Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09-22-2025 Agenda
Human Services Committee * Regular Meeting CITY OF * September 22, 2025 - 4:00 PM A1JJ1JJ ] 4 1 East Main Street Annex Conference Rm 1 WASHINGTON 2nd Floor AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC PARTICIPATION A. The Human Services Committee Meeting scheduled for Monday, September 22nd, 2025 at 4:00 p.m. will be held in person and virtually. Virtual Participation Link: Microsoft Teams Need help? Join the meeting now Meeting ID: 248 953 040 008 Passcode: AA2Tw5 Dial in by phone +1 509-530-1507„207853047# United States, Spokane (509) 530-1507..207853047# United States (Toll-free) Find a local number Phone conference ID: 207 853 047# For organizers: Meeting options I Reset dial-in PIN ROLL CALL AGENDA MODIFICATIONS AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION This is the place on the agenda where the public is invited to speak to the Board on any issue. A. The public can participate in-person or submit written comments in advance. Participants can submit written comments via mail, fax, or email. All written comments must be received prior to 5:00 p.m. on the day before the scheduled meeting and must be 350 words or less. Please mail written comments to: City of Auburn Attn: Jody Davison, CDBG Coordinator 25 W Main St Auburn, WA 98001 Please fax written comments to: Attn: Jody Davison, CDBG Coordinator Fax number: 253-288-3132 Email written comments to: jdavison@auburnwa.gov If an individual requires accommodation to allow for remote oral comment because of a difficulty Page 1 of 37 attending a meeting of the governing body, the City requests notice of the need for accommodation by 5:00 p.m. on the day before the scheduled meeting. Participants can request accommodation to be able to provide a remote oral comment by contacting Human Services Department in person, by phone 253- 876-1965, or by email (jdavison©auburnwa.gov). ANNOUNCEMENTS, REPORTS, AND PRESENTATIONS A. Presentation by Health Point APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Discussion and Approval of the August 25th Meeting Minutes DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Potential Program(s) in the next funding cycle to address the needs of the most vulnerable in the community B. 2024 Needs Assessment Review NEW BUSINESS SCHEDULE FOR UPCOMING MEETINGS A. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Human Services Committee is September 22nd 2025 at 4:00 pm. ADJOURNMENT Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office and on the City website (http://www.auburnwa.gov). Page 2 of 37 CITY OF J\I.JBU1R.ts4 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM WASHINGGTTON Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Discussion and Approval of the August 25th Meeting Minutes September 22, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Human Services 2025.08 - Draft August 2025 minutes Administrative Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Councilmember: Staff: Page 3 of 37 Human Services Committee Regular Meeting CITY OF * August 25, 2025 - 4:00 PM 1 East Main Street Al- JJ3lJI:&tttAnnex Conference Rm 1 WASHINGTON 2nd Floor MINUTES CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC PARTICIPATION A. The Human Services Committee Meeting scheduled for Monday, August 25, 2025, at 4:00 p.m. was held in person and virtually. ROLL CALL Committee Members present: Erica Tomas, Susan Miller, David Wright, Carmen Goers, Amber Lott, Heather Wise & Ashley Samuel Committee Members absent: Staff present: Kent Hay, Human Services Director; Jody Davison, Human Services Coordinator AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION A. No requests for accommodation or written comments were received prior to the meeting. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS A. Sue Miller asked for an update from staff on the HUD financing and how it relates to the Executive Order 14151. ANNOUNCEMENTS, REPORTS, AND PRESENTATIONS Staff provided an update on the injunction filed, the last court ruling in favor of the jurisdictions and submission of the consolidated plan on the 22nd of August, 2025. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Discussion and Approval of the July 28th Meeting Minutes Motion by Heather Wise to amend the draft July minutes to correctly reflect the Page 4 of 37 June 23rd 2025 date and update the spelling of Erica Thomas's last name to Tomas. Motion Seconded by Erica Tomas Motion Carried Motion by Sue Miller to approve the June 23rd, 2025 minutes as amended Motion Seconded by Erica Tomas Motion Carried DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Discuss future funding strategies Action Item: The committee members will create funding-focused ideas for the 2027-2028 years and send them to staff within the next 2.5 weeks. SCHEDULE FOR UPCOMING MEETINGS A. The next Human Services Committee Meeting will take place on September 22, 2025 @ 4:00 PM. City of Auburn, Annex Building, Second Floor Conference Room 1 1 East Main Street, Auburn WA 98001 ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn by Erica Tomas. Seconded by Amber Lott Motion Carried There being no further business to come before the Human Services Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 5:07 p.m. APPROVED this day of , 2025 Carmen Goers, Human Services Chair Kent Hay, Director of Human Services Page 5 of 37 Page 6 of 37 2024 CITY OF AUBURN Needs Assessement Contents Needs Assessment 3 NA-05 Overview 3 NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs -91.415, 91.215 (f) 5 Housing Needs Assessment Attachment 1 8 Housing Needs Assessment 8 Housing Needs Summary Tables 13 Disproportionally Greater Needs 19 Public Housing 22 Homeless Needs Assessment 25 Page 12 Page 8 of 37 Needs Assessment NA-05 Overview The City of Auburn is an entitlement community within the King County Consortium. As part of the King County Consortium,Auburn participates in an inter-jurisdictional partnership with nearly all the cities and unincorporated areas of King County, excluding Seattle and Milton.The Consortium coordinates investment for HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grants, and CDBG)funds. However,Auburn, as an entitlement community, receives a separate allocation of CDBG funds from the King County Consortium. Auburn utilizes the Consolidated Plan to explore trends specific to the city and its CDBG allocation. The Needs Assessment of the Consolidated Plan summarizes key housing and community development trends impacting the City of Auburn.Through analysis of federal, state, and local datasets, as well as a review of existing planning documents and reports, Auburn identified several major housing and human service needs of low-and moderate-income people in the city.The needs identified in this section help to inform the Strategic Plan, which outlines how the City of Auburn will use its CDBG funds over the next five years.As a member of the King County Consortium, King County's 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan outlines how the Consortium will use its HOME and Emergency Solutions Grants funds over this period. The Consolidated Plan utilizes two primary data sources: the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey(ACS) and the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy(CHAS),which