From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Local Housing Development Can Be Both Affordable and Supportive
Parallel Track Program Must be Developed
To their credit, Council Member Christopher Krohn and local housing activists are justifiably concerned about and have focused much attention on the lack of “affordable housing” available in our community. My focus, in part fueled by my advocacy for the unsheltered and part by support for increased access to mental and behavioral health services, is primarily directed at the development of “transitional and permanent supportive housing”. The two concerns are by no means mutually exclusive and we, as a community, and our council as policy makers, lack only the clarity of commitment that can push a parallel tracked housing program forward to address each of these needs.
The integration of social services and housing is not a new concept. The services available near housing should, and often do, define our sense of community. This is as true for affordable housing development planning as it is for the subset of housing which is defined as “supportive”. Supportive housing, in its broadest definition, is housing linked with social services tailored to the needs of the population being housed. Yet for some, the services they need are not easily found. This is particularly true for those with special needs, such as people with chronic mental illness, people living with HIV/AIDS, the physically or developmentally disabled, victims of domestic violence, and recovering substance abusers. Nonprofit housing developers and social service providers have long recognized the importance of comprehensively addressing the needs of their residents and clients. Housing and supportive services are interdependent; both are less effective in the absence of the other.
In this model, the homeless are assessed at emergency shelters, transferred to a transitional housing program with on-site services, and then placed in permanent housing. Emergency shelters and transitional housing programs have a finite length of stay, which may vary anywhere from a few nights for emergency shelters to two years for transitional housing. There are many different types of emergency shelter and transitional housing, ranging from barracks-type facilities, to shared living quarters, to individual apartments or houses. We, as policy makers, are free to decide which model is best for our community and can best be appropriately tailored to the demographics of our local houseless population.
The major focus of transitional housing is to help people increase their coping and life management skills to resolve crises in their lives, gain access to community-based resources, and move into independent permanent housing. Transitional housing may be an appropriate setting for those whose present circumstance requires targeted supportive services to regain stability and develop skills, such as victims of domestic violence, recovering substance abusers, and pregnant and parenting teenagers.
For the general low-income population, a more resident-friendly and cost-effective method is to focus on developing permanent housing with social services available either on-site or nearby. This serves to directly integrate the formerly homeless into communities; provides for increased family stability and avoids costly school and day care transfers; allows families to adjust to their surroundings, rather than prepare for another move; and changes the focus from crisis response to community building. There are numerous successful permanent supportive housing models across the country of which our local decision makers should take note.
Regardless of the model we deem best for our community, transitional and permanent supportive housing programs must be included in our long-term strategy for housing development. If we are to not only recognize but address the clear and present need for comprehensive and integrated housing options in our community, our policymakers and elected officials must take the lead. That leadership begins with a vision for housing development that is not merely affordable for our community members, but supportive as well.
The integration of social services and housing is not a new concept. The services available near housing should, and often do, define our sense of community. This is as true for affordable housing development planning as it is for the subset of housing which is defined as “supportive”. Supportive housing, in its broadest definition, is housing linked with social services tailored to the needs of the population being housed. Yet for some, the services they need are not easily found. This is particularly true for those with special needs, such as people with chronic mental illness, people living with HIV/AIDS, the physically or developmentally disabled, victims of domestic violence, and recovering substance abusers. Nonprofit housing developers and social service providers have long recognized the importance of comprehensively addressing the needs of their residents and clients. Housing and supportive services are interdependent; both are less effective in the absence of the other.
In this model, the homeless are assessed at emergency shelters, transferred to a transitional housing program with on-site services, and then placed in permanent housing. Emergency shelters and transitional housing programs have a finite length of stay, which may vary anywhere from a few nights for emergency shelters to two years for transitional housing. There are many different types of emergency shelter and transitional housing, ranging from barracks-type facilities, to shared living quarters, to individual apartments or houses. We, as policy makers, are free to decide which model is best for our community and can best be appropriately tailored to the demographics of our local houseless population.
The major focus of transitional housing is to help people increase their coping and life management skills to resolve crises in their lives, gain access to community-based resources, and move into independent permanent housing. Transitional housing may be an appropriate setting for those whose present circumstance requires targeted supportive services to regain stability and develop skills, such as victims of domestic violence, recovering substance abusers, and pregnant and parenting teenagers.
For the general low-income population, a more resident-friendly and cost-effective method is to focus on developing permanent housing with social services available either on-site or nearby. This serves to directly integrate the formerly homeless into communities; provides for increased family stability and avoids costly school and day care transfers; allows families to adjust to their surroundings, rather than prepare for another move; and changes the focus from crisis response to community building. There are numerous successful permanent supportive housing models across the country of which our local decision makers should take note.
Regardless of the model we deem best for our community, transitional and permanent supportive housing programs must be included in our long-term strategy for housing development. If we are to not only recognize but address the clear and present need for comprehensive and integrated housing options in our community, our policymakers and elected officials must take the lead. That leadership begins with a vision for housing development that is not merely affordable for our community members, but supportive as well.
Add Your Comments
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network