Homelessness in Rural America

Policy and Practice

Paul A Rollinson, John A Pardeck

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• eBook ISBN: 9781317956365
• Topic: Medicine
• Subtopic: Health Care Delivery

Take your knowledge of the needs of the rural homeless to the next level

This groundbreaking text examines research methodologies for studying the homeless, rural homeless policy, and the lives of today's rural homeless. It gives a thorough overview of the issues faced by this unique sector and outlines specific avenues for further research. The authors' insightful data analysis, real life findings, and specific case examples offer useful and research-based approaches to improve the difficult situation of the rural homeless, using a family health approach well suited to addressing the issues that affect them.

Since services for the homeless are most often located in cities, the rural homeless are at a physical disadvantage. Because they are unable to utilize the services provided for the urban homeless, their needs often go unmet. Researchers and social service professionals face the same dilemma. Homelessness in Rural America addresses these issues by making vital research techniques, difficult-to-find data, and strategies for practice easy to access, understand, and put to use.

Homelessness in Rural America: Policy and Programs examines:

• the current condition of the rural homeless
  
• factors that can increase the probability of a rural individual becoming homeless
  
• the influence of welfare programs on the rural homeless
  
• issues faced by the rural homeless and how a family health approach can treat these issues
  
• the research methodology used to study the rural homeless
  
• micro- and macro-level solutions to rural homeless problems

Students and educators will benefit from Homelessness in Rural America's micro- and macro-level approaches to intervention. Policy planners will discover the further complications that have arisen from welfare programs. As the homeless population continues to increase, Homelessness in Rural America becomes even more essential. The rural homeless are often overlooked in the social sciences literature, and this book fills that void with its rare and well-organized information.

Chapter 1
Rural Homelessness in America

Today, homelessness is a multifaceted social-service delivery problem that afflicts both metropolitan and rural communities in the United States (Burt 1992; Burt et al. 1999; Vissing 1996). The magnitude and causes of this problem are unclear; the solutions are the subject of much debate (Jahiel 1992). What is clear is that the needs of the very poor extend beyond simply a roof over their heads and that homelessness is much more than a lack of shelter. "Homeless" can best be understood as a catchall term, sometimes a misnomer, focusing our attention on only one aspect of a person's or a family's plight: namely, the lack of a roof. Homelessness results from a complex, often interrelated set of circumstances that can require people to choose between shelter, food, and other basic needs.

Social and Economic Factors

Despite the public perception, homelessness is not a new phenomenon, As economic circumstances and demographic forces have fluctuated throughout history so have the size and composition of the homeless population (Miller 1991). Two trends are seen as largely responsible for the rise in American homelessness since the 1980s: an increase in poverty and a growing shortage of affordable rental housing. Poverty and homelessness are seen as inextricably linked (Blau 1992). Poor people are frequently unable to pay for the combined costs of housing, food, health care, and child care; difficult choices must be made when limited resources cover only some of these necessities. The poor in contemporary America are often an illness, an accident, or a paycheck away from potentially living on the streets. In the past, the homeless were portrayed as highly mobile alcoholic men (Anderson 1923). The stereotypical image of the homeless in America remains one of predominantly single adult men panhandling on city streets, rather than of the very poor.

Decline in Public Awareness

The homeless in rural areas and smaller towns have largely been overlooked (Fitchen 1981; Floyd 1995; Lord Gaber 1996), despite the fact that rural homeless people have become more visible in smaller communities (Patton 1988; Mayher 1993; Gray 2001). During the 1980s, the problem of homelessness received much attention; regrettably, since then, interest in the problem appears to have declined. People who are homeless in rural areas rarely fit the national stereotype and are often less visible than their urban counterparts, partly because of lower population densities in rural areas and the scarcity of social services and shelter programs to identify and assist them. It is important to note that although rural homelessness is clearly not as concentrated or as visible as urban homelessness, the proportion of the homeless is greater in many rural areas than in metropolitan areas (Lawrence 1995). Further, the nature of homelessness in rural areas may be qualitatively different (First et al. 1994), and we may also be missing the policy and program implications of the dignity and inventiveness of poor rural people faced with the loss of shelter (Lawrence 1997; Rollinson 2001). Data are critically needed on the coping strategies of the rural homeless and on their service needs (Bushy et al. 2000).

