>>> TONIGHT, A SHOCKING NEW AUDIT EXPOSES THE TROUBLING REALITY THAT HOMELESS FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN FACE AND THE GOVERNOR AND MAYOR'S NEW PLAN TO DEAL WITH IT.

INSIDE THE HOUSING PROGRAM THAT OFFERED A BETTER LIFE BUT ENDED WITH AWFUL CONSEQUENCES.

"METROFOCUS" STARTS RIGHT NOW.

♪ >> THIS IS "METROFOCUS," WITH RAFAEL PI ROMAN, JACK FORD AND JENNA FLANAGAN.

"METROFOCUS" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- >>> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO "METROFOCUS."

THE CITY OF NEW YORK GUARANTEES EVERY HOMELESS FAMILY WITH CHILDREN THE RIGHT TO STAY IN A SHELTER.

UNFORTUNATELY, THE CITY DOES NOT GUARANTEE A SMOOTH PROCESS FOR SECURING A SPOT IN ONE OF NEW YORK'S FAMILY SHELTERS.

IN A NEW REPORT RELEASED BY THE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE, IT MAKES CLEAR HOW DIFFICULT THAT PROCESS CAN BE.

THE REPORT AND AUDIT ON THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELESS SERVICES SHOWS TWO DISTURBING FACTS.

FIRST, MANY FAMILIES ARE REPEAT L REPEATEDLY DENIED BEFORE BEING ALLOWED.

40% ARE REJECTED BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT COMPLETELY THOROUGH INVESTIGATIONS.

AS PART OF OUR CHASING THE DREAM INITIATIVE ON POVERTY, JUSTICE AND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY IN AMERICA, WE ARE TAKING A LOOK AT THE CONTROLLER'S REPORT.

TO HELP US DO THAT, WE ARE JOINED BY CHRISTINE QUEINN, THE CURRENT PRESIDENT AND CEO OF WIN, NEW YORK CITY'S LARGEST PROVIDER OF SHELTER AND SERVICES FOR HOMELESS FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN.

IT WAS SPEAKER QUINN WHO CALLED FOR THE RECENTLY RELEASED AUDIT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

IT'S A PLEASURE TO HAVE YOU HERE WITH US.

>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

>> SPEAKER QUINN, BEFORE WE GET INTO THE FINDINGS OF THE RECENTLY RELEASED AUDIT, COULD YOU TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS THAT FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN HAVE TO GO THROUGH IN ORDER TO OBTAIN TEMPORARY HOUSING ASSISTANCE FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELESS SERVICES OR DHS?

>> SURE.

THE PROCESS IS GRUELING.

ALL FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN HAVE TO GO TO ONE INTAKE CENTER IN THE BRONX, REGARDLESS WHERE THEY ARE COMING FROM.

YOU CAN HAVE A VERY LIMITED NUMBER OF BELONGINGS, ONE OR TWO BAGS THAT YOU BRING WITH YOU.

THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT TAKES ON THE LOW END IS 12 TO 15 HOURS.

MORE THAN ALL OF A DAY.

YOU HAVE TO TAKE YOUR CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL AND BRING THEM WITH YOU.

YOU HAVE TO BRING ALL KINDS OF PAPERWORK, DOCUMENTATION FROM ALL OF YOUR PAST RESIDENCES, THINGS ABOUT YOUR W-2, ET CETERA.

REMEMBER, WE ARE ASKING PEOPLE TO BRING ALL THIS DOCUMENTATION WHEN THEY MAY BE FLEEING A BATTERER OR THEY MAY HAVE COME HOME AND THE MARSHAL HAS PADLOCKED THEIR DOOR AND THEY HAVE BEEN EVICTED.

I'M NOT SAYING THERE SHOULDN'T BE A STANDARD.

BUT THIS IS ONE THAT'S VERY, VERY HARD TO ACHIEVE.

THEN YOU HAVE TO SIT WITH THE STAFF AT INTAKE, WHICH IS CALLED CARE.

THEY WILL GO DOWN THE LIST OF YOUR FAMILY IN THE AREA THAT YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE TO THEM.

THEY WILL SAY, YOU HAVE AN AUNT WHO LIVES IN QUEENS.

