First Thing First?

Will the Inquirer's series on homelessness change the way Philadelphia addresses the problem?

by Tom Namako

Michael T. Regan SIGN OF THE TIMES: Phyllis Ryan, PCEH director, has been using the housing-first approach for years. Now she wants the city to do the same. (CLICK IMAGE FOR LARGER VERSION)

gimme shelter

When a newspaper publishes a series of articles on an urban issue, writers will usually make sure to do three things: A) identify a problem, B) identify a solution, and C) identify who is already addressing the problem (likely with the already-identified solution).

To a large extent, the Inquirer used this formula to present its recent three-part series on homelessness in Philadelphia. The first segment identified a problem: the city's rising homeless population; the last highlighted a successful attempt to address it: in this case, in New York City.

But the second segment was a bit more striking: It seemed to advocate an up-and-coming solution over a more traditional one. The 2,000-word piece focused on the housing-first approach, which began in Los Angeles in the 1980s. Before housing-first came along, it was generally believed that many homeless people could only be housed after going through the merit-based shelter and transitional-housing systems, and receiving treatment for whatever mental health or addiction problems they might have. Housing-first rejected this. Instead, it simply placed people in subsidized apartments, then provided the services.

In many cities across the country, housing-first and the transitional-housing approach are stuck in a kind of horse race. Each side jockeys for support from mayoral administrations, vies for face time, publishes statistics to prove its philosophy's effectiveness, and yes, even courts big-time media coverage. In Philly, for more than a decade, it's the shelter-based model that has been getting all the attention — and, though there are several small housing-first programs in town, most of the nearly $98 million in federal, state and local funds the city contracts each year (and the private donations that follow it) go to traditional programs.

Take, for example, the city's last 10-year plan to fight homelessness. The only substantial mention of housing-first was a two-paragraph anecdote about "Sam," who was in and out of shelters 134 times until a program called Home First offered him an apartment. Otherwise, the plan said, there's a shortage of "affordable units and a never-ending wait for rental subsidies." The rest of the plan emphasized easier access to health, social and job-training services.

This horse race is handicapped: The shelter-based approach has been standing in the winner's circle before housing-first even catches sight of the finish line.

Until, that is, part two of the Inquirer series. The article, headlined, "First, Find Them a Home," criticized the city government for not embracing the housing-first philosophy, noting that other major cities have used it successfully and that it's been endorsed by the federal government. In fact, the story noted, Philly's refusal to move away from the transitional approach led to a 40 percent cut in Housing and Urban Development funding for local homeless initiatives.

The story unnerved supporters of the shelter approach. There's only so much money to go around: Funding a rental-subsidy program means less money for shelter-based programs; these folks believed in shelter-based programs. And all of a sudden, they had a rival that was not just championed by the federal government, but by the city's most influential paper. For the first time, both horses were in the same place: back at the gate, waiting for the starting gun to sound and for the race to begin again.

When Phyllis Ryan founded the Philadelphia Committee to End Homelessness (PCEH) in 1982, one of her first orders of business was to swear off government money. "We wanted to be able to speak and act freely on our own policies," she said. "I just don't trust the city."

In the early years, PCEH searched for a new way to address homelessness, and during the 1990s Ryan began criticizing the traditional approach and turned to housing-first, or what she called the "homeless-to-housed continuum." For a while, her group courted only private donors, but recently, she's considered public funds. She would make a pitch for contract money, she decided, if a steering committee was set up to oversee the city's homeless policies and funding.

Ryan usually sent out a slew of press releases about PCEH. And around the ime of the 2007 mayoral primary, she started talking to friends at the Inquirer.

Ryan says Inquirer reporter Jennifer Lin visited PCEH's sunny one-floor office on Carlisle and Brown streets last August. Ryan set her up to interview a woman who used to be homeless, then moved into a subsidized home, and now works nights to pay rent and support her family.

Ryan wanted to show the reporter an approach to homelessness that cost less, she says, and had a lower recidivism rate and was more dignified than living in a shelter or transitional housing.

Gloria Guard would object to that description of housing-first. The president of the People's Emergency Center, which runs a 70-family shelter and two transitional housing facilities, Guard was quoted in Lin's story (co-written by Joseph Slobodzian) saying that chronic disorders, like addiction and trauma, can't be "fixed with an apartment."

Guard acknowledges being worried about public funds being diverted to subsidized housing programs.

"Programs are vanishing," she says. "There are only so many dollars Philadelphia can lay its hands on." She says the housing-first approach is ideal for more stable homeless people, but that she's concerned about the cost of subsidizing too many rents. "Who's going to pay the bill every year? Can't be the city of Philadelphia and certainly not the state."

Will the Inquirer's work change Philly's funding tendencies? Dainette Mintz, acting director of the city's Office of Supportive Housing, said the series caught Mayor Nutter's attention. The two spoke about a revised plan to combat homelessness, which became part of the series in a sidebar on day three: "It's a complex issue and we are committed to finding a solution that takes into consideration all of the intricacies associated with homelessness," spokesman Douglas Oliver told the Inquirer.

A housing-first approach will be an "integral component" of the mayor's strategy, Mintz said, adding that without more money from the federal government, the city will have to reallocate existing funds. "I think it's unfair that we had to cut those programs to do more housing programs. ... It's very unfair because it puts a burden on existing providers trying to maintain a quality program who we have funding obligations to," says Mintz.

Other details are scarce, but some insiders believe the plan will be released soon. Phil Lord, executive director of the Tenant Union Representative Network, runs the city's official housing-first pilot, known as the "diversion program." He says that he is in constant contact with Mintz's office, although he hasn't been specifically asked his opinion of the new plan yet. "The model has expanded around the country," he notes.

For Ryan, it's still unclear where her organization fits in: She hasn't heard from the administration since she sent them a letter about PCEH earlier this year.

Mintz maintains that the simultaneous timing of the articles, and the revised homeless plan from a new, progressive administration is a coincidence. "I don't know if there was any effort or design to release the series after the administration transition," she says. "But I don't believe that the new plan is in direct response to the newspaper series."

(tom.namako@citypaper.net)