Chronic Homelessness, We Are the Problem
The stigma of poverty is deeply painful for many unhoused citizens throughout Connecticut. It influences decision making, problem solving and the personal safety of more than a thousand individuals across the state. Many would rather remain in unsafe conditions to avoid the shame of being found out. In many of these cases, medical emergencies go unaddressed and physical violence becomes more prevalent. Those in the crisis of poverty are often in danger.
For those with mental health diagnoses and/or substance use history, these situations are often chronic. The alternative is emergency shelter. Connecticut offers emergency shelter for those in active addiction. What many may not consider is that those in recovery and those actively using drugs are mingling and developing friendships. In a stressful and unstructured environment like a wet shelter, this creates endless opportunity for failure.
The goal of many (if not all) agencies within the homeless system is to practice effective Harm Reduction. In my experience, this is often done poorly or not at all. The problem with Harm Reduction Strategy is that it needs to be practiced consistently and without deviation from its designed procedure. Half-assed attempts or alterative practices create the opposite effect. This is a regular occurrence within wet shelters.
As a provider and volunteer in the community, I speak directly with those utilizing recovery resources in New London County and I am well versed in the goings-on of shelter. Temporary residents of shelter often complain about the lack of support, the ‘free-for-all’ use of drugs, theft, violence and complacency of guests setting a tone for their own journey. The phrase ‘Doing nothing’ comes up again and again.
Services are not properly tailored to the individual either. The state and federal governments pour millions of dollars into helping the unhoused. Programs are created to support these individuals but when the staff isn’t properly trained or vetted, or if the clients are only given 20% of what they need, problems occur. This is a huge issue and it is commonplace. In my experience, shelter guests are often treated like herded cattle. They are hustled into housing when they have little to no support to maintain it. It’s also often done on a whim which is chaotic and awful for the guests. In some instances, people are offered poor or inappropriate housing because it is known this person cannot maintain housing independently. I’ve seen this happen repeatedly. They cycle in and out of shelter over and over and over.
The system creates unrealistic standards as well. A person should be enrolled in and exited from shelter in a very brief amount of time. For example, 45 days or 60 days. This is partly because funding is linked to ‘length of stay’.
Picture this, you’ve been laid off from your job where you were barely making ends meet. As someone with poor computer skills, you struggle to apply for work as most employers use electronic applications. You reach out to your local employment office and schedule an appointment for help – it’s six weeks out. When you arrive at that appointment, you are told you need a resume, which you can’t make on your own (those computer skills again). They help you build one, but this takes more than one appointment. You have been applying for work on your own but don’t get many responses – likely because of your applications. This process becomes tedious and diminishes your self-esteem.
Folks living paycheck to paycheck likely have little or no savings to back them up in an emergency either, right? So now you are past due on rent and getting a Notice to Quit. Eventually you end up in shelter and are told you need to get a job when you’ve been trying to gain employment for months already. Are you frustrated yet? A little defeated?
Now, picture you are applying for work while staying in shelter and after 3 weeks, you get a job offer. It’s only part time, but it’s better than nothing, right? You are told you can’t be housed with that income. It’s another 2 weeks before you receive a check and it’s only for a few hours. Eventually, you ‘time out’ of shelter because the job you got isn’t enough and you aren’t eligible for a housing voucher so out to the street you go. Even if you aren’t struggling with mental health or addiction, being unhoused can feel like navigating a landmine field.
While working as a Program Manager in this system, I have witnessed many heartbreaking situations where those who want to succeed are sidetracked by the fishbowl dynamic that occurs within shelter. Dozens of these people, gainfully employed and contributing to society at the time, are sabotaged by the system that is tasked to help them – all while taking no responsibility. It is clear to staff, clients and many previously housed (or never housed) individuals that in many instances, those in charge are more concerned with legal liability and their own personal reputation than the outcomes they create. Some leaders aren’t even present at their own facilities. This shouldn’t be allowed. The disconnect between government agencies, agency leaders and issues is alarming and sad. All they have to do is listen.
I say WE ARE THE PROBLEM because the public has a limited understanding of homelessness or poverty in general. We judge, we criticize, we don’t want to pay for them, and we don’t want them in our back yard, regardless of if they have been our neighbor all along. The fact is, they are and have been. WE ARE THE PROBLEM because our government doesn’t support its most vulnerable people the way they need to be supported. Rental caps, funding for holistic mental health and longer-term support so no one is left behind would be a great start. WE ARE THE PROBLEM because we put people in positions of authority and leave them unchecked. Third party reviews should be required for all non-profit agencies, not just for CARF Certification or clout. Reviewers should be onsite for regular unannounced auditing of daily procedures as well as a review of leadership practices. This should include a standard of overall well-being and physical safety for clients and frontline staff.
All Connecticut residents can benefit from the success of the chronically unhoused. When supported, they contribute to the community in ways that others cannot, but it would also decrease public risks that aren’t always considered. Public health, property and violent crime, and environmental damage are just the tip of the iceberg. We have a golden opportunity to help our neighbors and finally experience all the value they can bring to the table. - Katherine Brown
