We Can’t Help Homeless Youth if We Don’t Count Them!

Every other January, cities and towns that receive federal money to serve the homeless are required to perform a point-in-time census count of their homeless population. During a single 24-hour period, staff and volunteers fan out to find people who aren't in traditional shelters and instead are struggling to survive on the streets and in the shadows.

These counts give us data to figure out what works, what doesn’t and what we need to do better. Yet they often miss some of the most vulnerable of this population: homeless young people.

Take Miami-Dade county, for example. During the 2009-2010 school year, the school district had more than 2,800 homeless youth on their rolls, but in its annual census that January, the County only “counted” two (yes, two) youth under age 18 living on the streets.

I can’t tell you how many times I heard someone in Miami say, “There are no homeless youth in our city,” even as I worked as the director of a program serving these very young people. You could say I lost count.

Teenagers who ran away from abuse or were thrown away due to neglect do exist in every major city in America and most small towns and rural areas. CNN reported that 1 in every 50 youth will become homeless before reaching 18. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) youth and those in foster care are disproportionately represented. In fact, up to 36 percent of teens who age out of foster care become homeless as adults.

So why is it so hard to count them? There are several controversial problems with the point-in-time (PIT) methodology, problems with the government’s definition of who is homeless, and not surprisingly, specific problems with trying to find youth during the counts. 

When they're not counted, it is as though they don't exist. In turn, few dollars enter the funding stream to serve them and help them get off the streets. If we want more resources to end youth homelessness, we need to learn how to count them!

It's good news, then, that the National Alliance to End Homeless released a timely set of strategies to help communities get an accurate count, as well as two webinars by experts discussing a host of solutions and how they were applied in one California city.

Doing Things Differently in One Major City

 On the other side of the country, Washington, DC, is gearing up to do something remarkable for their homeless youth: Conduct a comprehensive two-week study targeting all homeless youth, even those generally undetectable, and learn about them in comprehensive ways that will inform policy and future services.

I think you’ll enjoy reading excerpts from an interview I conducted with Maggie Riden, a policy analyst at the D.C. Alliance of Youth Advocates. Maggie co-chairs an interagency sub-committee working on recommendations and a committee within DCAYA that is developing the survey protocol and planning the study for March 2011.

Eddy Ameen: How many homeless youth were last counted in D.C.?

Maggie Riden: The U.S. Department for Housing & Urban Development (HUD) counted nine homeless, unaccompanied youth in their 2009 PIT count and 130 in 2010 when homeless youth providers started to participate in the PIT. In contrast, NEO-RHYMS (the Runaway and Homeless Youth Management Information System) had street outreach contact with 3,586 youth between October 2009 and October 2010.  

The D.C. Alliance of Youth Advocates estimates (based on provider feedback and NEO-RHYMS data) that in a given year, at least 4,000-5,000 youth experience a period of homelessness and that on any given night, a minimum of 1,500 youth are without shelter. Bottom line: D.C. attempts to track and estimate the number using a multitude of imperfect systems. 

EA: Why has it been hard to get an accurate number?

MR: For three reasons. First, the PIT process for tracking youth is both inherently flawed and extremely limited. HUD only considers them youth if they are under 18, whereas we consider them youth up to 24 and homeless if they are economically and/or emotionally detached from their families and lack an adequate or fixed residence. This includes children and youth who are unstably housed, living in doubled up circumstances, in transitional housing programs, emergency shelters, on the street, or other places not intended for human habitation.

Second, the PIT occurs only on one night and focuses primarily on using homeless providers to count the individuals seeking services. Since youth avoid adult shelters by and large, the count is generally only a reflection of the number of beds your city or state has.Youth are typically mobile and will stay with any number of friends/families/community members when able rather than being on the street. The PIT is not designed, nor able, to capture this couch-surfing portion of the population.

And third, the PIT process is simply a count. It does not gather information on casual factors leading to homelessness, job/education status, services needed, or barriers to stabilization. While much of this information is known for the adult population, it is inapplicable to the youth population which we know, at least qualitatively, is very different in all of these above aspects. 

EA: What have you done to address these issues?

MR: DCAYA decided to execute our own homeless and runaway youth survey. We’re shying away from calling it a PIT because it is far more in-depth and extended in scope than a Point in Time title suggests.

