FINALDRAFT COUNTUSIN2018REPORT 5.25.18

Transcript

1 SEATTLE/KING COUNTY POINT-IN-TIME COUNT OF PERSONS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS 2018 COMPREHENSIVE REPORT PRODUCED BY ASR

2 ABOUT ALL HOME All Home is the lead agency for the Seattle/King County Continuum of Care. All Home’s vision is that homelessness is rare in King County, racial disparities are eliminated, and if one becomes homeless, it is a -time occurrence. brief and only one Zachary DeWolf Sinan Demirel Danielle Winslow Mark Putnam Jean - Paul Yafali Michelle Valdez Felicia Salcedo Kira Zylstra Triina Van 201 S Jackson Street , Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98104 www.allhomekc.org ABOUT THE RESEARCHER Applied Survey Research (ASR) is a social research firm dedicated to helping people build better communities by collecting meaningful data, facilitating information -based planning, and developing custom strategies. The firm was founded on the principle tha t community improvement, initiative sustainability, and program success are closely tied to assessment needs, evaluation of community goals, and development of appropriate responses. Applied Survey Research has over 18 years of experience conducting Point -in-Time Counts throughout California and across the nation. Their work is featured as a best practice in HUD’s publication: A Guide to Counting Unsheltered Homeless People. Vice President: Peter Connery irector: Samantha Green Department D Project Lead: John Connery, Laura Petry Department Coordinator: Jenna Gallant Research Analysts: Javier Salcedo Graphic Design and Layout: Jenna Gallant Central Coast: 55 Penny Lane, Suite 101 Watsonville, CA 95076 tel 831- 728- 1356 Bay Area: 1871 The Alameda, Suite 180 San Jose, CA 95126 tel 408- 247- 8319 www.appliedsurveyresearch.org

3 Table of C ontents Table of Contents 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ... ... 14 COUNT US IN FINDINGS IN SURVEY FINDINGS COUNT US 23 ... Survey Demographics ... 24 Duration and Recurrence of Homelessness ... 28 Living Accommodations ... 30 Self -Reported Causes of Homelessness ... 33 Support in Obtaining Permanent Housing ... 35 ... 37 Assistance and Services Employment and Education 42 ... Health and Disabling Conditions ... 45 Domestic Violence and Partner Abuse ... 46 Criminal Justice System Involvement 47 ... COUNT US IN SUBPOPUL ATION FINDINGS ... 49 COUNT US IN SUBPOPUL ATION FINDINGS: CHRO NIC HOMELESSNESS ... 50 ... RANS ATION FINDINGS: VETE 57 COUNT US IN SUBPOPUL COUNT US IN SUBPOPUL ... 63 LIES WITH CHILDREN ATION FINDINGS: FAMI ATION FINDINGS: UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YOUNG COUNT US IN SUBPOPUL ... 69 ADULTS ATION FINDINGS: VEHI CLE RESIDENTS COUNT US IN SUBPOPUL ... 77 APPENDIX 1: METHODOL OGY ... 83 Street Count Methodology ... 84 93 Youth and Young Adult Count Methodology ... Shel tered Count Methodology ... 97 Survey Methodology 98 ... APPENDIX 2: POINT -IN-TIME COUNT RESULTS ... 103 APPENDIX 3: SURVEY R ESULTS ... 110 FIGURES APPENDIX 4: TABLE OF ... 128 APPENDIX 5: REGIONAL TERED COUNTS ... 132 DEFINITIONS & UNSHEL APPENDIX 6: TERMS & ABBREVIATIONS ... 134 ... DGEMENTS 136 APPENDIX 7: ACKNOWLE 3 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

4 Executive Summary Executive Summary BACKGROUND Point -in-Time Counts provide a “snapshot” of how many people are experiencing homelessness on a given night. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires all Continuums of Care to conduct a Point -in-Time Count during the last 10 days of January, allowing for nationwide analysis of major trends ove r time and tracking progress toward ending homelessness. While Continuums of Care are required to conduct a Point -in-Time Count of their unsheltered population on a biannual basis, Seattle/King County is among several communities that conducts an annual co unt. As the lead agency for the Seattle/King County Continuum of Care, All Home is responsible for conducting and reporting the findings of the local Point -in-Time Count. -in-Time Count findings are used in tandem with data captured through t he Locally, Point Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) to inform local strategic planning and investment, capacity building, and advocacy to address racial disparities and make -time experience. homelessness a rare, brief, and one DEFINITION OF HOMELE SSNESS the purposes of Count Us In, the HUD definition of homelessness for the Point For -in-Time Count was used, and includes individuals and families who: Are living in a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter (including • using, and safe havens) designated to provide emergency shelter, transitional ho temporary living arrangements; or Have a primary nighttime residence that is a public or private place not designed • for or ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings, le, park, abandoned building, bus or train station, airport, or including a vehic camping ground (including any sanctioned or unsanctioned encampment location). It should be noted that this definition is very specific and excludes persons and families who ith friends or other families in private homes, hotels or motels, or other are “doubled up” w arrangements. While the U.S. Department of Education’s definition of homelessness includes -in- children who are living in such arrangements, these families are not included in the Point Time Count. 4 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

5 Executive Summary METHODOLOGY Count Us In was a comprehensive community effort, with the participation of over 200 individuals with a lived experience of homelessness, more than 600 community volunteers, ther community partners interested in staff from various city and county departments, and o ending homelessness. This effort resulted in completing the following core components of Count Us In: 1) informed visual count of unsheltered individuals, General Street Count —a peer- the hours of 2:00 AM and 6:00 AM in most conducted on January 26, 2018 between areas, with more rural or difficult to access locations covered at daybreak on the same day; Youth and Young Adult Count —a focused, survey -based count of unsheltered, 2) unaccompanied youth under the age of 18 and youn g adults between the ages of 18 and 24, conducted throughout the day of January 25, 2018 at both site -based and street locations; 3) Sheltered Count —a count of individuals residing in emergency s helter, transitional housing, and safe haven programs the night of January 25, 2018; and Survey —an in- person representative survey of unsheltered and sheltered individuals 4) conducted by peer surveyors and service providers in the weeks following the general street count. Specialized outreach strategies were also implemented as part of general street count activities in order to achieve more accurate enumerations of vehicle and encampment residents, all -night bus r iders , and unsheltered families. Data presented in this repo rt are sourced from the four components of the count, and frequently from a combination of components. Detailed information on the methodology, including how estimates were produced, can be found in Appendix 1. -TIME COUNT CHALLENGES AND LIMITATI ONS POINT-IN While the methodology employed for Count Us In was the most comprehensive approach available, no methodology allows for a 100% accurate enumeration of all people experiencing homelessness. There are many challenges in any homeless count, especially whe n implemented in a community as large and diverse as Seattle/King County. For a variety of reasons, many individuals and families experiencing homelessness generally do not want to be located, and make concerted efforts to avoid detection. Regardless of ho w successful . This is outreach efforts are, an undercount of those experiencing homelessness will persist especially the case with hard -to-reach subpopulations such as unsheltered families and undocumented persons. The enumeration can also be complicated by differing definitions of homelessness or preconceived ideas about who experiences homelessness. Additionally, the Point -in-Time Count does not calculate the number of unique persons who —which is much higher t elessness over a calendar year han those who are experience hom —and may not be representative of fluctuations experiencing homelessness at any given time 5 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

6 Executive Summary and compositional changes in the population either seasonally or over time. This annual total -in-time can easily be two to three times the single point -in Time estimate. Instead, the Point Count provides a “snapshot” that quantifies the size of the population experiencing homelessness at a given point during the year. The Point -in-Time Count can also provide insight into people who may not be accessin g services, and are therefore absent from other , it is only one of sources of information. Though particularly useful in tracking trends over time many different data sources communities should use to assess, understand, and address the needs of those with out safe, stable, and affordable housing. By counting the minimum number of individuals experiencing homelessness during a given -in-time, the count methodology used for Count Us In was conservative and therefore point most likely resulted in an undercount of certain unsheltered individuals. A margin of error on the final count is not available, though the data presented is to be considered a minimum estimate. . For more information on the challenges and limitations of this study, please see Appendix 1 6 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

7 Executive Summary INTERPRETING DATA PRESENTED IN TH E COUNT US IN REPORT This report provides data regarding the number and characteristics of people experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County on a single night in late January. Special attention is given to specific subpopulations, including persons experiencing chronic homelessness, veterans, families with children, unaccompanied youth under the age of 18 and young adults g in vehicles. between the ages of 18 and 24, and persons livin to aid in understanding overall changes Trend data from 2017 to 2018 are presented in order in the population and assessing progress toward ending homelessness in the region. However, trend the Point -in-Time Count assessment is not designed to answer “why” certain changes may occur over time, as this requires data collection and analysis beyond the scope of the count . While the overall Count Us In methodology was consistent between 2017 and 2018, several factors can contribute to fluctuatio and prevent n in overall Point -in-Time Count findings simple comparisons. These variations include the level of participation among service providers, people with lived experience of homelessness, community volunteers, and other -to- stakeholders. In particular, special challenges presented in counting and surveying hard guides, outreach workers, reach populations rely on the knowledge and expertise of specialist and service providers participating in count activities. As individual participants change and occur the community shifts over time, some fluctuation will naturally . Weather, code enforcement schedules, and local community relationships with people experiencing homelessness also contribute to changes over time. Self -reported survey data. - Additionally, the Count Us In methodolo gy relies heavily on self reporting allows individuals to represent their own experiences; however, such data can be more variable than clinically reported data. Further, while every effort was made to collect - surveys from a rand om and diverse sample of sheltered and unsheltered individuals, the hard to-reach nature of the population experiencing homelessness prevents true random sampling. For these reasons, survey data and data derived from survey responses may shift from year to year. While the demographics of survey respondents changed slightly between 2017 and 2018, many of the survey findings are similar or the same. Survey data presented focus on major findings among the overall population experiencing homelessness and key Survey confidence intervals are presented in each report section subpopulations of interest. featuring survey findings. More granular analyses are not presented because margins of error increase as sample sizes decrease. 7 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

8 Executive Summary COUNT US IN RESULTS of the 2018 Point On the night - in Time Count in Seattle/King County, there were 12 , 112 - people experiencing homelessness experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County on A total of 12,112 individuals were 6, 2018. Fifty -two percent (52%) of the population was unsheltered, living on the January 2 or in parks, tents, vehicles, or other places not meant for human habitation. Compared street, to 2017, the number of individuals experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King Cou nty increased by 4% (469 persons). The unsheltered population increased by 15% (835 persons). CING HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL COUNT POPULATION FIGURE 1. INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN WITH TREND 20,000 15,000 12,112 11,643 10,000 +4% 5,000 0 2017 2018 INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN BY CING HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL COUNT POPULATION FIGURE 2. SHELTER STATUS Sheltered 5,485 6,320 (47%) (52%) 6,158 5,792 Unsheltered (53%) (48%) 2017 2018 643; 2018 n= 12,112 = 11, 2017 n 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 8 |

9 Executive Summary The largest increase was observed among individuals living in vehicles. In 2018, there were an . This represented a 46% increase 3,372 persons living in cars, RVs, and vans estimated compared to 2017, when there were an estimated 2,314 persons living in vehicles. , on the streets, not residing in vehicles, i.e. Alternatively, the unsheltered population in within the unshelter or in tents , decreased by 7% (223 persons), indicating a shift ed buildings, population. Among the sheltered population, the number of persons residing in emergency shelter increased by 3% (94 persons) and the number of persons residing in transitional housing and safe havens decreased by 17% (460 persons). The decrease in the sheltered population was due in part to the successful conversion of transitional housing to permanent housing. FIGURE 3. INDIVIDUALS EXPERIE NCING HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL COUNT POPULATION BY LOCATION TYPE 4,000 2018 2017 3,000 3,585 3,491 3,372 2,667 2,000 2,314 2,207 1,000 1,482 1,402 1,465 370 967 149 138 146 0 Emergency Transitional Sanctioned Street/ Tent/ Building* Vehicle Shelter Housing Outside Encampment/ Unsanctioned and Safe Village* Encampment Haven 1% 3% 12% 8% 30% 30% 20% 28% 18% 23% 13% 1% 12% 1% 2017 2018 2017 n= 11,643; 2018 n= 12,112 ategory “Sanctioned Encampment/Village” In 2018, c Note: to was added and category “Tent” was updated updated in 2018 to reflect 2017 “Tent/Unsanctioned Encampment” for both 2017 and 2018 . Category “Building” was also and 2018 field reports, and includes individuals identified in abandoned buildings as well as public buildings and storefronts. ions of each location type. definit Please see Appendix 6 for c omplete 9 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

10 Executive Summary -one percent (71%) of the county’s unsheltered population identified during the street Seventy count were residing in Seattle. Fifteen percent (15%) of unsheltered individuals were residing in the Southwest region. Lower percentages of unsheltered individuals experiencing homelessness were residing in East County, North County, Northeast County, and Southeast Appendix 5. County. For regional definitions, see When compared to 2017, notable increases in the unsheltered popu lation were observed in Seattle, North County, East County, and Northeast County. While the unsheltered population remained stable in Southeast County, the number of persons experiencing homelessness in Southwest County decreased. FIGURE 4. INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN CING UNSHELTERED HOMELESSNESS, BY REG ION UNSHELTERED 2018 2017 n % n REGION % 319 6% 6% 393 East County 4% 58 1% 251 North County 84 2% 137 2% Northeast County 71% 4,488 3,841 70% Seattle 15% 974 20% 1,113 Southwest County 1% 70 1% 77 Southeast County 100% 5,485 100% 6,320 TOTAL Note: The Seattle region is based on jurisdictional boundaries, while all other regions were defined by census tracts and jurisdictional include both incorporated and unincorporated areas. The Seattle region was updated in 2018 to reflect boundaries for the City of Seattle; unincorporated areas located within census tract areas of the Seattle region were removed and reassigned to adjacent regions as appropriate. The regional definitions for East County and Northeast County w ere also revised in 2018, and Issaquah and Sammamish were reassigned to the East County region. This shift in regional definitions resulted in the movement of data representing 35 persons. The 2017 unsheltered data have been tent comparisons between count years. Please see Appendix 5 for more informat ion on updated in order to make consis how regions were defined and for additional unsheltered detail. 10 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

11 Executive Summary About our neighbors experiencing homelessness An estimated 2,624 individuals were in families with children These individuals represented 782 family households, 96 of which were households headed by a young parent under 25 years old . Ninety -seven percent (97%) of persons in families were sheltered on the night of the count and 3% were unsheltered. Comp ared to 2017, the number of persons in families experiencing homelessness decreased by 7% (209 persons). Note: unsheltered families with children is extremely difficult in the Point -in-Time Count Identifying setting and the number of unsheltered families is likely an undercount. For more information on the methods used to enumerate unsheltered families, please see Appendix 1 (p. 10 1). An estimated 1,518 individuals were unaccompanied youth and young adults Young people represent ed 13% of the total count population, and include d 172 youth under ) of 18 years old and 1,346 young adults between 18 and 24 years old. Three -quarters (75% unaccompanied youth and young adults were unsheltered 25% and on the night of the count were sheltered. Compared to 2017, the number of unaccompanied youth and young adults experiencing homelessness increased by 1% (20 persons). The number of unaccompanied youth under the age of 18 decreased by 22% (49 persons). An estimated 921 individuals identified as veterans On the night of the count, over half (57%) of veterans were unsheltered and 43% were sheltered. Approximately 35% of veterans were experiencing chronic homelessness . Twenty - three veterans were part of family households with children. umber of veterans experiencing homelessness decreased by 31% Compared to 2017, the n (408 persons). The number of veterans experiencing chronic homelessness decreased by 23% (96 persons). An estimated 3,552 individuals were experiencing chronic homelessness Chronic homelessness is defined as sleeping in places not meant for human habitation or shelters for a year or longer— or experiencing at least four such episodes staying in emergency of homel essness in the last three years— and also living with a disabling condition such as a chronic health problem, psychiatric or emotional condition, or physical disability. On the night , 71% of individuals experiencing chronic homelessness were unsheltered and of the count 29% were residing in sheltered locations. Compared to 2017, the number of individuals experiencing chronic homelessness increased by 28% (779 persons). 11 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

12 Executive Summary An estimated 3,372 individuals were living in vehicles ed represent -one Persons living in vehicles over half (53%) of the unsheltered population. Fifty percent (51%) of vehicl e residents were living in RVs, 34% were living in cars, and 14% were living in vans. Compared to 2017, the number of individuals living in vehicles increased by 46% (1,058 persons). Homelessness disproportionately impacts people of color and people identifying as LGBTQ+ In 2018, the majority of individuals experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County identified as people of color. When compared to the demographic racial profiles of the county’s general population, the largest disparities were obs erved among those identifying as -in-Time Count compared to 6% Black or African American (27% in the Point in the general King County population ), as Hispanic or Latino (15% compared to 9%), and with multiple races (16% compared to 6%). Individuals in families identified as people of color at higher rates than individuals who were amily respondents reported encountering a language barrier when survey not in families, and f at th no a rate six times higher than survey respondents wi trying to access local services children. The shelter status of individuals experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County varied across race and ethnicity as well as by gender . Individuals identifying with multiple races, as with American Indian or Alaska Native , and as transgender or a gender other than male or female reported the high est rates of being unsheltered. A 2015 Gallup U.S. Daily survey found that 4.8% of the general population living in the Seattle nsgender. The Bellevue region identifies as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or tra -Tacoma- majority (82%) of 2018 Count Us In Survey respondents identified as straight, while 8% identified as bisexual, 6% identified as gay or lesbian, and 1% identified as queer. One -third (33%) of unaccompanied youth and young adults under 25 years old identified as LGBTQ+, compared to 16% of all other survey respondents. Additionally, histories of domestic violence and partner abuse were most prevalent among . LGBTQ+ survey respondents LGBTQ+ survey respondents when compared to non- Individuals ide ntifying as LGBTQ+ also indicated higher rates of foster care involvement compared to other survey respondents (25% compared to 15%). Domestic violence -six percent (36%) Survey respondents reported a history of domestic Thirty of Count Us In violence or partner abuse, and 7% reported that they were currently experiencing domestic violence. Histories of domestic violence or partner abuse were most prevalent among 12 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

13 Executive Summary Q+ (55%), unaccompanied youth and young adults under 25 individuals identifying as LGBT old (45%), and families with children (40%). years Foster care Seventeen percent (17%) of Count Us In Survey respondents reported a history of foster care. Rates of foster care involvement were highest among unaccompanied youth and young adults identifying as LGBTQ+ (25%). under 25 years old (33%) and respondents of all ages Health conditions Approximately 70% of Count Us In Survey respondents reported living with at least one health condition. The most frequently reported health conditions were psychiatric or emotional conditions (44%), post -traumatic stress disorder (37%), and drug or alcohol abuse (35%). Twenty -seven percent (27%) of respondents reported chronic health problems and 26% reported a physical disability. Over half (53%) of survey respondents indicated that they were living with at least one health condition that was disabling, i.e. preventing them from holding employment, living in stable housing, or taking care of themselves. ng needs Housi -eight percent (98%) of Count Us In Survey respondents said they would move into Ninety safe and affordable housing if it were offered. Prior to losing their housing, 70% of Count Us In Survey respondents reported living either in friends or relatives. a home owned or rented by themselves or their partner, or with Approximately 21% of survey respondents indicated that issues related to housing affordability were the primary conditions le ading to their homelessness, including eviction (11%), inability to afford a rent increase (6%), family or friend could no longer afford to let them stay (2%), and foreclosure (2%). t Us In Survey When asked what would help them to obtain permanent housing, 80% of Coun respondents cited more affordable housing and rental assistance as key to ending their homelessness. Employment as the primary cause of One -quarter (25%) of Count Us In S urvey respondents cited job loss their homelessness. The majority (80% ) of survey respondents reported being unemployed. Forty -five percent (45%) of respondents reported they were looking for work . Sixteen percent they were unable to work due to disability or retirement. (16% ) reported 13 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

14 Count Us In Findings Count Us In Findings The 201 8 Seatt le/ King County Count Us In included a n enumeration of individuals experiencing homelessness living in unsheltered locations , or in sheltered locations listed in 1 The general street count was conducted on January King County’s H ousing Inventory Chart . from approximately 2:00 AM to 6:00 AM and covered the entire geography of 26, 2018 King County. The shelter ed count referenced shelter occupancy of the preceding Seattle/ evening and included all individuals residing in emergency shelters, transitional housing facilities, and safe havens. The methodology used in 201 8 for Count Us In is commonly described as a “blitz count ,” since it is conducted by a large team over a very short period of time. As this method was conducted in Seattle/ King County, the result was an observation -based count of individuals s then followed by ount wa and families who appeared to be experiencing homelessness. The c an in- re used to estimate the e survey, the results of which we person representativ xperiencing homelessness. Information collected from characteristics of the local population e the survey is also used to inform local service delivery and strategic planning efforts , and to fulfill federal reporting requirements . As in previous years, in a continuing effort to improve data on the extent of youth homelessness, Seattle/ King County also conducted a dedicated, survey -based youth and young adult count and young throughout the day on January 25, 2018 . The specialized youth count methodology ensured adult unaccompanied young people under 25 years of age were represented in both the general street count and youth and young adult count. For more information regarding the project methodology, including de -duplication methods, Appendix 2. . For complete count findings, see Appendix 1 see 1 Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Assistance Programs Housing Inventory Count Reports can be found https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/coc/coc at -housing -invent ory -count -reports | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 14

15 Count Us In Findings individuals were experiencing homelessness in Seattle/ King County the night of A total of 12,112 January 2 , living on the street, or 6, 2018 in parks, . Over half of the population was unsheltered (52%) s, vehicles, or other places not meant for human habitation. tent number of persons experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County Compared to 2017, the increased by persons ). The unsheltered population increased by 15% (835 persons ). The 4% (469 number of persons residing in emergency shelter increased by 3% (94 persons) and the number of part to persons residing in transitional housing and safe havens decreased by 17% (460 persons), due in the successful conversion of transitional housing to permanent housing. The largest increase was observed among individuals living in vehicles. In 2018, there were 3,372 persons estimated to be living in cars, RVs, and vans— d to the previous year. a 46% increase compare Alternatively, the unsheltered population not residing in ve hicles, i.e. , on the streets, in buildings, and in tents , decreased by 7% (223 persons), indicating a shift in the unsheltered population. SS, WITH TREND FIGURE 5. TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS EXP ERIENCING HOMELESSNE 20,000 15,000 12,112 11,643 4 + % 10,000 5,000 0 2017 2018 FIGURE 6. BY CING HOMELESSNESS INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN , TOTAL COUNT POPULATION SHELTER STATUS Sheltered 5,485 5,792 (47%) 6,158 (48%) Unsheltered 6,320 (53%) (52%) 2018 2017 15 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

16 Count Us In Findings INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN FIGURE 7. BY CING HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL COUNT POPULATION LOCATION TYPE 4,000 2017 2018 3,000 3,585 3,491 3,372 2,667 2,000 2,314 2,207 1,000 1,482 1,402 1,465 370 967 149 138 146 0 Emergency Transitional Sanctioned Building* Vehicle Street/ Tent/ Shelter Housing Unsanctioned Encampment/ Outside and Safe Village* Encampment Haven 1% 3% 12% 8% 30% 30% 20% 28% 18% 23% 13% 1% 12% 1% 2017 2018 2017 n= 11,643; 2018 n= 12,112 In 2018, category “Sanctioned Encampment/Village” was added and category “Tent” was updated to Note: updated in 2018 to reflect 2017 Building” was also Category “ “Tent/Unsanctioned Encampment” for both 2017 and 2018. 18 field reports, and and 20 includes individuals identified in abandoned buildings as well as public buildings and storefronts. definitions of each location type. Please see Appendix 6 for complete | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 16

17 Count Us In Findings residing in Seattle on Similar to 2017, the majority of the coun ty’s unsheltered population (71%) was in the Southwest region . percent ( the night of the count. Fifteen 15%) were residing When compared to 2017, increases among the unsheltered population were observed in most regions of Seattle/Kin g County, including: • Seattle : 17% (647 persons) % (193 persons) 33 • North County: 3 : 23% (74 persons) • East County : 63% (53 persons) Northeast County • nty persons). Southwest Cou Southeast County reporte d an increase of 1% (7 reported a decrease of 12% (139 persons). - The increase in the number of unsheltered persons residing in Seattle accounted for over three 7%) of the countywide increase observed among the unsheltered population quarters (7 . Please see Appendix 5 for regional definitions and additional un sheltered regional data. INDIVIDUALS EXPERIENCING UNSHELTERED HOMELESSNESS, BY REG ION FIGURE 8. UNSHELTERED 2017 2018 n REGION % n % 6% 319 393 6% East County 251 1% 58 4% North County 2% 84 2% 137 Northeast County 4,488 71% 70% 3,841 Seattle 20% 1,113 15% 974 County Southwest 70 1% 1% 77 Southeast County 5,485 100% 6,320 100% TOTAL Note: The Seattle region is based on jurisdictional boundaries, while all other regions were defined by census tracts and include both incorporated and unincorporated areas. T he Seattle region was updated in 2018 to reflect jurisdictional for the City of Seattle; unincorporated areas located within boundaries census tract areas of the Seattle region were . The regional definitions for East County and Northeast removed and reassigned to adjacent regions as appropriate County were also revised in 2018, and Issaquah and Sammamish were reassigned to the East County region. This shift in regional definitions re sulted in the movement of data representing 35 persons. The 2017 unsheltered data have been updated in order to make consistent comparisons between count years. Please see Appendix 5 for more information on how regions were defined and for additional unshe ltered detail. 17 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

18 Count Us In Findings TLE/KING COUNTY REGIONAL MAP OF SEAT FIGURE 9. 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In | 18

