Where to Homeless?

Where to Put the Homeless?  Two Paths to Choose From

By: Thomas Hansen, Ph.D.

 

The solutions for where to place the homeless seem to divide into two major approaches.  The problem of finding housing for the homeless is like a big and foreboding puzzle.  The first approach is basing the intervention on the current model: shelters.  The plan is to continue the use of a variety of shelters and similar facilities, based on the government-supported model with block grants and budget lines that provide funds to non-profit shelters and agencies to help this population with housing and other needs. 

The second is to try something new.  Something new.  For example, the powers that be can try innovative and alternative solutions with existing structures within the city, such as the use of hotel rooms and large spaces available in mostly-empty buildings like armories.  Both of these solutions were explored recently by the mayor’s office during the first “stay at home” plea issued by Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot.  Another new approach under the second category is to build new kinds of structures.  Still more pieces of this puzzle are looking at things in a new way, coming up with plans, and getting a wide variety of stakeholders involved in their intervention. 

Current Model

A definite problem with the current model is that there are simply not enough “spaces” in a traditional shelter for homeless persons.  There are slightly different types of facilities.  Some are simply large rooms with beds.  There are common showers, and there are common toilet areas.  The number of residents varies. 

Other shelters are for specific types of residents, such as those for homeless persons fleeing a violent spouse.  Organizations like “Connections for Abused Women and Their Children” provide emergency services and housing to residents who need to hide from someone who intends to harm them and their kids (Programs for Abused Women - Domestic Violence Programs | CAWC).   

One slight problem with the first approach is that many, many homeless people simply do not want to go to shelters.  No “decision-makers” know what to do about that fact.  The decision-makers have to ignore this reality when they expand shelters, or try to establish new ones, or try to improve/champion/beef up the current shelter stock that is already out there, with the idea that the shelters everything is “hunky-dory” with the current system and facilities.

Several people I have talked to recently do not want to go to a traditional homeless shelter – ever.  They have a wide variety of reasons.  Some are afraid to go.  Some are avoiding “the law” and do not wish to reveal where they are.  Others have been raped or robbed in shelters.  Others have heard stories of “things that happen there.”  There is a strong force out there telling some homeless people to find other places to go – safe or unsafe – to avoid going to a shelter.  Some of the persons I have spoken to have reasons that are not very rational-sounding ones… and that is maybe a sign of some other thought or feelings the person is experiencing.  They perhaps need help from an agency that can help them sort out some of their issues or fears.  

What the decision-makers wish to do is force – through hook or crook – or simply just through refusal to change – everyone to accept the idea that the shelters are fine, homeless people must all go there, taxpayers must be made to believe that the shelters are fine, and there is no real problem.  Shelters should be expanded, slowly, and the model works – according to those who think traditional shelters are the answer.  They feel there is “no problem” overall and that the kinks in the system can be worked out over time.  They offer a range of explanations of why there are kinks – such as shelter employees who sexually harass the residents or who steal from the residents. 

Said one shelter employee (who refused to give her name) about issues that arise in the shelter, “We know it isn’t perfect but it has to work... it’s all we have available for people and it is what it is.”  This employee insisted that a big part of the difficulty comes from homeless people not doing what they are supposed to do when they come to the shelter.  Blaming the residents is a typical way to get out of addressing the pressing problems.

The attempt to Mitt Romney the problem out of existence by saying that all is well and saying that homeless people need to do what they are supposed to do is apparently not very helpful.  I base that conclusion on these facts:  1.  There are still people sleeping on the sidewalk in Chicago, even though the temperatures at night dip below 40 degrees;  2.  There are still people living in tents in several locations in and near the city;  and  3.  There are still people sleeping or napping or lounging anywhere they possibly can all over Chicago at all times of the night – and also during the day .  Hard-pressed to find good sleeping spots in which they can get enough sleep at night, these persons try to catch a little “shut-eye” anywhere and everywhere during the day.

