The interagency council model works well because it brings multiple sectors together around a common issue, despite the fact of siloed funding, resources and mandates. But local and state governments need to be encouraged (or incentivized) to use this model. As it stands, the ICH model is one option, and governors/mayors who do not subscribe are under no requirement to implement the model. Local and state governments need to understand the most effective tools for addressing and preventing homelessness, as well as get the help they need to implement 10-year plans, rather than just to create them. This is often a non-issue because persons who are homeless are usually not a strong constituency. This is a voice that needs to be represented and heard by local governments. One way to accomplish this is to though federal guidance, technical assistance, funding and the flexibility necessary to combine multiple programs and funding streams.

At this point, the wait is anywhere from 18 months to 7 years for a housing voucher and nearly as long for public housing. Most of the people who finally get into this housing are elderly, disabled or families with children. People struggling with the many issues that lead to and sustain homelessness are often left (literally) out in the cold. They are often forced to live in deeply substandard housing that they pay too much for, or resigned to staying in shelters, couch surfing or sleeping outdoors. We need enough housing vouchers to go around, and we need to provide ways for people to bridge back into permanent housing even when they have difficult histories and / or multiple personal vulnerabilities. People who are homeless are often living with the long-term effects of multiple Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs), multiple disabilities, poor credit, poor rental histories, little or no income and the list goes on. Even though it seems that the public housing resources we have would go to meet the needs of the most vulnerable, that is not necessarily true. People bump into homelessness, often as the result of a bad choice, bad luck or persistent crisis poverty. They can stay there for years at a time, and many die as a resule. We can do better than that. We need housing options and available, affordable, safe housing for all - and we need it in every corner of our country...the rural, frontier and urban areas. We also need to be respectful of those who must access subsidized housing - often we expect far more from these folks than we would ever ask of ourselves or our neighbors. .

It is critical to ensure that housing is available for everyone. Every year people die because they couldn't get inside as the result of addiction or behavioral health issues. Wet housing, damp housing, dry housing ... permanent, transitional, emergency shelter...we must be aware that housing is not a "one size fits all" concept, but one that must meet the needs of each family and each individual. This will mean flexibility for housing providers, incentives for safely housing the most difficult populations and providers that understand the harm reduction philosophy. Last year, we know of 29 people who died as a result of having lived without homes in Montana, and many of these folks never come to our attention. Addiction is a disease. We have got to ensure that this disease is not a death sentence.

Frontier and rural communities in states such as Montana, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Alaska, Utah and others often are forced to mold themselves around urban models that really don't work well in these environments. We must allow flexibility to states and communities, provide funding mechanisms that level the playing field for rural and frontier communities. Ensure that the states with the largest geographies and smallest populations have funding that is not tied to population, but to the extreme diseconomy of scale that makes it so much more expensive to provide services in these areas. Many times the lack of funding in extremely rural and frontier areas means relocating to a more urban area for housing, treatment, case management support and services. This destabilizes families and individuals. Also: rural / frontier communities cannot compete for the limited funding available in these states, and are often left without the funds needed to provide more than the most rudimentary services to prevent and end homelessness.

Many mainstream programs are out of reach for persons experiencing homelessness for a variety of reasons. Housing policy that precludes someone from accessing subsidized housing on the basis of a poor credit history, poor or lacking rental history, or a background that includes drug abuse or a felony offense often mean that people are living - often with their children - in unsafe, unstable, unaffordable environments that can literally put their lives at risk. We must begin creating bridges for people that allow them to reconstruct their lives. In many cases, one mistake - or a series of mistakes - leaves people without the tools to regain their status in the community at any point.

When we ask people what they need to get back on their feet - and then help them access what they say they need - people begin to stabilize. People who have survived (or are surviving) homelessness are the true experts in what works, what doesn't, where the obstacles are, and how we might remove those obstacles at policy and direct service levels. These folks are the true "experts" in homelessness and without their voice, we presume to know things that we may not fully understand. Going beyond tokanism and ensuring a meaningful place at the table is critical to addressing homelessness.

Universal living wage, health care, housing, education and jobs are all critical components to ending homelessness. As long as we rely on a minimum wage standard that is no where close to a liveable wage, people will be condemned to remain in poverty and to risk homelessness every time a small emergency occurs.

The new Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Rehousing (HPRP) funds have been invaluable because they provide a flexible funding stream that can be used to help stabilize people before they become homeless, or to help ensure stability once they are housed. The longer people are homeless, the more difficult it becomes for them to restabilize. This is absolutely critical.

Homelessness is a condition related to housing - it should not be used as a means to apply discriminatory policies - from no public sleeping and eating - to the slippery slope of Spare Change for Real Change. Civil rights - human rights - must be honored for everyone who lives in American, regardless of their housing status.

The Bring America Home Act in its entirety embraces all of the major components needed to prevent and end homelessness. It provides the range of common sense strategies needed to finally ensure that every American has a place to call home. Sherri Downing