19 Count Us In Findings 7%) of individuals experiencing homelessness were in -quarters (7 households comprised of Over three s with no children. Twenty -two percent (2 2%) of individuals wer e in single adults or adult household (including young adults between 18 and 24 years old) family households comprised of at least one adult under 18 years old . Unaccompanied youth under 18 years old or individuals in and one child households with only children represented less than 2% of the total count population. Ninety -seven percent (97%) of the unsheltered population in 2018 was comprised of individuals in households households with no children. Compared to 2017, the number of unsheltered individuals in increased by 17% (894 persons). with no children FIGURE 10. INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN BY AGE, CING HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL COUNT POPULATION SHELTER STATUS , AND HOUSEHOLD TYPE 2018 ADULTS YOUNG ADULTS YOUTH UNDER TOTAL % OF TOTAL 18 - 24 OVER 24 18 Sheltered 541 3,672 5,792 4 8 % 1,579 1,541 2,545 21% 822 182 Individuals in family households Individuals in households with no children -- 359 2,850 3,209 26% Individuals in households with only children 38 -- -- 38 <1% Unsheltered 180 1,006 5,134 6,320 52% Individuals in family households 42 10 27 79 1% 50% 6,103 5,107 996 -- Individuals in households with no children 1% 138 138 -- Individuals in households with only children -- 12,112 Total 1,547 8,806 100% 1,759 15% 13% 73% 100% -- Percent 2017 ADULTS YOUNG ADULTS YOUTH UNDER % OF TOTAL TOTAL OVER 24 24 - 18 18 535 3,946 Sheltered 6,158 53% 1,677 Individuals in family households 1,647 205 900 2,752 24% 29% Individuals in households with no children -- 330 3,046 3,376 Individuals in households with only children 30 -- -- 30 >1% Unsheltered 237 953 4,295 5,485 47% 42 Individuals in family households 1% 6 33 81 Individuals in households with no children -- 947 4,262 5,209 45% Individuals in households with only children 195 -- -- 195 2% 100% Total 1,914 1,488 8,241 11,643 Percent -- 100% 71% 13% 16% under 18 years old Note: Family households are defined by households with at least one adult and one child . Households without children e children, but include households with one or more adults, but no children. Households with only children include households with one or mor centages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. Please see Appendix 6 for complete definitions of all household types. Per no adults. 19 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

20 Count Us In Findings 61% of individuals experiencing homelessness identified as male . Thirty -five percent An estimated of indiv 3% identified with another (35 %) iduals identified as female, 1 % identified as transgender, and gender. -eight percent (58%) . Fifty The shelter status of individuals experiencing homelessness varied by gender of persons identifying as female were sheltered on the night of the count 44% of persons and identifying as male were sheltered. Individuals identifying as transgender or with another gender . —66% and 97%, respectively reported notably higher rates of being unsheltered CING HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL COUNT POPULATION FIGURE 11. INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN BY GENDER 1% 3% 1% 1% Female Male 36% 35% Transgender Gender Non-Conforming (i.e. 62% 61% not exclusively male or female)* 2017 2018 112 2017 n= 11,643; 2018 n= 12, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) updated reporting categories for gender. In In 2018, Note: Don't Identify as Male, Female, Transgender , Male, 2017, the reporting categories for gender included Female , and or -Conforming (i.e. not exclusively s included Female, Male, Transgender, and Gender Non . In 2018, the categorie Transgender -Conforming; -Queer; Gender Non Gender as male or female). For federal reporting purposes, survey respondents identifying Non re included in the Gender Non -Binary; Neither Male, we ; or Other Not Listed Female, or Transgender -Conforming category. Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. CING HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL COUNT POPULATION FIGURE 12. BY INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN SHELTER STATUS GENDER AND 2018 Unsheltered 2018 Sheltered Female 42% (n= 1,761) 58% (n= 2,490) Male 44% 56% (n= 3,297) (n= 4,164) Transgender (n= 57) 66% 34% (n= 29) Gender 97% (n= 338) Non-Conforming (n= 12) 3% 100% 0% | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 20

21 Count Us In Findings 8, an estimated majority of individuals experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County In 201 identified as people of color. An estimated 48 % of individuals identified as W hite , 27% identified as , 3% identified as American Indian or Alaska Native, Black or African American ed as Asian, 3% identifi Sixteen percent (16%) of individuals identified and 3% identified as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. . Additionally, an estimated 15% of individuals identified their ethnicity as Hispanic with multiple races or Latino. , general population Seattle/King County’s e demographic racial profiles of When compared to th , (27% compared to 6%) lack or African American ng as B disparities were observed among those identifyi , as American Indian or Alaska Native (3% compared to 5% compared to 9%) Hispanic or Latino (1 as 1%), as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (3% compared to 1%), and with multiple races (16% compared to 6%). The shelter status of individuals experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County varied across race and ethnicity. Individuals identifying with multiple races or as American Indian or Alaska Native reported the highest rates of being unsheltered (70% and 60 %, respectively). Individuals identifying as Black or African American or as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander reported the highest rates of being 6% and 65%, respectively). sheltered (6 CING HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL COUNT POPULATION INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN BY RACE FIGURE 13. AND ETHNICITY 2017 Count Us In Population 2018 Count Us In Population 2016 King County General Population 100% 67% 48% 45% 29% 27% 16% 15% 16% 14% 15% 9% 6% 6% 6% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 1% 1% 0% American White Black or African Hispanic or Native Asian Multiple Races Latino Indian or Alaska American Hawaiian or Native Pacific Islander 11,643; 2018 n= 12, 112 2017 n= 2016 King County General Population Source : U.S. Census Bureau. (May 2016). American Community Survey 2015 1 -Year Estimates, Table DP05: ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates. Retrieved from http://factfinder2.census.gov . The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) gathers data on race and ethnic through two ity Note: separate questions, similar to the U.S. Census. For the purposes of this report, race and ethnicity are presented together. Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. 21 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

22 Count Us In Findings FIGURE 14. INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN CING HOMELESSNESS , TOTAL COUNT POPULATION BY RACE AND BY SHELTER STATU AND ETHNICITY S 2018 Unsheltered 2018 Sheltered White 43% (n= 2,481) (n= 3,308) 57% Black or African American (n= 2,205) 66% 34% (n= 1,112) Hispanic or Latino (n= 796) 43% (n= 1,074) 57% American Indian or Alaska Native 40% (n= 159) 60% (n= 239) Asian 47% (n= 160) (n= 177) 53% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (n= 208) 65% 35% (n= 110) Multiple Races 30% (n= 579) (n= 1,374) 70% 100% 0% 22 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

23 Survey Findings Count Us In This section provides an overview of the findings generated from the survey component of 2018 Count Us In . Surveys were administered to a randomized sample of individuals experiencing homelessness in the weeks immediately following the general street count. Data collected through this survey effort w used to estimate the characteristics of the local ere population experiencing homelessness in order to inform local service delivery and strategic planning efforts , and to fulfill HUD reporting requirements . Please note that the findings presented in this section only include individuals responding to the Count Us In Survey. The 201 complete and unique surveys , which 8 Count Us In Survey effort resulted in 1,056 include d 158 eligible surveys completed as part of the youth and young adult co unt effort . Based on a point -in-time estimate of 1 2,112 individuals experiencing homeless ness, these - 2.9% with a +/ represent a confidence interval of 95% confidence level when 1,056 surveys generating the results of the survey to the estimated population of persons experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County. In other words, if the survey were conducted again, we can be 95% certain that the results would be within 2 .9 percentage po ints of the reported results. Since c onfidence intervals increase as the sample size decreases, more granular analyses are not presented. In order to respect the privacy and ensure the safety and comfort of those who participated, respondents were not req uired to complete all survey questions. Missing values are intentionally omitted from the survey results. Therefore, the total number of respondents for each question will not always equal the total number of surveys conducted. data are -reported data allow individuals to While self -reported. Count Us In Survey 100% self it is often more variable than clinically reported data. For represent their own experience, example , respondents who report a health condition may not have received a formal diagnosis o report the condition based upon their current symptoms. or ma y be more or less likely t For more information regarding the survey methodology, please see Appendix 1 (p. 98). For . Appendix 3 complete survey findings, please see 23 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

24 Count Us In Survey Findings In order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the experiences of individuals, youth, Seattle/King County, respondents were asked basic in and families experiencing homelessness and ethnicity. age, gender, sexual orientation, demographic questions regarding their were over 24 urvey respondents 77%) of Count Us In S -quarters ( three Over years of age. g adults between the ages of 18 and Youn 24 represented less than one -quarter (2 2%) of all outh under the age of 18 represented survey respondents . Y 2% of all survey respondents. OF COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENTS AGE FIGURE 15. 2017 2018 100% 24% 23% 22% 22% 19% 17% 16% 16% 14% 11% 6% 6% 4% 2% 0% 51-60 Years 41-50 Years 31-40 Years 25-30 Years 18-24 Years Less than 18 61 Years or More Years 1,158; 2018 n= 1,056 2017 n= | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 24

25 Count Us In Survey Findings male, identified as fe 4% -five percent (65%) of survey respondents identified as male, 3 Sixty 1% identified as transgender, and 7 -queer, , gender another gender (e.g. with % identified binary). -conforming, or non- gender non A 2015 4.8% of the general population living in the that Gallup U.S. Daily survey found 2 -Tacoma- Be llevue region identifies as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender . Seattle across Survey respondents ighteen percent Approximately e of Count Us In (18%) Seattle/King identified their sexual orientation as either lesbian or gay ( 6%), bisexual (8%), queer County pansexual (1%) , or other (1 %). (1%), questioning ( 1%), While limited data are available on the number of LGBTQ+ individuals experiencing individuals experience homelessness at higher homelessness, available data suggest LGBTQ+ – especially among those under 25 years of age rates -third (33%) of unaccompanied . One youth and young adult survey respondents identified as LGBTQ+, compared to 16% of all -one percent other survey respondents. Seventy (71% ) of all survey respondents identif ying as LGBTQ+ reported first experiencing homelessness as a youth or young adult, compared to 42% of respondents not identifying as LGBTQ+. FIGURE 16. GENDER , COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENTS 2018 2017 100% 65% 63% 32% 33% 5% 1% 2% 2% 0% Transgender Female Male Gender Non-Conforming* 1,142; 2018 n= 1,046 n= 2017 Housing and Urban Development (HUD) updated reporting categories for gender. In In 2018, the U.S. Department of Note: 2017, the reporting categories for gender included Female, Male, Transgender, and Don't Identify as Male, Female, or . In 2018, the categories included Female, Male , Transgender, and Gender Non Transgender -Conforming (i.e. not exclusively male or female). For federal reporting purposes, survey respondents identifying as Gender -Queer; Gender Non -Conforming; -Conforming Non -Binary; Neither Male, Female, or Transgender; or Other Not Listed wer e included in the Gender Non Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. category. 2 Newport, F. Gates, GJ. (2015, March 20). San Francisco Metro Area Ranks Highest in LGBT Percentage. -lgbt - Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/182051/san -francisco -metro -area- ranks -highest percentage.aspx?utm_source=genericbutton&u tm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=sharing 25 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

26 Count Us In Survey Findings FIGURE 17. SEXUAL ORIENTATION ESPONDENTS , COUNT US IN SURVEY R 2018 2017 100% 82% 79% 8% 6% 7% 5% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 0% Pansexual Questioning Other Bisexual Lesbian or Gay Straight Queer 1,135; 2018 n= 1,037 n= 2017 Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. Note: Half (50 urvey res pondents identified as White and 2 Count Us In S 2018 %) of 3% identified as Black or African American . Three percent (3%) identified as Am erican Indian or Alaska Native, 2% as Native Hawaiian or Pacific %) identified (20 Islander. Twenty percent , and 3% as Asian . Additionally, f with multiple races ifteen percent (15%) of survey respondents identified their ethnicity as Hispanic or Latino. RACE ESPONDENTS FIGURE 18. , COUNT US IN SURVEY R AND ETHNICITY 2017 2018 100% 54% 50% 29% 23% 20% 15% 13% 11% 10% 3% 3% 4% 2% 3% 0% Black or African Hispanic or White American Native Asian Multiple Races Indian American Latino Hawaiian or Alaska or Pacific Native Islander -1,143; -1,056 n= 2017 n= 1,115 1,016 2018 Note: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) gathers data on race and ethnicity through two separate questions, similar to the U.S. Census. For the purposes of this report, race and ethnicity are presented together. Multiple response question. Percentages may no t add up to 100. 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 26 |

27 Count Us In Survey Findings Nationally, it is estimated that at least 20% of foster youth experience homelessness after 3 In the state of Washington, many foster youth are eligible to receive ex tended exiting care. st birthday. foster care benefits as they transition into adulthood, up until their 21 In urvey respondents reported a history of Count Us In S (17%) of -fifth less than one 2018, of respondents indicated that they were living in a foster care foster care. Approximately 2% housing loss. Two percent (2%) of respondents reported that aging placement prior to their out of foster care was the primary event that led to their homelessness. When compared to as well as individuals ey respondents, unaccompanied youth and young adults other surv identifying as LGBTQ+ reported the highest rates of foster care involvement (33% and 25%, respectively). FIGURE 19. HISTORY OF FOSTER CARE , COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENTS 100% 19% 17% 0% 2018 2017 1,116 2017 n= ; 2018 n= 1,018 3 Fernandes, AL. (2007). Runaway and Homeless Youth: Demographics, Programs, and Emerging Issues. https://fas.org Congressional Research Services, January 2007, . /sgp/crs/misc/RL33785.pdf 27 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

28 Count Us In Survey Findings two -thirds (6 7%) of Count Us I n S urvey respondents reported experiencing Over -two percent (22%) of respondents homelessness prior to their current episode. Twenty - reported experiencing homelessness four or more times in the past three years. Nearly two thirds (64%) reported their current ep isode of homelessness lasting for a year or longer. When asked how old they were the first time they experienced homelessness, 22% of survey respondents were children under the age of 18, 26% were (whether sheltered or unsheltered) young adults between the ages of 18 and 24, and 53% were adults over the age of 24. Over one -third (36%) of individuals over the age of 50 reported they were currently experiencing homelessness for the first time. Compared to other survey respondents, individuals identifying as L GBTQ+ reported notably higher rates of first experiencing homelessness as a child or young adult. Thirty -three percent (33%) of LGBTQ+ survey respondents first experienced homelessness as a child under the age s between the ages of 18 and 24. This of 18, while 38% first experienced homelessnes . compares to 19% and 23% , respectively, of non survey respondents -LGBTQ+ TIME FIGURE 20. FIRST EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS , COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENTS 100% 36% 33% 0% 2018 2017 2017 n= 1,138; 2018 n= 1,036 FIGURE 21. SURVEY LENGTH OF CURRENT EPISODE OF HOMELESS , COUNT US IN NESS RESPONDENTS 2017 2018 100% 64% 59% 12% 13% 11% 12% 7% 8% 4% 4% 3% 4% 0% 1 Year or More 7-11 Months 4-6 Months 1-3 Months 8-30 Days 7 Days or Less 2017 n= 1,035; 2018 n= 970 Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 28

29 Count Us In Survey Findings OF HOMELESSNESS OCCURRED, COUNT US IN SURVEY AGE FIRST EXPERIENCE FIGURE 22. RESPONDENTS 2018 2017 100% 26% 26% 24% 24% 22% 20% 17% 18% 11% 12% 1% 1% 0% 0-17 Years Old 66 or older 50-65 Years Old 36-49 Years Old 25-35 Years Old 18-24 Years Old = 1,103; 2018 n= 1,020 2017 n Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. 29 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

30 Count Us In Survey Findings 8 Count Us In S urvey, approximately 83% of respondents reported living in During the 201 prior to los Seattle/King County s of housing. Eleven percent ( 11% ) of survey immediately 6% were le , whi prior to loss of housing in another Washington county lived respondents state. out of residing Approximately n inety -five percent (95%) of survey respondents reported living in the state of Washington at the time of their housing loss, followed by California (1%), Oregon (1%), and Texas (1%). Fifty -two percent (52%) of survey respondents reported living in Seattle at the time of their housing loss, followed by Kent (10%), Renton (4%), and Federal Way (4%). PLACE OF RESIDENCE A FIGURE 23. T TIME OF HOUSING LO SS , COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENTS 2018 2017 100% 83% 77% 9% 6% 5% 5% 5% 3% 3% 4% 1% 1% 0% Pierce County Out of State Thurston County King County Snohomish County Another County in WA n= 866 ; 2018 n= 888 2017 Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. Note: Y, COUNT US IN SURVEY FIGURE 24. LIVING IN KING COUNT LENGTH OF TIME SPENT RESPONDENTS 11% Less than 1 Year 19% 24% 1-4 Years 24% 2017 2018 12% 5-9 Years 13% 21% 10 Years or More 24% 32% Born/Grew Up Here 20% 0% 100% = 845; 2017 n 2018 n= 862 Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 30

31 Count Us In Survey Findings -four percent (34%) of Count Us In S urvey respondents indicated living in a home Thirty owned or rented by themselves or their partner prior to experiencing homelessness. Thirty -six percent (36 %) reported living with friends or relatives, while smaller perc entages reported subsidized housing or , or in either in a motel or hotel (5%) %), jail or prison (6 in residing permanent supportive housing (4%) . Other living arrangements of survey respondents prior to experiencing homelessness included hospital or treatment facility (3%), foster care placement (2%), military base or active duty and (1%), juvenile justice facilit y (<1%). FIGURE 25. LIVING ARRANGEMENTS IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO EXPERIENC NESS ING HOMELESS ME THIS TI SURVEY RESPONDENTS , COUNT US IN 36% With Friends/Relatives 31% A Home Owned or Rented 34% by You or Your Partner 43% 6% Jail/ Prison 5% 5% Motel/ hotel 5% Subsidized Housing or 4% 2018 Permanent Supportive Housing 6% 2017 3% Hospital or Treatment Facility 3% <1% Foster Care 0% 1% Military Base/Active Duty 1% <1% Juvenile Justice Facility <1% 8% Other Places 7% 0% 100% n= 842; 2018 n= 846 2017 Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. 31 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

32 Count Us In Survey Findings While the general street count collected basic information regarding the type of location where individuals were observed , survey respondents we re also asked about their usual Count Us In Survey respondents of 17%) percent ( Seventeen nighttime accommodations. . housing transitional while 21% reported staying in shelter reported staying in emergency percent ( reported sleeping outdoors, including on the streets, in parks, or in Forty -one 41%) . Sixteen tents % reported a vehicle, and 4 in of respondents reported sleeping 16%) percent ( . andoned building or squat sleeping in an ab children, including out 7%) of survey respondents were part of households with The majority (8 young adults couples with no children under the age of 18, single adults, and unaccompanied . , and 2% re in family households with children Approximately 13% of survey respondents we were unaccompanied youth under 18. the age of When comparing the current living arrangements of survey respondents to the overall count population, it is important to note that the survey population includes on ly heads of household while the count population includes all household members. FIGURE 26. USUAL NIGHTTIME ACCO MMODATIONS , COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENTS 2017 2018 100% 41% 27% 26% 21% 21% 17% 16% 10% 7% 4% 0% Emergency Shelter Transitional Housing Outdoor/ Street/ Tent/ Vehicle Abandoned (Car/ Van/ RV/ and Safe Haven Encampment* Building/Squat Camper) n= 1,056 2017 n= 1,158; 2018 Note: Respondents categorized as “Outdoors/Streets/Tent/Encampments” include persons residing in outdoor locations, public facilities, single tents, sanctioned encampments, and unsanctioned encampments. Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 32

33 Count Us In Survey Findings When asked to identify the primary event or condition that led to their current experience of homelessness , approximately 25% of Count Us In S urvey respondents reported the loss of a job. Other top responses inc luded alcohol or drug use (21 %), eviction (11%), and illness or medical problems (9%) . Other self -reported causes of homelessness included: mental health issues (9 %); di vorce, separation, or breakup (8 %); domestic violence (7%); incarceration (7%); a n a rgument with a e (6%); ; inability to afford rent increas 6%) friend or family member who asked them to leave ( friend or f amily ’s housing wouldn’t allow them to stay ( 5%); death of a family member (4%); ldn’t afford to let them stay (2%); hospitalization or foreclosure (2%); family or friend cou treatment (2%); and aging out of foster care (2%). It should be noted that these responses are the result of a self -assessment, not from a clinical source. These responses, however, are consistent with other needs assessments and other communities, and generally have been considered accurate by homeless service providers and outreach staff. Still, w hile these self -identified causes may have contributed to an individual or household’s immediate experience of homelessness, these causes do not reflect the structural ing crises and t and institutional factors that contribute to such hous he lack of an adequate safety net. 33 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

34 Count Us In Survey Findings SELF FIGURE 27. SURVEY RESPONDENTS S OF HOMELESSNESS, COUNT US IN CAUSE -REPORTED 25% Lost Job 30% 21% Alcohol or Drug Use 20% 11% Eviction 11% 9% Illness/ Medical Problems 8% 9% Mental Health Issues 8% 7% Incarceration 7% 7% Family/ Domestic Violence 6% 7% Divorce/ Separation/ Breakup 8% 2018 6% Could Not Afford Rent Increase 6% 2017 Argument with a Friend/ Family Member 6% Who Asked Me to Leave 8% 5% Family/ Friend's Housing Wouldn't Let Me Stay 6% 4% Death of a Parent/ Spouse/ Child 4% 2% Family/ Friend Couldn't Afford to Let Me Stay 4% 2% Hospitalization/Treatment 3% 2% Foreclosure 2% 2% Aging Out of Foster Care 1% 4% Don't Know/ Decline to State 3% 8% Other 6% 0% 40% respon ; 2018 n= 889 dents providing 1,216 responses 2017 n= 864 respondents providing 1,194 responses Note: Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. 34 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

35 Count Us In Survey Findings Eight y percent (80%) of Count Us In S urvey respondents indicated that rental assistance and mployment or E more affordable housing would help them to obtain permanent housing. increased income (4 7%), money for moving costs ( 42%), and an easier housing process ( 38%) . ed as types of support need ed were also frequently mention help clearing their credit (21%), case Additional supports cited by survey respondents included management (18%), transportation (17%), and help clearing their rental history (14%). When asked if they would move into safe, af fordable housing if it were offered, 98% of Count . urvey responde nts answered yes Us In S 35 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

36 Count U s In Survey Findings FIGURE 28. SUPPORT NEEDED TO OB TAIN PERMANENT HOUSI SURVEY , COUNT US IN NG RESPONDENTS Rental Assistance/ 80% More Affordable Housing 73% 47% Job/ Increased Income 45% 42% Money for Moving Costs 44% 38% Easier Housing Process 42% 21% Help Clearing Credit 24% 18% Case Management 24% 17% Transportation 25% 2018 Help Clearing 14% 2017 Rental History 23% 13% Additional Education 16% Landlords Who Accept 11% Housing Voucher 20% 9% Medical/Health Care 11% 9% New ID/ Paperwork 12% 9% Legal Assistance 15% 7% Child Care Assistance 5% Immigration/ 3% Refugee Assistance 3% 4% Other 4% 0% 100% responses ; 2018 n= 862 respondents providing 2,964 2017 n= 867 respondents providing 3,728 responses Note: Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 36

37 Count Us In Survey Findings 6%) indicated receiving some form of state The majority of Count Us In Survey respondents (8 ood stamps . F were the most frequently cited form federal /or and of government assistance . assistance (77%), followed by Medicaid/Medicare (19%) and SSI/SSDI/Disability (13%) Approximately 14% of survey respondents reported not receiving any form of government assistance. , COUNT US IN TS FIGURE 29. STATE AND FEDERAL SURVEY RESPONDEN ASSISTANCE RECEIVED 77% Food Stamps/SNAP/WIC 70% 19% Medicaid/Medicare 29% 13% SSI/SSDI/Disability 17% 9% General Assistance 8% 8% TANF 5% 2018 2017 7% Social Security 7% 3% Any VA Disability Compensation 3% 3% Other Veterans Benefits (GI, Health) 4% 14% Not Receiving Any Form of Government Assistance 19% 100% 0% respondents providing 1,263 responses n= 781 2017 dents providing 1,275 responses ; 2018 n= 833 respon Note: Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. 37 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

38 Count Us In Survey Findings majority of Count Us In Survey respondents ( using local, community -based The 82%) indicated services are funded publicly or privately, aside from any state or federal . These services assistance . The most frequently cited services included free meals (45 %), emergency shelter (27%), transitional housing (26%), bus passes (24%), hyg iene services (22%), health services (19%), mental health services (19%), and day shelter services (18%). Eighteen percent (18%) of all survey respondents indicated they were not currently accessing any services or assistance —a rate three times higher tha n the 2017 Count Us In Survey findings . In trying to access community services, the majority of survey respondents ( 69%) reported encountering issues when seeking help. Not qualifying for the service s that they wanted 23 ack of transportation ( (23%), l were the , and not knowing where to go for help (23%) %) most frequently cited barriers not having their identifi cation or . Other reasons included personal documents (22 %) and never hearing back after applyin g for services (1 8%) . Thirt y- one percent (31%) of sur vey respondents indicated experiencing no issues in accessing services. When asked if they had completed a Coordinated Entry for All (also known as a Assessment %) indicated that Housing Triage Tool) , the majority of Count Us In S urvey respondents ( 58 had not. , compared to -quarter (23%) reported completing the assessment they Nearly one 14% of survey respondents in 2017. Nineteen percent ( 19% ) reported not knowing whether It is important to note that 21% of respondents were they had completed the assessment. residing in transitional housing at the time of the survey. Transitional housing residents are not eligible for programs accessed through coordinated entry, though they may have completed an assessment prior to entry . 38 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