Another slight problem is that putting homeless people into shelters gives them the Coronavirus and can kill them.  Lodging people a few feet from each other, having them share bathrooms, and forcing them to breathe the same air is a simple recipe for endangering them.  COVID-19 infection rates are up in places like the Franciscan shelter in Chicago.  At that shelter, throwing people indoors together has been a risky business.  At the start of December, there has been an increase in the number of cases.  Note this information: “About 65 guests have tested positive for COVID-19 since September at the Franciscan Outreach shelter in Lawndale, which currently houses 130 people, said Executive Director Richard Ducatenzeiler” (Coronavirus Outbreak At West Side Shelter Reveals Risks To People Who Are Homeless – Block Club Chicago). 

Many homeless people do not have consistent access to health care.  Many do not take vitamins.  Many have health issues.  Many do not exercise on a regular basis and have a strong immune system.  In the case of the Francsican Outreach shelter, they have stopped taking on additional residents now because of the increase in the virus.  Ducatenzeiler reminds us, “Homelessness makes it tough to live a healthy lifestyle, eat nutritious food and manage stress, so pre-existing medical conditions and underlying mental health challenges are common…”

Related to the use of the shelter is using other kinds of other existing structures.  A problem with that version of the first model is that there are only a handful of apartments and rooms available in this city for homeless persons, even though there are approximately 10,000 families in Chicago who do not have a place to live, according to an important 2018 study (Family homelessness in Chicago: 10,000 families, almost 80% doubled-up - Chicago Coalition for the Homeless (chicagohomeless.org).  Just as with the use of shelters, there simply are not enough “spaces” around.  Doing the math will produce scary results:  At the bare minimum, if a family consists of a person and partner/spouse, that means 20,000.  If that includes one child, the family now yields a number of 30,000 roughly.  This represents a lot of people.  Is there room for 30,000 in the shelters of Chicago?  The answer is clearly NO.  There is not enough room to house the homeless, currently.

By the way, the same study yields several important recommendations, put forth by the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless, Catholic Charities, Heartland Alliance, and other organizations.  Most of them have to do with making more funds available, increasing the number of persons served because there are so many of them out there.  And all of the recommendations center on using the shelter model as the basis for intervention.     

Innovative Model

There is a second and sometimes very controversial model being tried, and that is the use of innovative approaches, such as renting hotel rooms for the homeless.  For example, during the spring 2020 Chicago “stay-at-home” days, the city was placing homeless persons into motel rooms (Coronavirus: Chicago houses homeless people in hotels - Curbed Chicago).  There were 100 spaces used to isolate homeless persons who had tested positive for COVID-19 from other populations in the city – including homeless persons who had tested negative.  Persons who had not tested positive wound up in the regular shelters.   

The city also worked with the YMCA to find some spaces for the homeless.  Hundreds of spaced were freed up in the YMCAs within the city – the suburban facilities did not participate – and 400 persons were in the first round to access beds (Chicago homeless shelters get beds at YMCAs to ease coronavirus-related overcrowding (msn.com)).  This cooperation among agencies and the city is a welcome sign.  It shows, especially, an understanding that the homeless population consists of neighbors and taxpayers, persons valuable to the lives and destinies of other persons in the city.    

What about vacant buildings held by the Chicago Housing Authority?  Carlos Ballesteros in a Chicago Sun Times article tells us recently that housing advocates have pleaded that the CHA open up its 2,000 vacant units to people experiencing homelessness during the coronavirus pandemic.  Important to note is that Ballesteros tells us in that article, “Their demands come as homeless shelters across the city fear becoming overwhelmed in the coming days as between 30% and 45% of people tested positive for the virus at some locations (https://chicago.suntimes.com/city-hall/2020/4/21/21229695/coronavirus-covid-19-chicago-homeless-cha-housing).

