ENERGY COMMUNICATION AND INFLUENCE

ENERGY COMMUNICATION AND INFLUENCE

Paul Goree  ASU SOCIAL WELFARE, PHOENIX AZ 1/19/2013

Daniel Fels caught my attention, when I read in Scientific American's June 2009 issue. What was so interesting was his research on the communication that occurs between cells PARAMECIUM CAUDATUM. Placed individual test tubes, the cells were able to exchange some energy by which they altered the "feeding behavior and growth." This is interesting because it suggest that behavior can be influenced by factors other than sensory stimuli. When I first read this, I immediately thought of Carl Jung and sub-conscious mind. Jung sub-conscious mind was a parasympathetic system by which some body functions are automate, and others are related to memory, intuition and mystic occurrences. 

The conscious mind is a cognitive system, by which stimuli is received through the sensory receptors. These stimuli with cognition determine our ability to identify the environment we live in, thus constructing our social reality (Berkeley University 2010). How we perceive the world by which we live in, is determined by our ability to full inter-grate societal behavior. This cognitive system is fueled by potential action, creating a synaptic response. A synaptic response is instruction from the brain and nervous system on how to maneuver. Action potential is the accumulated energy needed to start a connection, resulting in movement (Gorman JM, Kent JM, Sullivan GM, Coplan JD,2000).  Thus behavior is a result of individual and collective perception. 

The sub-conscious mind operates on similar but different foundation. The sub-conscious mind is in continuous operation. Whereas the conscious mind has sleep to refresh and rest. The conscious mind is 24/7 (Soren R. Ekstrom, Watertown, MA 2000). The sub-conscious mind is the source of intution. Such things as hunches, deja vu, GUMPTIONS are a factor of a process which may not be fully cognitive (Gorman JM, Kent JM, Sullivan GM, Coplan JD,2000). Jung believed that the sub-conscious mind in its defense, against the cognitive actions of the conscious mind, creates a entity, he termed "SHADOW" (Soren R. Ekstrom,Watertown, MA 2000). I believe that Jungs "Shadow" is similar in communicating, like Daniel Fels, electro-magnetic energy.   "Returning to the research which was the basis for his earlier book, The

Emotional Brain (1998), LeDoux describes how emotional states monopolize brain... The brain has a number of emotional systems—detecting and defending against threat..." (Gorman JM, Kent JM, Sullivan GM, Coplan JD,2000). 

For Jung, that "monopolized emotional state, defending against threat", is the "Shadow". The "Shadow" protects the sub-conscious mind, yet is not a fully cognitive, thus able to stream stimuli without the social constructed reality filter: otherwise termed "norm" in behavior. Have you ever had a hunch that the telephone was going to ring, and at the same time recall a sudden thought of your mother. Well that hunch is the sub-conscious mind at work (Gorman JM, Kent JM, Sullivan GM, Coplan JD,2000). Considering Jungs "Shadow", Fels "Electro-magnetic communication, I think that this "energy" source is a means of communicating that exist without cognitive processing. This energy is fluid in nature in that it is not block, and thus can spark intution and mystical thoughts, which if processed by the cognitive mind, would be denied as possible or not confirmed consciousness. I am think about individual operating in the sub-conscious mind thus influence behavior, through a similar mechanism founded by Fels. When I am in a good mood, simply by standing by another individual I can transfer that energy. That energy is a frequency (Doc Childre ). That frequency is able to operate outside the realm of the brain. I look to Dr. Hank Wesselman, who explains the journey of a Shaman, by which the "spirit" takes Shamanistic journey into the non-conscious reality (Wesselman, 2000).  The energy by which the a shaman harvest is similar in action of Fels electro-magnetic energy.  Wesselman suggests that the shaman spirit, while in the non-conscious reality is able to receive resourceful energy by which when returned to the conscious reality, is able to assist in healing, empowering and altering states of minds of individuals. This energy is also capable of forserting energy of loved ones that may have passed on.  Sandra Engleman who worked with Wessleman, stated She points to the Azuni tribes of new mexico that vanished suddenly all at once (rapture). She believes that they didn't vanish, they evolved to a higher state of existence and presently still live where they did in the past, just in a different dimension than we do, so we are unable to feel them, but their energy can be felt alive. She this is what will happen to us: some of us will evolve out of out physical existence into a new dimension.." (2012).

