[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
HOUSING AMERICA: ADDRESSING
CHALLENGES IN SERVING PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
=======================================================================
VIRTUAL HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT,
AND INSURANCE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 2, 2022
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Financial Services
Serial No. 117-66
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
47-104 PDF WASHINGTON : 2022
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES
MAXINE WATERS, California, Chairwoman
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York PATRICK McHENRY, North Carolina,
NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ, New York Ranking Member
BRAD SHERMAN, California FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York BILL POSEY, Florida
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
AL GREEN, Texas BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri ANN WAGNER, Missouri
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado ANDY BARR, Kentucky
JIM A. HIMES, Connecticut ROGER WILLIAMS, Texas
BILL FOSTER, Illinois FRENCH HILL, Arkansas
JOYCE BEATTY, Ohio TOM EMMER, Minnesota
JUAN VARGAS, California LEE M. ZELDIN, New York
JOSH GOTTHEIMER, New Jersey BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia
VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas ALEXANDER X. MOONEY, West Virginia
AL LAWSON, Florida WARREN DAVIDSON, Ohio
MICHAEL SAN NICOLAS, Guam TED BUDD, North Carolina
CINDY AXNE, Iowa DAVID KUSTOFF, Tennessee
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois TREY HOLLINGSWORTH, Indiana
AYANNA PRESSLEY, Massachusetts ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
RITCHIE TORRES, New York JOHN ROSE, Tennessee
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts BRYAN STEIL, Wisconsin
ALMA ADAMS, North Carolina LANCE GOODEN, Texas
RASHIDA TLAIB, Michigan WILLIAM TIMMONS, South Carolina
MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania VAN TAYLOR, Texas
ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, New York PETE SESSIONS, Texas
JESUS ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
SYLVIA GARCIA, Texas
NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia
JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts
Charla Ouertatani, Staff Director
Subcommittee on Housing, Community
Development, and Insurance
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri, Chairman
NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ, New York FRENCH HILL, Arkansas, Ranking
BRAD SHERMAN, California Member
JOYCE BEATTY, Ohio BILL POSEY, Florida
AL GREEN, Texas BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas LEE M. ZELDIN, New York
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York TREY HOLLINGSWORTH, Indiana
JUAN VARGAS, California JOHN ROSE, Tennessee
AL LAWSON, Florida BRYAN STEIL, Wisconsin, Vice
CINDY AXNE, Iowa, Vice Chair Ranking Member
RITCHIE TORRES, New York LANCE GOODEN, Texas
VAN TAYLOR, Texas
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on:
February 2, 2022............................................. 1
Appendix:
February 2, 2022............................................. 39
WITNESSES
Wednesday, February 2, 2022
Bush, Adrienne, Executive Director, Homeless and Housing
Coalition of Kentucky.......................................... 6
Dones, Marc, Chief Executive Officer, King County Regional
Homelessness Authority......................................... 5
Karr-McDonald, Harriet, President, The Doe Fund.................. 11
Oliva, Ann, Vice President, Housing Policy, Center on Budget and
Policy Priorities.............................................. 8
Roman, Nan, Chief Executive Officer, National Alliance to End
Homelessness................................................... 9
APPENDIX
Prepared statements:
Bush, Adrienne............................................... 40
Dones, Marc.................................................. 55
Karr-McDonald, Harriet....................................... 60
Oliva, Ann................................................... 65
Roman, Nan................................................... 86
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Cleaver, Hon. Emanuel:
Written statement of Catholic Charities USA.................. 95
Written statement of Community Solutions..................... 103
Written statement of the Council of State Community
Development Agencies....................................... 110
Written statement of the Skid Row Housing Trust.............. 114
Written statement of the J. Ronald Terwilliger Center for
Housing Policy and the Bipartisan Policy Center............ 118
Waters, Hon. Maxine:
Written responses to questions for the record from Adrienne
Bush....................................................... 124
Written responses to questions for the record from Marc Dones 131
Written responses to questions for the record from Ann Oliva. 139
Written responses to questions for the record from Nan Roman. 149
McHenry, Hon. Patrick:
Written statement of Isabel McDevitt, Executive Vice
President, The Doe Fund.................................... 156
HOUSING AMERICA: ADDRESSING
CHALLENGES IN SERVING PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
----------
Wednesday, February 2, 2022
U.S. House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Housing,
Community Development,
and Insurance,
Committee on Financial Services
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m.,
via Webex, Hon. Emanuel Cleaver [chairman of the subcommittee]
presiding.
Members present: Representatives Cleaver, Velazquez,
Sherman, Beatty, Green, Gonzalez of Texas, Vargas, Lawson,
Axne, Torres; Hill, Posey, Huizenga, Zeldin, Hollingsworth,
Rose, Steil, and Taylor.
Ex officio present: Representative Waters.
Also present: Representatives Pressley and Barr.
Chairman Cleaver. Good morning. The Subcommittee on
Housing, Community Development, and Insurance will come to
order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess of the subcommittee at any time. Also, without
objection, members of the full Financial Services Committee who
are not members of the subcommittee are authorized to
participate in today's hearing.
Today's hearing is entitled, ``Housing America: Addressing
Challenges in Serving People Experiencing Homelessness.''
I now recognize myself for 3 minutes for an opening
statement.
Homelessness in the United States is an unnecessary and
worsening crisis. According to HUD, between 2016 and 2020,
homelessness increased in the richest nation on the planet by 6
percent, with more than 580,000 people, including children,
experiencing homelessness in January of 2020.
The significant economic instability brought by COVID-19,
and reports of crises from homeless service providers on the
front lines have only heightened concerns about conditions
facing homeless and at-risk populations. In every congressional
district in the country, homeless service providers have worked
tirelessly to benefit those communities. It is without question
that these service providers are heroes and that the work they
do saves American lives. It is also without question that
service providers have been asked to solve complex, systemic
problems with woefully insufficient resources and a unique set
of professional challenges.
It is my intent that this hearing will allow the public to
better understand the challenges that local homeless service
providers face in the battle to end homelessness in our
country, and that members of this subcommittee will be better
able to continue to explore ways that we can provide the needed
support and resources for the benefit of those who are in need.
I would also be remiss not to emphasize that while the
causes of homelessness are many, the affordable housing crisis
is an accelerant to open flames. Soaring housing costs and
growing backlogs for critical housing resources have pushed
some Americans into homelessness and left millions more at
risk.
In addition, the national strain on housing resources
limits the ability of service providers to provide positive
outcomes for Americans battling housing insecurity. In the
United States, 40 percent of people experiencing homelessness
are currently employed, yet unable to obtain stable housing.
The Build Back Better Act passed by the House in November
includes very, very, very, very important provisions for the
committee, which we would now like to see pass in the Senate.
I have heard opponents of these investments in the House.
Many of their arguments, I think, are rather weak, but we will
get into this, hopefully, as this hearing proceeds.
I now recognize the ranking member of our subcommittee, Mr.
Hill from Arkansas, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Hill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
convening this hearing to talk about an issue that is important
to all of us in our local districts, with all of our
constituents, and that is the issue of how we can best, locally
and nationally, address homelessness.
I would like to start by talking about the success we have
had in my district, first with my own team. I am so grateful to
our combat wounded warriors--we have three on our staff--and
how they work seamlessly with our veteran community to tackle
veteran homelessness and help those veterans find shelter. And
it is one of the most rewarding parts of my job and my time in
Congress.
Second, I would say that Central Arkansas is blessed by
having a robust and well-coordinated support system to help our
brothers and sisters who are homeless, including many of our
great nonprofits like the Salvation Army, Jericho Way, the
Union Rescue Mission, St. Francis House--which has a particular
emphasis on veterans--the Veterans Villages of America, run by
the great Iraq veteran, Colonel Mike Ross, Goodwill, and Our
House. All of them work together seamlessly to try to eliminate
homelessness and to fight for shelter.
From Little Rock to Los Angeles, people experiencing
housing insecurity need not just a safe place to stay, but also
supportive services, whether it is clinical help, career
coaching, or case management. That way, people can not only get
housed, but eventually get their own place, break the cycle of
homelessness, and begin their pursuit of happiness. That is why
organizations like Our House, which is successfully working in
Little Rock, as well as The Doe Fund in New York, that we will
hear from today, have an expanding array of supportive
services, including job training, childcare, and others that
are successful in going well beyond shelter. I look forward to
discussing how the Housing First approach disadvantages many
successful local service providers, like those in my district,
from receiving appropriate Federal funding, and why we should
support those that provide crucial wraparound services as well
as a true holistic approach to reducing homelessness.
Before I yield back the balance of my time, I would just
like to share a story from an Arkansan who has found success in
these sorts of programs. Joshua is a constituent of mine in
Little Rock, who had trouble finding stable housing after he
left prison. He came to Our House and has been working there
since 1987. He quickly settled in, found a home in the shelter,
and joined a job training program on campus. And since last
year, Joshua has worked in the guard shack, where he enjoys
meeting people as they come to seek help. Because of his hard
work and dedication, Joshua was selected to move into Our
House's transitional housing, where he has been attending
classes to earn his forklift certification, which will
eventually lead to that career. Joshua, we are proud of you,
and we are with you every step of the way. Joshua's story is so
important, and it illustrates the importance of not just
providing a safe place to stay, but giving people the resources
and the help they need to succeed.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to our discussion today, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Cleaver. The gentleman yields back the balance of
his time.
The Chair now recognizes the Vice Chair of the
subcommittee, the gentlewoman from the snow-filled Iowa area of
our country. Mrs. Axne, you recognized for 1 minute.
Mrs. Axne. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is really good that
we are having this hearing. I appreciate you holding this
hearing because at last count, we had over 580,000 Americans
who were experiencing homelessness, and over 2,500 right here
in Iowa. Tonight, the wind chill in Iowa will be negative 15
degrees. That is dangerous for anyone, let alone those who are
forced to sleep outside tonight because they couldn't find
shelter. I hope we get as many people sheltered in the short
term as possible, but we absolutely need to use this hearing to
discuss more solutions to address homelessness for the long
term, including my bill to give rural areas more flexibility to
help people experiencing homelessness. We need to implement the
ideas we discuss today to get us back on track to finding
people the homes they need, like we were a few years ago. Thank
you, and I yield back.
Chairman Cleaver. The gentlewoman yields back.
The Chair now recognizes the Chair of the full Financial
Services Committee, the gentlewoman from California, Chairwoman
Waters.
Chairwoman Waters. Thank you so very much for this
subcommittee hearing, and I am here today to listen to our
witnesses. I am absolutely upset, and I am unhappy about the
lack of progress that some of our cities are making despite the
fact that we are doing everything that we can to get the
resources to them. I spent 6 hours out on the street working
with the homeless, who were in tents with all of the trash, et
cetera, and I was able to offer them Project Homekey, despite
the fact that we were having locals telling us people didn't
want to get off the street. Every one of them accepted getting
into hotel rooms for the night and being able to work with
whomever in order to transition them to permanent housing. And
so, I want to hear what these obstacles are, because I am not
pleased at all, and we have to move the homeless off the
street, and I think we can all do a better job. I yield back
the balance of my time.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Today, we welcome the testimony of our distinguished
witnesses: Ms. Adrienne Bush, the executive director of the
Homeless and Housing Coalition of Kentucky; Mr. Marc Dones, the
chief executive officer for the King County Regional
Homelessness Authority; Ms. Ann Oliva, the vice president for
housing policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities;
and Ms. Nan Roman, the chief executive officer at the National
Alliance to End Homelessness. And I will recognize Mr. Hill to
introduce our final witness.
Mr. Hill. Would you like me to do that now, Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Cleaver. Yes, please.
