Agenda Package - City of Vernon

Evaluation of Homelessness Strategy for the North Okanagan
Anecdotally we know as well that pursuant to the quarterly and annual reports prepared
by the Partners in Action Committee that certain progress and/or accomplishments have been
reported. We also know that once a Partners in Action initiative has been achieved (successfully
completed) the Action Team is disbanded and thus success has been deemed to have resulted.
ln this case we know that various Actions Teams have in fact been disbanded (e.g, Land Trust,
Gateway Shelter, URM Support, Under One Roof ) and thus in these cases we can assume
confidently that some level of success was achieved though the actual measure of that success
and the apparent magnitude or context of that success might not be measurable in terms of the
contribution of the effort to the organizational vision.
For some others, there are clearly measurable outcomes or indicators attached to the
actions and thus from this perspective we know the following:
lndicator
Tracking of successful placement of people in permanent housing
a nd/or support programs.
Reported Actual Performance
November 2010
Yes, Howard House
Tracking successful referrals to shelters and transitional housing. Yes, System is working as house is
at caoacitv each evenine.
Tracking successful referrals by staff to programs such as addictions
Yes
counseline etc.
Monitor success rate after one year of people remaining housed. Yes, Howard House every 6
months
lncrease in rentalvacancv rate (to between 2-4Yo vacancv). 5.6%in Sprine 2010
But again there appears to be a disconnect between some of the performance measures
specified and the contribution of the activity to the vision, i.e. "yes" there is a monitoring of the
success rate after one year of people remaining housed, but how does this presence or
alternatively absence of monitoring impact on the broader effort to achieve the vision?
On another level, implementation accomplishments (outputs, outcomes, impacts)
arising from Strategic Plan recommendations can be assessed from the perspective of
effectiveness. ln that regard there are two perspectives from which effectiveness can be
evaluated. On the one hand, most obviously effectiveness is reflected in the aggregate impacts
of programming to date, i.e. actual accomplishments as measured by prescribed indicators of
success. On the other, and conceivably from an organizational perspective the more important
of the two, effectiveness can be measured in terms of the consistency of impacts with the
original expected outcomes. ln the exercise at hand, consistency in turn is a reflection of the
adequacy of local capacities to deliver on an ongoing basis focused programming to achieve
positive outcomes. Clearly in the case of the gateway Shelter, the additions to URM and the
expansion of other programming capacities, the Strategic Plan has accomplished what it set out
to do.
Thus with this breadth of information both quantitative and anecdotal we can assert
that some notable accomplishments are being realized and there has been some definitive
progress achieved. However, there are several cautionary notes in this assessment. Given the
Ltr';
Fn¡ltl
- i¿tt¿fi,
Lochaven Management Consultants Ltd.
November 2010
Page 38
107