Revised: December 2018
By Sarah Owens and Michael Livingston
[Originally posted under the title, "Neither Collaboration, Nor Collective Impact."]
On May 15, for the first time in maybe forever, the Salem Urban Renewal Agency's Annual Action Plan (AAP) was submitted to HUD with written comment, the theme of which was that the AAP overstates the extent to which the City engages in any collaborative process with the community, beyond what is needed to administer its federal grants program (link is to City's old website, which links to the 2016 AAP, but access is dodgy, and readers might need to ask City staff to assist.)
We were not the first to make the observation, however. As noted recently by former Salem Planning Commission member Rick Stucky:
"One of the major hurdles in developing more [affordable] housing is limited federal funds, but also the city's urban renewal [development] department. The department over the 20+ years I was involved with SKCDC [Salem Keizer Community Development Corp.] went from an agency that worked with affordable housing organizations [to] help break down those barriers to one that was focused on HUD compliance. That is not to say the early years they were not looking at HUD compliance, it's to say the staff at that time had a vision and creativeness to work within the regulations and with the affordable housing organizations." [Emphasis added.]
Dammasch State Hospital |
Kristin Retherford, Salem's new Director of Urban Development, was working as a project director, urban renewal manager and economic development manager for Wilsonville during the time Villebois was being built, so perhaps there is hope for change under her leadership.
Shangri-La Staff at May Meeting |
To find out what the barriers are to providing efficient and effective services, they divided us into two groups, rural and urban. The responses were similar, and not surprising.
Providers pretty much seemed to accept as given that there was not enough cooperation between providers and not enough money.
Participants were also aware of 211info.org and lamented the demise of Marion County's Community Resource Network (CRN), which 211 more or less replaced. [Update: CRN was reinstated in July 2017.]
Barriers to Providing Services
- not knowing where to send/refer someone for help
- program limitations (e.g., age, gender)
- not knowing or being able to find out program limitations prior to referral
- lack of interaction/guidance with/from/for providers
- incorrect/out-dated information about programs resulting in a dead-end
- wait lists
- systems trauma (trust)
- lack of trauma-informed services
- lack of transition services
- literacy, language, and clients who just cannot comprehend what is being offered
- depression and other mental illness
- criminal or eviction history
- lack of ID, parental consent or funds (e.g., security deposit)
- having to choose between needs (e.g., providing shelter and keeping a youth in school)
The group briefly discussed implementing in Marion County the service integration and co-location models that Polk County uses. There was general agreement that the programs were effective, but others had tried to implement the service integration model in Marion County, without success. One participant suggested Salem's neighborhood associations might facilitate collaborative efforts, however, they tend to focus on protecting private property interests, parks, and other quality-of-middle-class-life issues, not on social services. Organizers did not share their next steps.
No comments:
Post a Comment