WHY CAN'T YOU STAY WITH HER?

DOESN'T SHE LOVE YOU?

THEY WILL CALL HER AND ASK WHY SHE WON'T TAKE YOU IN.

ASK WHY -- ASK WHETHER OR NOT YOU REALLY ARE WITHOUT RESOURCES TO FIND A HOME.

AS THE AUDIT SHOWED, 42% OF THE TIME PEOPLE ARE REJECTED.

YET THE VAST MAJORITY GO BACK AND ARE ACCEPTED.

AT WIN, ON AVERAGE, OUR CLIENTS GO FOUR TIMES BEFORE THEY ARE ACCEPTED.

DURING THE PANDEMIC, THEY HAVE SAID, YOU DON'T HAVE TO BRING YOUR CHILD.

THINK ABOUT IT.

FOUR TIMES AND USUALLY, YOU HAVE TO BRING ALL YOUR CHILDREN WITH YOU.

WHEN THE CHILDREN ARE THERE, THEY ARE LISTENING TO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING TO THE STAFF.

YOU COULD BE TALKING ABOUT LOSING YOUR JOB.

YOU COULD BE TALKING ABOUT BEING BEATEN BY YOUR SPOUSE.

YOU COULD BE TALKING ABOUT HAVING BEEN RAPED OR SEXUALLY ASSAULTED.

THINGS THAT THEY SHOULD NOT LEARN IN THAT SETTING AND MAYBE SHOULDN'T LEARN FOR YEARS AND YEARS.

SERVING SOMEONE IN NEED LIKE A HOMELESS FAMILY SHOULD BE SET UP IN A WAY WHERE YOU ARE ADDRESSING TRAUMA AND TRYING TO HELP PEOPLE WORK THROUGH TRAUMA.

INTAKE CREATES MORE TRAUMA.

>> I GUESS YOU TOUCHED ON THIS, BUT I WANT TO ASK YOU, ASSUMING THAT THE DHS'S PERSONNEL DID EVERYTHING CORRECTLY -- WE WILL GET INTO THAT -- WHAT ARE THE REASONS WHY A FAMILY'S APPLICATION FOR ASSISTANCE WOULD BE DENIED?

WHAT ARE THE RED FLAGS?

>> INSUFFICIENT PAPERWORK.

IT'S WHAT WE HEAR MOST IS INSUFFICIENT PAPERWORK.

IF YOU ARE HEARING THAT OVER AND OVER AGAIN, SOMEBODY SHOULD STEP BACK AND ASK WHETHER OR NOT THE LEVEL OF PAPERWORK IS REALLY REASONABLE GIVEN THE SITUATION THESE FAMILIES ARE IN.

I'M TELLING YOU, IF I HAD TO GO TO TOMORROW, I WOULDN'T FIND THE PAPERWORK NEEDED TO GET INTO A HOMELESS SHELTER IN NEW YORK CITY.

NO JOKE AT ALL.

THAT IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS WE HEAR.

THEN THE SECOND IS, HAS FAMILY THEY COULD STAY WITH.

BECAUSE FAMILY SAID ON THE PHONE TO THE PERSON FROM THE CITY, YES, THEY CAN COME.

WHAT THEY THEN SAY WHEN YOU ARRIVE COULD BE A VERY DIFFERENT SITUATION.

YOU MAY HAVE COME FROM THIS AND YOUR AUNT IS OPEN HEARTED BUT SHE HAS HER FAMILY, MAYBE HER SON'S FAMILY AND DOESN'T ACTUALLY REALLY HAVE ROOM FOR YOU AND YOUR CHILDREN.

OR SHE LIVES REALLY FAR AWAY FROM THE SPECIAL SCHOOL YOUR CHILD NEEDS TO GO TO.

THE EXISTENCE OF FAMILY MEMBER IS NOT THE SAME AS A VIABLE PLACE FOR A FAMILY TO STAY.

>> MAYBE THAT ANSWERS PART -- I WONDERED ABOUT THAT.

IT LOOKS LIKE WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO FIND OUT IS IF YOU REALLY DON'T NEED THIS PUBLIC HOUSING.

BUT I'M WONDERING, WHY WOULD ANYBODY WHO ACTUALLY HAS A PLACE TO STAY AND LIVE, WHY WOULD THEY WANT PUBLIC HOUSING?

