No result found
Chicago Coalition for the Homeless;
As Chicago waits to hear whether it will be chosen to host the 2016 Olympics, it is importantfor housing advocates to be aware of how housing rights have been impacted in other Olympic host cities around the globe. While the Olympics are an opportunity to showcase a city to the world, the development that comes with hosting the games can often have very negative consequences, particularly for poor and marginalized people.Looking at the past 20 years of experiences of Olympic host cities, what is revealed are some rather devastating impacts on housing rights. In fact, all cities that have hosted the Olympic Games suffer similar negative consequences.
Hollywood Homeless Youth Partnership;
This policy brief, "Towards a National Housing Strategy for Homeless Youth", is part of a series developed by the Hollywood Homeless Youth Partnership (HHYP) to advance policy and practice recommendations focused on preventing and ending youth homelessness. This brief emerges from "No Way Home: Understanding the Needs and Experiences of Homeless Youth in Hollywood", a report released by the HHYP in November 2010 presenting findings from a multi-method needs assessment conducted with 389 homeless youth ages 12 to 25 in the Hollywood community.The purpose of this brief is to address the inadequacies of prioritizing permanent housing as the only solution for homeless youth, identify the major limitations of our existing housing programs, and advocate for developing a national housing strategy and funding a full housing continuum for homeless young people that is responsive to their unique needs and circumstances. This brief is being released at a time of unprecedented interest in the issue of youth homelessness -- we hope it will inform federal and local planning and decision-making and help advance our national agenda of preventing and ending youth homelessness.
Examines New York City residents' perceptions of homelessness and housing issues. Includes detailed survey results and a breakdown of interview responses according to borough of residence.
Heartland Alliance National Initiatives on Poverty & Economic Opportunity;
In order to realize long-term benefits for individuals, employers, and communities, employers and community-based organizations serving people experiencing homelessness need to have tools, resources, and partnerships established to identify, recruit, prepare, and support people experiencing homelessness for employment success. This brief offers promising practices for employers and community-based housing and homeless service organizations that want to maximize their success in creating pathways to employment and economic opportunity for homeless jobseekers.
Poverty Solutions at the University of Michigan;
Children need stability to thrive, but for the more than 36,000 children in Michigan's elementary, middle and high schools who face homelessness, stability is often elusive. Under federal education law all children and youth who "lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence" are homeless. These children not only lack a stable place to call home, they are more likely to transfer schools, have long commutes, struggle with poor health, and be chronically absent than their non-homeless peers. All of these daily challenges place homeless students at a greater risk for not meeting grade-level standards and for dropping out of school. Recent research in the State of Michigan has shown homelessness among children to be a key factor predicting student achievement in both rural and urban areas, yet little attention has been given, thus far, to understanding where homeless students in Michigan attend school and how their needs might differ depending on their geographic location. This policy brief seeks to fill that gap so that policymakers and local stakeholders can begin to think about the impact of homelessness in their area and to identify resources to support some of the State's most vulnerable children. Data for this brief comes from school year 2015-16 administrative records collected by every school under the mandate of the Federal McKinney-Vento Act, a law which guarantees homeless student's right to an education.
Cottage Housing Incorporated;
Poverty is a well-documented risk factor for family involvement with child protective services and other elements of the child welfare system.Recent studies show that homeless families have higher rates of being involved in the child welfare system than the general population.However, there is little known about how supportive housing programs for homeless families can affect their long-term outcomes.This report describes the outcome evaluation of Cottage Housing Incorporated's Serna Village program in Sacramento, California. Serna Village is a supportive housing program serving homeless families. Outcomes from the program illustrate that it is possible to end recidivism into the child welfare system for homeless families by providing them with permanent housing and comprehensive support services. Although homeless and marginally housed families have high support and case management services can prevent these disenfranchised families from re-entering the foster care system.The intervention of supportive housing -- housing and services focused on the unique needs of adults and their children exiting homelessness -- may break the cycle of abuse and neglect among these families.Conducted in 2011, this study involved a sample of 293 children and youth from approximately 150 families who lived with one or more parents in Cottage Housing Incorporated's Serna Village between 2002 and 2009, thefirst seven years of the program.The findings from this study indicate that comprehensive supportive housing programs following a best-practice model can provide homeless parents and their children with stable living for a significant period of time. Supportive housing programs also may give homeless parents an opportunity to find and maintain employment, work on their education, save a substantial amount of money for move-out costs, learn daily living skills, experience a real-world living situation and prevent re-entry into the child welfare system. The outcomes from this study may help inform policymakers and child welfare administrators with recommendations to better assist marginalized families and save valuable funding dollars.
The Boston Foundation;
Evaluates lessons learned from the first three years of the Homelessness Prevention Initiative (HPI), which studies successful models of homelessness prevention and has distributed $3 million in grants to service agencies to test new program strategies.
Coalition for the Homeless;
New York City reached a grim new milestone at the close of 2017: Last December, an average of 63,495 men, women, and children slept in City homeless shelters each night – an all-time record. To put this in context, only nine cities in the entire state of New York have populations larger than New York City's sheltered homeless population. Three-quarters of New Yorkers sleeping in shelters are members of homeless families, including 23,600 children. An 82 percent increase in homelessness over the past decade speaks to the severe shortage of affordable housing – fed by the combination of rising rents and stagnating incomes – along with devastating policy decisions that have limited access to affordable and supportive housing for homeless and extremely low-income New Yorkers. State of the Homeless 2018 articulates the steps necessary for the City and State to make a meaningful and lasting impact on this tragedy of historic proportions.
