AURORA | As Aurora prepares to open its new Regional Navigation Campus to address homelessness, Mayor Mike Coffman and a local conservative think tank made the case Thursday for a plan to require homeless people to work to participate in the city’s new services program.
“It is a tough love approach to helping people,” Coffman told reporters at a press conference outside the unfinished homelessness center in northwest Aurora. The center is expected to open in stages, and completely this fall.
Coffman partnered with the metro Common Sense Institute on a presentation promoting a so-called “work-first” approach to addressing homelessness. The philosophy essentially requires homeless people seeking services and housing to commit to being sober and moving toward and keeping employment. Numerous vetted and peer-reviewed studies over more than a decade insist that so-called “housing-first” programs are more effective at getting people off the streets and moving toward long-term self-sufficiency. Proponents argue that the stability of getting off the streets makes drug and alcohol rehabilitation work successful, as well as making participants more successful at getting and keeping a job.
Aurora, led by Coffman and former City Councilmember Dustin Zvonek, have for years promoted the “tough-love” approach.
Combined with the new Navigation Center facilities, Aurora’s new approach will require people living on the campus to “work for their stay.”
The campus will be a one-stop-destination for homeless people seeking help with getting identification, social and health services as well as counseling for employment and rehabilitation.
Coffman joined Zvonek and members of the Common Sense Institute presented details building a case to persuade the federal government to fund “work first” programs the same way federal agencies fund the widely adopted “housing first” model, which has dominated national homelessness policy and grants.
CSI’s recent report, “No Place to Call Home,” questions the effectiveness of housing-first policies in cities like Denver, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Portland, where homelessness has continued to grow despite heavy public investment.
“If we want real progress statewide, we also need to fix the system,” Zvonek said. “Cities shouldn’t be punished for pursuing the (work first models) simply because it doesn’t fit within the housing first mold. Aurora is ready to lead, and I’m proud to stand with Mayor Coffman as he continues to chart a new direction. One based on dignity, accountability and structure.”
While “housing first” has been scrutinized and heralded for years, touted for reducing chronic homelessness by placing individuals into permanent housing with optional services like social work and addiction treatment, Coffman and Zvonek argue that the approach lacks the structure and accountability needed to produce long-term self-sufficiency.
In contrast, Aurora’s work-first program will require participants to actively engage in services such as mental health treatment, addiction recovery, job training and case management as they move through a three-tier shelter and housing system.
“We’re not just providing shelter, we’re providing a structured path to change lives,” Coffman said.
Aurora’s $42 million Regional Navigation Campus three-tier system will move from a no-privacy, Tier One, with little commitment, to a private room in a full-commitment third tier. Tier One is a congregate emergency shelter for individuals newly entering the system. Tier Two is a semi-private room with more intensive case management and resource navigation. Tier Three is transitional housing focused on workforce development and long-term stability.
The goal for both housing-first and work-first systems is to get participants to become permanently housed and self-sufficient.
The project is being funded through a combination of funding from Arapahoe, Douglas and Adams counties, funding from the City of Aurora, the city’s marijuana sales tax, and private financing.
While no peer-reviewed studies currently support the “work-first” model as more effective than “housing-first,” the Common Sense Institute and Aurora officials say they plan to track outcomes carefully, with the hope of offering a replicable model to other municipalities.
“Housing First in every city that it’s been tried has failed,” Zvonek said. “San Francisco’s Housing First, Denver’s Housing First. It hasn’t worked for nearly two decades. We need to do something different.”
Homeless studies and experts dispute that claim. The Colorado Coalition for the Homeless and Metro Denver Housing Initiative have long claimed success at helping people reclaim lives in homes, along with similar advocates from other cities across the nation.
The Common Sense Institute is basing its prediction of the success of the ‘work-first approach on one year of research from Colorado Springs’ “work-first” approach and San Antonio, Texas’s Haven for Hope program, served as a model for Colorado Springs. Haven for Hope has a similar model to what Aurora plans to use at the Navigation Campus. In 15 years, San Antonio has experienced a 77% reduction in unsheltered homelessness in the downtown area, the CSI report said. Vetted studies and analysis was not included in the CSI report.
Homeless experts point out that policies beyond housing programs affect homelessness data. Some cities, including Colorado Springs, adopted no-tolerance public camping bans in addition to service programs. Some experts say “success” stories are sometimes skewed as a result of cities moving homeless people to other neighboring communities, according to a 2024 RAND study in Los Angeles. Denver and Aurora have both been flagged by other metro communities for causing homeless migrations in the metro area.
Another criticism by homelessness advocates of the Colorado Springs program is that camping-bans and mandatory ticketing creates a revolving door at local jails. Homeless people collect unpaid tickets until they’re jailed, then have no resources for housing when they get out and return to the streets, according to 2024 reporting by the Colorado Sun.
The work-first approach could show successes, but the report published by CSI does not include full information about the “housing-first” approach. For example, the report said that the Mile High All-In Programs in Denver spent $16 million on individuals who remained in unsheltered status after exiting the All-In Mile High program. While the All-In Mile High Dashboard shows that 38% of people in the program found permanent housing, and 82% are no longer outdoors, and overall length of stays in hotels or micro-communities is 173 days.
The report also withholds the details that Denver’s Basic Income Project had a 45% rate of people living in their own house or apartment after a 10-month span.
The CSI report also states that about “1% of All-In Mile High participants, 19 total, are known to have died while in the program.” The report and the All-In Mile High Dashboard explained the deaths as a possibility when dealing with homeless communities. Jessica Prosser, director of housing and community services, told Aurora council members during an April 10 Public Safety, Courts and Civil Service Policy Committee Meeting that one of the people matched to a housing voucher through the city was staying in a hotel while about to receive permanent housing and died in the hotel.
