How Effective Is Low-income Housing Assistance in Dealing with the Homeless Problem?
The homeless problem is historical and social in the United States. Homelessness is a problem primarily attributed to underemployment and unemployment. The situation gets more severe after the breakout of COVID-19. The number of help seekers to shelters has sharply increased every year. As the problem gets more serious, more people confront “more crime, violence and bad weather, including extreme heat” (Stasha). Among the multiple solutions to the homeless problem, many states consider low-income housing assistance as the primary solution to tackle the problem. As one of the United States’ most prominent cities, Los Angeles is confronting an increasingly severe homeless pain. According to statistics, 69,144 people are homeless this year, growing by 4%. In Los Angeles, five homeless people die every day. Some of them died from summer’s extreme heat and winter’s extreme cold. Also, significant race-based differences occur in the problem. About 30% of African Americans account for Los Angeles homeless people, while they only account for 9% of the wider population. The homeless problem involves racial issues. Furthermore, older homeless people increased by 6.5% (Levin). It means that the aging population problem is getting worse. The situation in Los Angeles indicates that the problem is troubling the whole US: the issue relates to multiple systematic problems. This research paper centers on the effectiveness of low-income housing assistance and investigates a better direction for the current execution of the approach.
The nature of the homeless problem is the shortage of affordable housing and long-term social inequalities. The term “homeless” demonstrates that homeless people become a problem because they do not have a place to live stably. “Lahsa leaders emphasized that the root cause of the crisis was a lack of affordable housing and suggested the region needed to add 800,000 units over the next eight years to stem the crisis.” (Levin) The leader of Los Angeles also emphasizes that the fundamental reason for the crisis is the lack of affordable housing. He suggests increasing the number of 800,000 houses to restrain the crisis. Moreover, long-term social inequalities have facilitated the problem to develop and spread. “The largest cause of mass homelessness was a roughly 75% reduction between 1979 and 1982 in federal funding to make housing affordable for poor people.” (Watts) The biggest reason that causes large-scale homelessness is the decrease in the federal capital for poor people’s affordable housing from 1979 to 1982. The capital decreased by around 75%. Since then, the shortage of housing has been extending. The limited resources, such as housing and federal capital aid, are unequally distributed among Americans. Instead, the privileged gained more resources, and the vulnerable received less help. On such occasions, it is more likely for the vulnerable to get rid of the problem, thus leaving the issue to extend continuously. However, these vulnerable groups bear the most consequences of the problem, and other Americans are also involved.
The problem contributes to the deaths and diseases of homeless people. Around 40% of Los Angeles’s homeless people have drug abuse sickness or severe mental disorders (Levin). Moreover, homeless people are twice more likely to get chronic diseases such as diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart attacks. Homeless children are more likely to get mental pain, physical disorders, and teeth problem (Watts). These statistics show that deaths and diseases threaten homeless people because of homelessness. The problem ruins their health and lives. Even so, they are not the only victims of the problem.
Furthermore, the homeless problem is a public health issue and the origin of disorders and violence, thus threatening all residents. Since the physical status of homeless people is terrible, they can quickly spread infectious diseases such as COVID-19 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). Hence, once America confronts another pandemic as severe as COVID-19, homeless people will still be an effective channel to extend it. On such occasions, every city resident is at risk of infection. Moreover, since most homeless people are vulnerable, they may contribute their status to society and the government. Hence, driven by hunger, cold, and other survival needs, they use violent methods. Moreover, when living in the margin of society, people will inevitably be stuck in disorder or violence (Huff). In front of the significant threats, America has taken action. Low-income housing is one of the primary measures to tackle the problem.
