Cross-Sector Collaboration to Improve Homeless Services: Addressing Capacity, Innovation, and Equity Challenges

• Author: Jennifer E. Mosley
• DOI: 10.1177/0002716221994464
• Published date: 01 January 2021
• Date: 01 January 2021
• Subject Matter: New Perspectives and Methods

246 ANNALS, AAPSS, 693, January 2021

DOI: 10.1177/0002716221994464

Cross-Sector

Collaboration to

Improve

Homeless

Services:

Addressing

Capacity,

Innovation, and

Equity

Challenges

By

JENNIFER E. MOSLEY

994464ANN THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMYCROSS-SECTOR COLLABORATION TO IMPROVE HOMELESS SERVICES

research-article2021

Homeless services are plagued by resource scarcity and

fragmentation, making the field a poster child for cross-

sector collaboration—a policy trend where nonprofits

and government come together to address problems

that cannot be solved by one sector alone. The contin-

uum of care (CoC) system mandates this—through

coordination, regions are thought to be better able to

integrate services to improve homeless outcomes. This

study uses qualitative data from eighteen CoC net-

works to investigate (1) the collaborative challenges

that CoCs experience and (2) the role that network

managers play in addressing those challenges. Findings

indicate three primary challenges: lack of capacity,

inability to create momentum around innovative prac-

tices, and inequities across service populations.

Together, these can affect the trajectories of people

who are homeless by making the system less efficient

and creating service gaps, but leaders can address them

by promoting a collective vision and sharing power.

Keywords: continuums of care; homelessness; cross-

sector collaboration; capacity; leadership;

organizations; networks

The homeless service system in the United

States is notorious for its fragmentation

(e.g., lack of coordination between different

relevant policies and service systems) and con-

stant resource scarcity, both of which have led

to the persistence of ineffective policy solutions

and service interventions (Zur and Jones 2014).

Such a “wicked problem” is a poster child for

the collaboration imperative—a policy trend

where nonprofit providers and government

agencies come together to address problems

Jennifer E. Mosley is an associate professor in the

School of Social Service Administration at the University

of Chicago. She researches the role of nonprofit organi-

zations as political actors, specifically the role human

service organizations, philanthropic foundations, and

cross-sector collaborations play in advocating for or

implementing policy change that affects underrepre-

sented populations.

Correspondence: mosley@uchicago.edu

CROSS-SECTOR COLLABORATION TO IMPROVE HOMELESS SERVICES 247

that cannot be solved by one sector alone (Kettl 2006; Rittel and Webber 1973).

Such cross-sector collaboration between government entities and nonprofit pro-

viders is thought to promote more holistic solutions, support innovation, and

better coordinate services (Page etal. 2015).

As a response to this policy trend, in 1994 the U.S. Department of Housing

and Urban Development (HUD) initiated the continuum of care (CoC) system.1

The CoC system requires organizations seeking funding to serve the homeless to

join together with all the other homeless-serving organizations in their region and

submit a single application to access McKinney Vento funding—the leading

funding source for homeless services in the United States. By mandating that

communities submit a single joint application, HUD intended to promote

community-wide planning and coordination to improve the outcomes and trajec-

tories of people who are homeless (Burt etal. 2002; Culhane etal. 2018). Each

region of the country is covered by only one CoC, and membership is intention-

ally diverse; CoCs generally comprise local government agencies, nonprofit

homeless service providers, faith-based organizations, engaged individuals, and,

sometimes, consumers. This type of collaboration is aimed at coordinating focus

on the most difficult to serve populations, such as the chronically homeless, who

can fall through service gaps when such collaboration is not present. Collaboration

also allows for “no wrong door” programs that help to ensure that when people

enter the system they are directed to the most appropriate types of services for

their needs, avoiding under or over serving.2

More than four hundred CoCs now exist in the United States, serving every

region of the country. Each is unique, and they vary greatly in size, reflecting the

array of services available in each catchment area. These networks of organiza-

tions carry out required tasks such as engaging in year-round planning, submit-

ting HUD funding applications, conducting point-in-time (PIT) counts, and

managing homeless management information systems (HMIS) and coordinated

entry processes (designed to triage and direct people who are homeless to the

best available housing option). Beyond those duties, CoCs also play key roles in

setting local priorities, generating community support, and improving regional

communication. Importantly, CoCs are not just a process, they are cross-sector

organizational networks, with defined leadership, governance processes, infra-

structures, and rules.

Cross-sector collaboration in the form of organizational networks like CoCs is

on the rise (Bryson, Crosby, and Stone 2015), but collaboration requires precious

resources and time, and can be perceived as taking time away from front-line

service activities; this may be frustrating for organizations if they do not see a

payoff from the collaboration. Other known challenges of cross-sector collabora-

tion include the potential for conflict between different organizational cultures,

loss of flexibility and autonomy for participants, and challenges for organizations

whose missions do not neatly align with collaborative goals (Emerson

NOTE: I gratefully acknowledge the research assistance of Bridgette Davis, Kevin Lee, Jade

Wong, and Tadeo Weiner-Davis. This work was supported by the University of Chicago Center

for Health Administration Studies and the RGK Center-ARNOVA President’s Award.