Tacoma can’t find a provider to run its young adult homeless shelter. That’s a problem
The situation is troubling.
It’s been four months since I wrote about the less than amicable separation between Comprehensive Life Resources and the City of Tacoma at the Beacon Center young adult overnight shelter. It’s been just about as long since the city issued a request for proposal in hopes of finding a new provider to operate the shelter, which supplies a place for roughly 50 unhoused 18- to 24-year-olds to sleep every night.
During that time, the city has heard from many local providers, some of whom have expressed concerns, publicly and privately, that what the city is trying to do at the Beacon Center — and what it’s offering to pay for it — need significant changes to work.
So perhaps it’s no surprise, then, that what the city hasn’t managed to do over the last four months is find an agency to run the shelter long term.
During the Tuesday, June 22, City Council study session, Linda Stewart, who leads Tacoma’s neighborhood and community resources department, provided the update. With Comprehensive Life Resources’ contract ending and nowhere else to turn, Valeo Vocation has agreed to run the Beacon Center young adult shelter for the next 90 days. Valeo recently operated COVID-19 related temporary shelters at the Eastside Community Center and the Center at Norpoint.
Especially for the young people who depend on the shelter, it’s a welcome short-term solution.
What it doesn’t provide an answer to is the important questions the saga has raised.
Why has nearly every agency in town that provides homeless services to youth and young adults balked at the city’s overtures?
What does that tell us?
The only clear conclusion is that the city’s approach, expectations and dedication to solving the problem must change.
Like every dilemma related to homeless services, the one surrounding the Beacon Center young adult shelter is complicated. For years now, some residents at the nearby Midtown Lofts have complained of the crime, blight and disruptions they say the shelter brings to the neighborhood. At the same time, those running the shelter have poured their hearts and souls into providing a safe place for homeless young adults to turn to, despite being underfunded, underappreciated and under-supported by city staff and elected officials, according to Comprehensive Life Resources CEO Kim Zacher. Between 2019 and 2020, the city contributed roughly $1 million to run the shelter, according to funding data provided by the city earlier this year, which Zacher has said failed to cover all the associated costs.
In some ways, that’s water under the bridge now, which at least provides a path forward. Comprehensive Life Resources is moving on, and Tacoma now has a chance to get things right.
The next — more challenging — step is agreeing on what right looks like.
During Tuesday’s study session, several city leaders offered their thoughts.
Council member Lilian Hunter suggested the city incorporate lessons learned from the operation of temporary emergency micro shelter sites, which have been successfully run at locations across the city. Council member Catherine Ushka, meanwhile, urged the city to leverage its community connections to help establish new homeless services providers, drawing on Tacoma’s homegrown compassion and skills. Both are ideas worth considering.
Greg Walker, who is the Pierce County area director at The Coffee Oasis, also has suggestions that should be taken seriously.
As Stewart told the council this week, Coffee Oasis — which runs a 12-bed underage youth shelter up the street — considered stepping up at the last minute to run the Beacon Center young adult shelter for up to 12 months.
Ultimately, Coffee Oasis was left with the same conclusion as others, Walker said. The nonprofit couldn’t pull it off, at least in a way that felt right.
Through email, Walker said Coffee Oasis “determined that the scope of work was not a good fit for our organization at this time.”
While he declined to delve into specifics, Walker did point to several letters he sent to Stewart and members of the council — as well as other area service providers — which shed significant light on his nonprofit’s misgivings.
In an email from March shared between service providers, Walker explained that Coffee Oasis is interested in operating youth and young adult shelters for “the long term.”
He noted the Beacon Center “was not intended to be a long-term solution to young adult shelter needs,” while arguing that the “program model” described in the city’s initial RFP “does not adequately provide the stability necessary for residents to achieve long-term success.”
Walker went on to write that the large, congregate shelter model that the Beacon Center currently operates is a limitation, which “contributes to ongoing instability and a lack of dignity afforded to residents” by forcing them to “vacate daily.”
They’re difficult points to refute.
What’s particularly striking is how similar they are to concerns bluntly shared by Zacher from Comprehensive Life Resources earlier this year.
“I think the city wants to run a shelter,” Zacher said back in March. “I don’t think they want to do what it would take to end homelessness of youth.”
So what should be done about the problem? Walker’s emails also highlight several potential solutions.
For starters, Walker advocates for a long-term plan that would transition from the congregate shelter setting offered at the Beacon Center to a model that includes “5-7 sites around the city that provide a home-like environment for 6-8 residents” at a time.
He would also like to see those shelters be low-barrier — meaning young adults with addiction issues or behavioral health needs could still access them — with staffing that allows for comprehensive case management on site.
While they would cut against the city’s plan to spend significant money upgrading the Beacon Center, the beauty of both these suggestions is they potentially alleviate long-standing issues on all sides. From a provider perspective, they would establish a model for homeless young adults that’s much more than a cot at night and a few meals, offering a real shot at success. For the shelter’s neighbors, many of the problems associated with housing 50 people every night and then sending them on their way in the morning would likely dissipate.
From a city perspective?
All it will require is time, money, cooperation and — most of all — a much larger commitment to providing more than a Band-Aid to the problem of young adult homelessness.
That’s the message being sent.
The question is whether or not the city is ready to hear it.