With this I believe that we are able to utilize our sub-conscious mind in a more influential matter. By which social ills can be resolved. It is stated by many, that you get the life that you perceive. Your perception is energy, resulting into behavior. If you think happy, you will be happy. If you think sad, you will be sad. This is also found in the work of Dr. Albert Ellis. Ellis, determined that some psychosis are self created. (Ellis). I think that if some self created psychosis individuals are able to influence other, in a peer-pressure manner. That negative behavior is the SHADOW in action. The shadow unable to deal with the conscious cognitive processing, reaches out into the reality affecting those near. Just like the cells of Fels individual test tubes.

Another factor to consider is Dr. Weilheim Reich. Reich was the creator of "orgone" energy, which was able to fully remove negative energy from the environment, thus healing various elements of an illness or mental state of mind.(Reich, 1932). Reich developed the "Orgone Box" where he placed individual to remove the negative energy. It is believe that this energy is able to influence others by changing the energy level within the environment. Acting similar to Fels electro-magnetic energy.

I believe and am interested in exploring the possible benefits of energy communication,by mean so electro-magnetic energy and sub-conscious energy, within the social service field. Developing means by which negative factors of social development can be altered resulting in empowered individuals, who exchange energy, instead of WORDS to communicate.  Wayne Dyer states that, 'every time you see someone do an act of kindness, your seratonin level increase and so does that person, also those who witness it." That is electro-magnetic energy exchange influence, as detailed by Fels.).

 Other theorist that suggest this energy exchange is Dr. Emoto, Joe Rogan, Sandra Eckelman, Rollin McCarthy, Carl Jung (sychronicity)

American Citizen Vs. American Citizen: State of the USA

AMERICAN CITIZEN VS. AMERICAN CITIZEN: STATE OF THE USA

On the subject of citizen verse citizen relationships and Civil Liberties. Sunday an event occur in Los Angeles. It was the kind of event that happens everyday across the nation, but as I watched it unfold, I perceived it as the ripping of the nations-citizen against citizen. Early in the morning at a non-profit faith based breakfast gathering, an individual approached me and explained that his suitcase had been stolen. His suitcase is his livelihood seeming he is a independent sales person and had his inventory in his suitcase. He was in rage about the theft and began to curse God as being ineffective in assisting him. It was awkward for me, seeming as he approached I was praising God, with internal dialogues and thoughts from 2008 Youtube posting Sunrise by Yearsayer https://youtu.be/Wr9KUkiaJlc  and 2012 Youtube posting Pueblo De Jah by Tribo De Jah https://youtu.be/UMEhPqqp30A

So this individual approached me venting disdain for God and his personal anger, not even realizing that he was infringing upon my very blessed disposition at that very moment. Sunday was my birthday and I was just feeling really thankful to God and life in general. Until this individual approached. With his approach, my response seemed to not support him (and it never will) and I jokingly generalized his events (the theft of his suitcase) as personal and a physical reality issue: which should not be associated with a spiritual issue such as God. It's cool if you want to vent, but I can't relate at this moment and I didn't feel it necessary to explain. In our day to day life, we might be confused as if we must attend to all as to assist and be a shoulder to cry upon. But as I have presented thus far, at what point does one let someone else wooos, infringe upon their disposition. Should I jump off the edge with him and curse God also. Of course not and why should I feel guilt that he believes I should be...empathetic to his purpose, which is in direct contradiction than mine. People intentional try to bring a person down- the old statement, "MISERY LOVE COMPANY" is true.

This individual escalated the event, by getting a cup of coffee and throwing it outwardly upon the ground. As he did this the coffee seemed to have fallen upon another individuals car. The owner of the car, expressed his concerns about the coffee and it POSSIBLY hitting his car. At that point another by stander shouted out, "don't tell him not to vent, he has a right to vent!" This was alerting to me, seeming it is what I always express to all, but worded differently. I always express. "Never tell an AMERICAN to shut up because you are infringing upon their 1st Amendment right and also desensitizing the Bill of Rights!" 

