The Economic Consequences of Homelessness in The US

vouchers when they are no longer needed, allowing PHAs to target voucher use toward
families with the highest needs.
Such regulatory limits to the effectiveness of housing vouchers also play a role in the
causal pathway to homelessness, along with limiting the effectiveness of interventions
to resolve it. Economic conditions such as fluctuations in wage and employment levels,
the rising costs of housing even at the lowest levels, and income or wage gaps all play a
part in driving individuals into episodes of homelessness, increasing the complexity of
the problem. Similarly, beyond such economic drivers, there are a wide range of
reasons why individuals become homeless. Families may experience homelessness as
a result of conditions in or outside of their control, such as unsafe home environments,
traumatic or violent events, natural disasters, unexpected costs that overwhelm financial
safety nets, and temporary lapses in availability for employment. These complexities
can be pointed to as a reason for programs’ inability to “end” homelessness, but they do
not eclipse support for expansion of programs that seek to solve current homelessness
or prevent future homelessness from occurring.
This issue of complex economic, systemic, and social drivers is also connected to the
notion that housing support and other homelessness services will end up being a
permanent crutch to individuals accessing them. In fact, such a model of homelessness
simultaneously supports the case that homelessness is in some ways beyond the
control of the individuals it affects, contrary to the aforementioned negative perceptions
held by political entities and members of society. If the complex web of causes of
homelessness stems even in part from factors external to individual behaviors or
characteristics, then interventions intended to either temporarily or systematically
remedy those factors cannot be dismissed outright.
Finally, the popular media often cites widespread fraud in social programs as a reason
to defund housing and income support services. Despite media portrayals of
widespread disability fraud, the Social Security Administration found in 2012 that only
1% of payments were inaccurate and that most cases of fraud are detected prior to an
individual receiving payment. Similarly, HUD found that just over 1% of families living in
public housing exceeded income limits, and the agency has taken action to encourage
PHAs to withdraw vouchers from these families and target vouchers to those with the
highest needs.
Action Steps
This policy statement represents APHA’s strong commitment to ending and preventing
homelessness. As a means of reaching this goal, APHA:
1. Calls upon federal agencies such as HUD and the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, states, and local providers of housing and homelessness
services to promote programs that demonstrate adherence to the Housing First
model, prioritizing low-barrier access to housing for individuals experiencing
homelessness across all housing program types, with an emphasis on harm
Page 110 of 289