A study has praised efforts to help people pay their rent. Researchers wonder about other homelessness-related expenses

A limited study by a local government watchdog found that money spent on preventing homelessness could be more effective than other forms of aid, although researchers cautioned that a full accounting of Millions of dollars spent on the crisis would require access to more data.

The San Diego County Taxpayers Association has again called on the nonprofit organization that tracks much of the region’s homeless population to release additional materials.

The analysis follows a state audit that also praised efforts to keep people housed and criticized how the money has been controlled so far.

“It passes the gut test: Spending more up front might help,” Haney Hong, the association’s president and CEO, said in an interview. “I wish we could dig a lot deeper — it would be so helpful to the different cities, it would be so helpful to everyone who is actually interested in this.”

There appears to be a growing consensus on the need for increased surveillance.

County officials last year ordered a comprehensive review of all homeless-related contracts and programs. In April, Gov. Gavin Newsom said cities that don’t document their finances wouldn’t be eligible for state grants, prompting San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria to criticize “haphazard and unclear spending of various local governments in duplicative homelessness programs.”

“We support accountability,” Gloria said in a statement.

The most recent study was released Wednesday by the San Diego Taxpayers Educational Foundation and looked at how each city in the county spent money on the homeless during a recent six-year period.

The group then compared these values ​​with local homeless populations to see if more money in an area affected the number of people sleeping in tents or shelters.

The report states that “there appears to be a link between prevention spending” – which can include rental assistance – “and a slight reduction in homelessness.”

The key word is “light”: their statistical model concluded that for every million dollars spent on prevention programs, only eight fewer people were left homeless.

There were more than 10,200 homeless people nationwide at the start of last year.

The study did not find a statistically significant relationship between the number of homeless people in a city and the amount spent on diversion programs (which help those who have just lost their housing, often through one-time expenses like deposits for the apartment) or in crisis management (which can include traditional shelters).

This is not to say that the researchers thought these two approaches were useless. Diversion and crisis management have undoubtedly helped thousands of people. The association also did not call for a halt to spending in these areas, particularly because strengthening services, contrary to popular belief, does not appear to attract more homeless people.

Executives were primarily frustrated that limited data prevented firmer conclusions from being drawn.

The homeless population figures were taken from the region’s point-in-time counts, which almost certainly underestimate the problem. Each count covers just one day a year and relies largely on volunteers, meaning anyone in hard-to-spot places, like cars or hotels, can remain hidden.

The association wants the raw data to be entered into the region’s homeless management information system. Researchers aren’t looking for names, but hope to see when individuals enter and exit specific programs throughout the year.

These records are maintained by the Regional Homelessness Task Force. Taxpayers association representatives said they were initially given what they wanted before the task force changed course.

“We need this data to determine the best way to help people get off the streets while getting the most value for taxpayer dollars,” Mike McLaughlin, taxpayer council president, said in a statement . “Homelessness is only getting worse, and it seems unacceptable not to share anonymized data. »

Task Force officials argued that these records still contain personal information about vulnerable people.

Spokesman Jordan Beane acknowledged that the nonprofit had signed a one-year research project with the taxpayers’ group, but he said their board chose not to renew the agreement after the association failed to “produce a report or analysis based on the data provided. »

“We have a consistent, transparent and simple process for sharing requested data for research purposes,” he wrote in an email.

The task force regularly releases reports summarizing housing-related homelessness, and there are hundreds of such successes each month. This “shows that the region’s homeless system is working,” Beane said.

The problem is that many more continue to find themselves homeless, and Beane added that the focus should be on the region’s lack of affordable housing as well as shortages of mental health care and treatment. substance addiction.

The taxpayer study comes with other caveats.

It’s nearly impossible to document all of the unintended costs of people living on the streets, such as the extra time public works employees might spend cleaning sidewalks, although researchers took into account each municipality’s total spending. (The analysis additionally considered home values ​​and income as some of its control variables.)

Police policies can also change from place to place. If one city clears encampments more aggressively, especially before a point-in-time count, it could quickly increase the number of people in a neighboring city.

The study covered the period 2017 to 2022 and did not include San Diego County spending.

The association organized an appeal to city officials last month to recommend that any money available for the homeless “be prioritized for prevention, diversion and crisis management, in that order.”

El Cajon City Manager Graham Mitchell said the analysis was useful to a point.

“In San Diego County, that data is very protected,” he said. “That’s when I start to wonder, ‘How effective are our programs?’ »