Low-income housing helps tackle the homeless crisis by targeting the core cause of the situation and offering serial and systematic guidance for homeless people to recover their work capabilities and social abilities. In recent years, Los Angeles has been working to provide affordable housing to homeless people. For example, Los Angeles is restraining the rise of rent to restrain the increase in the homeless population (Levin). First, “Permanent supportive housing offers safe and stable housing environments with voluntary and flexible supports and services to help people manage serious, chronic issues such as mental and substance use disorders.” (SAMHSA) Low-income housing assistance can provide various services commonly needed by the homeless. Therefore, it can temporarily meet the needs of the homeless. Second, low-income housing assistance covers a time length for the homeless to rebuild their capabilities and regain their order of life (SAMHSA). During this process, homeless people have a place to stay so they can focus on developing new skills and managing their mental or physical chronic diseases (SAMHSA). Low-income housing assistance functions more than providing a place for the homeless. It supports homeless people in identifying obstacles hindering them from making a living, connecting with society, or living healthily on the condition that the people need to live is satisfied. However, the actual outcomes of the action are not as effective as expected.
This approach has not worked effectively because the limitation of finance and the lack of regulations in affordable housing places restrains its execution. First, the operational costs of low-income housing assistance are pretty high. On average, “the service provided to a family by an emergency shelter costs 4,819 dollars per month” (Semuels). Considering the massive homeless population, the expenditure needed to shelter all or most homeless will be tremendous and too heavy for the government to bear. Long-term affordable housing will be a trend to solve the homeless problem, “cities like New York and San Francisco would be very different than they are now and far less expensive. It’s costly to build new apartments and homes in cities where land is pricey, and developers want to recoup their investment as soon as possible, which means they have to charge a lot for rent.” (Samuels) The land prices and construction costs in big cities such as New York and San Francisco are high. From an economic perspective, it will be impossible to provide housing at affordable prices. Otherwise, federal finance will fail to support the long-term operation of the assistance. Once we cannot control the high costs of low-income housing assistance, we inevitably cannot limit the full potential and effectiveness of the solution.
On the other hand, people may feel that being homeless is far better than paying rent or having responsibility, especially when they are unemployed thus, they are reluctant to be engaged or provide unreliable information so that they remain in such places. Second, low-income housing is not properly or effectively regulated, and the homeless may confront new threats. Different from commercial housing, low-income housing is not satisfy residents for money. Correspondingly, the service system in low-income housing differs from that in commercial housing. Also, the operation and residents’ behaviors in low-income housing are difficult to regulate. According to the report of New York Daily News, “Last year nearly half of these incidents — 826 — were labeled by the city as ‘violent,’ including 153 assaults leading to arrest, 65 cases of child abuse resulting in arrest or removal, 174 domestic violence incidents involving a removal or arrest and 90 allegations of sexual assault involving shelter residents.” (Sandoval et al.) 826 violent accidents happened in New York’s homeless shelters, including sexual harassment and domestic violence. Women are more likely to be the victims of shelter violence because they are vulnerable to gender-based violent behaviors (Posada-Abadía, et al. 1). They usually experience systematic sexual abuse and sexual violence when homeless. On the other hand, the experiences make them give up reporting sexual abuse or violence in shelters or low-income housing. Under this circumstance, such problems are hidden and left unsolved. In other words, when low-income housing assistance helps solve some issues for the homeless, it generates new troubles for them. Those who have experienced violence in shelters will refuse to enter shelters again and even lose faith in the solution. Hence, the failure to manage violence in shelters restrains the solution’s effectiveness.
To make a better step forward, Los Angeles should help homeless people to regain their ability to survive and feed themselves by providing low-income housing assistance. Low-income housing assistance lays a foundation for the satisfaction of higher-level needs. For example, it is fair to say that the homeless generally possess physical health problems and that health problems make their plight even worse. The solution to this problem requires long-term, participatory help, and providing housing is the first step. Marc Collet and Hervé Picard’s survey show that if we can address physical health, mental health, and stable employment, homeless people will likely return to homelessness 1–2 years after exiting their plight. Medical assistance can help reduce the rate of return to homelessness. On such occasions, Los Angeles should utilize low-income housing as a foundation to integrate all necessary aid and support for homeless people. For instance, skills training, mental treatment, and psychological aid. This help cannot function without low-income housing assistance, while low-income housing assistance cannot fundamentally reduce the population of homeless people without this help. In fact, from a broader perspective, this better direction has social meaning.