contains custom tabulations of ACS data. Auburn analyzed the 2016-2020 five-year CHAS estimates, 2018-2022 ACS five- year estimates, and information from other available sources such as local reports, plans, studies, dashboards, and datasets to better understand recent trends impacting the city. Key Themes from the Needs Assessment Forty-seven percent of Auburn households are considered low-to moderate-income. As seen in Auburn and throughout many cities in the United States, low-to moderate-income households have distinct housing and non-housing community development needs. Listed below are some key findings related to housing needs. • Housing cost burden, defined as a household paying more than 33 percent of their income on housing, and severe housing cost burden, defined as a household paying more than 50 percent of their income on housing, constitute the greatest share of housing problems,with extremely low-income households experiencing the greatest share of severe housing cost burden as opposed to low-and moderate-income households. • Fifty-two percent of renter households experienced at least one housing problem. • Small families experience the greatest share of severe housing cost burden among renter households. • Elderly households experience the greatest share of severe housing cost burden among owner households. • Although the sample size is small, Pacific Islander households were disproportionately impacted by housing cost burden and other housing problems. • Most public housing residents and voucher recipients are considered extremely low-income. • Adults with children comprise the greatest share of households experiencing homelessness. Page 13 Page 9 of 37 • The average time spent experiencing homelessness varies greatly depending on the family type, but the length of homelessness in Auburn tends to be longer than that in the King County Consortium, extending over two years for some categories. Public Survey Process In addition to analyzing ACS and CHAS data, the City of Auburn conducted a public survey regarding community needs and CDBG funding priorities from July 24 to August 23, 2024. One question asked respondents to identify Auburn's spending priorities for the CDBG Grant Funds,which included the following suggestions for the city: • Prioritize families with fixed incomes in funding activities. • Support affordable housing, particularly for low-income seniors. • Increase funding for the Clean and Sober Housing Program for those completing substance abuse treatment. • Help disabled senior homeowners facing increased costs to age in place. • Assist with move-in costs and application fees for those experiencing housing instability. • Support programs to assist with home improvement costs and permitting fees. Needs Assessment Attachment 1 provides a greater analysis of the trends described above. Page 14 Page 10 of 37 NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs - 91.415, 91.215 (f The City of Auburn identified the jurisdiction's non-housing community development needs by analyzing information gathered through several methods, including: • Public engagement efforts conducted for the Consolidated Plan from July 25 to August 23, 2024. These efforts included stakeholder engagement and a public survey, which received 120 responses. • Needs identified through the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan update process,which includes a community poll, an open house, and data analysis. • An analysis of 211 calls originating from the Auburn School District. The needs of Auburn residents identified through the above sources are summarized below. Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Facilities. How were these needs determined? Consolidated Plan Survey The survey asked participants to rank the CDBG spending categories (housing, other real property activities, public facilities and improvement activities, economic development activities, and other activities)from 1-5, with 1 being the most important. Participants ranked public facilities and improvements as a 3.04, indicating a medium priority level. Participants to provide open-ended comments regarding what they believe would be beneficial to the City in determining its spending priorities for CDBG grant funds. Participants commonly reported a desire for more community centers and recreational facilities for teenagers and young adults. Comprehensive Plan Update The capital element of the Comprehensive Plan Update includes a list of facilities in which the level of service is expected to decrease because of changes made under the capital facilities plan.A decreasing level of service might lead to gaps in coverage or a need for greater services.These facilitates are: • General municipal buildings. • Open space. • A senior center. • Special use areas. Additionally,the city held a kickoff open house for the Comprehensive Plan to collect public comments. The comments revealed a desire to have greater recreational facilities such as sports fields, outdoor recreation areas, and entertainment venues. Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Improvements. How were these needs determined? Consolidated Plan Survey As stated above, survey participants ranked public facilities and improvement activities at an importance level of 3.04 (with 1 being the greatest priority). Participants spoke about the following community needs in the open-ended comment section of the survey: Page 15 Page 11 of 37 • Greater investment in public safety measures and assistance. • Development of safe paths for both walking and cycling. • Street beautification, including litter control and neighborhood cleanup. • Park improvements and acquisition of more park areas. Pickleball lines on tennis courts and outdoor basketball areas were specifically noted as desired park improvements. Comprehensive Plan Update The transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan update describes needs identified in the community relating to transportation improvements.These include: • Creating new transit routes to connect Auburn's West Hill region, which is not directly served by any transit services,to the Federal Way Transit Center or Auburn Station. • Providing frequent and efficient transportation transit systems between Federal Way Transit Center and Auburn Station. • Increasing access to transit, such as a commuter-oriented shuttle,to connect the Lee Hill region to greater transportation options. • Providing greater service and routes in the Lakeland Hills region. • Creating and maintaining infrastructure for biking and pedestrians, including bike lanes. In addition, a poll conducted by the City of Auburn regarding the 2024 Comprehensive Plan asked participants to identify their top five priorities for Auburn in the next 20 years.The following results indicate that public improvement is a priority based on the percentage of respondents who selected it as a priority: • Preserving open space and environmental stewardship (54.4 percent). • Maintaining a safe community(45.5 percent). • Increasing bicycle and pedestrian amenities (36.4 percent). • Increasing access to parks and amenities (18.2 percent). 