An estimated 582,500 people experienced homelessness in America on a single night in 2022, roughly 40 percent of them in unsheltered locations—on the street, in abandoned buildings, or in other places unsuitable for habitation. The unsheltered population has grown by over a third since 2015.
The federal government provides funding to help state and local governments finance their homelessness response systems, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) prioritizes programs that apply the principles of Housing First—an approach that seeks to house people as quickly as possible without prerequisites such as sobriety or behavioral treatment, while offering them voluntary supportive services. As a result, local organizations that serve unhoused people have pursued this model across the country.
Studies have shown Housing First to be a cost-effective strategy to address the needs of unhoused people, who might otherwise drain significant resources from temporary shelters, emergency room visits and hospitalizations, policing, and other public services. The model was first developed in New York City in the 1990s, attracted significant bipartisan support in the early 2000s, and was implemented at the federal level by successive Republican and Democratic administrations.
However, Housing First isn't a silver bullet to end homelessness. Many cities that have enthusiastically adopted the model continue to see increases in their homeless populations. This isn't an indictment of the Housing First approach, but rather a sign of deeper trends that must be addressed if we are to end homelessness. We also need the nation to increase the supply of affordable homes, policymakers to provide adequate support for federal homelessness assistance programs, and Congress to take a fresh look at those programs and update them as necessary.
Conservative lawmakers, noting the shortcomings of Housing First in some of the cities most impacted by homelessness, have criticized the federal government for championing the model. Many argue that service providers using other models are unfairly being denied federal funds.
As the topic becomes increasingly partisan, it's important to understand what Housing First is, what it isn't, and why it remains an important tool for ending homelessness. So, let's clear up three misconceptions about Housing First, and then delve more deeply into what policymakers should do next to cut through party divisions and build a consensus agenda for addressing the heart-wrenching problem of homelessness.
First, Housing First is a model, not a policy, and it should not be seen as a one-size-fits-all approach to homelessness.
Housing First encompasses a great variety of programs. Some help clients find and pay for housing in the private market and access supportive services; others bring all their resources to a single site where they provide both housing and services. Some provide short-term assistance to quickly get people who have fallen on hard times back into stable housing, while others are oriented to address the long-term needs of those with chronic physical or mental illnesses.
Furthermore, Housing First often requires collaboration across many different types of programs, including homeless outreach, emergency shelters, permanent supportive housing, case management, and income support.
Second, Housing First is neither "housing only" nor "free permanent housing without any conditions."
Programs that adopt Housing First seek to reduce barriers to housing and avoid evicting people back into homelessness. However, tenants of such programs must comply with basic responsibilities, and many subsidized housing programs that follow a Housing First approach, such as permanent supportive housing, require tenants to contribute part of their income (often 30 percent) toward rent.
One of Housing First's greatest success stories involves veterans. The number of veterans experiencing homelessness has fallen by 55 percent since 2009 (and 11 percent just since 2020), and that's due in large part to the HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program—a Housing First-friendly program that combines rental assistance from HUD with case management and clinical services from the VA.
Third, programs that use alternative approaches often must do so because they're working with limited resources.
In many localities, the homelessness response system may be a church community or small nonprofit that lacks the resources to fully implement a program that aligns with the support services component of Housing First. Faith-based organizations are a critical part of the homelessness support system. According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness, they provide nearly 30 percent of emergency shelter beds for families and single adults across the country. Any national agenda to end homelessness must recognize the importance of faith communities and small charitable organizations in meeting the needs of unhoused people—particularly in rural areas.
Looking ahead, how can we improve Housing First and strengthen the broader effort to end homelessness?
To achieve the goal of ending homelessness, it will be crucial to address both the housing and behavioral health needs of unhoused people. Housing First interventions such as permanent supportive housing are well-placed to accomplish this—if they can receive sufficient funding and staff to provide quality support services. With cities and states struggling to retain qualified support staff and cover the significant costs of behavioral health and recovery services, the federal government should explore policies that support these efforts.
Although it has provided annual funding for federal homelessness assistance programs, Congress has not meaningfully updated these programs since the HEARTH Act of 2009, which reauthorized homeless assistance programs first created by the McKinney-Vento Homelessness Assistance Act of 1987. Using successful examples like the HUD-VASH program as a model, it's time for lawmakers to take a fresh look at federal policies to ensure that homeless support systems across the country have the resources they need.
The standards and guidelines for using this funding—such as HUD's emphasis on the Housing First model as well as the annual funding application process (which some providers find overly burdensome)—will no doubt be part of the conversation. With funds so scarce, however, any alternative approaches that do arise must meet the rigorous test of proving they can help meet the needs of unhoused people in a cost-effective manner.
Housing First is not a panacea for a problem as big and complex as homelessness. In the long term, governments must invest in helping people stay housed and in increasing the supply of affordable homes to truly make homelessness brief, rare, and nonrecurring. However, the Housing First model has played an important part in meeting the needs of thousands of unhoused people, and should remain a key part of federal, state, and local approaches to the problem.
Dennis Shea is the Executive Director of the J. Ronald Terwilliger Center for Housing Policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center. Francis Torres is a Senior Policy Analyst on the Bipartisan Policy Center's housing team.
The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.
Uncommon Knowledge
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
About the writer
To read how Newsweek uses AI as a newsroom tool, Click here.