39 Count Us In Survey Findings N SURVEY RESPONDENTS ACCESSED, COUNT US I MS PROGRA SERVICES AND FIGURE 30. 45% Free Meals 62% 27% Emergency Shelter 42% 26% Transitional Housing 33% 24% Bus Passes 44% 19% Health Services 32% 19% Mental Health Services 23% 18% Day Shelter Services 30% 10% Alcohol/Drug Counseling 2018 16% 2017 8% Legal Assistance 10% Job Training/ 8% Employment Services 13% 2% Immigration Services 3% 2% Other 3% 18% Not Using Any Services 6% 22% Hygiene Services* 6% Safe Parking* 5% Sanctioned Encampment/ Village* 100% 0% 2017 n= 872 respondents providing 2,762 responses; 2018 n= 858 respondents providing 2,217 responses Note: Comparison data for “Hygiene Services,” “Safe Parking,” and “Sanctioned Encampment /Village ” are not available , as Multiple response question. these answer choices were added to the Count Us In Survey instrument beginning in 2018. Percentages may not add up to 100. 39 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

40 Count Us In Survey Findings ILE TRYING T FIGURE 31. SURVEY , COUNT US IN O ACCESS SERVICES ISSUES EXPERIENCED WH RESPONDENTS 23% Did Not Qualify for the Service I Wanted 26% 23% Lack of Transportation 32% 23% Did Not Know Where to Go for Help 27% 22% Did Not Have ID/ Personal Documents 25% 18% Never Heard Back After Applying for Services 15% 14% Program Rules are Too Strict 13% 2018 2017 11% Did Not Follow Through or Return for Services 11% 9% Issues with Program Staff 12% 4% Separation from My Partner/Spouse 9% 4% Separation from My Pet 6% 4% Language Barrier 4% 4% Other 5% 31% I Have Not Experienced Any Issues 21% 100% 0% n= 2017 respondents providing 1,686 responses; 2018 n= 800 respondents providing 1,499 responses 814 Note: Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. 40 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

41 Count Us In Survey Findings , COUNT US IN ASSESSMENT (CEA) COMPLETION OF COORDINATED ENTRY FOR ALL FIGURE 32. SURVEY RESPONDENTS 2018 2017 100% 63% 58% 23% 24% 19% 14% 0% Yes Don't Know No n= 1,122; 2018 n= 1,019 2017 Note: It is important to note that 21% of respondents were residing in transitional housing at the time of the survey. Transitional housing residents are not eligible for programs accessed through coordinated entry, though they may have due to rounding. Percentages may not add up to 100 completed an assessment prior to entry. 41 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

42 Count Us In Survey Findings 4 It is The overall unemployment rate in Seattle/King County . was 4 ry Janua for .7% 2018 important to note that the unemployment rate only represents those who are unemployed and actively seeking employment; it does not represent all joblessness. dents ed , reported being unemploy (80%) urvey respon The majority of 2018 Count Us In S compared to 71% of survey respondents the previous year. Forty -five percent (45% ) of were unable to were not looking for work, and 16 % looking for work, 19% respondents were current their survey respondents reported Employed work due to disability or retirement. job seasonal or sporadic (5%), part status as -time (9%), or full -time (6 %). ent for work, over one -third When asked how long it had been since they last received paym %) (39%) reported receiving payment within the past six months. Eighteen perce nt (18 reported more than 5 years had passed since they last received payment for work. that of the general population in Seattle/King County high school are (93%) Over ninety percent 5 Among 49%) graduates or higher, with nearly half ( possessing a bachelor’s de gree or higher. urvey respondents experiencing homelessness, 74 % reported Count Us In S completion of high (45%) obtained their high school diploma or GED, 2 -five percent . Forty school or higher 2% % completed a bachelor’s degree or completed some college or an associate’s degree, and 7 higher. FIGURE 33. EMPLOYMENT STATUS , COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENTS Employed Unemployed 100% 20% 29% 80% 71% 0% 2017 2018 n= 863 ; 2018 n= 1,035 2017 Area 4 Washington State Emplo yment Security Department. (2018 ). Labor Summaries. Retrieved from https://fortress.wa.gov/esd/employmentdata/reports -publications 5-Year Estimates, Table S1501: 2016 American Community Survey 5 U.S. Census Bureau. (2016). 2012- Educational Attainment. Retrieved from http://factfinder2.census.gov | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 42

43 Count Us In Survey Findings EMPLOYMENT STATUS BY RESPONDENTS FIGURE 34. EMPLOYMENT TYPE, COUNT US IN SURVEY 6% Employed Full-Time 8% 2018 9% Employed Part-Time 2017 9% 5% Employed Seasonal/Sporadic 12% 0 Unemployed 71% 45% Unemployed, and Looking for Work* 0 19% Unemployed, and Not Looking for Work* 0 16% Unable to Work (Disabled/Retired)* 0 100% 0% n= 863; 2018 n= 1,035 2017 Comparison data are unavailable for “Unemployed, and Looking for Work,” “Unemployed, and Not Looking for Work,” Note: and “Unable to Work (Disabled/Retired),” as these answer choices were added to the urvey instrument Count Us In S beginning in 2018. Percen tages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. PASSED RVEY ORK, COUNT US IN SU CEIVED PAYMENT FOR W FIGURE 35. SINCE LAST RE TIME RESPONDEN TS TIME PASSED SINCE LAST 2018 2017 RECEIVED FOR WORK PAYMENT * Less than 1 Month 20% 1 to 6 Months 37% 19% 7 to 12 Months 20% 11% * 1 to 2 Years 19% 2 Years 14% 6% 12% 8% 3 to 5 Years More than 5 Years 17% 18% 2017 n= 803 ; 2018 n= 847 Note: Comparison data are unavailable for “Less than 1 Month” and “1 to 2 Years,” as these answer choices were added to urvey instrument beginning in 2018. the Count Us In S 43 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

44 Count Us In Survey Findings , COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENTS EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT FIGURE 36. 2018 2017 100% 45% 40% 29% 26% 26% 22% 4% 3% 4% 2% 0% Graduate Degree High School Did Not Graduate Some College or AA Bachelor's Degree Diploma/GED High School 1,126 n= ; 2018 n= 1,018 2017 Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. 44 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

45 Co unt Us In Survey Findings Seattle/King County, approximately 70 % of individuals surveyed during Count Us In In reported one or more health conditions. These conditions include d physical living with disabilities, chronic substance use disorder , and severe mental health conditions. Behavioral health conditions (i.e. , mental health and/or substance abuse) were the most -four percent (44%) of s among survey respondents. Forty frequently reported health condition - post 37% reported survey respondents reported psychiatric or emotional conditions, traumatic s tress disorder, and drug or alcohol abuse 35% reported . Twenty -seven percent -six percent (27%) of respondents reported chronic health problems. Twenty (26%) reported a physical disability. th condition that prevented Over half (53%) of survey respondents identified at least one heal them from holding employment, living in stable housing, or taking care of themselves. One - third (33%) of these respondents indicated living with multiple disabling conditions. HEALTH FIGURE 37. S , COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENT CONDITIONS 2018 2017 100% 44% 45% 37% 35% 36% 34% 30% 27% 26% 26% 11% 11% 3% 3% 0% AIDS/HIV Post-Traumatic Traumatic Brain Psychiatric or Physical Drug or Alcohol Chronic Health Related Abuse Emotional Disability Injury Stress Disorder Problems (PTSD) Conditions -1,129; 2018 n= 1,036 n= 1, 086 -1,040 2017 Note: Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In | 45

46 Count Us In Survey Findings of all Count Us In Survey respondents reported currently experien cing Seven percent (7%) -six percent domestic violence or abuse. Thirty (36%) of survey respondents currently family or domestic violence as the primary experiencing domestic violence or abuse identified event leading to their homelessness. %) (36 Over o ne of all survey respondents reported experiencing physical, emotional, or -third was most istory of domestic violence or partner abuse in their lifetime. A h sexual abuse unaccompanied youth and young (55%), viduals identifying as LGBTQ+ prevalent among indi ). 40% families with children ( adults under 25 years of age (45%), and DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OR ABUSE RRENTLY EXPERIENCING CU FIGURE 38. , COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENTS 4% 3% 7% 7% Yes No Decline 90% to State 90% 2017 2018 n= 1,009; 2018 n= 903 2017 Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. FIGURE 39. , STAYED WITH HISTORY OF ABUSE BY A RELATIVE OR ANOTHE R PERSON THEY HAVE S COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENT 5% 6% Yes 40% No 36% Decline 55% to State 58% 2017 2018 1,006 n= 2017 ; 2018 n= 894 46 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

47 Count Us In Survey Findings 2%) of survey respondents reported ever being in jail or juvenile detention. Six Over half (5 reported being in jail or prison immediately prior to experiencing homelessness, percent (6%) and 9% reported being on probation or parole at the time of the survey. ONDENTS RESP , COUNT US IN SURVEY IN JAIL OR JUVENILE DETENTION EN EVER BE FIGURE 40. 4% 3% Yes No 42% 45% 52% 55% Decline to State 2017 2018 n= 1,131; 2018 n= 1,026 2017 CURRENTLY ON PROBATION OR PAROLE FIGURE 41. , COUNT US IN SURVEY RESPONDENTS 3% 9% 9% 11% Yes No Decline to State 82% 86% 2017 2018 2017 n=1,117; 2018 n= 1,026 47 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

48

49 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings Coun t Us In Subpopulation Findings Opening Doors: Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness outlines national objectives and evaluative measures for ending homelessness in the United States. In order to adequately address the diversity within the population experiencing homelessness, the federal government identifies four subpopu lations with particular challenges or needs : individuals experiencing chronic homelessness, veterans, families with children, and unaccompanied . Individuals residing in vehicles are identified as an additional youth and young adults subpopulation of local interest, given the prevalence of vehicle residency in the region. These subpopulations represent important reportable indicators for measuring local prog ress toward ending homelessness . T he following section examines the number and characteristics of during Count Us In. viduals identified within each of these subpopulations estimated indi ing The 2018 Count Us In Survey effort resulted in 1,056 complete and unique surveys, includ 158 eligible surveys completed as part of the youth and young adult count effort. Based on a point -in-time estimate of 12,112 individuals experiencing homelessness, these 1,056 surveys - 2.9% with a 95% confidence level when generating the represent a confidence interval of +/ of persons experiencing homelessness in S estimated number eattle/King County. Gathering complete and unique surveys from populations that are hard -to-reach pose s further challenges. Confidence intervals increase as the sample size decreases, meaning there is a greater probability that results would vary from thes e findings if the study were conducted of to total surveys again . In other words, a smaller population requires a higher ratio in order to maintain or improve confidence. The following table displays the population confidence intervals for each subpopulation featured in this section. Estimated Complete and Confidence Subpopulation Unique Surveys Interval Population Chronically Homeless 323 3,552 +/- 5.2 % Veterans 119 921 +/ - 8.39 % Families with Children 134 782 +/- 7.71% (by Household) Unaccompanied Youth and +/- 6.05% 224 1,518 Young Adults Vehicle Residen ts 171 % 3,372 +/ - 7.3 he results presented in the following section continue to provide important insights However, t se subpopulations experiencing homelessness. into each of the 49 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

50 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Chronic Homelessness Homelessness : Chronic Count Us In Subpopulation Findings defines an individual experiencing chronic homelessness as someone who has HUD —or who has experienced at least four episodes experienced homelessness for a year or longer also and ssness in the last three years— totaling 12 months of homele condition has a disabling that prevents them from maintaining work or housing. For the purposes of the Point -in-Time households where at least his definition applies to individuals as well as to Count, t both family one adult member is chronically homeless . 552 8, Count Us In estimated 3, In 201 in individuals experiencing chronic homelessness Seattle/King County. These individuals comprised 29% of the total count population. Compared to 2017, the number of individuals experiencing chronic homelessness increased by 28% (779 persons). Conversely, the number of veterans experiencing chronic homelessness decreased by 23% (96 persons). were Seventy -one percent ( 71%) of individuals experiencing chronic homelessness 29% were residing in sheltered locations on the night of the count while unshelter ed . % of individuals experiencing chronic homelessness Across household types, approximately 97 Three percent (3%) were in children. were in adult households without family households with unaccompanied . Less than 1% of ind ividuals were in households comprised only of children the age of 18. youth under FIGURE 42. INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN CING CHRONIC HOMELES SNESS, TOTAL COUNT P OPULATION WITH TREND 4,000 3,552 3,500 2,773 3,000 +28% 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 2017 2018 50 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

51 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Chronic Home lessness COUNT POPULATION FIGURE 43. INDIVIDUALS EXPERIEN CING CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL BY SHELTER STATUS Unsheltered Sheltered 2018 (n= 2,514) 71% (n= 1,038) 29% 2017 36% 64% (n= 1,787) (n= 986) 30% 60% 10% 0% 70% 80% 90% 40% 50% 20% 100% FIGURE 44. INDIVIDUAL S EXPERIENCING CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL C OUNT POPULATION BY HOUSEHOLD TYPE NUMBER OF NUMBER OF % OF NON- % OF CHRONIC TOTAL CHRONIC CHRONIC NON- TOTAL CHRONIC TOTAL PERSONS PERSONS HOUSEHOLD 2017 2018 2018 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2017 TYPE Persons in 3% 2,624 family 2,833 290 115 10% 2,543 2,509 29% 29% households Persons in households 2,481 97% 9,312 8,585 69% 3,434 89% 6,104 5,878 69% without children Persons in households 3 225 2% 2 176 <1% <1% 223 173 3% with only children 12,112 11,643 100% 8,870 60 8,5 100% TOTAL 2,773 3,552 100% 100% Note: Family households are defined by households with at least one adult and one child. Households without children include households with one or more adults, but no children. Households with only children include households with one or Percentages may not add more children, but no adults. Please see Appendix 6 for complete definitions of all household types. up to 100 due to rounding. 51 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

52 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Chronic Homelessness SURVEY FINDINGS CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS Half (50%) of Count Us In S urvey respondents experiencing chronic homelessness were ov er -two percent (22%) were 40 years old. Twenty between 41 and 50 years old, 20% were between 51 and 60 years old, and 7% were 61 years old or older . Seventy -one percent (71%) of survey respondents experiencing chr onic homelessness identified as male . Twenty -two percent (22%) identified as female, 1% identified as transgender, and 6% identified with another gender . Over half (56%) of survey respondents experiencing chronic homelessness identified as White. Sixteen percent (16%) identified as Black or African American, 4 % identified as Native % identified as Asian, and 2% identified as A merican Indian or Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 2 Alaska Native. Twenty percent (20 %) identified with multiple races. Additionally, 1 7% identified their ethnicity as Hispanic or Latino. Individuals experiencing chronic homelessness most frequently reported living with psychiatric or emotional conditions (63%), drug or alcohol abuse (63%), or post -traumatic stress disorder (57%). Over ha lf (52%) of survey respondents experiencing chronic issues were medical indicated that behavioral health or homelessness of the primary cause 32% of all other survey respondents . , compared to their homelessness Emergency shelter, free meals, day shelter services, and hygiene services were among the top services accessed by Count Us In S urvey respondents experiencing chronic homelessness . However, overall , survey respondents experiencing chronic homelessness reported a lower (76% rate of accessing community -ba sed services compared to all other survey respondents (77%) -quarters all survey respondents experiencing chronic of compared to 85%) . Over t hree homelessness reported issues when trying to access services in the community, including not having an ID o r personal documentation, lacking transportation, and never hearing back after reported a higher rate of not following applying for services. These survey respondents also ng through or returning for services when compared to survey respondents not experienci chronic homelessness (20% compared to 6%). Individual s experiencing chronic homelessness reported higher rates of having been in jail or (62% compared to 47%). juvenile detention , compared to all other survey respondents ondents, eighteen percent (18%) of individuals experiencing Similar to all other survey resp chronic homelessness reported a history of foster care. 52 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

53 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Chronic Homelessness FIGURE 45. AGE OF SURVEY RESPON -CHRONIC AND CHRONIC COMPARISON , NON DENTS 2018 Chronic Survey Population 2018 Non-Chronic Survey Population 100% 25% 23% 24% 22% 20% 17% 15% 15% 13% 11% 7% 6% <1 0% 0% 61 years or older 25-30 years 31-40 years 18-24 years Less than 18 41-50 years 51-60 years 733 Chronic Survey Population n= Non- 2018 323 ; Chronic Survey Population n= PONDENTS FIGURE 46. GENDER OF SURVEY RES CHRONIC AND CHRONIC COMPARISON , NON- 2018 Chronic Survey Population 2018 Non-Chronic Survey Population 100% 71% 59% 37% 22% 6% 4% 1% 1% 0% Transgender Gender Non-Conforming* Male Female ; Chronic Survey Population n= Chronic Survey Population n= 727 Non- 319 2018 Note: In 2018, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) updated repor ting categories for gender . In 2017, the reporting categories for gender included Female, Male, Transgender, and Don't Identify as Male, Female, or Transgender exclusively -Conforming (i.e. not . In 2018, the categories included Female, Male, Transgender, and Gender Non male or female). For federal reporting purposes, survey respondents identifying as Gender -Queer; Gender Non -Conforming; Non -Binary; Neither Male, Female, or Transgender; or Other Not Listed were included in the Gender Non -Conforming Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. category. 53 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

54 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Chronic Homelessness -CHRONIC AND CHRONIC RVEY RESPONDENTS, NON F SU RACE AND ETHNICITY O FIGURE 47. COMPARISON 2018 Chronic Survey Population 2018 Non-Chronic Survey Population 100% 56% 47% 27% 20% 17% 16% 18% 15% 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 2% 0% Multiple Races Native Asian White American Hispanic or Black or African Hawaiian or Latino Indian or Alaska American Pacific Islander Native -701 681 Chronic Survey Population n= Non- 2018 -311 299 ; Chronic Survey Population n= Note: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) gathers data on race and ethnicity through two separate questions, similar to the U.S. Census. For the purposes of this report, race and ethnicity are presented together. Multiple response question . Percentages may not add up to 100. SURVEY RESPONDENTS HEALTH CONDITIONS REPORTED BY FIGURE 48. , NON -CHRONIC AND CHRONIC COMPARISON 2018 Chronic Survey Population 2018 Non-Chronic Survey Population 100% 63% 63% 57% 41% 39% 35% 27% 22% 22% 19% 19% 8% 3% 2% 0% Psychiatric or Physical Traumatic Brain Post-Traumatic AIDS/HIV Chronic Health Drug or Alcohol Abuse Problems Related Disability Stress Disorder Injury Emotional (PTSD) Conditions -323 n= 322 ; Chronic Survey Population 2018 Non- Chronic Survey Population n= 714 -717 Note: Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 54

55 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Chronic Homelessness (TOP AMONG SURVEY RESPONDENTS OF HOMELESSNESS -REPORTED CAUSES SELF FIGURE 49. CHRONIC AND C FIVE RESPONSES), NON- HRONIC COMPARISON 2018 Chronic Survey Population 2018 Non-Chronic Survey Population 100% 29% 27% 19% 17% 13% 12% 10% 11% 9% 7% 0% Mental Health Issues Eviction Illness/Medical Lost Job Alcohol or Drug Use Problems Chronic Survey Population n= 2018 Non- 600 ; Chronic Survey Pop ulation n= 289 - SURVEY RESPONDENTS ACCESSED BY SERVICES FIGURE 50. (TOP FIVE RESPONSES), NON CHRONIC AND CHRONIC COMPARISON 2018 Chronic Survey Population 2018 Non-Chronic Survey Population 100% 58% 39% 34% 26% 22% 23% 21% 20% 18% 16% 0% Day Services Hygiene Services Emergency Shelter Free Meals Mental Health Services 2018 Non- Chronic Survey Population n= 583; Chronic Survey Population n= 275 HILE TRYING TO ACCES FIGURE 51. BY SURVEY S SERVICES REPORTED ISSUES EXPERIENCED W RESPONDENT -CHRONIC AND CHRONIC S (TOP FIVE RESPONSES), NON COMPARISON 2018 Chronic Survey Population 2018 Non-Chronic Survey Population 100% 28% 28% 26% 25% 22% 23% 22% 20% 19% 14% 0% Never Heard Back Did Not Have Lack of Did Not Know Where Did Not Qualify for the Service I Transportation After Applying for ID/ Personal to Go for Help Document Services Wanted -Chronic Survey Population n= 529 2018 Non 271 ; Chronic Survey Population n= 55 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

56 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Chronic Homelessness CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM INVOLVEMENT REPORTED BY FIGURE 52. SURVEY RESPONDENTS, NON- CHRONIC AND CHRONIC COMPARISON 2018 Chronic Survey Population 2018 Non-Chronic Survey Population 100% 62% 47% 10% 9% 0% Currently on Probation/Parole Ever been in Jail/Juvenile Detention Non- Ever been in Chronic Survey Population n= 709; 2018 Chronic Survey Population Ever been in Jail/Juvenile Detention , Chronic Survey -Chronic Survey Population Currently on Probation/Parole n= 709 ; Non Jail/Juvenile Detention n= 317 Currently on Probation/Parole n= 317 Population REPORTED BY HISTORY OF FOSTER CA RE FIGURE 53. SURVEY RESPONDENTS, NON- CHRONIC AND CHRONIC COMPARIS ON 2018 Chronic Survey Population 2018 Non- Chronic Survey Population 100% 18% 17% 0% ; Chronic Survey Population Ever been in Foster Care 2018 Non- Chronic Survey Population Ever been in Foster Care n= 704 314 n= | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 56

57 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Veterans s : Veteran Count Us In Subpopulation Findings defines veterans as adults who have -in-Time Count, HUD For the purposes of the Point served on active duty in the Armed Forces of the United States. This does not include inactive military reserves or the National Guard unless the person was called to active duty. veterans experiencing homelessness in estimated Count Us In In 2018, there were 921 represented 8% of the total count population. Seattle/King County. These individuals er of veterans experiencing homelessness decreased by 31% Compared to 2017, the numb (408 persons). ) who were unsheltered experiencing homelessness There were 529 veterans (57% of veterans 392 veterans (43% on the night of the count ) who were sheltered. and of veterans experiencing homelessness identified as male, 10% identified as An estimated 87% (up from 4% in 2017) female as transgender, and 2% identified with another , 1% identified gender. -four 4% of veterans experiencing homelessness identified as White. Twenty An estimated 5 4%) identified as Black or African American, 4 % identified as American Indian or percent (2 Alaska Native, 2 % identified as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and 1% identified as Asian . . Additionally, 14% identified their Sixteen percent (16%) identified with multiple races ethnicity as Hispanic or Latino. ) who were (35% of veterans experiencing homelessness There were 324 veterans experiencing chronic homelessness. Compared to 2017, this represents a decrease of 23% (96 er of veterans experiencing chronic homelessness. persons) in the numb of veterans experiencing homelessness were in households Ninety -eight percent (9 8%) without children, while 23 veterans were members of family households. VETERA PULATION FIGURE 54. WITH LESSNESS, TO NS EXPERIENCING HOME TAL COUNT PO TREND 1,329 1,400 1,200 921 1,000 800 % 31 - 600 400 200 0 2017 2018 57 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

58 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Veterans G HOMELESSNESS, TOTA L COUNT POPULATION B VETERANS EXPERIENCIN FIGURE 55. Y SHELTER STATUS Sheltered Unsheltered 2018 (n= 529) 57% 43% (n= 392) 2017 52% (n= 693) 48% (n= 636) 30% 70% 90% 100% 60% 50% 80% 40% 0% 10% 20% FIGURE 56. G HOMELESSNESS, TOTA L COUNT POPULATION B Y GENDER VETERANS EXPERIENCIN 3% 4% 2% 1% Female 10% Male Transgender Gender Non- 87% 93% Conforming* 2017 2018 2017 n= 1,329; 2018 n= 921 Note: In 2018, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) updated reporting categories for gender. In 2017, the reporting categories for gender included Female, Male, Transgender, and Don't Identify as Male, Female, or Female, Male, Transgender, and Gender Non -Conforming (i.e. not exclusively . In 2018, the categories included Transgender male or female). For federal reporting purposes, survey respondents identifying as Gender -Queer; Gender Non -Conforming; Female, or Transgender -Binary; Neither Male, ot Listed ; or Other N Non were included in the Gender Non -Conforming category. Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. | 58 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

59 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Veterans VETERANS EXPERIENCIN G HOMELESSNESS, TOTA L COUNT POPULATION B Y RACE FIGURE 57. AND ETHNICITY 2017 Veterans Count Population 2018 Veterans Count Population 100% 56% 54% 24% 25% 16% 14% 10% 9% 6% 4% 2% 1% 2% 1% 0% Multiple Races Asian Native American Black or African Hispanic or White Hawaiian or Latino Indian or Alaska American Pacific Islander Native Veterans Count Population n= 1,329; 2018 V eterans Count Population n= 921 2017 Note: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development gathers data on ethnicity and race through two separate questions, similar to the U.S. Census. For the purposes of this report, race and ethnicity are presented toge ther. Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. 59 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

60 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Veterans SURVEY FINDINGS VETERANS Over half (55%) of veterans responding to the Count Us In Survey were over 40 years old . Twenty -seven percent (27% ) were between 31 and 40 years old and 13% were between 25 and 30 years old. ompared to other When c ly higher Survey respondents, veterans reported notab Count Us In rates of rates of living with post -traumatic stress disorder and physical disabilities, and similar Two -thirds (66%) of veterans indicated that they were living with a health substance abuse. condition that prevented them from holding a job, living in stable housing, or taking care of themselves, ans. -veter compared to approximately half (51%) of non Job loss was the most frequently cited cause of homelessness among veterans (31%), followed by alcohol or drug use (16%) and eviction (15%). urvey respondents identifying as veterans reported accessing Overall, s a higher rate of ree meals, day shelter services, and (88% compared to 81%). F services than non- veterans temporary housing were among the top services accessed by veterans. Similar to non - veterans, the top issues encountered by veterans in seeking services included not qualifying ice they wanted, not having an ID or personal documentation, and lack of for the serv transportation. However, veterans indicated a lower rate of experiencing issues while seeking -veterans (65% compared to 69%). Veterans also services in the community compared to non reported a notably lower rate of never hearing back after applying for services compared to non- veterans (9% compared to 19%). urvey reported higher rates of ever being in jail or Veterans responding to the Count Us In S juvenile detention than non -veterans (60% compared to 51%), and similar rates of currently being on probation or parole (10% compared to 9%). FIGURE 58. OF SURVEY RESPONDENTS, NON- VETERANS AND VETERAN S COMPARISON AGE 2018 Non-Veterans Survey Population 2018 Veterans Survey Population 100% 29% 27% 24% 24% 18% 16% 13% 13% 13% 12% 4% 5% 0% 0% 0% 31-40 years 41-50 years 51-60 years 61 years or older Less than 18 18-24 years 25-30 years ; Veteran s Survey Population n= 119 2018 Non -Veteran s Survey Population n= 916 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 60