211 Data From September 11, 2023 to September 9, 2024,4.5 percent of calls received from the Auburn School District 211 call center requested transportation assistance. Of those, 55.8 percent of callers (234 calls) requested assistance with ride services and local transportation such as metro buses, senior rides, and paratransit. Of note, 41.5 percent of callers were over the age of 60.This underscores the need for increased transportation options, particularly for seniors. Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Services. How were these needs determined? Consolidated Plan Survey Several needs regarding public service needs arose from the open-ended survey comments, including: • Support for early childhood education programs. • Affordable childcare for young families. • Business and technical assistance to improve childcare services. Page 16 Page 12 of 37 Comprehensive Plan Update In the poll conducted by the city of Auburn, 18.2 percent of residents indicated that maintaining a high level of public services and utilities should be a priority for Auburn over the next 20 years. 211 Data The City of Auburn analyzed publicly available 211 data from callers in the Auburn School District.The 211 data provides insight into the nature of services needed in the community. From September 11, 2023 to September 9, 2024, 9,407 calls were made to 211 from the Auburn School District.The data does not indicate the number of unique calls made.The data from the calls indicated: • 34.5 percent were regarding housing and shelter service needs. • The second most requested service category was utilities (13.9 percent). • 61.7 percent of calls requesting utility assistance were about electric bills. • 12.2 percent of callers requested government and legal support; 44.9 percent of those calls were requesting housing law assistance. • 10.4 percent of calls were regarding food assistance; 65.4 percent of those calls requested help buying food. Page 17 Page 13 of 37 Housing Needs Assessment Attachment 1 Housing Needs Assessment Introduction The Housing Needs Assessment provides an overview of demographic information regarding Auburn's low-to moderate-income population,which serves as a base for further analysis into the needs and characteristics of these households. Another way to evaluate housing needs is to consider the different types of housing generally affordable to different household incomes. In 2023, a family of four is considered low-income if they earn less than $110,950 per year.Assuming they spend 30 percent on rent,the maximum rent they could spend is approximately$2,770. Table 1 provides the FY 2024 income limits for the Seattle-Bellevue, WA HUD Metro fair market rent (FMR) area.These figures are calculated annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD) and provide context as to what constitutes extremely low, low, and moderate incomes in the region.The household area median family income (HAMFI) is comparable to the area median income (AMI)for the below analysis. While CHAS estimates utilize the Seattle-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Area in determining income categories in Auburn,the income limits for Auburn align more closely with Pierce County due to it lying on the outskirts of the Seattle-Bellevue area.Table 2 provides the FY 2024 income limits for the Tacoma, WA HUD Metro FMR area,which is located in Pierce County. Table 1:FY 2024 Income Limits(Seattle Bellevue, WA HUD Metro FMR Area) Income 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Category Extremely low- income $31,650 $36,200 $40,700 $45,200 $48,850 $52,450 $56,050 $59,700 (30% HAMFI) Very low- income $52,700 $60,250 $67,800 $75,350 $81,400 $87,450 $93,400 $99,450 (50% HAMFI) Low- income $77,700 $88,800 $99,900 $110,950 $119,850 $128,750 $137,600 $146,500 (80% HAMFI) Data Source:2024 Income Limits Documentation System. Page 18 Page 14 of 37 Table 2:FY 2O24 Income Limits(Tacoma, WA HUD Metro FMR Area) Income 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Category Very low- income(50% $40,550 $46,350 $52,150 $57,900 $62,550 $67,200 $71,800 $76,450 HAMFI) Extremely low-income $24,350 $27,800 $31,300 $34,750 $37,550 $41,960 $47,340 $52,720 (30%HAMFI) Low-income $64,900 $74,150 $83,400 $92,650 $100,100 $107,500 $114,900 $122,300 (80%HAMFI) Data Source:2024 Income Limits Documentation System. An analysis of the most recent CHAS data found that 13,730 households earned less than 80 percent HAMFI in 2020, meaning that 47 percent of the total households qualified as low-to moderate-income. The Housing Needs Assessment uses ACS and CHAS data as a base to understand the characteristics and needs of those low-to moderate-income households in Auburn. Population Growth As of April 2024, 88,950 people resided in the City of Auburn, making it the 14th largest city in Washington State (Washington State Office of Financial Management). In the past five years, Auburn has experienced significant growth. One factor influencing growth was the opening of two large apartment complexes in the city, which attracted new residents. Figure 1 depicts the annual population and growth rate in Auburn from 2012 to 2022. In that span,the city's population grew 21.8 percent. In 2021,the city experienced the highest growth rate of 5.4 percent,which is more than double the next highest growth rate (2.4 percent in 2017). In 2022,the rate slowed significantly to a near-stagnant growth. Page 19 Page 15 of 37 Figure 1 Annual Population in Auburn (2012-2022) Population —%Annual Change 90,000 85,623 6.0% M 80,000 5.4% 70,297 5.0% 70,000 • o 60,000 4.0% a ea ca n 50,000 U 3.0% 73 a To 40,000 2.2% 2 4% Q 30,000 2.2% 2.2% 2.0% 1.5% 20,000 1.4% 1.3% 1.0% 1.0% 10,000 — 0.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Data Source:ACS 5-year estimates for years 2012-2022. Increases in population create a greater need for housing and increase housing costs. As depicted in Table 3,the number of households in Auburn increased 15 percent in the last 10 years. As housing becomes less available and more expensive due to the spiking interest rates and stalling development, as described throughout the Needs Assessment and Market Analysis, low-to moderate-income households feel the effects of decreased affordable housing stock and increased instances of housing cost burden. Table 3:Housing Needs Assessment Demographics Demographics Base Year:2012 Most Recent Year:2022 %Change Population 70,297 85,623 22% Households 26,968 30,987 15% Median income $54,329 $87,406 61% Data Source:ACS 2008-2012(Base Year),ACS 2018-2022(Most Recent Year). While median incomes per person have increased 61 percent in the last decade, many Auburn residents earn less than the AMI. Figure 2 depicts the number of Auburn households by income category in 2020. Forty-seven percent of Auburn households fell into the low-to moderate-income category, earning less than 80 percent HAMFI. Among the low-to moderate-income categories,the extremely low-income (0- 30 percent HAMFI), low-income (31-50 percent HAMFI), and moderate-income (51-80 percent AMI) were approximately equal, at 15 percent, 16 percent, and 15 percent respectively. 