 On November 3, 2016, over 100 stakeholders including elected officials, County leaders and staff, community-based organizations and service providers, community members, and youth advocates attended a Policy Forum on Youth Housing Instability and Homelessness. The forum, sponsored by ICPC with the Alameda County-Oakland Community Action Partnership, highlighted the scope of youth housing instability and homelessness in Alameda County from the perspective of researchers and advocates, youth service providers, and Alameda County youth.
A major goal of this forum was to begin a
conversation that spans the multiple systems that touch youth in our County who
experience housing instability and homelessness, with the aim of increasing our
capacity for cross-system and cross-regional collaboration around this pressing
issue. During the event, participants engaged in thoughtful dialogue and worked to identify actionable solutions that will impact youth in our community.
Video and Materials
-
Forum Video: Video
is available from the morning sessions featuring opening remarks by Mayor
Libby Schaaf and Supervisor Wilma Chan, as well as presentation by Sonali Patel
of Chapin Hall, Bill Bedrossian of Covenant House California, and Elaine de
Coligny of EveryOne Home Alameda County. Our informative provider panel on the
spectrum of youth housing instability is also available.
-
Forum
Materials: Visit our website to download materials and
presentations shared at the forum, including youth policy recommendations,
results from our breakout action planning session, and panelist responses to
participant questions.
Youth Housing Instability and Homelessness
While obtaining accurate counts of homeless youth is a challenge, the most recent Alameda County Homeless Count indicated that on any given night in Alameda County there are
approximately 414 homeless youth ages 18-24 – approximately 10% of the County’s
homeless population. The majority (83%) of homeless youth ages 18-24 in
Alameda County are in Oakland. Read more here.
Youth
experiencing housing instability and homelessness in Alameda County have unique
needs that span multiple service systems. It is critically important to recognize that
homeless young people have needs that are separate and distinct from the
homeless adult population and that interventions for youth often look different
than those for adults.
Recommendations for continued work and collective action identified during the forum include:
- Coordinate and streamline supportive services for transition age youth in Alameda County.
- Provide ongoing opportunities for TAY service providers across various systems to convene.
- Support the continued engagement of young people in policy development.
Youth Leadership and Participation
Youth were involved in forum planning and participated during the forum. Youth advocates facilitated focus group discussions with Alameda County TAY experiencing housing instability and homelessness in September and October.
During the forum a number of youth who participated in these sessions led participants through case study scenarios inspired by stories collected during the youth-led convenings at various TAY housing and service organizations in Alameda County and presented a number of youth-identified policy recommendations.
Youth presenting recommendation at the forum
Youth Recommendations. Click Image to view full size.
Next Steps
The Interagency Children's Policy Council and our partners are working on identifying next steps to continue the collaborative dialogue around youth housing and homelessness in our County. Please stay tuned for more information on how you can continue to participate.
State and Local Ballot Measures Impact Alameda County Children
The recent election brought many changes that may have an impact on Alameda County children and youth:
➤ Soda Taxes
Oakland and Albany (as well as San Francisco) voters approved a penny-per-ounce tax on sugary drinks despite the efforts of the beverage industry to defeat the measures. Since a similar tax was passed in Berkeley in 2014, the city has seen a reduction in the sale of sodas and other sugar-sweetened beverages.
In Alameda County in 2015, only 64% of 7th graders were at a healthy weight. Obesity has been linked to
conditions such as diabetes and heart disease. A tax on sugary beverages and
the health programs it funds could help improve the diets of Alameda County
children, as well as direct funds to prevention and nutrition programs.
➤ Education Measures
California voters approved a number of education-related measures, including:
Proposition 55, which will extend the state income tax on high-incomes ensuring billions of dollars a year for K-12 schools and community colleges; Proposition 51, which will provide billions of dollars in bonds for construction and renovation of schools and other education facilities; and Prop. 58 which allows public schools more
choices of how to teach students who have a primary
language other than English.
In addition, voters in many jurisdictions approved school bond measures to support local districts.
➤ Housing and rent control measures
Alameda County voters approved a $580 million housing bond that will provide affordable rental housing and supportive housing for low-income and homeless County residents, including families with children and transition age youth.
Berkeley and Oakland voters approved a number of rent control measures that may impact housing instability for children in low-income families. Notably, Berkeley's Measure AA will prohibit owner move-in evictions of families with school-age children during the academic year and increase the relocation assistance fee required after owner move-in evictions.
|
|