As a whole, the nation's rural population has lower income, lower employment, and higher poverty levels than urban and suburban Americans (Castle 1995). All but 11 of the 200 poorest counties in the United States are nonmetropolitan. Since 1960, 363 nonmetropolitan counties, accounting for 13 percent of the nonmetropolitan U.S. population and 23 percent of the rural poor, have experienced persistent poverty rates of 20 percent or more (Housing Assistance Council 2002). Unfortunately, the social problems of rural Americans have received less attention than those of their more visible urban counterparts (Moore 2001). Further, many in contemporary America view life in rural communities as a bucolic idyll, but this image is partially maintained by the invisibility of our rural citizens in need (Belden and Wiener 1999). Rural homelessness is numerically less and often proportionally more than urban homelessness (National Coalition for the Homeless 1999), and it differs markedly from the urban stereotype (Cummins 1996).

Increasing Poverty

Two major factors help account for increasing poverty: eroding employment opportunities for a segment of the workforce and the declining value and availability of public assistance (Boland 1997; Wright et al. 1998). Media reports, especially in the late 1990s, of a growing economy and relatively low unemployment masked a number of important reasons why homelessness persists and today may actually be growing in some areas of the country. These reasons include stagnant or falling incomes for a segment of the workforce, less secure jobs that offer fewer benefits, and a rapidly changing economy (Mishel et al. 1999). The economy has shifted from an industrial base to one based on services. This change appears to have marginalized a large sector of the poor population, who increasingly are at risk of homelessness.

In 2004, the nation's official poverty rate rose for the fourth straight year, to 12.7 percent of the population (U.S. Census Bureau 2005). Until its repeal in 1996, the largest cash assistance program for poor families with children was the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program. Between 1970 and 1994, the typical state's AFDC benefits for a family of three fell 47 percent, after adjusting for inflation (Greenberg and Baumohl 1996). The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (the federal welfare reform law) repealed the AFDC program and replaced it with a block grant program called Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Welfare caseloads have dropped sharply since the passage of this act and the implementation of welfare reform legislation. However, declining welfare rolls simply mean that fewer people are receiving benefits. not that they are necessarily employed or able to purchase shelter, food, and other basic needs.

Early findings suggest that although more families are moving from welfare to work, many of them are faring poorly as a result of low wages and inadequate work supports to pay for the combined burden of housing, food, and other necessities (Wolch et al. 1997). Only a small fraction of these former welfare recipients' new jobs pay above-poverty wages; most pay below the poverty line (Sherman 1998). Sherman's report for the Children's Defense Fund and the National Coalition for the Homeless concluded that work alone was not enough. Families moving to unstable and inadequately paid jobs need more support if they are to succeed in the workplace.

Decrease in Affordable Housing

A growing shortage of affordable housing and limited housing assistance programs have also contributed to the rise in homelessness. The gap between the number of affordable housing units and the number of people needing them has created a housing shortage for poor people. These low-income units have been abandoned or converted into condominiums and more expensive apartments, or they have become unaffordable because of rent increases. Between 1973 and 1993, despite an improving economy, 2.2 million low-rent units disappeared from the housing market (Daskal 1998). According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a shortage of 2.8 million affordable rental units existed in 1999 (U.S. Census Bureau 1999).

More recently, the strong economy has caused rents to climb, putting housing out of reach for some of the poorest Americans. Between 1997 and 1999, the number of housing units affordable to extremely low-income renters dropped (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 2001). The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development study found that with rents rising faster than inflation, pressures for above-average rent increases at the bottom end of the rental housing stock continue, while income growth among very low-income renters could be reversed in the event of an economic downturn.

Recently, the Bush administration proposed to transform the nation's main form of housing assistance by replacing the rent voucher system with block grants that would be administered by the states. Although the plan was mentioned only briefly in the White House budget for 2004 and faces stiff opposition, it is clear that the philosophy behind the welfare overhaul of the 1990s is likely to be felt within the low-income housing market in the near future.

