Overview
Partnering with Adjacent Systems
Single Adults Scorecard: Questions 3D
Youth Scorecard: Questions 2A, 2B, 2C, 4C, 5
Family Scorecard: Questions 2A, 2B, 2C, 4C
The foundational content below applies System-wide to all populations. Sections at the bottom of this page highlight areas where there may be population specific nuances for Single Adults, Youth, and Families.
Does our community have formal or informal agreements and processes in place to coordinate with adjacent systems, including domestic violence providers, child welfare, school districts, juvenile justice, and Veterans Affairs, to quickly and accurately identify people experiencing homelessness within those systems and ensure they are reflected in the by-name dataset?
This page, along with related tools, resources, and case studies, will help you answer the adjacent systems questions across all three population scorecards. These questions cover two main themes:
- Whether the homeless response system has established relationships and referral pathways with key adjacent systems
- Whether people experiencing homelessness who are primarily served by adjacent systems are identified, connected to resources, and included in the by-name dataset
What does BFZ mean by “adjacent systems?”
Adjacent systems are organizations and providers that regularly interact with people experiencing homelessness but operate outside the traditional homeless response system. These providers are not typically HMIS-contributing partners and may serve a broader population that includes, but is not limited to, people experiencing homelessness.
Key adjacent systems include:
- Domestic violence / victim services providers — Organizations serving people fleeing or attempting to flee domestic violence or other forms of interpersonal violence. These providers are often prohibited from entering client data into HMIS and require heightened confidentiality protections. In some communities, the domestic violence shelter is integrated into the homeless responses system and coordinated entry process, but other victim services providers (such as rape crisis centers, court advocates, and crisis hotlines) may be less connected.
- Child welfare systems — State and county agencies responsible for child protection and foster care. Families and youth involved with child welfare are at elevated risk of homelessness and may not be identified by the homeless response system without intentional coordination.
- Local school districts (McKinney-Vento) — Schools are required under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act to identify and support students experiencing homelessness. School districts often have information about families and youth that the homeless response system may be missing.
- Juvenile justice systems — Youth involved in the juvenile justice system face significantly elevated rates of homelessness. Coordination with juvenile justice can help identify young people who are experiencing or at risk of homelessness.
- Veterans Affairs (VA) — VA Medical Centers and VA-funded programs serve veterans experiencing homelessness and may have information about veterans not yet connected to community homeless response services. While VASH and SSVF are often integrated into the homeless response system, connecting with other areas of the VA may be important to reach all veterans experiencing homelessness.
Why does partnering with adjacent systems matter?
People experiencing homelessness don’t only interact with homeless response providers
Many people, particularly youth and families, first come into contact with systems outside the traditional homeless response providers. Without intentional coordination, these individuals and households may never be identified, connected to resources, or included in the by-name dataset.
Adjacent systems often serve the most vulnerable and hardest-to-reach populations
People fleeing domestic violence, youth involved in child welfare or juvenile justice, and families known to school McKinney-Vento liaisons are among the populations most likely to be missed by traditional outreach and intake processes. Building relationships with the systems that are already serving these populations is one of the most effective ways to ensure they are not overlooked.
Coordination improves outcomes across systems
When homeless response providers and adjacent systems share information and have clear referral pathways, people can be connected to the right resources faster. This coordination contributes to improved outcomes for people experiencing homelessness while also reducing the burden on providers who may not be equipped to address housing instability on their own.
How to build relationships and referral pathways with adjacent systems
Start with relationship-building
Effective coordination with adjacent systems begins before any formal agreement is in place. Homeless response system leaders should identify the key staff within each adjacent system, such as a McKinney-Vento liaison at the school district, a DV shelter director, or a VA social worker, and establish regular communication. These relationships create the foundation for more formal coordination over time.
Educate adjacent system partners
Many providers outside the homeless response system are not familiar with how the by-name dataset works, what resources are available, or what to do when they identify someone experiencing homelessness. Providing clear, accessible information about how to make a referral, what happens after a referral is made, and what resources are available to the populations they serve is an essential part of building effective partnerships.
Develop formal or informal referral agreements
Communities should work toward establishing written agreements or documented processes with key adjacent systems that outline how referrals will be made, what information will be shared, and how confidentiality will be protected. Even informal agreements, such as a shared understanding between a shelter and a school district’s McKinney-Vento coordinator, can significantly improve coordination. (Adjacent Systems Resources)
Regularly assess and strengthen partnerships
Like outreach coverage and provider participation, adjacent system partnerships should be regularly reviewed to ensure referral pathways are functioning, staff turnover hasn’t created gaps, and new adjacent system partners are identified as the community’s needs evolve.