Mr. Hill. I appreciate that. I have the pleasure of
introducing Ms. Harriet Karr-McDonald today, who serves as the
president of The Doe Fund in New York City. Harriet is a
longtime and fierce advocate for people experiencing
homelessness at The Doe Fund, which she co-founded with her
husband, the late George McDonald. And, first, Harriet, on
behalf of all of us, let me offer my condolences to the family
and The Doe Fund teams and over the loss of George. You and
George have truly been points of light in New York, helping the
less fortunate, and New York is a much better place because of
you.
I have been fortunate to visit The Doe Fund several times
since I have been in Congress, and every time I return, I am so
impressed by the work done by the men and women who are ready,
willing, and able to fight homelessness and hopelessness due to
this enormous challenge. The Doe Fund is an ordinary success,
not only because it has lowered criminal recidivism and has
higher work attachment than virtually any other program for the
homeless in New York City, but because it specializes in
tackling the hardest cases and helping those most in need. That
is what impresses me so much about this organization. I thank
Harriet Karr-McDonald for taking the time to lend her
expertise, and I look forward to her testimony. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you, Mr. Hill, and welcome, Ms.
Karr-McDonald.
Witnesses are reminded that their oral testimony will be
limited to 5 minutes. You should be able to see a timer on your
screen that will indicate how much time you have left. I would
ask that you be mindful of the timer, and quickly wrap up your
testimony when your time has expired, so that we can be
respectful of both the witnesses' and the subcommittee members'
time.
And without objection, your written statements will be made
a part of our record.
I now recognize Mr. Marc Dones for 5 minutes to give an
oral presentation of his testimony.
STATEMENT OF MARC DONES, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KING COUNTY
REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY
Mr. Dones. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the
subcommittee for the opportunity to speak today. My name is
Marc Dones, and I have the honor of serving as the chief
executive officer of the Kings County Regional Homelessness
Authority. The Authority is charged with the oversight of the
entirety of the homelessness system in King County, inclusive
of the City of Seattle, and 38 other cities in our
unincorporated areas.
We are currently facing a growing crisis of national
proportions, aided and abetted by policy choices that have
misunderstood the root causes of homelessness, and under-
resourced the solutions that are most effective. Our
investments in the homelessness space have been overly focused
on services that offer sub-clinical support, while leaving
systems unable to provide the actual housing solutions that
people need. As the system administrator for the third-largest
continuum of care, I am here to tell you that it simply doesn't
matter how many social workers attend to a person's needs, or
how many outreach workers are available to connect with our
unsheltered neighbors if we don't have anywhere for them to go,
and that is precisely where we stand today. The reality is that
there is no number of social workers who will ever transform
into a house. Until we prioritize stabilizing the housing
market for low-income individuals, we will not end
homelessness; we will simply manage it.
We must also recognize that homelessness is
incontrovertibly a racial justice issue. Homelessness
disproportionately impacts people of color as a direct result
of this country's history of racialized exclusion from housing.
While Black people represent only 12 percent of the general
population, we routinely make up 30 to 40 percent or more of
the homeless population. Native people who make up only 1
percent of the general population often make up 3 to 6 percent
of the population experiencing homelessness. We must not forget
that it wasn't until 1968, with the passage of the Fair Housing
Act, that this country stepped towards ensuring people of color
had access to the same housing finance tools as White
Americans. This legacy is alive today in the patterns of
generational wealth that communities can access to get through
hard times like housing bubble bursts, global recessions, or
global pandemics.
Our national strategy to end homelessness must be aligned
with these fundamentals and must focus on ending the racialized
outcomes that continue to harm people even as we sit here
today. Put quite frankly, the time has come for America to
decide whether it will live down to its racist history or up to
the dreams we all hold for it, and the decision to solve
homelessness is a core component of that. This will require us
to understand that homelessness is an economic issue; it is
about not having the money to pay rent.
At the local level, we see over and over again that many of
the people in our shelter system, or, frankly, in our
encampments, are working. What they aren't doing is making a
living wage. We also know that the belief that homelessness is
driven by behavioral health is false. What we tend to see is
that even if people present with these concerns, they
frequently begin after the experience of homelessness, not
before. The reality is that every day we allow someone to
experience homelessness, the harder it will be for us to
connect them with the resources they need. Because of this, we
must transform our homelessness systems into true crisis
response, as has been called for us since the first United
States Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) plan in
2010. In order to do that, we must equip systems with the
necessary resources to act quickly and decisively when people
experience homelessness.
Jurisdictions have had success acquiring hotels, motels,
and installed market rate projects to repurpose as housing
supports. To some degree, this is a reinvestment in the single
room occupancy (SRO) and other low-income housing stock that
was wiped from the American landscape during the
suburbanization of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. This low-income
housing stock has played a significant role, or the lack
thereof rather, in the inability to exit people from
homelessness without some form of subsidy in the rise of the
modern formation of homelessness itself.
Additionally, given the fragile economic networks that
communities face, we must continue to invest in diversion and
other cash benefits that are tried and proven methods of
keeping people from entering homelessness and prevent further
public investment down the road. This data-driven decision-
making is critical for the appropriate targeting of resource,
which absolutely must include prioritization and people
experiencing unsheltered homelessness. It is unacceptable for
our policies to force people to live outside, and we must make
a concerted effort to end unsheltered homelessness in America.
Finally, we must invest in our workforce. For 30 years, our
field has been chronically underfunded and, as a result, we
have seen our pipeline collapse. Providers are hemorrhaging
staff who are no longer willing to tolerate poverty wages while
trying to end homelessness. The fact of the matter is this work
is done by people helping other people. There is no app that is
going to change that. ``Housing case managers,'' ``recovery
coaches,'' and, ``peer navigators'' are all fancy terms for
people who have decided that the thing they want to do with
their lives is to help others. And we as a country need to
decide, do we care about our caretakers?
I thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Dones can be found on page
55 of the appendix.]
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you very much.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Bush for 5 minutes for an oral
presentation of your testimony.
STATEMENT OF ADRIENNE BUSH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, HOMELESS AND
HOUSING COALITION OF KENTUCKY
Ms. Bush. Good morning, Chairman Cleaver, Ranking Member
Hill, and members of the subcommittee. I am honored to share
our thoughts on ending homelessness in the Commonwealth of
Kentucky. My name is Adrienne Bush, and I am the executive
director of the Homeless and Housing Coalition of Kentucky
(HHCK), a Statewide non-partisan advocacy organization with a
unique perspective on administering housing assistance to
people experiencing homelessness.
Our mission is to eliminate the threat of homelessness and
fulfill the promise of affordable housing. To that end, we also
step in to identify gaps to provide continuum of care and
emergency solutions grant assistance when requested.
Additionally, we convene and staff a Kentucky Interagency
Council on Homelessness, the Statewide homeless policy and
planning body authorized by State statute. We are a State
partner of the National Low Income Housing Coalition, and we
abide by the principles that: (a) housing is a human right; and
(b) housing ends homelessness.
Here is what we know about homelessness in our small,
mostly rural State. Using multiple sources, including the
Point-in-Time Count, the coordinated entry process, and
hospital discharge data, we know that just over 4,000 people
enter street or shelter homelessness annually. Further, we know
that Kentucky is not immune to systemic racial disparities
among people entering homelessness. Most glaringly, 25 percent
of people experiencing homelessness are Black in a State where
only 8 percent of the general population identifies as Black.
And the odds ratio of a Black hospital patient being identified
as experiencing homelessness is 70 percent higher than the odds
for a White patient.
In Kentucky, there are three continuum of care (COC)
jurisdictions: Lexington, Fayette County; Louisville, Jefferson
County; and then the 118 counties outside of our two largest
cities comprise the balance of the State. Each COC maximizes
Federal funding to the extent possible. While Lexington and
Louisville often are able to offer additional local revenue to
support homeless assistance activities, homeless service
providers in the balance of the State rarely have that option,
and use much smaller allocations of COC and ESG funds. Each COC
prioritizes projects that implement Housing First principles
and strategies. They offer housing with case management in
connection to employment and other services tailored to the
needs of the household and the community.
Barriers to ending homelessness and housing insecurity writ
large are driven by the lack of affordable housing. As the
members of this subcommittee are well-aware, the housing crisis
is prevalent nationwide, and in Kentucky, where our cost of
living is theoretically lower than the coasts, prior to the
pandemic, we were short nearly 78,000 affordable and available
rental homes for extremely low-income Kentuckians. The average
wage that renters earn in Kentucky is $14.25 per hour, while
the hourly wage required to pay for a 2-bedroom rental home is
$15.78. Service and care sector jobs, where many labor
shortages are occurring, have a median hourly wage of $9 to $10
per hour here in Kentucky. It is also important to recognize
that not all job openings with living wages are spread
equitably across regions within the State, and this is acutely
true in areas of longstanding depressed economies, such as
Appalachian Kentucky.
Congress, through the leadership of the House Financial
Services Committee, has taken bold steps to reduce homelessness
through the housing provisions in the CARES Act and the
American Rescue Plan Act. Now is the time to continue that work
through pathways of the Build Back Better Act and other
legislation for consideration today. At HHCK, we know what
works in Kentucky communities, whether in larger cities like
Louisville or in our small rural towns. Given the challenges
the United States faces in coming out of the pandemic, now is
the time to course correct away from the affordable housing
crisis and provide the foundation to end homelessness through
legislation and correctly-scaled funding.
Thank you for your consideration of my remarks this
morning, and I yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Bush can be found on page 40
of the appendix.]
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you very much, Ms. Bush, for your
testimony.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Oliva for 5 minutes for an
oral presentation of your testimony.
STATEMENT OF ANN OLIVA, VICE PRESIDENT, HOUSING POLICY, THE
CENTER ON BUDGET AND POLICY PRIORITIES
Ms. Oliva. Thank you, Chairwoman Waters, Chairman Cleaver,
and Ranking Member Hill. My name is Ann Oliva, and I am the
vice president for housing policy at the Center on Budget and
Policy Priorities. I want to commend this subcommittee for the
housing-related relief measures enacted during the pandemic.
Thank you as well to Chairwoman Waters, Chairman Cleaver, and
Representative Torres for your continued leadership on
homelessness, including the introduction of the Ending
Homelessness Act of 2021, which, if enacted, would address many
of the challenges that we are discussing today.
The housing investments made as part of the nation's
pandemic response are helping communities to keep families in
their housing and/or providing critical resources for those
experiencing homelessness in significant ways. More than 3.2
million households, most of whom have very low or extremely low
incomes, have received emergency rental assistance. Communities
have issued nearly 23,000 emergency housing vouchers to
households experiencing or at risk of homelessness, and more
than 9,500 units have been leased. Emergency Solutions grants
funding has helped communities respond to the needs of people
living unsheltered and in shelters, and HOME funds will help
communities build permanent and supportive housing.
These resources are the right start, but more investments
are needed to address capacity and equity challenges being
experienced on the ground. All of the reliable evidence tells
us that the situation for people experiencing homelessness is
urgent, and that the homelessness crisis, which predates the
pandemic, will persist afterwards without serious intervention.
The Census Poll Survey continues to show that millions of
households are at risk of eviction and that people of color
continue to be disproportionately impacted by the pandemic.
In 2020, for the first time since we started gathering this
data, we saw an increase in the number of people in families
with kids living unsheltered, and the number of individuals
living on the streets exceeded the number of individuals living
in shelters, also for the first time. HUD reports that more
than 580,000 people experienced homelessness on a single night
in January of 2020, and that nearly 1\1/2\ million people
experienced sheltered homelessness at some time in 2018.
People of color are disproportionately impacted by
homelessness. Families experiencing homelessness are typically
headed by women, many are headed by young parents, and they
include a high percentage of young children. Youth, veterans,
and adults experiencing chronic homelessness are suffering on
our streets and in our shelters every day, and data shows that
more than half of sheltered people and 40 percent of
unsheltered people experiencing homelessness work but still
can't afford housing.
Homelessness assistance systems face daunting challenges.
