtually no group homes for adults with autism.
On a local level, San Francisco must be a more inclusive community, including opportunities for housing for the growing population of adults with autism. ASD needs a seat at the table in local housing policy decision-making.
Variables to Consider
What is your vision? Vision changes things. Housing vision is driven by specific identified needs, for example:
Is there a coherent group needing a particular type of housing in a particular location?
How many families are ready to let their loved one move out of the family home at a given moment in time? Families have different degrees of readiness.
Is there an agreed-upon vision for the service model? Eg, supported living, common programming, licensed care?
Determine whether or not the group wants to commit to a single housing project or explore multiple solutions.
Shared housing (roommates) or individual apartments (everyone gets a front door)?
On-site or visiting services (will residents or their families have ownership or tenant’s rights?).
There are trade-offs between publicly funded and privately funded housing. If publicly funded, fair housing laws come into effect triggering need for a lottery for available units and other restrictions.
There are also trade-offs between licensed vs. unlicensed housing models. Unlicensed, such as SLS services in an apartment are service-enriched independent housing. An adult residential facility, or licensed group home, is an integrated residential services model. Licensed models outside of the Community Placement Plan system which are subject to more robust funding streams, and serving those who have not been previously institutionalized such as the children of the people at this meeting, are underfunded and under fire in the current system.
There are trade-offs between private ownership (LLC) and nonprofit ownership. Nonprofits can create permanency, lower property taxes. Private ownership, where families come together in a partnership investment, allows for greater control, asset retention, and personal return on investment when there is a rental income stream. Rental vouchers are difficult if not impossible to obtain now, however.
Private lenders, including families are act as a lending pool, just like a bank, to nonprofit developers like West Bay to fund new autism housing products. That way, families can have return on investment and the housing product can have the advantages of nonprofit ownership.
Advocacy
Quantify your need. Clarify the ask.
Advocate locally (Mayor’s Office of Housing, MOD, Disability Commission, Housing Elements, etc.). SB 812 requires municipalities to address needs of developmentally disabled in Housing Elements of the General Plan.
Support state-level affordable housing initiatives (SB 391, SB 1178).
Consider how various affordable housing options could work with the right supports (while parents know their loved one’s needs best, they may, like all parents, be overprotective, underestimating the capacity for independence with proper supports).
Ask your case manager if a referral to WBHC’s Housing Services program can help (developing an Individualized Housing Plan; housing search and re-location; housing retention; housing applications/waitlist management; etc).
Miscellaneous Questions
Is it possible to pilot an "autism-friendly" housing development in SF (or close) with a mix of market-rate and subsidized ASD tenants, with autism-friendly onsite amenities?
It will be challenging as any development in a housing boom cycle, and both publicly and privately financed projects face unique hurdles.
How can we acquire houses to use as autism-amenity-rich small scale group homes?
Buy them with family equity + debt financing if debt can be supported. Seek donated or discounted REO properties (limited if any in SF at this time). Use the CPP program (currently devoted to DC movers). Use local public agency affordable housing funds (currently allocated to public housing stock revitalization)
What about re-use of public lands or failing public housing?
Some public lands may be available – but often either highly competitive or in locations that may be unsuitable for supportive housing
Public housing is currently being recapitalized and converted to private ownership through a SF-led, HUD-governed
The mission of WBHC, based in San Francisco, is to create affordable, community-based housing for underserved populations with an emphasis on people with developmental disabilities. Bill became WBHC’s executive director in 2007. Under his leadership, WBHC has grown from a staff of 2 to 50 full-time employees, from 3 to 90 properties, and from one government funding partner to 15, including 10 Regional Centers.
Today, WBHC is California’s leading developer, owner, and manager of licensed residential care facilities permanently deed restricted for persons with developmental disabilities. WBHC developed, owns and manages housing for individuals who have transitioned from: Agnews, Lanterman, Porterville, Sierra Vista, Fairview, and Sonoma Developmental Centers; Laguna Honda Hospital; and several other private institutional settings. WBHC also provides on-on-one Housing Services by Regional Center referral.
