​In the 2000s, the United States acknowledged a model called “Housing First,” (National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2022) which prioritizes providing permanent housing to people experiencing homelessness. This model, however, was formed in 1992. This model doesn’t look like it will end homelessness at its roots or address all the factors that produce or sustain it. It does, however, look to use the safety and positioning of being housed as a platform to bridge those stigmas and further develop the quality of life for every individual. Most of these locations would be called supportive housing or transitional housing. They view the stability of being housed as a foundation for an individuals life. This approach aims to encourage growth solely through housing stability but also assists with individual needs and well-being to further their lives. This, however, is a choice rather than a requirement when approaching the supportive housing platform. The “Housing First” initiative has seen a 75-91 percent retention rate (National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2022) of those housed through the program. With this growth in autonomy, “Housing First” saves an average of 23,000 per consumer in emergency services (National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2022), as those who are housed are less likely to use them. Some of these include hospitals, jails, and emergency shelters.
Since the development and implementation of funding for social services such as “Housing First,” funding for sustaining supportive and transitional housing has increased. Although the degree of sheltered homelessness is decreasing, this just shows a redistribution of funds; according to their statistics, more people are in these social programs than are using local shelters. This could mean we are producing more homeless people due to the cost of living, or a statistic that connects the migration of homeless populations to services. I would consider both of these points true and connect to the economic disparities within governments at every level’s ability to serve the needs and sustainability of the community, while limiting the pressures that sustain the issues they seek to alleviate. “With Housing First,” the primary barrier is the lack of housing to meet demand. The addition of financial amenities aims to change the housing market for financial providers, furthering access to home and family financing. This encroaches on environmental issues, such as proximity to vital rivers or ecological concerns. It places homes in undesirable locations that are harmful to the population. This focus allows for greater financial development within the Housing First movement and the local economy while stretching the safety net. The strong initiative of housing over personal development. While this route separates an individual from the streets, offering them the potential for a better life, it doesn’t address where they are and the harm produced and sustained by homelessness. Even if the demand is met, the limitations that prevent one from being housed are blocked by repeated offenses that become inhibited by the stigma and formulation of homelessness. This leads to further mental health, legal, and social needs. First, without the help of outreach nonprofits, it limits continued engagement with the individual and prevents meeting the person where they are.