Management Index & Serious Incident Tracking

Aaron Dobish, Associate Director – Housing Operations & Programs

Synopsis

Common Ground Overview

Databases

Management Index

Serious Incident Tracking

Conclusions

Common Ground Overview

Common Ground was founded in 1991.

We own 11 properties and manage 2, comprising 2,659 units of supportive housing, in New York City, Rochester, and Connecticut.

We operate 123 scatter-site apartments, 386 units of transitional housing, and conduct street outreach in Brooklyn, Queens, and Manhattan.

Our partners, CUCS, The Actors Fund, Good Shepherd, Bronxworks, and The Door provide onsite social services.

Common Ground properties have robust staff, including 24 hour contract security.

Although we don’t have access to the same information as social services, we examine a great deal of data.

Databases for tenant information

MRI – Intuit Real Estate software Rent, including charges and payments No-pay cases

MTDB – Internal Database, with link to MRI Primary source for tenant information Subsidies, income, demographics Holdover information

Incidents Database – Internal Database, with link to MRI Incident reports

Facman/Maintenance Connection – Web based CMMS Workorders Apartment inspections

Data Entry

Information is entered into these databases as events occur

Rent Monthly Billing Real time information for payments and notes Court cases are tracked when the case begins and ends, as well as

intermediate steps

Security staff document incidents immediately

Workorders are requested by tenants as needed

Apartment inspections are conducted at least three times a year and are recorded as they happen

Distribution Mechanisms

Incident report distribution includes social services Allows for quick

interventions Feedback is given to

security staff after an incident

Agency Dashboard

Monthly financial review for each property

Regular meetings with Social Services to review: Rent Legal Cases Incidents Apartment Condition

Thoughtful in how to get staff to complete data entry

Close feedback loops with analysis of data

Management Index

Management Index

Index provides a complete picture of tenants in our housing Uses objective criteria to document their success Highlights individual tenants in need of additional assistance

Helps to focus attention on problematic areas in a building Drastic changes in one area may indicate an issue e.g. drug activity may result in more incidents

Ability to get a snapshot of overall tenant needs

No double entry of information

Index has evolved over time

Score Calculation & Distribution

Given a score of 1, 3, or 5 in five categories

Lowest Score determines overall score

Scores are calculated monthly and distributed

Historical scores are tracked in MTDB

Number of tenants scoring 1 is tracked on our agency dashboard

Focus and calculations

Three month period for data

Rent Percentage of amount

billed vs. amount paid Tenants on Rep Payee

automatically get a 5

Serious Incidents No incidents – 5 1 to 2 incidents – 3 3 or more - 1

Holdover Notice to cure or later Includes stipulation

periods

Apartment Inspections Acceptable, Borderline,

Unacceptable Rating determines score

Workorders Number submitted

Sample Management Index Scores

FirstName

LastName Unit Subsidy

CodeRep

payeeRentScore

WorkorderScore

IncidentScore

Apt ConditionScore Holdover Total

Score

Bart Simpson 211 NYNY 3.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 3.00

Lisa Simpson 212 LI 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00

Ned Flanders 213 NYNY 5.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 3.00

Bleeding Gums Murphy 214 LI 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 3.00

Montgomery Burns 215 NYNY 1.00 5.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 1.00

Seymour Skinner 216 LI 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00

Percentage of Tenants with Each Score

april may jun

e julyau

gust

septem

ber

octob

er

nove

mber

decem

berJan

-12

februa

rymarc

h0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

531

Individual Tenant History

Rating Date

Apt Cond

Holdover

Incidents Rent Rep

PayeeWork

OrdersTotal Score

8/31/2011 5 5 5 5 1 5 5

9/30/2011 5 5 3 5 1 3 310/31/201

1 5 5 5 5 1 3 3

11/30/2011 5 5 5 5 1 3 3

12/31/2011 5 5 5 5 1 3 3

1/31/2012 5 5 1 5 1 3 1

2/29/2012 5 5 3 5 1 3 3

3/31/2012 5 5 3 5 1 1 1

Number of Tenants with Incident Scores

may june jul

yau

gust

septem

ber

octob

er

nove

mber

decem

berJan

-12

februa

rymarc

hap

ril05

1015202530354045

31

Uses

Provides a quick snapshot of individual tenant behavior at the moment Cross check against other