Some are longstanding issues like the scarcity of available,
supportive, and affordable housing units, but new challenges
have also emerged. Rising rents make finding and keeping
permanent housing more difficult for extremely low-income
people. The urgency created by the pandemic has stretched
community planning and staffing resources thin, creating
unanticipated implementation challenges. Congregate shelters
have proven to be unsafe environments for people who often have
underlying health issues. Criminalization of people
experiencing homelessness is rising, and more resources are
needed. Communities consistently report that they want and need
more housing and service resources.
Expanding the Housing Choice Voucher Program and building
new units through well-targeted programs is the most important
and effective step Congress can take to address this crisis.
Congress should pass a Build Back Better Act that retains
critical housing investments, which currently includes voucher
expansion that we estimate would serve about 300,000 extremely
low-income households after phase-in, including about 80,000
households experiencing or at risk of homelessness, an
estimated 70 percent of whom are people of color.
I regularly partner with people who have experienced
homelessness and their priorities are clear: one, create more
affordable housing options and supports and target those most
impacted by structural equity; two, develop and support
dignity-based services led by the communities most impacted by
homelessness; three, reimagine congregate shelter and crisis
response options; and four, end practices and policies that
criminalize people experiencing homelessness. The need for
housing assistance is urgent, especially for historically-
marginalized people. Now is the time for bold action to
increase housing supply and affordability nationwide, to
partner with people with lived expertise to define solutions,
and to set communities up for success by making services more
accessible.
Thank you, and I look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Oliva can be found on page
65of the appendix.]
Chairman Cleaver. Thanks, Ms. Oliva. I appreciate your
testimony.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Roman for 5 minutes for an
oral presentation of your testimony.
STATEMENT OF NAN ROMAN, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THE NATIONAL
ALLIANCE TO END HOMELESSNESS
Ms. Roman. Thank you so much, Chairman Cleaver, Ranking
Member Hill, Chairwoman Waters, and members of the subcommittee
for inviting me to testify today. I am Nan Roman, CEO of the
National Alliance to End Homelessness, which is a nonpartisan,
nonprofit, education policy, capacity-building organization.
Briefly, a few comments on where we stand on homelessness.
As other witnesses have said, homelessness has been going up
slightly every year since 2016. Due to the pandemic, we are not
certain where the numbers stand today. The Alliance has
conducted four surveys of the nation's continuums of care
during the pandemic, and most COCs feel that the number of
homeless people is up, including unsheltered numbers being up.
It is our belief that unsheltered homelessness has likely
increased, and it is possible that overall homelessness has
also increased. And as others have said, people of color are
disproportionately homeless, and there are disparities in the
availability and the impact of the assistance they receive from
that homeless assistance system. So, this is where we stand on
homelessness today.
Thanks to your work, there is a significant opportunity at
the moment to make a serious dent in the problem of
homelessness. The inability of people to afford housing is the
major driver of homelessness and the major solution to
homelessness. That is not to say that people don't need
services and jobs. They do need services and jobs, but
everything works better when people have safe, stable, and
affordable housing. I think we could all say that about our own
lives.
During the past 2 years, you have generously provided
through the CARES Act and the American Rescue Plan Act the very
resources that people experiencing homelessness need to return
to housing. And Build Back Better, should it advance--fingers
crossed--will build upon those resources. These resources are
not going to be enough to end homelessness, but they can
certainly reverse its course, and they represent a significant
opportunity for us to make a difference.
Of course, there are many challenges as well to making
progress. A key challenge is to apply the resources that you
have provided in the most strategic ways possible.
Organizations, agencies, and their staffs are depleted, and
they are struggling. It is easier to house people who have
lower needs, who do not require services, who are more
acceptable to landlords, or who are not yet homeless, than it
is to house people who are literally homeless, possibly
unsheltered, and have high service needs. But to reduce
homelessness, we really need to focus on the latter group, not
the former group.
A critical priority is to address the needs of unsheltered
people. It is just not acceptable that in a nation with the
resources and capacity of ours, 230,000 people should be
sleeping on the streets every night. Data indicate that people
who are unsheltered have much more serious health problems and
shorter life expectancy than those living in shelters. This
group should be a top priority for us, and I am not sure that
it is.
Another challenge is staff shortages. Most COCs report
significant shortages in staff across-the-board. While the
sector welcomes and appreciates new resources and initiatives,
it can be a struggle to implement, to follow up on those
resources without staff. Similarly, new funding and initiatives
often require the creation of new partnerships, important, but
hard work, that many simply feel too overwhelmed to undertake
at the moment. One final challenge is the possibility that
there will be a significant post-pandemic increase in
homelessness. Many Federal supports will be coming to an end,
and the nation is facing a period of high inflation, including
for housing. While I hope that the strategic use of stimulus
resources prevents it, we should be prepared for a wave of
increased homelessness possibly in the summer or next fall.
Given these opportunities and challenges, there are some
key solutions that the Alliance encourages communities to
invest in to reduce homelessness. We recommend that they use
funds to help people with the highest needs, including people
who are unsheltered, those experiencing chronic homelessness,
people with disabilities, families with children, and pregnant
women and older adults who are homeless.
On the other hand, we recommend that the funds not be used
for the prevention of homelessness. There are other resources
available for that. We recommend that communities allocate
their resources to strategies that are specifically designed to
reduce racial disparities and eliminate racial
disproportionality. It is important to focus our resources on
proven solutions, such as Housing First. Housing First is not
housing only. We recommend that jurisdictions take the
opportunity to investigate the possibility of converting
available office and commercial space to housing, and we
recommend investing in those partnerships that are needed.
In closing, while people experiencing homelessness have
suffered tremendously, the resources you have provided have
ended homeless [inaudible].
[The prepared statement of Ms. Roman can be found on page
86 of the appendix.]
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you, Ms. Roman, for your testimony.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Karr-McDonald for 5 minutes
for an oral presentation of your testimony.
STATEMENT OF HARRIET KARR-MCDONALD, PRESIDENT, THE DOE FUND
Ms. Karr-McDonald. I want to thank you all for this really
wonderful opportunity to testify about my 30 years of
experience working mostly on the ground in this area. I am the
president of The Doe Fund, and I ask that we keep the concept
of opportunity at the forefront of our mind, opportunity that
leads to true self-sufficiency. It is unquestionable that the
vast majority of the people that we have served are minority
people, and that is, for very obvious reasons, the lack of
opportunity at every level for minority people.
The Doe Fund pioneered Work Works in New York City 30 years
ago. It was a similar moment of urgency. Homeless people were
living on pretty much every street corner, and on subway
grates, and one of the major areas where you could see this
horrible human drama play out was Grand Central Terminal, where
the thousands, literally, of people living there were desperate
to survive. My deceased husband and I made it our business to
spend an enormous amount of time in Grand Central with homeless
people, and what we learned from them is what they told us over
and over again: What they wanted was a room and a job to pay
for it. We heard it constantly, ``a room and a job to pay for
it,'' and that is what we set out to do.
We started with 70 men that we literally picked up off the
floor of Grand Central, and we decided that we would create a
work program that at that time was a total innovation in the
area of homelessness. Work came first. Even before we had a
contract for transitional housing, we got a contract for work,
and at that time, everyone thought that homeless people were
too lazy or too crazy to work. From the beginning, those 70 men
demonstrated that the absolute opposite was true. They worked
so hard.
Then, we got our transitional housing, and what we realized
was that we needed a three-legged stool approach to start
ending homelessness. We have very extensive social services,
including drug treatment. We have paid work, of course, very
good transitional housing, and training for jobs, and
introduction to work. We clean 150 miles of New York streets
every day. We also have an oil business, oil that gets refined.
We have a direct mail business. And even increasingly, in this
period of the pandemic, we have grown our culinary arts program
and served other hungry people in the communities in which we
work.
The population that we serve today is honestly no different
than the population we saw then. They are demographically
absolutely [inaudible]. I believe that these single adult men
make up the largest segment of the homeless population. That is
who our program serves. We serve about 1,000 people at a time
who are ready, willing, and able, and it has been replicated in
6 cities across America, whether they are rural communities,
other large cities, or more suburban areas.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you so much.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Oh, is that my 5 minutes? Okay.
Chairman Cleaver. Yes.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Can I just add one little thing? What I
am asking for here today--I know the critical need for
independent permanent housing, but so many people can be
independent. I ask you to consider funding additional models.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Karr-McDonald can be found
on page 60 of the appendix.]
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you for your testimony, and I will
now recognize myself for 5 minutes for questions.
I want to say to all of you, not far from my office here in
Kansas City, Missouri, a young person, a 28-year-old woman, was
burned to death--burned to death--in a homeless encampment
under I-70, a bridge at I-70, not too far from where I am right
now. The fire was so bad that traffic was blocked on the
freeway. Now, the fire was under the freeway, but traffic was
blocked on I-70. Anywhere you go in any major city, you are
going to find that scene.
In Washington, D.C., not far from where I live, there is an
encampment of homeless individuals and some people living out
of their vehicles. All kinds of issues are there. One of the
things that I think we ought to do, and maybe, Mr. Dones, you
can help here--because I grew up in public housing, I have
heard all of the things: ``If you live in public housing, it is
because you don't want to work.'' You all have heard it or
maybe know people who say it even today. Are there things that
we can be doing, that maybe this committee could do, or those
of us who are thinking about this issue seriously can do to try
to erase all of the stigma attached to homelessness? ``They
want to be homeless; they don't want to have food,'' or
whatever. Give us any kind of direction that you might be able
to provide?
Ms. Karr-McDonald. My experience, and it is long now, is
that people desperately want to be independent. They want to be
fathers to their children. They want to be contributing members
of society. I get calls from guys saying, ``Oh, Miss Harriet, I
just did my first taxes, I am so excited,'' because people want
the dignity of being in the mainstream. We also do permanent
supported housing. We now have 14 buildings, and I am not
saying that is not critical for people with any kind of
disability, but 95 percent of the people who come to us have a
very serious drug problem.
Chairman Cleaver. Right.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. And we deal with that on site; we always
have. We honestly drug test, and if people are doing drugs, we
don't ask them to leave, but we ask them to give up the paid
work. We can't put them on the street to clean the streets of
Manhattan.
Chairman Cleaver. That is very helpful.
Mr. Dones, do you have a response, do you or any panelists,
to what can we do to begin to erase the stigma that also fights
against us successfully getting more money that I think all of
you are talking about?
Mr. Dones. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. My response to
that would be that the best thing we can do is incorporate
people who are experiencing homelessness or have experienced
homelessness into the work that we do, right? I, myself, have
experienced housing instability. I have a serious psychiatric
condition. I have been hospitalized twice. These are not things
that you would know about me unless I talk about them. And in
being honest about that history, and how I got here and how
that influences my work, I think that is the most stigma-
disrupting thing that we can do. You, yourself, just spoke
about growing up in public housing. I think we have to talk
about it more frankly, those of us who have made it out.
I also think that folks who are currently experiencing
homelessness do have critical voices and real insight into what
is necessary, and they are often highly refined, like,
thinking, right? I have been quoted regulation chapter and
verse by people experiencing homelessness, saying these are the
things that are in my way right now to getting where I want to
be. And the more that we pull those voices to the center, the
more that we can disrupt the belief that is out there that
folks want to live outside, that they don't actually know what
is best for them or how to get where they need to go.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you so much. I appreciate your
testimony. It is very, very critically important. My father
turned 100-years-old on July 17th. I saw him cry about 30 years
ago when he was looking at the news where they talked about how
people who lived in public housing didn't want to work.
Mr. Hill, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Hill. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Every January,
traditionally, HUD releases its, ``Annual Homeless Assessment
Report to Congress,'' which provides estimates on the local
rates of homelessness in America. Despite the Federal reliance
on Housing First as the sole approach to ending homelessness,
that rate has increased over the past several years. While I
hoped we would have that data before this hearing, I look
forward to that report soon, and I hope, Chairman Cleaver, that
we can bring attention to it at a future hearing.
