Emergency Shelter for San Diego’s Most Vulnerable

Screen shot: KPBS Homeless Babies and Toddlers Endure Tough Long Days on San Diego Streets (video)

By Jeeni Criscenzo / San Diego Free Press

Using school data, we can prove that close to 10,000 families in San Diego County are homeless and are not included in the Point-in-Time Count (PITC) that is conducted every year throughout the country to determine how to allocate HUD funds for homelessness programs.

[C]lose to 10,000 families in San Diego County are homeless and are not included in the Point-in-Time Count [used] … to determine how to allocate HUD funds for homelessness programs.

They are not being counted because single mothers, who for a myriad of reasons become homeless, will wisely prioritize their personal safety and the safety of their children over anything else. So while their male counterparts will often sleep “rough” on the streets or in the canyons, or compete for the few emergency beds in City and County shelters, 80% of the kids reported as homeless by the schools are spending their nights doubling up with “friends and relatives”.

Anyone who has graciously offered a couch to a friend or family member who is down on their luck, knows how, even in the best of circumstances, this is a strain on everyone’s patience. Tragically, in too many situations, couch surfing turns out to be unsafe for moms and their kids. And because it is always temporary, the experience is traumatic, particularly for the children and studies have shown it can be detrimental to their physical, emotional, behavioral, and cognitive development.

By any measure, these families should be considered homeless and as a humane civilization we should be dedicating resources to helping them get out of this situation. But not only are they not counted by the PITC because they are not visible, they are not even considered homeless by HUD because of their choice of nighttime accommodations, which means there is no funding available to help them. So they go from imposing on family, to wearing out their welcome with friends, to whatever horrendous situation will shelter them for the night (use your imagination – it’s happening).

We need a “meantime” solution – emergency shelter that is safe – meaning it not only protects from the elements, but also protects women and children from assault, robbery and rape.

Changing HUD’s definition of “homeless” is a legislative process that should begin now, but will not change things soon enough for the 10,000 families needing real housing tonight in our county. But there is a way to provide emergency shelter for these families that is safe while still qualifying them as “homeless” so they can be served by agencies using HUD funds. They could be safely sheltered and still qualify for rental assistance for real housing, which we also need to be building but isn’t going to appear overnight.

We need a “meantime” solution – emergency shelter that is safe – meaning it not only protects from the elements, but also protects women and children from assault, robbery and rape. There has been a flurry of interest recently in tiny homes as a solution for homelessness and a counter argument that these are not really homes. Last week I wrote about the wooden shelter that Lisa Kohan built for a homeless man, which was impounded by SDPD. It seems to me that there is a convergence of ideas here that could actually solve the problem of counting our most vulnerable homeless population, women and children, while getting them services through HUD funding.

And that’s by classifying these small wooden shelters as emergency shelter specifically for women and children and elderly homeless persons. As emergency shelters, property that has been classified for emergency housing would be exempt from code regulations. The women and children sheltered in these structures would be classified as homeless.

[By] classifying these small wooden shelters as emergency shelter specifically for women and children and elderly homeless persons … [they] would be exempt from code regulations [and the] women and children sheltered in these structures would be classified as homeless.

By clustering these shelters near public transportation, we could do this in an organized way so that these families would get into the social services system and get the assistance they need to get into permanent housing. We could provide common facilities for toilets, showers, laundry and even dining. People in the housed community who want to help could provide bedding and basic furnishings, meals etc.

And most important, these families, women and kids who are dealing with trauma, would have a place of their own, privacy where they can lock the door at night and lock their few precious belongings up in the day, so they can get their kids to school and go to work.

We can do this. It wouldn’t cost a ton of money, especially if we could get donors for the construction materials and volunteers for the work. Families could participate in maintaining a site as part of their agreement to stay. As emergency shelter, there would need to be a time limit on how long a family could stay, but it should be tied to the availability of housing – so if there isn’t affordable housing to move into, we are not putting these folks back on the street.

I’m throwing this idea out there, for your feedback. Let’s put our heads together and solve this problem. No more ten year plans. No more unrealistic goals that end in brick walls. Continue in our efforts to get affordable housing built – thousands of units. But let’s do something right now, this month, to get those who are truly the most vulnerable, safely sheltered.