Sheltered Inc. lawsuit: Funder says there will be ‘only losers on both sides’

After the closure of the Executive Inn and withdrawal of Homefull from the Springfield area, Sheltered Inc. is now the only provider of shelters for people experiencing homelessness who do not necessarily face the threat of violence.

“I understand the county’s position that there were funds spent out of the wrong money source, but there is no denying that services were rendered, people were sheltered and people were fed,” Calabrese said. “Now they may have been sheltered and they may have been fed out of the wrong column, but nonetheless the citizens of Clark County understand this and understand that the county commissioners, while they want to ensure that funding was properly spent, they can also rest assured people were housed and fed.”

Clark County last week filed a civil lawsuit against Sheltered Inc. for breach of contract and is seeking reimbursement of more than $500,000. This lawsuit stems from a county allegation that the nonprofit mismanaged funds for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) or Prevention, Retention and Contingency (PRC) services, a program through the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services that provides work support and other services to low-income families that is funded through TANF.

Sheltered Inc. provides emergency shelter to single adults and families. The nonprofit serves as the community’s access point, meaning individuals and families at risk of or experiencing homelessness first go to the nonprofit, which will then help place them either in its own shelters or another location. It has funding to operate through an agreement with OIC of Clark County.

Sheltered Inc. became the sole shelter provider again after the city and county earlier this month terminated their contracts with Dayton-based homelessness nonprofit Homefull, which was operating the Executive Inn family shelter.

On Aug. 5, the city held a sometimes contentious emergency meeting to vote whether to fund Homefull’s continuing operation of the shelter at a cost of up to $1,047,436 of federal funds, with the option to renew for three more one-year periods. City commissioners voted down the proposal 3-2.

Since then, Calabrese said all families and individuals removed from the Executive Inn on Aug. 6 who wanted or needed help have been placed in Sheltered Inc. shelters or at the Quality Inn hotel. He said the county should work towards solutions for the future, and that everyone will be better off when Sheltered Inc. gets stabilized.

“It affects our whole spirit as a community,” Calabrese said.

Calabrese said OIC has funding to “probably” take people enrolled in the shelter in October through November as the situation currently stands. That raises questions about the cold-weather months.

At Tuesday’s regular city commission meeting, City Commissioner Bridget Houston, who voted to approve the Homefull contract along with Mayor Rob Rue, said that without Sheltered Inc., there would be no plan to address homelessness, though she said there is no concrete plan moving forward.

“I truly hope we can work together with all community entities to develop that,” Houston said.

City Commissioner Tracey Tackett, who voted no on the Homefull proposal, said at Tuesday’s meeting that a potential closing date for Sheltered Inc. is looming.

“I am disheartened to hear there is nobody working on this, well it feels like nobody’s working on this ...” Tackett said.

In response to concerns about how residents of the Executive Inn were abruptly removed from the shelter, City Manager Bryan Heck said at the meeting that it was a decision with Homefull for safety reasons, because after the contract was turned down, there was no provider at the shelter monitoring who came in and out, and providing other necessary services.

“It’s not safe for anyone involved in that situation for them to just stay in there with no operator,” Heck said.

The county lawsuit alleges that Sheltered Inc. did not provide proper documentation for reimbursements, and submitted invoices for expenses not allowed under the program, including staff salaries, utilities, rent, insurance, office supplies, gasoline, facility maintenance/repairs, contracted personnel, hotels, gas cards, bus passes, meals and birth records.

Sheltered Inc. representatives have previously disputed the allegations and pointed to a lack of proper monitoring by the Clark County Department of Job and Family Services. The issues were reportedly found through a state audit of the Department of Job and Family Services.

Sheltered Inc. did not return requests for additional comment for this story.

In February last year, Clark County terminated a portion of a $700,000 contract with Sheltered Inc. — of which about $495,000 was reimbursed — which county officials said was due to “multiple violations” regarding the reimbursement of funds found following a review. But Sheltered Inc. disputed the allegations.

The county entered into an agreement with the Ohio Attorney General in November 2023 to collect money it said is owed by Sheltered Inc., requiring the nonprofit to pay back more than $500,000.

According to Sheltered Inc., the issue was sent back to Clark County by the attorney general earlier this year, but the county has not scheduled any meetings or otherwise made “any attempts to address the purported issues and their resolution.”