Attachment A - Task Force Recommendations to the City Manager

PAGE 1 
TASK FORCE  
RECOMMENDATIONS  
TO THE CITY MANAGER 
Attachment A

PAGE 1 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
STRATEGIES TO ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS PLAN 
In JUNE 2020, City staff presented a Strategies to Address
Homelessness Plan (Plan) to the Mayor and City Council. This initial 
draft served as an outline for strategies and goals for City efforts 
moving forward. Under City Council direction, staff presented the Plan 
to the public to gather community input. 
In OCTOBER 2020, the City Council adopted the Plan along with
several recommendations gathered during the public meetings. 
Among them was the creation of a City Manager’s appointed task 
force (Task Force) to prioritize and provide ongoing feedback on the 
City’s efforts to deploy the Plan. In late 2020, with recommendations 
from the Mayor and City Council, staff invited 19 community members 
to join the Task Force. 
In JANUARY 2021 a task force made up of neighborhood leaders,
service providers and homeless advocates began meeting to prioritize 
and provide recommendations on the City’s efforts to deploy the Plan. 
Throughout 2021, the Task Force met to review and evaluate the City’s 
Strategies to Address Homelessness Plan. The recommendations 
presented below were made in consensus among the Task Force 
members and are presented to the Phoenix City Manager.   
REPORT Summary 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER

The Task Force began with training on interest-based problem-solving 
techniques and an overview of group dynamics. The meetings were 
facilitated by a third party using best practices in interest-based 
facilitation and with sensitivity to creating positive group dynamics, 
full participant engagement and a shared vision of how the Task 
Force would approach its work. All decisions regarding 
recommendations, processes and logistics were made by consensus 
among the Task Force members. 
In FEBRUARY 2021, Task Force members were assigned to smaller
workgroups to review the strategy sections of the plan and respond 
to FIVE QUESTIONS: 
• Are the strategies in your section functioning;
• What is useful in each strategy;
• What is not useful in each strategy;
• Do you see connections between your section(s) and any other
sections in the plan;
• What elements are missing from the section(s) you are reviewing?
THE Process
PAGE 2 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER

PAGE 3 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
The Task Force then engaged in evaluation, prioritization and adding 
new items to the strategies as outlined in the Plan. Throughout the 
year, the Task Force met and identified several recommendations in 
the deployment of the Plan.  
KEY TAKEAWAYS from the recommendations are that they:   
•
Distribute shelters and services throughout the community;
•
Use all opportunities to provide additional shelter beds and permanent supportive
housing;
•
Work closely with neighborhoods when establishing new shelter opportunities;
•
Recommend better use of data to drive and improve services;
•
Recommend improved outcome measures;
•
Provide more transparency with respect to services and outcomes;
•
Replace the concept of “service resistant” individuals and instead recognize a Service
Readiness Continuum to describe the concept; and
•
Prioritize tailoring City responses to the unique needs of those being served and the
communities impacted.
THE Process
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER

OUTREACH AND RESOURCES STRATEGIES 
In reviewing the Outreach and Resources strategies of the Plan, the 
Task Force aligned many of their recommendations with the Plan’s 
existing strategy to provide more focused, unique, and individualized 
resources and referrals to individuals and families experiencing 
homelessness. The Task Force focused discussions on street outreach 
resources for criminal justice diversion, cross training of outreach 
teams and identifying resources to better connect with families. 
Additionally, the PLAN’S GUIDING PRINCIPLE of using  
Evidence-Based Practices guided the Task Force discussions revolving 
around the sharing of best practices across outreach providers and 
the need for better data tracking and metrics to guide outreach 
efforts. The Task Force also convened a work group to identify new 
terminology for the term “service resistant” (Attachment A).
Recommendations
PAGE 4 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER

PAGE 5 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
OUTREACH AND RESOURCES STRATEGIES 
1. Coordinate criminal justice diversion with specially trained navigators at
all points of the Sequential Intercept Model.* 
2. Develop an enhanced Community Outreach Practice Profile to guide
best practices and consistency across community street outreach providers. 
3. Cross-train other workforces (i.e., CHW and Peer Support Specialists) to
serve as homeless outreach teams.* 
4. Identify “hotspots” in the Valley to target the delivery of services based
on unique needs of community (understand, analyze hotspots to tailor 
location specific interventions). 
5. Establish meaningful quantitative and qualitative success metrics and
outward facing data dashboard for community outreach (including data 
quality and reporting and focused outreach workforce training).*  
6. Identify new methods (in addition to public schools) to connect with
families on the edge of homelessness.* 
7. Increase outreach teams and intensive engagement to encampments to
encourage engagement with services – which hopefully leads to entering 
available shelter. 
Recommendations
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
* denotes a recommendation aligned most closely to existing strategies

