{"id":123923,"date":"2026-01-07T18:05:35","date_gmt":"2026-01-07T18:05:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/123923\/"},"modified":"2026-01-07T18:05:35","modified_gmt":"2026-01-07T18:05:35","slug":"whats-taking-so-long-to-fix-how-sf-finds-housing-for-homeless-people","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/123923\/","title":{"rendered":"What’s Taking So Long to Fix How SF Finds Housing For Homeless People"},"content":{"rendered":"

[This is a two-part series. For part 1, click here<\/a>.]\u00a0<\/p>\n

Soon after arriving in San Francisco from Honduras in 2023, Maria Zavala, her husband, and three young kids enrolled in coordinated entry, SF\u2019s system to help people get off the streets and into housing.<\/p>\n

That system is meant to prioritize the most vulnerable residents, but city officials and people who need housing say it\u2019s confusing and sometimes unfair.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Like everyone who goes through the process, Zavala received a score that marked her family\u2019s place on a housing wait list. For two years, while they waited for a home, the family lived in cars, closets, shelters, hotels, and on the streets. Zavala\u2019s seven year old, Samara, began suffering from complex medical issues in 2024, and in August 2025 underwent several surgeries.<\/p>\n

One of the coordinated entry nonprofits Zavala was working with was Compass Family Services. Compass told her to submit letters from the hospital describing Samara\u2019s condition. Even with the documentation, Zavala says their score went down, not up. Compass workers blamed it on the evaluation system, says Zavala: \u201cEven though Samara was in this really difficult and vulnerable situation, the blessed computer didn\u2019t have feelings or a heart.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

(Editor\u2019s note: The interview with Maria Zavala was conducted in Spanish with the help of a translator.)<\/p>\n

A year before the family arrived, SF\u2019s Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing (HSH) set out to reform coordinated entry. There\u2019s no way to know if the Zavala situation would have been solved faster if reforms had taken place. But the city still hasn\u2019t finished. And now a larger problem for the system \u2014 and for families like theirs \u2014 is looming.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Coordinated entry relies on federal funding, and the Trump administration wants to make it harder to get those dollars \u2014 nearly $60 million was last year\u2019s total for San Francisco, roughly 10 percent of HSH\u2019s annual budget.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"aSan Francisco\u2019s access points for homeless people seeking housing and other services are concentrated in the Tenderloin and South of Market, with others in the Castro, Mission, and Bayview. (Sources: HSH, Open Data SF, The Frisc)<\/p>\n

Part one of this series<\/a> examined how coordinated entry is supposed to work. Part two will examine what\u2019s gone wrong, how the city is trying to fix it, and the potential effect from federal crackdowns.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Fast, then slow<\/p>\n

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grants between $2 billion and $3 billion a year to cities and counties for homelessness services. To receive its share, San Francisco must conduct a biennial \u201cpoint in time\u201d count and operate a coordinated entry system. The city launched its version in 2018.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In early 2022, the nonprofit Coalition on Homelessness, whose leader has helped shape city policy for years<\/a>, published a critical report<\/a>. It said SF designed coordinated entry without input from service providers.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"I\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n

Around that same time, HSH launched a three-part redesign. The first step: hire an outside research firm to analyze flaws. The next step: form a working group to make recommendations. The final step would turn those recommendations into reality.\u00a0<\/p>\n

HSH got through the first two phases rather quickly. The analysis, from Focus Strategies, came out in July 2022 and highlighted several problems<\/a>. Then the working group, made up of city and county staff, homelessness workers, and community members, issued recommendations in Jan. 2023.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The final phase, implementation, began in May 2023. It\u2019s still underway. \u201cWe knew the redesign process would take time,\u201d says HSH deputy director for communications and legislative affairs Emily Cohen. \u201cThe commitment to community input and ongoing engagement has made the process a bit longer than desired.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"AA person in a sidewalk encampment sits through a recent downpour on the corner of Polk and Geary. (Photo: Alex Lash)<\/p>\n

Conditions have changed since coordinated entry\u2019s pre-pandemic launch. COVID scrambled city services. The number of people without a home \u2014 whether sleeping on the sidewalk, in a tent, in a vehicle, or in overnight shelters \u2014 grew almost 40 percent<\/a> from 2019 to 2024. COVID-era experiments, like sanctioned tent sites, \u201cshelter in place\u201d hotels, and secure parking lots, were mostly dismantled once the pandemic ended.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not unusual for cities and counties to tweak their coordinated entry systems. But San Francisco\u2019s reform is now more than three years in the making.\u00a0<\/p>\n

To understand why, it\u2019s important to dive into what was in the consultants\u2019 report back in 2022.\u00a0<\/p>\n

What the report found: mismatches<\/p>\n

Focus\u2019s report was clear that the pressure for reform was local. SF\u2019s system \u201cgenerally met federal requirements.\u201d<\/p>\n

Housing scarcity requires priorities. Then, as now, coordinated entry used a questionnaire and scoring system to sort out people\u2019s eligibility for the housing wait list and other services.\u00a0<\/p>\n