When the individual who tossed the coffee as he was venting about God, probed me on the events, I told him I have an issue: for where he believes he has a first amendment right to vent and although I don't have to accept it, I should be empathetic. I informed him that I perceive that you do have a 1st Amendment right and I DO NOT have to attend to it. You can vent all you want  and express what ever you want and I DO NOT have to give any of my time, emotion, devotion or empathy to your expressed reasons. 

But what is more important is you are over looking the rights of the individual who owns the car. He used his 1st Amendment right to express to you, concern about you tossing coffee upon the ground, near his car and almost getting it on his car. Don't you see he was probing his 5th Amendment right of private property and you simply override his intent. Then you escalated it even further by getting a "quasi non-profit personal" from another agency to get involved as an authority - by which that quasi non-profit personal, suggested verbally to the car owner, that he APOLOGIZE to you to resolve the situation. And you expect me to have empathy for you. As I see it you are an ENERGY SUCKER! I walked away from the individual hoping he understand, stay away from me.

So a overview we have citizen against citizen, then a quasi non-profit personal acting on behave of an official, suggests verbally that one citizen apologize to another citizen: as if one citizen is correct and has a RIGHT! This is that state of America today! DESENSITIZED to their rights and entitlement of them. 

State vs. County Social Service: Prevention of Secure State Economy (DES) part 1 California

Cali Reflection in Cali = seeming I was considering/in route academically (MSW/JD) for a NASW career (halted, Phoenix ARIZONA --Margret Finn/SWBS Case Manager Neglect)! I am very concerned naturally about what use to be termed WELFARE (too much stigma) and then Social Service (current in many states and fading) and more correctly should be termed DES (the Department of the States Economy (all of these Services, work to insure a secure state economy!)

So Cali-Cali with it's county based inefficiency is slowly drowning themselves and all TAX PAYING state citizens into- confusion. Thus it immobilizes state citizens from county to county movement. That prevents economic growth for the state. And slows down processing. Well I'd be dead from hunger (if not for faith based churches and shelters, GOD BLESS YOU ALL). Still one county can't communicate to another county on the behalf of the TAX PAYING state citizen. DAMN California since I've returned home, this state just isn't radiating GOLDEN any more!

The majority of States have established a centralized administrative system and can be classified as State administered: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming.

Nine States can be described as county administered: California, Colorado, Minnesota,New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
Virginia (.https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/services.pdf)

So within the battle of the counties (Los Angeles County and San Diego County) I the state citizen am tossed back and forward. I on my own thoughts, think LET CONSIDER SECURITY ISSUES!!!

So San Diego County seems correct! I am no longer in the county, don't intend to return to the county, have applied for benefits in Los Angeles County 3 times (Oct 20, 2015-Nov 2, 2015), and have received different answers from each separate state department, bias to the county preferences. In San Diego, my prior EBT Card was stolen in Los Angeles (voided) yet November benefits are posted on that card and now December benefits.

Yet according to Los Angeles county, I must close out my San Diego accounts (Oct 20, 2015): According to San Diego county, I have 2 options 1) transfer my account and the account balances will transfer to Los Angeles within 30 days or 2) close out my account, but this option might take longer and depends on Los Angeles county and me being able to apply with a closed San Diego account (hint: TIMING 30-90 days).

This month San Diego has proven that they have closed the accounts as requested and the funds are in a transfer status. This will never occur, because Los Angeles county systems is not going to be able to open a CALFRESH account as long as there is funds on a prior EBT from another county. Los Angeles is correct with this and thus await San Diego to remove the account.

You'd think getting a EBT from San Diego County would be not so difficult. UHM when I was working as a contract worker at EDS and all the contract work I did across this nation, corporations that went out of business always seemed to have this type of customer and data bank confusion going on within their on network operations. Is this one state or not!!!

San Diego you are RIGHT for instructing me to tell the Los Angeles office to call you and you will release the code for a San Diego EBT card that can be printed from the Los Angeles office.

