Trends in Community Needs
Illustrated by Demand for CSP Services
Update: FY 2016 (Q3)
4/2016
Coordinated Services Planning (CSP)
CSP provides callers direct access to a specialist who will
listen to the expressed need, assess the situation,
explore possible short and long term solutions, and
coordinate resources within the community.
CSP Data
3
•
As a “front door” to Fairfax
County’s human services system,
CSP is well positioned to capture
trend information about needs of
vulnerable households and the
system’s overall capacity to meet
those needs.
•
Examples of data collected:
Client Service Interactions
Contacts
Client Service Interactions
• Client service interactions represent incoming calls to the CSP line as well
as outbound calls made by workers to coordinate with clients, community-based organizations, landlords, utility companies, etc.
• In early FY 2011, CSP implemented new automated call distribution (ACD)
technology that allows greater flexibility in routing calls, including allowing clients already working with a CSP to reach their worker more quickly for follow-up. Prior to this system, CSP could not accurately collect
information on outbound case coordination calls. FY 2011 - 181,510
FY 2012 - 166,991
FY 2013 - 161,476
FY 2014 - 182,383 (includes 8,723 email interactions) FY 2015 – 167,253 (includes 16,448 email interactions)
CSP Call Volume Data
Calls to CSP increased dramatically over the course of the economic
downturn. Average daily call volume increased steadily from an average of 297 per day in FY 2007 to 420 calls per day in FY 2014. In November 2010 CSP had a daily high of over 780 calls. The average in FY 2015 was 393. 5 297 358 412 441 474 401 397 420 393 359
Average Number of Calls Received per Day
Why do people need assistance?
6 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000New Affordable Housing Reduced Work Hours Homelessness Loss of Other Income DFS Benefits Change/Delay Other Unexpected Expense Health - Physical Expenses Exceed Income Fixed Income/Low Income Loss of Employment/Wages
Top 10 reasons why people need assistance
(7/1/14 - 6/30/15)
Contacts
•
Contact Data
CSP workers record the topics of each call, whether the caller receives information only or more intensive services.
Contact topics provide a broad, timely snapshot of particular needs in the community, such as food or housing assistance.
After a prolonged increase since August 2006, requests to CSP have
begun to slowly decrease. Requests for housing payment assistance peaked at 639 in August of 2010.
Requests for emergency food assistance increased dramatically in recent years. In FY 2015 CSP received 7,035 requests for emergency food, this is more than double the 2,800 requests made in FY 2007. The most emergency food requests received by CSP in one month was 922 in
November 2013.
Emergency Rent & Food Contacts
Jan 2001 – Mar 2016
50 150 250 350 450 550 650 750 850 950 1050 CY' 01 CY' 02 CY' 03 CY' 04 CY' 05 CY' 06 CY' 07 CY' 08 CY' 09 CY' 10 CY' 11 CY' 12 CY' 13 CY' 14 CY' 15 CY' 16 Financial Emg/ Rent Asst. Emergency needs/foodNov 2015 8 Oct 2001 Aug 2006 Sept 2008 Aug 2010 Nov 2012 Nov 2013
“Top Eleven” Contact Topics
•
The “Top 11” contact topics of calls to CSP consistently represent
just over half of all specific requests.
•
Since July 2007, there has been an 36% increase in requests for the
“Top 11.” In that same timeframe, the Fairfax County population has
grown by less than 1%.
•
Topics with the largest increase include emergency food and food
stamps, emergency utility assistance, and emergency shelter.
•
The chart on the following slide shows the “Top 11” since 2007.
