Assessing Data Collection Systems Used by Providers of Housing Services to People Living With HIV and AIDS

`
ASSESSING DATA COLLECTION SYSTEMS USED

BY PROVIDERS OF HOUSING SERVICES TO
PEOPLE LIVING WITH HIV AND AIDS
Presented to:
Bailey House, Inc.

Program Evaluation Services
Housing and Health Evaluation Technical Assistance Project1
April 2003
Submitted by:
Partnership for Community Health, Inc.
245 W. 29th Street
Suite 1202
New York, NY 10001
Primary Contact:
Mitchell Cohen
PCH
Telephone: 800 411 4399
Fax: 212 564 9781
Email: Mitchell@PCHealth.org
1
The Housing and Health Evaluation Technical Assistance Project (HHETA) is funded by the New York City Mayor’s
Office of AIDS Policy Coordination under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Housing
Opportunities for Persons with AIDS program and administered by the Postgraduate Center for Mental Health.
© PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 2
METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................................... 2
Data Analysis............................................................................................................................................. 3
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS...................................................................................................................... 3
Principles of Housing Data Collection Systems ........................................................................................ 3
Process and Outcomes Indicators .............................................................................................................. 4
Reporting Requirements ............................................................................................................................ 5
Reporting Requirements for HOPWA-funded Housing and Housing-Related Services ...................... 5
Reporting Requirements for other Sources of Funding......................................................................... 6
Data Input and Data Quality ................................................................................................................. 7
Data Analysis...................................................................................................................................... 11
Barriers to More Effective Data Use and Management ........................................................................... 11
Reporting expectations do not reflect program activities.................................................................... 11
Existing data systems are not flexible................................................................................................. 12
Not enough resources allocated to fulfill reporting needs................................................................... 12
Inconsistent reporting categories in different data systems................................................................. 12
Outcome indicators are not relevant to housing programs.................................................................. 12
Reporting needs compee with program needs..................................................................................... 13
Multiple anxieties and fears about how programs will be judged and the consequences. .................. 13
Stealing Clients .............................................................................................................................. 13
Data being used to enforce set numerical or quality criteria for services....................................... 13
Discovering or revealing redundant service provision ................................................................... 13
Mistrust of the ability of data system to maintain client confidentiality. ....................................... 13
RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 14
Technical Assistance (TA) on the Use of Data, Data Entry and Quality Control, Data Analysis, and the
Use of Data for Internal Needs. ............................................................................................................... 14
Minimize Duplicate Entry for Data Entry Elements................................................................................ 15
Create a System-wide client Unique Identifier ........................................................................................ 15
Realistic Cost Allocation By Funders Related to Data Entry and Analysis............................................. 16
Assurances of Client Confidentiality ....................................................................................................... 16
Relevant Outcomes.................................................................................................................................. 17
Link System Development to Billing or Provide Financial Incentives for Reporting Data Accurately and
in a Timely Fashion ................................................................................................................................. 17
CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................................... 17
Figures
Figure 1 Client and Data Flow at a Typical Multi-service Agency ................................................................ 9

Figure 2 Client and Data Flow through the Continuum of HOPWA-funded Services................................. 10
Tables
Table 1 Agencies Interviewed ........................................................................................................................ 3

Table 2 Housing Reporting Requirements by Type of Contract .................................................................... 6
Table 3 Sources of Funding & Associated Data/Reporting Requirements..................................................... 7
Attachments
Attachment 1 Housing Program Descriptions ..............................................................................................I-1

Attachment 2 Annual Performance Report (APR) .................................................................................... II-1
Attachment 3 Description of “Factors” Data Management Module.......................................................... III-1
i © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

ASSESSING DATA COLLECTION SYSTEMS USED BY PROVIDERS OF
HOUSING SERVICES TO PEOPLE LIVING WITH HIV AND AIDS
By
Partnership for Community Health
Presented to:
Bailey House, Inc.
Program Evaluation Services
Housing and Health Evaluation Technical Assistance Project
April 2003
INTRODUCTION
During FY 2001-2002, Bailey House, Inc. contracted with Partnership for Community
Health (PCH) to undertake a brief study to complement the Housing and Health
Evaluation Technical Assistance Project (HHETA). The goals of this study were to:
♦ Systematically describe how organizations providing housing and housing-related
services with support from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program currently manage
data collection and reporting for multiple contracts and evaluation projects.
♦ Develop recommendations to facilitate the reduction or elimination of duplicative
data collection while helping organizations to collect and share data for reporting,
program evaluation and outcomes measurement.
The services that were the focus of this report were supportive housing (SH), housing
placement assistance (HPA), independent living skills (ILS), and outreach/harm
reduction (O/HR)2. A description of the services offered by these programs is shown in
Attachment 1.
The recommendations are limited to those providers receiving funding under HOPWA
through the Postgraduate Center for Mental Health in New York City. The research and
data for these recommendations are based on these providers and findings may or may
not be generalizable to other housing providers.
METHODOLOGY
To determine the existing reporting service definitions and reporting requirements, data
collection included:
♦ Conducting secondary research:
Reviewing existing housing reports, literature, and reporting requirements.
Reviewing outcome and process indicators for housing programs.
2
This study was started before the merger of most HPA and ILS programs.
2 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

♦ Conducting key informant interviews with staff from five selected programs (Table
1).
♦ Holding a feedback session with staff from ACQC, African Services Committee and
Osborne Association.
Table 1 Agencies Interviewed

AGENCY PERSON INTERVIEWED POSITION
Casa Betsaida Francisco Quinteros Program Director
Felipe Urrutia Fiscal Manager
African Services Committee Mulusew Bekele Health Programs Director
Maaza Seyoum Assistant Health Programs
Director
Harlem United* Wanda Mitchell Director, Women’s Programs
Osborne Association Yvette Bairan Senior Director of Program
Planning and Operations
Citywide Harm Reduction Daliah Heller Executive Director
Data Analysis
Data was analyzed to:

♦ Determine overall principles for data collection and reporting.
♦ Specify key outcome and process indicators.
♦ Document the way data is collected and entered and assess the quality and reliability
of data.
♦ Identify categories for data elements and gaps in the data collected.
♦ Identify and discuss efficiencies that may be obtained in standardizing data collection
and reporting requirements.
Secondary analysis involved collecting instruments and reports from organizations with
housing contracts and comparing them for similarities and differences. The interviews
were conducted by PCH staff and extensive notes were taken and analyzed for trends and
observations.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
Principles of Housing Data Collection Systems
Based on the literature review and interviews, a number of principles were determined.
A comprehensive data system would have:
♦ Minimal amounts of redundancy between inputs for the system and reporting
requirements.
♦ Security that protects the privacy and confidentiality (not anonymity) of clients.
♦ Data collection protocols that:
Minimize consumer reporting burden.

Minimize provider data entry.
Minimize provider reporting burden.
Facilitate accurate data entry for valid and reliable analysis.
Facilitate efficient analysis for individual service plans and aggregate
reporting.
Facilitate outcome evaluation of services.
Process and Outcomes Indicators
There are several reasons for collecting process and outcomes data, in addition to meeting
reporting requirements. They include:
♦ Providing input into organizational and regional planning.
♦ Assessing services.
♦ Contract monitoring.
♦ Quality control.
♦ Formalizing consumer input.
After reviewing the process indicators from different agencies, the key process measures
include:
♦ All programs
Type and units of service delivered.
Cost of service delivery.
Number and profile of clients served (unduplicated).
Quality of service delivery.
Timeliness of service.
Barriers to services.
The key outcome measure include:

♦ All programs
Client satisfaction.
Maintained or improved health status.
Maintained or improved quality of life.
Adherence to drug regimen.
♦ Housing placement, supportive housing, and outreach/harm reduction
Housing Status.
Effective and timely referral to transitional or permanent housing.
Placement in adequate, safe, stable housing.
Sustained housing for PLWH/A.