According to Focus, this was the problem at the heart of coordinated entry. Service providers and people on the streets said the questions and scores were confusing, invasive, and unfair.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"These three questions from the coordinated entry questionnaire ask participants about disabilities. <\/p>\n

In the Focus report, HSH officials said the questionnaire does a good job determining who is most in need. But nonprofit workers who administer the questions said the process focused too much on an overall score and not enough on identifying specific resources for people. <\/p>\n

This was also a complaint in the Coalition on Homelessness report, which Focus quoted: \u201cCoordinated Entry should be about connecting people to the correct resource, not about giving people a score to disqualify them from help because of limited resources.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

Participants are \u2018often upset\u2019 about the wait. Single adults often don\u2019t realize that the system only matches them with housing, not temporary shelter. <\/p>\n

Local Homelessness Coordinating Board co-chair Megan Rohrer<\/p>\n

Instead of matching resources with greatest need, it matches people with what\u2019s available. With limited resources, not everyone can get housing when there\u2019s a shortage. \u201cOne of the toughest things about the job here is telling people, \u2018You don\u2019t qualify for housing and we don\u2019t have anything else for you,\u2019\u201d says Episcopal Community Services chief program officer Chris Callandrillo, whose organization also runs an access point. \u201cNot everyone is eligible for something.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"Questions 13, 14, and 15 from the coordinated entry questionnaire: What is your total monthly income? Are you pregnant? Have you traded sex for a place to stay? <\/p>\n

Critics said that even when making matches, coordinated entry is flawed. For example, some housing providers had \u201cintense concerns\u201d about people with mental and physical health problems coming to them who needed more help than their facility could offer.\u00a0<\/p>\n

On the family side, Zavala said the questionnaire wasn\u2019t matching her to the proper resource. \u201cThey would never take any information about the health of my kids. They would only ask about the health of me and my husband,\u201d she said. \u201cThe questions don\u2019t produce a score that aligns with reality.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

What the report found: access problems<\/p>\n

The Focus report said more than 75 percent of people didn\u2019t know how to find help, and more than 50 percent said it took six months or more to access services. A person first has to get to one of SF\u2019s access points before they can take the questionnaire.<\/p>\n

The report also said some groups weren\u2019t getting results that represented their share of the overall population. For example, in SF\u2019s 2022 count, 30 percent of the homeless population was Latino, but Focus found only 20 percent of people filling out coordinated entry forms were Latino.<\/p>\n

Focus also found that Black participants who got a housing referral were 30 percent more likely than Whites to get rejected by a housing provider. According to HSH, the most common reason for a housing rejection is a background check. (In the 2024 count<\/a>, 29 percent of SF\u2019s homeless population identified as White and 24 percent as Black.)\u00a0<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"The\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n

The study also found communication problems. including one that seems to violate HUD standards: making housing eligibility criteria public.<\/p>\n

Critics say HSH should also provide more clarity about coordinated entry\u2019s limitations. Participants are \u201coften upset\u201d about the wait, according to Megan Rohrer, co-chair of the Local Homelessness Coordinating Board. Single adults often don\u2019t realize that the system only matches them with housing, not temporary shelter. (Coordinated entry only matches families with shelter.)\u00a0<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"SF\u2019s\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n

People also mistakenly think shelter stays will give them a leg up on housing. \u201cThey\u2019re not statistically more likely to get federal housing because they went through a shelter. \u201d Rohrer said. \u201cCoordinated entry is designed to help people who are the least likely to be able to navigate other systems of support.\u201d<\/p>\n

Focus authors also criticized a lack of basic standards and training across access points. This was one of Zavala\u2019s main complaints. She said she had worked with both family access point providers, and one set of staff gave her more information on her score and eligibility than the other.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Phase 2: recommendations<\/p>\n

With the Focus report in hand, a workgroup began meeting weekly in Sept. 2022. Four months later, it produced four sets of recommendations<\/a> to improve coordinated entry. (Each set was extremely detailed. What follows is an overview.)\u00a0<\/p>\n

First, the workgroup recommended improving how coordinated entry is governed. Board members suggested two new committees: one to implement recommendations and another made up of formerly homeless people to assist.<\/p>\n

The second recommendation called for hiring more staff, especially people who have been homeless themselves, and for standardized training and more access points.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The third recommendation was about communication. The board called for creating a Client\u2019s Bill of Rights and an oversight committee to review grievances. <\/p>\n

\"\"One part of the form that participants in coordinated entry fill out to file a grievance. This version was posted inside ECS\u2019s 10th St. access point. (Photo: Ayla Burnett) <\/p>\n

The board also recommended posting written standards at access points to give visitors a clearer understanding of services they can expect. Also in this category: developing a mission statement and public meetings to disseminate information.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The final recommendation struck at the heart of coordinated entry. It said to get rid of the scoring and priority system. Everyone coming to an access point should hear a standardized description of what to expect \u2014 including automatic placement on the housing wait list. They would still take the questionnaire, but it would pose more \u201cinclusive\u201d questions about experience with discrimination, length of time in San Francisco, and eviction history.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Phase 3: Waiting for more studies<\/p>\n