Economies of Rural Counties

Deep recessions in agriculture and energy, restructuring in manufacturing, and the emergence of the service industry are among the forces that have significantly reshaped American rural economies since the 1980s. Although median economic indicators turned upward in the 1990s, much of the new rural growth was in counties with scenic amenities or in emerging trade centers that drew much of their strength from the surrounding counties. Many rural counties remain in economic decline, with dwindling populations and growing fiscal problems. Remote and farm-dependent counties appear to be facing especially difficult economic challenges.

Four broad trends describe the current economic environment of rural America (Drabenstott and Smith 1996). First, some rural places have adapted to the new economic environment better than others. These include counties with natural amenities, often catering to a large influx of new residents. Second, a consolidation in retail activity has produced fewer rural trade centers. Historically, rural America was characterized by a large number of small rural trading communities, often built around the county seat. Today, many of these towns can no longer claim to be a trade center for the surrounding area. Third, consolidation in agriculture continues to weaken the link between farming and local communities. Although agriculture remains important, its economic impact has changed. Commodity agriculture remains, but it is in bigger hands, and the advent of industrialized agriculture has created a new economic pattern of rural haves and have-nots. Fourth, remoteness appears to have become a deterrent to economic growth in many rural places. Rural counties adjacent to metropolitan areas have grown faster than more remote counties. Although some remote counties with scenic amenities have grown rapidly by attracting tourists, retirees, and new businesses, even in these counties the poor appear to experience difficulties in securing housing (Gober et al. 1993; Aran and Fitchen 1996). Remote farm-dependent counties have fared much worse. As rural economic conditions have changed so has the ability of some rural people and families to secure shelter, food, clothing, and other necessities.

Emergency Shelter Agencies

Individuals are deemed to be homeless if they have no fixed, regular, adequate nighttime residence and must therefore constantly move around seeking security, rest, nutrition, and protection from the elements (U.S. Congress, House 1987). Homeless people are provided with emergency shelter by either a private or a public agency in homeless shelters (for example, by a church, the Salvation Army, or a city government). Homeless people may also be placed temporarily in hotels or institutions (for example, a home for battered women), or live in areas that are not designed to be shelters (for example, parks, abandoned trailers, or under bridges), or occupy structures without permission (squatting). Emergency shelter facilities range from small organizations serving only a few individuals at any one time to large agencies serving more than 100 people each night. Many shelters are religiously affiliated and their primary mission entails ministering to the disadvantaged. The range of services provided varies widely: most shelters provide only limited assistance with clothing and food, but some of the larger facilities also provide counseling, a caseworker, and access to health care. Some shelters limit the period of stay.

Patterns and Characteristics of Homelessness: A Review of the Literature

Much of the existing literature on homelessness focuses on the problem in metropolitan areas, probably because of both the visibility and the accessibility of the urban homeless to researchers. What follows will detail the lessons that can be learned from studies of homelessness in metropolitan areas and our limited understanding of the problem in rural America. The first part of the discussion pertains to the national counts and characteristics of homelessness. The second pari reviews the different causes of homelessness discussed in the literature.

Some of the first studies focused on attempting to count the homeless population. One of the first national estimates of more than two million homeless individuals was offered by the advocacy group the Center for Creative Nonviolence (Hombs and Synder 1982). This estimate extrapolated figures from local service providers throughout the country's largest metropolitan areas, and it was quickly accepted as authoritative by the media and the public alike (Link et al. 1996). Since then, formal enumeration of the national homeless population has usually produced smaller point-in-time estimates than those provided by service providers, advocates, and local officials (Wright et al. 1998; Burt et al. 1999).

Recognizing the Patterns of Homelessness

One way to describe the homeless population is to divide it into three patterns of homelessness: the temporarily, episodically, and chronically homeless (Institute of Medicine 1988). As the problem does not take on a single form or shape, this is a useful way to distinguish between the populations. It also speaks to the nature of the homeless experience.