61 Count Us In Su bpopulation Findings: Veterans S AND -VETERAN , NON SURVEY RESPONDENTS REPORTED BY CONDITIONS HEALTH FIGURE 59. VETERAN S COMPARISON 2018 Non-Veterans Survey Population 2018 Veterans Survey Population 100% 52% 50% 43% 37% 36% 36% 35% 35% 26% 24% 12% 11% 5% 2% 0% Drug or Alcohol Traumatic Brain Chronic Health Post-Traumatic Physical AIDS/HIV Psychiatric or Injury Abuse Stress Disorder Related Problems Disability Emotional Conditions Veterans Survey Population with Condition n= Health Non- 2018 Health ; Veterans Survey Population with -901 897 Condition n= 119 Note: Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. -REPORTED CAUSES AMONG SURVEY RESPONDENTS (TOP FIGURE 60. SELF OF HOMELESSNESS S COMPARISON VETERAN S AND VETERAN FIVE RESPONSES), NON- 2018 Non-Veterans Survey Population 2018 Veterans Survey Population 100% 31% 24% 22% 16% 15% 12% 10% 11% 8% 6% 0% Lost Job Incarceration Alcohol or Drug Use Eviction Divorce/ Separation/ Breakup 2018 Non 5 ; Veterans Survey Population n= 11 -Veterans Survey Population n= 768 61 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

62 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Veterans FIGURE 61. SERVICES ACCESSED BY SURVEY RESPONDENTS (TOP FIVE RESPONSES), NON - VETERAN S AND VETERAN S COMPARISON 2018 Veterans Survey Population2 2018 Non-Veterans Survey Population 100% 48% 44% 35% 30% 25% 26% 26% 24% 24% 17% 0% Day Shelter Services Emergency Shelter Free Meals Bus Passes Transitional Housing Veterans Survey Population n= 738 114 ; Veterans Survey Population n= Non- 2018 ISSUES EXPERIENCED W FIGURE 62. HILE TRYING TO ACCES S SERVICES REPORTED BY SURVEY RESPONDENTS (TOP FIV -VETERANS AND VETERAN S E RESPONSES), NON COMPARISON 2018 Non-Veterans Survey Population 2018 Veterans Survey Population 100% 25% 23% 21% 23% 23% 22% 21% 18% 19% 9% 0% Did Not Know Where Lack of Transportation Did Not Qualify for the Did Not Have ID/ Never Heard Back after Service I Wanted Personal Document Applying for Services to Go for Help ; Veterans Survey Population n= 104; -Veterans Survey Population n= 690 2018 Non SURVEY RESPONDENTS, FIGURE 63. TEM INVOLVEMENT REPORTED BY CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYS NON- VETERANS AND VETERANS COMPARISON 2018 Veterans Survey Population 2018 Non-Veterans Survey Population 100% 60% 51% 10% 9% 0% Has been in Jail/Juvenile Detention Currently on Probation/Parole 2018 Non- Veterans Survey Population Has been in Jail/Juvenile Detention n= 891, Veterans Survey Population Has been in , Veterans Survey Survey Population Currently on Probation/Parole n= 891 Jail/Juvenile Detention n= 116 ; Non -Veterans Population 116 Currently on Probation/Parole n= | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 62

63 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Families with Children : Families with Children Count Us In Subpopulation Findings HUD defines households with children as households comprised of at least one adult (including young adults between 18 and 24 years old) and one child under the age of 18. For is report, these households are presented as families with childre n. the purposes of th In 2018, Count Us In identified 2,624 with children experiencing families 782 in persons were children under the age of 18. These ; 1,583 homelessness in Seattle/King County individuals comprise d approximately 22% of the total population experiencing hom elessness. Compared to 2017, the number of persons in families with experiencing homelessness decreased by 7 children . % (209 persons) Ninety percent (97%) of persons in families with children identified during Count Us In -seven 6 were sheltered 3% were unsheltered. and were experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County, 96 with children families Of the 782 households headed by a young parent under living in 0 children 25. There were 13 the age of these young families. 2%) An estimated sixty- two percent (6 of persons in families with children identified as female , and 38 % identified as male. When compared to the remainder of the count population, individuals in families with children ns in families % of perso at higher rates. An estimated 48 identified as persons of color with e, 5% identified as children identified as Black or African American, 27% identified as Whit and r, 3% identified as Asian, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islande 2% identified as American fied with multiple races. Indian or Alaska Native . Fifteen percent (15%) identi Additionally, 17% identified their ethnicity as Hispanic or Latino. Five percent (5%) of family households were experiencing chronic homelessness. IES WITH CHILDREN EX INDIVIDUALS IN FAMIL FIGURE 64. ESS, TOTAL PERIENCING HOMELESSN ATION WITH TREND COUNT POPUL 2,833 3,000 2,624 % 7 - 2,000 1,000 0 2017 2018 6 -in-Time Count setting, and the Identifying un sheltered families with children is extremely difficult in the Point number of reported unsheltered families is likely an undercount. For more information, please see Appendix 1 (p. 10 1). 63 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

64 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Families with Children IES EXPERIENCING HOM ELESSNESS, TOTAL COU NT INDIVIDUALS IN FAMIL FIGURE 65. R STATUS POPULATION BY SHELTE Sheltered Unsheltered 3% (n= 79) (n=2,545) 97% 2018 3% (n= 81) 2017 (n= 2,752) 97% 100% 60% 90% 70% 20% 30% 80% 40% 10% 0% 50% INDIVIDUALS IN FAMILIES WITH CHILDR FIGURE 66. EN EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL COUNT POPULATION BY AGE OF PARENT 2018 TOTAL NUMBER OF NUMBER OF NUMBER OF NUMBER OF FAMILY FAMILY NUMBER CHILDREN % OF PARENTS UNDER TOTAL MEMBERS AGE UNDER AGE OF MEMBERS AGE 25 PERSONS 24 18 - 18 OVER AGE 24 Persons in Households with Parent Age 25 or 90 91% 1,453 -- 849 2,392 Older Persons in Households with Parent Age 24 or 130 9% -- 232 102 -- Younger TOTAL 102 100% 1,583 90 849 2,624 2017 TOTAL NUMBER OF NUMBER OF NUMBER OF NUMBER OF NUMBER FAMILY % OF CHILDREN FAMILY PARENTS UNDER UNDER AGE MEMBERS AGE TOTAL OF MEMBERS AGE 25 18 18 PERSONS - 24 OVER AGE 24 Persons in Households 1,467 -- 69 933 2,469 87% with Parent Over Age 24 Persons in Households 222 142 -- -- 364 13% with Parent Under Age 25 2,833 933 69 142 100% TOTAL 1,689 Note: Family households are defined by households with at least one adult and one child. Please see Appendix 6 for complete definitions of all household types. 64 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

65 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Families with Children INDIVIDUALS IN FAMILIES WITH CHILDR EN EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, TOTAL FIGURE 67. COUNT POPULATION BY GENDER Female Male 40% 38% Transgender 62% 60% Gender Non- Conforming* 2018 2017 2017 n= 2,833; 2018 n= 2,624 Note: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) updated reporting categories for gender. In In 2018, the 2017, the reporting categories for gender included Female, Male, Transgender, and Don't Identify as Male, Female, or Transgender . In 2018, the categories included Female, Male, Transgender, and Gender Non -Conforming (i.e. not exclusively n-Conforming; -Queer; Gender No male or female). For federal reporting purposes, survey respondents identifying as Gender -Conforming -Binary; Neither Male, Female, or Transgender; or Other Not Listed were included in the Gender Non Non category. Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. INDIVIDUALS IN FAMIL FIGURE 68. IES WITH CHILDREN EX PERIENCING HOMELESSN ESS, T OTAL COUNT POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY 2018 2017 100% 48% 38% 27% 27% 21% 17% 15% 16% 5% 7% 5% 3% 2% 2% 0% Hispanic or American White Native Asian Black or African Multiple Races American Latino Indian or Alaska Hawaiian or Pacific Islander Native 2017 n= 2,833; 2018 n= 2,624 Note: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) gathers data on ethnicity and race through two separate questions, similar to the U.S. Census. For the purposes of this report, race and ethnicity are presented together. Multiple response question . Percentages may not add up to 100. 65 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

66 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Families with Children SURVEY FINDINGS EN FAMILIES WITH CHILDR respondents with no children, families Compared to Count Us In Survey with children reported experiencing notab ly higher rates of domestic violence. Furthermore, they attributed other homelessness to domestic violence at more four times the rate of all than experiencing -one percent (21%) of families cited the Twenty (21% compared to 5%). survey respondents loss of a job as the primary cause of their homelessness. , 49% of families with children reported living Immedi ately prior to experiencing homeless ness -six percent (26%) in a home owned or rented by either themselves or their partner. Twenty reported living in a home owned or rented by relatives or friends. survey respondents living in families with children (97%) Nearly all reported currently accessing services, most frequently citing transitional housing , bus passes, health services, job/employment services . Forty and -two percent (42%) of famil ies mental health services, any with children reported not experiencing issues trying to access services in the community. with children that did indicate encountering problems in seeking services, the For families not knowing where to go for lack of transportation and included frequently cited issues most Notably, families help. cited a language barrier at six times the rate as survey with children respondents with no children (12% compared to 2%). Families with children also reported a lower rate of never hearing back after appl compared to survey respondents ying for services with no children (10% compared to 19%). reported a slightly higher with children survey respondents, families other all Compared to lower rate of drug or alcohol abuse. -six Thirty rate of chronic health problems and a markedly percent (36%) of families with children indicated that they were living with a health condition that prevented them from holding a job, living in stable housing, or taking care of themselves, 5%) of survey respondents without children. r half (5 compared to ove Families with children also reported lower rates of having ever been in foster care when compared to all (8% compared to 18%). other survey respondents ng families with children were residing in The majority of survey respondents representi Note: transitional housing at the time of the survey, due to challenges in identifying unsheltered families. 1) for additional information. Please see Appendix 1 (p. 10 FIGURE 69. NON- SPONDENTS, SURVEY RE PERIENCE REPORTED BY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE EX S WITH CHILDREN COMPARISON FAMILIES AND FAMILIE 2018 Non-Families Survey Population 2018 Families with Children Survey Population 100% 40% 30% 0% 13 ; Families with Children 4 Survey Population n= 2018 Non- Families Survey Population n= 922 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 66

67 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Families with Children (TOP AMONG SURVEY RESPONDENTS OF HOMELESSNESS -REPORTED CAUSES SELF FIGURE 70. FAMILIES AND FAMILIE S WITH CHILDREN COMPARISON NON- FIVE RESPONSES), 2018 Non-Families Survey Population 2018 Families with Children Survey Population 100% 26% 21% 21% 12% 8% 8% 8% 9% 5% 4% 0% Eviction Family/ Domestic Lost Job Family/ Friend's Illness/Medical Problems Housing Wouldn't Let Violence Me Stay ; Families with Children Survey Population n= hildren Survey Population n= 757 132 Families with C Non- 2018 FIGURE 71. SERVICES ACCESSED BY SURVEY RESPONDENTS NON- (TOP FIVE RESPONSES), MPARISON FAMILIES AND FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN CO 2018 Families with Children Survey Population 2018 Non-Families Survey Population 100% 83% 24% 24% 19% 20% 18% 19% 16% 13% 7% 0% Health Services Bus Passes Transitional Housing Mental Health Job Services Training/Employment Services 130 728 2018 Non- Families with Children Survey Population n= ; Families with Children Survey Population n= 67 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

68 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Families with Children BY SURVEY S SERVICES REPORTED HILE TRYING TO ACCES ISSUES EXPERIENCED W FIGURE 72. E RESPONSES), NON- RESPONDENTS (TOP FIV S WITH FAMILIES AND FAMILIE CHILDREN COMPARISON 2018 Families with Children Survey Population 2018 Non-Families Survey Population 100% 24% 24% 23% 23% 21% 16% 14% 14% 12% 2% 0% Did Not Have ID/ Language Barrier Did Not Qualify for Did Not Know Where Lack of Transportation to Go for Help Personal Document the Service I Wanted Families Survey Population n= 684 2018 Non- 116 ; Families with Children Survey Population n= HEALTH CONDITIONS REPORTED BY FIGURE 73. SURVEY RESPONDENTS, NON- FAMILIES AND FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN COMPARISON 2018 Non-Families Survey Population 2018 Families with Children Survey Population 100% 45% 38% 37% 35% 34% 29% 27% 27% 15% 12% 10% 4% 3% 0% 0% Physical Drug or Alcohol Traumatic Brain Post-Traumatic AIDS/HIV Chronic Health Psychiatric or Emotional Abuse Injury Problems Related Stress Disorder Disability Conditions (PTSD) -909 -Families with Children Survey Population n= 905 2018 Non 131 n= ; Families with Children Survey Population Note: Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. FAMILIES , NON- SURVEY R REPORTED BY RE FIGURE 74. HISTORY OF FOSTER CA ESPONDENTS AND FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN COMPARISON 2018 Non-Families Survey Population 2018 Families with Children Survey Population 100% 18% 8% 0% ildren Survey Population n= 886 Families with Ch ; 132 Non- ; Families with Children Survey Population n= 2018 | 68 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

69 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults : Unaccompanied Youth and Count Us In Subpopulation Findings Young Adults For the purposes o -in-Time Count, unaccompanied youth and young adults are f the Point defined as youth under the age of 18 and young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 who are not accompanied by a parent or guardian —and are not parent s presenting with or sleeping in the s ame place as their own child(ren). Unaccompanied youth and young adults include single youth, young couples, and groups of young people presenting together as a household. Of individuals counted during Count Us In, an estimated 1,518 (13% of the to tal coun t population) were 17 . This includes 2 children under unaccompanied youth and young adults the age of 18 and 1,34 6 young adults between the ages of 18 and 24. These numbers do not se young ng people under 25 years of age who are in families or have children; the include you included in the people are data on families with children. he number of unaccompanied youth % and young adults increased by 1 Compared to 2017, t . The number of unaccompanied youth under the age of 18 decreased by 22% (49 (20 persons) persons). -quarters (7 Three 25% and were unsheltered 5%) of unaccompanied youth and young adults were sheltered on the night of the count. nd young adults experiencing homelessness unaccompanied youth a An estimated 60 % of during Count Us In identified as male. Thirty -two percent ( 32 %) identified as female, 2 % , and 6% identified with another gender . identified as transgender An estimated 4 xperiencing homelessness 1% of unaccompanied youth and young adults e 6% identified as White. Twenty percent (2 3%) identified as Black or African American, -three , 3% identified as Asian identified as American Indian or Alaska Native 1% identified as , and -six percent ) identified with multiple races. (26% Twenty Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. their ethnicity as Hispanic or Latino. 16% identified Additionally, Nineteen percent (19 %) of unaccompanied youth and young adults were experiencing chronic homelessness. FIGURE 75. DULTS , SNESS UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YO UNG A EXPERIENCING HOMELES WITH TREND TOTAL COUNT POPULATION 2,000 1,518 1,498 1,500 1 + % 1,000 500 0 2017 2018 69 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

70 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults FIGURE 76. UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS EXPERIENCING HOMELES SNESS, TOTAL COUNT POPULATION BY SHELTER STATUS Unsheltered Sheltered 2018 75% (n= 384) 25% (n= 1,134) 2017 (n= 356) 76% (n= 1,142) 24% 100% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% ERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS EXP FIGURE 77. TOTAL COUNT POPULATION BY AGE Age 18-24 Under 18 (n= 172) 11% 2018 89% (n= 1,346) (n=221) 15% 2017 (n= 1,277) 85% 0% 80% 70% 60% 50% 30% 20% 10% 90% 100% 40% 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In | 70

71 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults FIGURE 78. UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS EXPERIENCING HOMELES SNESS, TOTAL COUNT POPULATION BY GENDER 5% 2% Female 6% Male 40% 32% Transgender 60% 64% Gender Non- Conforming* 2018 2017 2017 n= 1,498; 2018 n= 1,518 Note: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) updated reporting categories for gender. In In 2018, the 2017, the reporting categories for gender included Female, Male, Transgender, and Don't Identify as Male, Female, or Transgender . In 2018, the c ategories included Female, Male, Transgender, and Gender Non -Conforming (i.e. not exclusively male or female). For federal reporting purposes, survey respondents identifying as Gender -Queer; Gender Non -Conforming; Non Female, or Trans -Binary; Neither Male, gender ; or Other Not Listed were included in the Gender Non -Conforming category. Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. 71 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

72 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults , OMELESSNESS DULTS EXPERIENCING H OUNG A OMPANIED YOUTH AND Y UNACC FIGURE 79. TOTAL COUNT POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY 2017 Unaccompanied YYA Count Population 2018 Unaccompanied YYA Count Population 100% 43% 41% 26% 26% 23% 19% 17% 16% 8% 6% 3% 4% 1% 1% 0% White American Multiple Races Hispanic or Asian Black or African Native Hawaiian or Latino American Indian or Alaska Pacific Islander Native 2017 n=1,498; 2018 n= 1,518 Note: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) gathers data on ethnicity and race through two separate questions, similar to the U.S. Census. For the purposes of this report, r ace and ethnicity are presented together. Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. 72 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

73 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings : Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULT SURVEY FINDINGS at approximately twice the rate Unaccompanied youth and young adults identified as LGBTQ+ (33% compared to 16%). Forty -five percent (45%) of as survey respondents age 25 and older identified as bisexual, 22% identified as lesbian or gay, young people identifying as LGBTQ+ 14% identified as pansexual, 11% identified as queer, and 8% identified as questioning. Sixty -three percent (63%) of young people identified as male. Twenty -nine percent (29% ) (e.g. identified as female, 7% identified as transgender, and 1% identified with another gender , gender -queer, gender non -binary). -conforming, or non Eight percent (8%) of unaccompanied young people responding to the Count Us In Survey reported that either they or their partner w ere currently pregnant, compared to 3% of survey respondents age 25 and older. One -third (33%) of unaccompanied young people indicated ever having been in foster care. When asked to identify the primary cause of their homelessness, unaccompanied young people most frequently cited job loss, alcohol or drug use, aging out of foster care, an . argument with a family member or friend who asked them to leave, and mental health issues Unaccompanied young people reported accessing services at a slightly higher rate when ree meals, temporary . F 9% compared to 82%) compared to all other survey respondents (8 were among the top services accessed. Forty lter services housing, bus passes, and day she percent (40%) of unaccompanied young people reported not experiencing any issues trying to access services in the community. For young people who did indicate encountering problems es, the most frequently cited issues included not knowing where to go for in seeking servic help, not qualifying for the service (s) they wanted, and not having their ID or personal documents. When compared to survey respondents age 25 and older, unaccompanied young people reporting a health condition indicated slightly higher rates of psychiatric or emotional lower rates of conditions, post -traumatic stress disorder, and traumatic brain injury , but substance abuse, chronic health problems, and physical disability. Forty -thr ee percent (43%) of ted that their health condition (s) prevented them from unaccompanied young people indica holding a job, living in stable housing, or taking care of themselves, compared to 55% of survey respondents age 25 and older. r survey respondents, young people indicated a higher rate of being on Compared to all othe probation or parole (14% compared to 8%). Note: Of a total 642 surveys administered during the youth and young adult count, 1 58 valid surveys were left for analysis. Unaccompani ed yout h and young adults surveyed through the general Count Us In Survey effort in the weeks following the general street count were not included , however, were included in the data presented in this section. in the count . T heir survey responses tion on the methodology of the youth and young adult count, please see Appendix For more informa 1 (p. 9 3). 73 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

74 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults SURVEY RESPONDENTS IDENTIFY ING AS LGBTQ+, NON- UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH FIGURE 80. (YYA) AND UNACCOMPANIED AND YOUNG ADULTS YYA COMPARISON 2018 Non-Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 2018 Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 100% 33% 16% 0% 2018 ; 224 Survey Population n= YYA Non- Survey Population n= 832 YYA Unaccompanied ; Unaccompanied FIGURE 81. - Y RESPONDENTS, NON RE REPORTED BY SURVE HISTORY OF FOSTER CA UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS (YYA) AND UNACCOMPANIED YYA COMPARISON 2018 Non-Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 2018 Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 100% 33% 13% 0% -Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population Ever been in Foster Care n= 799; Unaccompanied YYA Survey 2018 Non Population Ever been in Foster Care n= 219 (TOP -REPORTED CAUSES OF H SELF FIGURE 82. AMONG SURVEY RESPONDENTS OMELESSNESS FIVE RESPONSES), NON- UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS (YYA) AND UNACCOM PANIED YYA COMPARISON 2018 Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 2018 Non-Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 100% 26% 21% 16% 16% 14% 11% 9% 9% 6% 1% 0% Lost Job Alcohol or Drug Use Mental Health Issues Aging out of Foster Argument with Family/Friends who Care Asked Me to Leave ; Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population n= 64 -Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population n= 825 2018 Non | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 74

75 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults TOP FIVE RESPONSES), SURVEY RESPONDENTS ( SERVICES ACCESSED BY FIGURE 83. NON- UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS (YYA) AND UNACCOMPANIED YYA COMPARISON 2018 Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 2018 Non-Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 100% 50% 44% 41% 30% 27% 26% 24% 25% 24% 18% 0% Transitional Housing Day Shelter Services Bus Passes Emergency Shelter Free Meals ; Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population n= 66 -Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population n= 792 2018 Non S SERVICES REPORTED HILE TRYING TO ACCES ISSUES EXPERIENCED W FIGURE 84. BY SURVEY RESPONDENTS (TOP FIV E RESPONSES), NON- UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YOUNG RISON ADULTS (YYA) AND UNACCOMPANIED YYA COMPA 2018 Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 2018 Non-Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 100% 25% 25% 22% 23% 23% 20% 22% 22% 18% 13% 0% Lack of Transportation Did Not Have ID/ Did Not Know Where Did Not Qualify for the Never Heard Back After Applying for Services Service I Wanted to Go for Help Personal Document 2018 Non -Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population n= 740 ; Unaccompan ied YYA Survey Population n= 60 75 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

76 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Unaccompanied Youth and Young Ad ults RESPONSES), ESPONDENTS (TOP FIVE REPORTED BY SURVEY R CONDITIONS HEALTH FIGURE 85. UNACCOMPANIED AND (YYA) TS YOUTH AND YOUNG ADUL UNACCOMPANIED NON- YYA COMPARISON 2018 Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 2018 Non-Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 100% 51% 42% 39% 36% 36% 28% 30% 29% 18% 14% 13% 11% 2% 3% 0% Drug or Alcohol AIDS/HIV Chronic Health Traumatic Brain Physical Post-Traumatic Psychiatric or Injury Disability Problems Abuse Related Stress Disorder Emotional (PTSD) Conditions Survey Population n= 2018 218 Non- Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population n= 822; Unaccompanied YYA 214- entages may not add up to 100. Note: Multiple response question. Perc NTS, CRIMINAL J USTICE SYSTEM INVOLVEMENT A MONG SURVEY RESPONDE FIGURE 86. NON- UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS (YYA) AND UNACCOMPANIED YYA COMPARISON 2018 Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 2018 Non-Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population 100% 51% 52% 14% 8% 0% Currently on Probation/Parole Ever been in Jail/Juvenile Detention 2018 Unaccompanied YYA Jail/Juvenile Detention n= 811, Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population Ever been in Non- Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population Currently on Survey Population Ever been in Jail/Juvenile Detention n= 215; Non- Probation/Parole n= 811; Unaccompanied YYA Survey Population Curren tly on Parole/Probation n= 215 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 76

77 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Vehicle Residents : Vehicle Residents Count Us In Subpopulation Findings For the purposes of the Point -in-Time Count, vehicle residents are defined as persons sleeping in a car, RV, or van. In 2018, individuals living in vehicles . These individuals Count Us In estimated 3,372 comprised 28% of the total count population and 53% of the unsheltered population. increased by 46% (1,058 residing in vehicles Compared to 2017, the number of individuals persons), with the most marked increase observed among individuals residing in RVs. (51%) of individuals living in a vehicle Over half on the night of the count were sleeping in an RV, while 34% were sleeping in a car and 14% were sleeping in a van. , TOTAL COUNT POPULATION WITH TREND FIGURE 87. RESIDING IN VEHICLES INDIVIDUALS 4,000 3,372 3,500 3,000 2,314 2,500 46 + % 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 2017 2018 INDIVIDUALS , TOTAL COUNT POPULA TION BY VEHICLE TYPE FIGURE 88. RESIDING IN VEHICLES 2017 2018 2,000 1,500 1,730 1,000 1,163 876 861 500 577 479 0 Car RV Van 77 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

