When discussing what we currently know about homelessness, many of us expressed our concern of not knowing how many homeless people there actually are. An inaccurate count is universal because: not all homeless people will be found on the streets, some cities do not count cars or those in shelters, we don’t know how many people are couch surfing / temporarily living with friends or family… it’s impossible to fully know.

We discussed what we think could be done to help alleviate homelessness (there is no 100% cure) and making more housing available was the common main concern. “Affordable” housing is actually not affordable at all, so low-income housing is the better route to take. It is unknown if shelters are a big help, because they act as temporary fixes. They may help some people get off the street for one night or a short period of time, but what about in the long-run? The argument could also be posed that shelters further catalyze homelessness because if people think they have somewhere they can go for free, they may be homeless by choice. I do not think this is a popular thought process, because shelters can be terrible places. In the book “Reckoning with Homelessness”, shelters were described as dirty and violent places, where you can get robbed and beat up even though your peers know you have nothing. Employees of the shelters have been accused of physical and emotional violence. Developing homes that people can actually live in on a minimum wage paycheck is a viable solution.

One topic during the class discussions and guest speakers that truly held an impression on me was the cost of Point-in-Time Counts. Point-in-Time (PIT) Counts are done every two years throughout every county, typically during the last week of January. PITs are unfunded mandates that find multiple sponsors to fund the expenses, the time, and the quality of the count itself and require hundreds of volunteers to participate. The range of cost for a PIT count could be all the way up to a million. For example, the PIT count for Los Angeles count is approximately 600,000 dollars. My big question is does the expenses to conduct a PIT count outweigh the amount of money that is received towards services for the homeless? What if the 600,000 dollars was directly contributed to services and shelter for the homeless community instead of being donated to a middle-man type of service? PIT counts do provide useful and effective information about the homeless community but the fact that the amount of money received for the community does not directly tie to the number of people counted during the PIT does make me wonder. One reason I believe PIT counts do actually benefit the community is the process does prove a correlation between the number of homeless individuals to the effectiveness of the services being provided. If the amount of homeless individuals are declining, thus can prove the services are actually having a benefit to society.

Down and Out, on the Road The Homeless in American History, the book I was assigned for our “Book B” presentations, gives an in-depth historical analysis of homelessness throughout the history of the United States. One thing that struck me about this book is the interplay between voluntary and involuntary homelessness in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Many people were forced into homelessness due to changing economic realities. As post-bellum America shifted economically people were far less likely to be economic secure. Resultantly, many people adopted train hopping tramp lifestyle as an escape from oppressive economic structures and still more people were forced into economic situations where tramping made more sense. Moreover, seasonal work became very prevalent in the tramp/hobo community. People would work during the winter in seasonal jobs while returning to tramp lifestyles in the summer and spring. In addition, many hegemonic social structures were abandoned in homeless communities. Much of social hierarchy is economically enforced and thus, the author Kenneth L. Kusmer argues that traditional social constructs matter less in homeless communities. During a time when American society was becoming more institutionally segregated “hobo jungles” were arguably some of the most racially integrated communities in the United States. Further, the author reports some evidence of sexual liberation and the removal or weakening of gender constructs. Kusmer concludes then that for many people being homeless is neither a purely voluntary or involuntary state. Instead, being homeless, at least in part, presents a measure of freedom in the opportunity to escape American social and economic forces.

Both of the presentations we listened to this week gave me a greater appreciation for the difficulties of practically correcting this housing problem. The thing that stuck with me with the first presentation on Monday was when the speakers from San Bernardino Homeless Outreach explained how there is an extent to what they can do, based on where the person in need of assistance is psychologically that day. If someone isn’t wanting help it isn’t within their rights to put them in some kind of program, even if it would help. I don’t necessarily think this is a bad thing because people have the right to make their own decisions; and it isn’t right to assume that people not struggling with poverty automatically know what is best for people in those situations.

On a more positive note, I was pleasantly surprised to find out that there is a 211 number you can call for homeless issues. This is both less expensive for the taxpayer and the people who show up to the issue are specifically trained for it. I wish this was a more well-known fact because more people would probably use that number and then we wouldn’t be waiting until someone is a potential danger before alerting authorities. The people talking to us were pretty clearly more conscious about homeless issues than many of the police we have read about. They talking about how charging someone with a misdemeanor is about $1000 and doesn’t fix anything and how there is a current trend of criminalization instead of reintegrating back into society.

In the words of Craig Willse, the author of The Value of Homelessness, “Today, rather than serve the economy by keeping labor happy, healthy, and alive, social programs serve the economy directly as part of the economy, as a social welfare industry” (Willse 46). In this way, he reasons, “surplus populations are not simply left to die, but in their slow deaths are managed by social service and social science industries” (48). In a sense, Willse is arguing that resources which supposedly ensure the wellbeing of people really have a stake in maintaining people’s vulnerability because they profit off of disorder in the economy. (For some reference, I would say that Willse’s argument is very reminiscent of Herbert Gans’ The Positive Functions of Poverty article.)
What do you all think of this? Is this too cynical of a perspective? Are there agencies that are free of this criticism that help the homeless out of pure altruism?
I see obvious parallels between this critique of homeless service agencies and entities that provide mental health support. Our university’s counseling center and Residence Life and Housing branch are both able to exist and profit from the existence of mental health disorders on our campus. Along with about 40 other CA’s and CD’s, I am paid about $ 5,000 as a CA to provide oversight in a dorm and refer students to resources if they need help. In no way am I denying the ways in which both entities help many people every year, I am just questioning if our counseling center and Residence Life and Housing maintain the mental instability of students at all for their own benefit. For example, is our university’s willingness to keep chronically depressed students at school when they are not being productive in class but still ensuring a regular presence in the counseling center best for the student?