HOUSING & SHELTERS STRATEGIES 
Within the Housing strategies, the Task Force focused their 
discussions and recommendations on the Plan’s goals for smaller, 
accessible and specialized shelters. Particularly, the need for more 
low barrier facilities. Following the Plan, the Task Force provided 
guidance for the development and implementation of future no/low 
barrier shelters and more accessible temporary solutions. 
Additionally, the Task Force convened a small work group to collect 
and analyze Housing data from the Maricopa Association of 
Governments (MAG) to guide their recommendations related to 
affordable and permanent supportive housing (PSH). Using this data, 
the Task Force made recommendations related to additional shelter 
beds and permanent supportive and affordable housing units in the 
City of Phoenix (Attachment B). 
Recommendations
PAGE 6 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER

PAGE 7 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
HOUSING & SHELTERS STRATEGIES 
SHELTERS 
1. Provide guidance on an effective spectrum of supportive services to
ensure new/existing shelters or sites can create environments that adopt 
SAMHSA Principles for trauma-informed design for their customers and the 
surrounding community.*  
•
Task Force Identified Guidance:
•
Defining No/Low Barrier Shelter – Attachment C
2. Recommend the City Council commit to rapid development of additional
temporary housing capacity by placing beds and services in every City
Council district.
•
Work with providers to overcome transportation/physical barriers to
accessing services.
3. Increase new temporary housing beds as soon as possible.
4. Provide safe storage with a hot box available for personal property
available at any shelter and clean, safe restrooms.*
5. City commitment to multiple, smaller pocket shelters.*
6. Develop at least one structured campground to provide temporary and
rapid relief to people who cannot, or will not, enter a traditional shelter.*
•
Considerations for Structured Campground Implementation –
Attachment D
Recommendations
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
* denotes a recommendation aligned most closely to existing strategies

HOUSING & SHELTERS STRATEGIES 
AFFORDABLE HOUSING 
The Task Force reviewed the nine initiatives of the Housing Phoenix Plan and 
recommended the following components of the Housing Phoenix Plan to be 
prioritized to help address the need for affordable housing.  
1. Initiative 2 – Amend Current Zoning Ordinance to Facilitate More
Housing Options
a. Recommend City Council and staff to pursue a Voluntary
Inclusionary Zoning and adopt accessory dwelling unit housing options.   
2. Initiative 3 – Redevelop City-owned Land with Mixed Income Housing
a. Identify list of city-owned parcels in each Council district to use
for affordable housing ensuring citywide equity.
3. Initiative 7 – Expand efforts to preserve existing affordable housing
stock
a. Support the landlord incentive program with additional funding.
b. Implement a tracking tool to analyze affordable housing
preservation.
4. Initiative 9 – Education Campaign
a. Education for Village Planning Committees (VPCs) on how
affordable housing benefits communities.
b. Tracking tool outlining how affordable housing initiatives benefit
the community (measures such as home value, crime rates, etc.).
c. Advocate for more housing representation on the VPCs.
d. Outreach to communities.
Recommendations
PAGE 8 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER

PAGE 9 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
HOUSING & SHELTERS STRATEGIES 
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
The Task Force discussed permanent supportive housing and recommended 
the following: 
1. Increase project-based vouchers by 50 percent with the City of Phoenix
responsible for 150 additional project-based vouchers.*
2. Provide supplemental funding to ensure multi-disciplinary
supportive services for individuals in PSH to ensure retention and positive outcomes. 
3. Partner with community agencies to provide PSH services in alignment with
national best practices and other local community/culturally sensitive models.
4. Recommend City research supportive service methods/models to assist
vulnerable clients in PSH who are struggling in housing or are not receiving or 
accepting supportive services. 
5. City research best practices/models for exit strategies from PSH.*
Recommendations
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
EVICTION PREVENTION
1. Designate funds for more flexible financial assistance to prevent evictions-
specifically for financial needs that remain unmet by current City of Phoenix programs 
(i.e. car repairs, a one-time visit to urgent care, help with paying a speeding ticket,      
support for cox/phone bills). 
2. Gather data from Eviction Prevention to advocate for more rental/mortgage
funding.*
3. Partner with community-based organizations and businesses (schools, landlords,
etc.) to target those at risk of eviction.*
* denotes a recommendation aligned most closely to existing strategies

NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGIES 
The Task Force recommendations related to the Neighborhood strategies 
aligned with the Plan’s core strategies of increased City/provider 
engagement, increased supportive infrastructure and the continued 
promotion of healthy giving.  
1. Targeted resources to surrounding neighborhoods where shelters and
services are provided: 
a. Neighborhood specific multidisciplinary outreach teams and
coordinated service teams with the expectation of regular, on-going
communication with neighborhoods and businesses, towards
neighborhoods with a high concentration of encampments.*
b. Neighborhood Plan for surrounding community including city and
provider resources.
c. City should incentivize collaborations through RFP and contract
processes to: Increase communication and outreach to engage smaller
organizations, faith-based groups and community groups; and include
an in-depth neighborhood outreach plan as an expectation for city
funding prior to awarding funds.
2. Expand the Gated Alley Program throughout the city.*
3. Support in identifying shelter locations with wrap around services that are
equitably distributed in all parts of the City with best opportunity for success 
(ties to regional / citywide distribution goals).*  
Recommendations
PAGE 10 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
* denotes a recommendation aligned most closely to existing strategies

PAGE 11 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGIES 
4. Public safety plans, within and surrounding neighborhoods where
shelters are located, with measurable commitment.
Providers:
•
24/7 Public Safety Plan
•
Detailed site planning process for facility.
•
Detailed planning process for surrounding area.
•
Closed campus/services on-site/24-hour access.
•
Engage with City departments to effectively address issues that may
occur at the facility.
•
Specify provider contacts for City and community.
•
Clean property i.e. feces, trash and adequate lighting.
City: 
•
Work with provider and community to provide city resources and
services to ensure facility and community are supported.
•
Issues include blight, bus stop cleaning, encampments, alley/street
trash pickups, and business support and outreach.
•
Facilitate a coordinated approach with Police, City Prosecutor’s Office
and other stakeholders within the criminal justice system to ensure
issues related to crime in neighborhoods and safety of residents and
businesses are addressed along with support from NSD, HSD, Streets,
Public Works, and Public Transit.*
•
Prioritize and provide additional resources and funding to Police in
neighborhoods that suffer disproportionately.
Recommendations
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
* denotes a recommendation aligned most closely to existing strategies

NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGIES 
5. More support for the Healthy Giving Council and education to the
public.*
a. Public education campaign (intersection signs, language for
Givesmartaz.org, focused outreach to organizations/faith-based
institutions, increased collateral such as transit ads, social
media, year-round messaging).
i. Focused messaging to specific groups.
b. Identify sources of funding to support and grow the work of the
Healthy Giving Council.
Recommendations
PAGE 12 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
ENCAMPMENTS STRATEGIES 
1. Provide private property clean-up program.*
2. Support the implementation of a Phoenix Works program.*
3. Define Encampment : “Encampments can include makeshift shelters
outdoors such as a lean-to, tent, cardboard box, etc., housing one or
more persons; that habitually sleep with or without shelter
structures in a public space.”
4. Commitment that encampments located near the HSC are treated
the same as encampments located in other areas of the city.
* denotes a recommendation aligned most closely to existing strategies

PAGE 13 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
SERVICE RESISTANT TO SERVICE READINESS 
CONTINUUM* 
The Task Force convened a work group tasked with identifying new 
terminology for the term “service resistant” as well as identifying 
possible solutions for the Task Force to consider for those who do 
not want to accept services. The workgroup recognized the first step 
to identifying possible solutions was to acknowledge individuals may 
be at different levels of service readiness when it comes to accepting 
services. The term “service resistant” does not fully encompass all 
individuals experiencing homelessness who may not accept services. 
The Task Force identified the continuum below that may be used in 
replacement of “service resistant” when determining an individuals 
readiness to accept services.  
• The Service Readiness Continuum:
•
Individuals not ready to accept service ­ individuals who may not have
the mental capacity to accept services and need further assistance.
•
Individuals who don’t have access to appropriate services due to a
gap in the homeless response system
•
Individuals Refusing Service – Those who truly do not wish to accept
services.
ATTACHMENT A:
* denotes a recommendation aligned most closely to existing strategies

