Rebuilding Governance to Support System Change
Montgomery County, Maryland – Interagency Council on Homelessness (ICH)
Who’s at the Table
ICH Core
Decision-Making Body
Governance redesigned to balance representation across all stakeholder sectors
Montgomery County’s homelessness response system spanned multiple government agencies, nonprofit providers, and funding sources, but governance structures lacked the authority and clarity needed to support durable system change. Like many communities, decision-making bodies were shaped by historical participation patterns rather than intentional design, creating imbalances in representation and limiting the system’s ability to respond holistically.
The Interagency Council on Homelessness (ICH) existed as an advisory body, but its legislative framework and membership structure did not fully reflect the breadth of stakeholders required to drive coordinated, accountable action.
As Chief of Services to End and Prevent Homelessness, Amanda led a comprehensive effort to redesign the governance infrastructure supporting the homelessness response system. This work focused not only on structure and authority, but on who needed to be at the table for the system to function effectively.
Key elements of the work included:
- Revising ICH legislation to establish clear authority, purpose, and decision-making responsibilities
- Restructuring governance in statute, rather than relying solely on written charters or informal agreements
- Redesigning membership to balance representation across government agencies, nonprofit providers, philanthropic partners, adjacent systems of care, elected officials, and people with lived or living experience of homelessness
- Creating standing governance processes tied to system priorities, funding alignment, and performance outcomes
This approach treated governance and membership design as core infrastructure, not administrative detail.
- Governance authority was formalized through legislation, providing stability across leadership and administration changes
- Membership became more intentionally balanced, reducing overrepresentation by any single sector and broadening accountability
- Voices traditionally peripheral to decision-making, including people with lived or living experience, were more clearly integrated into system governance
- Decision pathways became clearer, more transparent, and more consistently applied across partners
Strengthened governance and intentional membership design created the foundation for improved coordination, accountability, and system performance. With clearer authority and broader representation, the system was better positioned to align policy, funding, and practice over time.
These changes supported countywide efforts that contributed to sustained reductions in homelessness and improved system functioning during periods of significant external disruption, including the COVID-19 pandemic.
Governance is not neutral. Who is at the table, how authority is defined, and whether structures are memorialized in legislation directly shape what a system can achieve. Durable outcomes require both intentional membership and formal authority that outlast individual leaders.
Designing a Local Competition That Reinforced System Goals
Howard County, Maryland – Continuum of Care
Governance & Process Design
Lived Experience Participation
Transparency & Accountability
Repeatable Framework
Howard County’s Continuum of Care did not have a formal local competition framework for allocating CoC funding. The process had remained largely unchanged from year to year and had not kept pace with evolving HUD priorities or the community’s own system goals. Providers experienced uncertainty about expectations, and the process offered limited opportunity for innovation or system improvement.
The County, serving as the CoC Lead and Collaborative Applicant, sought to redesign the local competition from the ground up to improve clarity, transparency, and alignment with current best practices.
Amanda was engaged by the County to design and facilitate the local competition process. While she did not hold final decision-making authority, she was responsible for leading the community through each step of the process, making recommendations, and facilitating structured dialogue to support informed decisions.
Her role included:
- Designing the full local competition framework from the ground up
- Writing the Collaborative Application and supporting project applications
- Establishing and supporting a Rank and Review Committee
- Developing scoring criteria aligned with system goals and HUD priorities
- Providing targeted technical assistance to projects throughout the process
- Creating detailed process documentation and tools, including a comprehensive Gantt chart to guide timelines and responsibilities
This approach emphasized clarity, participation, and shared understanding rather than compliance alone.
The redesigned local competition introduced new infrastructure into the CoC, including:
- A clear, documented competition timeline and process
- Scoring and review criteria that prioritized housing-focused outcomes and fidelity to best practices
- Meaningful participation by people with lived experience
- Transparent review and ranking processes that providers could understand and anticipate
- A repeatable framework the CoC could use in future funding cycles
Rather than treating the competition as an annual scramble, the work established it as a system-level process.
- Providers had clearer expectations and greater transparency in how funding decisions were made
- The CoC engaged a broader network of providers through improved communication and structure
- The system increased its competitiveness and secured additional funding
- Leadership gained a defensible, consistent process aligned with HUD priorities
Strong process design matters, but it is not enough on its own. Local competitions and rank-and-review processes work best when they are treated as year-round system functions, not one-time events. Even well-designed frameworks require sufficient staffing and operational capacity to be fully sustained over time.
Translating System Models Across Cultural and Policy Contexts
Tokyo, Japan – Housing First Early Exploration
In 2014, Japan was in the early stages of exploring Housing First approaches. At the time, homelessness responses were largely centered on street outreach and short-term assistance, with limited housing-focused infrastructure. Broader social dynamics shaped this landscape, including high rates of institutionalization for people with mental and developmental disabilities and deep cultural stigma surrounding mental health, addiction, and homelessness.
As Japan began to deinstitutionalize, homelessness was becoming more visible, particularly among older men with histories of construction work and alcohol dependence. These shifts challenged long-standing norms and exposed gaps in how homelessness was understood and addressed.
While at Pathways to Housing, Amanda was invited by a Japanese NGO to support early learning and dialogue around Housing First implementation. Her role emphasized knowledge exchange, mentorship, and translation of practice rather than replication of U.S. models.
Her work included:
- Hosting and mentoring a fellow from Japan for approximately three months, providing structured learning and shadowing opportunities across frontline, supervisory, and leadership roles
- Designing and delivering trainings on housing-focused system approaches and service delivery
- Serving as a keynote speaker at Tokyo’s inaugural Housing First Symposium in 2014
- Providing onsite consultation in Tokyo to support early pilot efforts and community dialogue
- Supporting practitioners and leaders in adapting concepts to Japan’s cultural, policy, and service context
Throughout the work, Amanda emphasized humility, local adaptation, and respect for context rather than prescriptive solutions.
This engagement required navigating significant language and cultural differences, including:
- Limited precedent for housing-focused responses within the existing system
- Cultural norms that made open discussion of mental health and addiction difficult
- Deep stigma and shame associated with homelessness
- Community discomfort with harm reduction concepts, which challenged prevailing assumptions
In some neighborhoods, homelessness had historically been rendered invisible, including the physical erasure of areas with high concentrations of unhoused people. These realities required careful, respectful dialogue focused on shifting understanding rather than prescribing policy.
While no single intervention transformed the system, the work helped change the conversation. Community leaders, practitioners, and advocates began to engage homelessness as a systemic issue requiring more than emergency aid or outreach alone.
The engagement:
- Influenced how Housing First was discussed and understood in Japan
- Expanded thinking beyond short-term assistance toward housing-focused solutions
- Helped frame homelessness as a complex social issue requiring structural response, not charity alone
Systems change begins with hearts and minds. Before policies, programs, or infrastructure can shift, people must be willing to see homelessness differently and imagine alternatives that challenge long-held assumptions.