4,670 households were considered extremely low-income, and 4,395 households were considered low-income. Fifty-three Page 110 Page 16 of 37 percent of Auburn households were not considered low-to moderate-income, with 60 percent of households earning more than 100 percent HAMFI annually. Figure 2:Number of Households by AM!Category 0-30% HAMFI 40% • 31-50% HAMFI 51-80% HAMFI • 81-100% HAMFI Over 100% HAMFI 16% Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS. Types of Households by Income Level Table 4 analyses the type of households in the City of Auburn by income category in 2020. As depicted in the table, small households represented the greatest share of total households in Auburn. Forty-four percent of all households in Auburn were considered small-family households. Small-family households were the most represented in each income category as well.The data also indicates that in 2020,there were 4,239 low-to moderate-income households in Auburn with at least one household member over the age of 65. Table 4:Households by Income Category Household Type 0-30%HAMFI 31-50% 51-80% 81-100% Over 100% HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI Total Households 4,670 4,395 4,665 3,780 11,710 Small-family households—four or 1,435 1,525 2,145 1,745 6,255 fewer people in the household Large-family households—four or more 505 420 730 405 1,385 people in the household Page 111 Page 17 of 37 Household Type 0-30%HAMFI 31-50% 51-80% 81-100% Over 100% HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI Household contains at least one person aged 62 835 875 760 730 2,530 to 74 years of age Household contains at least one person aged 75 735 579 455 205 500 or older Household contains one or more children aged 6 895 855 1,155 760 2,020 years or younger Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS. Figure 3 provides further insight into the income levels of renter and owner households in Auburn. Notably, 66 percent of owners and 54 percent of renters earned over$100,000 annually.The $50,000— $74,999 income bracket was most represented in Auburn, accounting for 27 percent of total households. However, renters were more represented in the lower-income categories, particularly in the $35,000—$74,999 income brackets. Figure 3:Percentage of Owners and Renters by Income Owner Households •Renter Households Total Households 70% 66% 60% 54% 50% 40% 30% 27% 23% 1k 20% 15% 15% 0 0 8/ 9% 6/ 8/ 10% 12 0 9% 10% 5% F 4% 2/ 3% 0% 1. 1/� Less than $10,000 to $20,000 to $35,000 to $50,000 to $75,000 to $100,000 plus $10,000 $19,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 Data Source:ACS Data 2018-2022. Page 112 Page 18 of 37 Housing Needs Summary Tables The following tables explore the number of households in Auburn experiencing specific types of housing problems that are captured in CHAS data,which include the following. Housing Problems • Substandard housing: Units lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities. • Overcrowded: Households in which there is more than one person per room (and none of the above problems). • Housing cost burden: Households that spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs. Severe Housing Problems • Substandard housing: Units lacking any plumbing or kitchen facility. • Severe overcrowding: Households in which there are more than 1.51 people per room (and none of the above problems). • Severe housing cost burden: Households that spend more than 50 percent of their income on housing costs. Table 5 outlines the number of households that experienced a housing problem by tenure in Auburn in 2020. Of the housing problems identified in the table,the most common issues for renter and owner households were housing cost burden and severe housing cost burden. For renter households, 2,165 were housing cost burdened and 2,475 were severely housing cost burdened.Those figures for owner households were 2,950 and 1,060, respectively. The most significant issue facing these groups is housing affordability across each income level.Aside from housing cost burdens, owner households do not have high instances of substandard housing issues or overcrowding, meaning owners could have better living conditions. Page 113 Page 19 of 37 Table 5:Housing Problems by Income Level and Tenure Renters Owners Income Level 0-30% 31-50% 51-80% 81-100% Over 100% 0-30% 31-50% 51-80% 81-100% Over 100% HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI Substandard housing 180 45 15 0 85 4 35 10 0 160 Severely overcrowded 100 160 55 10 75 0 0 4 0 45 Overcrowded 195 280 95 50 125 20 45 135 10 70 Housing cost burden greater than 50%of income(and none of the 2,055 345 30 0 40 555 315 120 40 30 above problems) Housing cost burden greater than 30%of income(and none of the 385 1,160 475 100 40 I 390 645 1,010 575 330 above problems) Housing cost burden not computed 110 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 (and none of the above problems) Has none of the above housing 425 345 1,375 1,410 235 1,020 1,330 1,585 8,675 12,845 problems Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS. CITY OF *AUBURN Page 14 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 20 of 37 As represented in Figure 4 and Figure 5, for both renter and owner households, extremely low-income households experienced the greatest share of severe housing cost burden,while low-and moderate- income households experienced the greatest share of housing cost burden. In particular, moderate- income owners experienced a significant amount of housing cost burden. Between renters and owners, renters were more likely to experience housing problems: 52 percent of renter households experienced at least one housing problem as opposed to 26 percent of owner households. Figure 4: Housing Problems by Income Category for Renter Households 2,500 2,055 2,000 Substandard Housing 1,500 •Severely Overcrowded 1,160 Overcrowded 1,000 •Housing Cost Burden Severe Housing Cost Burden 500 385 475 195 280 3 I 1 100 45 160 95 15 55 30 0 . —m1111- 0-30% HAMFI 31-50%HAMFI 51-80%HAMFI Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS. Figure 5:Housing Problems by Income Category for Owner Households 1,200 1,010 1,000 Substandard Housing 800 •Severely Overcrowded 645 600 555 Overcrowded 1390 •Housing Cost Burden 400 315 Severe Housing Cost Burden 200 135120 4 020 3i0 � 104 ,, 0 — 0-30% HAMFI 31-50%HAMFI 51-80%HAMFI Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS. CITY OF AUBURN Page 15 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 21 of 37 Housing Cost Burden Figure 6 depicts the percentage of households who experienced either form of cost burden by tenure. Notably, owners with a mortgage and renters experienced cost burden at similar rates-22 percent and 25 percent, respectively. However, renters experienced a severe cost burden more than three times as much as owners with a mortgage (26 percent and 7 percent respectively). Figure 6: Cost Burden by Tenure Owners with a mortgage •Owners without a mortgage • Renters 30% 25% 26% 25% 22% 20 II- 15% 10% 10% im 5% 5% 0% Cost Burdened Severely Cost Burdened (30-50%) (50%or more) Data Source:2018-2022 ACS. To further explore the demographics of severe cost burden in Auburn, Figure 7 and Figure 8 depict which types of families experienced the greatest share of severe cost burden in 2020. For renters, small families made up the largest share of severely cost burdened households at 43 percent overall and in most individual income categories. One notable exception is the moderate-income category, in which elderly households represented the overwhelming majority(71 percent).This represents a large variation from the overall representation of