These numbers point towards a failing in the process not a failing in the people who are homeless.
If you offer someone a place to live no strings attached they’re going to take it. Once housed it’s orders of magnitude easier to treat the causes of homelessness.
Every time you complicate or add a restriction you lose people out of the system. Sounds like there are about twelve restrictions or hoops to jump through in the Portland system.
Housing first programs in Salt Lake City showed phenomenal success. Get people houses and then take care of the other things like medical care, mental health care, addiction treatment.
Know why the phenomenally successful program isn’t around anymore? Republicans pulled funding to it out of a weird and broken ideological belief. Not based on the facts of its effectiveness.
At a certain point if your ideology doesn’t allow for the value of facts it’s just broken.
>>> If you offer someone a place to live no strings attached they’re going to take it.
There are multiple articles that show the homeless do infact refuse shelter based on a number of reasons so the whole predicate you base your reasoning on should be reexamined.
Every time you complicate or add a restriction you lose people out of the system. Sounds like there are about twelve restrictions or hoops to jump through in the Portland system.
Housing first programs in Salt Lake City showed phenomenal success. Get people houses and then take care of the other things like medical care, mental health care, addiction treatment.
Know why the phenomenally successful program isn’t around anymore? Republicans pulled funding to it out of a weird and broken ideological belief. Not based on the facts of its effectiveness.
At a certain point if your ideology doesn’t allow for the value of facts it’s just broken.