Los Angeles you are WRONG for following through and then giving me the code and telling me to call San Diego. THE CLIENT IS ALWAYS RIGHT, THIS IS PUBLIC SERVICE...

So as far as California and it's county based system goes. Does the ideal of inter-office, inter-state department communication mean anything any more! Well considering these days of network/mainframe security risk...WHY would a state employee provide the client with the data that is secure, when it could be done through an inter-department communication. One employee to another employee.

Thus let's raise concern and just post this information...This date should be consider inter state departmental data...so it's RED FLAGGING material to mean (data that is risky and not attended to appropriately by corporations or government agencies)...EBT CODE: 19014EMBOS01

FARRAKHAN’s Message of The Self Determinate African American in the 21’st Century: EXODUS (Reversal of the Great Trans-Atlantic Slavery Incident)

FARRAKHAN’s Message of The Self Determinate African American in the 21’st Century: EXODUS (Reversal of the Great Trans-Atlantic Slavery Incident)

Thinking today of what it is and what is not in the United States, to be a Descendant of a Kidnapped African... https://paulgoree.wordpress.com/2013/11/27/farrakhans-message-of-the-self-determinate-african-american-in-the-21st-century-exodus-reversal-of-the-great-trans-atlantic-slavery-incident/

San Diego County, Calif., funds by Housing and Urban Development, Department of

Listing $77,617,379.00 in stimulus funds from Housing and Urban Development, Department of for San Diego

Note: For some programs where states do not report where money will be distributed across the state, we do not have the allocation for individual counties. Those programs include: Medicaid, unemployment benefits and food stamps. Those amounts are included in the totals for where the state agency receiving that money is located.

Amount refers to both the amount of stimulus funding going toward the project and the face value of the loan.

http://projects.propublica.org/recovery/locale/california/san-diego/dept/8600

Seems Rapid Rehousing funds in San DIego went to Obama's second preference those who are about to face homelessness

San Diego Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing

Homelessness Prevention And Rapid Re-Housing Program

In 2009, the San Diego Housing Commission (SDHC) launched a cutting-edge homeless prevention program called Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-housing (HPRP). The three-year, $5.7 million federal program targets families in danger of becoming homeless as a result of the economic downturn. Through payments to their landlord for security deposits, back rent, and rent subsidies eligible families can receive up to 12 months of assistance. SDHC is administering the funds on behalf of the City of San Diego, which received a one-time grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development under the federal American Recovery & Reinvestment Act.

http://www.sdhc.org/Special-Housing-Programs/Homeless-Prevention-and-Rapid-ReHousing/

Capacity Building

Technical Assistance

Capacity Building | Current Collaborative Projects | Recent Collaborative Efforts

Capacity Building

http://www.shelterpartnership.org/technical-assistance.aspx

Through on-going technical assistance, Shelter Partnership works to build the capacity and effectiveness of individual agencies providing short-term and transitional housing for homeless people.  We also work with agencies to create permanent affordable housing with supportive services for homeless people.

At the same time, Shelter Partnership provides technical assistance to government agencies and funders in order to give guidance on where there are needs across the community and how to design and support effective “best practice” programs for homeless persons.  Shelter Partnership's work has often led to the creation of new programs.

Shelter Partnership provides the following Technical Assistance:

Funding Alerts: When a source of funding is announced with a call for project proposals and applications, Shelter Partnership issues an alert, which describes the available funding and how to apply. Shelter Partnership tracks public and private funding sources daily in order to keep the community informed and on the competitive edge for national, state and local funding.

Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA): Shelter Partnership provides critical technical assistance to LAHSA, including the preparation of a collaborative application to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

City of Los Angeles Housing Department’s (LAHD) Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) Program: Shelter Partnership participates with the City and County of Los Angeles in designing how federal funding will be used each year in meeting the needs of persons living with HIV/AIDS and has prepared successful applications for federal grants.

LAHD’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund:Shelter Partnership has successfully advocated for priority funding for affordable housing projects that target special needs households and provide services to meet the tenants' needs.

County of Los Angeles’ Community Development Commission (LACDC) City of Industry Program: Shelter Partnership assists the County CDC in designing programs under their City of Industry capital funding program as well as other housing programs.
For more information, please contact Ruth Schwartz.

