Homelessness is one of those issues where conversations can quickly become political, emotional, or overly simplified. Some argue that government is not spending enough. Others look at rising budgets and continuing homelessness and wonder whether the money is accomplishing what taxpayers were promised.
There is a more basic question residents should be able to ask:
What are we doing, how much are we spending, and is it working?
Washington’s counties recently completed new five-year homeless housing plans covering 2025 through 2030. These are not simply optional planning exercises. State law requires counties to develop local homeless housing plans consistent with guidance from the Washington Department of Commerce, and reports on accomplishments are due annually. Commerce also collects county expenditure and performance information.
That makes 2026 an important year. We are moving out of the planning stage and into the period where residents should begin seeing whether projects are actually moving forward.
For Legislative District 24, that means looking separately at Clallam, Jefferson and Grays Harbor counties because each county is taking a noticeably different approach.
Clallam County: Programs Are Operating, but Better Measurement Is Still Needed
Clallam County already has a network of homelessness programs, funding agreements and service providers in place. Its Homelessness Task Force is responsible not only for helping set priorities for available money, but also for monitoring and evaluating programs receiving public funds.
That oversight responsibility is important because the county has acknowledged that it needs better tools for tracking implementation and results.
Clallam adopted its 2025-2030 Homeless Housing Plan, but county materials have also identified the need for clearer implementation timelines, prioritized projects and better measurement of progress.
The county’s 2026 adopted budget continues separate funding categories for affordable housing and the Homelessness Task Force, demonstrating that homelessness and housing remain an ongoing county responsibility rather than a temporary program.
There are tangible projects underway.
One is a safe-parking program intended to provide temporary locations for people living in vehicles while they work toward more permanent housing.
Another major project involves Serenity House of Clallam County and the proposed replacement of the aging Sunbelt Apartments property in Sequim with a larger permanent supportive housing development.
Clallam is therefore not starting from scratch. Money is being allocated and programs are operating.
The accountability question is more specific:
What measurable result should residents expect from each investment?
That means looking beyond how many people receive services. Residents should eventually be able to see how many people entered permanent housing, how long they remained homeless before being housed, how many returned to homelessness, and what programs produced the strongest results.
Commerce already collects many of those types of measurements statewide. Its homelessness reporting system combines expenditure information with Homeless Management Information System data, giving Washington the ability to look at spending alongside outcomes.
Clallam’s Homelessness Task Force page currently includes the five-year plan, a 2025 Coordinated Entry report and other background reports. What is less visible publicly is a detailed implementation document showing exactly which portions of the five-year plan have been completed, which are underway and which remain unfunded.
That is something worth watching as the first annual reporting cycle under the new plan approaches.
Jefferson County: Follow the Money and the Caswell-Brown Project
Jefferson County may be the easiest of the three counties to track against specific deadlines because its 2025-2030 Homeless and Affordable Housing Services Plan contains a detailed timeline of actions and milestones.
The plan includes work on homelessness prevention, tenant resources, supportive housing, emergency housing, affordable housing capacity and changes to local housing oversight.
One project deserves particular attention: Caswell-Brown Village.
Caswell-Brown has become an important part of Jefferson County’s homelessness response, and in 2026 additional public money was redirected to the project.
A May 4, 2026 county agenda shows that Jefferson County approved an amendment adding $92,674 in unspent 2025 funding to a $171,000 2026 award, bringing the Caswell-Brown Village award to $263,674.
That followed a March special meeting of the Jefferson County Housing Fund Board specifically called to consider OlyCAP’s request to use unspent 2025 awards for the Caswell-Brown project.
There is nothing inherently improper about redirecting unused funding. In fact, moving money toward a project that can use it may be sensible.
But residents should be able to follow the entire trail:
Why was the original money unspent? What specific work will the additional Caswell-Brown funding accomplish? When will that work be finished? What additional funding will be needed afterward?
Those are ordinary accountability questions.
Jefferson County’s Housing Fund Board meets regularly and operates jointly with the City of Port Townsend to support affordable and homeless housing programs. That gives residents a public forum where funding decisions and progress can be followed.
Jefferson also has an advantage from an accountability standpoint because its five-year plan includes milestones rather than simply broad goals.
When a plan says a certain action should occur during 2026, residents can later ask a very simple question:
Did it happen?
That is much easier to evaluate than a goal such as “improve coordination” without a specific deadline or measurable outcome.
Grays Harbor County: The Clearest Test of Spending Versus Results
Grays Harbor may ultimately provide the most interesting case study.
The county formally adopted its 2025-2030 Homeless Housing Plan in December 2025, and released it publicly in March 2026. The county says the plan includes measurable goals involving affordable housing, emergency shelter, supportive services, homelessness prevention and coordination among service providers.
The amount of public money involved is substantial.
Grays Harbor County’s 2025 Homeless Housing Fund budget totaled approximately $9.28 million, with about $6.61 million appropriated for services and administration.
That does not mean $9.28 million was necessarily spent during the year. A fund budget includes appropriations and available fund resources, and the distinction matters.
But it demonstrates the scale of the public resources involved.
Grays Harbor is also more transparent than many jurisdictions when it comes to historic system performance. Public Health has posted a series of annual homeless-system performance reports, with the newest listed report covering July 2024 through June 2025.
That creates an opportunity to look at trends instead of judging the system from one year’s numbers.
At the same time, Grays Harbor acknowledges the scale of its housing problem. County Public Health has reported that only about one in four residents identified as homeless is able to obtain a safe place to live, while people needing subsidized housing can face waits exceeding three years.
One concrete 2026 development is a modular housing feasibility project.
NeighborWorks of Grays Harbor says it received a county Health Department grant to study development of vacant land it owns in south Aberdeen. The feasibility study is examining whether the property could support up to 15 modular housing units, with completion expected around September 2026. NeighborWorks says another funding phase would then be necessary for utilities and site preparation.
This is exactly the type of project taxpayers should be able to follow from beginning to end:
How much did the study cost? What did it determine? How much will site preparation cost? Will additional public money be required? How many units are ultimately constructed, and when do people actually move into them?
Another unresolved issue is emergency shelter.
Grays Harbor previously sought proposals for investment in permanent emergency shelter property. The county’s housing information still answers the question of whether a permanent shelter site has been established with: No specific site has been discussed or approved.
That makes permanent shelter capacity another measurable issue to watch during the five-year-plan period.
The Bigger Question Is Outcomes, Not Just Spending
None of this tells us that the counties are spending too much, spending too little, or following the wrong approach.
Homelessness is affected by many factors, including housing supply, rent, employment, behavioral-health needs, disabilities, domestic violence, substance-use disorders, family circumstances and the availability of supportive services.
Likewise, an increase in homelessness does not automatically prove that a program failed. It is possible that conditions would have become worse without the program.
But that does not remove the responsibility to measure results.
Washington already collects information designed to help do exactly that. Counties report homeless-housing expenditures, while Commerce maintains performance data intended to show what happens after people enter the homelessness-response system.
Residents should therefore be asking more precise questions:
How many people entered permanent housing?
How many returned to homelessness?
How long were people homeless before receiving housing?
What did successful housing outcomes cost?
Which programs consistently produce better results?
Which programs are falling short of their targets?
And when a county establishes a five-year goal, is that goal actually being completed on schedule?
Those questions are not anti-homeless, anti-government, pro-government or partisan.
They are the questions anyone should ask when public money is being used to address a serious community problem.
December 2026 Could Be an Important Checkpoint
The next major opportunity for accountability is approaching.
Commerce requires reports on accomplishments under local homeless housing plans annually.
That means the new 2025-2030 plans should increasingly provide something residents have often lacked: a way to compare what government said it would do against what actually happened.
For LD24, we should watch three things closely.
In Clallam County, look for clearer implementation timelines and measurable outcomes tied to its existing programs and housing investments.
In Jefferson County, follow Caswell-Brown Village, the use of redirected funding, and whether the numerous 2026 milestones contained in the county’s plan were completed.
In Grays Harbor County, watch the modular housing project, efforts to establish permanent shelter capacity, the county’s substantial Homeless Housing Fund, and whether system-performance measurements begin showing sustained improvement.
The goal should not simply be to count dollars.
It should be to understand what those dollars accomplish.
When government says a program is working, residents should be able to see the evidence. When something is not working, officials and service providers should have enough information to change course.
And when millions of dollars are devoted to one of the most persistent problems facing our communities, asking for measurable results is not unreasonable.
It is responsible government.
Sources
Washington State Department of Commerce, State Strategic Plan, Annual Reports and Audits
Commerce homelessness planning and annual reports
Washington State Department of Commerce, County Plans and Annual Reports
Commerce county plans and reports
Washington State Department of Commerce, Housing Reports and Publications
Commerce housing data and expenditure reports
Clallam County, Homelessness Task Force
Clallam County Homelessness Task Force
Clallam County, 2026 Adopted Budget
Clallam County 2026 adopted budget
Jefferson County, 2025-2030 Homeless and Affordable Housing Services Plan
Jefferson County five-year housing plan
Jefferson County, May 4, 2026 Board of Commissioners agenda, Caswell-Brown Village funding amendment
Jefferson County May 4 agenda
Jefferson County, Housing Fund Board
Jefferson County Housing Fund Board
Grays Harbor County, 2025-2030 Homeless Housing Plan announcement
Grays Harbor County five-year plan
Grays Harbor County Public Health, Homeless Housing Task Force and Housing Programs
Grays Harbor Homeless Housing Task Force
Grays Harbor County, 2025 Adopted Budget
Grays Harbor County 2025 budget
NeighborWorks of Grays Harbor, Modular Housing Feasibility Project
NeighborWorks of Grays Harbor