This week I really enjoyed our second presentation/conference. It was amazing to hear how they analyze the homeless. To do that they said that you need to know the definition of homeless. In order to do the counts you have to not only check the streets because not everybody gets the opportunity to stay in a shelter for the night but you also check the different care systems and organizational funded shelters. The key components to the counts are timing and well trained volunteers with a guide team. The problem that was being faced with the homeless counts was the volunteers were not meeting expectations. This means that they did not know the area as well as they said they did, they were slaking off, or simply did not show up. The volunteers need to know the area being counted extremely well because they have to check areas that most do not go to. This could be different fields, vacant lots, and parking lots.

I also was very surprised about the counts in Seattle. It it now considered to have the 3rd highest homeless population. they have 11 thousand homeless and about 6 thousand of them are unsheltered. This is a huge amount that the city needs to work on.

This week in class there were two presentations by individuals who interact with the topic of homelessness. Through these presentations I was able to gain a further understanding on topics discussed or assigned in class. The aspects they presented about homelessness and their experiences along with interpretations was the tool in doing that.

Monday’s presentation added so much more context to the issues of the relationships between law enforcement officers and the homeless themselves. It provided a view into the local enforcement in San Bernardino County today, and their methodology of how they interact with the homeless. The present methods gave direction to where the book ” Down, Out, and Under Arrest…” by Forest Stuart left off, describing how therapeutic policing influenced  the lives of the homeless, specifically on Skid Row.

Prior to Wednesday’s class we had to complete Data Exercise # 2. For the exercise I examined the methods for point in time counts, in Ventura and LA counties. During this I had a lot of questions regarding how money was used, who decides what way is the right way to count, and who gets surveys or doesn’t. Through the presentation many of my questions were answered and overall I understood how things were executed prior to the homeless count in each city. I learned that money was allocated through sponsors, count methods depend on who’s running it which can be outside organizations. The biggest concept I carried away and what appears evident in success in varying methodology for counts based on the community.

After volunteering at a local homeless shelter, I decided to research why many homeless individuals do not want to stay in homeless shelters. Many people assume the homeless do not use shelters because of theft or drugs, but there are a number of reasons. Many of the homeless prefer to sleep on the streets and I ask myself why? Of course, one reason is that there are simply not enough beds available at shelters and a long waiting list. According to author Kylyssa Shay, “In most cities in the US, there’s space for less than 25% of the homeless people living in that city. In some cities, there is room for less than 5% of their homeless population” (Shay 2017).

Another reason why the homeless do not stay in shelters is that the disabled are not always safe. Some shelters will take away walkers, crutches, or canes while they are there. This avoids the chance of them being stolen, but leaves the disabled at a disadvantage.

The homeless do not want to go to the shelters because they have a lack of control. There are strict check-in, sleep, check-out times, etc. These strict rules and regulations can cause them stress and make them feel like they are not in control.

I was shocked to discover some reasons for not staying in a shelter. Thankfully, not all shelters include these downsides. Still, these are things many homeless people have experienced which may have caused them to later avoid using them at all. After researching this, I ask myself if there WERE enough beds available, would the homeless still want to stay in shelters?

https://soapboxie.com/social-issues/why_homeless_people_avoid_shelters

Earlier this week, the Trump administration proposed a vague new idea on how to combat hunger. The proposal issued stated a plan to replace more than 40% of SNAP benefits given to recipients with a “Harvest Box”. These boxes would contain non-perishable foods selected by the government (for the people) and would be distributed monthly. While my initial reaction was positive, it changed quickly after reading certain criticism. The plan offered no specifics on what would be in the boxes and if they would consider food allergies, fussy eaters, SNAP recipients whose addresses often change, and people finding themselves temporarily homeless. I also found myself wondering if the contents of the boxes would require kitchenware like a functioning stove, a microwave, or some type of refridgeration post cooking. What happens near the end of the month when the contents of the box have been used up and no funds are left in benefits?

While the U.S. government should be taking action to fight hunger, I do not think that “Harvest Boxes” are the way to go. They are focusing way too much on agribusiness and less on the people who are actually going hungry. Welfare recipients already have to accept that they’re receiving welfare, and at least they have the power to choose what they buy with their food stamps. By taking away that ability, it offers less control in the lives of welfare reliant individuals and allows for the government to fully take over. The government needs to focus on the wellbeing of the people, not the industries they own.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/15/trump-food-stamps-harvest-box-blue-apron-snap-217004

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/02/12/585130274/trump-administration-wants-to-decide-what-food-snap-recipients-will-get

I was really struck this week with the multitude of interactions we were able to have with people so knowledgable in the field of homelessness. It was encouraging to come into contact with individuals who have devoted their time and effort to helping and encouraging this marginalized group we have been learning about. After hearing from the San Bernardino County HOPE team, I was left thinking about the potential for these types of programs in other places across the country. After class I talked briefly to my dad, who works for the City of Portland, about the programs in Oregon put in place to address issues of homelessness. They don’t seem to be anywhere as successful or dedicated as the work of HOPE. Now I am  curious about other city and county’s work that may be comparable! I also really enjoyed hearing more information about point-in-time counts, and how they are executed differently all over the place, and more particularly, how they are viewed by the public. One would think that everyone should be in favor of keeping count of their city’s homeless populations, at-least to keep officials accountable for addressing such issues, but as we heard our guest speakers talk about, this is not always the case. I learned  there is so much more to the process of these counts than meets the eye. We can’t forget  about the role economics, politics, and society all play. Later in the week I also had an incredibly informative meeting with two individuals who are very  active in the nonprofit scene here in Redlands. We talked about homelessness, social services, and the idea of community. During this meeting, I could really tell that this class has already taught me so much. I was able to have a thoughtful and informed conversation about these topics with true experts.