Effective and timely referral to services such as substance abuse treatment,
mental health, case management, and employment assistance.
♦ Independent living skills
Ability to handle finances.
Ability to schedule day-to-day living affairs.
Ability to make and keep doctors appointments.
Reporting Requirements
Reporting Requirements for HOPWA-funded Housing and Housing-Related Services
Recipients of funding from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s

(HUD) HOPWA program are required to provide reports to the grantor. The programs
described here receive this funding through PCMH. PCMH serves as the Master
Contractor for the grantee, the Mayor’s Office of AIDS Policy Coordination (MOAPC).
On a monthly basis providers report the total number of clients (duplicated) and units of
service for the purpose of contract monitoring. Once a year, in addition to the monthly
project monitoring report, PCMH asks housing providers administering HOPWA
contracts to provide an unduplicated count of their clients. From this data PCMH
completes the Annual Performance Report (APR) for submission to HUD(see
Attachment 2).
HUD provides a database system, Integrated Disbursement Information System (IDIS)

for grantees, but its use is not mandatory. IDIS gathers information at the aggregate level
and is mostly designed to track money flow, i.e. allocations and spend down. It is not
proficient at capturing client information. PCMH considers it cumbersome, and in key
informant interviews, representatives of the PCMH say they plan to introduce a central
case-management-based system called “Factors” to facilitate the collection of data to
meet reporting requirements for housing and housing-related services. The module
provides a suite of powerful functions, shown in Attachment 3.
The types of information currently required by PCMH from providers of HPA, SH, ILS
and O/HR services are shown in Table 2. HPA providers have the most reporting
requirements, followed by SH providers. O/HR and ILS providers have fewer reporting
requirements. Notably, while the number of referrals is tracked in several services, based
on interviews with providers, there is little follow-up on referrals across agencies. Within
the current system, service providers are only required to report aggregated data. Given
this, determining accurate unduplicated counts of client services is challenging.
According to both MOAPC and PCMH, one of the limitations in providing accurate
aggregate reporting is that unduplicated data is not available at the provider level because
data cannot be unduplicated between providers.

Table 2 Housing Reporting Requirements by Type of Contract
Housing Outreach / Indepen-
Placement Supportive Harm dent Living
Type of Service Asst Housing Reduction Skills
Intakes x x x
Housing Start-up kits distributed x x x
Referral to drug and alcohol treatment or counseling x x x
Referrals to mental health treatment or counseling x x x
Referrals to case management services x x x
Referrals to employment assistance x x x
Other referrals x x x
Nutritional services (food bags, vouchers, meals, snacks) x x x
Referrals to medical treatment x x
Referrals to legal assistance x x
Assessments x x
Service Plans developed x x
Follow-up home visits x x
Follow-up other than home visits x x
Requests for assistance from the “sustainable living fund” x x
Clients receiving Emergency Rent Assistance x x
Recreational activities (# of activities/ # of clients) x x
Advocacy encounters (i.e. case management, crisis
intervention, mentoring, etc..) x x
Apartment viewings x
Permanent housing placements x
Transitional housing placements x
Approvals from the sustainable living fund x
Housing placements (permanent or transitional) x
Outreach efforts to recruit new clients x
Outreach efforts to landlord and real estate brokers x
Number of training sessions completed x
Successful completion of ILS classes x
Reporting Requirements for other Sources of Funding
To develop recommendations that both facilitate the reduction or elimination of

duplicative data collection and help organizations to collect and share data for reporting,
program evaluation and outcome measurement, other data collection needs have to be
considered. Most organizations that receive HOPWA funds also receive other State and
Federal funds, and several receive grants and contracts from other sources.
By themselves, reporting requirements for each source of funding are not necessarily
onerous. Taken together, though, they may present a burden. For agencies with multiple
funding, the number of different systems and reports can be substantial, particularly given
different system requirements, staff training needs, issues of scalability (systems designed
for the size of the client population), and related costs. Common sources of other funding
and associated reporting requirements are shown in Table 3. In many instances, as seen
under “level of analysis”, the data is analyzed on an aggregate level. Data collection may
or may not capture individual level data, as shown in the last column.

Table 3 Sources of Funding & Associated Data/Reporting Requirements
SOURCES Level of Analysis Unique ID
Housing
HOPWA reporting requirement Aggregate
Other HUD programs (HUD's Homeless Assistance
Aggregate
Programs, Programs for Persons with Disabilities, HOME)
Housing Assessment / Outcomes
Outcome Assessment (HHETA) Aggregate
Title I Reports and City Services
MHRA Ryan White Fiscal Program Monitoring Report (URS) Aggregate Don’t Know (DK)
HRSA Standard Annual Administrative Report (AAR) Aggregate X
Title II and State Funds
AIDS Institute Aggregate Reports (URS) Aggregate X
Other RWCA Reports (Title III, IV, SPNS, etc.)
Testing and Medical Monitoring (CDC)
Pre-Test Counseling Report Individual & Aggregate X
HIV/AIDS Related Surveillance Reports (HARS) -and other
Individual & Aggregate X
surveillance
Medication
AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP) Report (RWCA Title
Individual X
II)
AIDS Pharmaceutical Assistance Annual Administrative
Aggregate X
Report (APA)
Insurance
Health Insurance (HIP) Annual Administrative Report Aggregate DK
Medicare Aggregate X
Medicaid Aggregate X
Other Insurance
Internal Management Reports
Internal Process Monitoring Aggregate X
Client Management / Case Plan Individual X
Other Funder Reporting Requirements Aggregate DK
Board Reports Aggregate
Referral to Programs
Case Management / Case Plan & Notes Individual & Aggregate x
Case Management Referrals Individual x
Housing (Outreach / Harm reduction, ILS, SH, HPA) Individual & Aggregate x
Other Programs (outpatient medical, food, transportation,
Individual & Aggregate x
substance abuse, prescription services, etc.)
Many of the same data elements are required across funding sources. However data
formats and categories for the same variable often differ. Within agencies, the process of
collecting data for reporting is often not coordinated. If each funding source served a set
of unique clients, then multiple data forms and entry, while burdensome, would result in
low redundancy in the system. This is usually not the case, however. Most funding
sources are for the same client and they provide different and redundant services, thus the
net result is redundant data collection for both providers and clients.
Data Input and Data Quality
While funders often mandate the reporting of information and may even provide systems
to collect data, little effort is focused on developing protocols or refining the process of

data collection. There are, however, similarities in the way most service providers collect
information. Figure 1 diagrams the structure of a typical multi-service organization and
shows points at which data collection occurs. For many agencies, their clients come into
services some time after testing positive for HIV. Agencies themselves may conduct
outreach to bring clients into services. Often clients are referred to an agency, but, in
some instances, seek out an agency themselves. Once at the agency, clients usually
undergo a general intake and, perhaps, an assessment of need. Based on the assessment,
they may receive a referral to services in the same agency or other agencies.
Clients referred to services, even to services within the same agency, may undergo
another intake and/or assessment, both to facilitate the delivery of services and to fulfill
requirements for data collection of a particular program. Next, clients may receive some
type of service plan and referrals. Monitoring may occur to track progress on the service
plan and re-assessments may be conducted periodically. Data collected through
assessment and reassessment may be used to assess client outcomes and aggregated to
determine the efficacy of the program.
Figure 2 shows the continuum of housing and housing-related services funded by

HOPWA and demonstrates how data collection efforts may be duplicated when clients
access multiple services either within a single agency or across several agencies. Some
recipients of housing and related services may be brought into the continuum through
HOPWA-funded outreach and harm reduction services. They may also enter the
continuum by referral to any of the other HOPWA-funded programs (or, by seeking out
services themselves).
What becomes clear from Figure 2 is the large amount for redundant information that is
collected through numerous intakes and assessments. For each service accessed, clients
typically undergo intake and/or assessment both at the agency providing the service and
at entry into the funded program. For example, a client seeking HPA services may
undergo intake when they reach the agency and undergo intake and/or assessment when
they are referred to the HPA program within the agency.
In most instances, service providers have an intake worker or case manager who makes
an assessment of clients’ needs and eligibility. Depending upon the agency, this
information may then be forwarded to data entry clerks. None of the groups interviewed
devote many resources to determining the best process of obtaining information or
entering information, and only one had quality checks on data entry as a standard part of
their data entry process. Forms are not designed to be input directly and are usually not
designed to facilitate data entry by pre-coding fields or using column layouts.