78 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Vehicle Residents VEHICLE RESIDENT SURVEY FINDINGS urvey respondents living in vehicles were 40 years Sixty -eight percent (68%) of Count Us In S -third (33%) were between 31 and 40 years old, 26% were between 25 old or younger. One and 30 years old 9% were young adults between 18 and 24 years old . , and Sixty -four percent (64 %) of vehicle resident survey respondents identified as male. Thirty -two ) identified as female, percent % identified with 1% identified as transgender, and 3 (32% another gender. The majority of survey respondents living in vehicles (61%) iden tified as White. Twenty - , 2% identified as Ameri can Indian percent (20%) identified as Black or African American (20%) or Al aska Native, and 1% identified as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. Eighteen percent . Additionally, 14% identified their ethnicity as Hispanic or (18%) identified with multiple races Latino. vehicle reported by Behavioral health issues were among the most prevalent health conditions residents. Similar to all other survey respondents, half (50%) of survey respondents living in vehicles indicated that their health condition(s) prevented them from holding a job, living in hemselves. stable housing, or taking care of t -three Thirty percent (33%) of vehicle resident survey respondents were experiencing chronic homelessness. Compared to all other survey respondents, vehicle residents reported notably higher rates of attributing their homelessness to the loss of a job, eviction, or the dissolution of a relationship. Thirteen percent (13%) of vehicle residents reported a history of foster care, compared to 18% of all other survey respondents. reported a lo Overall, Count Us In S urvey respondents living in vehicles wer rate of accessing community -based services compared to all other survey respondents ( 71% compared to 85%). Sixty percent (60%) of vehicle resident survey respondents reported issues in trying to access services in the community, including not qualifying for the service (s) they wanted, never Among those hearing back after applying for services, and not knowing where to go for help. accessing services in the community, survey respondents living in vehicles d accessing indicate free meals, day she services, and Safe Parking sites at higher rates than all other survey lter respondents. Vehicle residents indicated slightly lower rates of involvement in the criminal justice system than all other survey respondents. Seventy -one percent (71%) of vehicl e residents reported that law enforcement had asked them to move from their sleeping location, compared to 49% of all other survey respondents. Ninety -three percent (93% ) of vehicle residents responded that they would move into safe, affordable housing if it were available. Note: Further analyse s, such as , are not presented due to increased margins of error by vehicle type within a small sample population. 78 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

79 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Vehicle Residents FIGURE 89. AGE OF SURVEY RESPON DENTS, NON -VEHICLE RESIDENT VEHICLE RESIDENT AND COMPARISON 2018 Vehicle Resident Survey Population 2018 Non-Vehicle Resident Survey Population 100% 33% 26% 24% 22% 18% 16% 14% 14% 14% 9% 7% 2% 2% 0% 0% 18-24 years 25-30 years Less than 18 31-40 years 41-50 years 51-60 years 61 years or older Non- 2018 ; Vehicle Resident Survey Population n= 171 Survey Population n= 885 Vehicle Resident RESIDENT FIGURE 90. GENDER OF SURVEY RESPONDENT S, VEHICLE AND NON- VEHICLE RESIDENT COMPARISON 2018 Non-Vehicle Resident Survey Population 2018 Vehicle Resident Survey Population 100% 64% 62% 32% 32% 5% 3% 1% 1% 0% Transgender Gender Non-Conforming* Male Female n n= 171 ; Vehicle Resident Survey Populatio sident Survey Population n= 875 -Vehicle Re 2018 Non Note: In 2018, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) updated reporting categories for gender. In 2017, the reporting categories for gender included Female, Male, Transgender, and Don't Identify as Male, Female, or -Conforming (i.e. not exclusively Transgender . In 2018, the categories included Female, Male, Transgender, and Gender Non -Conforming; male or female). For federal reporting purposes, survey respondents identifying as Gender -Queer; Gender Non Non -Binary; Neither Male, Female, or Transgender; or Other Not Listed were included in the Gender Non -Conforming category. Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. 79 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

80 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Vehicle Residents AND VEHICLE RESIDENT , NON- F SURVEY RESPONDENTS RACE AND ETHNICITY O FIGURE 91. VEHICLE RESIDENT COMP ARISON 2018 Vehicle Resident Survey Population 2018 Non-Vehicle Resident Survey Population 100% 61% 48% 25% 20% 18% 18% 16% 14% 5% 4% 2% 3% 1% 0% 0% Multiple Races Native Asian American Black or African Hispanic or White Hawaiian or Indian or Alaska American Latino Pacific Islander Native Non- 2018 823 ; Vehicle Resident Survey Population n= Vehicle Resident Survey Population n= 157 -163 -849 Note: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) gathers data on race and ethnicity through two For the purposes of this report, race and ethnicity are presented together. separate questions, similar to the U.S. Census. Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. NON- TS, ONG SURVEY RESPONDEN FIGURE 92. VEHICLE RESIDENT HEALTH CONDITIONS AM VEHICLE RESIDENT COMPARISON AND 2018 Vehicle Resident Survey Population 2018 Non-Vehicle Resident Survey Population 100% 45% 38% 37% 37% 33% 34% 30% 25% 26% 14% 12% 8% 4% 3% 0% Psychiatric or Drug or Alcohol AIDS/HIV Physical Traumatic Brain Chronic Health Post-Traumatic Emotional Related Disability Stress Disorder Abuse Injury Problems Conditions (PTSD) ; Vehicle Resident 168- 170 Survey Population n= 2018 Non- Vehicle Resident Survey Population n= 868 -870 Note: Multiple response question. Percentages may not add up to 100. | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 80

81 Count Us In Subpopulation Find ings: Vehicle Residents SELF CAUSES FIGURE 93. (TOP AMONG SURVEY RESPONDENTS OF HOMELESSNESS -REPORTED VEHICLE RESIDENT NON- FIVE RESPONSES), COMPARISON VEHICLE RESIDENT AND 2018 Vehicle Resident Survey Population 2018 Non-Vehicle Resident Survey Population 100% 31% 22% 23% 20% 20% 12% 10% 9% 9% 7% 0% Divorce/ Separation/ Lost Job Mental Health Issues Eviction Alcohol or Drug Use Break up 726 Survey Population n= Vehicle Resident Non- 2018 163 ulation n= Survey Pop ; Vehicle Resident VEHICLE FIGURE 94. HISTORY OF FOSTER CA RE REPORTED BY SURVEY RESPONDENTS, NON- RESIDENT AND VEHICLE RESIDENT COMPARISON 2018 Non-Vehicle Resident Survey Population 2018 Vehicle Resident Survey Population 100% 18% 13% 0% 2018 Non ; Vehicle Resident Survey Population Ever -Vehicle Resident Survey Population Ever been in Foster Care n= 799 been in Foster Care n= 219 SERVICES ACCESSED ESPONSES) (TOP FIVE R FIGURE 95. AMONG SURVEY RESPONDENTS , NON- AND VEHICLE RESIDENT COMPARISON RESIDENT VEHICLE 2018 Vehicle Resident Survey Population 2018 Non-Vehicle Resident Survey Population 100% 52% 43% 24% 23% 20% 19% 20% 16% 17% 3% 0% Safe Parking Site Hygiene Services Free Meals Health Services Day Shelter Services Non- 157 Survey Population n= 2018 Vehicle Resident Vehicle Resident Survey Population n= 701; 81 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

82 Count Us In Subpopulation Findings: Vehicle Residents REPORTED BY SURVEY S SERVICES HILE TRYING TO ACCES ISSUES EXPERIENCED W FIGURE 96. (TOP FIVE R RESPONDENTS VEHICLE AND RESIDENT -VEHICLE , NON ESPONSES) COMPARISON RESIDENT 2018 Vehicle Resident Survey Population 2018 Non-Vehicle Resident Survey Population 100% 24% 24% 24% 24% 19% 17% 17% 16% 18% 14% 0% Lack of Transportation Did Not Know Where Did Not Have ID/ Did Not Qualify for the Never Heard Back After Service I Wanted to Go for Help Personal Document Applying for Services Survey Population n= Vehicle Resident Survey Population n= 649; -Vehicle Resident 2018 Non 151 NDENTS, RTED BY SURVEY RESPO TEM INVOLVEMENT REPO CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYS FIGURE 97. NON- COMPARISON VEHICLE RESIDENT VEHICLE RESIDENT AND 2018 Non-Vehicle Resident Survey Population 2018 Vehicle Resident Survey Population 100% 52% 48% 10% 7% 0% Currently on Probation/Parole Ever been in Jail/Juvenile Detention 2018 Vehicle Resident Survey n= 858; Vehicle Resident Non- Ever been in Jail/Juvenile Detention Survey Population Ever been in Jail/Juvenile Detention n= 168 Vehicle Resident Survey Population Currently on ; Non- Population Probation/Parole n= 858; Vehicle Resident Survey Population Currently on Probation/Parole n= 168 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 82

83 Appendix 1: Methodology Appendix 1: Methodology wa -in-time The purpose of the 201 s to produce a point 8 Seattle/King County Count Us In estimate of the number of people experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County . The methodology used is commonly described as a “blitz count” since it is conducted by a large conducted in team o ver a very short period of time. As this method was Seattle/King County, -based count of individuals and families who appear ed to be the result was an observation experiencing homelessness. The results of the street count were combined with the results of ed the shelter ncing homelessness at one count to produce a total number of people experie point Seattle/King County. The count was then followed by an in -person -in-time in were o profile and estimate the condition representative survey, the results of which used t and characteristics of the local population experiencing homelessness. Count Us In follows. A more detailed description of the methodology employed for 8 Seattl e/King County Count Us In wa s comprised of four primary components: The 201 enumeration of unsheltered individuals conducted —a visual Count Street 1) General the hours of 2:00 AM and 6:00 AM on the day of the count; between —a focused, survey Youth and Young Adult C ount -based 2) count of unsheltered young people under the age of 25 conducted throughout the day of the c ount at both site - ; based and street -based locations Shelter ed C 3) of individuals residing in emergency shelter or transitional —a count ount ing programs the night prior to the street count as reported directly by each hous program; and Survey 4) —an in- person representative survey of unsheltered and sheltered individuals conducted by peer surveyors and service providers in the weeks following the gener al street count. , many county and community To ensure the success of Seattle/King County Count Us In agencies collaborated in community outreach, volunteer recruitment, logistical planning, cy coordination efforts. Applied Survey -making, and interagen methodological decision 83 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

84 Appendix 1: Methodology Research provided technical assistance with these aspects of the planning process. All Home to provide project management support designated their staff , coordinate guide recruitment, support general street count log istics, and assemble members of the steering com mittee . The steering committee was convened on a monthly basis to provide community oversight and feedback on various elements of count coordination. were active and valued partners in the Local homeless service providers and advocates -in-Time planning and implementation of the 201 8 Seattle/King County Count Us In Point Count . County and jurisdictional representatives, l ocal service providers , system pa rtners, and unaffiliated community members dedicated to efforts to end homele ssness in Seattle/ King County assisted in local count and survey coordination served on the steering committee, ors. activities, and volunteered as street count team members and survey important partners in the planning and were Persons with lived experience of homelessness implementation of 2018 Count Us In participat ed in planning meetings, serv ed as guides . They for the general street count as well as the youth and young adult co unt, and conduct ed surveys. The goal of the general street count was to obtain an accurate count of persons sleeping outside, in vehicles, in tents, or in other places not meant for human habitation throughout ounty Seattle/King C . Point , the HUD definition of unsheltered -in-Time Count For the purposes of the homelessness was used. This definition includes individuals and families with a primary nighttime residence that is a public or private place not designed , or ordinarily used , as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings, including a car, park, abandoned building, bus or train station, airport, or camping ground (including sanctioned and unsanctioned encampment locations) . In order to minimize potential duplicate counting, t he counts of unsheltered and sheltered individuals were coordinated to occur within the same time period. This included coordinating —ensuring the timing of the count prior to morning release times of any local shelter progra ms — that individuals experiencing homelessness were not expected to migrate across count areas and instructing street count teams to prioritize high density areas. The majority of general AM, with exceptions made for street count activities took place between 2:00 AM and 6:00 rural communities in the eastern and southern regions of Seattle/King County. Due to increased visibility and safety concerns in navigating large open spaces, remote encampments, 84 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

85 Appendix 1: Methodology and and more rugged terrain, these communities conducted their counts closer to daybreak their counts by 10:00 AM. completed were Street count teams generally comprised of at least one guide with lived experience of homelessness and up to three community volunteers . Guides assist ed the team in navigatin g the count area, identifying locations where unsheltered individuals were likely to be encountered providing additional guidance on identifying individuals experiencing , while homelessness. Volunteers assist ed with transporting the team through their coun t area and performing the tally. Guides were compensated $15 per hour for their time spent in the field on the night of the count and an additional $15 for attending an in -person training session the . week prior to the count Depending on the size and dens ach team was assigned up to three ity of the areas, e contiguous census tract maps . Census tracts serve d as a method of organizing the general ; their boundaries are street count mined by the federal based on population density and deter government. Teams instructed to canvas all accessible streets, roads, and highways were within the boundaries of their assigned census tracts by foot, car, or a combination of both. Teams were asked to cover the entirety of their count assignment during the hours of the str eet count, and to communicate with deployment center staff if they required additional assistance or time. captains in advance of the team In some cases , census tracts were pre -assigned to designated This approach was taken for logistical reasons as count. well as to continue traditions of previous Point captains were seasoned Team -in-Time Count efforts in Seattle/King County. volunteers or street outreach workers who were familiar wit h specific areas of the count . These individuals ed often scout county the ir assigne d areas in advance of the count , assist ed with r ecruiting the volunteers and guides required for their team, and were ultimately responsible for leading their team through their assigned area in a democratic manner. In the captains were frequently utilized in areas counted in prior 2018 general street count, t eam at years, sites of regular street outreach, and in locations with special safety or access considerations. In all other cases, teams were brought together and assigned census tract areas at the deployment center on the morning of the count. While nearly all census tracts deployed from the City of Seattle deployment centers were pre- assigned to designated team captains, this strategy took place on a notably smaller scale in other regions, such as in East County, North County, and Southwest County. All street count teams were equipped with their assigned census tract map area(s), tally sheets, training guidelines, deployment center staff contact information, and other suppl ies. In performing the tally, teams were not to initiate direct contact with , or to otherwise disturb , individuals experien observed during the count . Leveraging the knowledge cing homelessness and expertise of their guide and other team members , count vol unteers were instructed to only observe and record basic demographic and location information . were Upon their return from the field, count teams submitted their tally sheets and maps , then nd the integrity of the debriefed by the deployment center staff. Observational comments a count effort were reviewed and assessed. This process functioned to check for double - 85 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

86 Appendix 1: Methodology t every accessible road and area (e.g. counting and to verify tha , parks, walkways, etc.) within their map assignment had been counted. General stre et count teams achieved 96% coverage of the 398 census tracts within the Seattle/King County region. There were fourteen census tracts that were not covered in 2018 These census tracts were frequently loc ated due to accessibility challenges or safety concerns. in remote areas where local leadership believed zero counts were expected; no adjustments , however, were made to census data and these census tracts were excluded from the final analysis. The 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In Point -in-Time Count methodology was consistent with the 2017 count, with improvements made in implementation and participation. In 2018, the total numbers of volunteers and guides participating in the general street count increased. Please note that the numbers featured in the table below do not include the approximately 50 youth guides and 30 team leaders who served the youth and young adult count. 2017 2018 Guides 110 206 520 Volunteers 609 Special outreach efforts to count known vehicle hot spots and safe parking locations, sanctioned and unsanctioned encampments, late -night bus routes, and unaccompanied youth and young adults continued to improve and remained consistent with the previous ye ar. A new strategy for improving outreach to unsheltered families during the count was introduced in 2018 through the existing family emergency shelter access line in Seattle/King County. The assistance of those who possess an intimate knowledge of the activities and locations of individuals experiencing homelessness is critical to the success of the count . Individuals with lived experience of homelessness were recruited to serve as guides through local and regio nal . homeless services provider organizations in coordination with a staff member from All Home Partner organizations were instructed to focus recruitment on individuals who possessed mmunity current knowledge of where individuals were sleeping outside in their co . These on the day organizations were also asked to help facilitate guide participation in training and of the count . Regional quotas for guide recruitment were developed based on the number of adjusted census tracts and estimated number of teams required to cover the count area, then based on input from local partners involved in count planning. Recruitment primarily too k place in the weeks immediately prior to the count in order to safeguard against attrition . Recruitment of community volunteers included outreach by All Home to prior count rvice provider organizations, county agencies, jurisdictional participants, local and regional se partners, local media, funding collaborators, and other community stakehol Regional ders. volunteer recruitment quotas were established in a similar manner as the guide recruitment were determined by the number of census tracts assigned to the . These quotas quotas deployment center and the ideal number of volunteers needed to complete a team. 86 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

87 Appendix 1: Methodology expected rates of volunteer attrition and to Adjustments were made to account for were accommodate recommendations of local partners involved in count plannin g. Volunteers directed to register online beginning in November 2017, and to indicate the areas of Seattle/King County in which they had previous experience counting or were otherwise interested. Applied Survey Research maintained the volunteer database and managed . volunteer communications All prospective guides and volunteers were asked to participate in training in advance of the count. Count Us In , the definition of homelessness , guidelines Training covered the purpose of how to safely and respe ctfully count individuals and families observed sleeping outside , on . and how to effectively use the tally sheets and census tract map s to complete the count Beginning in December 2017, a streaming version of the training became for online available ve volunteers to view in lieu of attending an in -person session. In-person training prospecti sessions were facilitated by Applied Survey Research the week prior to the count and were held in multiple locations throughout Seattle/King County. Applied Survey Research also held a virtual office hour in the days immediately prior to the count in order to answer questions from volunteers unable to attend in -person training. On the morning of the general street count, deployment center staff delivered an abbreviated refresher training to all participants. Every effort was made to minimize potentially hazardous situations. All count participants ng areas were advised to take every safety precaution possible, including refraining from enteri , staying together with their team, they were uncomfortable where and maintaining a he observational nature of the count was distance from those they were counting. T respectful emphasized, which is generally successful in minimizing potentially dan gerous situations. t center staff verified that at least one person on e ach team had a cell phone Deploymen available for their use during the count , then recorded the cell phone number on a volunteer deployment log sheet used for tracking teams in the fiel d. Deployment center staff also teams could communicate provided each team with a contact cell phone number so that count any issues or questions . counting while they had In addition to not initiating contact with persons encountered on their route, c ount participants received additional guidance on respecting the space and maintaining the confidentiality of people experiencing homelessness in the community. This included refraining from taking photos or posting details of their observations or count locat ion to social media; keeping a respectful distance from individuals, tents, and vehicles; not shining flashlights into tents or vehicles; and reco rding only partial license plate numbers on inhabited vehicles. During planning, a number of areas were ident ified as unsuitable for general street count teams due to accessibility challenges, safety concerns, or the need for more established relationships to enter certain areas. Consequently, these areas were assigned to teams orkers, seasoned volunteers, and expert guides. Further, comprised of experienced outreach w rural eastern and southeastern parts of the county were counted shortly after daybreak to ensure count teams could safely navigate difficult terrain. 87 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

88 Appendix 1: Methodology Immediately before the count, law enforcement was notified of pending street count activity in their jurisdictions. Law enforcement were only alerted to the fact that street count teams would be performing the census on foot and by car from approximately 2:00 AM to 6:00 AM. Specific count areas, encampme nt locations, or other route details were not disclosed. No official reports were received in regard to unsafe or at -risk situations during the street count in any area of the county. To achieve complete coverage o f Seattle/King County within the four -hour count period, deployment centers were identi fied and selected in Seattle, Shoreline, Bellevue, eight primary These deployment centers served as central meeting Tukwila, Renton, Kent, and Federal Way. locations for count participants to meet the rest of their team, receive a brief refresher training, and to obtain and return their count materials. Volunteers and guides were assigned to a deployment center prior to the night of the count based on their familiarity with particular areas of the county, their desire to count alongside a specific volunteer group or organization, or convenience. The planning team allocated count routes to the deployment center closest or most central to the coverage area in order to facili tate the timely deployment of count teams into the field. Enumclaw, remote deployment centers were located in Auburn, Bothell, An additional seven Issaquah, . Partners local to these communities Snoqualmie, and Vashon Island Sammamish, in more focused volunteer and guide recruitment and managed smaller, concentrated ed engag to cover specific areas of the county deployments . A special planning meeting with organizations conducting regular street outreach aided in formulating a special strategy for counting individuals in larger or more difficult to access encampments . Residents of sanctioned encampments were counted by accessing data le easily reported in the local Homeless Management Information System ( HMIS). Whi or make -shift accessible unsanctioned encampments comprised of three or more tents were counted by general street count teams, u nsanctioned encampments requiring shelters special access were identified on and redacted from general street count maps . These sites were counted separately by encampment residents, camp managers, or outreach workers during the same time as general street count activities . This special outreach strategy ensured both the accuracy of the data and the privacy of encampment residents. During planning for the general street count, the need for a strategy to count individuals living in vehicles across Seattle/King County, and within the City of Seattle in particular, emerged. The special outreach strategy conceived in 2017 proved successful and continued in 2018. Vehicle teams expanded their efforts to other areas of the county and covered additional, more challenging vehicle locations within the City of Seattle. still deemed active in the City of Seattle that were In response to several vehicle “hot spots” teams s, special vehicle high mobility of vehicle resident by local advocates, in addition to the 88 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

89 Appendix 1: Methodology were assembled prior to the day of the count in order to focus chiefly on counting veh icles in these areas . Approximately five teams , comprised of at least one guide and typically one volunteer , covered specialized vehicle routes throughout the City of Seattle. Vehicle teams were assigned to specific “hot spots.” Vehicle specialists assembl ed with their teams to determine the best route to cover their assigned hot spots, emphasizing routes that would minimize duplication with general street count teams and concentrate on more challenging locations. Vehicle teams were asked to collect the sam e data as general street count teams, including the last four digits of license plates to allow for de -duplication across efforts. Teams Seattle . and East King County were dispatched from downtown While the expansion of the vehicle outreach strategy was explored in other areas of Seattle/King County, it was determined that vehicle identification was better suited to general street count teams. This guidance was provided in consultation with regional Safe Parking advocates. In order to aid in identifying vehicles eligible for reporting, vehicle count teams consulted the schema outlined in the following vehicle identification Seattle Vehicular Residency Research Project 2012 Advisory Report . These guidelines were also distributed to general street count teams prior to deployment : A vehicle should be considered a vehicle residence if it exhibits two of th e following six characteristics : 1) The view through the front to rear windows is blocked The side and/or rear windows are blocked by sheeting, panels, and/o r 2) curtains to restrict visibility on both sides 3) There is evidence of unfrozen condensation on windows At least one window is partially open 4) 5) There are items often associated with vehicular residency such as generators, bicycles, or storage containers externally secured 6) There are unusually large volumes of possessions, sometimes appearing to be 7 in bags), within or near the vehicle “refuse” (often training was led by local vehicle In the special vehicle count team in the City of Seattle, count teams counted exp ert Graham Pruss. While general street residency vehicles in special -duplication process was vehicle routes as part of their general count assignment , a de undertaken using the last 4 digits of the vehicle license plate to ensure the same vehicle was not counted more than once . This process was important because general street count teams and special vehicle count teams could pot entially double -count vehicles that moved during the count shift or were counted a second time by different teams. Once the de -duplication plate information was deleted for privacy process was complete , the file of license 7 Pruss, G. (2012). Seattle Vehicula r Residency Research Project 2012 Advisory Report. Seattle University, September 2012. Retrieved from http://clerk.seattle.gov/~public/meetingrecords/2012/hhshc20120926_8a.pdf 89 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

90 Appendix 1: Methodology considerations. License plate inf ormation was not made available to any persons other than the data analysis team at Applied Survey Research. As in prior count years, special teams comprised of volunteer pairs were assigned to ride the King Coun ty Night Owl Bus routes during the hours of the general street count. V olunteers were instructed to tal ly individuals observed sleeping on the buses during a single round -trip journey, following the same protocols for identification as general street count teams. In 2018, eleven bus routes were covered by these special teams. In 2018, a new strategy to identify unsheltered families during Count Us In was coordinated through the existing family emergency shelte r access line, which was implemented in Seattle/King County in November 2017. Mary’s Place operates the 24/7 emergency shelter access line for families experiencing homelessness or fleeing domestic violence, and also ludes basic information on the family’s household maintains an active daily list that inc members, living situation, and specific needs. For the purposes of the count, All Home provided a non -identifying list of families on the active daily list who reported residing in unsheltered locations on the night of the count. While a small number of unsheltered families were counted using this method , efforts to identify additional families during the count are to . considered a methodological improvement be During the street count, teams were instructed to tally individuals living i , or tents n vehicles, using the following protocol : abandoned buildings If the number of individuals c urrently residing in the vehicle, tent, or abandoned building were known by the team or were visible , the team was to fill in the appropriate information on the tally sheet, including their approximate age category (under 18, age 18 -24, or 25 and older), dwelling or vehicle type, and whether they were part of a family household with children. If the vehicle, tent, or abandoned building appeared to be occupied , but the number of individuals tally the vehicle ty pe, tent, or abandoned living there was unknown, the team was to only building. abandoned buildings in In estimating the number of individuals living in vehicle, tents, and Seattle/King County, a multiplier— described below —was applied to structures and vehicles . This number tallied during the street count where the number of individuals was unknown was subsequently combined with the known number of individuals who were observed residing in these location types during the street count. Vehicle, tent, and abandoned building multipliers were developed usi ng responses from the -year, -community multiplier, multi Count Us In Survey and 10 California counties . This multi , allows for greater accuracy and a smaller margin of produced from a larger number of surveys The survey questions asking where respondents were residing on the night of the count, error. 90 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

91 Appendix 1: Methodology a more reliable, all and how many people (including themselves) were staying there, produced - s, tents, and county multiplier to estimate the number of individuals residing in vehicle abandoned buildings in Seattle/King County. Data across years and counties were compared to assess for variability. Ultimately, individual multipliers for those residing in a van, developed from the automobile/car, camper/RV, tent, or abandoned building/squat surveys were applied. Prior to 2017, a generic multiplier of “2 persons per” location type was applied. Data from 2018 led to the same results as 2017; consequently, the same multipliers were maintained. multipliers applied in 201 8: following table summarizes the The Multiplier Vehicle/Location Type 1.8 Van Automobile/Car 1.42 1.8 Camper/RV 1.31 Tent 1.69 Abandoned Building/Squat Additionally, demographic characteristics were extrapolated for individuals residing in these locations using data collected during the street count and through the 2018 survey , including . age and gender For the purpose of the count , encampments were defined as three or more tents or make - shift shelters. G eneral street count teams were instructed to tally persons or tents /make -shift /make ents encampment if they observed three or more t as part of an shelters -shift shelters grouped together on their route. This observation was recorded on the tally sheet under a category separate from dwelling or vehicle type. Therefore, teams followed the same protocol observed individuals , tents, or make -shift s helters , only completing the additional field to for /make -shift shelter was included in an encampment when indicate the person or tent . In cases where only the tent /make -shift shelter was identified because the number applicable of persons living inside was uncertain, the number of individuals residing in these structure s were estimated using the same procedure and multiplier described in the preceding section — was ident /make -shift shelter ified as part of an encampment. regardless of whether the tent It should be noted that general street count teams only collected information on unsanctioned encampments as sanctioned encampment numbers were collected directly through HMIS reporting and redacted from general street coun t maps. A few un sanctioned encampments were covered by special encampment outreach teams ; these areas were also redacted from genera l street count maps. General street count teams were found to be somewhat inconsistent in recording persons or tents /make -shift shelters as belonging in encampments . As such, c aution is advised when considering the number of persons in unsanctioned encampments reported. , especially when i Many challenges exist in any homeless count mplemented in a community as large and diverse as the size Count Us In is a “snapshot” that quantifies Seattle/King County. 91 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