WHY WOULD THEY WANT GO THROUGH THAT?

>> THEY WOULDN'T.

NO ONE WOULD WANT TO GO THROUGH THIS EMBARRASSING, INTRUSIVE INTAKE PROCESS TO THEN STAY IN A SHELTER.

ALTHOUGH OUR SHELTERS ARE NICE, THEY ARE FAR FROM GLAMOROUS OR LUXURIOUS.

AND EVERYONE, WHETHER YOU ARE 50 OR 5 YEARS OLD, HAS A CURFEW.

IT'S NOT A PLACE WHERE YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT.

HISTORICALLY, NOT JUST NEW YORK, SOCIETY TREATS POOR PEOPLE, PARTICULARLY WOMEN, WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT THEY ARE LIARS AND CROOKS AND TRYING TO GET OVER ON THE SYSTEM.

THAT IS WHAT WE ARE SEEING THE VESTIGES OF HERE.

WE MAY BE THIS VERY PROGRESSIVE PLACE, BUT WE STILL HAVE EMBEDDED IN US THAT IDEA THAT POOR PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO STEAL SOMETHING FROM THE SYSTEM.

>> ACCORDING TO THE AUDIT, IN MANY OF THE CASES WHERE FAMILY APPLICATIONS FOR TEMPORARY HOUSING ASSISTANCE WERE TURNED DOWN, THE STAFF WAS, IN FACT, NOT DOING EVERYTHING CORRECTLY.

THAT'S THE MEAT OF THE AUDIT.

RIGHT?

>> RIGHT.

>> HOW EXACTLY WERE THEY FALLING SHORT?

AND WHY?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, THE WHY QUESTION IS HARD TO ANSWER.

RIGHT?

IS IT JUST HUMAN ERROR AND WE SHOULD DO MASS RETRAINING AND MORE RETRAINING REGULARLY?

OR IS IT SOMETHING MORE?

IS IT SOMEHOW A BIAS?

OR IS IT HISTORICALLY A MESSAGE FROM ON HIGH AND IT'S -- THIS WASN'T DURING THE ADAMS ADMINISTRATION.

IT WAS BEFORE.

IT WAS STARTED BY CONTROLLER STRINGER.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THAT.

WAS IT SOME MESSAGE FROM ON HIGH IN THE de BLASIO ADMINISTRATION TO KEEP THE NUMBERS DOWN?

YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN?

I DON'T KNOW.

LET'S GIVE PEOPLE THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.

IT WAS HUMAN ERROR.

WE SHOULD DO SOME MASS RETRAINING TO PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING.

IT'S INCREDIBLY UNFAIR TO HAVE PEOPLE DO THE RIGHT THING.

THE HOMELESS PEOPLE.

AND LOSE OUT BECAUSE THE STAFF IS DOING THE WRONG THING.

IT BEGS A BIGGER QUESTION.

WHAT TYPE OF MANAGER STRUCTURE, SUPERVISION STRUCTURE IS THERE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELESS SERVICES THAT NOBODY CAUGHT THIS REPETITIVE ERROR BY STAFF?

THAT IT TOOK A CONTROLLER AUDIT.

THIS TYPE OF REPETITIVE ERROR SHOULDN'T OCCUR AS IT DEALS WITH SINGLE MEN OR WOMEN WHO ARE HOMELESS, IT SHOULDN'T.

BUT WHETHER N IT COMES TO CHILD IT IS COMPLETELY UNACCESSIBLE.

I THINK THE DEPARTMENT HAS TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION AS WELL.

GIVEN THE NEW ADMINISTRATION AND NEW COMMISSIONER, WHO HAS A LOT OF EXPERIENCE, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THIS.

>> GIVEN THE NEW ADMINISTRATION AND NEW COMMISSIONER, I HAVE TO SAY, SPEAKER QUINN, I'M LOOKING AT THIS AND I'M LOOKING AT THE COST TO FAMILIES THAT ARE BADLY IN NEED OF SHELTER.

SOME OF THE BASIC THINGS THAT THE STAFF DIDN'T DO, LIKE GOING ONLINE AS THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO DO, OR HELPING THEM GET THE PAPERS.

