Applying the Scientific Method to Homeless Data Analysis

1
Applying the Scientific Method to Homeless Data
Analysis

• Presented by
• Matthew D. Simmonds
• Simtech Solutions Inc.
• Quincy, MA
• www.SimtechSolutions.com

2
Hypothesis

• If a small portion of the clients served within
  the shelter consume a majority of the resources
  then if you were to move those clients to a less
  resource intensive environment you would reduce
  the agencys overall operational costs.

3
HUD Definition of Chronic Homelessness

• A person who is chronically homeless is an
  unaccompanied homeless individual with a
  disabling condition who has either been
  continuously homeless for a year or more, OR has
  had at least four (4) episodes of homelessness in
  the past three (3) years.

4
The Experiment

• Calculate the average number of chronically
  homeless clients on a given day. Compare that to
  the total number of clients served for that day.
• Calculate the total number of chronically
  homeless clients served over the course of a
  year. Compare that to the total number of clients
  served for that year.
• If the hypothesis holds true then the percentage
  of clients that are chronic for one day would
  exceed the percentage of clients that are served
  over the course of a year (as the same group of
  clients are consuming the majority of the
  resources).

5
The Control Group Father Bills

• Well isolated from other shelters.
• Good longitudinal data to work with.
• Large data set.

6
Observations
7
Observations
8
Observations

• Chronic clients served FY04 397.
• Total clients served in FY04 1285.
• clients that were chronic 397/1285 or 30.8
• Chronic clients served on 2/1/04 72
• Total clients served on 2/1/04 146.
• clients served that were chronic 72/146 or
  49.3
• Roughly half of the bed resources were being
  consumed by less than one-third of the clients.
• One of several randomly selected dates all of
  which showed similar findings.

9
Conclusions (soft costs)

• Better quality of life for the clients.
• Increased stability has aided in the provision of
  supportive services.
• Privacy.
• A place to call home.

10
Conclusions (hard costs)

• Analysis led to development of 37 Housing First
  units and the reduction of 35 emergency shelter
  beds.
• Hard costs per client at the shelter per year
  14,600.
• Hard costs per client at Claremont House per yr
  9,492.
• Total savings per client 5,108.

11
Conclusions (medical costs)

• Of the 12 formerly chronically homeless women
  that are now housed at Claremont House
• Emergency room visits dropped from 22 visits in
  the year prior to housing to 11 after housing.
  (50 decline)
• Inpatient stays dropped from 44 to 4 days. (91
  decline)
• Administration from Quincy Medical estimated the
  cost savings to the community of 60,000 or
  5,000 per client.

12
Conclusions (the count)

• Quincy beats housing goal City reports 20 drop
  in chronic homelessness (Source Annual Point in
  Time Count)

13
Medical Costs (breakdown of comparable analysis
by Matthew Simmonds)

• According to the Medical Care Cost Equation Tool
  (MCCE) the average cost of inpatient stays in the
  US was 1023 per day.
• http//www.dartmouthatlas.org/data/mcce_instructi
  ons.pdf  
• According to MEPS the national average cost of an
  ER visit was 560. Note The data set on chronic
  homeless we used in our initial study was from
  that same time period.  http//www.meps.ahrq.gov/m
  epsweb/data_files/publications/st111/stat111.pdf
• Inpatient days went from 44 down to 4 reducing
  costs from 45056 to 4092 or savings of 40,964.
• ER visits went from 22 to 11 or 12320 to 6160
  for a savings of 6160. Total medical savings
  40,964 6160 or 47,124.  
• NOTE This is not too far from the 60K number
  from Quincy Medical and I am surmising the 60K
  might have some inflationary pressure on it as
  health care costs have risen double digits every
  year for the past several years.  Using the same
  baseline cost helps to keep inflation out of the
  equation so you are comparing apples to apples.  
  For example, according to BlueCross ER costs as
  of March 2006 now range from 580 to 700 (see
  http//www.bluecrossma.com/common/en_US/pdfs/Sampl
  eMedicalCosts.pdf) instead of the 560 quoted for
  2003.