In my opening statement, I mentioned the story of Joshua
and the success he found at Our House, which is our shelter in
Little Rock for the working homeless. It has been in place
since 1987 and has been such a success and part of our strategy
to reduce homelessness in my hometown. Residents of Our House
are required to work full time and to save 75 percent of their
earnings as we try to get them that important savings account,
that deposit for that next apartment or that down payment for a
future home. But there are specific challenges facing homeless
families with children. They often get left out of many, many
Federal policy conversations, and the focus on Housing First
often leaves out nearly all families with children who are
experiencing homelessness. Our House's work shows that
homelessness among families with children can be solved, but it
takes this kind of holistic approach. And I am glad that they
have put together a huge nonprofit that works in that way that
brings in city, private philanthropy, and some Federal grant
resources to achieve that.
Harriet Karr-McDonald, again, thank you for coming today.
It is so good to see you. And, again, I am so sad about the
loss of George, but so gratified by your continued work, and
your passion, and the personality that you have shown to the
subcommittee today. The Doe Fund, as you try to access Federal
funding, tell me the concerns you have when you combine paid
work with transitional housing and support services? Does that
make it harder to get Federal grant funding?
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Absolutely. Up until 2016, we won many
awards from HUD because of our very strong data outcomes.
Harvard studied us, New York State studied us and found we
reduced recidivism by 62 percent. HUD stopped funding us
because they decided the only thing they would really fund was
permanent housing. We have 14 buildings now of really
beautiful, supported housing. The only people who qualified
have very distinct illnesses, whether it is mental health,
AIDS, being elderly and not obviously being at a point in their
life where they are going to enter the workforce, and it is an
essential part of the solution for people with disabilities.
However, the majority of people on the street don't suffer from
that.
Mr. Hill. And, Harriet, tell us--throw some numbers out
there.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Yes.
Mr. Hill. The vast majority of your clients are what we
consider transitionally homeless.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Yes.
Mr. Hill. They are coming from incarceration. They are out
of work. They are out of luck. They have drug and alcohol
dependency.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Yes.
Mr. Hill. But they would be able to reenter society fully.
Is that right?
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Absolutely, and they do.
Mr. Hill. Yes.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. We have reduced recidivism by 62
percent, one of the highest numbers in the country. And we have
now served 29,000 people in these past 30 years who have
entered the mainstream, and have paid child support. It is
actually a requirement at The Doe Fund because the mothers are
incredibly poor, too, and the men overwhelmingly want to be
involved with their children. When you don't have a big legacy
[inaudible], the children are maybe even more important.
Mr. Hill. Thank you, Ms. Karr-McDonald, for your work in
New York, and society there is better. And I yield back to my
friend, Chairman Cleaver.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Thank you.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you, Mr. Hill. The Chair will now
yield to the Chair of the full Finanacial Services Committee,
the gentlewoman from California, Chairwoman Waters.
Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. I am going to try
and raise a few questions and go quickly to each of our
witnesses. And I don't mean to be abrupt, but I am now into
trying to understand systems and how they work in various
areas. For example, I want to know from each of you who is
responsible for your homelessness programs? Is it a department
of the city council, or is it another agency that has been
organized by the city council to work on homelessness? And let
me start with Ms. Bush.
Ms. Bush. In Kentucky, we have three COCs, and the balance
of the State is led by the State Housing Finance Agency as the
collaborative applicant, Kentucky Housing Corporation. In
Louisville, the collaborative applicant is a nonprofit
organization, the Coalition for the Homeless. And then in
Lexington, the Office of Homelessness Prevention and
Intervention within the City of Lexington coordinates their COC
activities.
Chairwoman Waters. Thank you. And Ms. Oliva?
Ms. Oliva. Thank you for that question, Chairwoman Waters.
Obviously, I don't run a continuum of care at this point in my
career. I worked in the District of Columbia's Continuum of
Care, where a nonprofit organization was identified as a
collaborative applicant. But what I would say is probably the
most important piece of COC work is that public and private
sector partners and nonprofit organizations are working
together to achieve a common goal and to ensure that people
with lived expertise are helping to make those decisions.
Chairwoman Waters. Excuse me. Where does it stop? Who has
the responsibility for making sure that the funds that we
receive are utilized in the way that they were intended to be?
Where does the buck stop?
Ms. Oliva. The buck stops in many communities with the
collaborative applicant, which is sometimes a nonprofit and
sometimes a government entity.
Chairwoman Waters. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Marc Dones, what
about you? Who has the responsibility? Is it the city council,
or a nonprofit, or a combination of agencies?
Mr. Dones. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. The buck stops in
our community with me. I run an agency that was created through
legislation that combined the efforts of the county and the
City of Seattle into a single organization that has the span of
policy control and funding for everything in the county. And I
would add that we are one of only at least three organizations
similarly situated in the country, and it really does make a
big difference. The complexity of the answers you are getting,
Madam Chairwoman, is actually why it is so difficult to
implement things appropriately. It should be possible for
people to say to you, ``It is my job.''
Chairwoman Waters. Thank you. Ms. Roman, who runs it?
Ms. Roman. I am in the District of Columbia, so the same
answer, the COC is run by a nonprofit.
Chairwoman Waters. How many people know of or have seen a
database of city-owned property that is available, that could
be used for the development of affordable housing? How many
people have seen that database? Raise your hand if you have
seen it.
[Hands raised.]
Chairwoman Waters. How many people believe that perhaps
what we could be involved with is seeing how we could get the
ability for housing developers who develop affordable housing
to have access to that land, if they can build these units at a
very, very affordable price? Would that help?
Ms. Roman. Yes.
Mr. Dones. Yes.
Chairwoman Waters. And do we believe that there are other
laws and policies that could be made by the people who have
land use authority, whether it is what I just alluded to, the
use of city-owned property, or the removing of obstacles in the
city in order to expedite housing development for low-income
developers? Do you think there can be a better job done?
Ms. Roman. Yes.
Mr. Dones. Absolutely.
Ms. Roman. Zoning and permitting issues also, similarly,
could be reduced, and that would result in a lot more housing.
I would put Federal property on that list as well.
Chairwoman Waters. Federal property, too. How many people
believe that we have systems that deal with the mentally ill
and the developmentally disabled now that are working inside of
the processes for dealing with homelessness? What do we do? Do
we have processes? None.
Mr. Chairman, I think that we have to not only be concerned
about the money. We are concerned about the money, and we
should be concerned about it, but we have to look at these
processes now. I am not happy in Greater Los Angeles about the
process. We just got a report that $3 million was returned that
was unspent. We also know that in addition to unspent funds--I
talked with my public housing agencies about the CARES Act, and
they have not been able to get their money out. We have to look
at these processes. Thank you, and I yield back the balance of
my time.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. The Chair
now recognizes Mr. Posey of Florida for 5 minutes.
Mr. Posey. Clearly, homelessness and [inaudible] sad. It is
a disappointing reality. Some critics suggest that focusing on
housing the homeless with many collectives, as you mentioned,
is an effective approach for dealing with the health and
addiction issues that explain much of our homelessness. Ms.
Karr-McDonald, tell us what you think the strategy should look
like?
Ms. Karr-McDonald. We developed a three-legged stool. That
was always our concept from knowing the people and their needs.
We concentrate on work, services, including working with people
on their drug addictions, which 95 percent of our people have
had, and job training. And increasingly, we do training and
entry to higher-level secure jobs, like union jobs. For the
first time in America, because so many people in the
construction industry are retiring or have retired, they have a
huge shortage.
We have worked some deals with unions to train people and
license them. Training for these jobs for people not associated
and part of a program is my goal for anyone who can't afford
that training. It is very expensive, so homeless people could
never afford it. Even poor people can't afford it. It is like
saying, oh, pay for college. Okay. And we all want people to go
to college, of course, and enter secure jobs. They have a right
to support their families and get pensions and healthcare, of
course. And I think to an earlier question, having the number
of people that we have had on the streets of New York for all
of these years, cleaning and serving the communities, has truly
changed the perception of what those who are, honestly,
overwhelmingly minority people and formerly homeless and
incarcerated people can achieve.
We are all different, and homeless people are all
different. They are not a monolith. And as I said before,
people with disabilities definitely need permanent housing. Is
housing too expensive now for even working people? Of course,
but breaking the cycle, life breaking the cycle, is an
incredibly important part of this. And I have to say, in great
part it is due to prejudice, a history of long racial inequity.
Almost all of the people that we serve are minority people, and
so I believe people still feel, ``Eh, they are not so smart.''
I have known thousands personally. It is not true. They are
like everybody else. They just have lacked opportunity, and
that is what I believe in, and what I have seen demonstrated
that works. And the most important thing is, like I did
previously, I think funding data-heavy social programs in
transitional housing is critical for a large segment of the
homeless population. Thank you.
Mr. Posey. Clearly, we need to move on housing to deal
effectively with the reasons people end up homeless on our
streets. I can imagine that it could be hard to get the
chronically homeless to enter treatment coaching programs. That
might be even more difficult since the Martin v. Boise case,
which held that people experiencing homelessness can't be
arrested for sleeping outside on public property if there are
no available alternatives. No one wants to punish the homeless,
but do local governments have the legal tools to get those
people into treatment and coaching programs is the question.
Sorry. I am out of time.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you, Mr. Posey.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Velazquez of New York.
Ms. Velazquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking
Member, for holding this important hearing. Mr. Dones, New York
City's LGBTQ senior population struggles with substandard
housing conditions, poverty, and homelessness, particularly in
parts of the Lower East Side in Manhattan, which I represent.
In fact, according to a study, nearly 1 in 4 of New York City's
LGBTQ senior population was reported as living in substandard
housing. Can you speak to the unique challenges our LGBTQ
seniors face, not only in New York but across the country, and
also what recommendations do you have for addressing these
challenges?
I appreciate the question, particularly as a queer, non-
binary person, and I have had the opportunity to do quite a bit
of work actually with trans-identifying folks experiencing
homelessness in New York City. The thing that folks need, and I
think this is a thread today, is community. For LGBTQ folks,
because they have navigated the world via chosen family
networks, being able to engage in the chosen family networks
inside the housing options that they have is really important.
So, when we think about that, when we think about housing
options, we need to be prioritizing those community
engagements.
We also need to be really clear-eyed, but particularly for
our trans community. There is still quite a bit of housing
discrimination, so folks do need robust protections as they
attempt to access certainly any market rate housing. But even
inside the homelessness system itself, we continue to see that
there is quite a bit of discrimination against folks. And then
the other thing that I would say is that, again, speaking to
that incorporation of lived experience and that community
aspect, for folks who are experiencing homelessness at any age
range who identify as LGBTQ, one of the things that is in the
data quite clearly is that pathways inside are often framed
inside of connecting with someone who is like them, whom they
relate to and understand, and can understand the things that
they are going through.
I once worked on a project compiling--actually this was for
LGBTQ young people, again, trans young people--but compiling a
manual for outreach workers and case managers around transition
supports for trans women, and it was incredibly detailed
medical information that is not part of what most people know.
And finally, I would just say that we have to be thinking about
seniors broadly, and I think the rest of the panel can speak to
that.
Ms. Velazquez. Thank you for your answer. Ms. Oliva, one of
the central tenants of tackling our homelessness crisis is to
stop it before it starts and keep people stably housed. There
is no denying that the COVID 19 pandemic has exacerbated the
threat of homelessness for millions of individuals and
families. But President Biden and Congressional Democrats have
responded by allocating more than $46 billion for Emergency
Rental Assistance. Can you explain how the creation of this
program has helped keep individuals and families housed during
the pandemic, particularly those on the lowest end of the
spectrum?