Figure 1 Client and Data Flow at a Typical Multi-service Agency
TESTING/OUTREACH REFERRAL TO AGENCY
INTAKE
HOUSING CASE MANAGEMENT FOOD MEDICAL
Intake Intake Intake Intake
Assessment Assessment Assessment

Assessment
Referral Referral Referral

Referral
Service Plan Service Plan Service Plan

Service Plan
Monitoring Outcome Monitoring Outcome Monitoring Outcome

Monitoring Outcome
Re-assessment Re -assessment Re-assessment

Re -assessment

Figure 2 Client and Data Flow through the Continuum of HOPWA-funded Services
HOUSING OUTREACH
HARM REDUCTION
OUTCOMES
Engagement
Awareness
INTAKE
Eligibility
ASSESSMENT
Need
REFERRAL
HOUSING PLACEMENT ASST SUPPORTIVE HOUSING INDEPENDENT LIVING SKILLS VOCATIONAL
INTAKE INTAKE TRAINING / WORKSHOP INTAKE

Eligibility Eligibility Action Eligibility
ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT MONITORING OUTCOME ASSESSMENT

Need Need Utilization Ind Living Skills Need
Quality of service Quality of life
Barriers Housing status
REFERRAL REFERRAL REFERRAL
SERVICE PLAN SERVICE PLAN Re-assessment SERVICE PLAN

Action Action Action
MONITORING OUTCOME MONITORING OUTCOME MONITORING OUTCOME

Utilization Housing Status Utilization Housing Status Utilization Jobs
Quality of service Health Status Quality of service Health Status Quality of service
Barriers Adherence Barriers Adherence Barriers
Re-assessment Re-assessment Re-assessment

Data Analysis
In general, agencies performed very basic analyses of the data they collected. Some
standard report formats are available, however, there is little in-house capacity to model
data to project service trends or needs. Data reports are often seen as something that
must be provided to funders to meet contractual commitments. Internal analysis and
review of data is not viewed as a high priority, and there is little staff capacity to conduct
more in-depth analysis.
A few examples highlight these findings. At Harlem United Community AIDS Center,
data collection is ad-hoc. A monthly report prepared for presentation to the Board
suggests that most of the client data is derived from a number of sources and presented
for several programs. However, data for the report comes primarily from chart reviews
of a sample of cases, not from a database or some other repository maintained on an
ongoing basis. Data prepared by an outside consultant on client attitudes and behaviors is
a main source of information for one report, but not systematically updated for future
reports. Only marginal tabulations prepared by the consultant were presented with no
analysis by demographic subgroups. The Uniform Reporting System (URS), the
reporting system supported by MHRA and the AIDS Institute for programs receiving
support under the Ryan White Care Act, is not operational at that agency. Interestingly,
while there is little effort to adopt URS, a new billing system is being installed that will
capture client activity.
On the other hand, the Osborne Associates, a large multi-service agency, uses a
proprietary system designed by IMA to collect data on an ongoing basis. The data is
used extensively for internal reports. However, this system is not entirely compatible
with other reporting systems, such as URS, which they do not use internally to examine
data. Program staff reported that they would like to be able to more readily perform more
sophisticated analyses.
A smaller agency, African Services Committee (ASC), relies on URS. Program staff
reported that URS meets their reporting needs, but does not supply data readily to meets
the internal analytical interests. They are working with staff from Defran, the consultant
that created URS, to have custom fields and reports designed for these purposes.
Barriers to More Effective Data Use and Management
Data managers interviewed in the housing organizations identified ten main barriers to
more effective data use and management.
Reporting expectations do not reflect program activities.
Agencies are aware of their capacity. However, in responding to RFP’s and trying to
meet the expectations funders, agencies feel pressure to report the services they provide
in ways that they perceive to be desirable, even if they do not accurately represent what
they do. When funders design reporting formats with service categories that do not

match those developed at the agency level, resulting reports may not accurately represent
the agencies’ actual levels of service delivery. The lack of data systems are unable to
unduplicate clients with multiple services. The absence of accurate monitoring about
program capacity may lead agencies to overestimate their performance in funding
applications. One person interviewed summarized this barrier by saying, “We may know
how many we can serve, but the city and state want you to inflate that number so that
they can get the money.”
Existing data systems are not flexible.
Staff responsible for data at most agencies had few positive things to say about the
systems that some funders asked them to use. URS is widespread and, the mandated
Title II client management system, and the endorsed system by MHRA for Title I. It is
one of the most complex systems the agencies use. Whether or not it currently works
well as a reporting tool, there is a huge reservoir of frustration among users who are
interested in examining the data they collect internally. One data manager, reflecting
often heard comments said, “URS is a horrible system – it’s not flexible and it doesn’t
give you what you need. The fields are pre-determined.”
Not enough resources are allocated to fulfill reporting needs.
Many contracts require agencies to collect and report data, but, in general, they do not
provide sufficient funds or other support for this function in order to assure high-quality
data. Under most contracts, support for data collection and reporting come out of
administrative overhead, which is limited to 10% in many contracts. Regarding data
entry, one data manager said, “We go into these contacts assuming a deficit because we
have to pay additional administrative costs.”
Inconsistent reporting categories in different data systems.
While many of the data systems capture similar information, many use slightly different
formats. One data manager noted, “You have client level data you have to provide to
funders. One may have a list of ethnicities while the other wants another list of
ethnicities with different codes.” This barrier is heightened because the ability to
manipulate data internally is limited and categories that might be combined for reporting
purposes is usually not considered because internal staff cannot manipulate the data.
Outcome indicators are not relevant to housing programs.
Data managers and management interviewed in housing organizations questioned the

ability to show that housing contributed to better health outcomes or more stable medical
conditions. One manager said, “My concern is you can’t say housing is the lone factor to
some of the outcomes e.g. quality of life. I think ‘Is our housing doing this alone?’ No,
there is more than this one component.”
For most housing projects, it is true that the number of clients would be too small to
demonstrate, at the program level, the clear impact of housing on health-related outcomes

or adherence. If the data was combined at a city-wide level, or if there was an inter-
agency plan to show outcomes, then it might be possible. The HHETA project is
combining data citywide to assess outcomes, but this purpose is not well known by
program staff.
Reporting needs compete with program needs.
Because data collection and data entry are not seen as part of the program activities, and
case managers and line-staff typically do not use the data systems to recall individual
client data or aggregated trends, there is a perception that data needs and program needs
are different. In addition, data collected for evaluation is rarely filtered in a constructive
way to line-staff, so they often perceive it as an unwelcome addition to their schedule.
For example, one data manager noted, “You can’t allow evaluation to co-exist in service
provision. I think it reduces the quality of the service.”
Multiple anxieties and fears about how programs will use data.
Stealing Clients
Given the current funding mechanisms and focus on numbers of clients served, there is a
fear that a central data system where client information is available would be used by
some agencies to “steal” clients from other agency.
Data being used to enforce set numerical or quality criteria for services.
To date data has not been used to enforce numerical quotas on units of services offered or
quality standards. With improved data available, there is some fear that it would be used
in a punitive way to enforce contractual commitments or develop standards for
accountability.
Discovering or revealing redundant service provision
Although multiple data systems are cumbersome and inefficient, since they do not
reference each other, the same service may be provided by multiple programs. With an
ability to uniquely identify clients and services, revenue may be reduced.
Mistrust of the ability of data system to maintain client confidentiality.
Many of the line-staff and their managers do not believe that data systems can maintain
their clients’ confidentiality. Anecdotes abound about systems that have been breached.
However, there is little appreciation of the security measures available and the
vulnerability of files and charts maintained in paper files