92 Appendix 1: Methodology of the population experiencing homelessness at a given point during the year. Hence, the count may not be representative of fluctuat ions and compositional changes in the population either seasonally or over time. It does not calculate the number of unique persons who which is much higher than those who are over a calendar year, experience homelessness experiencing homelessness at any given time. Point -in-Time Counts significantly underrepresent those whose homelessness does not last very long, but who , nevertheless , need and access emergency shelter and services. From HMIS data available in other jurisdictions, including New York, Phil adelphia, and Columbus, as many as 5 to 10% of those 8 living in poverty in a jurisdiction may experience homelessness over the course of a year. For a variety of reasons, many individuals experiencing homelessness generally do not want to be located, and thus make concerted efforts to avoid detection. Regardless of how successful outreach efforts are, an undercount of those experiencing homelessness will persist, especially and of hard -to-reach subpopulations such as unsheltered families, undocumented individuals, unaccompanied . youth and young adults The methods employed in non- intrusive visual homeless enumeration, while academically sound, have inherent biases and shortcomings. Even with the assistance of dedicated homeless service providers and individua ls with lived experience, the methodology cannot guarantee 100% accuracy. Many factors may cont ribute to missed opportunities , including : who may be sleeping in vans, cars, recreational vehicles, abandoned Individuals • are difficult to identify buildings, or structures unfit for human habitation . Individuals residing in isolated rural areas are difficult to access or otherwise identify • for the purposes of the count. • Individuals experiencing homelessness whose physical appearance differs from traditional visual cues associated with people experiencing homelessness can be mistaken for housed individuals. This is especially true of unaccompanied youth and young adults , who often “hide in plain sight” and present similar ly to their stably housed peers . • Families with children experiencing homelessness often seek opportunities to stay on eshift shelters. private property, rather than sleep on the streets, in vehicles, or in mak • Guide and volunteer recruitment can be particularly difficult in suburban and rural communities, where the existing homeless services system or infrastructure is less robust than in urban communities. By counting the minimum number of individuals experiencing homelessness during a given point -in-time, the count methodology wa s conservative and therefore most likely result ed in an undercount of certain unsheltered individuals. A margin of error on the final count is not , althou available gh the data presented is to be considered a minimum estimate. This conservative approach wa s necessary to preserve the integrity of the data collected. Even though Count Us In wa s most likely an undercount of the population experiencing 8 Burt, MR. Wilkins, C. (March 2005). Estimating the Need: Projecting from Point -in-Time to Annual Estimates of the Number of Homeless People in a Community and Using the Information to Plan for Permanent -content/uploads/2013/08/Estimating -the - http://www.csh.org/wp Supportive Housing. Retrieved from Need.pdf 92 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

93 Appendix 1: Methodology ness, the m s the most comprehensive approach available homeless ethodology employed wa and provides invaluable data for local and federal service agencies. Count Us In is a community -driven effort that utilizes a broad range of partners for all c ou nt Over 200 guides with current or recent experience of homelessness and over 600 activities. 8 general street count. Both guides and community volunteers participated in the 201 t. volunteers were invited to submit feedback through a survey following the coun guides reported being extremely satisfied with the recruitment process (70%), The majority of their deployment location (70%), communication (76%), and their team assignment (81%). Most guides were new to the effort with 87% reporting that it was their first time participating in Seattle/King County’s Point- (73%) of in-Time Count. Nearly three -quarters guides reported that the training helped prepare them for though 16% reported the count, al that they did not attend training prior to the count either because of transportation barriers or because they were not aware of the training . In regard to overall experience, 96% of guides reported that they we re likely to participate in Count Us In again next year . Volunteer surveys reported generally pos itive experiences with registration, communications, training, deployment , and conducting the count . Sixty -five percent (6 5%) of respondents in-Time indicated 201 8 was the first year they had participated in Seattle/King County’s Point- Count ercent (39%) rated their experience as “Very Positive” and 47% rated their -nine p . Thirty experience as “Positive.” of respondents indicated they we re 3%) More than ninety percent (9 Very Likely ” or “Likely ” to participate in Count Us In in future years. either “ The goal of the youth and young adult count was to be more inclusive of youth under the age of 18 and young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 who we re unaccompanied and and experiencing homelessness. While Seattle/King County has conducted a dedicated youth young adult count the annually ed mark since 2010, the 2017 youth and young adult count first year that results were integrated into overall estimates of individuals, youth, and families in Seattle/King County. experiencing homelessness In 2013, HUD asked communities across the country to improve efforts to include young people in the Point -in-Time Count. Unaccompanied youth and young adults experiencing homelessness are traditionally un derrepresented due to the fre quently hidden nature of youth homelessness. Many of these young people avoid traditional homeless services, stay in unsheltered locations that can be difficult to find or access, and are more difficult for adult street count volunteers to identify as they often appear similar to their stably housed peers . and young adult count work upon the y outh In 201 8, the goal was to reproduce and improve achieved the previous year. 93 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

94 Appendix 1: Methodology , the HUD definition of unaccompanied youth for the Point -in- For the purposes of the count under the age of 18 and young adults Time Count was used. This definition includes youth between the ages of 18 and 24 who are not accompanied by a parent or guardian, and also are not parent s presenting with or sleeping in the same place as their child(ren). Unaccompanied youth are single youth, youth couples, and groups of youth presenting household . together as a The 201 8 youth and young adult count methodology was comprised of two primary components: and -based survey of youth 1) under the age of 25 at youth shelters, young adults A site -in centers, libraries, schools, community centers, and other organizations serving drop young people across Seattle/King County; and -based 2) A street survey of unsheltered and unaccompanied youth and young adults under the age of 25 conducted in specific areas throughout Seattle/King County by young people (age 18- 24) with lived experience of homelessness and outreach workers. site s from the -based survey component Partner locations for the had access to small stipend United Way of King County to support survey activities, including incentives to encourage the participation of young people. Agency staff and volunteers participated in training sessions the were instructed to administer surveys to young people under the week before the count, and age of 25 who sought to participate -identification as g status or self , regardless of housin . However, only respondents indicating sleep ing in an unsheltered experiencing homelessness were included in the estimates discussed in this report. location on the night of the count Planning for the street -based survey component of the 201 8 youth and young adult count included representatives from several youth homeless se rvice providers , as well as you ng In early January, Applied Survey Research facilitated a focus people with lived experience. group wherein young people identified locations unsheltered youth were known to congregate . This information was supplemented with y additional hot spots identified by youth th . Friends of Youth, Lifelong AIDS Alliance, Neighborcare Health at 45 outreach workers Street, New Horizons Ministries, Nexus Youth and Families, Peace for the Streets by Kids from the Streets, TeenFeed, YMCA, an d YouthCare recruited young people with lived experience of homelessness and line staff to participate in planning and implementing the youth street count. Applied Survey Research provided training the week before the count, which covered data collection procedures, confidentiality, safety protocols, and count day logistics. Participating organizations were assigned general count areas where “hot spots” for unsheltered youth staff and their young were identified prior to the day of the count based on th e familiarity and young adult street count teams met at one of seven people had with these areas. Youth , 2018. Teams on Thursday, January 25 deployment locations throughout Seattle/King County were comprised of one team leader (a youth outreach worker or service provider) and 2 -3 94 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

95 Appendix 1: Methodology youth guides with lived experience. Approximately 50 youth guides and 30 team leaders participated in the youth street count. Teams were instructed to survey any yo ung person under the age of 25 who was unsheltered, and to provide young people who completed the survey with a $5 food card incentive. Teams were also given tally sheets to count any young person determined to be unsheltered , but unable to complete a survey due to refusal or safety con -based youth . Young people who participated in planning and conducting the street cerns their time spent in training . survey were paid $15 per hour for their time, including -based surveys of young p eople under the age of Agency staff and volunteers conducted site 25 throughout the day and evening of January 2 5, 201 8. Partner s ites included youth shelters, drop -in centers, libraries, schools, and community centers. For the thir d year, New Horizons Ministries hosted the Community Resource Excha nge, an opportunity for young people to participate in the survey while accessing a variety of services and resources. Street -based surveys of unsheltered, unaccompanied youth and young adults were conducted and young adult . During youth from approximately 12:00 PM to 5:00 PM on January 25, 2018 count planning, young people with lived experience and youth service providers determined young people would be more prominent and the safety of outreach teams w unsheltered ould between ed s. Young people serving as youth guides on the day of the be ensur these time count also completed the survey at the end of their count shift if they had not already completed a survey at one of the partner survey sites earlier that day. Care was taken by felt comfortable, regardless of all interviewers to ensure that young people the street or service location where the survey occurred. During the interviews, young people were encouraged to be candid in their responses and were informed that responses would be framed as general findings, would be kept confidential, and would not be traceable to any one individual. There were fewer participating survey sites in 2018 than the previous year (48 compared to 73); several branches of the King County Library Syst em that had once been survey sites did not participate same capacity . A number of branches of the King County Library System in the identified during hot spot planning were covered by youth and young adult street , however, count teams. These teams performe d visual enumerations of young people experiencing homelessness observed inside the library. The impact of the modified participation of the King County Library System in the youth and young adult count is presumed to be minimal, given the small number of eligible surveys typically completed. The survey requested respondents’ initials and date of birth so that duplication could be avoided without compromising the respondents’ anonymity. Upon completion of the survey effort, an extensive verif ication process was conducted to eliminate du plicates. This process examined date of birth, initials, gender, ethnicity, length of homelessness, and consistencies in patterns of responses to other questions on the survey. Surveys were also processed accord ing to the housing status of young people. Of 642 youth and young adult count surveys valid surveys were left for the analysis. 58 administered, 1 Approximately 25% of youth survey 95 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

96 Appendix 1: Methodology respondents indicated they were unsheltered or residing in temporary shelter, 8 % reported experiencing housing instability , and 6 7% reported being stably housed. This high percentage of stably housed respondents was an artifact of the effort to avoid stigm atizing the housing status of respondents in the many group and institutional settings where the survey was administered. Only respondents meeting the HUD definition of homelessness for the Point -in- Tim e Count we re included in the final analysis. and young adult count and general street To addre ss potential duplication between the youth count, all visual count data were analyzed at the census- oung people under level and y tract treet count were subtracted. the age of 25 counted in the general s In producing an estimate of the number of unaccompanied youth and young adults experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County, count data were collected and integrated from the f ollowing sources: • Youth and young adult count • General street count (visual) and survey • Sheltered count -based survey efforts and street Young people surveyed during the site- the youth and young of -duplicated based on the unique identif ier collected through the survey adult count were de instrument. Young people who were surveyed t hrough the general Count Us In S urvey effort in , however, the weeks following the count were not included in the count ; their surveys were included in the survey data presented in this report . Counts of young people obtained through the youth and young adult count were de -duplicated at the census tract -level from young people under the age of 25 tallied during the general street numbers inc luded from the general street count effort also reflect count. Youth and young adult extrapolated age detail applied to the observed street count population , which took place after de-duplication . For d ata reported as unknown by count teams due to access or privacy concerns (e.g. , individuals .), extrapolation percentages were derived from residing in vehicle s, tent s, abandoned buildings, etc a review o f both survey and count sources and applied to this segment of the general street count population. combined to produce an overall estimate of unsheltered These two counts were subsequently unaccompanied youth and young adults. Additional data on young people residing in emergency shelters and transitional housing collected through the sheltered count were included in the total youth and young adults experiencing homelessness. number of 2018 youth and young adult count methodology featured the same methodology utilized The . In 2017, the youth and young adult in with some differences in timing and participation 2017, as the general street count. In 2018, the youth and count was conducted on the same day 96 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

97 Appendix 1: Methodology young adult count took place the day before in order to maximize the participation of youth - serving organizations and available resources , while still ensuring al l Point -in-Time Count activities took place within a 24 -hour period . Youth and young adult street count activities took place during the same timeframe as 2017 —between 12:00 PM and 5:00 PM —with the help of increased coverage and increased participation of service provider staff across Seattle/King County. -in-Time Counts In addition to the overall challenges and limitations applicable to Point the challenges specifically facing the youth and young adult count discussed previously, one of -specific service providers. in Seattle/King County was the involvement of exclusively youth are served solely by the single Approximately 40% of young adults in Seattle/King County adult o r family systems. Local data reveal that these are essentially non -overlapping groups of young people that have little or no contact with youth -specific service providers. Consequently, counts obtained through t he youth and young adult count we re significa ntly This wa s partially lower than estimates from HMIS and the local coordi nated entry system. - mitigated by the integration of youth and young adult estimates derived from the all . Further, the “snapshot” e population general street count and survey effort lement of conducting Point -in-Time Counts is compounded by the often transitory and cyclical nature of youth homelessness. ed count was to gain an accurate count of persons temporarily residing The goal of the shelter in sheltered locations across Seattle/King County, including emergency shelters, transitional housing, and safe havens . These data were vital in gaining an accurate overall count of the local population experiencing homelessness and in understanding where individuals and families access shelter. -in- For the purposes of the count , the HUD definition of sheltered homelessness for the Point Time Count was used. This definition includes individuals and families living in supervised ely operated shelter s designated to provide a temporary living arrangement , publicly or privat which may include emergency shelter, transitional housing, or safe haven programs . 01 Most s helter facilities reported their occupancies for the night of January 2 5, 2 8 through the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). BitFocus, the administrators of the local HMIS system, then reported shelter data in aggregate to A pplied Survey Research . For shelter facilities not included in the HMIS, Applied Survey Resear ch collected their data web -based survey. For data with unknown demographic information, the HUD through a Only programs -in-Time Count Data Extrapolation Tool was used to produce estimates. Point 97 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

98 Appendix 1: Methodology listed on the Housing Inventory Count reported to HUD are in cluded in the shelter report, which was developed with review by BitFocus. The goal of the survey was to conduct an in -person representative survey of unsheltered and in order sheltered persons experiencing homelessness to gather all federally required reporting elements. Results of the survey were also used to aid in estimating the number of further characterize the individuals residing in vehicles, tents, and abandoned buildings, and to population experiencing homelessness. The survey of 89 8 individuals experiencing homelessness (not inclusive of the youth and young adults surveyed through the youth and young adult count effort) in the weeks following r to yield qualitative data on the homeless as conducted in orde the general street count w 9 basic The survey collected information such as community in Seattle/King County. demographics , household composition, military service, length and recurrence of es of homelessness, and access to homelessness, usual nighttime accommodations, caus -ended, and multiple response questions. The survey data services through open -ended, closed bring greater perspective to current issues of homelessness and to the provision and delivery of services. by peer surveyors with current or recent experience of Surveys were conducted homelessness on the project , who were trained , in addition to service provider volunteers background information and instruction on respondent eligibility, interviewing protocol, and Peer surveyors were compensated at a rate of $7 per completed survey. confidentiality. Socks supplied by Applied Survey Research were given as an incentive for completing the survey. The socks were easy to obtain and distribute, were thought to have wide appeal, and incentive and could be provided within the project budget. The gift proved to be a successful was widely accepted among survey respondents. Based on the p oint -in-time estimates of individuals experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King h all attempts County , wit made at a randomized survey sampling process, the 1,056 valid eligible HUD- surveys conducted during the youth and young adult surveys 158 (inclusive of confidence level - 2.9% with a 95% count component) represent a confidence interval of +/ when generalizing the results of the survey to the total estimated population of individuals experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County. Data col lected from the survey effort 9 Please note that the methodology described here applies only to the general Count Us In Survey 98 unique surveys were completed. of all populations experiencing homelessness, during which 8 eligible surveys conducted during the youth and ver, in the final analysis, an additional 158 Howe young adult count were inc luded for a total of 1,056 surveys. 98 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

99 Appendix 1: Methodology used to estimate characteristics of the unsheltered population experiencing were homelessness by applying percentages of respondents to the number of individuals tallied . This included producing estimates of certain subpopulations during the general street count , chronically homeless, veterans, families with children, and unaccompanied youth and (i.e. young adults) and of individuals living in vehicles, tents, and abandoned buildings. unsheltered locations both The 201 8 Count Us In Survey was administered in and in transitional housing programs s were developed based on preliminary . Unsheltered quota results from the general street count, includ ing quotas set for each of the twelve regions covered by deployment centers during the general street count, as well as six encampment locations and four special vehicle out reach teams. Quotas for emergency shelter and transitional housing programs were based on the previous year’s housing inventory count, which focused similarly on ensuring geographic and subpopulation representation across Emergency shelter and unsheltered quotas were met by selecting programs countywide. respondents from general street locations throughout the county. Transitional housing quotas were met by program staff selecting and administering the survey to heads of residents household. Strategic attempts were made to reach individuals in various geographic locations, and of various subsets such as vehicle residents, encampment residents, families, domestic violence survivors, veterans, and unaccompanied youth. The se strategic attempts to increase the participation of these groups included recruiting peer surveyors to engage them in the survey, partnering with a number of local service providers throughout the county with specific knowledge of certain regions or subpopulations, and establis hing specific regional and subpopulation quotas to help achieve geographic and subpopulation representation. In order to increase randomization of sample respondents, peer surveyors were instructed to employ an “every third encounter” survey approach. Peer surveyors were to approach every third person they encountered whom they considered to be an eligible survey respondent. If the person declined to take the survey, the peer surveyor could approach the next eligible g a survey, the randomized approach was resumed. person they encountered. After completin It is important t s re made to r andomize the respondents, it wa o recognize that while efforts we not a random sample methodology. It is also important to recognize that the populations of individuals experien cing homelessness is considered an estimate as most populations are actually unknown and there are known limitations to population census efforts. The sampling meth od used in 201 8 Count Us In lay somewhere between simple random sampling (SRS) and selective sampling (SS). Selective sampling assures an even, random sampling of the population. This method was used re not in unsheltered locations where individuals in an y one neighborhood or location we e. Simple random sampling was static, making simple random sampling difficult or impossibl used in sheltered locations in order to ensure any one head of household or individual was as likely as any other to be included in the sample. 99 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

100 Appendix 1: Methodology Care was taken by interviewers to ensure that respondents felt co mfortable regardless of the street or shelter location where the survey occurred. During the interviews, respondents were encouraged to be candid in their responses and were informed that responses would be framed as general findings, would be kept confide ntial, and would not be traceable to any one individual. The survey requested respondents’ initials and date of birth so that duplication could be avoided without compromising the respondents’ anonymity. Upon completion of the survey effort, an extensive verification process was conducted to eliminate duplicates. This process examined respondents’ date of birth, initials, gender, ethnicity, length of homelessness, and is process wa s on the survey. Th s also consistencies in patterns of responses to other question of the youth and young adult count efforts. This left inclusive of the surveys completed as part 1,056 valid surveys for analysis. Due to the sensitive nature of the survey, respondents were not required to answer every survey question , and respondents were asked to skip questions that were not applicable. Additionally, the youth and young adult count survey featured fewer question s than the general Count Us In S urvey, with only questions required for HUD reporting and youth -specific que stions of local interest included. For this reason, the number h survey question may not total 1, of respondents for eac 056. In order to estimate the number of individuals belonging to the key subpopulations identified by , the following methods were employed for unsheltered subpopulations. HUD Chronically Homeless —Percentage the definition of chronic Individuals of single survey respondents meeting homelessness were applied to the population of individuals of the same age category 24 years old, and over 2 4 years old) counted during the general street (under 18, 18- count. Families with children —Percentage of family survey re spondents meeting the definition of chronic homelessness were applied to the number of families counted during the general street count. The total number of individuals in family household s experiencing chronic homelessness was estimated based on the mean size of family survey household respondents meeting the definition of chronic homelessness. Veterans Individual s —Percentage of single survey respondents identifying as veterans w as applied to the number of young adults (18 -24 years old) and adults ( older than 24 years old ) counted during the general street count. Families with children —Percentage of family survey respondents identifying as veterans ed total number of family households count applied to the was during the general street 100 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

101 Appendix 1: Methodology count. T he t otal numbe r of individuals in veteran family households was estimated based on the mean household size of veteran family survey respondents. Families with Children The number of families with children and the total number of individuals in these households come from the general street count. Count volunteers tallied individuals in families observed, recording the age category of each family member (under 18, age 18 - 24, or older than 24 ) and grouping these individual tallies together to indicate a single - family househ In 2018, a new strategy to identify unsheltered families during Count old. Us In was implemented through the existing family emergency shelter access line, which le/King County in November 2017. T his resulted in the inclusion was implemented in Seatt of fiv e unsheltered families residing in vehicles. Estimates of unsheltered families with children were not extrapolated from survey data due to the small sample size of unsheltered family survey respondents. Identifying unsheltered families with children is ext remely difficult in the Point -in-Time Count setting . As such, the number of reported families is likely an undercount. Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults Estimates of unaccompanied youth under the age of 18 and young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 re produced through a combination of young people counted we through the survey -based youth and young adult count and young people observed during the general street count. Following de -duplication of young people counted across age derived through the general street polation of reported these two components, extra count and survey was applied to individuals whose ages were recorded as unknown during the street count. For more information, please see the Youth and Young Adult Count Appendix 1 section in (p. 93 ). The Count Us In methodology relies heavily on self -reported survey data collected from peer -report allows individuals to represent their own surveyors and program staff . While self experience, self -reported data are often more variable than clinically reported data. However, using a peer- to-peer interviewing methodology is believed to allow respondents to be more candid with their answers and to help reduce the uneasiness of revealing personal information. Approximate ly 70% of surveys were conducted by peers , with the remainder conducted by service providers. Furthermore , service providers and survey coordinators recommended individuals who would be best suited to conduct interviews . The service providers and survey co ordinators also reviewed surveys to ensure quality responses. Surveys that were considered incomplete or containing false responses were not accepted , the process for which included reviewing individual survey responses and patterns in survey responses for inconsistencies. It is important to recognize that slight variation s between survey years may result from shifts in the demographic profiles of surveyors and accessibility to certain populations. Survey indings section of this report to provide confidence intervals are presented in each survey f additional information on how variable these data can be interpreted and the level of While every effort was made to collect surveys variability that may occur from year to year. 101 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

102 Appendix 1: Methodology from a random and diverse sample of the sheltered and unsheltered individuals, the hard -to- reach nature of the population experiencing homelessness prevents a true random sampling. Every effort is made to recruit a diverse and geographically dispersed group of surveyors and all populations may , equal participation across However provide them with survey quotas. to be limited by the participation and adequate representation of subpopulation advocates in the initial planning and implementation process. Consequently, survey data and data derive d from survey responses may shift from year to year. It is for this reason Point -in-Time Count data should be used in conjunction with other community sources of data on individuals and families experiencing homelessness to gather a understan ding of the community. comprehensive 102 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

103 Appendix 2: Point -in-Time Count Results Appendix 2: Point -in-Time Count Results Point The following tables include the 2018 -in-Time Count data submitted to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for individuals experiencing homelessness in . Data are reported by three household types (households with at least Seattle/King County one adult and one child, households with no children, and households with only children) and d). by shelter status (emergency shelter, transitional housing, safe haven, and unsheltere Specific data on veteran households, youth and young adult households, and various subpopulations are also reported and included in the tables found in this section. -IN POINT Y HOUSEHOLD TYPE -TIME COUNT SUMMARY B EAST ONE ADULT AND HOUSEHOLDS WITH AT L ONE CHILD Sheltered TH Sheltered ES Sheltered SH Unsheltered Total Total number of households 325 432 0 25 782 Total number of persons 1422 0 79 2624 1123 Number of children (under 18) 858 0 683 42 1583 Number of young adults (18 - 24) 63 119 0 10 192 0 Number of adults (over 24) 377 445 27 849 Gender (adults and children) Female 888 0 45 1621 688 Male 533 0 434 31 998 Transgender 0 1 0 0 1 Gender Non Conforming (i.e. not exclusively - male or female) 1 0 3 4 0 Ethnicity (adults and children) Non - Latino 904 1222 Hispanic/Non 0 64 2190 - Hispanic/Latino 219 200 0 15 434 Race (adults and children) 710 41 White 310 359 0 103 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

104 Appendix 2: Point -in-Time Count Results - American 522 716 0 14 1252 Black or African 9 53 0 7 69 Asian 0 18 0 65 American Indian or Alaska Native 47 56 88 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 0 144 0 Multiple Races 179 188 0 17 384 Chronically Homeless Total number of households 0 0 34 7 41 Total number of persons 99 0 0 16 115 HOUSEHOLDS WITH NO C HILDREN Sheltered TH Sheltered SH Total Sheltered ES Unsheltered 2424 718 41 Total number of households 4840 8023 Total number of persons 2442 726 6103 9312 41 Number of youth adults (age 18 - 24) 188 171 0 996 1355 Number of adults (over age 24) 2254 555 41 5107 7957 Gender 1688 16 2568 Female 641 223 4023 Male 484 25 6317 1785 10 16 0 57 83 Transgender -Conforming (i.e. not exclusively Gender Non male or female) 3 0 335 344 6 Ethnicity 7889 Non Hispanic/Non - Latino 2163 644 38 5044 - 3 Hispanic/Latino 279 82 1059 1423 Race 4950 White 1361 3157 415 17 20 Black or African 737 197 American 1070 2024 - Asian 77 19 2 170 268 0 American Indian or Alaska Native 77 17 239 333 Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Native 53 9 0 110 172 Multiple Races 69 2 137 1357 1565 Chronically Homeless 3434 Total number of persons 900 0 37 2497 104 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