State of California: The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) contracts with Shelter Partnership to review and evaluate the supportive service plans of housing for special needs populations.

Current Collaborative Projects

Homeless Older Adults: This project addresses the needs of homeless older adults in Los Angeles County. One quarter of the 250,000 homeless annually in Los Angeles County are over age 50 and their numbers are increasing.

Homeless older adults are unique because they are more likely than their younger counterparts to have multiple medical problems and chronic illnesses that have gone untreated for years, and illnesses common to aging such as diabetes, cardiac disease, circulatory problems, and hypertension. Homelessness compromises health, and can lead to hypothermia, insufficient sleep, and poor nutrition. It is also a predictor of mental illness, such as depression and dementia. Homelessness contributes to memory problems, cognitive impairments, poor judgment and poor comprehension, which causes difficulties delivering services.

In 2006-2007, with the support of the California Community Foundation and theCorporation for Supportive Housing, Shelter Partnership undertook an exhaustive 18-month planning process with the help of a diverse and expert 26-member Steering Committee. The final product, Homeless Older Adults Strategic Plan included an exhaustive literature review, data analysis, interviews of housing developers, social services providers and government officials as well as older adults themselves; and case studies of housing for this population.
According to the Strategic Plan, there are 3,000 to 4,000 homeless individuals nightly in Los Angeles County who are 62 years of age or older, and their numbers are growing. The Housing for Homeless Older Adults Collaborativeentails two interventions to address the two major groups of homeless older adults.

The Securing Affordable Senior Housing Collaborative assists seniors with few social and health care needs who have more recently become homeless, typically because of a major life event such as hospitalization, layoff, or death of a spouse. For this group, as a result of their extremely low incomes, affordable rent is the main impediment to their securing permanent housing. Through a structured, staff intensive process, we are working with the many subsidized senior housing developers in the county to overcome their reluctance and programmatic barriers to providing housing to our population, and concurrently work with agencies serving homeless older adults to identify, assist, and provide follow-up services so that these individuals secure housing and permanency in these buildings.

The challenge in undertaking this initiative is persuading senior housing developers to work with homeless service providers and be willing to make changes to their customary practices, such as accepting alternatives to the documentation that they routinely require, requires extensive and persistent education.  Among the most prevalent barriers to accessing these units are lotteries, screening procedures, and wait list management through the U.S. Mail, which effectively excludes homeless adults who lack reliable mailing addresses. Requirements for references from prior landlords, criminal background checks, credit checks, birth certificates, and move-in deposits also screen out homeless applicants.

Our first partner in this collaboration is Menorah Housing Foundation, a major local nonprofit developer of senior housing and a strong proponent of including homeless older adults in their buildings. Since early 2009, 200 homeless seniors have moved into 26 senior buildings and hundreds of homeless seniors are on waiting lists to move-in to housing.

The Permanent Supportive Housing Collaboration is aimed at homeless older adults who have experienced long-term homelessness and have extensive, difficult, and challenging health care and social service needs, who are otherwise known as “chronically homeless.”  In partnership with special needs developers, we work to ensure that critically needed health and social services are provided in new developments, preferably on-site.

The most difficult challenges involve producing permanent supportive housing for the chronically homeless older adults who have been homeless for many years and present with mental health and substance use issues.

We are working with the sponsors to develop partnerships with health care and social services agencies and access funding, including the difficult-to-secure local, state and federal services funding, such as the Assisted Living Waiver Pilot Project (ALWPP); Adult Day Health Care (ADHC); Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHC); Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-housing Program (HPRP): In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS); and Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) programs.

The first development to come on-line was the Bonnie Brae Village Apartments in the fall of 2009 - a 90-unit senior housing development with more than half of the units set-aside for homeless older adults. The development is located just west of downtown Los Angeles and was developed by Affordable Living for the Aging.  To date, 100 previously homeless older adults have moved into their own apartment and several additional projects are in the development process that will bring 80 additional units online.