“Top 11” Contact Topics
FY 2007 – FY 2015
*Emg Shelter totals include contacts for adult only and family shelter. Family shelter contacts were excluded in prior years’ reports. 10
36 % increase since FY 2007
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY2015 2883 3465 4789 5547 6574 5983 6142 7684 7035 3879 4540 5516 5755 6026 5173 5389 5355 5215 2340 2552 2946 3423 3744 4080 3920 3723 3366 2031 2399 3500 4450 4311 3733 3056 3466 2970 2070 2421 3116 3521 3298 2689 2066 1830 1450 1982 2186 2020 2032 2203 2555 2360 1999 1601 1834 2156 2520 2711 2864 2575 2558 2929 2385 1570 1937 2848 3140 3364 2854 2678 3268 2647 1447 1618 1640 1704 1863 1715 1623 1988 1791 1235 1513 1584 1504 1448 1448 1550 1309 1084 1186 1315 1291 1287 1088 1134 1143 1112 1006 Dental Care Subsidized Housing Medicaid SNAP Inquiries +69% Job Search Asst +30% Housing Search Asst Comm. Health Network Emg Utility Asst +46% Emg Shelter +44% Emg Rent Asst +34% Emg Food +144%11
CSP Contacts by Zip Code
Zip Total Zip Total Zip Total Zip Total Zip Total 20120 1,264 22003 3,734 22042 2,106 22124 162 22303 646 20121 1,327 22015 953 22043 622 22150 1,191 22306 3,844 20124 149 22027 34 22044 1,032 22151 698 22307 205 20151 786 22030 2,510 22046 480 22152 638 22308 41 20170 2,179 22031 1,301 22060 204 22153 791 22309 3,617 20171 1,049 22032 668 22066 105 22180 649 22310 606 20190 1,470 22033 921 22079 1,520 22181 231 22311 212 20191 1,714 22039 125 22101 222 22182 290 22312 1,471 20194 133 22041 2,805 22102 333 22302 174 22315 499
Case Data
•
Case Data
CSP creates an electronic case file for callers who request assistance with basic needs through community or public resources.
Information on the outcomes of these requests (i.e., whether and how they are filled) provides a snapshot of the community’s capacity to meet its residents’ needs.
CSP does not collect public case data for state or federal programs. For example, while CSP provides information and referral for Food Stamps, we do not collect data on who enrolls.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Average Number of New Cases
Per Month, FY 2007 – FY 2016 (Q3)
• A “new” case in CSP is someone brand new to our system. CSP maintains
electronic case records indefinitely to reference for repeat callers.
• The average number of new cases opened by CSP increased from 370 a
month in FY07 to a high of about 525 per month in FY09-10. After a period of variability, the rate of new case growth has decreased to about 350 per
month.
Case Objective Outcomes
• Case objectives for basic needs can be met with CBO assistance, through
creative use of the caller’s personal resources, by public services, or by some combination of these.
Of all objectives met, over 85% are met with community-based resources.
• Case objectives may go unmet if a client does not comply with his or her
service plan, if CBO resources are exhausted, or if the client is not eligible for services (e.g., for housing assistance, if a household’s ongoing
expenses exceed their income, or if they have received help previously within one year).
Housing and utility payment needs account for 76% of unmet objectives.
Housing & Utility Payment Case Needs
• Housing and Utility Payment Assistance objectives consistently represent between 40-50% of all case needs. The community’s ability to respond has struggled to keep pace with the level of need. New funds made available through the TANF-Emergency Assistance program in late FY10 and early FY11 helped many families with emergency rent assistance.
15 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Q3
Outcomes of Housing & Utility Assistance Case Need Objectives
Unmet: No Service or Ineligible Unmet: Client Non-Compliance Objectives Met
Unmet Housing & Utility Case Needs
by Human Services Region
• The number of requests for housing/utility payment assistance and the
community’s capacity to respond to those requests vary across the diverse regions of the county. The chart below shows regional differences in
housing payment and utility needs that went unmet, either because community-based funding was temporarily depleted or, more often, because households were not eligible for assistance.
16 751 850 746 807 767 731 744 652 419 535 843 800 747 662 717 603 497 303 404 529 436 447 434 354 407 381 195 487 586 529 471 384 426 222 422 212 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 (Q3)
Region 4 Region 3 Region 2 Region 1
Impact of the Economy:
Income Disparity in Fairfax County
17
Income disparity has grown markedly in the past decade. In 1999, the mean income for the highest earning 20% of households was 8.8 times the mean of the lowest earning 20%. By 2013, the mean income of the
highest 20% had increased to 10.9 times that of the lowest.
20% Intervals 1999 2013 % change Lowest Quintile $ 35,774 29,175 -18.4% Second Quintile $ 76,589 71,157 -7.1% Third Quintile $ 113,181 111,506 -1.5% Fourth Quintile $ 161,870 164,098 1.4% Highest Quintile $ 314,835 319,008 1.3%
Mean Household Income:
Comparison of 1999 and 2013 Incomes (in 2013 Dollars)
Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Decennial Census and 2011 American Community Survey; and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPI Inflation Calculator.
