by Kevin Schofield

---

This weekend’s read is the California Statewide Study of People Experiencing Homelessness (CASPEH), a new report released last month by the Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative at the University of California, San Francisco. In contrast to the “Point-in-Time” census-like homeless counts that must be completed by all jurisdictions receiving federal homeless response funding, the CASPEH attempts to dig into the hows and whys of homelessness.

The report begins by noting that people often conflate two questions related to homelessness: “Why do some people become homeless?” and “Why do so many people become homeless?” They cite an apt analogy first introduced by authors Gregg Colburn and Clayton Page Aldern: a game of musical chairs. Imagine 10 people playing musical chairs, where one of the players sprained his ankle the previous night and is walking on crutches. Not surprisingly, at the end of the first round when the music stops, he can’t get to a chair fast enough and is left standing. If we ask why he was the one who didn’t get a chair, then certainly the fact he was using crutches put him at a great disadvantage. But if we ask why someone was left standing, it’s because there were 10 people and only nine chairs.

There is plenty of evidence that homelessness is, first and foremost, a housing problem: There isn’t enough housing at prices people can pay. But then when we look at who doesn’t get housing, we see that more often than not, it’s a set of people who have one or more issues that placed them at a higher risk to become homeless. The CASPEH report focuses on this second question: cataloging the issues homeless people faced that tipped them into homelessness, and the problems they continue to face that often keep them homeless.

The researchers collected questionnaires from 3,200 homeless individuals across the state of California, selected to provide a representative sample. They then conducted in-depth interviews with 365 of the respondents to delve further into their context and their stories. The report presents an enormous amount of numeric data, but because of the selection process it used, it’s not clear the statistics are highly accurate; call them “coarsely accurate,” as they can tell us what the major groupings are and their rough size. Nevertheless, we can read the report as “color commentary” on what’s happening in California’s homeless population rather than as a census report; the groups and patterns are still insightful, even without perfect measurements.

Right upfront, the report once again dispels the myth of the “migrant homeless”: that homeless people move somewhere in order to access services. Here in our hometown, that myth is referred to as “Freeattle,” but the myth exists and is persistent in every major metropolitan area in the country as well as in many rural areas. The CASPEH report reiterates what every other report that has examined this question has found: The vast majority of homeless people remain at or near the place where they became homeless. The researchers found that 90% of the homeless people they surveyed became homeless in California, and three-quarters of those remained in the county where they became homeless.

Their exploration into how people became homeless revealed some surprising details. Only 39% of their survey respondents were in their first episode of homelessness. The median length of time an individual had been homeless was 22 months, and (perhaps counter to what we might assume) people in their first episode of being homeless tended to be homeless longer than those who had been homeless previously. 

Thirty-six percent of the respondents fit the standard definition of chronically homeless: being homeless for more than 12 months and also having a disabling condition. The figure is much higher if we look at just the length of homelessness: nearly 75% for the adult single men.

Much of the report explores factors that would make someone at higher risk to become homeless. For instance, around three-quarters of the respondents had experienced physical violence at some point in their lifetime; half had experienced sexual violence. Over 80% had experienced mental health issues at some point; 27% had been hospitalized for it (56% of those before their first homelessness episode). Sixty-five percent had a period in their lives where they had used illicit drugs regularly, and 62% had periods of heavy drinking.

Looking at their housing situation immediately before becoming homeless, the respondents fell into three groups: those who had been released from an institution, such as a jail or prison (19%); those who had owned or held a lease on a home (32%); and those who were neither an owner nor a leaseholder (49% — surprisingly high), such as a young adult who had been kicked out of their home, or someone living with a partner who left to escape physical or sexual violence. The researchers found that those exiting from an institution largely received no support to reintegrate into society. Leaseholders had a median of 10 days’ advance notice they were losing their housing, and non-leaseholders had a median of only one day of notice before being kicked out. Leaseholders generally cited economic reasons for losing their housing (such as losing a job or a big increase in rent); non-leaseholders mainly cited social reasons, such as a conflict with roommates or partners.

Health issues abounded among the people surveyed: 45% self-reported that they were in fair or poor health; 60% said they had a chronic disease. About one-third had a condition that limited a daily living activity; one-fifth reported a mobility limitation. Two-thirds said they currently had symptoms of a mental health issue.

The report also looks at the current issues homeless individuals face. Substance abuse was common but far from ubiquitous: 31% used methamphetamines, 3% used cocaine, 11% used non-prescribed opioids, and 16% reported heavydrinking at times. Despite all we hear about street use of opioids, the most common illicit drug use is of stimulants, such as methamphetamines. 

The interviews with homeless individuals documented that for many, this wasn’t just a mindless addiction; it was frequently a conscious decision — weighing both benefits and harm to themselves — to use stimulants to stay awake to protect themselves and their property, as well as to allow them to get things done (like earning money). Further, more people said their substance abuse had “decreased a lot” since becoming homeless than those who said it had “increased a lot,” with the notable exception of youth transitioning to adulthood (“TAY” in the graphs above and below).

The full 96-page report is packed with insightful analysis; the numbers aren’t perfect, but the color commentary is powerful and compelling.

California is not Seattle, and some of the specific details probably differ a bit here (and in other parts of Washington State). At the same time, there is no reason to believe that among our respective homeless communities, things are vastly different here than in the Sunshine State.

There is much we can learn from this deep dive into what’s really happening in the lives of homeless people that will help us to identify and aid those at highest risk of becoming homeless and to provide better help to those without housing today.

California Statewide Study of People Experiencing Homelessness

---

📸 Featured image by Hrach Hovhannisyan/Shutterstock.com.

---