NASW Alaska | The Alaska Chapter of the National Association of Social Workers

Good data helps policymakers drive programs and funding. As a result of methodological and financial constraints, most studies are limited to counting people who are in shelters or on the streets. While this approach may yield useful information about the number of people who use services such as shelters and soup kitchens, or who are easy to locate on the street, it can result in underestimates of homelessness. Many people who lack a stable, permanent residence have few shelter options because shelters are filled to capacity or are unavailable. A recent study of 24 U.S. cities found that in 2005, 14% of all requests for emergency shelter went unmet due to lack of resources. For families, the numbers are even worse: 32% of emergency shelter requests from families were denied.[1] A review of homelessness in 50 cities found that in virtually every city, the city's official estimated number of homeless people greatly exceeded the number of emergency shelter and transitional housing spaces.[2] Moreover, there are few or no shelters in rural areas, despite significant levels of homelessness.[3] As a result of these and other factors, many people in homeless situations are forced to live with relatives and friends in crowded, temporary arrangements. People in these situations are experiencing homelessness, but are less likely to be counted. For instance, of the children and youth identified as homeless by the Department of Education in FY2000, only 35% lived in shelters; 34% lived doubled-up with family or friends, and 23% lived in motels and other locations. Yet these children and youth may not immediately be recognized as homeless and are sometimes denied access to shelter or the protections and services of the McKinney-Vento Act (U.S. Department of Education).

The costs of homelessness are much higher than the costs of housing. More than $14 million are spent annually on homeless services in Alaska, and include assistance with housing, health, education, social services and public safety. A 2003 study of chronic homelessness in Fairbanks, conducted by the University of Alaska Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, revealed that more than $40,000 per person was spent in public intervention over a 20-month period. By contrast, housing with supports can cost substantially less.

Statewide, approximately 3,500 people are homeless on any given night, including 1,600 people in families with children.[4] In Anchorage alone, 2,800 children from birth to age 12 were homeless at some time during the 2005-2006 school year.[5] There are several national estimates of homelessness. Many are dated, or based on dated information. For all of the reasons discussed above, none of these estimates is the definitive representation of "how many people are homeless.” The best approximation is from a study done by the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty which states that approximately 3.5 million people, 1.35 million of them children, are likely to experience homelessness in a given year (National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 2004). NASW Alaska Chapter supports funding increases for the development of affordable housing in the form of permanent, permanent supportive, and transitional housing.

As of December of 2006, 2,697 households were waiting for federal rental assistance programs in Alaska, 1,543 of which were in Anchorage.[6] Approximately 20,000 low-income households spend over half their income on housing, placing them at risk of homelessness. In February 2005 Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) announced a temporary suspension of new vouchers to people applying for rental assistance under the federally funded Housing Choice program (formerly called Section 8 housing). AHFC, the state-owned housing authority, initially indicated the voucher freeze would last 45 days and would be re-evaluated in March. The freeze was extended to the end of April. In 2004 the federal government increased funding for housing vouchers nationwide, but cut the Alaskan program. AHFC Is the sole provider of these vouchers statewide. In January 2007 the Housing Choice voucher lease up rate for Anchorage remains underutilized at 89% and has not returned to the pre-freeze lease up rate. This put Alaska at risk for further federal funding cuts on the Housing choice voucher program. NASW Alaska Chapter supports the immediate increase AHFC’s lease up rates to 98% in every state identified catchments area.

More than 30 states have created housing trust funds, with consistent success in decreasing homelessness, which on average have leveraged $9.25 million in additional funding. The Municipality of Anchorage’s Ten Year Plan on Homelessness contains an action step to “Create a Housing Trust Fund that contributes to affordable housing locally.” In 2005- 2006, a state wide body of Commissioner and federal level appointments to the Alaska Council on the Homeless studied this problem and concluded that creation of a housing trust will allow Alaska to create more supported and flexible resources for the homeless and is an important next step for the state. An Alaska Housing Trust will have the flexibility to provide necessary supportive services and quickly address the changing needs of those at risk of homelessness. The Alaska Housing Finance Corporation Board of Directors approved an FY08 budget that included a $10 million capital increment for initial funding of a Housing Trust. The Alaska Mental Health Trust also supports a Housing Trust. NASW Alaska Chapter supports the creation of an Alaska Housing Trust and an appropriation of $15 million annually to implement the Alaska Housing Trust.

A National Perspective on Homelessness

Scholars have suggested that the persistence of homelessness in the richest country in the world at the beginning of the 21st century is a consequence of massive policy failure, as on any given night, point prevalence estimates indicate that as many as 800,000 people are homeless in the United States. Quantitative and qualitative researchers have addressed a plethora of causes, correlates, and covariates, and micro–mezzo–macro system-wide approaches have been recommended in numerous policy arenas. Too often policy-making processes at the federal, state, and local levels have been limited to local emergency measures, such as various health care services for the homeless coalitions that began in the 1980s. Although short-term program and policy changes are needed at the local level to cope with fiscal crises and the disjointed system of emergency services for individuals and families who are homeless, longer-term fiscal and programmatic recommendations contained in newer initiatives such as housing trust funds merit our attention. State and local communities as well as nonprofit and public agencies should rethink the place of shelter care within a larger continuum of services for special at-risk populations faced with crisis poverty and chronic homelessness. Shelters have become the frontline response, but their presence should not be viewed as a policy solution. Social workers should, in collaboration with people who are homeless, be actively involved in the development of continuity of services for individuals, children, and families who are without residence and in the development of a sound national housing policy that reaches those most in need.

[1] U.S. Conference of Mayors, 2005

[2] National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 2004

[4] AHFC, Statewide Homeless Survey: Winter 2006. The survey uses the HUD definition, which focuses on people in shelters. It is a point-in-time count.

[5] Anchorage School District, Child in Transition Program, personal communication January, 2007, based on the US Department of Education definition of homelessness and includes children from birth to age 12 in shelters, substandard housing, shared housing, and non-traditional spaces such as motels, campgrounds, and cars. This number is cumulative for the school year.