I'M ASKING -- I DIDN'T SEE THIS IN THE REPORT.

MAYBE IT'S THERE.

ARE THERE CALLS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION?

ARE THERE CALLS FOR DISMISSALS?

SHOULD THERE BE?

>> YOU KNOW, THAT'S A QUESTION WE NEED TO LOOK AT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE ADMINISTRATION.

YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN?

TO TAKE SOMEONE'S LIVELIHOOD IS A BIG THING.

I CAN'T SAY I KNOW ENOUGH FROM THE AUDIT TO SAY THAT ABOUT X, Y OR Z SPECIFIC PERSON.

WE DO HAVE A REAL OPPORTUNITY WITH A NEW ADMINISTRATION.

ALSO, THE MAYOR HAS PUT TERRIFIC PEOPLE LIKE JESSICA KATZ WHO REPORTS TO THE FIRST DEPUTY MAYOR, LORRAINE GRILLO, A PRO OF PROS, SHE IS THE LEAD HOUSING PERSON IN THE CITY.

SHE GETS THAT THE ANSWER TO HOMELESSNESS ULTIMATELY ISN'T SHELTER.

IT'S HOUSING.

SHELTER IS A STOP WE SHOULD MAKE THE MOST OUT OF.

I AM OPTIMISTIC JESSICA WILL HELP WITH SOME OF THIS.

THE NEW DHS COMMISSIONER, WHO HAS A LOT OF EXPERIENCE, HE ASKED TO TOUR THE FACILITY.

WE SET THAT UP.

I THINK THAT'S A GOOD SIGN, TOO.

>> ACCORDING TO THE REPORT, ON AVERAGE THESE FAMILIES HAD TO APPLY 15 TIMES ON AVERAGE.

>> CRAZY.

>> IT'S CRAZY.

THESE ARE HOMELESS PEOPLE.

WHERE DO THEY STAY?

THIS HAS TO BE A LONG PROCESS.

WHERE DO THEY STAY?

WHERE DO THEY LIVE WHILE THEY ARE WAITING FOR THIS APPLICATION TO BE ACCEPTED?

>> YOU KNOW, IT'S ILLEGAL TO HAVE YOUR CHILD ON THE STREET.

BUT I'M SURE MANY OF THEM HAVE GONE BACK OR GONE TO THE STREET.

SOME OF THEM HAVE GONE BACK TO FAMILY WHERE IT'S REALLY STRETCHING THE LEVEL OF SAFETY AND APPROPRIATENESS FOR HOW MANY PEOPLE IN AN APARTMENT.

LET'S BE HONEST.

SOME PEOPLE HAVE GONE BACK TO THEIR BATTERER, BECAUSE THEY -- THE CHOICE IS THAT OR TAKE MY KIDS TO THE STREET.

>> WOW.

>> WHY DO WE WANT TO PUT PEOPLE IN THAT SITUATION?

WHY DO WE REGARD POOR PEOPLE WITH SUCH DISDAIN?

WHY DO WE REGARD WOMEN SO NEGATIVELY WHEN THEY ARE TRYING TO KEEP THEIR FAMILIES TOGETHER?

I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT.

>> AS YOU SAID EARLIER, THE AUDIT WAS BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED BETWEEN JANUARY 2019 AND MARCH 2020.

ALL BEFORE THE PANDEMIC.

>> YEP.

>> HOW HAS THE PANDEMIC AFFECTED THIS REALITY?

HAS IT MADE IT WORSE OR NOT?

>> SO, I WILL CREDIT THE de BLASIO ADMINISTRATION.

THEY PUT CHANGES.

THE STATE GAVE THEM WAIVERS IN SOME SITUATIONS.

DURING THE PANDEMIC AND STILL, YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO TAKE YOUR CHILD.

THAT WAS GOOD.

I'M GOING TO CONFUSE EVERYONE.

YOU GET ACCEPTED.

RIGHT?

>> THAT'S THE AGENCY WITHIN THE AGENCY IN CHARGE OF INTAKE.

>> RIGHT.

YOU GO TO INTAKE.

THEY SAY, YES, YOU QUALIFY AS HOMELESS.