sources of information Identify tenants most in

need of help Determine strategy and

targets for court cases

Determine impacts of new policies and changing tenant populations

Examine trend data for individuals Chronically street homeless

adjusting to housing Identify decompensation

and other issues

Quickly review building information Current building snapshot

and trends Buildings as compared to

each other

Serious Incident Tracking

History of Development

Concern about nature and frequency of incidents

Desire to look at aggregate information

Desire to compare trends across buildings

Focus

Incident Database has incident types and check boxes for emergency responders

Report examines frequency of Incident types Presence of emergency responders

Rate of incidents per 100 residents allows for comparison across buildings, because buildings vary in size.

Historical data is shown for trending purposes

Sample Incident Tracking Report

Total IncidentsJanuary

2012February

2012March2012

Q12012

Q42011

Q32011

Q22011

Q12011

NYPD (checked) 14 25 21 60 25 44 60 76

FDNY (checked) 1 4 1 6 6 8 12 9

EMS (checked) 17 17 16 50 34 40 47 70

Unduplicated Total 28 37 30 95 60 82 98 120

Argument/Dispute 4 5 8 17 10 21 32 36

Disorderly Conduct 1 4 3 8 3 2 19 5

Harassment 0 2 0 2 3 7 5 14

Illegal Activity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Missing Property / Theft 0 1 1 2 2 5 0 2

NYPD Called/Onsite 10 22 14 46 23 28 58 68

Physical Altercation 0 1 0 1 0 2 10 7

Property Damage 1 1 2 4 2 6 1 3

Tenant Abuse of Onsite Staff 1 1 1 3 1 3 5 2

Tenant Abuse of Security 1 5 3 9 4 11 6 7

Total 18 42 32 92 48 85 136 144

Incidents per 100 Residents

Total Incidents Per 100 residentsJanuary

2012February

2012March2012

Q12012

Q42011

Q32011

Q22011

Q12011

NYPD (checked) 4.12 4.21 5.08 13.41 8.65 13.27 13.04 12.59

FDNY (checked) 0.46 0.37 0.37 1.19 1.33 1.42 1.46 1.19

EMS (checked) 5.63 4.44 4.49 14.55 10.39 13.32 12.13 14.32

Unduplicated Total 8.65 7.51 8.42 24.58 17.89 23.75 22.33 23.39

Argument/Dispute 0.73 0.78 1.42 2.93 3.16 3.89 4.90 3.71

Disorderly Conduct 0.50 0.78 1.46 2.75 1.28 0.87 2.47 1.56

Harassment 0.37 0.27 0.09 0.73 0.55 1.14 0.82 1.65

Illegal Activity 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.14 0.09 0.23

Missing Property / Theft 0.32 0.09 0.23 0.64 0.50 1.05 0.96 0.50

NYPD Called/Onsite 3.25 3.34 3.66 10.25 7.69 9.06 10.94 11.62

Physical Altercation 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.23 0.32 0.64 0.64

Property Damage 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.23 0.27 0.50 0.37 0.23

Tenant Abuse of Onsite Staff 0.32 0.27 0.27 0.87 0.64 0.96 0.50 0.78

Tenant Abuse of Security 0.64 0.78 0.78 2.20 1.46 2.33 1.69 1.60

Total 6.18 6.50 8.01 20.69 15.84 20.27 23.39 22.52

Serious Incidents by Quarter/100 Residents

Q12012

Q42011

Q32011

Q22011

Q12011

Q42010

Q32010

Q22010

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00

TOTALABCDD(a)EFF(a)GH

Uses

Examine current number of serious incidents per building Modify or change practices, such as setting thresholds for court Use data to help re-center staff and give perspective

Compare incident rates across buildings Examine different populations Promote best practices in managing incidents

Review trend information Are there more incidents during certain times of year? Helps to devote resources during startup

Conclusions

Two Tools Amongst Many

Use both tools together to give a clearer picture of incidents Management Index provides individual tenant data Serious Incident tracking shows frequency and types of incidents

Other tools include Exit Analysis – examines positive and negative exists from housing MTDB Audit – internal review of MTDB data Case Note Audit and Service Plan reviews – ensures we meet

contractual requirements Incident Review Committee – examines best practices, training

needs, etc.