PAGE 14 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
ATTACHMENT B: Housing Data Recommendations
The City of Phoenix is a leader in reducing homelessness in our  
community by providing additional shelter and housing units for 
persons experiencing homelessness, low-income individuals and 
families, and persons in the workforce. Lack of shelter and  
affordable/workforce housing is a valley wide problem, and the 
City is a leader in this effort. 
1. Shelter- The City of Phoenix currently has 1,492 active shelter
beds and has approximately 530 beds in development.
Additionally, Maricopa County has approximately 172 beds in
development. The Homelessness Taskforce recommends that the
City continuously monitor the amount of active shelter beds and
evaluate the need for additional units with the goal of adding
new beds equal to 35 to 50 percent of new units of the Phoenix
unsheltered Point in Time count over the period of three years.
Please consider using the following Maricopa Association of
Governments (MAG) data in determining costs associated with
addition of these beds.
Capital Cost- 
One time 
Annual Operation Costs 
Intervention Type 
Per unit 
Individual 
Units 
Family 
Units 
Emergency Traditional Shelter 
$34,666.67 
 $22,648.10 
 $26,120 
Low-Barrier Shelter 
$34,667 
 $22,648.10 
 $26,120 
Bridge Housing-Purchased Hotel 
 $83,337.62 
 $25,256.62 
 $38,556 
Bridge Housing-Leased Hotel 
 $-  
 $51,629.42 
 $54,060 
MAG DATA:

PAGE 15 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
ATTACHMENT B: Housing Data Recommendations
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
2. The City of Phoenix Housing Department has made remarkable
progress towards its goal of creating or maintaining 50,000 housing 
units by 2030. Currently there have a been a total of 19,318 units 
added (see below graph for breakdown of units). The current rate 
of addition of units indicates 10.76 percent of units are
affordable. Per HUD AMI income levels cited in the Housing Phoenix 
Plan, 46 percent of Phoenix families fall within the Affordable 
Housing Range, 19 percent fall within the workforce range and 35 
percent fall within the Market range. A greater percentage of units 
added or maintained should be for affordable or workforce 
households as defined by the Phoenix Housing Plan. As such a panel 
of affordable housing experts should be convened to evaluate the 
current housing landscape to determine specific recommendations 
on affordable and workforce housing to the City Manager.
Housing Type 
AMI 
Number of units* 
Percentage 
Affordable 
0-80%
2,080 
10.76% 
Workforce 
80-120%
3,379 
17.48% 
Market 
120% and above 
13,859 
71.76% 
Total 
19,318 
100.00% 
*As of September 2021

PAGE 16 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
3. City to prioritize and equitably distribute city-owned vacant land for
affordable and workforce housing. 
4. Recommend policy to preserve affordable housing units.
5. Identification of additional non-government funding to fund on-going
shelter and affordable housing operations. 
ATTACHMENT B: Housing Data Recommendations
We recognize that the cost of adding affordable units can be       
burdensome. The Task Force recommends a focus on renovations, projects 
with no land costs, or other creative ideas that reduce the cost of 
development/renovation. The costs below indicate the rate for      
development annual operations per MAG Data points. The table below 
indicates the cost for development and annual operations per MAG data.
Capital Cost- 
One time 
Annual Operation Costs 
PSH-New Build 
$264,767.33 
 $9,899.76 
 $9,899.76 
PSH- Purchase Hotel/ Renovations 
$83,337.62 
 $9,899.76 
 $9,899.76 
MAG DATA:

PAGE 17 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
Background: Of the many conversations and areas of focus for the City of 
Phoenix’s Homelessness Task Force, the need for additional shelter beds 
emerged as a top priority. Task force members were concerned about 
how to provide additional shelter beds that served people who struggle 
to engage in shelter services. National best practices surrounding shelter 
operations suggest that no/low-barrier shelters are a service option for 
this population. According to the National Alliance to Homelessness, a 
no/low-barrier shelter is one in which “the most acute, highest need 
people are prioritized for shelter such as unsheltered individuals and 
families who are at greatest risk for severe health and safety 
consequences if not sheltered.” While we recognize that not all shelters 
will be no/low barrier, this guidance aims to reduce barriers to shelter 
access in the City of Phoenix. 
Recognizing that we need a diverse spectrum of shelter services within 
Phoenix, a workgroup was formed to: 
a. Define no/low-barrier shelter for the City of Phoenix, in alignment
with national best practices
b. Ensure that any no/low-barrier shelter provider would work in
coordination with neighborhoods, residents, and local businesses to
avoid issues of blight, crime and safety
c. Create a framework or understanding of no/low-barrier shelters for
use by City of Phoenix staff and councilmembers when considering
funding for shelter programs through the RFP and zoning process
ATTACHMENT C: Defining No/Low Barrier Shelter  
for the City of Phoenix

