We Used Three Different Systems. Here's How We Finally Picked One.

The Mess

Street outreach used one database. The shelter used another. Our housing navigators had spreadsheets. Everyone insisted their system was fine and the others should switch.

Meetings about this went nowhere. Someone would present a "solution," someone else would explain why it wouldn't work for their team, and we'd all go back to our desks annoyed.

The Breakthrough

Our ED finally called a time-out. "We're not talking about systems anymore," she said. "We're talking about what information each team needs to do their job."

That reframe changed everything. Suddenly we weren't defending territories. We were mapping workflows. What does outreach need to know before they hit the streets? What does the shelter need when someone walks in? What does housing need to place someone successfully?

What We Discovered

Most of our data needs overlapped. We were entering the same information in three places because nobody had asked the obvious question: what if we just shared it?

The integration wasn't perfect. Some fields didn't map cleanly. Some teams had to change their processes. But once we understood what we were actually trying to accomplish, the software decisions got easier.

The Lesson

Technology arguments are usually process arguments in disguise. We spent two years debating platforms when we should have been asking: how do we work together?

Figure that out first. The technology follows.