Ms. Oliva. Yes, I would be happy to do that, and thank you
for the question. I think it is a really important question as
we think about how we want to strengthen our affordable housing
system to be better equipped for the next crisis or another
crisis down the road. As I mentioned in my testimony, more than
3.2 million households have been served with the Emergency
Rental Assistance (ERA) Program between January and November of
last year. And according to the Treasury's data, 88 percent of
those who were served with that first tranche of ERA money were
extremely low-income or very low-income people, which means
that program is very well-targeted to help the folks who need
it the most.
So, folks or households who are in that program can receive
rental and utility arrears to help them get caught up on rent
as well as prospective rent to help support stability through
what are very difficult financial circumstances and help people
get back on their feet. And it is largely credited with holding
off a wave of potential evictions after the end of the Federal
eviction moratorium.
Ms. Velazquez. Thank you for your answer.
Ms. Oliva. Sure. You are welcome.
Ms. Velazquez. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. My time has
almost expired. Thank you.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you. Ms. Oliva, did you finish your
comment?
Ms. Oliva. Thank you for the opportunity just to finish
that thought. I think what I was trying to say at the end there
was, as we know, and as we have heard from Marc and Adrienne,
homeless assistance systems are stretched to capacity right
now, and a wave of evictions would have been disastrous for
those systems, which is why we need more rental assistance
resources in our communities, permanent rental assistance
resources that can grow and contract based on needs, so the
next time we have a crisis, we will be more prepared.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Mr. Rose of Tennessee, you are now recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Rose. Thank you, Chairman Cleaver, and thanks to
Ranking Member Hill for holding this hearing. I also want to
thank our witnesses for being here today. I was disappointed,
however, to see the Democrats' tax and spend reconciliation
bill attached to this hearing, a bill that has already passed
the House without the support of a single Republican. That is
disappointing to see. Now, on to today's topics.
A few months ago, I visited Independence Again in
Cookeville, Tennessee, in my hometown, in the 6th District of
Tennessee, which is a nonprofit organization dedicated to
helping individuals combat drug addiction. They are funded
primarily through charitable donations, with help from the
Tennessee Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse
Services, in addition to payments that they receive from their
residents. They also offer financial assistance to individuals,
when funds are available, to assist those who cannot afford
their program. Independence Again asks each resident to follow
a set of rules to participate in the program. These rules
include attending meetings, respecting curfews, and submitting
to random drug screenings, all of which are aimed at providing
structure and promoting individual responsibility. However,
these common-sense rules are disfavored under the Housing First
approach.
Ms. Karr-McDonald, your organization states that,
``creating pathways to self-sufficiency and independence is at
the heart of everything you do.'' Could you please speak more
about the importance of ensuring that individuals leave
programs like this with the ability to maintain a stable job,
in addition to their sobriety?
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Absolutely. Homeless people have
problems. You couldn't live on the street without having
trauma, and, as I said, they need a three-legged stool
approach. The reason the paid work that we offer at $15 an hour
is so effective is because amongst the poorest people, money,
of course, is essential. We do not put people out on the street
to clean buildings if they are using because it is not good for
the community, so it does mean drug testing. It does mean very
intense case management and drug services. The other thing I
want to say is 70 percent of our staff are graduates of our
program, and I think that has been key to our success. The
other men, because they are staff, obviously see them as role
models and it gives them hope. Hope is very important.
If you want people to give up drugs, if you want people to
go to work, they need to have hope that they will achieve that.
And there is no one who knows better--I learned everything I
know from the homeless people we serve. They are the experts
and the homeless people on our staff, formerly homeless people.
Do we have rules? Yes. Do you need to be drug tested? Yes.
Violence--we have a security team mostly of graduates. They
don't permit violence. We have metal detectors because we have
to protect the whole, and we don't allow guns.
So, yes, there are requirements for doing this. We don't
throw anyone out on the street, though. You don't get paid for
work. If it is a serious criminal thing, we call the police
like anybody else because you have to protect the whole, all of
the other people who live there. So, yes, we have rules. You
have to, and people want to pay child support.
Mr. Rose. Ms. Karr-McDonald, I see my time has expired, so
I yield back.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you, Mr. Rose. The Chair now
recognizes Mrs. Beatty of Ohio, not Cincinnati.
[laughter]
Mrs. Beatty. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's, ``of the
Chiefs,'' and I am about to be, ``of the Bengals.'' But with
that said, and to our ranking member, thank you so much for
holding this hearing today, and also, thank you to all of our
distinguished witnesses for being here today. Certainly, we
know our chairman has spent a lifetime fighting and being an
advocate for those in need of housing, just as you, as
witnesses, have made a commitment to that.
With that said, let's talk about the American Rescue Plan,
the rescue plan that Democrats passed earlier this year and was
signed into law by President Biden. And I am just so proud that
I could be a part of that because it funded approximately
70,000 emergency housing vouchers for persons at risk of
homelessness or survivors of domestic violence or human
trafficking, something I have also spent a lot of time with
prior to coming to Congress and now in Congress.
I guess I want to start with you, Ms. Roman. Can you tell
me what kind of impact this is going to have on the homeless
data, that we have been able to do this?
Ms. Roman. Right. There are about 580,000 people homeless
on any given night. This would be 70,000 vouchers, so it would
certainly not solve the problem, but it would have an impact on
it and really turn the corner. I will say that the vouchers,
however, are not going to only go to people who are literally
homeless. There are other categories of people who are also
eligible. And as I mentioned in my testimony, the fact that the
systems are so beleaguered and overrun at the moment makes it
more attractive to house people with fewer problems, rather
than people with more serious problems. Housing people with
more serious problems, though, has the benefit of clearing them
out of the shelter system so that we can reduce homelessness
overall. There are a lot of challenges going on. Also,
partnering with healthcare and behavioral healthcare systems so
that people do get the services and so forth they need in the
housing is a challenge.
Mrs. Beatty. Thank you for mentioning that it goes to other
things. In the session before, I think it was, I worked with
Congressman Steve Stivers, and we did a bipartisan effort to
make sure that Congress appropriated $20 million for family
unification vouchers, and that was the first time that this
program had been funded since 2010, and each year it has
continued to be funded. Is this helpful? Would it be impactful
for that population? As most of you know, it is for those who
have aged out of foster care and families at risk of being
split up due to a lack of housing. What kind of impact is it
having on that? And the reason I am asking you as an expert to
respond to this is because we have so many people, whether it
was Build Back Better or the Rescue Plan, who didn't vote to
support this, and then we want to always be protective of our
children or anti-human trafficking.
Ms. Roman. Yes.
Mrs. Beatty. Help me and others understand that when they
cast that vote, and it is so important for those watching to
know when you look at us and the responsibility that we have to
this population.
Ms. Roman. Sure. Quickly, I will just say that a lot of
people who have behavioral health issues, mental health and
substance abuse issues and who are homeless, have those issues
because of being homeless. They weren't the issues that caused
their homelessness. Their health is causing those issues, so it
really is important to have these resources. And another thing
I will say is we have been talking about the fact that all of
these resources are going in, but the homeless numbers are not
going down. The reason the homeless numbers are not going down
is something that is totally outside the ability of the
homeless system to control, which is the people coming in. More
people are coming in, and one of the systems that is sending
people into homelessness is foster care, so the vouchers that
you provided are really important. They are a hugely effective
prevention mechanism to stop people from exiting foster care
and, sadly, becoming homeless.
Mrs. Beatty. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. And thank you to the witnesses.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you, Mrs. Beatty.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Steil of Wisconsin for 5
minutes.
Mr. Steil. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
you holding today's hearing.
Ms. Karr-McDonald, I want to build on what my colleagues
have been discussing today, in particular, as it relates to
Housing First. As you know, and I think we are all really well
aware of, there has been a big shift in HUD and among
practitioners to Housing First, and my concern is that the
shift is really ignoring the fact that many homeless
individuals need more than just a home. They need support to
overcome, maybe it is addiction, maybe mental health, or other
challenges. It really reminds me--I went to a homeless shelter
in Kenosha, Wisconsin, called the Shalom Center. It provides a
lot of those key wraparound services. I remember the tour. I
was actually walking, and a local church group was preparing
dinner that evening. It was a little before 5:00, and I met a
young man, and I asked him if he was going to have dinner. He
said, well, he was going to have breakfast, because he just
woke up, and I was kind of shocked. I was thinking, geez, it is
almost 5:00. And I asked him why, and he said he was going to
work the night shift at the Amazon facility just down the road,
which pays well north of $15 an hour, often $18 to $20 an hour,
depending on your exact shift.
And the Shalom Center had provided some assistance. This
young man fell on hard times through probably no fault of his
own, and didn't have a family support structure where he could
go, and he found himself receiving the help of the Shalom
Center. And they not only provided him with shelter, but they
also provided him the connection to a local job to make sure
that he could get back on his feet, not only to stabilize what
was going on in his life but also really to provide that next
step so he could get out on his own into an apartment, and
then, hopefully someday, be able to own a home and move along
in his progress in his life.
My concern with the Housing First policy is that sometimes
it is missing some of the other key components of homelessness.
So, could you comment, just in your experience, to what extent
do non-housing-related factors--think about addiction or mental
health challenges--contribute to homelessness? And then,
assuming that is a big factor, can we really address some of
the key challenges of homelessness without these key wraparound
services?
Ms. Karr-McDonald. I think that what is available today,
true permanent housing is certainly essential and designed and
funded to serve people who are chronically mentally ill, suffer
from other disabilities, and some moms with very young kids,
and that is important. As I said, we have 14 buildings, but
that is not the majority of the people who live on our streets.
They have systemic, lifelong problems due to terrible
education. Yes, totally foster care. We have tons of young
people who come out of foster care and incarceration. We can't
lose sight of that piece. When you come out of prison, how are
you going to get a job? Where are you going to live? And that
is a very substantial part of the population we serve. Yes,
they need--
Mr. Steil. If I can, I just want to continue this dialogue,
and I totally agree. I look at some of the work that you have
done with The Doe Fund, and then the question starts to become,
how have the Housing First policies impacted The Doe Fund?
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Yes. When this policy was really first
embraced in 2016, we lost all of our HUD money because we were
not a permanent housing solution but one that transitioned
people to independence, and you need both. And to say that,
well, these people can't live in this housing, the permanent
housing, and there is no way that out of homelessness with a
residence, that is critical to us.
Mr. Steil. We have limited time unfortunately.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Yes.
Mr. Steil. Would you say the Housing First policies have
negatively harmed vulnerable populations with whom you work?
Ms. KarrMcDonald. Yes, because they don't qualify.
Mr. Steil. I appreciate it. I am only cutting us off
because I am cognizant of the time. I appreciate your
testimony. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate you holding the hearing,
and I yield back.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the
gentleman from Texas, Mr. Green, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Green. Thank you very much. This hearing is exceedingly
important because, like you, I have persons who are living
under an overpass near my office, and it is heartbreaking to
see young people there, to see persons who appear to be
associated with the military in one way or another, or at least
they were veterans or they claim to be, but my question has
more to do with how we approach the problem. There is a debate
that looms which deals with whether we should have these
services and resources centralized for persons who experience
homelessness or whether they should be decentralized; whether
we should take a holistic approach and have all of the
resources in one area or decentralize them and have them all
over a given city, as well as the housing integrated into
communities.
And I bring this up because I think that the
intentionality, to a certain extent, as it has been explained
to me with reference to Skid Row, the intentionality was to do
good, to help people, but then you have a concentration of
people and services. On the other hand, there are many people
who need the services, but they can't get to them because they
don't have transportation. So if you decentralize, then
transportation becomes a real issue for people who are
homeless. The question that I have is for persons who can help
me with the question of centralized or decentralized or maybe
some other model.
Mr. Dones, sir, would you care to respond, please?
Mr. Dones. Sure. Thanks for the question. I think it is
important that we create avenues for folks to get as much as
they can in one-stop shops. I think that doesn't have to be
Skid Row. I think there are a lot of ways to do that. I think
of Central City Concern, for example, in Portland, Oregon,
which leverages a federally-qualified health center to create
an integrated model of housing and healthcare where all of the
supports are onsite. And I think it is very possible to do in a
way that doesn't create the sort of troubling trends of the
concentration or suffering or poverty that we have seen in
other jurisdictions.
