Transcript Slide 1
Rural Homelessness: The Hidden Homeless June 2nd, 2009 Matt Leslie, Housing Policy Analyst Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) What is rural? • • • • Communities less than 100,000 people Located 100 miles from a major urban area Large geographic areas with many small towns or communities Large areas which are dependent on one industry such as agriculture, timber, mining, tourism, etc. • Higher poverty rates • Lower levels of educational attainment • An area that is described as “country” Rural Homelessness: the effected population Tend to be women with young children and men who have lost employment More families than chronic individuals More first time homeless Possible higher reported incidence of family violence Younger than urban trends But also more likely to see elderly as compared to urban trends Under employed Less visible, hidden population (in woods, cars, campers, etc.) Had been staying with friends/family Often precariously housed, rather than literally homeless Rural Homelessness the causes Pervasive poverty, including multi-generational, is more of an issue Substandard housing/code enforcement Less diversity of housing and fewer rental options (older housing stock) Lack of affordable housing and rental assistance Nonexistent or shrinking mental health and drug and alcohol services Rural economies based on one industry (eg. agriculture and/or mining, tourism, etc.) Local employment patterns (low-paid, part-time, and temporary employment) Transportation issues as barriers to employment and services Federal homeless definitions that have favored homeless in larger metropolitan areas Limited capacity for resource development (eg. Grant writing and management) Challenges for Service Providers in Rural Communities • • • • • • Lack of transportation infrastructure (eg. Public transportation) Single agencies providing many services Individuals wear several different “hats” Sense of isolation Fewer dollars when funding decisions are based on population Difficult for staff to attend “state-wide” meetings/trainings/workshops • Less public awareness due to “invisibility” of homeless • Less existing research about what works in rural areas Rural Communities Strengths • • • • • • Multi-service mainstream agencies Good access to local political leaders Relatively small numbers of homeless Involved and supportive church communities Rural culture of community Extended family support Rural Homelessness promising approaches Increased coordination and collaboration (among programs, agencies, and localities) Rapid re-housing TBRA, housing vouchers, rent subsidies Transportation Case management Case study: Rural Homeless Initiative of Southeast and Central Ohio • Improve point-in-time counts • Engage mainstream programs that assist low-income people (Often there has been found to be a disconnect on the relationship between housing and the program’s goals) • Work on finding people housing (eg. Real estate functionbuilding of relationships with landlords, helping individuals overcome barriers to housing) • Coordinate resources within the community • Develop supportive housing for those with severe disabilities • Improve access to information (eg. Public information campaigns) • Improve prevention of homelessness • Promote intraregional collaboration Homeless Shelter Bed Inventory as Compared to Number of Homeless (Balance of State 2007/2008) 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 938 470 50.1 % UR Total Number of Homeless Total Number of Beds 462 Emergency Beds 476 Transitional Beds Individuals (singles) Housing Inventory as Compared to Number of Homeless (Balance of State 2007/2008) 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 183 108 85 % UR 91 50 % UR 76 38 Total Individuals (singles) Emergency Beds Available Individuals Sheltered Transitional Beds Available Individuals Sheltered 54 Unsheltered Individuals (singles) Individuals in Families Housing Inventory as Compared to Number of Homeless (Balance of State 2007/2008) 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 400 354 287 34 % UR 122 27 % UR 108 57 Total Individuals in Families Emergency Beds Individuals Sheltered Transitional Beds Individuals Sheltered Unsheltered Individuals in Families Summary • Appearance of surplus in shelter bed inventory – Particularly for family beds • Resulting low utilization rates • Shelter-based funding (fixed costs- good or bad?) • Firehouse approach vs. flexible approach – Future funding implication • Case for rapid re-housing? • McKinney-Vento Reauthorization References • 2007. Virginia Homeless Report, Department of Housing and Community Development, retrieved from http://www.dhcd.virginia.gov/HomelessnesstoHomeownership/default.htm • 2008. Virginia Homeless Report, Department of Housing and Community Development, retrieved from http://www.dhcd.virginia.gov/HomelessnesstoHomeownership/default.htm • 2008. January Research Matters. Housing Vouchers are Critical for Ending Family Homelessness. National Alliance to End Homelessness, Homelessness Research Institute. • 2005. Hunger Report. Strengthening Rural Communities. Center for Rural Affairs. • 2008. Rural Homeless Initiative of Southeast and Central Ohio: A National Model for Planning to End Homelessness. National Alliance to End Homelessness. References (cont.) • 2002. Continua of Care Best Practices: Comprehensive Homeless Planning in Rurik America. Housing Assistance Council. • 2006. Homelessness in Rural America: Policy and Practice. Paul Rollinson and John Pardeck. Haworth Press. • 1996. Out of Sight out of Mind: Homeless Children and Families in Small Town America. Yvonne M. Vissing. University Press of America.