elderly households at 21 percent. For owner households (Figure 8), elderly households represented the greatest share of severe housing cost burden across income categories, aside from the moderate-income category. Small families followed closely behind at 31 percent. Elderly households represented the greatest share of severe housing cost burden across all income levels except for the low-income category. Finally, small-family owner households comprised the majority of the moderate-income category. CITY OF AUBURN Page 16 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 22 of 37 Figure 7:Severe Housing Cost Burden for Renters by Income Category and Family Type P Small Family ■Large Family Elderly Households ■Other Households 0-30% HAMFI 31% 9% 28% 31% 31-50%HAMFI 65% 3% 13% 20% 51-80%HAMFI Total Under 80%AMI 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS. Figure 8:Severe Housing Cost Burden for Owners by Income Category and Family Type Small Family ■ Large Family Elderly Households ■Other Households 0-30% HAMFI 29% 14% 14% 31-50%HAMFI MEEMISI 31% 51-80%HAMFI 34% 0% '0 34% Total Under 80%AMI 30% 10% 22% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS. Crowding Although not as pervasive as housing cost burden, the data indicates that crowding was the most common housing problem not related to housing cost burden in 2020.Table 6 categorizes all instances of crowding in Auburn by income category and household type. 1,157 households in Auburn below 100 percent HAMFI experienced crowding. Across all income categories, single families comprised the greatest share of crowding instances,with 919 single-family households experiencing crowding out of 1,157 (79 percent of total crowding instances). In terms of need by income category, both extremely CITY OF AUBURN Page 17 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 23 of 37 low-and low-income categories comprised the greatest share of crowding instances at 314 and 480, respectively. Table 6:Instances of Crowding by Income Category and Family Type 0-30% 31-50% 51-80% 81-100% Total Under 100% HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI Single-family 280 410 174 55 919 household Multiple, unrelated 34 45 120 0 199 families Non-family 0 25 0 14 39 household Total need by 314 480 294 69 1157 income Data Source:2018-2020 CHAS. Lead-Based Paint Risk Table 7 provides information on housing conditions in Auburn. In particular, the table presents data on the age of housing structures with children younger than age six present. In 1978,the federal government banned the use of lead-based paint in homes. Structures built prior to 1978 are at an increased risk of having lead-based paint, which poses a health risk to occupants. Due to data limitations,Table 7 provides information on structures built earlier than 1980. Most households (64 percent) lived in a structure built in 1980 or later,while 30 percent of households lived in a structure built between 1940 and 1979. Of the 1,060 households with children aged six and under living in a structure built prior to 1980, 67 percent were renters and 33 percent were owners. For renters,the extremely low-and low-income households were more likely to live in a structure built prior to 1980 at 48 percent and 43 percent, respectively. For owners, low- and moderate-income households experienced the greatest share of older housing stock at 44 percent and 42 percent, respectively. Table 7:Age of Housing Structure by Income Level for Households with Small Children Household Type HAMFI 31-50% 51-80% Total Under ji HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI 80%HAMFI Structure built 1980 or later 565 480 800 1,845 Structure built 1940 to 1979 330 305 250 885 Structure built 1939 or earlier 0 70 105 175 Total households with children age 6 895 855 1,155 2,905 or younger present Data Source:2018-2020 CHAS. CITY OF AUBURN Page 18 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 24 of 37 Disproportionally Greater Needs Introduction HUD defines a disproportionately greater housing need when a racial or ethnic group experiences housing problems at a rate over 10 percentage points higher than that of the corresponding income level as a whole.The tables below summarize the percentage of each racial or ethnic group experiencing housing problems by HAMFI levels. For this analysis, HAMFI is comparable to AMI. Housing Problems • Substandard housing: Units lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities. • Overcrowded: Households in which there is more than one person per room (and none of the above problems). • Housing cost burden: Households that spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs. Severe Housing Problems • Substandard housing: Units lack any plumbing or kitchen facility • Severe overcrowding: Households in which there are more than 1.5 people per room (and none of the above problems). • Severe housing cost burden: Households that spend more than 50 percent of their income on housing costs. Table 8 lists the racial and ethnic groups that experience a disproportionately greater share of housing problems and their corresponding income category.The data analysis discovered six unique instances of disproportionately greater need regarding housing problems. Across income categories, Pacific Islander households experienced the most instances of disproportionate impact. Pacific Islander households were disproportionately impacted in two out of three income categories,while Pacific Islanders in the 0-30 percent and 31-50 percent income categories experienced disproportionate impact at the highest rate compared to the income category(17 percent and 28 percent higher than average, respectively). Note that the sample size in both categories was small (fewer than 100 households). Table 8: Disproportionally Greater Need:Housing Problems Race/Ethnicity Income Category Percent Difference from Total Pacific Islander alone,non-Hispanic 0-30%AMI 17 Hispanic,any race 0-30%AMI 11 Asian alone,Non-Hispanic 31-50% 11 American Indian or Alaska Native alone,non-Hispanic 31-50% 20 Pacific Islander alone,non-Hispanic 31-50% 28 AUBURN Page 19 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 25 of 37 Race/Ethnicity Income Category Percent Difference from Total Black or African American alone, non-Hispanic 51-80% 24 Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS. Table 9 depicts the racial and ethnic groups that experienced severe housing problems disproportionally to their respective income categories.The data analysis identified eight instances of disproportionate impact. Pacific Islander households experienced two instances of disproportionate impact (in the 0-30 percent AMI and 31-50 percent AMI income categories). Notably, Pacific Islander households in the 31- 50 percent AMI income category experienced severe housing problems 66 percent more than average, respectively.Again, it is important to note that in both categories the sample sizes were less than 100 people. Table 9:Disproportionally Greater Needs:Severe Housing Problems Race/Ethnicity Income Category Percent Difference from Total Black or African American alone,non- Hispanic 0-30%AMI 11 Pacific Islander alone,non-Hispanic 0-30%AMI 33 Hispanic,any race 0-30%AMI 12 Asian alone,non-Hispanic 31-50%AMI 10 American Indian or Alaska Native alone, 31-50%AMI 26 non-Hispanic Pacific Islander alone,non-Hispanic 31-50%AMI 66 Black or African American alone,non 51-80%AMI 11 Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native alone, 51-80%AMI 18 non-Hispanic Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS. Table 10 displays the percentage of each racial and ethnic group who experienced no housing cost burden (share less than 30 percent), housing cost burden (share 30-50 percent), and severe housing cost burden (share greater than 50 percent).The first row shows the percentages for total households, which represents the baseline for determining disproportionate need.The data analysis finds no instance of disproportionally greater need regarding no housing cost burden. However, Black or African American and American Indian or Alaska Native households have a housing cost burden at 11 percent and 15 percent, respectively. Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and Asian households were the most overrepresented for severe housing cost burdens.There is no specific ethnic group that is disproportionately affected by a severe housing burden. CITY OF AUBURN Page 20 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 26 of 37 Table 10:Disproportionate Share of Housing Cost Burden Shar ing Cost Burden Race/Ethnicity Share Less Than 30% 0-50% Share Greater Than 50% Total Households 68% 19% 13% White alone,non-Hispanic 69% 18% 12% Black or African American alone,non-Hispanic 63% 20% 16% Asian alone,non-Hispanic 74% 15% 10% American Indian or Alaska Native alone,non-Hispanic 58% 34% 10% Pacific Islander alone,non- 75% 13% 12% Hispanic Hispanic,any race 65% 17% 18% Other 47% 29% 23% Data Source:2016-2020 CHAS. CITY OF AUBURN Page 21 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 27 of 37 Public Housing The King County Housing Authority(KCHA) serves low-income residents living in Auburn with housing assistance. KCHA aims to provide decent, safe, and sanitary housing to low-income people in the community.The following section outlines the number of public housing units and vouchers in use for Auburn and data on the characteristics of current public housing residents and 2023 voucher recipients. As illustrated in Table 11, KCHA manages 315 units of public housing in Auburn and awards 1,471 project-and tenant-based rental vouchers. 1,316 vouchers (89 percent) are tenant-based Section 8 vouchers. KCHA also administers 336 special purpose vouchers in addition to project-and tenant-based vouchers. Approximately 60 percent of special purpose vouchers are dedicated to people living with a disability.These include non-elderly disabled, mainstream one-year, mainstream five-year, and nursing home transition vouchers. In addition, 73 Auburn residents received a Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing voucher, and 62 Auburn residents received a Family Unification Program voucher. Table 12 depicts selected characteristics of Auburn residents residing in public housing or utilizing vouchers. Across programs, the average annual income of residents ranges from approximately$17,000 to $23,000. Residents utilizing project-based vouchers report the lowest average annual income ($17,304.79),while residents utilizing tenant-based vouchers report an average annual income that is almost$5,000 higher($22,216.32). With the average household size being approximately 2.5 across programs, this indicates that, on average, Auburn residents living in public housing or utilizing vouchers are considered extremely low-income. In addition,Table 12 includes the average length of stay in public housing or utilizing vouchers.Across all programs, the average length of stay in Auburn is higher than the King County Consortium. Of note,the average length of stay in public housing in the King County Consortium is 8.5 years.The average length of stay in Auburn is 9.8 years.Those figures are 8.8 and 10.2 years, respectively,for residents utilizing tenant-based vouchers. Finally,Table 12 indicates that 400 housing vouchers are awarded to elderly residents and 756 are awarded to disabled families.The table also notes that in Auburn,there are no residents receiving vouchers identifying them as victims of domestic violence, HIV/AIDS program participants, or homeless at admission. Tables 13 and 14 present race and ethnicity data for the head of household living in public housing or utilizing vouchers. Overall,44 percent of voucher recipients identify as White and 43 percent of voucher recipients identify as Black or African American.These figures align with trends observed in the King County Consortium, in which 45 percent of voucher recipients identify as White and 41 percent identify as Black or African American. Additionally, 68 percent of Auburn public housing residents identify as White,which is 14 percentage points higher than the King County Consortium. Nineteen percent of King County Consortium public housing residents identify as Asian, while just 6 percent of Auburn public housing residents identify as Asian. Finally, 5 percent of voucher recipients and 6 percent of public housing residents identify as Hispanic, which aligns with trends observed across the King County Consortium. CITY OF AUBURN Page 22 of 31 WASH I N GTON Page 28 of 37 Table 11: Public Housing by Program Type Vouchers Public Housing Project- Tenant- Special Purpose Vouchers 4111 Based Based Veterans Affairs Family Unification * Supportive Housing Program Disabled #of units/vouchers 315 1471 155 1316 73 62 201 in use Data Source:2023 PHA data. *Includes non-elderly disabled, mainstream one-year, mainstream five-year, and nursing home transition vouchers. Table 12: Characteristics of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Vouchers M. Public 'ecial Purpose Vouchers Housing Total Project- Tenant- Veterans Affairs 1 Family Based Based Supportive Unification Housing Program Average annual income $21,698.79 $19760.55 $17,304.79 $22,216.32 $21,869.40 $22,802.58 Average length of stay in years 9.8 8.35 6.5 10.2 4.2 9 Average household size 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.6 1.4 3.2 #Homeless at admission 0 0 0 0 0 0 0#of elderly program participants(age 62+) 400 400 35 365 36 6 #of disabled families 756 756 70 686 53 23 #of families requesting accessibility features 0 0 0 0 0 0 #of HIV/AIDS program participants 0 0 0 0 0 0 Data Source:2023 PHA data. CITY OF r AUBURN Page 23 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 29 of 37 Table 13: Race of PHA Residents by Program Type Vouchers e rs Race Category of the Head of Household Public Housing Project- Tenant- Veterans Family Total Affairs Based Based Unification Disabled Supportive Housing Program White 215 654 69 585 46 25 126 Black/African American 58 621 54 567 22 22 50 Asian 19 42 9 33 0 3 4 American Indian,Alaska Native 5 39 5 34 0 4 5 Pacific Islander 5 44 3 41 2 3 6 Other 13 71 15 56 3 5 10 Data Source:2023 PHA data. Table 14:Ethnicity of PHA Residents by Program Type Vouchers Special Purpose Vouchers Ethnicity of the Head of Household Public Housing troject Tenant- Veterans amI Total Affairs y Based Based Supportive Unification isabled Housing Program Hispanic 19 74 6 68 4 5 9 Non-Hispanic 296 1397 149 1248 69 57 192 Data Source:2023 PHA data. CITY OF *AUBURN Page 24 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 30 of 37 Homeless Needs Assessment