A note on data sharing with adjacent systems
Adjacent systems present unique data sharing challenges. Many, particularly domestic violence providers and schools, may be legally restricted from contributing data to HMIS and/or require heightened confidentiality protections. Others may be willing to share data but lack the technical capacity to do so. Communities should approach data sharing with adjacent systems thoughtfully, with the following options in mind:
- Releases of information (ROIs) — With a signed ROI, providers can share individual-level data with the homeless response system. Communities should make it easy for adjacent system partners to obtain ROIs and should provide clear guidance on what data can be shared and how.
- Aggregate or de-identified data sharing — In cases where individual-level data cannot be shared, communities can work with adjacent system partners to share aggregate data that helps the homeless response system understand the scope of need without compromising client confidentiality.
- Anonymous records — Some communities use anonymous records within HMIS to include individuals served by DV providers or other high-confidentiality programs in the by-name dataset without exposing identifying information.
- Warm handoffs and referral tracking — Even without formal data sharing, communities can establish processes for adjacent system partners to make warm referrals to the homeless response system, with tracking mechanisms that allow the community to confirm whether referred individuals are connected to services and added to the by-name dataset.
Population-Specific Guidance
The content above applies to partnering with adjacent systems across all populations. The sections below highlight key nuances and considerations for specific populations. (On the toolkit website, these sections will appear as collapsible accordions.)
For Single Adults, the two most relevant adjacent systems are domestic violence providers and the Veterans Affairs system. While the scope of adjacent system coordination is narrower for this population than for youth or families, these partnerships are critical for ensuring that some of the most vulnerable single adults are connected to services and reflected in the by-name dataset.
Key considerations for single adult adjacent system partnerships:
- Domestic Violence Providers: serve single adults fleeing interpersonal violence who may be experiencing literal homelessness but are not engaged with the broader homeless response system. Because DV providers are often restricted from entering client data into HMIS, communities must develop alternative pathways, like anonymous records, aggregate data sharing, or warm referral processes, to ensure these individuals are connected to services and included in the by-name dataset. Communities should also ensure that outreach and shelter providers are trained to identify and appropriately respond to single adults fleeing or attempting to flee domestic violence.
- VA Providers: Communities should coordinate closely with VA Centers and VA-funded programs to ensure that veterans experiencing homelessness who are engaged with VA services but not yet connected to community homeless response providers are identified and included in the by-name dataset. Clear data-sharing agreements and referral pathways between VA and community providers are essential for this population.
Youth homelessness doesn’t happen in isolation. It is often connected to other systems. Many young people first experience homelessness when leaving foster care, detention, or school. These systems often have data, staff, or resources that can help prevent or resolve homelessness if they’re coordinated. Effective collaboration with these key systems helps prevent youth from falling through the cracks.
Key considerations for youth adjacent system partnerships:
- Local School Districts and McKinney-Vento Partners: Schools are often the first or only public system to identify when a young person becomes unstably housed. Communities should build direct relationships with local school district McKinney-Vento liaisons and higher education basic needs coordinators to create clear referral pathways and coordinating protocols for when a young person is identified as experiencing homelessness.
- Child Welfare, Foster Care, and Juvenile Justice: Youth exiting foster care or juvenile detention face a disproportionately high risk of homelessness. Consider establishing referral pathways through formal (e.g. Memorandums of Understanding) or informal agreements with these systems to incorporate housing screenings into existing workflows and execute warm handoffs before a youth is discharged into housing instability.
- Trafficking and Victim Service Providers: Unhoused youth are highly vulnerable to commercial sexual exploitation and interpersonal violence. It’s important that the homeless response system coordinates closely with victim service providers, establishing secure, referral pathways to include young people in the by-name dataset without compromising their safety or confidentiality.
- System Involvement: Young people may not seek services due to a fear of being involved with law enforcement or forced Child Protective Services (CPS). Referral workflows from adjacent systems should prioritize trust, training cross-system staff to assure youth that connecting to the homeless response system is focused on housing support, not punitive action.
While formal agreements like Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) or service agreements can help sustain these relationships through staff turnover, they are not required. Informal agreements are sufficient as long as there is a clearly identified contact person within each system and a known process for connecting unaccompanied youth to homelessness service providers when they are identified. Whether formal or informal, relationships with adjacent systems should have specific champions and points of contact at both the leadership and frontline levels to ensure referral and data sharing processes are clear across partners. (Adjacent Systems Resources)
Coming Soon
Built for Zero is actively gathering best practices in family systems. Additional guidance will be added to this section as communities share their approaches.
Submit Questions or Feedback
We want to hear from you! Let us know if you have specific feedback, comments, or questions about the material on this page.
Submit Questions or Feedback
We want to hear from you! Let us know if you have specific feedback, comments, or questions about the material on this page.