RECOMMENDATIONS
There is no question that the current system of data collection and management among
providers of housing and housing-related services could be less fractured, more effective,
and encourage more accurate data reporting. Currently, data collection and reporting are
largely seen as requirements imposed by funders and, secondarily, as a management tool.
This attitude is reinforced by the cumulatively large data collection demands placed on
agencies with little thought or training as to how the data might be used to help agencies
plan more effectively and better meet the needs of their clients. In many instances,
limited expertise in data manipulation and analysis exacerbate barriers experienced by
agency staff. For example, data formats that differ (e.g. age in years vs. date of birth)
may be recoded into several different categories to meet multiple funder needs. However
this requires a level of analytic expertise that is not available in many agencies.
Funders could effect some change in this inefficient system. So far, however, there is
little evidence that they are coordinating their reporting requirements or standardizing
their data collection instruments. Programs, in general, are left largely to fend for
themselves in developing data collection procedures that minimize error and cost. In
some instances, funders have spent considerable time and resources developing systems
and forms and mandating programs for reporting. Yet, they dedicate relatively little time
and few resources to their implementation and to the necessary quality checks to assure
the accuracy of data. Program staff, in general, does not see the utility of much of the
data recorded. In many agencies many more data fields are collected than used in
analysis increasing the perceived, if not actual, magnitude of data collection efforts,
without a corresponding benefit in monitoring or understanding the clients’ needs and
barriers.
Redundancy and lack of coordination in data collection does not come without a cost.
First, there is the burden it places on clients, and the barriers that it causes for clients who
are discouraged by what they perceive as red tape and insensitive providers. Second,
there are costs to the agencies in terms of processing forms, entering data, reporting data,
and receiving training on the use of data collection systems.
Based on the interviews and secondary data collection, PCH recommends:
Technical Assistance (TA) on the Use of Data, Data Entry and Quality Control,
Data Analysis, and the Use of Data for Internal Needs.
Group and agency specific TA is likely to improve agency appreciation and use of the
data. TA providers must be trained in data management and analysis and understand
agencies’ reporting requirements. The TA should be less “process” oriented and more
“skill-based” and educational. That is, the TA should provide details on how data is
collected, processed, and used rather than address the process of whether or not data
should be used or the process of determining question wording and categories.

The outcome of the TA should be more efficient data collection, higher quality data, and
improved ability to use data for internal management needs. Agencies would benefit if
there was a better understanding of the different options for data collection and data entry
(on-line, paper forms, etc.), collection of data on-line or through systematic interviews
with clients, populating the same data fields in different systems, data cleaning, and the
types of data analysis that can be done internally to help plan and monitor services. The
more that data collection efforts are seen as functional for agencies, the greater the
likelihood of cooperation.
Minimize Duplicate Entry for Data Entry Elements
To minimize duplicate entry, providers first have to agree to share data, and second
funders must decide on reporting formats that are consistent across multiple forms.
For reasons listed above, achieving agreement to sharing data across different providers
may be challenging. Still, with continued emphasis on referrals and letters of agreement
(LOA’s) between agencies, data sharing should be part of those referral agreements.
For funders, establishing standardized reporting formats or designing systems that allow
data to be recoded into different formats should be top priority. If the barrier is an
interest in collecting trend data then an analyst could design a standard that exports or
translates data into existing categories of different databases while allowing the questions
to be more general. For example, age could be determined by date of birth rather than
asking a series of age categories. Once coded as a continuous variable, it could then be
recoded into the different age categories demanded in the different required reports. Race
could be asked in several different ways, as long as it is collapsible into uniformly agreed
upon categories. For open-ended questions, there is usually enough experience to design
close-ended questions with frequently used categories.
Create a System-wide client Unique Identifier
Key to reducing duplication of data is having a system-wide unique client identification

number. This would require an agreed upon standard, but it is an important part of any
system wide effort to reduce redundancy. Given the adoption of proper practices and
encryption, there is no reason to fear that a database would compromise the
confidentiality of clients.
One solution would be to have funders and grantees agree upon a uniform intake form
and create a modular set of forms or data entry screens that are capable of capturing
common elements, but have the flexibility to capture in-depth information about different
service categories.
With agreed upon formats, the actual system used to collect data could be scaled to the
needs of the user. In general, it would be useful for funders to limit their database design
and distribution ambitions. Once the data elements are specified, the providers should be
funded to purchase or design the database that best fits their needs. TA would be useful

in helping them select the appropriate system. This would limit the database
development costs and help desk and maintenance functions necessary to correctly
implement and update programs. An added benefit of this option is that agencies with
their own systems already in place, like IMA or URS, would not have to adopt a new,
parallel system. However, as mentioned previously, they may require funding to have
their existing systems adapted to meet the agreed upon reporting requirements.
Funders may also wish to specify available databases that meet their standards and
establish group buying discounts. As web-based databases and support becomes more
secure and accessible, they offer an attractive solution to centralized databases that have
real time distribution among different providers. Further, it saves on the need to support
different systems and hardware at each provider location.
Based on PCH’s experience we would not recommend mandating a system based on one
particular case management model. Providers may not be willing to adopt that particular
case management model, or have the expertise or resources to operate and maintain the
system. Any mandated system has to have proper preparation and training. For smaller
providers, the learning curve and maintenance costs may present a high barrier to
adoption.
Realistic Cost Allocation By Funders Related to Data Entry and Analysis
In requests for proposals and related TA, it would be useful for funders to specify a
percentage of the total amount or provide an equation that can be applied to calculate the
cost of data collection, data entry, quality assurance, and analysis. These costs might be
allowed as a line item and removed from the general overhead category. That would
serve to increase awareness, and reward agencies that correctly plan for data collection
and analysis.
Assurances of Client Confidentiality
Data systems should be designed with adequate encryption to assure client

confidentiality. The most appropriate systems would use unique client identifiers and
have the actual names, addresses, and numbers in a related highly secured file with highly
restricted access. In that way, anyone who might penetrate the system would not be able
to link clinical or personal data with a name.
Even without that “gold standard,” procedures can be designed to encrypt and limit
access to names. Many database programs are password protected, but the underlying
tables can be accessed without passwords, and that leaves names open to anyone with
slightly advanced database skills. It is necessary to password-protect specific files as
well as programs, and that technology is available in most operating systems.
Once the standards are adopted and implemented, it is necessary to show PLWH/A in the
system as well as line providers that the system is secure. Without that assurance,
cooperation will be limited.

Relevant Outcomes
For the evaluation of housing and housing-related services, two types of processes should
be considered. First, agencies should be able to assess their own services with a limited
set of process and outcome measures that are directly attributable to services. For
example, number of persons placed in transitional or permanent housing, increased
knowledge of housing services, improved access to support services, or increased ability
to live independently.
Second, funders might consider a series of system-wide assessments clustered around

service categories for outcomes that require greater sample sizes and more challenging
design and analysis. For example, physical or mental health outcomes such as morbidity
and mortality, adherence to drug regimens, or improved quality of life might require
several providers participating in a study where data is collected using a uniform
protocol. The design of these types of studies should take into consideration
recommendations to minimize redundant data collection and to provide agencies with
necessary resources to accomplish this.
Link System Development to Billing or Provide Financial Incentives for Reporting

Data Accurately and in a Timely Fashion
Linking client databases to billing offer a strong incentive for providers to adopt and
maintain client databases. This is done with COBRA case management, and while there
are complaints about the system, compliance is not a major hurdle. Alternatively,
incentives for entering data accurately and in a timely manner may be built into contracts,
rewarding agencies for performance in this area above the amount of their contracts.
CONCLUSION
Overall, we find that providers of housing and housing-related services are attempting to
manage competing demands for data, reporting, and evaluation in an environment where
there are considerable resources allocated to software development for the grantee, but
few resources allocated to providers to fulfill data requirements or train providers on
inputting, processing, and analyzing data.
From a systems’ viewpoint, the emphasis on different systems and databases has, so far,
failed to achieve a non-redundant system-wide data management system which promotes
improved client access to services without increasing the data reporting burden of clients
and providers.
We suggest that there be a greater emphasis on uniform data standards and providing TA
to providers to facilitate the understanding of how data enters, is processed, and is output
from the system. If funders had less vested in a particular system and cooperated more
on establishing uniform data elements, along with providing TA that would show

providers now to use the data for their own planning, the overall system would be more
useful for providers and provide more reliable and valid data for aggregate analysis.