THEY SEND YOU TO A SHELTER.

YOU ARE IN THAT SHELTER FOR TEN DAYS.

DURING THAT TEN-DAY PERIOD, THEY CONTINUE TO INVESTIGATE YOU.

THEN IF THEY DETERMINE YOU ARE NOT ACTUALLY HOMELESS, YOU GET KICKED OUT OF THE SHELTER, WIN OR SOMEWHERE ELSE, AND YOU GO BACK TO GOD KNOWS WHERE TO REAPPLY.

DURING THE PANDEMIC, YOU HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO REAPPLY BUT STAY IN THE SHELTER YOU WERE ASSIGNED TO.

WE URGED THE de BLASIO ADMINISTRATION TO MAKE BOTH OF THOSE CHANGES PERMANENT.

WE ARE NOW URGING THE ADAMS ADMINISTRATION TO DO THE SAME.

>> OKAY.

>> de BLASIO DIDN'T.

>> ASIDE FROM POINTING OUT THE PROBLEMS, THE AUDIT ALSO MADE RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATIONS.

I DON'T WANT YOU TO GO INTO ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHT ABOUT WHAT THEY RECOMMEND?

ARE THEY GOOD ENOUGH?

WHAT DO YOU THINK THEY SHOULD DO?

>> I THINK THAT THEY -- AS I THINK IS PROBABLY THE CASE IN MOST AUDITS, THEY'RE A GREAT START.

RIGHT?

THEY'RE A REALLY GOOD START.

YOU NEED TO BRING THE EXPERTS IN TO TAKE IT FURTHER.

RIGHT AWAY, WE GOTTA FIND A WAY TO GET CHILDREN OUT.

IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE.

WE HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO SPEED UP THE PROCESS.

IT SHOULDN'T TAKE 12 TO 14 HOURS, PARTICULARLY WHEN OVER 50% OF THE MOTHERS WERE WORKING.

THEY HAVE TO TAKE A DAY OFF FROM WORK.

THREE, ALL OF THIS INTAKE STAFF, ALL SHOULD BE EVERY YEAR TRAINED IN TRAUMA-INFORMED CARE SO THEY ARE INTERACTING WITH FAMILIES IN A WAY THAT'S HELPFUL, NOT TRIGGERING OR NOT MAKING TRAUMA WORSE.

THOSE ARE JUST SOME OF THE PLACES I WOULD START.

>> VERY QUICKLY, HAVE YOU HAD THE CHANCE TO SPEAK TO MAYOR ADAMS ABOUT THE AUDIT?

DO YOU KNOW IF HE READ IT, WHAT HIS RESPONSE IS?

>> WE HAVE SPOKEN A LOT ABOUT HOMELESSNESS AND PARTICULARLY HIS REAL DEEP COMMITMENT TO SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, WHICH IS TERRIFIC.

WE HAVE NOT SPOKEN ABOUT THE AUDIT.

I AM SEEING COMMISSIONER JENKINS IN ABOUT A WEEK.

WE WILL SPEAK ABOUT THE AUDIT.

WE ARE SETTING UP A MEETING WITH THE STAFF WHO RUNS INTAKE, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TO GO THROUGH MORE OF THAT.

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU ARE VERY POSITIVE ABOUT THIS NEW ADMINISTRATION AND ITS FOCUS ON THIS ISSUE AND HOMELESSNESS IN GENERAL, MORE THAN THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION, PERHAPS PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS?

>> WELL, CERTAINLY MORE THAN THE PREVIOUS ONE.

I AM VERY OPTIMISTIC.

UNTIL I'M NOT.

AT THE MOMENT, I'M VERY OPTIMISTIC.

GOD WILLING, THAT WILL CONTINUE.

>> LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT THE PLAN THE MAYOR AND THE GOVERNOR RECENTLY ANNOUNCED TO DEAL WITH HOMELESSNESS AND EXPLODING CRIME IN THE SUBWAY SYSTEM.

DO YOU THINK THEY GET THE BALANCE BETWEEN TOUGHER ENFORCEMENT OF THE EXISTING CODE OF CONDUCT IN THE SUBWAYS AND THE PROVISION OF SERVICES TO THE HOMELESS AND MENTALLY ILL RIGHT?