The Homeless Needs Assessment reviews data from various sources to describe the nature of homelessness in Auburn, including demographic information, challenges, and needs of those experiencing homelessness in Auburn.This section utilizes data acquired from the Seattle/King County CoC,the City of Auburn, the Consolidated Plan "Mini Poll," and 211. Point-in-Time Count and Homeless Management Information System Data from the Seattle/King County CoC The Seattle/King County CoC (WA-500) is the regional planning body that coordinates housing, shelter, and supportive services for people experiencing homelessness in Auburn.The CoC is led by the King County Regional Homelessness Authority(KCRHA), whose mission is to significantly decrease homelessness throughout the county while centering the principles of equity and social justice and incorporating the voices of people with lived experience into the homelessness response system. KCRHA publishes various dashboards, reports, and plans on its website that provide the public with detailed information on the people and households served and the performance of the homelessness response system. The Homeless Needs Assessment includes data provided by KCRHA.This data includes the official 2024 Point-in-Time (PIT) count and an unofficial Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) report for the 2023 calendar year. Due to the nature of homelessness and system limitations, challenges exist in collecting Auburn-specific data. As noted by the CoC, people experiencing homelessness in King County frequently move between small cities, such as Auburn,for shelter services.This pattern of movement is not captured in the static PIT and HMIS data reports, indicating that the data provided by the CoC likely undercounts the true number of persons experiencing homelessness in Auburn. Definition of Homelessness CoCs use a specific definition of"homeless,"which determines whether someone is eligible to receive CoC-funded housing, shelter, and services.An individual or family is considered homeless if they fall into at least one of the following categories: 1. Homeless:The individual or family lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence. For example,they live in a place not meant for human habitation such as a car, park, or public place. 2. At imminent risk of homelessness:The individual or family will imminently lose their primary nighttime residence, does not have another residence identified, and does not have the resources or support networks to find permanent housing. 3. Is fleeing or attempting to flee domestic violence:The individual or family is fleeing or attempting to flee or experiencing trauma or a lack of safety related to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or other dangerous, traumatic, or life-threatening conditions related to the violence against the individual or a family member in the individual's or family's current housing situation, including where the health and safety of children are jeopardized. The CoC definition of homelessness does not include people living in other unstable housing situations, such as people doubling up with another household,that could generally be considered as homeless living arrangements, likely underrepresenting the true nature and extent of homelessness in Auburn. CITY OF AUBURN Page 25 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 31 of 37 PIT and HMIS Data 2024 PIT and 2023 HMIS data, summarized below, provide insight into the characteristics and demographics of people experiencing homelessness in Auburn. 694 households were entered into HMIS, meaning they experienced homelessness at some point throughout the year. Most households who experienced homelessness (85 percent)were comprised of adults and children.Just 105 households (15 percent)were comprised of adult-only households.This differs from trends observed in the King County Consortium,wherein 54 percent of all people experiencing homelessness belonged to adult-only households. Overall,the City of Auburn experiences a greater percentage of homelessness among households consisting of both adults and children. Additionally,the 2023 HMIS report indicates that 66 percent of people who experienced homelessness in Auburn experienced chronic homelessness. Again,this figure is higher in Auburn than in the King County Consortium,where 20 percent of all people experiencing homelessness were experiencing chronic homelessness. Forty-one families also experienced unsheltered homelessness in 2023.Table 15 also indicates that 85 veterans and 281 unaccompanied youth experienced homelessness in 2023. Finally,Table 15 estimates the number of days people experience homelessness according to HMIS data. For populations for which data is available, days spent homeless vary greatly depending on the population. However,the length of homelessness for all categories spans greater than one year. Individuals experiencing chronic homelessness experienced, on average, 527 days homeless, which equates to approximately one year and five months. Persons in households with an adult and children present—which comprise the greatest share of Auburn's population experiencing homelessness— experience homelessness for approximately two years and five months. Finally, chronically homeless families experience homelessness for the greatest length of time on average, equating to four years and nine months. In all categories except chronically homeless individuals, residents of Auburn experience homelessness for longer periods of time than those in the King County Consortium as a whole. Table 15: Homeless Needs Assessment Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the# of Persons Experiencing Becoming Exiting of Days Persons Population Experiencing Homelessness Homeless Homelessness Experience Sheltered Each Year Each Year Each Year Homelessness Homelessness (HMIS) (HMIS) (HMIS) (HMIS) (PIT) Persons in households with 29 589 552 188 884.6 adult(s)and child(ren) Persons in households with 0 NA 6 3 0 only children Persons in households with 6 105 213 253 622.38 only adults CITY OF AUBURN Page 26 of 31 WASH I N GTON Page 32 of 37 Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the# Estimate the# of Persons Experiencing Becoming Exiting of Days Persons Population Experiencing Homelessness Homeless Homelessness Experience Sheltered Each Year Each Year Each Year Homelessness Homelessness (HMIS) (HMIS) (HMIS) (HMIS) (PIT) Chronically homeless 3 461 219 256 527 individuals Chronically homeless 3 41 161 90 1745 families Veterans 0 85 15 32 0 Unaccompanied 6 281 69 81 821.13 youth Data Source:2023 HMIS Data and 2024 PIT Count Data. Table 16 outlines the racial and ethnic makeup of the 35 people experiencing sheltered homelessness recorded in the 2024 PIT count. Forty percent of people experiencing homelessness on a given night in Auburn identified as White, 34 percent of people identified as Black or African American, and 17 percent of people identified as multiracial. No persons in the PIT count identified as Hispanic. Table 16:People Experiencing Homelessness on a Given Night by Race and Ethnicity Race #People Sheltered White 14 Black or African American 12 Asian 0 American Indian or Alaska Native 0 Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 1 Multiracial 6 Client prefers not to answer 