I.
Attachment 1 Housing Program Descriptions
HOUSING PLACEMENT ASSISTANCE
The primary goals of this program category are locating and securing permanent housing and housing-
related support for homeless or inadequately housed individuals, including rental assistance entitlements
and utility subsidies. Other goals include referrals for other needed services including, but not limited to,
case management, medical, mental health, substance abuse treatment services; housing-related
workshops; community outreach and educational activities regarding the availability of HAP services.
Kim Nichols Victor Seltzer

Development Program Manager - Brooklyn and Manhattan Programs
African Services Committee, Inc. Praxis Housing Initiatives, Inc.
429 W. 127th St., 2nd Flr. 470 Bergen St.
NY, NY 10027 Bklyn NY 11217
P-212-222-3882 x119 P-718-623-9810
F-212-222-7067 F-718-378-1964
Rosemary Lopez Sue Sabarra
Director HIV Director of Supportive Housing
AIDS Center of Queens County, Inc. Project Hospitality, Inc.
88-10 178th St., #1D 150B Richmond Terr.
Jamaica, NY 11432 Staten Island, NY 10302
P-718-262-8929/8750 P-718-448-1544 x 120
F-718-262-8760 F-718-448-0421
Martine Barbier Leona Williams
Client Services Coordinator
Haitian Women's Program, Inc. Research Foundation of CUNY on Behalf of Bronx
464-466 Bergen St. Community College Health Force
Bklyn, NY 11217 552 Southern Blvd.
P-718-399-0200 Bronx, NY 10455
F-718-399-0360 P-718-585-8585 x 235
Dicxon Valderruten F-718-585-5041
Director, Living Well
Osborne Association
809 Westchester Ave.
Bronx, NY 10455
P-718-842-0500
F-718-378-1964
INDEPENDENT LIVING SKILLS
Primary goals for this program category are to provide independent living skills training through workshops
and/or support groups to clients who are in the process of obtaining permanent housing or who have been in
permanent housing for less than one (1) year. Additional goals include follow-up home visits to assess the
client's ability to implement what has been taught in the workshops, and to offer assistance as individual
need indicates.
Rosemary Lopez Stanley Richards

Director HIV Senior Director
AIDS Center of Queens County, Inc. Fortune Society, Inc.
88-10 178th St., #1D 53 W. 23 St., 8th Flr.
Jamaica, NY 11432 NY, NY 10010
P-718-262-8929/8750 P-212-691-7554 x575
F-718-262-8760 F-212-255-4948
Maria Romero Dicxon Valderruten
Assistant Deputy Director - ILS Director, Living Well
Church Avenue Merchants Block Association, Inc. Osborne Association. Inc.
(CAMBA) 809 Westchester Ave.
19 Winthrop Street Bronx, NY 10455
Bklyn NY 11213 P-718-842-0500
P-718-462-8654 x 332 F-718-378-1964
F-718-703-8635 Lori Howe
F-718-876-7761
I-1 housing data report.doc

OUTREACH - SRO HARM REDUCTION
Primary goals of this program category are to provide SROs with low-threshold harm reduction interventions
including the provision of harm reduction and personal hygiene supplies and HIV/AIDS literature, and to
perform harm reduction outreach. Additional goals include the provision of on-site medical assessments and
case management services and referrals for mental health, substance abuse, medical and housing services
as needed.
Fulvia Alvelo Bronx, NY 10451

Assistant Director/Prevention Services P-718-292-7718
AIDS Service Center, Inc. F-718-292-0500
80 5th Ave., 3rd Flr. Allen Feldman
NY NY 10011 Principal Investigator
P-212-645-0875 Services for the Underserved, Inc. STOREFRONT
F-212-645-8712 263 East Tremont Ave.
L. Synn Stern Bronx, NY 10457
Director/Programs P-718-299-5943
CitiWide Harm Reduction, Inc.
260 E. 143 St.
F-718-299-5229
OUTREACH - STREET YOUTH
Primary goals of this program category are to provide outreach, HIV/AIDS prevention and intervention
services and harm reduction and personal hygiene supplies to homeless adolescents and street youth (ages
13 - 24 years).Other goals include the provision of on-site medical, case management and mental health
services, and substance abuse counseling; referrals for similar services; housing placements and
educational workshops.
Angela Amel Susan Baydur

Program Director Director of Homeless Youth Services
Safe Horizon, Inc. Safe Space NYC, Inc.
545 8th Ave. 133 W. 46TH St.
NY, NY 10001 NY, NY 10036
P-212-563-9638 P-212-354-7233 x231
F-212-695-2317 F-212-213-4594/4710
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
Primary goals for this program category are to identify and secure or provide appropriate permanent housing
for individuals with HIV/AIDS. Additional goals include providing case management and supportive services
to enable clients to maximize entitlements, be referred to needed medical, mental health, legal and other
services, and the provision of nutritious meals. Independent living and life skills workshops and support
groups may also be offered.
Difficult to Serve Women with Children

Francisco Quinteros Delores Moon
Executive Director Deputy Dir./Programs
Casa Betsaida, Inc. Harlem United Community AIDS Center, Inc.
267 Hewes St. 123-125 W. 124th St.
Brooklyn, NY 11211 NY, NY 10027
P-718-218-7890 P-212-803-2850
F-718-218-8264 F-212-803-2899
Women with Mental Illness Seniors
Michael Erhard Carlos Bristol
CAMBA Program Director
19 Winthrop Street Services for the Underserved, Inc.
Bklyn NY 11213 50 Court St.
P-718-462-8654 x 306 Bklyn NY 11201
F-718-703-7210 P-718-403-9846
F-718-643-685
I-2 housing data report.doc

3 housing data report.doc
II.
Attachment 2 Annual Performance Report (APR)
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Office of Community Planning and Development
OMB Approval No. 2506-0133 (exp.11/30/2003)
Annual Progress Report (APR)

for Housing Opportunities for Persons
With AIDS (HOPWA)
previous editions are obsolete II-1 form HUD-40110-C (11/97)

Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA)
Annual Progress Report
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 65 hours per response,
including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. This agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless that collection displays a
valid OMB control number.
This information is collected under the authority of the AIDS Housing Opportunity Act (AHOA), as amended,
42 U.S.C. 12901, which authorizes HUD to provide States and localities with the resources and incentives to
devise long-term comprehensive strategies for meeting the housing needs of persons living with acquired
immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) or HIV infection and their families. The statute includes the following
items that necessitate the collection of this information: (1) the AHOA authorizes the Department to conduct a
national competition for the award of funds for ten percent of the annual appropriation for the Housing
Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) program; and (2) the AHOA requires that recipients of
assistance report on the use of amounts received, including the number of individuals assisted, the types of
assistance provided and other information determined to be appropriate by the Secretary. This notice applies to
grants selected under the national competitions. HUD selects the highest rated applicants for special projects of
national significance and applicants for projects that are part of long-term comprehensive strategies for
providing housing and related services in areas that do not qualify for formula allocations. Annual Progress
Reports provide HUD with essential information on project activities in reporting to Congress and the public on
the use of program funds. In addition, the reports assist HUD Offices in monitoring the use of Federal funds,
and ensuring statutory and regulatory compliance. Information is collected on an annual basis in the application
to make selections and in the annual progress report to report on program activities based on statutory
requirements at 42 U.S.C. 12903(b)(3) and 12911. Less frequent submission of information on program
accomplishments, which is contained in the Annual Progress Report, could compromise the legal, efficient and
effective implementation of the program. The information to be submitted by applicants and recipients is
considered public information, except to the extent that applications contain personal or proprietary information
or are in use for the competition during a covered use period under the HUD Reform Act.
General Instructions computer database to store and tabulate the

information. Names and other individual
Purpose. The Annual Progress Report (APR) tracks information must be kept confidential, as required
the accomplishments of the Housing Opportunities by 24 CFR 574.440. However, HUD reserves the
for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) Program. This right to review the information used to complete
report will provide the grantee and HUD with this report, except for names and other identifying
important information necessary to assess the information. Information is reported in aggregate
grantee's program. to HUD. Do not submit the worksheet to HUD.
Applicability. Grantees must complete this report Operating Year. Grantees have flexibility in
for each program year in which HOPWA grant setting the dates of operating years. A grantee of a
funds were expended. Each competitive grant competitively-awarded grant may set the operating
should be reported in a separate APR. start date for its program on a date up to four
months following the date of the signing of the
Recordkeeping. An optional worksheet is included grant agreement and any change requires the
to assist grantees and project sponsors in recording approval of HUD by amendment.
the information necessary for completing this Organization of the Report. The information
report. The worksheet may be used to record included in this report is organized in the following
program information manually or to design a manner:

Part 1 Summary. This section provides an
overview of the activities carried out. Grantees also
describe any barriers encountered and their actions
in response and recommendations for program
improvements.
Part 2 Demographics. This part provides

information on the characteristics of persons
assisted by the program.
Part 3 Program Expenditures and Housing

Provided. This part provides information on the
financial status of the program including summary
expenditure information and information on
housing assistance and supportive services by each
site and project sponsor.
Final Assembly of Report. After the entire report

is assembled, please number every page
sequentially.
Filing Requirements. The information in this

package must be submitted to: (1) the CPID
Division Director in the HUD Field Office 90 days
after the end of each program year. Failure to
submit an Annual Progress Report may lead to a
delay in receiving future grant funds; and (2) an
additional copy should be sent to:
HOPWA Program, Office of HIV/AIDS Housing

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development
Off ice of Community Planning and Development
451 Seventh Street, SW Washington, D.C. 20410

Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)
Annual Progress Report
Grant Number(s) Program Year for this report

From (mm/dd/yy)
To (mm/dd/yy)
Grantee Name
Name of EMSA (if applicable)
I hereby certify that all the information stated herein, as well as any information provided in the accompaniment
herewith, is true and accurate. Warning: HUD will prosecute false claims and statements. Conviction may
result in criminal and/or civil penalties. (18 U.S.C. 1001, 1010, 1012, 31U.S.C.3729,3802)
Name & Title of Authorized Official Signature & Date (mm/dd/yy)
Name & Title of the Person who can answer questions about Phone (include area code)
this report
Address
Part 1 Summary.
Exhibit A - Overview of Accomplishments.
Please briefly describe the principal activities carried out during the program year on a page(s) attached to this
report. List your specific objectives and briefly describe your success in meeting these objectives. Technical
Assistance / Resource Development activities should be described in this section. Including information on how
recipients of assistance were chosen and on what services were provided.
Exhibit B - Program Improvements.

Describe on a page(s) attached to this report:
(1) Barriers. Any barriers or difficulties that were encountered in implementing the program, including
residents’ concerns, and actions that were taken to address those issues: and
(2) Recommendations. Any recommendations that you may have for program improvements, including
procedural, regulatory, or other changes, and how such improvements would assist eligible persons.

Part 2 Demographics.
Exhibit C - Numbers of Persons and Families Assisted During the Program Year with HOPWA Funds.
1. Persons Assisted With Housing Assistance. In the table below, enter the number of persons who received
housing assistance funded by HOPWA during the program year. Do not report on persons only receiving
supportive services or persons only receiving housing information services. If a person's HIV status is unknown,
count that person in (b).
a. Number of persons (adults and children) with HIV/AIDS who received housing assistance
b. Number of other persons in family units who received housing assistance
c. Total of persons who received housing assistance (a. plus b.)*

* Note that this number will be the basic participation number used for reporting other program information
throughout the report, including the characteristics of persons assisted (Exhibit D).
2. Families Assisted With Housing Assistance. Of the total of persons assisted with housing assistance (1-c,
above), how many family units were assisted (do not include single person households).
(Definition of Family: "Family" means a household composed of two or more related persons. The term
"family" also includes one or more eligible persons living with another person or persons who are determined to
be important to their care or well being, and the surviving member or members of any family described in this
definition who were living in a unit assisted under the HOPWA program with the person with AIDS at the time
of his/her death. [Section 574.3])
Total of family units assisted with housing assistance:
3. Persons Assisted With Supportive Services Only. In the table below, enter the number of persons who
received only supportive services funded by HOPWA during the program year. Do not include persons who
received supportive services in conjunction with housing assistance (1-c. above).
a. Number of persons (adults and children) with HIV/AIDS who received supportive services
only
b. Number of other persons in family units who received supportive services only
c. Total of persons who received supportive services only (a. plus b.)

4. Persons Receiving Housing Information Services. Enter the estimated number of persons who received
housing information services funded by HOPWA during the program year. This number may include persons
also reported above (1, 2, and 3).
Estimated total of persons receiving housing information services:
Exhibit D - Characteristics of Persons Receiving Housing Assistance During the Program Year.
Throughout this exhibit answer all questions regarding persons receiving HOPWA supported housing assistance
during the year (i.e. persons reported in Exhibit C 1). Do not include information on persons only provided with
supportive services or housing information
. c. Race. How many participants are in the following
racial categories?
1. Demographics.
a. Age and gender. Of those who received housing a. Asian/Pacific Islander

assistance during the operating year, how many are in
the following age and gender categories? b. Black
Persons male female c. Native American or Alaskan

Native
a. 17 years and
under d. White
b. 18 to 30 years
c. 31 to 50 years
d. 51 years and
over d. Recent living situation. How many participants
were in the following living situations immediately
prior to entering the program? Include participants in
the one category that best describes the participant's
b. Hispanic/non-Hispanic. How many participants most recent living situation.
are in the following ethnic categories?
a. Homeless from the streets

a. Hispanic
b. Homeless from emergency
b. Non- shelters
Hispanic
c. Transitional housing

d. Psychiatric facility*
j. Rental housing
e. Substance abuse treatment
facility* k. Participant-owned housing
f. Hospital or other medical facility* 1. Other (please specify)
g. Jail/prison *
* If a participant or family head(s) of household came from one
h. Domestic violence situation of these facilities but were there less than 30 days and were living
on the street or in emergency shelter before entering the treatment
facility, they should be counted in either the street or shelter
i. Living with relatives/friends category, as appropriate.
2. Incomes. For those receiving housing assistance, enter the number of individuals and family units falling
under these income categories at the time of their entry into the program. (The total for this element may differ
from the total in Exhibit C 1.)
Gross Monthly Incomes at Entry in Program

$0-250 $251-500 $501-1000 $1001-1500 $1501- $2001+
2000
Number of individuals
and family units

3. Reasons for leaving. Of those who left a program that provided housing assistance during the operating year
and are not expected to return (do not include, for example, participants who temporarily left their housing for
a brief period of hospitalization), complete the chart below based on how long they were in the program before
leaving and the primary reason for their leaving the program. If a participant left for multiple reasons. Include
only the primary reason for their departure.
Reason for Leaving Number of Months in Program
less than 3 3 to 6 7 to 12 more than

