Overview and methods
Dr. Jon Bruschke and Ms. Stephanie Jeffcoat
Ms. Jeffcoat’s story
Working group adopted a pilot research effort to be qualitative that would fill the void of research from the perspective of the unhoused An interview schedule was developed, IRB approval was obtained, and we worked cooperatively with the FPD (although no incidents occurred) Methods:
Data collected on five days between June 18 and June 27, 2024. 62 separate individuals were encountered, 22 agreed to a recorded interview and 11 agreed to an interview with notes. Three not coherent, result was 30 usable interviews.
Conclusions
Information about available services is not widely accessible. Most of those interviewed had access to smartphones, but the availability of housing support services was generally a mystery.
By contrast, word of mouth is by a wide margin the most important way services are discovered and evaluated.
Service access is Byzantine; many forms, long wait times, nowhere to go in between. The main barrier for those without significant mental health needs is a LOSS OF HOPE. Service co-ordination is crucial.
Shelters are part of a revolving door.
As part of our work, we hosted an on-campus symposium for formerly unhoused, service providers, Director of County Continuum of care. A clear consensus of experts and service providers is in favor of housing-first solutions.
Closing thought: Matthew 25
“For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ … 40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ We are at our best as a city when we treat the least among us with compassion Full report