Federal Continuum of Care (CoC) grants fund homelessness-specific housing and services. Do not exclude CoC-supported units from homelessness-related counts merely because the operating subsidy is federal rather than LOSP.
Keep separate fields for population served, funding source, and referral authority. CoC funding alone does not prove a specific unit is HSH Coordinated Entry referred; verify property-level admissions.
Example: Star View Court, 78 Johnson St — a 2022 financing analysis documented 71 CoC-supported units and contemplated LOSP backup if CoC grants were not renewed. This is historical funding evidence, not confirmation of current subsidy.
See V235_COC_CLASSIFICATION_RESEARCH.md in archive.
V232: Scattered-site / voucher pathways (no invented pins)
Known HSH/DPH building set-asides may be mapped at documented property addresses. Scattered-site destinations without verified public addresses are not plotted; citywide service coverage is not a property location.
Distinct pathways: HSH Housing Ladder / Moving On; HUD Housing Choice Vouchers; Flexible Housing Subsidy Pool scattered-site supportive housing; Emergency Housing Voucher transition. Overlap in administrators does not establish identical eligibility, funding or case management.
See V232_PROGRAM_PATHWAYS.csv and V232_PROGRAM_RESEARCH.md in the ZIP for dated sources and unresolved questions.
San Francisco HSH / DPH Facilities — Interactive Research Map (V371)
A reconciled, one-point-per-physical-site GIS inventory derived from the earlier 431-record map and a broader 444-site historical master. Current operating layer audited through October 2026.
San Francisco supportive housing and referral research — 413 mapped properties, including planned sites.
431 → 410record-level map to audited current-site layer
Interactive map
Click a marker for the facility record. Search filters the displayed points. “Current” means best-supported operating status in the October 2026 audit; it does not necessarily mean a site was accepting new clients on a particular day.
How the inventory changed
Original map431program-level records
ReconciliationDedupedsame-property and multi-program records consolidated
2026 audit−7old-map physical sites confirmed no longer operating
Completeness work+11current sites absent from the original 431
Final current layer410unique operating physical sites
The arithmetic is not a simple “431 minus 21 closures.” The original map contained duplicate/program-level entries, while the current inventory also gained legitimate sites that the earlier map did not contain. A separate 444-site historical master preserves current, closed, and temporary facilities so historical work is not lost.
The HTML contains all 413 map records internally, so the map data remain present even if the separate CSV/JSON files are moved. The Leaflet basemap itself requires an internet connection.
What went into this
This layer is the end product of a multi-stage reconciliation rather than a simple address list. Work included combining HSH, DPH, supportive-housing, shelter, behavioral-health and harm-reduction records; reconciling aliases and alternate street addresses; distinguishing programs from physical properties; consolidating multiple programs and floors within the same building; researching relocations and changed uses; adding missing current sites; preserving temporary and closed sites in a separate historical master; checking 2026 operating status; and resolving coordinates for every retained site.
During the historical build, 205 timeline events were reconciled against the earlier master, temporary facilities such as Safe Sleeping Sites and emergency hotels were researched, same-property duplicates were consolidated, and coordinate provenance/confidence was retained where possible. The result is designed for GIS analysis: one mapped point per physical site, while aliases, programs and historical context remain attached to the record.
Methodological caution: proximity on a map does not establish that an incident, overdose, arrest, service call or other event was caused by or connected to a facility. Spatial comparisons should be described as proximity or association unless independent evidence establishes a relationship.
431-to-410 reconciliation graphic
This graphic is explanatory. The final CSV/JSON/GeoJSON and map records are authoritative for individual facility names, addresses and coordinates; some small address text in the generated illustration may not match the final database.
V233 verified allocations: known buildings vs scattered-site destinations
MOHCD documents 730 Stanyan: 32 HSH Coordinated Entry units (including 19 NPLH), 32 separate SFHA project-based voucher units, 95 DAHLIA lottery units, and one staff unit (2025 financing review). 967 Mission Senior is a proposed off-inventory candidate, not a new pin. HSH's 2025 youth report distinguishes 118 site-based PSH units from 322 scattered-site openings; scattered-site destinations remain unmapped.
See V233_SITE_BASED_SETASIDES.csv and V233_RESEARCH_MEMO.md for dated sources and caveats.
V239 research: Section 8, CoC and HSH referral overlays
SFHA’s 2025 voucher administrative plan distinguishes Housing Authority referrals from HSH Coordinated Entry referrals when a LOSP/TAY overlay applies. The LOSP manual separately documents operating subsidies, referral authority, and services funding. CoC is federally funded homelessness assistance; it must not be omitted from the homelessness inventory. These program-level rules do not establish a specific building’s current unit mix.