12
a. Voluntary departure
b. Non-payment of rent
c. Non-compliance with supportive service

requirements
d. Unknown/Disappeared
e. Criminal activity / destruction of property /

violence
f. Death
g. Other (please specify)

Part 3 Program Expenditures and Housing Provided.
Expenditures are amounts spent for eligible activities. Do not include non-HOPWA sources or in-kind items,
such as the value of services or materials provided by volunteers or by other individuals or organizations.
Exhibit E - Summary of Program Expenditures.
This exhibit will provide information about available HOPWA funds and HOPWA expenditures for the
program during the reporting period.
Include only expenditures made from a single competitively-awarded HOPWA grant. Please round dollar
amounts to the nearest dollar.
HOPWA Funding Available
1. Unexpended HOPWA funds at end of previous report period (this balance is 0 in the
first year of program)
2. Amount of HOPWA grant received during period
3. Program income (e.g., loan repayments)
4. Total of HOPWA funds available during period (sum of lines 1 thru 3)
Also report the following aggregate totals by type of activity for the report period (totals equal all expenditures
of HOPWA funds during this period):
HOPWA Expenditures (Totals by Eligible Activity)
5. Expenditures for Housing Information Services
6. Expenditures for Resource Identification

7. Expenditures for Housing Assistance
(equals the sum of all sites and scattered-site Housing Assistance reported in Exhibit
G.)
8. Expenditures for Supportive Services (equals the sum of all Exhibit H funds used)
9. Grantee Administrative Costs expended
10. Project Sponsor(s) Administrative Costs expended
11. Total of HOPWA funds expended during period (sum of lines 5 thru 10)
12. Balance of HOPWA funds at end of report period (line 4 minus line 11)

Exhibit F - Units of Housing Assistance.
For housing assistance provided in facilities, including project-based rental assistance, complete Item 1. For
housing assistance payments, either tenant-based rental assistance or short-term payments, complete Item 2.
1. Units by type of housing facility. Report the number of units that were used during the program year by
number of bedrooms. Enter the number of units of project-based rental assistance under the appropriate type of
facility.
Type of housing facility Units by number of Bedrooms

SRO 0 bdrm 1 2 3 4 5+ bdrms
bdrm bdrms bdrms bdrms
a. Short-term facility
b. Single room occupancy dwelling
c. Community residence
d. Other housing facility (specify):
2. Units by type of housing assistance payment. Report the number of units that were used during the
program year by number of bedrooms. Count each unit assisted as one entry regardless of the number of
monthly payments made for that unit.
Type of housing assistance payment Units by Number of Bedroom size

SRO 0 bdrm 1 bdrm 2 bdrms 3 4 5+
bdrms bdrms bdrms
a. Tenant-based rental assistance

b. Short-term rent, mortgage and
utility payments
(Note: This page summarizes information provided on each site or activity location in Exhibit G.)

Exhibit G - Housing Assistance Expenditures.
1. Facility Based Housing Assistance. For each site, provide information on development actions and actual
HOPWA expenditures for a facility during the report period. Such facilities include community residences,
SRO dwellings, short-term facilities, and other housing facilities approved by HUD, and non-housing based
facilities. A site may include more than one structure or type of facility. All expenditures for acquisition,
rehabilitation/conversion, lease, repairs, new construction, operating costs and technical assistance for a facility
should be reported in this exhibit. (Please do not include funding for related supportive services; these services
are reported in Exhibit H. Except for administrative costs for community residences supported by a 1992 grant,
all grantee and project sponsor administrative expenses are reported in Exhibit E. Housing information services
and resource identification are also reported in Exhibit E.)
1-a Site Information.

Name of project Name and Address of project sponsor
Address/location of site
1-b Site development actions. For each site, provide the following dates or other information. (Do not submit
if a previous annual progress report indicated that all activities at this site were completed and that services had
been initiated.)
a. Date of closing on purchase of building or execution e. Date new construction was completed
of lease
b. Date rehabilitation started f. Date operations staff was hired
c. Date rehabilitation was completed g. Date residents began to occupy
d. Date new construction started h. Date supportive services began
1-c Units by type of housing facility.
Indicate the type of housing that was provided (i.e., enter one of the following: Short-term facility, SRO
dwelling, Community residence, or specify another type of housing facility).
Type of housing facility Units by number of Bedrooms

SRO 0 bdrm 1 2bdrms 3 drms 4 bdrms 5+bdrm
bdrm s

a. Short-term facility
b. Single room occupancy dwelling
c. Community residence
d. Other housing facility (specify):

1-d Expenditures by facility site. Enter the amount of HOPWA funds expended during the operating year for
the activities listed below.
Type of activity HOPWA Funds
a. Acquisition
b. Rehabilitation/conversion/repair
c. Lease
d. New construction (community residences/SRO dwellings only)
e. Operating costs
f. Technical assistance (community residences only)
g. Project-based rental assistance
h. Other (specify)
i. HOPWA Total for this site

2. Scattered-Site Housing Assistance. For housing assistance provided through tenant-based rental assistance
and short-term rent, mortgage, and utility payments, submit this form for each project carrying out scattered-site
housing assistance.
1-a Name and address of project sponsor
2-b General location(s) of activity
2-c Implementation actions. For the project, provide the following dates. (Do not submit if a previous annual
progress report indicated that housing assistance and services had been initiated.)
a. Date residents began to use payments (mm/dd/yy)
b. Date supportive services began (mm/dd/yy)
2-d Units by type of housing assistance payments. Report the number of units that were used during the
program year by number of bedrooms. Count each unit assisted as one entry regardless of the number of
monthly payments made for that unit.
Type of housing assistance payment Units by Number of Bedrooms

SRO 0 1 2 3 4 5+ bdrms
bdrm bdrm bdrms bdrms bdrms
b. Short-term rent, mortgage and utility

payments
2-e Expenditures by type of housing assistance payment. Enter the amount of HOPWA funds expended
during the operating
year for the activities listed below.
Type of housing assistance payment HOPWA Funds
b. Short-term rent, mortgage and utility payments

Exhibit H- Supportive Service Expenditures.
Submit this form for each project carrying out supportive services activities.*
Name and Address of project sponsor
General location(s) of activity
Date services began:
Enter amount for supportive services(s) which apply Amount
1. Outreach
2. Case management/client advocacy/access to benefits/services
3. Life management (outside of case management)
4. Nutritional services/meals
5. Adult day care and personal assistance
6. Child care and other children services
7. Education
8. Employment assistance
9. Alcohol and drug abuse services
10. Mental health services

.
11. Health/medical/intensive care services
12. Permanent housing placement
13. Other (specify)
14. HOPWA total for this sponsor

*For each project sponsor or for the grant in total, report on the amounts expended by type of activity. In cases
where multiple activities are carried out by the sponsor and records do not reflect actual expenditures by
individual services, provide the total amount expended by the sponsor during the reporting period and an
estimate of the amounts by type of activity or, aggregate the amount reported under the primary type of service
provided by the sponsor.

HUD HOPWA Annual Progress Report Worksheet
This worksheet is optional and is intended to help you collect project information needed to complete Part II of the HOPWA Annual Progress
Report. It should not be submitted to HUD. However, HUD reserves the right to request or review the information used to complete the
report, except for names and identifying information. See Worksheet Instructions for directions on using this worksheet. Please keep a file of'
“other information” (item 14 below) to specify on the annual report. Names and personal data on participants must be kept confidential; a
unique identifying code could be used to track participants. For families, list the head of household first and aggregate family information
following that entry. Other family members can be sequentially listed to provide space for demographic information. As described in this
instructions for the worksheet, codes are used for entries in items 9 to 12.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13 14.