A few of the recommendations have become reality. There\u2019s now a mission statement<\/a>, more access points, unified training standards<\/a>, and information at access points available in more languages. While there is a Client\u2019s Bill of Rights, it\u2019s only available in an online document that requires a password<\/a><\/p>\n

Other recommendations have yet to materialize. HSH answers to five different oversight bodies, but there\u2019s no grievance committee, which Rohrer said was crucial. \u201cThe original pitch was for an oversight group that would make sure every coordinated entry site was living up to [standards],\u201d Rohrer said. HSH decided the committee wasn\u2019t necessary.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Dexter\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n

Most concerning to critics, however, is that HSH still hasn\u2019t changed the questionnaire and scoring system. The agency says it\u2019s waiting for a study from an outside contractor, which HSH hired in March 2025. <\/p>\n

Results are due in early 2026, but it\u2019s not clear when they\u2019ll turn into fixes. Cohen says coordinated entry changes will be rolled out via a broader evaluation of every HSH program, which began last year.<\/p>\n

Suing HUD twice<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, the Trump administration is trying to impose new rules for its funding.\u00a0<\/p>\n

First, HUD would prohibit funding for programs with policies that support DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion), \u201cgender ideology,\u201d elective abortions, or \u201csanctuary\u201d immigration.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

The orders are on hold. In May, SF City Attorney David Chiu and officials in other locales filed suit. \u201cThese new grant conditions blatantly violate the Constitution and endanger people\u2019s lives,\u201d Chiu said in a statement. \u201cThis is part of Trump\u2019s strategy to push his ideology by threatening local programs and budgets.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"1174 Folsom was once 42 market-rate apartments. San Francisco bought it for nearly $30 million to convert into supportive housing for previously homeless young adults. With a shift of federal funds, projects like this would be more difficult. (Google Street\u00a0View)<\/p>\n

The U.S District Court for the Western District of Washington issued an order blocking HUD, so for now the new conditions can\u2019t kick in, city attorney spokesperson Jen Kwart told The Frisc. HUD has appealed, which further stalls the coordinated entry overhaul.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019re using every method we can, but [it\u2019s] harder to [make changes] in the public light in the midst of a retaliatory federal government,\u201d says Rohrer.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Second, HUD wants to shift federal homelessness funds away<\/a> from permanent supportive housing and toward temporary shelter. Each locale applying for those funds would be able to spend no more than 30 percent on permanent housing, down from the current 87 percent.<\/p>\n

It would make sense to invest in more permanent options that actually reduce homelessness.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

National Alliance to end homelessness chief equity officer Mary Kenion<\/p>\n

Announcing the shift in November, HUD Secretary Scott Turner said it\u2019s meant to get people off the streets faster and reduce the \u201cnever-ending government dependency\u201d on federally subsidized housing.<\/p>\n

California sued<\/a>, calling the cuts callous and cruel. Soon after, several counties including San Francisco joined the National Alliance to End Homelessness to file another lawsuit<\/a>. SF stands to lose more than 2,000 supportive housing and rapid rehousing beds \u2014 about 14 percent of its inventory \u2014 and $34 million, according to the National Alliance.<\/p>\n

While shelter and other short-term solutions are \u201ccritical in any homeless response system,\u201d National Alliance chief equity officer Mary Kenion says, \u201cit would make sense to invest in more permanent options that actually reduce homelessness.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

After HUD sent confusing signals about the shift, a federal judge temporarily blocked the rule a week before Christmas.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, with the help of local advocates, Maria Zavala and her family found a home two months ago \u2014 with an odd twist. While on the coordinated entry wait list, she also signed up for the affordable housing lottery<\/a> run by the Mayor\u2019s Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD). Offers from each system came through around the same time; the MOHCD apartment was a better deal.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Zavala said their Bayview apartment is a perfect fit, but she\u2019s concerned about others dealing with coordinated entry. \u201cThere are many more families in this situation,\u201d she said. \u201cThe system needs to be more empathetic, more transparent, and it needs to take into account people\u2019s real needs.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tMore from The Frisc…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"[This is a two-part series. For part 1, click here.]\u00a0 Soon after arriving in San Francisco from Honduras…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":123924,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[55720,9498,536,405,1011,58150,9500,64762,5409,101,103,102,104,106,105],"class_list":["post-123923","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-san-francisco","tag-department-of-homelessness-and-supportive-housing","tag-department-of-housing-and-urban-development","tag-donald-trump","tag-government","tag-housing","tag-hsh","tag-hud","tag-national-alliance-to-end-homelessness","tag-policy","tag-san-francisco","tag-san-francisco-headlines","tag-san-francisco-news","tag-sf","tag-sf-headlines","tag-sf-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/123923","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=123923"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/123923\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/123924"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=123923"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=123923"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=123923"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}