>> LOOK, I THINK THE FIRST ROUNDS OF THIS, WHICH HAVE HAPPENED IN OTHER ADMINISTRATIONS, HAD THE POLICE GOING IN AND TRYING TO MOVE THE HOMELESS ALONG AND TRYING TO GET THE HOMELESS TO GO TO SHELTER.

THAT MAKES NO SENSE.

POLICE OFFICERS ARE NOT TRAINED TO BE SOCIAL WORKERS.

THEY ARE NOT TRAINED TO INTERACT WITH THE HOMELESS.

THE HOMELESS UNDERSTANDABLY ARE TERRIFIED OF PEOPLE IN POLICE UNIFORMS.

NOT BECAUSE THE POLICE HAVE DONE ANYTHING WRONG.

NOW HAVING MENTAL HEALTH SOCIAL WORKERS, ET CETERA, IS A BETTER MODEL.

THE FOCUS CAN'T BE JUST ON GETTING THEM OUT OF THE SUBWAY.

OR THE STREET CORNER.

IT HAS TO BE, WHERE ARE THEY GOING?

DOES THE PLACE, THE SHELTER, THE HOSPITAL THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THE PSYCHIATRIC CARE THAT THEY NEED?

AND THEN, WHEN THEY LEAVE THAT FACILITY, IS THERE HOUSING FOR THEM THAT HAS THE PSYCHIATRIC CARE BUILT IN?

BECAUSE OTHERWISE, FOUR MONTHS FROM NOW, WE WILL SEE THE SAME PERSON ON THE SAME BENCH.

WHO HAVE WE HELPED?

WE HAVE TO DO THIS COMPREHENSIVELY.

>> ALL RIGHT, SPEAKER QUINN.

WE HAVE TO END IT THERE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> WE WILL TALK AGAIN.

>> TAKE CARE.

♪ >>> GOOD EAVENING.

I'M JENNA FLANAGAN MANY MENTALLY ILL AND LIVING ON THEIR OWN.

ARE THEY READY TO DO SO?

THOUSANDS OF MENTALLY ILL NEW YORKERS ARE OFFERED THE CHANCE TO MOVE OUT OF ADULT HOMES AND INTO SUBSIDIZED APARTMENTS.

FOR MANY, THE SHIFT TOWARD INDEPENDENCE IS HAZARDOUS AND DEADLY.

IN A NEW DOCUMENTARY, FRONT LINE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH PRO PUBLICA INVESTIGATING THIS FAULTY HOUSING SYSTEM.

HERE IS A LOOK.

>> IT WAS A LANDMARK RULING.

THOUSANDS OF NEW YORKERS WITH SEVERE MENTAL ILLNESS HAD A RIGHT TO LIVE ON THEIR OWN.

>> A HUGE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER PEOPLE THAT HAD BEEN INSTITUTIONALIZED CAN LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY.

>> THEY SAID, TA-DA.

>> WE INVESTIGATE.

>> DID IT FEEL LIKE YOU WERE LEFT ALONE?

>> I HAD NO COMPANY.

>> THE QUESTION IS, WHEN DO YOU TAKE AWAY SOMEBODY'S LIBERTY?

>> TUESDAY AT 10:00, 9:00 CENTRAL ON MOST PBS STATIONS.

>> HERE WITH MORE ON THIS INVESTIGATION IS FRONT LINE CORRESPONDENT JOAQUIN SAPIEN.

WELCOME.

>> THANKS.

>> THIS WAS A DIFFICULT ONE FOR ME TO WATCH, BECAUSE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE MOST MARGINALIZED PEOPLE IN SOCIETY.

JUST EXPLAIN TO PEOPLE WHAT IT IS THAT WE ARE TALKING WITH MENTALLY ILL PEOPLE IN ADULT HOUSING AND THE SUB SIDIZED HOUSING.

>> THEY WERE THE SUBJECT OF A REALLY DAMNING SERIES OF STORIE.

PEOPLE HAD FLUNG THEMSELVES OFF ROOFTOPS.

THEY WERE DYING DUE TO LACK OF AIR CONDITIONING.

THERE WAS A LOT OF MEDICAL PROCEDURES THAT PEOPLE DIDN'T ACTUALLY NEED, THAT THE OPERATORS WERE ABLE TO PROFIT FROM.