What about miniature houses – are they a good idea?  A trendy idea has been the idea of constructing costly tiny houses as a way to create more spaces for the homeless.  What is a tiny house, exactly?  According to members of the “Tiny Life” “the typical small or tiny house definition is a home with square footage is between 100 and 400 square feet... While of course there aren’t any rules to joining the tiny house movement, when people refer to “the tiny life,” their tiny house generally falls under the 400 square foot level (https://thetinylife.com/what-is-the-tiny-house-movement/) 

Deanna Isaacs in the Chicago Reader has stated that the little houses come and go in popularity and recently came up related to possible solutions for housing the homeless (Chicago Reader: Are tiny houses a solution to homelessness in Chicago? - Chicago Coalition for the Homeless (chicagohomeless.org).  Isaacs tells how the conversation gets going now and then… various people weighing in and then the arguments eventually going away for a while.          

People in a variety of locations think the tiny mini-house approach is a valuable, purposeful, and contribution to the solutions to homelessness.  One Chicago-area carpenter, Alonzo "Short" Hall, thinks they are the answer.  He has built some of the structures (Chicago homeless: Carpenter uses skills to build tiny homes for those who need shelter - ABC7 Chicago). 

Like others in the mini-house movement, this carpenter will soon discover four huge barriers to the use of the little structures:  exorbitant cost; mountain-high time commitment; neighborhood residents’ rejection of the structures being built in their beloved community; and the fact that the cute little cottages are really just a tiny solution to a huge problem.  Use of mini-houses seems to be like putting a band aid over a hole in the hull of the Titanic:  effective for that particular hole, but not so great considering there is an ocean liner full of people racing toward the bottom of the sea.

 What about Mayor Lori Lightfoot?  What is her current plan to help the homeless during the pandemic?  In September, the mayor’s office announced a new program, called the “Expedited Housing Initiative” meant to temporarily provide housing to the homeless during the COVID-19 crisis (City of Chicago :: Mayor Lightfoot and the Department of Family & Support Services Announce $35 Million to Rapidly House Chicagoans Experiencing Homelessness).  Meant to get homeless persons into this “housing-first” program, the initiative has not been communicated to persons living outdoors, for example.  In my recent interviews with 9 homeless persons on the street, although 3 of them had heard the mayor was trying to do something new to help, none of them had heard where to go for information, how to sign up, whether there was a process in place yet for signing up, or whether any of this would happen before the first of the year.   

Conclusion 

Two distinct approaches, and the most helpful-looking one being the Expedited Housing Initiative.  It is hoped that is part of the current mayor’s bigger plan.  This initiative could yield results soon – at least short-term results to begin with -- if word about how to access the spaces gets out there.  I assume the agencies like Catholic Charities and Heartland Alliance will not only have access to the planning process but also have some guidelines and assistance for communities – and indeed individuals – who need to make use of the spaces available to live in. 

Let us hope that the Expedited Housing Initiative will move the city forward in its attempts to help solve the “space shortage” problem and provide good options for our homeless brothers and sisters.  The Department of Family & Support Services (DFSS) is an advocate for the initiative.  “It is an important and effective tool in our crisis response to homelessness and COVID-19,” said DFSS Commissioner Lisa Morrison Butler. “By transitioning individuals and families who are housing insecure into permanent housing faster, we reduce the chance they will return to shelter again and we increase the odds they will have a more stable future. Meeting this goal requires a coordinated, citywide effort between homeless prevention advocates and landlords” (City of Chicago :: Mayor Lightfoot and the Department of Family & Support Services Announce $35 Million to Rapidly House Chicagoans Experiencing Homelessness) 

Longer-term strategies should be added to the mayor’s plan, such as the need for education and bringing younger generations along into a new mindset and understanding about community and responsibility and helping others – like the plan established in 2012 by then-Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emmanuel (City of Chicago :: Plan to End Homelessness).

Certainly other pieces of the puzzle must be found, sized up, and snapped into the frame to provide a beautiful picture.  To create that wonderful urban landscape with all persons becoming residents, we will need not only the resources of the mayor’s office, but also the ability to look at things in a new way, come up with rigorous long-term plans, welcome the views of many individuals and agencies, and secure the commitment from a very wide variety of stakeholders indeed.