PAGE 18 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
ATTACHMENT C: 
UNSHELTERED HOMELESSNESS IN PHOENIX 
• According to the most recent point-in-time report for Maricopa
County, there were roughly 3,767 individuals experiencing
unsheltered homelessness in Maricopa County on a single night.
2,380 of those individuals were in the City of Phoenix. In a research
study involving 100 unsheltered individuals in downtown Phoenix,
we learned that there are diverse reasons why people are not
currently in shelter:
-Unsheltered Perspectives,
2019,  
Reasons for Not Being in 
Shelter n=100  
GOAL: Provide guidance on an effective spectrum of supportive services to 
ensure new/existing shelters or sites can create environments that adopt      
SAMHSA Principles for trauma-informed design for their customers and the      
surrounding community.

PAGE 19 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
ATTACHMENT C:
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
SUMMARY OF NO/LOW BARRIER SHELTER PRACTICES 
Category 
Practice 
Case management and 
service provision 
Trauma-informed care training for all staff 
Transportation to and from off-site services 
Co-locate services like workforce development/employment  
services, medical care, etc. so clients can engage with the shelter as 
much as possible 
Encourage clients to drive their case plans and develop their own 
goals for obtaining housing 
Some people need time to rest /heal before participating in intensive 
case management 
Shelter staff are well-trained in additional community resources and 
can make referrals and connections to mental health and substance 
use treatment 
Exits to permanent housing 
Identify a sustainable housing plan for each client 
Clear messaging to clients that the goal is to return to permanent 
housing 
Soon after entry, every person is assisted to create a plan to rapidly 
exit to housing 
Safety and order 
Smaller in size; ideally 150 beds or smaller 
Develop a 24/7 public safety plan, with community input, to include 
inside the shelter campus as well as the surrounding neighborhood 
area 
Staff trained in conflict resolution, mediation and de-escalation 
techniques to encourage continued shelter stay 
Adequately funded staffing plan that provides enough security and 
staff to keep clients safe

SUMMARY OF NO/LOW BARRIER SHELTER PRACTICES 
ATTACHMENT C:
PAGE 20 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
Neighborhood engagement 
Detailed planning process involving surrounding 
neighborhoods and businesses 
Detailed site planning process involving surrounding  
neighborhoods and businesses (lighting, landscaping, 
environmental design) 
Providers engage with city departments to effectively address 
issues that may occur at the facility/to ensure that facility and  
community are supported by City resources 
Specify service provider contacts for City and community members 
for on-going relationship management 
Regular neighborhood meetings will be held with a 
neighborhood advisory committee that will discuss 
challenges, suggestions, improvements 
Access 
Ensure processes are in place at shelters to prevent or 
eliminate queuing or camping outside the facility 
No drop in or walk-up services provided to individuals not  
residing in the program but referrals made for other services 
Have a system for evaluation and referrals to available and 
appropriate beds 
Screening people in not out 
Protocol for accommodating new shelter guests onsite 24-7, even if 
they have to wait until the next business day or  
morning to meet with case management staff 
Limited criteria for refusal of entry/work with prospective  
clients to navigate barriers to entry (pets that are not service     
animals, personal belongings, any barriers that do not directly  
impact the safety and well-being of staff and shelter guests) 
Every resident must stay on-site after 8:00pm until 5:00am other 
than those excused because of employment or other valid reasons 
Accommodation for partners/families/care takers 
Provide homeless outreach services in the area around the shelter

PAGE 21 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT NO/LOW BARRIER SHELTERS 
1. Gainesville, Florida- Grace Marketplace
a.114 bed low-barrier emergency shelter
b. Since becoming low barrier in 2016:
i. There is a 36 percent decrease in PIT count
ii. 48 percent decrease in the unsheltered population
iii. One major safety incident in five years
iv. “This programmatic environment encompasses a
much greater degree of tolerance for disruptive behaviors than
would be found elsewhere in the shelter system” 
c. gracemarketplace.org/
d. fchonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Making-the-Case-for-a-Low-
Barrier-Shelter-1.pdf
ATTACHMENT C:
 