105 Appendix 2: Point -in-Time Count Results CHILDREN (UNDER 18) HOUSEHOLDS WITH ONLY Sheltered SH Unsheltered Total Sheltered ES Sheltered TH 174 0 138 20 Total number of households 16 Total number of children 138 18 0 (persons under age 18) 176 20 Gender 12 0 28 48 Female 8 10 4 0 110 124 Male 2 1 0 0 Transgender 1 -Conforming (i.e. not exclusively Gender Non male or female) 1 1 0 2 0 Ethnicity - Hispanic/Non Latino 13 12 0 138 163 - Non 0 7 6 0 13 Hispanic/Latino Race White 7 0 110 129 12 - 0 4 9 Black or African 28 41 American 0 0 0 0 0 Asian 0 0 American Indian or Alaska Native 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 2 0 0 2 0 4 0 0 0 4 Multiple Races Chronically Homeless 2 0 0 1 3 Total number of persons VETERAN HOUSEHOLDS ALL HOUSEHOLDS ) (SUBSET OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH AT L VETERAN EAST ONE ADULT AND ONE CHILD Sheltered TH Sheltered SH Sheltered ES Total Unsheltered Total number of households 8 12 3 23 0 Total number of persons 28 45 0 10 83 Total number of veterans 8 12 0 3 23 Gender (veterans only) 2 0 Female 2 6 2 Male 10 0 6 1 17 Transgender 0 0 0 0 0 Gender Non Conforming (i.e. not exclusively - male or female) 0 0 0 0 0 Ethnicity (veterans only) 19 1 Non - Hispanic/Non - Latino 8 10 0 105 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

106 Appendix 2: Point -in-Time Count Results 0 2 0 2 4 Hispanic/Latino Race (veterans only) 3 4 0 12 White 5 - American 2 7 Black or African 0 9 0 Asian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 American Indian or Alaska Native 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 1 0 0 0 1 Multiple Races 1 0 0 0 1 Chronically Homeless 0 0 2 Total number of households 4 2 Total number of persons 0 0 6 8 14 VETERAN HOUSEHOLDS W ITH NO CHILDREN Sheltered ES Sheltered TH Sheltered SH Unsheltered Total Total number of households 164 1 207 526 898 Total number of persons 207 166 1 696 1070 1 Total number of veterans 207 164 526 898 Gender (veterans only) 54 Female 4 0 84 26 179 159 1 441 780 Male 1 0 8 2 11 Transgender -Conforming (i.e. not exclusively Gender Non male or female) 0 0 0 23 23 Ethnicity (veterans only) Non - - Latino 199 157 1 412 769 Hispanic/Non Hispanic/Latino 8 7 0 114 129 Race (veterans only) White 101 1 111 271 484 Black or African - American 73 48 0 88 209 0 Asian 7 6 0 13 American Indian or Alaska Native 8 4 24 0 36 0 Native 4 2 Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 8 14 Multiple Races 4 3 0 135 142 Chronically Homeless 224 310 Total number of persons 85 0 1 106 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

107 Appendix 2 -in-Time Count Results : Point T HOUSEHOLDS YOUTH AND YOUNG ADUL ) (SUBSET OF ALL HOUSEHOLDS UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULT HOUSEHOLDS Sheltered ES Sheltered TH Sheltered SH Unsheltered Total Total number of unaccompanied and young adult households 201 180 0 759 youth 1140 Total number of unaccompanied 204 180 0 1134 1518 youth and young adults umber of unaccompanied youth N 138 14 0 20 172 (under 18) Number of unaccompanied young adults (18 - 24) 184 166 0 996 1346 Gender (unaccompanied youth) 74 0 Female 360 487 53 Male 91 0 142 680 913 Transgender 2 12 0 9 23 Gender Non -Conforming (i.e. not exclusively male or female) 7 3 0 85 95 Ethnicity (unaccompanied youth) 977 1281 Non - Hispanic/Non - Latino 163 141 0 Hispanic/Latino 39 0 157 237 41 Race (unaccompanied youth) White 87 0 87 452 626 Black or African - American 64 49 0 233 346 Asian 6 0 2 39 47 American Indian or Alaska Native 11 10 0 68 89 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific 0 Islander 6 4 0 10 Multiple Races 24 0 342 400 34 Chronically Homeless Total number of persons 0 0 8 273 281 PARENTING YOUTH HOUS EHOLDS Sheltered TH Sheltered SH Sheltered ES Unsheltered Total Total number of parenting youth households 26 65 0 5 96 Total number of persons in parenting 67 151 youth households 0 14 232 102 6 Total Parenting Youth 27 69 0 107 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

108 Appendix 2: Point -in-Time Count Results Total Children in Parenting Youth Households 82 0 8 130 40 0 2 0 0 2 Number of parenting youth under 18 parenting Children in households with age 18 youth under 0 2 0 0 2 Number of parenting youth 18 - 24 27 67 age 0 6 100 Children in households with parenting youth 18 - 24 40 80 0 8 128 Gender (youth parents only) Female 63 0 24 5 92 Male 3 6 0 1 10 Transgender 0 0 0 0 0 Gender Non -Conforming (i.e. not exclusively male or female) 0 0 0 0 0 Ethnicity (youth parents only) Non - Latino 21 61 0 6 88 Hispanic/Non - 8 0 6 0 Hispanic/Latino 14 Race (youth parents only) 0 White 8 15 0 23 Black or African - American 12 43 0 3 58 0 0 1 Asian 0 1 American Indian or Alaska Native 1 0 1 0 2 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific 0 Islander 1 1 0 2 8 Multiple Races 5 0 3 16 Chronically Homeless 2 0 0 0 2 Total number of households 4 Total number of persons 4 0 0 0 108 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

109 Appendix 2: Point -in-Time Count Results ADDITIONAL POPULATIONS HUD required that data reported on survivors of domestic violence should be limited to In 2018, reporting on those who are currently experiencing homelessness because they are fleeing domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, as opposed to reporting on survivors who have 10 ever experienced these circumstances . Sheltered ES Sheltered TH Sheltered SH Unsheltered Total 8 Adults with Serious Mental Illness 568 322 2331 3229 2324 1844 Adults with Substance Use Disorder 329 150 1 0 103 17 4 Adults with HIV/AIDS 124 Adult S urvivors of Domestic Violence 138 (optional) 147 631 0 346 10 -08: 2018 HIC and PIT US Department of Housing and Urban Development. (Sept 2017). Notice CPD- 17 Da ta Collection for CoC and ESG Programs. Retrieved 2018 from -PIT -Data- https://www.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/Notice -CPD -17- 08- 2018- HIC -Notice.pdf Collection . 109 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

110 Appendix 3: Survey Results Appendix 3: Survey Results The following tables include the aggregate results of each question asked of individuals experiencing homelessness in Seattle/King County during the 2018 Count Us In S urvey. Demographics Count Section A: Column N % Age Less than 18 years 21 2.00% 18 - 24 years 227 21.50% - 30 years 25 166 15.70% 31 - 40 years 252 23.90% 41 - 17.20% 182 50 years 13.50% 143 60 years 51 - 65 6.20% 61 years or more 1056 100. 00 % Total Which of the following best represents how you think of your gender? Male 15 36.60% Female 24 58.50% 0 Transgender 0.00% Don't identify as male, female, or transgender 1 2.40% 0 Gender - queer 0.00% Gender non - conforming 0 0.00% binary 0.00% 0 Non - 110 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

111 Appendix 3: Survey Results Refused 2.40% 1 Other not listed 1 2.40% 41 100. Total % 00 Are you Hispanic or Latino? Yes 152 15.00% No 828 81.50% Don't know 36 3.50% Total 1016 100. 00 % Which racial group do you identify with White 503 most? 49.70% Black or African American 232 22.90% 197 19.50% Multi ethnic American Indian or Alaska Native 33 3.30% 2.70% 27 Asian Native Hawaiian or 2.00% Pacific Islander 20 Total 100. 00 % 1012 Which of the following best represents how Straight 817 78.8% you think of your sexual orientation? Queer 14 1.4% Bisexual 81 7.8% 13 Pansexual 1.3% Lesbian or Gay 59 5.7% 12 1.2% I don't know/questioning Refused 43 4.1% 12 1.2% Other Total 1037 100.0% 3.90% 41 Are you or your partner currently pregnant? Yes 111 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

112 Appendix 3: Survey Results No 971 93.50% 27 2.60% Don't know Total 1039 100. 00% Have you ever been in foster care? Yes 173 17.00% No 845 83.00% Total 100. 00 % 1018 Do you have a companion animal living with Yes 15.9% 140 you? No 742 84.1% Total 882 100.0% Is English your primary language? Yes 767 86.4% 9.3% 83 No Decline to state 38 4.3% 100.0% 888 Total Section B: Veterans Status Count Column N % Have you served in the U.S. Armed Yes 110 10.6% Forces? 89.0% 924 No Don't know .4% 4 1038 100.0% Total Were you ever called into active duty as Yes a member of the National Guard or as a 30 3.5% Reservist? 816 96.0% No Don't know 4 .5% 100.0% 850 Total | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 112

113 Appendix 3: Survey Results Yes Have you ever received health care or 71 8.3% benefits from a VA center? No 780 90.8% Don't 8 .9% know Total 859 100.0% Is anyone else in your household a Yes 28 3.3% Veteran? No 813 95.0% 15 1.8% Don't know Total 856 100.0% Accommodation Count Column N % Section C: Where were you staying on the night of Outdoors/streets/parks/tent 175 16.6% January 25th? 1 .1% Backyard or storage structure Motel/hotel 20 1.9% 163 15.4% Emergency shelter Transitional housing 222 21.0% A place in a house not normally used for 5 .5% sleeping Public facility (train station, transit center, 27 2.6% bus depot) Van 29 2.7% Automobile/car 52 4.9% 90 8.5% Camper/RV Abandoned building/squat 43 4.1% 172 16.3% Encampment Drug/alcohol treatment/detox center 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Hospital 113 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

114 Appendix 3: Survey Resul ts Jail/juvenile detention/prison 0.0% 0 Foster care placement 0 0.0% 0 Apartment/house/trailer 0.0% 0.0% A home owned/rented by you/partner 0 A home owned/rented by friends/relatives 0 0.0% Other 42 4.0% Total 1056 100.0% How many people including yourself 1 189 60.2% usually stay there? 2 75 23.9% 16 5.1% 3 4 14 4.5% 3 5 1.0% 4 1.3% 6 5 1.6% 7 1 .3% 9 7 2.2% 10 Total 314 100.0 % Yes Do you feel safe where you stayed last 664 76.6% night? No 203 23.4% Total 867 100.0% Yes Is this the first time you have been homeless? 343 33.1% 66.9 No 693 % Total 1036 100. 0 % 7 days or less How long have you been homeless this 24 2.5% current time? (Shade 1) 114 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

115 Appendix 3: Survey Results 5 34 3. 30 days % 8 - - 3 months 70 1 7.2 % - 6 months 107 4 11.0 % 7 - 11 months 113 11. 6 % 1 year 106 10.9 % 516 53.2 % More than 1 year Total 970 100. 0 % Including this time, how many separate Less than 4 times times have you been living on the 792 76.3% streets, or in a vehicle, a tent, or a shelter in the past 3 years? 21.8% 226 4 times or more 20 1.9% Don’t know 1038 100.0% Total Have you been living in an emergency Yes shelter and/or on the streets (including bus stations, underpasses, 55.3% 493 encampments, abandoned buildings, etc.) for the past year (12 months) or more? No 377 42.3% Decline to state 22 2.5% Total 892 100.0% In addition to right now, how long Less than a year would you say you have stayed in these 187 26.7% kinds of places total in the past 3 years? 1 3 years 384 54.9% - 4 years or more 129 18.4% 100.0% 700 Total 115 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

116 Appendix 3: Survey Results you ever been asked to move Have Yes from your sleeping location by law 436 52.80% enforcement? 47.20% No 390 Total 826 100. 00 % How old were you the first time you 17 years 0 - 221 21.7% experienced homelessness? 18 - 24 years 260 25.5% 35 years 248 - 24.3% 25 174 - 49 years 17.1% 36 50 - 65 years 109 10.7% 66 or older 8 .8% Total 100.0% 1020 Section D: Household Members Count Column N % How many people are in your 1 734 69.5% household, including yourself? 2 185 17.5% 48 4.5% 3 4 40 3.8% 5 24 2.3% 1.5% 16 6 7 .7% 7 8 1 .1% 9 1 .1% Total 1056 100.0% Do you have any children under age Yes 250 23.7% 18? 75.3% 795 No 116 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

117 Appendix 3: Survey Results Don't know 11 1.0% 1056 100.0% Total Are any of your children under 18 Yes 127 12.0% currently living with you? No 926 87.7% .3% Don't know 3 100.0% Total 1056 Do you live alone or with other Alone 735 69.6% household members? 321 With other household members 30.4% Total 1056 100.0% Column Section D1: Demographic Household Responses % Members Count Column N % Responses Child 134 How they are related to you? 54.7% 134 45.3% 60 20.3% Spouse 60 24.5% Non - married 19.2% 47 15.9% 47 partner Other family 15 6.1% 15 5.1% member Other non - family 40 16.3% 40 13.5% member Total 245 100.0% 296 100.0% Under 18 How old are they? 57.1% 140 140 45.8% 18 24 34 13.9% - 34 11.1% 25+ 132 53.9% 132 43.1% 245 100.0% 306 Total 100.0% 146 45.8% How do they Identify their gender? Male 146 59.6% 117 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

118 Appendix 3: Survey Results Female 69.0% 169 53.0% 169 3 1.2% 3 .9% Transgender Don't identify as male, female or 1 .4% 1 .3% transgender 245 Total 319 100.0% 100.0% Are they Hispanic or Latino? Yes 44 18.0% 44 17.3% No 203 83.2% 203 79.9% Don't know 7 2.9% 2.8% 7 Total 244 100.0% 254 100.0% Which racial group do they White identify 126 42.7% 52.7% 126 with the most? 31.9% 94 39.3% African American 94 Asian 12 5.0% 12 4.1% American Indian or 13 13 4.4% 5.4% Alaska Native Native Hawaiian or 3.1% 9 3.8% 9 Pacific Islander Other 28 11.7% 28 9.5% Don't 13 5.4% 4.4% 13 Know/Refuse 295 100.0% Total 239 100.0% Section E: Residency Count Column N % Where were you living at the time you Out of State most recently became homeless? 50 5.6% King County 738 83.1 % 41 4.6 % Pierce County Thurston County 5 0.6 % % 3.2 28 Snohomish County 118 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

119 Appendix 3: Survey Results Another County in WA 2.9 % 26 888 100. 0 % Total If in King County, how long were you Less than 1 year living in King County before you became homeless? 16.2% 115 1 2 years 82 11.5% - 3 - 4 years 77 10.8% 5 9 years 79 11.1% - 10+ years 135 19.0% 224 31.5% Born/ grew up here Total 712 100.0% If from outside the county, why did you For a job/seeking work 43 31.4% move to King County? Was traveling/visiting and remained here 9 6.6 % 1 % .5 To access VA services or clinic 2 Family/friends are here 25 18. 2 % To access homeless services and/or benefits 28 20.4% LGBTQ+ community/acceptance 6 4.4 % 0 0.0 % Legal Marijuana Other 24 17.5 % 100. Total 137 % 0 How long have you lived in King Less than 1 year County? 93 10.8% 1 2 years 138 13.5% - 3 - 4 years 126 12.4% - 9 years 102 11.8 % 5 10 years or more 184 21. 3 % 273 % 31.7 Born/grew up here 119 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

120 Appendix 3: Survey Results % 100. 0 862 Total A home owned or rented by Immediately before you became friends/relatives 304 35.9% homeless, where were you living? A home owned or rented by you or your 34.4% partner 291 Other 71 8.4 % Jail or prison 49 5.8 % Motel/hotel 45 5.3 % Subsidized housing or permanent supportive housing 31 3.7% Hospital or treatment facility 29 3.4 % 20 2.4 % Foster care Military base/active duty 5 0.6 % Juvenile Justice Facility % 0.1 1 846 100. 0 % Total Section F: Cause and Prevention Count Column N % What do you think is the primary event Lost job or condition that led to your 220 24.7% homelessness? Alcohol or drug use 183 20.6% Eviction 99 11.1% 9.1 % 81 Illness/medical problems 78 8.8 % Mental health issues Divorce/separation/break up 72 8 .1 % Other 8.1% 72 64 7.2 % Family/domestic violence Incarceration 58 6.5 % 6.4 57 % Argument with family/friend/roommate | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In 120

121 Appendix 3: Survey Results Could not afford rent increase 5.5 % 49 Family/friend's housing wouldn't let me 41 4.6% stay 39 4.4% Don't know/decline to state 3 .6 % Death of a parent/spouse/child 32 21 2.4 % Foreclosure Family/friend couldn't afford to let you stay 20 2.2 % Hospitalization/treatment 15 1 .7% Aging out of foster care 1.7 % 15 889 100.0% Total What would help you obtain permanent housing? Rental assistance /More affordable housing 693 80.4% 404 46.9% Job/increased income Money for moving costs 363 42.1% 37.7% 325 Make housing process easier Help clearing my credit 180 20.9% Case management 152 17.6% 146 16.9% Transportation Help clearing my rental history 123 14.3% 108 12.5% Additional education Landlords who accept my housing voucher 94 10.9% Medical/health care 80 .3 9 % New ID/Paperwork 74 8.6 % Legal assistance 73 8. 5 % Child care assistance 61 7.1 % 33 3.8 % Other Safe parking location while seeking housing 29 3. 4 % % 0 3. Immigration/refugee assistance 26 121 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

122 Appendix 3: Survey Results 862 100.0% Total If safe, affordable housing were No 14 2.0% available, would you move inside? Yes 672 98.0% Total 686 100.0% Section G: Income and Employment Count Column N % What is your current employment status? Employed full -time 61 5.9% time 93 9.0% - Employed part Employed seasonal/sporadic 53 5.1% Unemployed and looking 466 45.0% Unable to work (disabled/retired) 162 15.7% Unemployed, and not looking 200 19.3% Total 1035 100. 0% How long has it been since you Less than 1 month 19.6% 166 received payment for work? 6 months 160 - 18.9 % 1 7 - 12 months 96 11.3 % - 2 years 157 18.5 % 1 2 years 47 5.5 % 3 5 years - 69 8.1 % 152 17.9 % More than 5 years 847 100.0 % Total What is the highest level of education Less than high school you have completed? 269 26.4% High school/GED 461 45.3 % 219 % 21.5 Some college or AA 122 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

123 Appendix 3: Survey Results Bachelor's 43 4. 2 % Graduate degree (Masters or PhD) 2.6 % 26 1018 100. 0 % Total Section H: Health 1. Do you experience any of the Yes % No % following: % Total % Refuse Any chronic health problem or medical 284 27. 3% 697 67.1% 58 5.6% 1039 100. 0% condition - Traumatic Stress Disorder 379 36.5 % 599 57.8 % 59 5.7 % 1037 100. 0 % Post Any psychiatric or emotional conditions 456 43.9% 520 50. 1% 62 6.0% 1038 100. 0% 25. 5 % 720 69.4 % 53 5 .1 % 1037 100. 0 % A physical disability 264 116 11. 2 % 864 83.4 A traumatic brain injury 56 5.4 % 1036 100. 0 % % Drug or alcohol abuse 360 34.6% 613 58.9 % 6.4 % 1040 100. 0 % 67 % 0 100. An AIDS or an HIV related illness 1038 28 2.7 % 937 90.3 % 73 7.0 % Section H: Health keep you from holding a job, living 2. Does it Yes % No % in stable housing or taking care of yourself? Refuse % Total % Any chronic health problem or medical 100.0% 184 64.8% 95 33.5% 5 1.8% 284 condition Post - Traumatic Stress Disorder 267 70.4% 95 25.1% 17 4.5% 379 100.0% Any psychiatric or emotional conditions 308 67.5% 137 30.0% 2.4% 11 456 100.0% A physical disability 74.2% 100.0% 196 264 60 22.7% 8 3.0% A traumatic brain injury 35 30.2% 78 67.2% 2.6% 116 100.0% 3 Drug or alcohol abuse 66.9% 241 101 28.1% 18 5.0% 360 100.0% An AIDS or an HIV related illness 100.0% 28 15 53.6% 12 42.9% 1 3.6% Section H: Health Count Additional Questions Column N % Chronic health problem If you live with a spouse, a significant 17 1.9% other or parent, do any of the following 123 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

124 Appendix 3: Survey Results conditions prevent them from maintaining work or housing? PTSD 1.5% 13 Drug or alcohol abuse 25 2.8% Physical disability 10 1.1% 0.0% 0 Traumatic brain injury 18 2.0% Psychiatric or emotional condition HIV/AIDS 0 0.0% 37 None of the above 4.2% Not applicable 796 90.2% Total 882 100.0% Yes Are you currently experiencing 61 6.8% home/domestic violence or abuse? No 89.5% 808 34 Decline to state 3.8% Total 903 100.0% Have you ever been physically, Yes emotionally or sexually abused by a person you have stayed with (spouse, partner, relative, non -relative)? 323 36.1% 58.2% 520 No Decline to state 5.7% 51 Total 100.0% 894 Count Column N % Section I: Services and Assistance Are you currently using any of the Free meals 44.8% 384 following services/assistance? Emergency shelter 229 26.7% Transitional housing 226 26.3% 124 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

125 Appendix 3: Survey Results Bus passes 24.0% 206 services Hygiene 191 22.3% 166 Health services 19.3% 18.6% Mental health services 160 shelter Day 155 18.1% services Not using any services 152 17.7% Alcohol/drug counseling 83 9.7% Job training/employment services 67 7.8% 67 7.8% Legal assistance Safe Parking site 49 5.7% 42 4.9% Tiny Home/sanctioned encampment Immigration services 20 2.3% 20 2.3% Other Total 858 100.0% If you are not using any type of shelter They are full 20 25.6% services, why not? They don't accept my pet 5 6.4% 5 6.4% don't feel culturally accepted I am afraid of others/predators 11 14.1% I am barred from services 1 1.3% 5 I am not eligible (e.g. criminal record) 6.4% Other 21 26. 9% They are far away 6 7. 7 % They are too crowded 24 30.8% 12 15.4% Germs Bugs 24 30.8% % 5.1 4 I can't stay with my partner/family 125 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

126 Appendix 3: Survey Results 5.1 % I can't stay with my friends 4 8 10.3% There is nowhere to store my stuff here are too many rules 21 26.9% T Total 78 100.0% Are you currently receiving any of the Food Stamps/SNAP/WIC 76.6% following forms of government 638 assistance? Medicaid/Medicare 158 19.0% Not receiving any form of government 114 13.7% ssistance a SSI/SSDI/Disability 111 13.3% 73 8.8% General Assistance (GA) TANF 64 7.7% 54 Social Security 6.5% 27 3.2% Any VA Disability Compensation Other Veterans benefits (GI, Health) 21 2.5% Section 8 voucher 15 1.8% Total 833 100.0% Have you recently experienced any of I have not experienced any issues 31.3% the following issues trying to get help or 250 access services in the community? 182 22.8% Did not qualify for the service I wanted 181 22.6% Lack of transportation Did not know where to go for help 180 22.5% Did not have an ID or personal document 174 21.8% Never heard back after applying for 141 17.6% Services 109 Program rules are too strict 13.6% Did not follow through or return for 11.1% 89 services 126 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

127 Appendix 3: Survey Results Issues with program staff 9.4% 75 Separation from my partner/spouse 33 4.1% Separation from my pet 29 3.6% Language barrier 28 3.5% Other 28 3.5% Total 800 100.0% for Yes Have you taken a Coordinated Entry All (CEA) Assessment (also known as 22.9% the Housing Triage Tool) 233 ? 588 57.7% No Don’t know 198 19.4% 1019 Total % 100.0 Section J: Criminal Justice Count System Column N % Have you ever been in jail or juvenile Yes 528 detention? 51.5 % No 460 44.8 % % Decline to state 38 3.7 Total 1026 100.0 % Are you currently on probation or Yes 95 9.3 % parole? No 842 82.1 % Decline to state 89 8.7 % Total 1026 0% 100. 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In | 127

128 Appendix 4: Table of Figures Appendix 4: Table of Figures EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Figures 1-4 FIGURE 1. ... 8 Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population with Trend FIGURE 2. Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Shelter Status ... 8 FIGURE 3. Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Location Type ... 9 FIGURE 4. ... 10 Individuals Experiencing Unsheltered Homelessness, by Region COUNT US IN FINDINGS Figures 5 -14 FIGURE 5. Total Number of Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, with Trend ... 15 15 ... FIGURE 6. Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Shelter Status FIGURE 16 ... 7. Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count population by Location Type 17 ed Homelessness, by Region ... FIGURE 8. Individuals Experiencing Unshelter FIGURE 9. Regional Map of Seattle/King County ... 18 FIGURE 10. Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Age, Shelter Status, and Household Type ... 19 FIGURE 11. ... 20 Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Gender FIGURE 12. Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Gender and Shelter Status . ... 20 21 FIGURE 13. Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Race and Ethnicity ... Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Race and Ethnicity and by FIGURE 14. 22 ... Shelter Status COUNT US IN SURVEY FINDINGS Figures 15 -41 ... Age of Count Us In Survey Respondents 24 FIGURE 15. ... 25 FIGURE 16. Gender, Count Us In Survey Respondents Orientation, Count Us In Survey Respondents ... 26 Sexual FIGURE 17. Race and Ethnicity, Count Us In Survey respondents ... 26 FIGURE 18. History of Foster Care, Count Us In Survey Respondents 27 ... FIGURE 19. First Time Experiencing Homelessness, Count Us In Survey Respondents ... 28 FIGURE 20. ... Length of Current Episode of Homelessness, Count Us In Survey Respondents 28 FIGURE 21. FIGURE 22. Age First Experience of Homelessness Occurred, Count Us In Survey Respondents 29 ... Place of Residence at Time of Housing 30 ... FIGURE 23. Loss, Count Us In Survey Respondents Length of Time Spent Living in King County, Count us In Survey Respondents ... 30 FIGURE 24. FIGURE 25. Living Arrangements Immediately Prior to Experiencing Homelessness This Time, Count Us In Survey Respondents 31 ... FIGURE 26. Usual Nighttime Accommodations, Count Us In Survey Respondents ... 32 FIGURE 27. Self -Reported Causes of Homelessness, Count Us In Survey Respondents ... 34 36 FIGURE 28. Support Needed to Obtain Permanent Housing, Count Us In Survey Respondents ... 37 ... State and Federal Assistance Received, Count Us In Survey Respondents FIGURE 29. 128 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