Therefore, what are the broader implications of this better direction? First, the problem solvers should harbor a systematic view. As mentioned above, the homeless problem intersects with multiple social problems, including racial problems and social inequalities. The nature of the problem decides that simply offering low-income housing assistance cannot restrain the uprising tendency of the homeless population. Hence, they should fully recognize the systematic complexity of the problem and tailor solutions to it.
Second, the problem solvers should fully understand the meaning of help. Increased affordable housing can reduce the number of homeless people. However, they have not dealt with the origins of homelessness, such as unemployment, loss of hope, mental impairment, and inadequate health status. These origins hinder homeless people from rebuilding their lives and regaining life orders. Hence, to effectively solve the problem, the solvers should clarify the underlying factors preventing homeless people from getting rid of homelessness.
To conclude, the level of income, unemployment, and racial disparities constitutes the largest proportion of homelessness in America. Some victims have no choice but to seek refuge in insecure or abandoned places to survive. Low-income housing assistance helps tackle the homeless crisis by targeting the core cause of the concern and offering serial and systematic guidance for homeless people to recover their work capabilities and social abilities. As for the effectiveness of the solution, it directly targets the origin of the homeless problem in the US, satisfies the most fundamental need of the homeless, and helps increase the effectiveness of medical assistance to the homeless, thus better dealing with the homeless problem as a whole. Meanwhile, it has limitations. First, the operational costs of low-income housing assistance are pretty high. Second, low-income housing is not properly or effectively regulated, and the homeless may confront new threats. In short, the solution cannot wholly solve the homeless problem, but it is indispensable for solving the problem. The problem of homelessness cannot be solved by low income housing assistance alone but rather the society. However, low income housing assistance can play a vital role in improving the plight of the homeless.
Works Cited
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “CDC — Homelessness As a Public Health Law Issue — Publications by Topic — Public Health Law.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 23 Apr. 2020, www.cdc.gov/phlp/publications/topic/resources/resources-homelessness.html. Accessed 3 Dec. 2022.
Huff, Andrew. “What Homeless Encampments Can Teach Us About the State of Nature.” Generocity Philly, 17 July 2020, generocity.org/philly/2020/07/17/what-homeless-encampments-can-teach-us-about-the-state-of-nature/.
Levin, Sam. “Los Angeles County is Home to More Than 69,000 Unhoused People, Count Finds.” The Guardian, 8 Sept. 2022, www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/08/los-angeles-homelessness-unhoused-people-number. Accessed 3 Dec. 2022.
Marc Collet. Hervé Picard. 2006. Why patients attending free health centres seek care Precalog Survey 1999–2000. Issues in health economics.
Posada-Abadía, Clara I., et al. “Women in a situation of homelessness and violence: a single-case study using the photo-elicitation technique.” BMC Women’s Health, vol. 21, no. 1, 2021, pp. 1–15.
SAMHSA. “Homelessness Resources: Housing and Shelter.” SAMHSA — Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 22 Apr. 2022, www.samhsa.gov/homelessness-programs-resources/hpr-resources/housing-shelter. Accessed 28 Nov. 2022.
Sandoval, Edgar, et al. “NYC Homeless Would Rather Risk the Street Than Hellish Shelter System.” New York Daily News, 14 Mar. 2016, www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-homeless-prefer-streets-violent-shelters-article-1.2564370. Accessed 28 Nov. 2022.
Semuels, Alana. “How Can the U.S. End Homelessness?” The Atlantic, 18 Apr. 2018, www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/04/end-homelessness-us/479115/. Accessed 28 Nov. 2022.
Watts, G. R. “Homelessness Is an Ethical Issue in America.” Journal of Ethics | American Medical Association, 2021, journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/homelessness-ethical-issue-america/2021–11. Accessed 3 Dec. 2022.
