Most agree there are insufficient resources to meet the needs of all homeless
people. How do we ensure that those few resources are used effectively for
those in greatest need?
HUD’s response is to base people’s eligibility on where they happen to find
refuge: with very few exceptions, HUD limits homeless assistance to people who
are on the street or are fortunate enough to find a shelter bed.
This approach excludes many of the most vulnerable people – specifically,
families and youth staying in motels, or with others temporarily because they
have nowhere else to go. These situations are unstable and often unsafe, putting
children at high risk of abuse, health problems, and educational deficits, thus
increasing the likelihood they will be homeless as adults..
Under the Federal laws they administer, public schools, Head Start programs,
and runaway youth programs include families and youth in these living situations
in their definition of homelessness.
Who are these families and youth? A parent struggling with mental illness, caring
for three young children with significant developmental delays, moving between
motels because there are no shelters in their community. A 17-year-old kicked
out of his home, staying with friends of friends, raped by the apartment owner,
not eating on weekends, whose high school found out only when he worked up
the courage to ask for food. These are real, but not extreme cases. They are
daily fare in schools across the country.
Where a person is sleeping is not the best measure of his or her vulnerability..
There are more effective ways of determining who is in greatest need. HUD’s
definition of homelessness should be amended to include families and youth who
are verified as homeless by public schools, Head Start programs, and runaway
youth programs. Then, with all homeless people eligible for assistance, local
communities can use a triage model to assess people’s relative needs,
considering factors such as income, employability, barriers to housing, illness,
disability, and children’s developmental delays – all of which are more relevant
than where they happened to land the previous night.
HUD's approach deprives communities of the flexibility to meet the needs of its
most vulnerable children and youth. Research on brain development makes clear
that adverse experiences in childhood can have lifelong impacts on physical and
mental health. Ignoring the urgency of child and youth development threatens to
create a new generation of homeless adults. We can and must do better.
Points left out:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Homeless families and youth move from shelter to motel to car to couch,
often at a moment’s notice
Families and youth in these situations are not a distinct population,
different from those staying in HUD shelters; in fact, they are often the
same people, with the same challenges and needs, but isolated from
services and hidden in communities. The HUD definition draws entirely
artificial distinctions between those who are in shelters and those who
may be living temporarily in substandard hotel or sleeping on the couch of
a stranger or acquaintance who can throw them out on the street at any
moment. IF THERE ARE WORDS TO ADD ONE MORE POINT, I’D ADD
THIS ONE. YOU COULD DO IT IN A SENTENCE AT THE END OF 3D
PARAGRAPH, LIKE “IT ALSO IGNORES HOMELESSNESS’S
INHERENT MOBILITY: YOUTH CAN MOVE FROM MOTEL TO THE
STREET TO DOUBLED UP ON A DAILY BASIS.”
Front-line providers know how to triage – they will not ignore a family in a
more dire situation in order to serve a family in a more stable situation.
And if HUD put in place a proper accountability system, no subpopulation
of people experiencing homelessness will be over-looked.
The ER doesn’t say, “We are only providing medical services to people
who slept in twin sized beds last night.”
Our approach creates a streamlined, efficient referral process, eliminating
the burdensome red tape of HUD’s current regulations. It imposes no
mandates, and costs nothing. It would simply allow local providers to
assess the full range of homeless situations without excluding many
children and youth.
LEA liaisons are trained to identify families that are doubled up due to
homelessness versus families that live doubled up for other reasons. The
ED definition does not cover families that are not homeless and we can
make that distinction, would it address the concern that limited funds
would be covering families that are not homeless or vulnerable?
The disparity in definitions causes confusion among those who work with
homeless children and deprives children and youth who don't have homes
of critical services.
The HUD definition draws entirely artificial distinctions between those who
are in shelters and those who may be living temporarily in substandard
hotel or sleeping on the couch of a stranger or acquaintance who can
throw them out on the street at any moment. Children living in hotels and
on staying on couches face greatly increased risks of physical abuse,
illness, failure in schools, etc. [throw in some stats.]
School numbers and statistics
LA study Youth who spent the night with a stranger were 3.6 times more
likely to be sexually active. Youth who spent the night at a shelter were 1.7
times more likely to use a condom at last sex, and youth who spent the
night with a stranger were 44% less likely to use a condom. Implications
spent the night with a stranger were 44% less likely to use a condom.
Implications. CAN THIS GO IN A FOOTNOTE WITHOUT COUNTING
TOWARD YOUR WORD LIMIT?