The National Leadership Initiative to End Elder Homelessness: The Homeless Older Adults Strategic Plan, the first of its kind, has generated considerable interest and helped form the content for the first convening to build a “National Leadership Initiative to End Elder Homelessness.”  The convening, which was held in Alexandria, Virginia in October 2011, was attended by 60 people from across the country, including policy makers, elected and appointed officials, advocates, housing providers and elder service providers.  Its purpose was to develop concrete strategies and policy recommendations to meet the unique needs of the homeless older adult population.  We hope to replicate this convening in Los Angeles in the fall of 2012

Funding is from the Corporation for Supportive Housing. For more information on these collaborations, e-mail Steve Renahan.

Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Support for Homeless Re-Entry (SHORE): Shelter Partnership was instrumental in the development, organization, and approval of this new program, SHORE. This program makes public transportation available for those homeless persons who are participating in a transition to stability through case management and supportive services. In 1994, the program was awarded $615,000 as a 14-month demonstration program through which 30 participating agencies received bus tokens for their clients. Most recently, Shelter Partnership successfully worked for renewal of the program that is now funded at $350,000 annually.  To date, over six million transportation tokens have been distributed to the most needy in our community.

Housing Element Project: California state law requires each city and county to adopt a housing element. In its housing element, the local government must plan to meet the existing and projected housing needs for all economic segments of the community, including homeless people and extremely low-income households.

Thanks to funding from the United Way, Shelter Partnership embarked on a project to review and provide in-depth comments on local housing elements to the respective city. We have now completed housing element reviews for 12 jurisdictions: Beverly Hills, Burbank, Culver City, Downey, Glendale, Hawthorne, Inglewood, Lancaster, Los Angeles County, Santa Clarita, Torrance and Whittier.

Our substantive reviews focus on three areas: 1) the cities’ plans to meet the regional housing need allocation, specifically for extremely low-income households; 2) the regulation of housing for people with disabilities, including adoption of a reasonable accommodation procedure; and 3) compliance with SB 2 of 2007, the fair share zoning law (Click to see Fact Sheet).   Shelter Partnership was very involved in providing technical support to then Senator Gil Cedillo, the author of SB2.  Many of the cities agree to our recommendations and modify their housing elements accordingly.

Once the housing element is adopted, Shelter Partnership monitors the local government to ensure that it is implementing the programs outlined in the housing element. Shelter Partnership is committed to holding cities accountable to their responsibilities to plan for housing for all members of the community and to remove obstacles to the development of this housing.

For more information, please contact Nicky Viola at nviola@shelterpartnership.org and visit the California Department of Housing and Community Development’s website at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/hrc/plan/he/.

Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Rehousing Program (HPRP): As part of the federal ARRA (stimulus) program, the City of Los Angeles received $29 million in Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Rehousing Program (HPRP) funds over a three-year period (2009-2012). The Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) administers HPRP on behalf of the Los Angeles Housing Department (LAHD). Shelter Partnership advises LAHD and LAHSA and assists with HPRP program design and implementation.

The HPRP program provides temporary housing-related financial assistance and stabilization services to households that currently live in the City, have an annual income that is less than 50% of the area median income and are homeless or about to become homeless. The federal regulations require that the program targets households that would be homeless “but for” HPRP assistance. At the same time, these households should be able to pay rent on their own once the temporary HPRP assistance period is over. [See Shelter Partnership’s blog dated March 22, 2010 for a longer description of the HPRP program and some examples of households that have benefited from HPRP assistance.]

Three regional coordinating agencies (RCAs) provide case management services to homeless families and individuals identified for this temporary assistance and help with locating affordable housing. HPRP agencies providing assistance to homeless persons are LA Family Housing, Special Service for Groups and PATH (in partnership with St. Joseph Center and Weingart Center Association). A partnership of legal aid organizations provides legal services, case management and temporary assistance to families and individuals who are about to lose their rental housing in the City. HPRP agencies providing homelessness prevention assistance are the Legal Aid Foundation of LA, Neighborhood Legal Services and Inner City Law Center. The fact sheet below provides contact information for all of these agencies:

http://www.lahsa.org/docs/hprp/City-of-LA-HPRP-fact-sheet-Updated-7-1-10.pdf

The City of LA HPRP program officially launched on November 2, 2009 and Shelter Partnership continues to participate in policy meetings and provide technical assistance to the City and participating agencies.  To date, more than 4,500 households have received financial assistance.

