About the Report of the Re-Entry Council

Policy Statement 19, Recommendation H

Tap state and local funding used for traditional public safety and criminal justice purposes and leverage those resources to finance the development of supportive housing.

Supportive housing is affordable housing that is enriched with on-site or easily accessible services that are made available to residents. In several studies, supportive housing has been demonstrated to improve the health and stability of residents, and to reduce their involvement in prisons, jails, and other costly public systems. [1]   Despite its promise as a housing option for people leaving prison or jail, the difficulties associated with creating and developing supportive housing limit its availability significantly. Whereas public housing or affordable housing have relatively streamlined financing and development mechanisms, supportive housing must rely on the ingenuity of nonprofit developers to pull together the funding and resources from various systems to create a single project. Developers can and should pursue support from a range of funding streams, including funding streams for homelessness prevention, case management, mental health treatment, employment training, substance abuse counseling, and crime prevention. (See Policy Statement 4, Funding a Re-Entry Initiative, for more discussion on the use of varied funding streams.) Meanwhile, policymakers should recognize the great need for supportive housing options for the re-entering population and should help developers overcome legal and other barriers to the development of such projects. (See Policy Statement 30, Housing Systems, for a further discussion on the need for housing systems change.)

Several supportive housing projects have been successful in negotiating funding agreements with state and local corrections or law enforcement agencies to provide operating subsidies or other funding for supportive services so that they can set aside units specifically targeted towards individuals leaving prisons or jails.

Example: St. Leonard's Ministries (IL)

The Illinois State Department of Corrections pays St. Leonard's Ministries, a local housing and services provider, just under what it costs the Department to supervise a given number of parolees. In return, St. Leonard's not only provides housing and other social services for the parolees but also assumes a large share of responsibility for their supervision.

In such agreements, the funding contribution from the corrections agency would last only for the duration of the person's parole term. The individual could stay in the housing, however, if the provider could identify and secure another source of rental subsidy through McKinney-Vento funding, a Section 8 voucher, or some other government housing initiative. (See Housing Options for People Released from Correctional Facilities chart, above, for key aspects of these programs.) In this way, corrections agencies can effectively purchase housing units and other services for individuals leaving their institutions and can contribute to the existing pool of resources used to house homeless and at-risk individuals.

Example: Alliance Apartments, RS Eden and Alliance Housing (MN)

RS Eden has received a state grant through the Department of Corrections to provide support services to people coming out of incarceration. An RS Eden staff person assigned to the grant is stationed at Alliance Apartments, affordable housing units for low-income residents who maintain sobriety and productivity.

  1. Dennis P. Culhane et al., "Public Service Reductions Associated with Placement of Homeless Persons with Severe Mental Illness in Supportive Housing," in Housing Policy Debate 13, no. 1 (Philadelphia: Fannie Mae Foundation, 2002). back
staff