2 Hispanic 0 Total 35 Data Source:2024 PIT Data. HMIS data for 2023 also provides information on specific subpopulations experiencing homelessness in Auburn. Table 17 indicates that eight people who identify as severely mentally ill, eight people who CITY OF AUBURN Page 27 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 33 of 37 identify with chronic substance abuse, and two people who identify with domestic violence experienced sheltered homelessness in 2023. Table 17:Subpopulations Experiencing Homelessness in Auburn A Subpopulation #of People Sheltered Chronic homelessness 0 Domestic violence 2 Severely mentally ill 8 Chronic substance abuse 8 Survivors of domestic abuse 0 Unaccompanied youth 0 Parenting youth 0 Chronic homelessness 0 Data Source:2023 HMIS Data. City of Auburn Homeless Outreach Data The City of Auburn employs three dedicated outreach staff who provide housing navigation services to people experiencing homelessness throughout the city and who work in encampments each day to provide assistance. Outreach staff maintain a client intake log, which collects demographic and outcome information on clients experiencing homelessness.The data tables below summarize key information from the 2024 Auburn Homeless Outreach Data log(from January to September 2024). From January to September 2024,the City of Auburn logged 983.4 total outreach contacts and 364 unduplicated clients.Table 18 depicts the number of total contacts by month. For five out of the first nine months of the year, Auburn staff interacted with over one hundred contacts (in February, March, April, May, and July).Auburn staff recorded the highest number of contacts in April (172) and February (145). Figure 18: Total Number of Contacts by Month (2024) Month (2024) Number of Contacts January 87 February 145 March 128 April 172 May 114.5 CITY OF AUBURN Page 28 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 34 of 37 Month(2024) Number of Contacts June 96 July 127 August 70 September 44 Total 983.5 Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(provided by the City of Auburn). Tables 19-21 provide insight into the demographic information of the 364 unduplicated clients for which information was recorded and available.Table 19 describes the gender identity of those experiencing homelessness in Auburn. Of unduplicated contacts for which gender information was available, 61 percent identified as male and 39 percent identified as female. Table 19: Gender of Unduplicated Contacts Experiencing Homelessness Gender #of Unduplicated Contacts Male 220 Female 142 Transgender 0 Unknown 0 Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(provided by the City of Auburn). Table 20 depicts the age of outreach clients. Out of the clients for which age was available (315), most contacts (48 percent) belonged to the 35-54 age category. Of note, 30 percent belonged to the 55-74 age category,which encompasses those considered to be elderly. Finally, 10 contacts (3 percent), belonged to the youngest age bracket (18-24). Table 20:Age of Unduplicated Contacts Experiencing Homelessness Mategory #of Unduplicated Contacts 18-24 10 25-34 56 35-54 151 55-74 94 85+ 0 Unknown 4 Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(provided by the City of Auburn). CEJYOF AUBURLV AT Page 29 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 35 of 37 Table 21 depicts the race and ethnicity of unduplicated contacts.The majority of unduplicated contacts identified as White (57 percent), while approximately 21 percent of contacted identified as Black. Finally, approximately 7 percent of unduplicated contacts identified as Latino. Table 21:Race/Ethnicity of Unduplicated Contacts Experiencing Homelessness Race/Ethnicity Category #of Unduplicated Contacts American Indian or Alaskan Native 6 Black 76 Native Hawaiian 16 Latino 24 White 207 Mult-Racial 19 Unknown 3 Other 6 Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(Provided by the City of Auburn). Table 22 provides information on the length of homelessness reported by unduplicated contacts. In 355 instances,the length of homelessness was collected by outreach workers. Of those instances, 70 percent of contacts reported experiencing homelessness for one year or longer.This represents the majority of unduplicated clients. The second highest length of homelessness reported was "90 days or more, but less than a year," which accounted for 14 percent of responses. Table 22:Length of Homelessness of Unduplicated Clients Time Frame #of Undu•licated Contacts One year or longer 249 One week or more,but less than one month 11 One night or less 1 One month or more,but less than 90 days 19 Not homeless 14 Data not collected 9 Client does not know 1 90 days or more,but less than a year 51 Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(Provided by the City of Auburn). Finally,Table 23 provides information on the outcomes of unduplicated clients.The City of Auburn defines outcomes using a scale of three levels, which are defined below. In 2024, most clients (approximately 50 percent) reached a level 2 outcome, which means they are actively engaged with CITY Of AUBURN Page 30 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 36 of 37 outreach workers to resolve their situation. Thirty-two percent of contacts reached level 3, meaning their situation was resolved or they otherwise achieved the goals of the outreach.Just one contact declined assistance in 2024. Table 23: Outcomes for Unduplicated Contacts evel Reached #of Unduplicated Contacts Level 1: Initial interactions,identify needs and offering support.Client may not yet 54 be actively engaged. Level 2:Client is actively engaged and working with outreach to set individual goals (needs/barriers/resources)that may resolve their individual situation.Client willing 178 to accept referral services such as help with documentation,transportation,shelter, etc. Level 3:Client situation is resolved or individual goal(s)achieved 115 Client declined assistance 1 Unknown 16 Data Source:2024 Homeless Outreach Data(Provided by the City of Auburn). Consolidated Plan Survey The City of Auburn conducted a public survey that accepted responses between July 25 and August 23, 2024.The survey, which garnered 120 responses, asked respondents to provide any information that they believed would be beneficial to the City in determining its spending priorities for the CDBG Grant Funds. Listed below are themes that emerged regarding homelessness: • Provide more transitional housing solutions. • Provide additional shelters to help people experiencing homelessness. • Offer more affordable housing and solutions, particularly for seniors,fixed-income families, and people living with a disability,to prevent loss of housing and homelessness. • Help people experiencing homelessness obtain and maintain ID cards, which are crucial to accessing services. 211 Data 211 data indicate that from September 12, 2023 to September 10, 2024, housing and shelter comprised the greatest number of inquiries to the directory (34.4 percent of calls). Of them, 10.4 percent, or 337 calls, directly requested shelter assistance. In 2023,417 calls requested shelter assistance. Of those calls, 61.6 percent of callers identified as female and 44.1 percent identified as being aged 30-39. CITY OF AUBURN Page 31 of 31 WASHINGTON Page 37 of 37