Instead, it’s a two week period during which providers (at all levels of the community) and volunteers will work with youth to complete an extensive survey that looks far beyond basic demographics to more accurately count the number of homeless youth, assess casual factors, identify services utilized and gaps in services for youth, gather health, and collect education and employment data.

We will learn where they lived and who they lived with prior to becoming homeless, their past involvement with state care, health history (including mental health and substance abuse histories), job status, job skills, employment history, educational background and goals, services utilized, services they have been unable to find or utilize, people in their support network, types of support, and more. Again, it’s pretty extensive.

EA: How did DCAYA’s survey model come about?

MR: In May 2010, we began talking about doing an extensive study of the homeless population here in DC. I immediately started to do outreach to DC’s Interagency Council on Homelessness (ICH) to see if there was interest in partnering with us in some capacity to support a youth survey and include the youth provider continuum and efforts in DC’s strategic framework to end homelessness. The Council was incredibly supportive of the idea and established a Youth Sub-Committee of their Planning Committee. The sub-committee will be using information gathered from DC agencies, existing providers and the data from our Youth Survey to craft specific recommendations for the ICH on how to more effectively prevent youth homelessness, and stabilize those already without housing.

EA: Why is this approach a better solution than what's occurred in the past?

MR: Having this information will be critical to informing policy and practice related to homeless youth in the District. The way in which this survey is structured will be far more effective at counting and capturing the youth perspective than current methods. Ideally, it will give us insights we have not had in the past, as well as a baseline understanding which of the size and needs of the youth population which we can use to measure our effectiveness as we implement structural/policy changes designed to address this issue. Fortunately, both the D.C. Council and the Department of Human Services recognize the need for data to inform decision making and are keenly aware of the limited information we have on homeless youth.

EA: In your opinion, why aren't we doing this already?

MR: I think the U.S. is just now realizing how unique this population is and how little information we have on them. Because of the unique nature (like reluctance to seek services, unwillingness to identify as homeless due to stigma) and high mobility of this population, executing a study that will accurately capture this information is time intensive.

EA: Tell me about the costs of money, time, and people-power.

MR:  I facilitated an incredible cost-saving partnership with Dr. Gary Young and graduate students at the Trachtenberg School of Public Policy at George Washington University to design a tool to track the data, complete the data input, and then take an initial cut at data. The study itself will be conducted by staff at a variety of agencies, community centers, schools, non-profits, shelters, drop-in centers, and so on. Organizations will be promoting the survey in the two months leading up to it, explaining why it is important for youth to participate.

We’re hoping this will create a snowball effect for participation; youth will then recruit peers they know to be in a similar situation and bring them to sites to complete the study.We’re in the critical process of volunteer recruitment now because we will need a sizeable volunteer pool able to cover the two week period of the study at the sites and on the street with youth not connected to other providers.

EA: If other cities wanted to replicate this model, how difficult would it be and what learned lessons would you pass on?

MR: Having partnerships with government agencies has been critical. This ensures that we are able to execute the survey in group homes and transitional living programs with youth who will be aging out of care but do not plan to return to families. Moreover, these relationships will make it much easier to ensure the information we’ve collected and the recommendations we develop as a result have buy-in at the agency level and will have a trickle-up impact to inform policy at the government level.

You also need strong relationships with local area providers willing to help conduct the survey and with police departments to make sure they know what’s up and do not try to chase youth off who are congregating to complete the study. Having local colleges with an interest and ability to support your project is important. Finally, doing this at even the state level is almost untenable; from my research small cities and communities have had far more success.

EA: Remind us again why the DCAYA project is crucial for homeless youth?

MR: This study provides DC with an opportunity to build on what’s working and fill existing gaps to make sure that no child or youth is without housing. Youth, homeless or otherwise, are resilient, capable and motivated to make change in their lives. BUT, without housing it’s tough to know where to start. With just a little bit of the right kind of support, youth can stabilize to become self sufficient, independent contributing members of their communities.

Eddy Ameen  is an editorial contributor to SparkAction and pre-doctoral psychology intern who counsels teens in the District of Columbia Superior Court. He is formerly the executive director of the Miami homeless youth program, StandUp For Kids.

Share your thoughts and ideas below!