ALL OF THIS RESULTED IN A LAWSUIT FILED IN BROOKLYN FEDERAL COURT.

IT TOOK A LONG TIME FOR THE LITIGATION TO PLAY OUT.

ULTIMATELY, THERE WAS A SETTLEMENT IN WHICH THE PEOPLE WERE THEN OFFERED A CHANCE TO LIVE ON THEIR OWN IN WHAT'S CALLED SCATTERED SITE SUPPORTED HOUSING.

BASICALLY, A CHANCE TO LIVE INDEPENDENTLY, THE SAME AS ANYONE ELSE WOULD, IN AN APARTMENT WITH SOME SERVICES IN PLACE.

THE IDEA IS THAT YOU WILL HAVE A TEAM OF PROFESSIONALS, EACH WITH THEIR OWN DISTINCT AREA OF EXPERTISE, THAT'S GOING TO HELP YOU MAKE THIS ADJUSTMENT INTO INDEPENDENT LIVING.

WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT THOSE SUPPORTS OFTEN FELL SHORT OF THE NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAD MOVED.

IN A NUMBER OF CASES, THERE WERE PEOPLE WHO HAD SUCH SEVERE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES THAT IT WAS QUESTIONABLE AS TO WHETHER THEY SHOULD HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO BEGIN WITH.

>> THAT TIES INTO THE TITLE OF THE FILM ITSELF, "THE RIGHT TO FAIL."

THAT'S PART OF THE SETTLEMENT WAS THAT NOT ONLY DO PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO TRY AND LIVE ON THEIR OWN, BUT THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO FAIL AT IT.

THE FILM MAKES CLEAR AS TO WHOSE FAULT THE FAILURES ARE.

>> RIGHT.

THROUGH THE SETTLEMENT, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THESE PEOPLE HAD BEEN DEPRIVED OF THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS.

THEY HAD BEEN SEGREGATED FROM THE REST OF SOCIETY AND FORCED TO LIVE IN GROUP HOMES THAT THEY DID NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO LIVE IN.

THEY HAD TO BE GIVEN THE CHANCE TO SUCCEED AND ALSO THE RIGHT TO FAIL ON THEIR OWN.

THAT'S WHERE THE TIGTLE COMES FROM.

YOU HEAR IT DESCRIBED AS THE DIGNITY OF RISK.

OBVIOUSLY, WITH PEOPLE AS COMPROMISED AS THESE FOLKS, THERE IS INHERENTLY GOING TO BE RISK INVOLVED IN THEIR LIVING ON THEIR OWN, WHICH IS WHY YOU NEED A STRONG SUPPORT SYSTEM INTACT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY SUCCEED.

>> TO SORT OF LAY BARE WHAT YOU WERE FINDING AS TO WHAT WAS GOING ON, THERE WERE CASES THAT YOU FOLLOWED VERY CLOSELY, AND ONE THAT SEEMED TO BE THE MOST ENGAGING WAS THAT OF A GENTLEMAN, MR.

BUNCH.

TELL US ABOUT HIM.

>> WE WERE TOLD EARLY ON ABOUT A PERSON NAMED NESTOR BUNCH, WHOSE EXPERIENCE IN SUPPORTED HOUSING SEEMED TO REFLECT MANY OF THE BIGGEST SHORTCOMINGS.

HE HAD MOVED INTO A NUMBER OF APARTMENTS OVER THE COURSE OF ABOUT 15 OR SO MONTHS.

THE FIRST ONE, IT WAS HIS FIRST APARTMENT LIVING ON HIS OWN.

THIS IS A PERSON WITH SERIOUS SCHIZOPHRENIA WHO HALLUCINATES, HEARS VOICES, WHO HAS NEVER BEFORE LIVED BY HIMSELF.

HE MOVED INTO THIS APARTMENT WHERE HE HAD TROUBLE KEEPING ENOUGH FOOD STOCKED IN HIS REFRIGERATOR, KEEPING UP WITH PAYING BILLS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

HE FELL INTO A PRETTY SERIOUS DEPRESSION.

HE BEGAN TO HAVE SUICIDAL THOUGHTS.

