All Roads / Boulder Shelter — Records & Accountability

Why this investigation exists

People experiencing homelessness often have limited access to their own records, limited ability to challenge decisions, and limited visibility into how shelter access, Coordinated Entry, and housing pathways are handled on their behalf.

This page gathers the documents, communications, and research generated while William Lodge attempted to obtain his own client records, understand his Coordinated Entry status, and clarify the housing pathway he was told he was on. It is published in the belief that how a community treats requests like these is itself a matter of public interest.

Sequence of documents and events

Dates below are drawn from the documents themselves. Where a date is not clearly established, it is labeled accordingly.

The documents

Every record, email, research document, and resource in this investigation. Use the search box or filters to narrow by type.

Read carefully — and conservatively

The statements below are framed as what the documents appear to indicate. They are not presented as proven conclusions.

• The email chain indicates the organization confirmed that certain records exist — one case-management note, shelter-stay records totaling roughly 100 days, three October capacity turnaways, locker-related log entries, and a returned-phone entry — but did not provide full copies of them.
• The records appear to show the organization took the position that, as a private corporation, much of the requested information is “privileged,” and that it did not understand itself to be required to provide the records.
• The correspondence indicates the organization directed database records to a regional HMIS administrator and a county open-records portal, describing itself as a third-party administrator of those systems.
• The documents appear to show the first-stay date was first stated as September 21, 2025 and later corrected to August 5, 2024 — a material change to the documented history.
• The county’s reply indicates Boulder County contracts with community partners for Coordinated Entry and does not hold direct access to individual records, creating a referral loop.
• Based on the attached records, a reported locker/property incident — including the loss of a laptop — appears to have generated no incident report or documentation that was provided in response to the request.

What still needs clarification

These are open, good-faith questions raised by the documents — not accusations.

• What complete records does the organization maintain about shelter guests, and what is the process for a participant to inspect and correct them?
• What records about a participant are stored in HMIS, County Connect, or Coordinated Entry — and how can the participant obtain copies of them?
• Why were full copies of the records the organization confirmed exist not provided, and what specific legal basis supports withholding each category?
• If the organization acts as a third-party administrator of HMIS and County Connect, what is its responsibility to facilitate access rather than only redirect the request?
• What documentation, if any, exists for the reported locker assignments, property removal, and laptop loss — and if none exists, why not?
• What is the participant’s current Coordinated Entry status and prioritization, and what concretely would change it?
• Given the organization’s public funding and contracts, which records are subject to open-records obligations, and which agency is ultimately responsible for responding?

If you represent an agency or organization