Below are several case studies and national resources which offer data to 
support the role of low-barrier shelters within the shelter system: 
2. Connecticut Coalition to End Homelessness
a. Formed a matrix comparing the differences between low-barrier and
high-barrier shelter programs in the areas of:
i. Safety and order
ii. Substance use
iii. Exits to permanent housing
iv. Case management and services
v. Access
b. cceh.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Shelter-Philosophy-
Matrix.pdf
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER

ATTACHMENT C: 
PAGE 22 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
3. National Alliance to End Homelessness
a. Published a graphic with 10 steps to evaluate your shelter rules

PAGE 23 
TASK FORCE PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS APRIL 2022 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
ATTACHMENT D: Structured Campground 
Implementation Considerations
 
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION 
Members of the Task Force acknowledge the timing required to build 
or acquire new shelters may take one to two years. The Task Force 
recognizes that allowing unregulated camping to occur in 
neighborhoods, commercial business properties, parks and other 
public areas is not good for either the person experiencing 
homelessness nor the area where the unregulated camping is 
occurring. There are many people who are not ready to enter a 
traditional shelter and the rules associated with traditional 
shelters. Nonetheless, every person experiencing homelessness is 
entitled to a safe, humane place to call home that provides adequate 
sanitation, availability of food and access to services. The Task Force is 
recommending the City of Phoenix develop at least one structured 
campground to provide temporary and rapid relief to people who 
cannot, or will not, enter a traditional shelter. The size of the 
campground should be proportionate to the amount of space 
available and the safety needs of residents and community members 
nearby.

PAGE 24 
STRAT-
EGIES 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
The City of Phoenix shall set up at least one very-low-barrier 
campground. These campground facilities shall: 
• be open to all (singles, couples, individuals with pets/possessions,
and other groups) that can’t be accommodated in traditional shelters;
• have clean drinking water, sanitary facilities, food services, shaded
areas, security, and communal areas;
• include outreach resources (behavioral health, work force
development, homeless ID, mental health, substance abuse etc.);
• have no time limits on length of stay (goal will be to move
individuals to housing as quickly as they are willing and able); and
• operate with basic behavior ground rules for short- or long-term
stay.
ATTACHMENT D: Structured Campground 
Implementation Considerations
During the discussion of this recommendation, the Task Force  
identified the following factors to be considered by the City  
during the development and implementation of the campground: 
• Proximity to other services and support systems;
• Maintaining choice into entry;
• Heat relief protocols;
• Ensuring humane approach;
• Transportation to and from;
• School districts outreach;
• Specifications of structures;
• Vehicle parking; and
• Focus remains on investment in permanent housing solutions.

FURTHER RESOURCES AND INFORMATION: 
• Camp Esperanza
• Responses to the Problem of Homeless Encampments
• Shelton, WA Temporary Homeless Encampments
• Vancouver “Safe Stay Community”
PAGE 25 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
ATTACHMENT D: Structured Campground 
Implementation Considerations
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS

PAGE 7 
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER 
PAGE 26 
STRATEGIES 
        TO ADDRESS 
ATTACHMENT E: Task Force Members
Dawn Augusta  
Jessica Bueno 
Sonora Crittenden 
Ken Curry 
Dr. Sheila Harris 
Matt Kelly 
Barbara Lewkowitz  
Caroline Lobo 
Bill Morlan 
Darlene Newsom 
Jerome Parker  
Geraldo Pena  
Julie Reed  
Nate Rhoton  
Nathan Smith 
Jeff Spellman 
Craig Tribken 
Ash Uss 
Dede Yazzie Devine 
Arizona State University  
Oakland Neighborhood Association 
Dignity Health, St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center  
Southwest Behavioral Health  
PHX Community Alliance  
Mercy Care  
Private Consultant  
Hatcher Urban Businesses (theHUB) 
Madison Pioneers Coalition  
Former CEO, United Methodist Outreach Ministries (UMOM) 
Healthy Giving Council 
Chicanos Por La Causa 
Neighborhood Leader  
One-n-ten  
PHX Rescue Mission  
Neighborhood Leader  
Central Arizona Shelter Services  
From the Ground Up Consulting  
Native American Connections