Federal funding is a chief goal of the CSI project, according to Zvonek, who is now a fellow at the institute, focusing on issues of homelessness.
Both Coffman and Zvonek cited CSI data they say argues that required personal responsibility and service-engagement provide a more sustainable path out of homelessness.
There is growing concern about a predicted budget shortfall in Aurora for the next two years, where staff will need to prioritize funding, and one priority for city council to consider is how important they find funding for the Navigation Campus, Aurora Deputy City Manager Robert Venegas said.
“That’s a volatile kind of market, the marijuana revenue, so I think we’ve been very conservative to make sure that that funding is adequate for the Flex Fund,” Venegas said.”We have a lot of other budget constraints. This will be a priority discussion, like everything else. If council feels like this is something that we have to maintain, we certainly can prioritize that.”
Coffman offered an optimistic prediction for data coming from the center after it opens later this year.
“We’re taking a different approach,” Coffman said. “It’s about transformation, not just shelter. Aurora is setting a new standard, and we hope others will follow.”
Absolutely love the approach Aurora is taking! Huge thanks to the Mayor, City Council, City Manager, Executive Team and all Aurora staff and employees. Well done!! Hopefully other cities will follow this approach!
You’re assuming this will work for some reason
I feel much better devoting a portion of my tax dollars toward a partnership between taxpayers and people willing to show some initiative in turning their lives around rather than just handing out more free stuff to slackers.
What makes you think they’re slackers. You personally know any?
I’m not sold on the approach, but admire the stated goal of gathering and analyzing data. If the program works, we need to understand why. The same goes if the program is a failure. I just hope these conservatives remain faithful to an unbiased analysis of the facts! I have no faith in the stats coming out of Texas. They tend to quote studies that have too small of sample sizes or don’t rely on rigorous statistical tests, but that agree with their point of view. They’ve even done that with educational data. Texas has the highest drop-out rate in the nation, but they used questionable “transfer” numbers to undercount the number of dropouts while I lived there. That way Abbott could lie about “making progress.” Texas is a state where real data goes to die and politicians lie!
“Housing First” creates a permanent and expensive sub-culture of dependency, and a large bureaucratic structure designed to grow and nurture that sub-culture. Bureaucratic process, yes; effective results, no.
I applaud Aurora’s sensible and compassionate approach to providing mental health treatment, addiction recovery, and job training for those in need who are struggling in life.
Thank you Mayor Coffman – thank you Aurora.
The actual data shows Housing First is the best and only model that helps people who have been homeless for a year or more achieve real self-sufficiency and permanently maintain housing with the help of a case manager and some needed services. And it actually cost very little to do so using transitional housing first and then subsidized housing – but there is not enough of either and programs always getting cut by GOP administrations, causing people to lose all they have achieved. We see that right now under trump. There are no funds for programs helping the unhoused (Over 30% are Veterans). Let’s see some data that supports you statement no effective results for Housing First. I worked for years in this area and my program at The Gathering Place over 6 years was extremely successful and very inexpensive, under $2000/year per person to achieve.
Placing a previously homeless person in a taxpayer provided apartment is a process that only the government would consider a success. But it is an expensive social failure -it does not always produce socially beneficial results – a productive and self-supporting individual.
https://www.britannica.com/procon/homelessness-debate
There is an incentive among government employees and social services organizations to focus on process, not results – more dependent clients means more case workers which in turn means more taxpayer money needed. Giving people a taxpayer-funded roof over the head often perpetuates or tolerates the problems that caused the homelessness in the first place. So when the government and social services organizations count roofs, it’s a process success, but not a real results-driven solution to the underlying causes of homelessness.
But heads under roofs pays; solving the underlying problems does not pay.
Good
I note the pricetag asnd then I rxead the article on Aurora’s expected budget shortfall.
I’ve worked for years using the housing first model with Denver’s Road Home and my program alone at The Gathering Place touched the lives for 4000 people experiencing poverty and/or homelessness and helped almost 500 people become self-sufficient in housing with the help of a case manager and service. This Aurora approach is misguided and data does not support the approach, quite the contrary, it’s why a Housing First model was first tried. This misguided approach shows a lack of experts involved and no understanding of where people are after a year of homelessness, and the many serious traumas that cause homelessness. 33% are Veterans. Coffman has pushed this “work first/prove yourself” idea since he pulled th stunt of dressing up like a Veteran and “infiltrating” the homeless community. He has not background or experience with this community and has said before they do not deserve help, because they don’t want it enough. It’s sad to see him continuing to push an initiative that is going to waste taxpayer dollars and probably be abusive in the process. It takes more time to get the facts and work with the reality, than set it up based on a structure Coffman thinks will keep himself in power with camping bans criminalizing poverty and homelessness and “tough love” that is really ignorance and cruelty.
I have some thoughts:
Who is providing the jobs? Who is helping them find these jobs? Is the city willing to put them to work?
Veterans have 13 different programs for homeless vets. I looked them up. And?
What is it homeless people want? A house? What is it the tax payors want them to have? Probably nothing unless that ‘taxpayor’ get’s to be homeless themselves. there was on on Next Door wrote an essay about how they were being forced into homelessness. I’m just an old guy. I am not seeing in legitimate solutions to this problem. You build a ghetto, and it gets neglected and turned into a trash heap. Many of these people need STRUCTURE in their lives. I have always seen the need for a community of ‘little’ houses but policed and provided with mental health and counselors to help guide this people towards a better life. Unfortunately, yep! It costs money. Trying to force certain people to work won’t work, giving them free permanent housing won’t work. I’m still waiting for real world solutions.