And I do briefly apologize. I do have to respond to some of
the lines of questioning about Housing First, which seems to
confuse what Housing First is.
Mr. Green. Could you do this for me?
Mr. Dones. To be really clear, Housing First is not housing
only. There have always been services involved, and we just
have to have that as what is true in this conversation.
Mr. Green. Thank you, Mr. Dones.
Ms. Oliva, I would like for you to respond to the question
that I posed. Thank you.
Ms. Oliva. Thank you for the question, sir. I agree with
Marc in that there are a number of ways that we can be
providing both housing and services to people who are
experiencing homelessness, and I would say a couple of things
about that. Whether it is centralized or not centralized, I
think it is important to ask people who are experiencing
homelessness how they would like to receive and what kinds of
services they would like to receive, and really providing
choice for folks to access the kinds of housing supports and
service supports that they want and need.
And I also just have to make sure that we are correcting
the record on Housing First. Housing First is not a program. It
is an approach, and it actually provides folks with a choice
about what they want and need. It is not a one-size-fits-all
approach, and it is not housing only. Those are really
important pieces of this discussion that I think have been
mischaracterized in this hearing.
Mr. Green. Okay. Thank you for your comments on Housing
First as well. Mr. Dones, I thank you, too.
Let's move on now, if we may, to Ms. Karr-McDonald. Ms.
Karr-McDonald, you have indicated, or it has been indicated,
that there are drug tests that are required. Can you give me an
indication as to what are the consequences if you fail the drug
test, please?
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Yes, and thank you. It is really not
having people go out to work, because, first, they work in
communities all over New York City, and you can't be high.
Second, and maybe the most successful part of it, is that
people want to make money, and that is what they lose. All of
the people want to have their own housing. They want to get
back with their children. They want to be functioning members
of society, but they can't do that if they are continuing to
get high.
Mr. Green. My time has expired. Thank you very much, Mr.
Chairman. I greatly appreciate it.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you, Mr. Green.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr.
Taylor.
Mr. Taylor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Ranking
Member Hill. I think this is an important hearing. I appreciate
the witnesses being here. I remember Ronald Reagan's time-held
comment that the best social program in the world is a job, and
so employment is really a key feature to helping people not
need whatever the social program is that we are discussing. We
are here talking about homelessness, which is very serious and
something that we continue to try to address in our society. We
have seen different places have different levels of success. It
certainly seems I hear a consensus about the wraparound
services addressing drug addiction and addressing mental health
as well as housing and employment in trying to help a person
sort of get back on their feet, and once they are fully
employed, they can be a contributing member of society. I think
that is probably ultimately all of our objectives, what we are
trying to see.
One thing I will express concern about, and I think it is
germane particularly in this committee, is that I believe that
one of the big drivers of inflation last year was the rise of
rent and making housing more expensive as a result of the
excessive printing of money by the Federal Reserve that was
driven by the deficit spending that was so profligate over the
last 2 years, particularly in the last year. I am worried that
we are going to see another wave of homelessness--I think I am
concurring with some of our witnesses here--as a result of the
inflation that has driven it. So, it is interesting. We are
borrowing money and creating inflation, trying to put it into
homelessness, which actually will create more homelessness. I
am not sure that is the correct way to address this problem.
Ms. Karr-McDonald, you were in the middle of saying
something about your work in New York City, and I want to just
commend you for your work and success. Clearly, you have had a
lot of success, and it seems like your focus is not just
housing but also the wraparound services. And I think you were
in the middle of saying something when you were cut off.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. I was going to say that is why we start
in order to be successful in our people earning money while
they are with us so that makes them able to save money and
contribute to child support.
Mr. Taylor. Sure. And could you just build on--
Ms. Karr-McDonald. For the vast majority of people, a job
is essential to independence. It is independence.
Mr. Taylor. Sure. And focusing on jobs, on economic growth
is the key. Texas has been an enormously successful State in
its job creation, and, from an employment point of view, has
completely recovered from the pandemic while other States,
which have, and, again, these are choices that different local
leaders have made, but shutting down harder during the pandemic
has hurt a lot of businesses, and they are having a harder time
recovering from an employment point of view, which exacerbates
that homelessness, right? Joblessness and homelessness kind of
almost seem to go hand in hand. Would you agree, Ms. Karr-
McDonald?
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Absolutely. I was actually going to tell
you about a current participant. We got a big contract with
what's called the Cleanup Corps, New York City Cleanup Corps,
to clean the streets in much broader areas and in poor
neighborhoods because of the pandemic. This young man entered
that way through that recruitment process. At that time, he
lived with his brother. He had a long, long history of
substance abuse, and a lack of education and training, and when
his brother moved out of State, he called us because he was
homeless, and we already employed him. And the result, as it is
in so many cases, has been that he was on a local TV show
talking about the Cleanup Corps. In the same week, he got to
see his daughter, whom he had previously been estranged with
for many years, and he went to her 9th birthday party. And she
told him he was her hero.
Mr. Taylor. Wow.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. And I hear children saying that
frequently.
Mr. Taylor. Wow. Mr. Chairman, I see my time has expired,
so I yield back.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you very much. The Chair now
recognizes Mr. Vargas of California for 5 minutes.
Mr. Vargas. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Before I say
anything else, Ms. Karr-McDonald, thank you. God bless you. I
can't tell you how much I have appreciated your testimony
today, honestly. It reminds me of Jesus' admonition in John 15,
that you love one another as I have loved you, or Matthew 19,
that you love your brother as yourself.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Yes.
Mr. Vargas. I never met your husband, but I assume that he
probably had that in mind, too. But I have to tell you, I
assume you are a Republican, because all of the Republicans are
asking you questions. And I have to say that normally, when we
talk about homeless or people who are incarcerated or
undocumented people, I don't always hear my brothers and
sisters on the other side of the aisle talking about them as
though they were humans or our brothers and sisters. Sometimes,
especially with undocumented people, the conversation goes so
sideways. Just listening to you is so uplifting, so God bless
you, and I mean that. God bless you.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Thank you.
Mr. Vargas. And, again, all of your work that you have
done, I am just so pleased with that. Putting that aside for a
second, I have to say that we have talked about this a little
bit. It is the price of housing that has gone up so
dramatically that has caused so many people to be homeless. I
remember when I bought my house that I still live in, in 1993.
We paid $176,000 for it. That is what we paid. Today, if you
factor in inflation, it calculates at about $330,000. My
neighbor just sold his house, and he bought it about the same
time I did. He sold it for $1.6 million. How can you afford
that? It is ridiculous, and that is why we have so many
homeless, too, the price of housing in California, because
everyone wants to move. People say they are all moving away. I
have to tell you, every time someone puts a house up, they sell
it in about a week. It is because people love to live there. We
need more housing, so I appreciate that.
I do want to ask one particular question. My good friend
and colleague, Salud Carbajal, asked me to ask about the Naomi
Schwartz Safe Parking Program Act he has proposed, because so
many people now live in their cars, that they have this grant
where the cities and localities are going to help people
transition from their cars, but at least have a safe place for
a while. I understand, Ms. Roman, that you know a little bit
about this? May I question you on that quickly?
Ms. Roman. Sure.
Mr. Vargas. What do you think about it?
Ms. Roman. I will tell you the truth. A while ago, I would
have said that I didn't think it was such a great idea, but I
have really been changing my mind about it. There are a lot of
people who, really, their only asset is their vehicle. If they
were going to stay in a shelter, they would probably lose their
vehicle, because there is no place for them to park, especially
in California and in the West. If they are going to get to a
job, they need a car. As we have said repeatedly, and I think
the witnesses have said that 40 percent of people who are
homeless are working. Most people who are homeless get out of
homelessness by working.
The average length of time people are homeless is 6 weeks,
so a car or vehicle is really important. It is an asset. If
they can't park it legally someplace, they will get ticketed.
And if they can't pay the tickets, they may get cited or
incarcerated because of that. It allows them to get their kids
to school, to get themselves to work. I think it is a good
model.
Mr. Vargas. So, you think it is a good idea. Okay. I do,
too. This is such a complicated issue.
Ms. Karr-McDonald, going to you, even though I am a
Democrat, I almost feel like I owe you this time. Obviously,
you are dealing with really hardcore issues, it sounds like.
How about families? Do you deal with any families?
Ms. Karr-McDonald. We started much more recently in our
permanent housing, and it is a different animal. They need the
same help, but they are very young children and those children
need that person at home, and so they can't go to work in the
beginning for sure. And there is no daycare. And I just want to
tell you I am not a Republican.
[laughter]
Ms. Karr-McDonald. I am not. I don't say I am a Republican
or a Democrat, but I am not a Republican at all, and I am not a
Democrat.
Mr. Vargas. I will tell you a little secret. I like
Republicans.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. Me, too. French Hill is my friend.
llaughter]
Mr. Vargas. He is my friend, too.
Ms. Karr-McDonald. And I know a lot of other amazing
Republican leaders, for example, Arthur Brooks. Do you know
Arthur? He used to be the head of the American Enterprise
Institute. He has been so helpful to me, and has been one of
our great champions. He is a Republican. So yes, and we have
had huge fans who are Democrats.
Mr. Vargas. Thank you.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you, Ms. Karr-McDonald. Thank you,
Evangelist Vargas. I appreciate your comments as well.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr.
Sherman, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Sherman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you so much
for including in this hearing my Homeless Assistance Act, which
is designed to allow Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) to share
data with local government agencies, and with nonprofit
organizations engaged in continuum of care. And according to
research done by the Pew Charitable Trust, this sort of data
sharing paved the way for the State of Virginia to become the
first State to, in their words, functionally end veteran
homelessness. We passed this bill in 2020 through the full
House, and I look forward to getting the support of our
colleagues and passing it again, and hopefully, the Senate will
take it up.
I think a lot of people have made the point that housing is
too expensive, rent is too high, and it is a matter of supply
and demand. Rent isn't expensive everywhere, but it is
expensive in my district, and in Juan Vargas' district, and in
many of the other districts that are represented here. I turn
to colleagues in other parts of the country where you can build
an apartment for $100,000. My city is trying to build just a
shelter for homeless people and is spending $500,000 or
$600,000 to do so. We have to bring down the cost of
construction, and that means allowing people to build, which
gets very controversial at the local level.
Ms. Oliva, given the complex nature of housing policies, we
have to look for ways to increase the supply of affordable
housing and provide those families and individuals in need with
assistance. Do you believe that the passage of the Ending
Homelessness Act, proposed by our colleague, Mr. Torres from
New York, would help prevent families who fall on hard times
from experiencing homelessness? And, of course, this is a bill
that provides $3 billion in short-term rental assistance to
targeted low-income people who are living paycheck to paycheck
and are at risk of being evicted. Ms. Oliva?
Ms. Oliva. Thank you so much for that question, sir. Rental
assistance is a key component of our strategies that we need to
have in place in order to address the homeless and housing
affordability crisis. Really, what we have been talking about,
and what is included in Build Back Better as well, and is
partially included in the bill that you are talking about, is a
three-pronged approach: making sure that we are keeping the
units that are affordable in our communities in place by
creating funds to address the backlog of needs in public
housing; increasing the supply where we need it in this country
for affordable housing. But I think one of the most important
pieces, as you pointed out, is really about increasing
affordability through an expansion of the Housing Choice
Voucher Program. That will allow units that are created with
those supply dollars to actually be affordable to folks who are
at the lowest incomes, including incomes from zero to 30
percent or 50 percent of the area median income.
And right now, in Build Back Better, the version that
passed the House, it includes an increase in the Housing Choice
Voucher Program that would serve about 300,000 households after
it is phased in, including 80,000 households experiencing
homelessness, 700,000 people in total, including--
Mr. Sherman. Let me squeeze in one more question for you.