WBHC is also leading provider of scattered-site supportive housing for homeless Veterans, other homeless individuals and families, and people transitioning from long-term care.
The Need for More Supported Housing for People with Autism and Developmental Disabilities
There are few housing options for adults with autism in SF. The state’s “Community Placement Plan,” which provides funding for new housing for adults with developmental disabilities, funds new community based housing, but primarily for people transitioning out of the state-run institutions.
Everyone knows the demand for affordable, community-based housing for ASD adults is surging. But the plans are not in place to provide it. The Regional Centers do not create new housing and are not empowered to do so through current funding mechanisms.
Regional Centers fund services, but except in the case of group homes, largely do not pay the rent for housing. And in San Francisco there are virtually no group homes for adults with autism.
On a local level, San Francisco must be a more inclusive community, including opportunities for housing for the growing population of adults with autism. ASD needs a seat at the table in local housing policy decision-making.
Variables to Consider
What is your vision? Vision changes things. Housing vision is driven by specific identified needs, for example:
Is there a coherent group needing a particular type of housing in a particular location?
How many families are ready to let their loved one move out of the family home at a given moment in time? Families have different degrees of readiness.
Is there an agreed-upon vision for the service model? Eg, supported living, common programming, licensed care?
Determine whether or not the group wants to commit to a single housing project or explore multiple solutions.
Shared housing (roommates) or individual apartments (everyone gets a front door)?
On-site or visiting services (will residents or their families have ownership or tenant’s rights?).
There are trade-offs between publicly funded and privately funded housing. If publicly funded, fair housing laws come into effect triggering need for a lottery for available units and other restrictions.
There are also trade-offs between licensed vs. unlicensed housing models. Unlicensed, such as SLS services in an apartment are service-enriched independent housing. An adult residential facility, or licensed group home, is an integrated residential services model. Licensed models outside of the Community Placement Plan system which are subject to more robust funding streams, and serving those who have not been previously institutionalized such as the children of the people at this meeting, are underfunded and under fire in the current system.
There are trade-offs between private ownership (LLC) and nonprofit ownership. Nonprofits can create permanency, lower property taxes. Private ownership, where families come together in a partnership investment, allows for greater control, asset retention, and personal return on investment when there is a rental income stream. Rental vouchers are difficult if not impossible to obtain now, however.
Private lenders, including families are act as a lending pool, just like a bank, to nonprofit developers like West Bay to fund new autism housing products. That way, families can have return on investment and the housing product can have the advantages of nonprofit ownership.
Advocacy
Quantify your need. Clarify the ask.
Advocate locally (Mayor’s Office of Housing, MOD, Disability Commission, Housing Elements, etc.). SB 812 requires municipalities to address needs of developmentally disabled in Housing Elements of the General Plan.
Support state-level affordable housing initiatives (SB 391, SB 1178).
Consider how various affordable housing options could work with the right supports (while parents know their loved one’s needs best, they may, like all parents, be overprotective, underestimating the capacity for independence with proper supports).
Ask your case manager if a referral to WBHC’s Housing Services program can help (developing an Individualized Housing Plan; housing search and re-location; housing retention; housing applications/waitlist management; etc).
Miscellaneous Questions
Is it possible to pilot an "autism-friendly" housing development in SF (or close) with a mix of market-rate and subsidized ASD tenants, with autism-friendly onsite amenities?
It will be challenging as any development in a housing boom cycle, and both publicly and privately financed projects face unique hurdles.
How can we acquire houses to use as autism-amenity-rich small scale group homes?
Buy them with family equity + debt financing if debt can be supported. Seek donated or discounted REO properties (limited if any in SF at this time). Use the CPP program (currently devoted to DC movers). Use local public agency affordable housing funds (currently allocated to public housing stock revitalization)
What about re-use of public lands or failing public housing?
Some public lands may be available – but often either highly competitive or in locations that may be unsuitable for supportive housing
Public housing is currently being recapitalized and converted to private ownership through a SF-led, HUD-governed