Temporary homelessness arises when people are displaced from their usual dwellings by fires, evictions, family breakdowns, or other unexpected circumstances. Episodically homeless people are those who frequently experience periods of being homed and then homeless, for example, a troubled youth whose home situation becomes intolerable and who ends up on the streets (Shaffer and Caton 1984). Another example is those suffering from mental illness who live with family members except when their disability episodically becomes intolerable for the family. Homeless persons who are considered "hidden" may well experience periods in and out of homelessness. For example, mothers with children escaping from spousal abuse may double up with relatives or friends for certain periods and then find themselves without housing when tensions in the house explode. Last, the chronically homeless are those without a home for one year or more; they are more likely to suffer from mental illness and substance abuse than other classes of homeless people (Bassuk et al. 1986; Fischer and Breakey 1988).

Difficulties in Counting the Homeless

Despite the development of increasingly sophisticated methodologies (Burt et al. 1999), the difficulties inherent in the enumeration of homeless people leave nearly all attempts at counting open to criticism, and today it would be fair to say that substantial uncertainty persists over the number. Such criticism and uncertainty do not invalidate prior enumerative research, but variations in counts are largely the result of different definitions of who the homeless are, the time intervals of counting, and variations in geographic coverage.

The duration of the count interacts with the definition employed. For example, a point-in-time count will enumerate those who are literally homeless (considered to be those in shelters and on the streets) but could miss the temporarily homeless, perhaps because they were in the hospital at the time. Further, the episodically homeless could have been housed at the time of the count. Generally speaking, homeless counts have tended to focus on those utilizing service provider facilities, although a number of studies have attempted to count the "street" population (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 1984). Most counts have tended to capture the chronically homeless, as they are available to be counted at any time, but have been less successful in capturing the temporarily and episodically homeless (Rossi et al. 1986).

These and other issues pose a methodological problem in rural areas, where service providers for the homeless are often few and far between and people living outside are often not visible. Because the counts focus on the visible, and therefore countable, homeless, those hidden from view or marginally housed have not been counted. Most researchers who try to count the homeless now deny they are attempting a complete enumeration of the population and state that their estimate should be viewed as a low estimate of the extent of the problem (Wright et al. 1998).

Recent Counts

Currently, several national estimates of homelessness are available. The Census Bureau reported that in the 2000 census point-in time enumeration, 178,638 people were counted in homeless emergency and transitional shelters (Smith and Smith, 2001). This estimate remains a source of debate and tension between advocates and the Census Bureau, and the count does not accurately reflect the number of people who are experiencing homelessness in America today. In fairness to the Census Bureau, after the confusion with the 1990 Census "Shelter and Street Night (S-Night)" operation, it was made clear that the Census 2000 would not be producing a count of the population experiencing homelessness, rather a "snapshot" of the population using shelters. In many cases, homelessness is not a permanent condition but a state of extreme poverty marked by a temporary or episodic lack of housing. People may move in and out of homelessness over time. An Urban Institute press release (2000) estimated that approximately 3.5 million people are likely to experience homelessness in any given year. This estimate was based on findings from the 1996 National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients (Burt et al. 1999); it translates to over 1 percent of the nation's population.

Regardless of the length of time over which the study is conducted, many people will not be counted because they are not in places researchers can easily find. A national study of formerly homeless people found that the most common places homeless people stayed were vehicles and other makeshift housing, such as tents, boxes, caves, or boxcars (Link et al. 1994). The same study found that 7.4 percent of all adult Americans have been on the street or in a shelter during their lifetimes. This measure provides a further insight into the dynamic nature of the problem.

National counts have shed some light on the magnitude of homelessness. However, owing to the nature of the problem a number of significant questions remain concerning these enumerations, particularly in attempting to count the rural homeless population (Toomey et al. 1993). A recent study of twenty-seven U.S. cities reported that the demand for emergency food assistance and shelter continued to outstrip availability (U.S. Conference of Mayors 2004). The issue of homelessness is likely to be a continuing stain upon the American landscape (Shlay and Rossi 1992).

The "Old' and "New" Homeless

The literature often contrasts the so-called old and new homeless. The old homeless of the skid row era have been described as ol...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Preface
• Chapter 1. Rural Homelessness in America
• Chapter 2. Current Policy and Programs for the Homeless
• Chapter 3. An Exploration of Homeless People and Families Living in a Rural Setting
• Chapter 4. An Analysis of the Findings for the Rural Homeless
• Chapter 5. Family Health and the Rural Homeless
• References
• Index