Translate

Monday, June 2, 2014

Homelessness and the Cost of Doing Nothing

                                   Homelessness and the Cost of Doing Nothing
By Albert B. Kelly

One issue that never seems to go away for most municipalities is homelessness. To begin with, the issue comes with a heavy financial cost.  I’m not talking about the costs associated with solutions as much as I’m talking about the costs of doing nothing.

For any community, homelessness is not revenue neutral. Between ER visits, costs for various medical procedures to patch a body up, the man-hours connected with multiple arrests, administrative costs for law enforcement and the courts, and the time in jail; you begin to see that one homeless individual can blow through tens of thousands of dollars in services.

If I understand the data correctly, the western side of Cumberland County, in 2013 the 08302 zip code had roughly 63 adults and 15 children (78 total individuals) seeking shelter at the shelter on Mays Landing Rd. While not all of these individuals are part of the cycle of ER visits, arrests, and county jail; just 20 adults (25%) in that cycle could chew up $18k a piece in ER-arrest-jail costs in the course of a year amounting to $360,000.

If we extend out to the whole of Cumberland County, the total number of individuals seeking shelter services for 2013 came in at 450 individuals; if 112 (25%) consume $18,000 a piece in ER-arrest-jail costs, it comes to about $2 million.

Then there are the costs you can’t calculate; like the amount of revenue that bypasses a community because of negative perceptions; the shoppers who take their retail dollars elsewhere because of a few semi-sober ill-clad souls drifting about asking for spare change. It makes residents angry; so much so that cities across the country have passed some hard legislation.

In Columbia SC, an ordinance was passed giving the homeless the option of relocating or getting arrested, though it was later repealed. In Raleigh NC, an ordinance was proposed that would prevent religious groups from feeding the homeless in a downtown park.

Philadelphia passed a similar ordinance about feeding the homeless in their parks. Fortunately, religious organizations said they would risk arrest rather than comply. Tampa FL took the step of passing an ordinance whereby police could arrest anyone they saw sleeping in public or storing personal property in public.

I understand the frustration and anger that communities feel toward the homeless population, with all of the problems that come with homelessness; how it undermines efforts to promote growth and revitalization. However, I’m not at all sure that punitive legislation is the answer.

For one thing it’s inhumane; for another, we can’t “enforce” them away or magically make them disappear. But maybe there’s an alternative. In the last 8 years, Utah has reduced their homelessness problem by an astounding 78% and they believe they can essentially eliminate it by 2016.

Utah’s approach is solid in its simplicity; providing homes to the homeless. It’s a state program, but it is working and it is less costly than the cycle of arrests and ER visits that come with a heavy enforcement stance.

In a cost-benefit analysis, Utah determined that it cost about $11,000 to provide a homeless person with a simple dwelling unit and the services of a social worker as compared to the $16,650 price tag that came with the arrest-ER model. And beyond cost savings, I’m sure it has a positive impact in the area of “perception” and recapturing retail dollars lost from having a bad image.

That said, I wonder if it would not be possible in our area to assemble a working coalition with the faith-based community, volunteers, non-profits, and government to develop a model that can transition people from homelessness to a productive stable life.  Any discussion should begin with the same sort of cost-benefit analysis as happened in Utah, though costs would likely be higher in New Jersey.

While our model might look different from another state, there are perhaps many ways to construct a successful program. In Utah, it was providing single dwelling units. Here, a transition might be done in phases starting with a basic shelter and support services and ending with more permanent housing and a stable life. 

The successful models have shown that the faith based community plays an integral part in the homeless success stories. But no matter what approach we take, I think it is worth some careful analysis because in the end, it’s more economical to act than to keep the status quo.