Ms. Oliva. Yes.
Mr. Sherman. We need to build 328,000 new apartments every
year. We think we need 328,000 just in the L.A. area. What
policies do you advocate in order to create additional
apartments units?
Ms. Oliva. Yes. What we really are focused on is ensuring
that we have affordable housing that is affordable to folks who
are at the lowest incomes. And so, the most targeted program to
do that is the National Housing Trust Fund.
Mr. Sherman. I don't know if I can squeeze in one more
question.
Ms. Bush, we have Section 8. Two-point-one million
households are deficient in their rent. Perhaps for the record,
you can tell us what we can learn from the private sector to
make the Section 8 Program more effective?
Chairman Cleaver. Very quickly.
Ms. Bush. Thank you for the question. I think we always
need to concentrate our thoughts on affordability, what is
affordable to extremely low-income constituents and build with
that in mind, and leverage both the power of the government but
also the private sector to make sure we are addressing those
needs. Thank you.
Mr. Sherman. Thank you.
Chairman. Cleaver. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Mr.
Lawson of Florida. Mr. Lawson, we are pleased to see that you
are continuing to recover. We're glad to you have you here in
the hearing today. You now have 5 minutes.
Mr. Lawson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the
great job that you are doing with this subcommittee.
Homelessness is a big issue in my district, especially in
Duval, and in the Jacksonville area, and here in Tallahassee.
My question is to the whole panel, and anyone on the panel can
respond to it. A November 20, 2021, report from the Florida
Council on Homelessness said it is too early to know the
effects of COVID on homelessness, but some reports show crowded
facilities, with many being turned away due to lack of supplies
and staff. Facilities all over the country report high rates of
burnout among staff, particularly due to rapid turnover and
short staffing. How might Congress--and I don't know whether we
can do it--better assist these shelters to ensure facilities
are receiving enough supplies and providing staff with
additional support in order to continue to help people in need?
And anyone on the panel can address it.
Mr. Dones. I would be happy to go first, Representative. In
our jurisdiction, quite frankly, we need funding in order to
pay people more. As I mentioned in my opening testimony, folks
are making poverty wages trying to end homelessness, and the
burnout rates are expansive and folks are simply leaving, and
we need to be able to continue. At the local level, we have
cobbled together money to do emergency funding like hazard pay
kinds of things. We need money to continue to do that. That
would be the most helpful thing that our jurisdiction could
receive from the Federal Government right now.
Mr. Lawson. Does anyone else want to respond?
Ms. Oliva. I would be happy to go next.
Mr. Lawson. Okay, Ms. Karr-McDonald.
Ms. Oliva. Oh no, this is Ms. Oliva.
Mr. Lawson. Okay. I'm sorry.
Ms. Oliva. I just wanted to sure that was clear for the
record.
Mr. Lawson. Okay.
Ms. Oliva. I agree with Marc completely that we have to
invest in our workforce in order to make sure that workforce is
stable and well-trained, and sort of not also dealing with
housing instability while they are trying to solve the housing
instability for people that they are serving. I talked to a
person who is experiencing homelessness who told me that they
had cycled through 10 case managers in their time at a
particular program, and that is not good for the case managers,
but it is also really not good for them to build their own
rapport with somebody and really get the services that they
need.
That said, the answer to homelessness and to addressing the
needs that are in shelters is permanent housing, affordable,
safe, permanent housing in jurisdictions across the country,
and that means that we need to increase the supply of
affordable housing and the affordability across the country
with the investments that I talked about earlier in the
National Housing Trust Fund and an expansion of the Housing
Choice Voucher Program. That will make everybody's job easier,
and it will serve people in the way that they have asked to be
served.
Mr. Lawson. Okay. I am going to try to get in this next
question. This is very important to the panel. Making more
vouchers available would mean that fewer people would live in
shelters or motels or on the streets or in overcrowded homes.
Do you agree with that statement, and if more vouchers were
widely available, how do you suggest we quickly get individual
families in shelters approved to get them into homes?
Ms. Roman. I can start on that. Definitely, more vouchers
are what are needed, and I think we need to also use those
vouchers strategically for the people with the highest needs.
What would help them get into housing quickly is if PHAs have
flexibility or exercise the flexibility to reduce some of their
requirements in terms of documentation and so forth. If we also
had a more organized sector that was doing landlord
coordination, landlord cultivation to find units. And also, we
need to pay the homelessness sector to do navigation to help
people who are homeless find units. It is not really practical
for someone who is living in a shelter to be going all around
town talking to landlords trying to find a unit, so we need to
build up more infrastructure there. That is happening, but it
could be happening faster.
Mr. Lawson. Okay. I have another question, but I will yield
back my time. But I just want to say this, Mr. Chairman, before
you cut me off. We have been talking about this homeless crisis
for the last 4 years, and we have the ability in Congress to do
something about it, and all of us should be. With COVID and
everything else, we allocate money for everything else, but we
really should take people off the streets, and give them a safe
environment, a place to live, put a roof over their head. This
winter is going on and everything else, but we are not doing
it. We are debating what vouchers are all about instead of
putting money where it should be. And so I admire, Mr.
Chairman, the work. The chairwoman wanted to do something about
it because it keeps escalating. And with that, I yield back.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you, Mr. Lawson. That is why we are
doing Build Back Better.
Mrs. Axne of Iowa, the Vice Chair of the subcommittee, is
now recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Axne. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the
witnesses for being here. This is such a critical subject for
this committee to be working on, and unfortunately, as we have
heard, there has not been as much progress as we would like to
be seeing here. After numbers were dropping from 2007 to 2016,
we have now seen increases in the number of people experiencing
homelessness for each of the last 4 years. And sadly, right
here in Iowa, that includes an increase of 14 percent just in
this last year, which is unfortunately the third-largest
increase in the country.
But one of the things that really jumped out at me is the
large increase in the number of unsheltered people, which is up
more than 25 percent in the last 4 years, and that is
especially true in our rural areas where 44 percent of people
experiencing homelessness were unsheltered. I have been working
specifically on that issue since I think we all recognize that
sometimes what works in cities might not work in rural areas in
the same way.
I would like to start by asking you, Ms. Roman, can you
describe some of the specific challenges of working on rural
homelessness?
Ms. Roman. Sure. A big challenge is that there is just not
the homelessness infrastructure in rural areas in the numbers,
because there are not as many people who need it, so, numbers-
wise, not percentage-wise. There is not necessarily an entire
homelessness infrastructure of shelter and services and so
forth in every community. And because of that, people also
double up, so it is not necessarily as obvious that they are
homeless or that there are housing problems. I think that
probably what is needed is more direct assistance to households
just to get re-housed, and a lot of kind of intermediate things
that we have in the bigger cities could be avoided and just
help people get into housing more quickly.
Mrs. Axne. Thank you for that. And I have a bill we are
considering at this hearing to work on those exact issues and
to expand the uses of homelessness funding for rural areas. I
think you have seen the bill. Do you think that this would help
get people sheltered in rural areas?
Ms. Roman. I do think it would help a lot. When the
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act was reauthorized, we got
something similar to this for rural areas, but it has never
been implemented just because of financing reasons. But I do
think that focusing on relocation assistance, on short-term
lodgings, on repairs and things like that, would work very well
in rural areas and help us decrease the numbers there.
Mrs. Axne. Thank you. And are there any additional
flexibilities that you would recommend to this legislation?
Ms. Roman. I don't have anything right now, but we can look
at it and get back to you about that.
Mrs. Axne. Thank you. I would appreciate that.
Moving on, Ms. Oliva, I know you have done a lot of work in
this area as well. Do you have any thoughts on this bill? You
brought up a few things, and I heard resources, needing more
people to help out. Many of you have mentioned that. But do you
have any thoughts on this bill and any additional uses for the
funding that you would suggest?
Ms. Oliva. Thank you for the question. I believe in my last
year in service at the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, we were proposing something similar to what your
bill reflects, which is to make the Continuum of Care Program a
little bit more flexible for those rural areas, especially
since we don't have a program that is specifically designed for
rural areas. So, I think the bill makes a lot of sense. I have
actually talked to the folks at the Housing Assistance Council
about their thoughts on the bill as well, and those
flexibilities are going to be really important. Things like
bringing housing up to code, those are the kinds of things that
our rural communities have been asking for.
Mrs. Axne. Thank you. Well, I will tell you what. My goal
here is to make some simple changes just to make sure that we
are helping these rural areas with homelessness. And to your
point, it is a different approach that is needed in our bigger
areas. We don't have connectivity necessarily for the
homelessness in the way that we do in some of our larger urban
areas, so I am hoping that we can get this bill through so we
can address those different solutions as you have all talked
about here and put those into practice very quickly. This idea
actually originally came from HUD under the last
Administration, and I am hoping we can recognize this as the
common-sense solution that it is.
Thank you so much for the work that you are doing, and
thank you for answering my questions. I yield back.
Chairman Cleaver. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair now
recognizes Mr. Torres of New York.
Mr. Torres. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The solution to
homelessness is affordable housing. If we did not have zoning
laws that made it illegal to build affordable housing, we would
have more affordable housing and less homelessness. If we had
more Federal funding for creating and preserving affordable
housing, we would have more affordable housing and less
homelessness. In the end, homelessness is a public policy
choice.
I have a few thoughts to offer on street homelessness in
particular. For me, there is something profoundly dehumanizing
about the American discourse surrounding street homelessness.
We often speak as if those living on the street are quality-of-
life conditions to be cleaned up or sanitary conditions to be
swept away. We often speak of the street homeless as nuisances
to be cycled in and out of the criminal justice system, and
most people pass by the street homeless every day without even
the barest acknowledgement of their basic humanity. For me, the
street homeless should be seen not as threats to our quality of
life but as people in need of housing and services. The
homeless should be seen not as an aesthetic blight on our
society, but our society should be seen as a moral blight on
the homeless who have been left to languish on the streets
unhoused and uncared for.
Even though most homelessness is essentially a consequence
of the affordability crisis, I do believe there is a mental
health dimension to chronic street homelessness. And for me,
the intersection of housing and healthcare underscores the
urgent need to invest in supportive housing, which is housing
with services.
My first question is to Ms. Roman. Is it fair to say that
supportive housing is not only the most humane but also the
most cost-effective approach to addressing the most chronic
forms of street homelessness?
Ms. Roman. Definitely housing with services, permanent
supportive housing, has proven effective over the years in
reducing chronic homelessness quite substantially and would do
the same for unsheltered chronic homelessness, yes.
Mr. Torres. And it is more cost-effective than psychiatric
hospitalization, correct?
Ms. Roman. There is a lot of data that indicates that for
people with behavioral health disorders, housing and services
is less expensive than leaving them on the street or in
shelters and overusing emergency assistance.
Mr. Torres. Right. It is more cost-effective than
psychiatric hospitalization, than the shelter system, and the
criminal justice system, and yet, there are more people in
America who get mental healthcare from jails rather than from
supportive housing developments. Indeed, one of the largest
providers of mental health in the United States is Rikers
Island, the New York City jail system. In Fiscal Year 2020, it
cost New York City nearly half-a-million dollars to incarcerate
an individual on Rikers Island. In Fiscal Year 2017, it cost
New York City $73,000 to provide emergency shelter to a family,
and $38,000 to provide emergency shelter to an adult. So, even
if you have no compassion for the poor, even if you have no
core belief in housing as a human right, the fact remains that
permanent housing for those in need is far less expensive than
incarceration or temporary shelter. Ms. Roman, do you share
that assessment?
Ms. Roman. I do share that assessment, yes. That is what
the data indicates.