HE WAS HOSPITALIZED FOR THAT.

THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN HIS CARE, THE SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES INVOLVED IN HIS CARE DECIDED WHAT HE NEEDED WAS TO LIVE WITH A ROOMMATE.

THEY PAIRED HIM WITH A MAN NAMED BERNARD WALKER.

THAT PAIRING LASTED A MATTER OF WEEKS.

NESTOR DISCOVERED BERNARD NAKED AND DEAD DURING A BLIZZARD IN THE FOYER OF THEIR APARTMENT BUILDING OUT IN JAMAICA QUEENS.

NESTOR SORT OF SPIRALED AGAIN.

HE WENT BACK INTO PSYCHIATRIC WARD.

CAME OUT.

MOVED IN WITH ANOTHER ROOMMATE.

THAT ROOMMATE FELT THAT HE WAS BEING ASKED TO TAKE CARE OF NESTOR.

HE WAS OVERWHELMED BY THAT.

WHICH HE DIDN'T FEEL HE DESERVED.

THEN NESTOR MOVED INTO ONE MORE APARTMENT.

THIS WAS OCCUPIED BY A PERSON WHO ALSO HAD SCHIZOPHRENIA, HAD A SERIOUS ALCOHOL PROBLEM.

ACTUALLY, A HISTORY OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

AS IT TURNS OUT, NESTOR WAS DISCOVERED IN THAT APARTMENT VERY SERIOUSLY INJURED.

HIS RIBS WERE BROKEN.

HE HAD KIDNEY DAMAGE.

EVEN THEN, THERE WAS AN EFFORT TO TRY TO KEEP HIM IN HIS OWN APARTMENT, IN INDEPENDENT HOUSING.

FINALLY, HE CAME OUT AND MOVED BACK INTO A GROUP HOME AND WAS DISCOVERED ON THE STREET AGAIN OUTSIDE OF A POLICE STATION WITH HYPOTHERMIA AND VERY SERIOUSLY DELUSIONAL.

WAS HOSPITALIZED.

NOW HE IS IN SORT OF A -- HE IS IN INDEPENDENT HOUSING.

BUT WITH MUCH MORE SERVICES IN PLACE.

HE IS DOING QUITE WELL.

>> I GUESS THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES, WHO IS REALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE PEOPLE ONCE THEY ARE PUT INTO THESE APARTMENTS?

IT SOUNDS LIKE NESTOR WAS ON HIS OWN.

>> THAT'S AN IMPORTANT QUESTION.

I THINK WHAT WE FOUND WAS THAT RESPONSIBILITY WAS DIFFUSED ACROSS SO MANY ACTORS THAT THERE'S AMPLE SPACE FOR FINGER POINTING AMONG ALL OF THEM.

THERE'S ONE CONTRACTOR THAT'S RESPONSIBLE FOR HOUSING.

THERE'S ANOTHER RESPONSIBLE FOR MEDICAL SERVICES.

THERE'S OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PSYCHIATRIC CARE.

THESE APARTMENTS ARE NOT ACTUALLY LICENSED BY THE OFFICE OF MENTAL HEALTH.

THE OFFICE OF MENTAL HEALTH DOES HAVE SOME RESPONSIBILITY TO OVERSEE SOME OF THE SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES.

THERE'S ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT ACTORS.

IT'S A DIZZYING ARRAY OF PEOPLE WHO EACH ARE SUPPOSED TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN CORNER OF THIS.

WHAT HAPPENS IS, IT'S VERY UNCLEAR WHO ULTIMATELY IS ACCOUNTABLE WHEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS GOES TERRIBLY WRONG.

>> FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR REPORTING.

I THINK THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT WE TALK SO MUCH ABOUT MENTALLY ILL PEOPLE IN NEW YORK CITY AND HOW BEST TO TREAT THEM.

BUT THIS IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT MOST PEOPLE, I'M SURE, DON'T KNOW ABOUT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR REPORTING.

OF COURSE, WE WILL BE LOOKING TO SEE IF SOMETHING COMES OF HAVING THIS STORY NOW BROADCAST.

>> YOU ARE WELCOME.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> THANK YOU.

♪ >> "METROFOCUS" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY --