HUD Category | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 |
Homeless people staying in temporary shelter: | 199 | 203 | - |
Homeless people without shelter (i.e. on the streets): | 25 | 34 | - |
Homeless families: | 23 | 27 | 59 |
Homeless people in families (including children): | 60 | 83 | - |
Homeless children: | 35 | 51 | 38 |
Homeless individuals (not in families): | 164 | 154 | 171 |
Homeless people with a history of domestic violence: | 23 | 25 | 48 |
Chronically homeless people: | 71 | 39 | 70 |
Total Counted | 224 | 237 | 230 |
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Point In Time Comparison, 2005-2007
Taken from the PIT reports sent to HUD. Not much change over the 3 year period except in the chronically homeless category. I suspect 2006 is bad data, but unfortunately that is the number the Orange County Partnership to End Homelessness is using to base their 10-year plan around.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Terri, I can see how 2006 could be an outlier. Would you elaborate?
BTW, nice run of posts on the homeless issue.
Right now, all this data is simply reported to HUD where they decide how much money to give us for temporary housing (through OPC, Chrysallis, and IFC). Although the Community Initiative to End Homeless is charged with collecting the PIT data, there has been no effort to do any kind of analysis on that data. For example, while the PIT count has remained relatively consistent over the past 3 years, the number of food stamp recipients in the county has increased by 18% during that same time frame. To me that means that we have a lot of folks who are at high risk of homelessness--thus my constant harping on about affordability and economic development.
I'm not sure how to explain the lack of interest in delving further into the analysis of this data. I know there are more details available than what I've published. For example, there is a breakdown between Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Hillsborough and Orange County. But I don't have access to it. I've offered to do the analysis for 2 years now.
Post a Comment