Participant’s Name or Date Number of Number of Race Hispanic/ Age (at Gross Recent Date Reason for Housing Housing Other Information
Unique ID Code (if any) entering adults(18+) children (A, B, non - entry) monthly living leaving Departure facility type assistance
program residing with residing with NA,W) Hispanic and /sex income situation program and unit size payment and
participant participant (H or N) by number of unit size by
bedrooms number of
bedrooms
Codes: Enter appropriate number(s) in the column above. (See back of page for codes.) form HUD-401 10-C (8/1)
previous editions are obsolete 17 form HUD-40110-C (11/97)

HOPWA Annual Progress Report Worksheet
Information is reported in aggregate to HUD. Do not submit this worksheet to HUD.
This worksheet is optional and is intended to help you collect project information needed
to complete the HOPWA Annual Progress Report. Please keep a list of “other" answers
to specify on the annual report.
1. Enter the participant's full name or a unique identification code (if any). The use of
names and other personal identification must be kept confidential. Information on the
family unit should be captured with the first participant listed. The additional members of
the family unit should be separately listed for items 5, 6, an d 7.
2. Enter date participant entered the HOPWA program. Usually, this will be the date of
consultation with a case manager.
3. Enter the number of additional adult (18 years and older) family members residing
with the participant, who are also receiving housing assistance. Enter "0" if the
participant resides alone. Other eligible beneficiaries residing in shared housing should be
separately reported.
4. Enter the number of additional children (under 18 years) who are family members
residing with the participant, receiving housing assistance. Enter "0" if the participant
resides alone.
5. For each participant, enter race (A = Asian/Pacific Islander,

B = Black, NA = Native American/Alaskan Native, or W
White).
6. For each participant, enter Hispanic or non-Hispanic (H = Hispanic or N =

non-Hispanic)
7. For each participant, enter age at entry into program and sex (M = Male or F = Female)
and age; ages will be reported as under 18 years, 18 through 30 years, 31 through 50
years, and 51 years and older.
8. Enter the amount of gross monthly income that the participant or the family unit
receives on the average at entry into the program; incomes will be reported as $O to 250,
$251 to 500, $501 to 1000, $1001to 1500, $1501 to 2000, or $2001 + per month.
9. Enter the participant's most recent living situation prior to program entry.
a. Homeless from the streets
b. Homeless from shelters
c. Transitional housing facilities
d. Psychiatric facilities *
e. Substance abuse treatment facility*
II-1 Housing Data Report.doc

f. Hospitals or other medical facilities*
g. Jail or prison *
h. Domestic violence situation
i. Living with relative or friend
j. Rental housing
k. Participant-owned housing
1. Other; specify type
* If a person (from Exhibit C) came from a treatment facility but they were there less
than 30 days and were in another living situation before they entered the treatment
facility, they should be counted as though they were still in the prior living situation.
10. Enter date participant or family ended program participation.
11. When the participant or family left the HOPWA assisted program, what was the
primary reason for the departure and how long were they in the program. Enter the code
and number of months in the program, less than 3, 3 to 6, 7 to 12, greater than 12 months,
which indicates:
a. Voluntary departure
b. Non-payment of rent
c. Non-compliance with supportive service requirements
d. Unknown/disappeared
e. Criminal activity/destruction of property/violence
f. Death
g. Other (please specify)
12. Enter the type of housing facility and unit size by number of bedrooms used. Count
each family unit as a single entry. Enter the code which indicates type and number of
bedrooms as SRO, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5+.
a. Short-term facility.
b. Single room occupancy (SRO) dwelling.
c. Community residence.
d. Other housing facility (please specify).
13. Enter the type of housing assistance payment and unit size by number of bedrooms
used. Enter the code which indicates type and unit size by number of bedrooms as SRO,
0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5+.
a. Tenant-based rental assistance.

b. Short-term rent, mortgage and utility payments.
14. Enter other information as necessary.
Do not submit this worksheet to HUD.
II-2 Housing Data Report.doc

III.
Attachment 3 Description of “Factors” Data Management Module
The FACTORS Residential Facilities Module™
The FACTORS Residential Facilities Module, first released in conjunction with version
3.1 of FACTORS/SA™, PMA’s enterprise case management solution, is a one-stop
workbench for coordinating all aspects of residential housing services. The module
provides a suite of powerful functions:
♦ Detailed tracking of housing facilities and units within them, including information
on lease terms, costs, accessibility, and eligibility restrictions
♦ Capacity management
♦ Housing referral tracking
♦ Census management
♦ Family and individual placement
♦ Blocking of units barred from placement because of inspection failure, crime
incidents, permitting problems, etc.
♦ Logging of rent payments and defaults; rent history tracking for each individual unit
♦ Linkage of placements to contracts
♦ Automatic reconciliation of current address information and living arrangement
history
♦ Full integration of housing referrals and census events with the overall case
management record (i.e., housing placements can be viewed side by side with other
types of referrals)
♦ Integrated production of agency-definable forms (referrals, reports, etc.) pre-
populated with client data; powerful support for embedded form scripting using the
industry-standard JavaScript and VBScript languages
♦ Standard reports
III-1 Housing Data Report.doc

Assessing Data Collection Systems Used by Providers of Housing Services to People Living With HIV and AIDS

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessing Data Collection Systems Used by Providers of Housing Services to People Living With HIV and AIDS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

`

ASSESSING DATA COLLECTION SYSTEMS USED

Bailey House, Inc.

© PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Figure 1 Client and Data Flow at a Typical Multi-service Agency ................................................................ 9

Table 1 Agencies Interviewed ........................................................................................................................ 3

Attachment 1 Housing Program Descriptions ..............................................................................................I-1

i © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

2 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Table 1 Agencies Interviewed

Data was analyzed to:

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Principles of Housing Data Collection Systems

3 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Process and Outcomes Indicators

The key outcome measure include:

4 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Reporting Requirements for HOPWA-funded Housing and Housing-Related Services

Recipients of funding from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s

HUD provides a database system, Integrated Disbursement Information System (IDIS)

5 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Reporting Requirements for other Sources of Funding

To develop recommendations that both facilitate the reduction or elimination of

6 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Data Input and Data Quality

7 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Figure 2 shows the continuum of housing and housing-related services funded by

8 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

TESTING/OUTREACH REFERRAL TO AGENCY

HOUSING CASE MANAGEMENT FOOD MEDICAL

Intake Intake Intake Intake

Assessment Assessment Assessment

Referral Referral Referral

Service Plan Service Plan Service Plan

Monitoring Outcome Monitoring Outcome Monitoring Outcome

Re-assessment Re -assessment Re-assessment

9 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

HOUSING PLACEMENT ASST SUPPORTIVE HOUSING INDEPENDENT LIVING SKILLS VOCATIONAL

INTAKE INTAKE TRAINING / WORKSHOP INTAKE

ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT MONITORING OUTCOME ASSESSMENT

SERVICE PLAN SERVICE PLAN Re-assessment SERVICE PLAN

MONITORING OUTCOME MONITORING OUTCOME MONITORING OUTCOME

Re-assessment Re-assessment Re-assessment

10 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Barriers to More Effective Data Use and Management

Reporting expectations do not reflect program activities.

11 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Existing data systems are not flexible.

Not enough resources are allocated to fulfill reporting needs.

Inconsistent reporting categories in different data systems.

Outcome indicators are not relevant to housing programs.

Data managers and management interviewed in housing organizations questioned the

12 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Reporting needs compete with program needs.

Discovering or revealing redundant service provision

Mistrust of the ability of data system to maintain client confidentiality.

13 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Based on the interviews and secondary data collection, PCH recommends:

14 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Minimize Duplicate Entry for Data Entry Elements

Create a System-wide client Unique Identifier

Key to reducing duplication of data is having a system-wide unique client identification

15 © PCH April 2003 housing data report.doc

Realistic Cost Allocation By Funders Related to Data Entry and Analysis