Federal housing policies supporting homeless individuals have been long-standing, but Trump's administration is set to discontinue them.
The Trump administration's proposed changes to the Housing First approach for addressing homelessness could have far-reaching impacts on homeless individuals and communities. Housing First, a model that prioritizes providing permanent housing to homeless people as quickly as possible and then offering support services, has been a cornerstone of homelessness policy for several decades.
Long-term Consequences
- Increased Homelessness
- By focusing less on Housing First, there might be a reduction in the availability of supportive services essential for maintaining housing stability. This could lead to a higher likelihood of individuals returning to homelessness.
- Shifting away from Housing First might also mean less emphasis on creating and maintaining affordable housing options, exacerbating the housing needs of vulnerable populations.
- Psychological and Physical Health Impacts
- Without stable housing, individuals are more likely to face increased stress, social isolation, and mental health issues.
- The lack of consistent housing can worsen chronic health conditions due to inadequate access to healthcare services.
- Economic Consequences
- Homeless individuals often face barriers to employment and education. The absence of stable housing compounds these challenges, potentially reducing economic opportunities and perpetuating cycles of poverty.
- Over the long term, failing to address homelessness effectively can lead to higher public costs for emergency services, healthcare, and law enforcement.
- Community Impacts
- Stable housing contributes to social stability and community cohesion. Reducing support for Housing First could lead to increased social unrest and public concern over homelessness.
- The presence of homeless encampments can deter investment in neighborhoods, affecting local businesses and property values.
The Trump administration's proposed changes could inadvertently exacerbate homelessness issues, leading to broader societal and economic consequences.
Case Study: Rachelle Ellison
Rachelle Ellison, who spent 17 years homeless in Washington, DC, moved into an apartment in 2008 with a rental voucher and mental health support services through a non-profit organization. Ellison, a formerly homeless person, believes that Trump's approach will make it harder for homeless people to get housing, deepening the cycle of criminal justice interactions and trips to the hospital she experienced while living on the streets.
Historical Context
The de-institutionalization without provisions for housing or social services starting in the 1950s is one of the factors that contributed to mass street homelessness in America. In 2003, Bush announced a 10-year plan to end homelessness as part of its "compassionate conservatism" agenda, adopting Housing First as the model. The Obama administration continued this approach and in 2009 launched a goal of ending veteran homelessness built around Housing First.
Cost and Effectiveness
In 2022, it was conservatively estimated that it would cost $9.6 billion to provide Housing First to every household in US shelters. Supportive housing, under the Housing First model, reduced costs annually by $16,000. The treatment-first approach during the 1980s and 1990s was not very effective, as people who entered were often discharged for failing to comply with sobriety requirements and ended up back on the streets.
Controversy and Opposition
The Trump administration wants to cut funding for Housing First programs, claiming they are ineffective and contribute to "crime and disorder." However, several studies have found that Housing First programs offer greater long-term housing stability than treatment-first and may even lower overall costs. Most homelessness service providers employ Housing First principles and fear the loss of federal funding and a retreat back to policies they abandoned years ago.
Current Developments
Trump has also cut funding for Medicaid and grants for drug addiction and mental health programs. This year, Trump ordered federal troops to forcibly remove homeless people from Washington, DC. Despite these actions, cities like Houston, Denver, and others have successfully used the Housing First approach to drive down homelessness.
In conclusion, the Trump administration's proposed changes to the Housing First approach for addressing homelessness could have significant and potentially negative long-term consequences for homeless individuals and communities.
- The shift in policy towards de-emphasizing Housing First may lead to a decrease in mental health support services, which could affect the mental health of homeless individuals like Rachelle Ellison.
- The Trump administration's proposal to cut funding for Housing First programs could hamper policy-and-legislation efforts aimed at improving health-and-wellness, such as mental health and fitness-and-exercise, for homeless individuals.
- The proposed changes could potentially impact general-news coverage of social issues, as the effectiveness and costs of Housing First programs become subject to heated politics debates.
- Science-based policymaking, which has previously considered evidence to support Housing First as an effective solution, could face renewed challenges with the administration's claims that the approach is ineffective and contributes to crime.