129 Appendix 4: Table of Figures Services and Programs Accessed, Count Us In Survey Respondents ... FIGURE 30. 39 ... Issues Experienced While Trying to Access Services, Count Us In Survey Respondents FIGURE 31. 40 ated Entry for All (CEA) Assessment, Count Us In Survey Respondents FIGURE 32. Completion of Coordin 41 ... FIGURE 33. Employment Status, Count Us In Survey Respondents ... 42 FIGURE 34. y Respondents ... 43 Employment Status by Employment Type, Count Us In Surve FIGURE 35. ... 43 Time Passed Since Last Received Payment for Work, Count Us In Survey Respondents Educational Attainment, Count Us In Survey Respondents ... FIGURE 36. 44 FIGURE 37. Health Conditions, Count Us In Survey Respondents ... 45 FIGURE 38. Currently Experiencing Domestic Violence or Abuse, Count Us In Survey respondents ... 46 FIGURE 39. History of Abuse by a Relative or Another Person They Have Stayed with, Count Us In Survey ... Respondents 46 FIGURE 40. Ever Been in Jail or Juvenile Detention, Count Us In Survey Respondents ... 47 Currently on Probation or Parole, Count Us In Survey Respondents ... FIGURE 41. 47 CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS Figures 42 -53 FIGURE 42. Individuals Experiencing Chronic Homelessness, Total Count Population with Trend ... 50 FIGURE 43. Individuals Experiencing Chronic Homelessness, Total Count Population by Shelter Status ... 51 FIGURE 44. Homelessness, Total Count Population by Household Type Individuals Experiencing Chronic ... 51 FIGURE 45. Age o f Survey respondents, Non -Chronic and Chronic Comparison ... 53 FIGURE 46. Gender of Survey respondents, Non -Chronic and Chronic Compa rison ... 53 54 ... -Chronic and Chronic Comparison Race and Ethnicity of Survey respondents, Non FIGURE 47. FIGURE 48. Health Conditions Reported by Survey Respondents, Non 54 -Chronic and Chronic Comparison Self FIGURE 49. -Reported Causes of Homelessness Among Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Chronic and Chronic Comparison ... 55 Non- FIGURE 50. -Chronic and Chronic Services Accessed by Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non Comparison ... 55 FIGURE 51. Issues Experienced While Trying to Access Services Reported by Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non -Chronic and Chronic Comparison ... 55 FIGURE 52. -Chronic and Criminal Justice System Involvement Reported by Survey Respondents, Non Chronic Comparison ... 56 FIGURE 53. History of Foster care Reported by Survey Respondents, Non -Chronic and Chronic comparison ... 56 VETERAN HOMELESSNESS Figures 54 -63 FIGURE 54. Veterans Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population with Trend ... 57 FIGURE 55. Veterans Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Shelter Status ... 58 FIGURE 56. Veterans Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Gender 58 ... Veterans Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Race and Ethnicity 59 FIGURE 57. ... Age of Survey Respondents, Non -Veterans and Veterans Comparison ... FIGURE 58. 60 FIGURE 59. Health Conditions Reported by Survey Respondents, Non -Veterans and Veterans Comparison ... 61 FIGURE 60. Self -Reported Causes of Homelessness Among Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non- ... 61 Veterans and Veterans Comparison FIGURE 61. Services Accessed by Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non -Veterans and Veterans Comparison ... 62 FIGURE 62. Issues Experienced While Trying to Access Services Reported by Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non -veterans and veterans Comparison ... 62 -Veterans and FIGURE 63. Criminal Justice System Involvement Reported by Survey Respondents, Non 62 ... Veterans Comparison 129 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

130 Appendix 4: Table of Figures -74 FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN HOMELESSNESS Figures 64 FIGURE 64. Individuals in Families with Children Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population with Trend 63 ... FIGURE 65. Individuals in Families Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Shelter Status 64 ... FIGURE 66. Individuals in Families with Children Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by ... 64 Age of Parent FIGURE 67. by Individuals in Families with Children Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population ... Gender 65 Individuals in Families with Children Experiencing Homelessness, Total count Population by FIGURE 68. Race and Ethnicity 65 ... FIGURE 69. Domestic Violence Experience Reported by Survey Respondents, Non -Families and Families 66 ... with Children Comp arison FIGURE 70. -Reported Causes of Homelessness Among Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Self Non- Families and Families With Children Comparison ... 67 FIGURE 71. Services Accessed by Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non -Families and Families with Children Comparison ... 67 Issues Experienced While Trying to Access Services Reported by Survey Respondents (Top FIGURE 72. Five -Families and Families with Children Comparison ... 68 Responses), Non FIGURE 73. Health Conditions Reported by Survey Respondents, N on -Families and Families with Children Comparison ... 68 FIGURE 74. History of Foster Care Reported by Survey Respondents, Non -Families and Families with ... 68 Children Comparison YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULT HOMELESSNESS Figures 75 -86 FIGURE 75. Young Adults Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population Unaccompanied Youth and with Trend ... 69 FIGURE 76. Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population ... 70 by Shelter Status Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults Experienci ng Homelessness, Total Count Population FIGURE 77. by Age ... 70 FIGURE 78. Count Population Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults Experiencing Homelessness, Total by Gender ... 71 FIGURE 79. Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults Experiencing Homelessness, Total Count Population by Race and Ethnicity ... 72 -Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults FIGURE 80. Survey Respondents Identifying as LGBTQ+, Non 74 (YYA) And Unaccompanied YYA Comparison ... FIGURE 81. -Unaccompanied Youth and History of Foster care reported by Survey Respondents, Non Youn g Adults (YYA) and Unaccompanied YYA Comparison ... 74 FIGURE 82. Self -Reported Causes of Homelessness Among Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non- Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults (YYA) and Unaccompanied YYA Comparison . 74 y Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non FIGURE 83. Services Accessed b -Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults (YYA) and Unaccompanied YYA Comparison 75 ... FIGURE 84. Issues Experienced While Trying to Access Services Reported by Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non -Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults (YYA) and Unaccompanied YYA Comparison ... 75 FIGURE 85. Health Conditions Reported by Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non - Unaccompanied Youth and Young Adults (YYA) and Unaccompanied YYA Comparison ... 76 Criminal Justice System Involvement Among Survey Respondents, Non -Unaccompanied FIGURE 86. Youth and Young Adults (YYA) and Unaccompanied YYA Comparison 76 ... 130 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

131 Appendix 4: Table of Figures -97 VEHICLE HOMELESSNESS Figures 87 Individuals Residing in Vehicles, Total Count Population with Trend ... 77 FIGURE 87. FIGURE 88. Individuals Residing in Vehicles, Total Count Population by Vehicle Type ... 77 -Vehicle Resident and Vehicle Resident Comparison FIGURE 89. Age of Survey respondents, Non ... 79 -Vehicle Resident and Vehicle Resident Comparison ... 79 Gender of Survey respondents, Non FIGURE 90. FIGURE 91. Race and Ethnicity of Survey respondents, Non -Vehicle Resident and Vehicle Resident Comparison ... 80 -Vehicle Resident and Vehicle Resident FIGURE 92. Health Conditions Among Survey Respondents, Non Comparison 80 ... Self -Reported Causes of Homelessness Among Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), FIGURE 93. Vehicle Resident and Vehicle Resident Comparison Non- 81 ... FIGURE 94. History of Foster care Reported by Survey Respondents, Non -Vehicle Resident and Vehicle 81 Resident Comparison ... FIGURE 95. Services Accessed Among Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non -Vehicle Resident and Vehicle Resident Comparison 81 ... FIGURE 96. Issues Experienced While Trying to Access Services Reported by Survey Respondents (Top Five Responses), Non -Vehicle Resident and Vehicle Resident Comparison ... 82 Criminal Justice System Involvement Reported by Survey Respondents, Non FIGURE 97. -Vehicle Resident dent Comparison ... 82 and Vehicle Resi 131 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

132 Appendix 5: Regional Definitions & Unsheltered Counts Appendix 5: Regional Definitions & Unsheltered Counts SOUTHWEST COUNTY NORTHEAST COUNTY EAST COUNTY Carnation Beaux Arts Village Algona Duvall Bellevue Auburn Clyde Hill North Bend Burien Skykomish Hunts Point Des Moines Issaquah* Snoqualmie Federal Way Unincorporated Areas Kirkland Kent Milton Medina Normandy Park Mercer Island SEATTLE Newcastle Pacific Renton Redmond SOUTHEAST COUNTY Sammamish* SeaTac Black Diamond Tukwila Yarrow Point Covington Unincorporated Areas Vashon Island Enumclaw Unincorporated Areas Maple Valley NORTH COUNTY Unincorporated Areas Bothell Kenmore Lake Forest Park Shoreline Woodinville Unincorporated Areas In 2017, these cities were assigned to the Northeast County region. Data from 2017 presented Note: been updated to reflect these shifts in the regional definitions, and resulted in the ve in this report ha 35 persons. movement of data representing 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In | 132

133 Appendix 5: Regional Definitions & Unsheltered Counts 2018 PERSONS TOTAL PERSONS ON PERSONS % OF TOTAL PERSONS PERSONS UNSHELTERED PERSONS IN VAN IN REGION CAR IN IN IN TENTS STREETS/ RV PERSONS BUILDINGS OUTSIDE 30 36 25 East County 63 72 393 6% 167 North County 26 33 8 55 97 32 251 4% 28 Northeast County 80 1 4 18 6 137 2% Seattle 1,120 1,034 55 59 2 1,375 312 4,488 71% Southeast County 12 25 15 12 13 0 77 1% 154 Southwest County 259 129 42 33 3 57 974 15% 6,320 100% Total 1,465 1,337 146 1,163 1,730 479 2017 PERSONS PERSONS TOTAL % OF TOTAL PERSONS PERSONS PERSONS ON IN PERSONS IN VAN UNSHELTERED REGION IN STREETS/ IN TENTS IN CAR RV PERSONS BUILDINGS OUTSIDE East County 37 74 4 41 45 319 6% 118 North County 22 0 1 23 8 4 58 1% 38 2% 2 Northeast County 18 84 2 6 18 666 Seattle 1,070 1,152 79 412 462 3,841 70% Southeast County 22 9 0 14 24 1 70 1% 278 52 Southwest County 313 20% 303 104 63 1,113 861 1,482 1,551 138 876 Total 577 5,485 100% Note: The Seattle region is based on jurisdictional boundaries, while all other regions were defined by census tracts and inc lude both incorporated and unincorporated areas. The Seattle region was updated in 2018 to reflect jurisdictional boundaries for the City of Seattle; unincorporated areas located within census tract areas of the Seattle region were removed and reassigned to adjacent regions as t years. Percentages may appropriate. The 2017 unsheltered data have been updated in order to make consistent comparisons between coun not add up to 100 due to rounding. 133 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

134 Appendix 6: Terms & Abbreviations & Abbreviations Appendix 6: Terms Building —An unsheltered location type that includes abandoned buildings, public buildings, and storefronts. —Defined by the Chronic homelessness U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs as “an unaccompanied homeless individual with a disabling condition who has either been continuously homeless f or a year or more, or has had at least four episodes of homelessness in the past three years.” This definition also applies to heads of household who meet the definition. Disabling condition —A physical disability, mental illness, depression, alcohol or dru g abuse, stress ost disorder (PTSD), or a developmental chronic health problems, HIV/AIDS, p -traumatic disability. Emergency shelter —The provision of a safe alternative to the streets, either in a shelter facility, or through the use of stabilization rooms. -term, usually for Emergency shelter is short 90 days or fewer. Domestic violence shelters are typically considered a type of emergency shelter, as they provide safe, immediate housing for survivors and their children. Families with children —A household co mprised of at least one adult (including young adults between 18 and 24 years old) and one child under 18 years old. Homeless —Under the Category 1 definition of homelessness in the HEARTH Act, includes individuals and families living in a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designated to provide temporary living arrangements, or with a primary nighttime residence t hat is a public or private place not designed for or ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings, including a car, park, abandoned building, bus or train station, airport, or camping ground. Households com Households with children — prised of at least one adult (including young adults between 18 and 24 years old) and one child under 18 years old. Also referred to as “Families with children.” Households with no children — Households comprised of only adults over 18 years old. ngle adults, unaccompanied young adults between 18 and 24 years old, adult Includes si couples, and other groups of adults presenting together as a household. Households comprised of only children under 18 years old. — Households with only children 134 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

135 Appendix 6: Terms & Abbreviations HUD —Abbreviation for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. —An unaccompanied adult or youth. Individual Safe haven —A form of supportive housing that serves hard -to-reach persons experiencing homelessness with severe mental illness, who come primarily from the st reets and have been unable or unwilling to participate in housing or supportive services. Sanctioned encampment —Temporary, permitted village/encampment operating on public property with city funding to support services, security, and operations. Sheltered individuals experiencing homelessness —Individuals who are living in emergency shelters, transitional housing programs, or safe havens. Transitional housing — Housing in which individuals experiencing homelessness may live up to 24 months and receive supporti ve services that enable them to live more independently. Supportive services – which help promote residential stability, increased skill level or income, and greater self – may be provided by the organization managing the housing, -determination or coordinated by that organization and provided by other public or private agencies. Transitional housing can be provided in one structure or several structures at one site, or in multiple structures at scattered sites. person between the ages of 18 and 24 —Unaccompanied young Unaccompanied young adult a parent presenting with years old who is not accompanied by a parent or guardian and is not or sleeping in the same place as their child(ren). Unaccompanied youth —Child under the age of 18 who is not accompanied by a p arent or guardian and is not a parent presenting with or sleeping in the same place as their child(ren). —Groups of three or more tents or make -shift shelters that are Unsanctioned encampment not authorized by a local jurisdiction. Unsheltered individuals experiencing homelessness —Individuals who are sleeping on the streets, on public transit, in abandoned buildings, public facilities, storage structures, vehicles, . encampments, or any other place unfit for human habitation Vehicle residents —Individuals who are sleeping in cars, RVs, campers, vans, or other vehicles. —Adults who have served on active duty in the Armed Forces of the United States. Veterans This does not include inactive military reserves or the National Guard, unless the person was called up to active duty. 135 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

136 Appendix 7: Acknowledgements Appendix 7: Acknowledgements -in-Time Count planning team would like to The 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In Point thank the many individuals and organizations who contributed to this project. Over 800 individuals with lived experience of homelessness, community volunteers, county and -based organizations, donors and sponsors assisted with all jurisdictional agencies, community aspects of Count Us In. From participating in planning meetings and coordinating count s to serving on the day of the street count and facilitating the administration of logistic surveys, the support of the community was critical to the success of the count. First and foremost, All Home and Applied Survey Research would like to acknowledge the 206 ides and 1,056 survey respondents, all of whom currently or recently experienced gu homelessness, and the dozens of outreach workers whose efforts and expertise are reflected ion. in this report. This report would not be possible without their input and participat All Home and Applied Survey Research would also like to acknowledge the 609 community members, service providers, faith -based partners, and county and city employees who participated as volunteers for the street count, many of whom had volunteered in this capacity for years. Special thanks to area leads and deployment site support teams for their dedication and leadership throughout the 2018 Count Us In effort, and to the United Way of King fforts to host the Youth County and the entire New Horizons team for their tremendous e Resource Exchange in coordination with Count Us In. All Home would like to recognize the special contributions of the United Way of King County, Graham Pruss of We Count, the Seattle/King County Coalition on Homelessness, Sound Cit ies and to working to make Association, King County, and the City of Seattle to Count Us In – homelessness rare, brief, and one- time in King County. 136 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

137 Appendix 7: Acknowledgements David Johns Bowling Zachary DeWolf Tom Miles Mark Putnam Congregations for the Homeless Michelle Valdez Jean -Paul Yafali Daniel Burton Kira Zylstra Downtown Emergency Service Center All Home Sara Wamsley John Connery Housing Development Consortium Peter Connery Samantha Green Janice Hougen Laura Petry Kate Speltz Applied Survey Research King County Housing and Community Development Derrick Belgarde Colleen Chalmers Eden Bossom Nawiishtunmi Connor Kristy Johnson Chief Seattle Club King County Housing Authority Bro oke Buckingham Jerene Battisti City of Redmond King County Libraries Guy Williams Laird Redway City of Renton King County Veterans Program Dusty Olson Paula Carvalho City of Seattle Human Services Department Sierra Phillips Kar sten Syverson Leslie C. Brinson Liz Trautman City of Seattle Mayor’s Office Mockingbird Society Dominick Dellino Manuela Ginnett Community Member Multi -Service Center Marshall Duvall Joseph Seia Community Member New Horizons Nancy Sherman Sinan Demirel Community Member Private Consultant Amanda Urwiler Chloe Gale Community Member Brenda Frazier Whitney Whittemore Marjorie Johnson REACH Corinne McKisson Walter Washington Aren Sparck Compass Housing Alliance United Indian Health Board 137 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In |

138 Appendix 7: Ackn owledgements Rebecca Stephens Jenna Gearhart Veterans Administration Indians of All Tribes United Graham Pruss Liahann Bannerman WeCount/Vehicle Residency Isaiah Day Lauren McGowan em Ezra Al United Way of King County Youth Advisory Board Carol Goertzel Susan Fitzergald Vashon Youth and Family Services Rita Badh • Mario Bailey • Samuel Baird • Rob Beem • Nikki Bordokas • Sarah Bridgeford • Shawna Broeker • Jo Cherland • Debbie Christian • Lisa Christen • Sally Cummings • Domenick Dellino • Sinan Demirel • Trissa Dexheimer • Susan Fitzgerald • Manuela Ginnett • Kristy Johnson • Marjorie Johnson • Tim King • Jennifer Kirk • Ray Kusumi • Hannelor Makhani • Karina O’Malley • Francesca Martin • David McCracken • Britt Nelson • Dusty Olson • Sol a Plumacher • Steve Roberts • Pam Russell • Martha Sassorossi • Josh Terlouw • Séan Walsh • Sara Wamsley • Jeff Watson Asian Counseling and Referral Service • Atlantic Street Center • Attain Housing • Au burn Food Bank • Bellevue Presbyterian Church • Chief Seattle Club • Catholic Community Services • Chief Seattle Club • Community Psychiatric Clinic • Compass Housing Alliance • Compass Housing Alliance – Road to Home Congregations for the Homeless • Community – Veteran’s Affairs • Consejo Counseling and Referral Service • Resource and Referral Center Downtown Emergency Service Center • El Centro • Elizabeth Gregory Home • First Place School • Formerly Homeless Youth • Friends of Youth • Imagine Housing • Interagency • International District Housing • Issaquah -Sammamish Interfaith Coalition • HopeLink • Interfaith Task Force on Homelessness • Kent Youth and Family Services • Lifelong • Low Income Housing Institute • King County Housing Authority • Millionair Club Charity • Mother th Street Africa • Multi -Service Center • Muslim Housing Services • Neighborcare Health 45 Homeless Youth Clinic • New Horizons • Nexus Youth and Families • Open Door Church • Peace for the Streets by Kids on the Streets • Pike Market Senior Center • Plymouth Housing Group • POCAAN • Prince of Peace Lutheran Church • RAP • REACH • Real C hange • ROOTS • Safe Futures • The Salvation Army • Sanctuary Art Center • Seattle Goodwill • Seattle Parks & Rec • Seattle Public Library • Second Chance • Solid Ground • The Sophia ortive Services Way • St. Lukes Episcopal Church • St. Stephen Housing Association • Supp for Veteran Families • TeenFeed • Therapeutic Health Services • Union Gospel Mission • United Indians of All Tribes Foundation • University Congregational Church • VA Puget Sound Health Care System • Valley Cities Counseling • YMCA • YouthC are • YouthSource • YWCA 138 | 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In

139 Appendix 7: Acknowledgements City of Auburn • City of Bellevue • City of Federal Way • City of Kent • City of Kirkland • City of Redmond • City of Renton • City of Seattle • City of Shoreline • City of Tukwila • Department of Veterans Affairs • King County • King County Housing Authority • King County Library System • Seattle Fire Department • Seattle Parks and Recreation • Seattle Public Library System King County • United Way of King County 2018 Seattle/King County Count Us In | 139

140 2018 COMPREHENSIVE REPORT PRODUCED BY ASR

Related documents

JO 7400.11C   Airspace Designations and Reporting Points

JO 7400.11C Airspace Designations and Reporting Points

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ORDER FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 7400.11C JO Air Traffic Organization Policy August 13, 2018 SUBJ: Airspace Designations and Reporting Points . This O rder, publ...

More info »
Programming Guide for ZPL II, ZBI 2, Set Get Do, Mirror, WML (en)

Programming Guide for ZPL II, ZBI 2, Set Get Do, Mirror, WML (en)

Programming Guide ZPL II ZBI 2 Set-Get-Do Mirror WML

More info »
CityNT2019TentRoll 1

CityNT2019TentRoll 1

STATE OF NEW YORK 2 0 1 9 T E N T A T I V E A S S E S S M E N T R O L L PAGE 1 VALUATION DATE-JUL 01, 2018 COUNTY - Niagara T A X A B L E SECTION OF THE ROLL - 1 CITY - North Tonawanda TAX MAP NUMBER ...

More info »
CRPT 116hrpt9 u2

CRPT 116hrpt9 u2

U:\2019CONF\HJRes31Front.xml APPRO. SEN. [COMMITTEE PRINT] REPORT { } CONGRESS 116TH 1st HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Session 116- FURTHER APPROPRIATIONS FOR MAKING CONTINUING OF HOMELAND SECURITY FOR THE...

More info »
RIE Tenant List By Docket Number

RIE Tenant List By Docket Number

SCRIE TENANTS LIST ~ By Docket Number ~ Borough of Bronx SCRIE in the last year; it includes tenants that have a lease expiration date equal or who have received • This report displays information on ...

More info »
CalCOFI Atlas 33

CalCOFI Atlas 33

THE EARLY STAGES IN OF THE FISHES CALIFORNIA CURRENT REGION CALIFORNIA FISHERIES COOPERATIVE OCEANIC INVESTIGATIONS ATLAS NO. 33 BY THE SPONSORED STATES OF COMMERCE DEPARTMENT UNITED OCEANIC AND ATMOS...

More info »
An Introduction to Computer Networks

An Introduction to Computer Networks

An Introduction to Computer Networks Release 1.9.18 Peter L Dordal Mar 31, 2019

More info »
MPI: A Message Passing Interface Standard

MPI: A Message Passing Interface Standard

MPI : A Message-Passing Interface Standard Version 3.0 Message Passing Interface Forum September 21, 2012

More info »
OperatorHoursReport

OperatorHoursReport

John Bel Edwards Rebekah E. Gee MD, MPH SECRETARY GOVERNOR State of Louisiana Louisiana Department of Health Office of Public Health Certified Water and Wastewater Operators 2018 - 2019 Hours Hours li...

More info »
me bpd eng

me bpd eng

2017–18 Estimates Parts I and II The Government Expenditure Plan and Main Estimates ESTIMATES ESTIMATES

More info »
untitled

untitled

G:\P\16\HR1\INTRO.XML ... (Original Signature of Member) TH 116 CONGRESS 1 ST S ESSION H. R. 1 To expand Americans’ access to the ballot box, reduce the influence of big money in politics, and strengt...

More info »
Department of Defense   Law of War Manual (June 2015)

Department of Defense Law of War Manual (June 2015)

D E A R T M E N T O F D E F E N S E P N A L O F W A R M A W U A L J U N E 2 0 1 5 O F F I C E O F G E N ER A L C O U N S E L D P A R T M E N T E O F D E F E N S E

More info »
Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals Update

Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals Update

201 8 Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals U pdated Tables, March 2018 , Volume One

More info »
pisa 2012 results volume I

pisa 2012 results volume I

PISA 2012 Results: What Students Know and Can Do tICS, themA StuDent PeRfoRmAnCe In mA ReADIng AnD SCIenCe Volume I rogramme for ssessment A tudent S nternational I P

More info »
doj final opinion

doj final opinion

UNITED STAT ES DIS TRICT COURT IC F OR THE D ISTR T OF CO LU M BIA UNITED STAT F AMERICA, : ES O : : la in t if f, P 99 No. on cti l A vi Ci : 96 (GK) -24 : and : TOBACCO-F UND, : REE KIDS ACTION F : ...

More info »
NB18

NB18

Table of Contents National Board Pressure Relief Device Certificati ons NB-18 FOREWARD... 1 NATIONAL BOARD PRESSURE RELIEF DEVICE CERTIFICATION... 2 DETERMINATION OF CERTIFIED RELIEVING CAPACITIES... ...

More info »
At the Dawn of Belt and Road: China in the Developing World

At the Dawn of Belt and Road: China in the Developing World

At the Dawn of Belt and Road China in the Developing World Andrew Scobell, Bonny Lin, Howard J. Shatz, Michael Johnson, Larry Hanauer, Michael S. Chase, Astrid Stuth Cevallos, Ivan W. Rasmussen, Arthu...

More info »
catalog 2019

catalog 2019

2019 ® HARLEY-DAVIDSON GENUINE MOTOR PARTS & ACCESSORIES

More info »