Mr. Torres. And the Ending Homelessness Act, which codifies
housing vouchers for all, would radically reduce homelessness
in America. I know of no other policy that would create so much
affordability, for so many, so quickly. If the United States
were to implement housing vouchers for all, hundreds of
thousands of units, maybe even millions of units would become
affordable to families almost overnight. Does anyone have any
thoughts on the importance of housing dollars for all?
Ms. Roman. Certainly, that is the case. There is a supply
issue. Having housing vouchers would generate some supply, but
there would need to be a subsidy for other supply. That is the
solution. I will also just say briefly that when I started
working on housing issues, which was in the late 1970s, we had
poverty, we had mental illness untreated, we had substance
abuse disorders. We did not have homelessness, and that is
because there was an adequate supply of affordable housing at
the time.
Ms. Oliva. And if I may, I would just add to everything
that Nan just said, which I agree with, that if we were to go
to the universal housing voucher model, we would be lifting 9.3
million people above the poverty line, and people of color
would benefit from that quite a bit. I think it is incredibly
important to be thinking about this in the way you just laid it
out, Representative Torres.
Mr. Torres. We have the power to create affordable housing
on a mass scale instantaneously. What we are lacking is the
political will, so I will leave it at that.
Chairman Cleaver. Did you get a full opportunity to raise
your questions, Mr. Torres? I didn't know if you--
Mr. Torres. I don't know if I can make one more comment. I
don't want to--
Chairman Cleaver. Please. I am going to allow Republicans,
Democrats, and Cincinnati Bengals--anybody to make sure you got
your final thought out.
Mr. Torres. There is a local example in New York City that
illustrates the power of housing vouchers. New York City
recently passed a law that raised the value of City vouchers to
the same standard as Section 8. Before the law passed, there
were only 564 units affordable to those with a City voucher.
After the law passed, there were 72,000 units affordable to
those with a City voucher tied to Section 8. That is one
example of the sheer power of the Housing Voucher Program to
create mass affordability and to do so instantaneously, and I
will leave it at that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Cleaver. The Chair now recognizes the gentlewoman
from Massachusetts, Ms. Pressley, for 5 minutes.
Ms. Pressley. Thank you, Chairman Cleaver, and thank you to
our witnesses for being here today. The pandemic has drawn new
attention to the eviction crisis and how it contributes to
homelessness, race and gender. Evictions are devastating,
disruptive, and violent events that not only destabilize
families in the short term but also make it more expensive and
challenging to rent safe housing in the future, apply for
credit, borrow money, or to purchase a home.
In Massachusetts, Black renters are 2.4 times more likely
to have [inaudible].
Chairman Cleaver. We are having a problem. I apologize, Ms.
Pressley. We are trying to get it straight here. Why don't we
proceed with the next Member and try to get Ms. Pressley's
audio straightened out? Actually, it is visual as well now.
Then we will come back, Ms. Pressley, to you so that you have
your complete 5 minutes of time.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr.
Barr, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Barr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and first, I want to
recognize my fellow Kentuckian, Adrienne Bush, who is
testifying with us today. Adrienne, how are you? As executive
director of the Homeless and Housing Coalition of Kentucky,
Adrienne and her team have done some truly life-changing work
in the Commonwealth. And while we may disagree on the merits of
the Federal Government's exclusive reliance on the Housing
First policy, I do want to thank her and her team for their
advocacy on behalf of the over 4,000 street and sheltered
homeless and disadvantaged Kentuckians.
In the first 5 years after 2014, when the U.S. adopted
Housing First as its exclusive solution to combating
homelessness, unsheltered homelessness increased more than 20
percent, despite substantial increases in Federal funding. This
increase came after a decade of decline in homelessness of
roughly 31 percent between 2007 and 2014.
In California, which doubled down on Housing First by
requiring all State funding to go to Housing First programs,
the results are even more telling. Between 2015 and 2019,
unsheltered homeless in California rose 47 percent.
In my view, the data is clear: Housing First has been a
failure. Last year, I introduced the Housing Promotes
Livelihood and Ultimate Success Act (Housing PLUS Act), which
would make more inclusive the allocation of grant money to
combat homelessness. We tried an exclusive Housing First model,
and it did not work. Now, we should expand the toolkit and
bring more providers into the fold.
Ms. Karr-McDonald, what impact would an approach like the
one I proposed have on combating homelessness, and will
allocating Federal funds to more rather than fewer qualified
providers, including The Doe Fund, help transition people out
of homelessness?
Ms. Karr-McDonald. As I said before, homelessness is not
made up of a monolithic group of people, and I think it was a
disservice to stop funding any transitional programs that
provided housing as well as more communal services. I think one
of the great benefits to us and to the people we serve has been
our ability to form strong communities of upwardly mobile
people and get support from the staff who are vastly--the
majority are formerly homeless folks. I think there have to be
a multiple of answers to a very complex issue.
We are fortunate because we are a social enterprise, so we
get contracts for the work we do and a lot of donations because
of our high visibility on the streets, but social enterprise
can be a poor piece of some homeless programs. We earn the
money that allows our guys to get paid at $15 an hour and save
money and all of those things because we run businesses, and
they are competitive with for-profit businesses.
Mr. Barr. Ms. Karr-McDonald, my time is running out, so I
will reclaim my time, but I do appreciate the fact that The Doe
Fund and similar organizations do provide the wraparound
services. And we need to identify homelessness as not just a
problem of lacking a roof over your head, but there are
underlying causes for homelessness, whether it is mental
health, lack of case management, lack of skills or financial
literacy, or what have you, substance abuse disorders. We need
to meet these folks where they are, and I subscribe to my good
friend, Juan Vargas', citation to Scripture that we need to
really care for these people. Not just warehouse them, but care
for them, and that is why I oppose Housing First.
And let me just briefly engage my constituent, Ms. Bush.
Your testimony today strongly advocates for the use of Housing
First, and, of course, your coalition is based in my district.
This issue was brought to my attention by another constituent
organization in Franklin County, and when I was visiting that
transitional housing facility that catered to women recovering
from substance abuse disorders, what one of the ladies told me
was, please, please, please--she begged me not to force her to
live in a shelter where there are other active users.
The Housing First approach would have forced her to be
surrounded by other people who are in active addiction and
using drugs, and you can understand that was going to
compromise her recovery. So, I invite your feedback on that.
Ms. Bush. Sure, and thank you, Congressman. It is always
good to see you, even over a camera on the computer. Janet
Gates, the director of the Franklin County Women and Family
Shelter, is who I think you are referring to.
Mr. Barr. Yes.
Ms. Bush. And she is a good friend of mine. We have known
each other for a long time. And having done this work in a
rural community--I have spent 15 years of my life in Eastern
Kentucky--I have worked the overnight shelter shift. I know
that we have those in varying stages of recovery and that any
sort of substance use issues may have come right after becoming
homeless. You do want to be careful. I will say that the
Franklin County Women and Family Shelter seems to have pivoted,
because their mission really is tied to recovery, and so they
are a recovery facility, and thanks to Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funding, things that may be more appropriate
to the recovery funding, and, quite frankly, more generous than
how the Emergency Solutions Grant Program is funded, they may
end up being in a better place.
And I just want to say that I have worked in a transitional
housing program that was Continuum of Care-funded back in the
2000s. I have done transitional shelter. I became a Housing
First advocate because I saw that is what works from my
perspective. And I think you are absolutely right, we need to
meet people where they are. One of the things I like about
true, high-fidelity Housing First programming is that it does
meet people where they are, and it prioritizes choice and
opportunity. Thank you.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you. Ms. Pressley, again, we
apologize. I am not sure what happened, but you are now
recognized again for 5 minutes.
Ms. Pressley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We will try this
again. Just getting to my first question here for Ms. Oliva,
could you speak to how the policy of reporting evictions on
consumer credit reports worsens the homelessness crisis and
makes it harder for people to find safe, affordable homes, and
to access the financial tools that they need to be successful?
Ms. Oliva. Yes. Thank you so much for that question. I
think it is really an important question as we think about
homelessness prevention and eviction prevention overall. We
know that evictions perpetuate cycles of homelessness and
housing instability, and that a lot of landlords use consumer
credit reports during their initial tenant screening, and then
they may choose to not rent to a tenant who has a history of
eviction. That happens even when an eviction filing is
ultimately withdrawn. Sometimes, those withdrawn filings still
show up on a tenant's credit report without the additional
context or ability for that tenant or prospective tenant to be
able to explain what happened or what that particular context
was.
And then, you also noted that this is a particular problem,
especially for renters of color. And, in particular, Black and
Latina women are more likely to be evicted than their male
counterparts [inaudible] for evictions. So, it really does have
a huge impact [inaudible] to people not being able to exit
homelessness.
Ms. Pressley. Thank you. It is clear that the U.S. credit
system is one that perpetuates racism and economic justice
while its benefactors attempt to sort of pass it off as an
objective metric of financial trustworthiness. In reality, this
policy further entrenches injustice and acts as a barrier to
families' ability to realize their basic human rights to
housing and opportunity. And we know that prior to the
pandemic, it was estimated that around 3.7 million evictions
are filed every year, so that is at a rate of around 7 per
minute. But even though this data is very jarring, it still may
not show the full story of the eviction crisis.
Ms. Oliva, do you mind just defining what are illegal
evictions, and how prevalent are they and how are they carried
out?
Ms. Oliva. Sure. An illegal eviction is an eviction where a
landlord doesn't follow State or local laws and includes a
number of tactics like changing the locks, and removing
somebody's belongings from a unit without a court order. We
have heard of people who actually removed the front door to
units as a method of an illegal eviction, or turning off the
utilities. But I would also note that sometimes just the threat
of an eviction from a landlord for all the reasons that we just
talked about, about the kind of impact and eviction can have on
somebody's record, can actually incentivize a family to move
out of a unit. These are illegal, so we don't know exactly how
many are affected, but what I would note is that a lot of
times, they happen because landlords have access to legal
counsel. About 90 percent of landlords have access to legal
counsel when they are filing an eviction, but only 10 percent
of tenants have access to legal counsel when they are fighting
an eviction.
Ms. Pressley. Thank you. Thank you for that. And so, Ms.
Oliva, what if landlords were required to inform tenants of
their rights? Would that help to crack down on these illegal
evictions, again, illegal, and also incredibly demoralizing in
so many ways, given the imagery that you provided there about
what often happens? But what if landlords were required to
inform tenants of their rights? Do you think that this would
crack down on these illegal evictions and reduce the numbers?
Ms. Oliva. I guess what I would say to that is that the
more that tenants know about their rights, the better, and the
better equipped they are to fight back against illegal or
unjust practices. But they also need access to counsel and
strong local and State tenant protections. And then, at the end
of the day, if we could make housing more affordable to more
households through an expansion of the supply and an expansion
of our affordability programs, like the Housing Choice Voucher
Program, all of that would lessen the burden on these tenants,
especially extremely low-income tenants and tenants of color.
Ms. Pressley. Thank you. I am almost out of time here. I
would add to that, if they were required to provide
justification for an eviction in writing, that might also
combat it. But that is why I have introduced the Housing
Emergencies Lifeline Program (HELP) Act, not only to prohibit
the reporting of eviction data on consumer credit reports, but
it funds legal counsel for those facing eviction and cracks
down on illegal evictions in that exact way. I hope my
colleagues will support this legislation as a critical part of
our larger, long-overdue strategy to end homelessness.
And I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Cleaver. We messed you up, so if you have--
Ms. Pressley. I am all set. Ms. Oliva answered my
questions, and I also was able to speak about my legislative
solutions in response. So, thank you.
Chairman Cleaver. Thank you.
The Chair notes that some Members may have additional
questions for these witnesses, which they may wish to submit in
writing. Without objection, the hearing record will remain open
for 5 legislative days for Members to submit written questions
to these witnesses and to place their responses in the record.
Also, without objection, Members will have 5 legislative days
to submit extraneous materials to the Chair for inclusion in
the record.
If there are no pertinent questions or comments, this
hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:26 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
February 2, 2022
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]