National Center on Employment and Homelessness (NCEH);
Presentation slides from the first IncomeNOW training "Creating Opportunity for Homeless Jobseekers: Connecting Income, Employment, and Housing Supports" held on March 22nd and 23rd 2016 in Houston TX. The slides provide information on the importance of earned income as a pathway for individuals and families to exit homelessness, remain housed, and improve overall health and wellbeing.
Wilder Research Center;
A study of supportive housing in Minnesota, including time-limited transitional housing and permanent supportive housing. The study looked at the characteristics of the programs and the populations they serve, outcomes achieved by participants over time, and the program models that appear to work best for participants.
Context: Chronically homeless individuals with severe alcohol problems often have multiple medical and psychiatric problems and use costly health and criminal justice services at high rates.Objective: To evaluate association of a ?Housing First? intervention for chronically homeless individuals with severe alcohol problems with health care use and costs.Design, Setting, and Participants: Quasi-experimental design comparing 95 housed participants (with drinking permitted) with 39 wait-list control participants enrolled between November 2005 and March 2007 in Seattle, Washington.Main Outcome Measures: Use and cost of services (jail bookings, days incarcerated, shelter and sobering center use, hospital-based medical services, publicly funded alcohol and drug detoxification and treatment, emergency medical services, and Medicaid-funded services) for Housing First participants relative to wait-list controls.Results: Housing First participants had total costs of $8 175 922 in the year prior to the study, or median costs of $4066 per person per month (interquartile range [IQR], $2067-$8264). Median monthly costs decreased to $1492 (IQR, $337-$5709) and $958 (IQR, $98-$3200) after 6 and 12 months in housing, respectively. Poisson generalized estimating equation regressions using propensity score adjustments showed total cost rate reduction of 53% for housed participants relative to wait-list controls (rate ratio, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.88) over the first 6 months. Total cost offsets for Housing First participants relative to controls averaged $2449 per person per month after accounting for housing program costs.Conclusions: In this population of chronically homeless individuals with high service use and costs, a Housing First program was associated with a relative decrease in costs after 6 months. These benefits increased to the extent that participants were retained in housing longer.Concerns about high public system costs incurred by chronically homeless individuals have inspired nationwide efforts to eliminate chronic homelessness. Homeless people have high barriers to health care access generally but use acute care services at high rates. Mortality rates among homeless adults are 3 or more times that of the general population.Chronically homeless people with severe alcohol problems, sometimes referred to as chronic public inebriates, are highly visible on the streets and are costly to the public through high use of publicly funded health and criminal justice systems resources. Typical interventions such as shelters, abstinence-based housing, and treatment programs fail to reverse these patterns for this population. Health conditions and mortality rates within this population are similar to those found in developing countries. Average age at death is estimated to be 42 to 52 years, with 30% to 70% of deaths related to alcohol.The provision of housing reduces hospital visits, admissions, and duration of hospital stays among homeless individuals, and overall public system spending is reduced by nearly as much as is spent on housing. One type of supportive housing, called Housing First, removes the requirements for sobriety, treatment attendance, and other barriers to housing entrance. Thus far, Housing First (HF) approaches have primarily targeted homeless people with serious mental illnesses and co-occurring substance use disorders.An HF program in Seattle?known as 1811 Eastlake?targets homeless adults with severe alcohol problems who use local crisis services at the highest levels. The project has been controversial because residents are allowed to drink in their rooms. The current study evaluated outcomes of the project on public use and costs for housed participants compared with wait-list controls and secondarily evaluated changes in reported alcohol use for housed participants and the effects of housing duration on service use.
Community Development Project at the Urban Justice Center;
The near-universal standard for affordable housing requires that tenants pay no more than 30 percent of their income towards rent. In New York State, only one low-income housing program denies tenants this standard affordable housing protection -- the HIV/AIDS rental assistance program.Low-income people living with HIV/AIDS and their families in New York City's "independent living" rental assistance program are forced to pay upwards of 70 percent of their disability income towards rent, well above what is considered affordable housing or a sustainable rent share burden. As a result, hundreds of low-income New Yorkers living with HIV/AIDS are homeless and thousands more are on the brink of losing their homes. In addition, chronically ill people are forced to make difficult trade-offs between medical care, food and other essential needs in order to pay their rent each month.Many are unable to continue this difficult balancing act and become homeless, with all the risks to their health -- and to HIV prevention efforts -- that homelessness entails. Homelessness can be a virtual a death sentence for a person living with HIV/AIDS. It jeopardizes the success of other interventions to fight the HIV/AIDS epidemic, making it harder for people living with HIV/AIDS to adhere to medication and medical appointments, adopt proper nutrition, and practice safer sex and other forms of HIV prevention.A simple solution -- and one that has broad bi-partisan support in the state legislature -- is to ensure that homeless and formerly homeless people living with HIV/AIDS pay no more than 30 percent of their income towards their rent if they already qualify for rental assistance. This report outlines why this is not only humane and just, but also a highly effective public health intervention that will produce cost-savings for taxpayers.