Shelter Partnership staff is currently working with the City and County of Los Angeles, as well as LAHSA in the design of the new Emergency Solutions Grant, which will continue the funding of rapid rehousing for homeless households, albeit at a much reduced funding level.

For more information, contact Dhakshike Wickrema at dwickrema@shelterpartnership.org.

Home for Good Shelter and Outreach Programs Standards of Excellence:  Working with the Los Angeles Business Leaders Task Force on Homelessness, a partnership of the L.A. Area Chamber Of Commerce and United Way of Greater Los Angeles, Shelter Partnership is developing standards of excellence for emergency shelter and outreach programs, as a priority goal of Home For Good, a comprehensive action plan to end chronic and veteran homelessness in Los Angeles County by 2016.

Conflicting expectations and measures for these programs often confuse both providers and funders alike.  The Home for Good Standards of Excellence project is a proactive effort to collaborate with our provider community and bring clarity on what success means for these important segments of our homeless system.  A clearer and community-informed set of standards and outcome measures will 1) highlight effective organizations, 2) attract new resources from funders looking for greater assurance on performance, and 3) create a simpler set of expectations for providers.

In a participatory process, Shelter Partnership is actively soliciting input through:

• Interviews and surveys with coalitions, policy-makers, funders, and providers across LA County on best practices, existing measures, and desired measures;
• Literature review and analysis of existing research; and
• Review of national best practices, funding requirements, and trends.

For more information, please email Steve Renahan or visit the Home for Good and the Business Leaders Task Force website @www.HomeforGoodLA.org

Recent Collaborative Efforts

Community Model: Shelter Partnership played a major role - including help in fundraising and siting -- in OPCC’s (formerly Ocean Park Community Center) development of a Safe Haven at 26th Street and Cloverfield Streets in Santa Monica. The Safe Haven utilizes a “Housing First” community model to serve chronically homeless individuals living with co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse disorders and has 25 beds.

As part of this effort, funded by The California Endowment, Shelter Partnership also produced The Community Model on how to replicate this program and conducted numerous trainings.

For more information, contact Ruth Schwartz or visithttp://www.communitymodella.org/.

LA's HOPE: Los Angeles Homeless Opportunity Providing Employment: As part of the national New Freedom Initiative to address chronic homelessness, the City of Los Angeles received five-year funding from the Departments of Labor and Housing and Urban Development for an innovative program that Shelter Partnership played a key role in designing and helping implement: the LA’s HOPE program.

LA's HOPE also involved the collaboration of eight public and private agencies:  Los Angeles Community Development Department, the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Goodwill Southern California, Inc. (Goodwill), Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health, Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, Portals House, Inc., San Fernando Valley Community Mental Health Center, Inc. (SFVCMHC), and South Central Health and Rehabilitation Program(SCHARP).

The chronically homeless adult participants, all of whom had mental health diagnoses, received extensive mental health and other social services; job training with vocational training, coaching, and employment; and permanent housing at very low rents.

The results from this pilot program were outstanding and are reported at http://www.urban.org/publications/411631.html.

Connections: Collaborative Project to Provide Permanent Housing for Homeless and Unstably Housed Persons Living with HIV/AIDS.

With Shelter Partnership’s extensive program design and grant-writing assistance, and as one of only three jurisdictions in the nation, the Los Angeles Housing Department (LAHD) received $1.2 million in Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) competitive grant funding to implement Connections in the County of Los Angeles, which resulted in permanent housing subsidies for 105 homeless or persons who are at imminent threat of homelessness. The project was a collaborative between the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the United States Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Connections represented an innovative opportunity to study the impact of providing housing for homeless or unstably housed persons on the transmission of HIV and the health of persons living with HIV. Several scholarly papers have been developed on this.

The initial grant was recently renewed for a second time to provide an additional 90 homeless and very-low income individuals with permanent housing subsidies.

For more information, please contact Nicky Viola.