Giving Compass' Take:
- Lori Tobias reports on research demonstrating that criminalizing homelessness is ineffective, emphasizing addressing root causes by providing affordable housing.
- What is the role of donors in ensuring that homelessness is effectively addressed by examining its root causes?
- Learn more about key issues in homelessness and housing and how you can help.
- Search our Guide to Good for nonprofits focused on homelessness and housing in your area.
What is Giving Compass?
We connect donors to learning resources and ways to support community-led solutions. Learn more about us.
Criminalizing behaviors often associated with people experiencing homelessness is not effective in reducing homelessness, a recent study found. Because there is no proof that criminal ordinances reduce homelessness, communities that impose these penalties are left bearing the cost of the “criminalization efforts,” which is “therefore a net welfare loss,” according to the report published in Policy Studies Journal, indicating that criminalizing homelessness is ineffective.
Creating community partnerships to make more affordable housing and wraparound services available is the best approach to reducing long-term homelessness, said Hannah Lebovits, assistant director of the Institute of Urban Studies at the University of Texas at Arlington and one of the report’s authors.
President Donald Trump last week signed an executive order to end “endemic vagrancy” that would give discretionary grant priority to states and municipalities that enforce prohibitions on open illicit drug use, urban camping and loitering, and “urban squatting” and expand indefinite forced treatment for people who “suffer from serious mental illness or substance use disorder, or who are living on the streets and cannot care for themselves.”
The order also seeks to end “’housing first” policies that “deprioritize accountability and fail to promote treatment, recovery, and self-sufficiency” and harm-reduction programs such as drug-injection sites.
“Shifting homeless individuals into long-term institutional settings for humane treatment through the appropriate use of civil commitment will restore public order,” the order states. “Surrendering our cities and citizens to disorder and fear is neither compassionate to the homeless nor other citizens.”
Lebovits said local governments are increasingly favoring criminal ordinances to deter homelessness, which led her to question if these “draconian” methods are effective.
The study she co-authored with Andrew Sullivan, assistant professor in the University of Central Florida’s School of Public Administration, compared communities that have passed criminal ordinances with those that have not and found that both experienced similar trends in homelessness rates.
Read the full article about criminalizing homelessness by Lori Tobias at Smart Cities Dive.