Cleveland, OH Case Study
Housing Command Centers: An Emergency Response to Homelessness
Cleveland has also made significant progress in ending unsheltered homelessness using a Housing Command Center approach. After observing a concerning increase in people sleeping outside during the winter of 2023-2024, Mayor Justin Bibb recognized that addressing the issue required a greater sense of urgency and new approach. This led to the A Home for Every Neighbor initiative, launched in early 2024 with the city driving the process of more rapidly bringing people experiencing unsheltered homelessness inside. Cleveland and Cuyahoga County have long-established policies guaranteeing a right-to-shelter, with assured access to shelter for those who are homeless. Nonetheless, this guaranteed access to shelter does not ensure that shelters adequately meet the needs of unhoused individuals. The city based its approach on the HCC models deployed in Houston and Denver, acknowledging that tackling homelessness requires a system-level approach and coordination across sectors and organizations.
The city, in partnership with the County and its Office of Homeless Services, committed to bringing people inside into permanent housing as quickly as possible through its Housing Command Center, led by a Senior Advisor to the Mayor and supported by a Housing and Outreach Project Manager. As in Denver, having someone with direct access to the Mayor leading the initiative enabled the team to cut through some of the bureaucracy and anticipate political disagreements related to site prioritization to enable an accelerated re-housing process. The city identified 150 people experiencing chronic unsheltered homelessness and set a goal to house them within the first 18 months. Since July 2024, they have successfully housed 155 people, a majority of whom self-report as chronically homeless, meeting their initial goal in just eight months. Cleveland created five teams reporting to the Housing Command Center: outreach, case management, unit acquisition, subsidy, and clean-up.
The outreach team begins the process by engaging directly with people experiencing street homelessness, prioritizing the largest encampments and those who are most vulnerable, typically measured by risk of violence or number of 911 calls at that location, age or ability, or risk of being displaced by an external entity. The city contracted with existing, trained outreach teams who observed regular residents of a specific site over 3-5 days before approaching those people to learn whether they were interested in housing. Cleveland’s approach differs from other cities in that outreach workers directly engage with individuals to assess their needs and secure appropriate housing before asking them to relocate, rather than using a punitive approach and threatening site clearing. The clean-up team clears the site only after residents of that encampment have been housed, and the City prevents camping on that site moving forward to ensure that the intervention remains effective. This approach helps build trust between outreach workers and people experiencing homelessness while addressing community concerns about encampments.
These residents are then matched with a case manager. In Cleveland, there is one case manager for every 20 participants, a remarkable level of support for a homelessness response initiative. Simultaneously, the unit team secures units in the private market by working with landlords willing to make units available for re-housing. City employees advocating for people experiencing homelessness has proven more successful than individuals negotiating on their own, as the city’s involvement instills greater trust with landlords and enables greater flexibility. Previously, individuals would complete an assessment to be put on a waitlist for funding for housing. They would then have to find an apartment themselves, which is extraordinarily difficult, as any criminal history can be automatically prohibitive. To signal their commitment to re-housing, the city also provides landlords with incentives such as sign-on bonuses, double security deposits, a one-time payment of $500-1,000, and the option for mutual lease termination. The team offers these incentives in recognition that the applicants often have greater needs or risks than typical tenants, and to work in good faith with the landlord to waive application fees and certain documentation requirements to expedite the placement process. The team has primarily identified available units in two-family homes and townhomes that are often close to transportation and other resources, though not necessarily close to the former camp sites. The HCC has found that if the unit meets the individual’s needs, they are open to different neighborhoods. The unit team has certified building inspectors on-staff, expediting the inspection process. Approved units are added to an inventory for the case manager and participant to select from, with case managers helping with the application process.
Once the participant’s application is accepted and the lease signed, the team provides a welcome kit and furniture for the unit ahead of the move-in date. The case manager continues to provide support services after the move-in date, and the City contracts with a local Community Development Corporation (CDC) to manage rental subsidy payments for up to 12 months. The typical wait time for a shelter resident to move to permanent supportive housing is 5-7 months. In contrast, the entire HCC process from outreach workers visiting the site to camp residents being housed takes approximately 2-3 weeks and is referred to as the “Surge.” The average length of time between case worker intake and move-in is only 11.5 days.
To maintain the emergency response as a top priority, the HCC meets daily to address complex cases and ensure that people with complicated needs are supported in obtaining stable housing. This type of case conferencing is only made possible through reliable by-name, real-time data that enables record-keeping of each person experiencing homelessness, their specific needs, and where they are in the process. Data are inputted by organizations across the community in this more detailed format and typically housed in that community’s existing Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). Daily case conferencing ensures accountability for entering and updating information in this system, and it enables communities to understand trends and progress over time. Community Solutions helps cities set up the systems to collect and utilize this information, as they do in Cleveland, rather than needing to rely on yearly Point-InTime (PIT) counts to track progress.
Cleveland also allocated $600,000 to a flex fund to address miscellaneous needs that prevent people from remaining stably housed. Needs addressed through this fund included things like paying a fee for a certification to pursue employment or clearing a criminal record to pass a background check. Awards from this fund were capped at $1500 per person, though most needs were under $500. Cleveland’s flex fund made up a small portion of the $4.7 million in total funding for this initiative, with $2.7 million being spent on rental assistance and an average of $24,000 being spent per person per year on housing and support services. Having a flex fund to make small investments can be crucial to unlocking a person’s ability to remain stably housed, and this has emerged as a best practice for communities implementing HCCs. In places where city funding is less flexible, philanthropic partners often step up to create this type of fund.
Now that Cleveland has reached its near-term goal of “functional zero” unsheltered homelessness, the potential next step involves working with the county CoC to apply the HCC model to reduce the time taken for individuals to move from shelters to permanent supportive housing, similar to how the HCC is used in Denver. The city is also exploring using the HCC model to rapidly relocate people living in distressed housing that no longer meets code or that is hazardous due to lead paint.