Running on empty: Monitoring the lives and circumstances of formerly homeless families with children

Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1994

Running on Empty: Monitoring the Lives and Circumstances of Formerly Homeless Families with Children

A n n e B. Shlay 1,2

Homelessness is a manifestation of acute poverty accompanied by long-terra unemployment, deficient human capital, problems with substance abuse, inadequate welfare benefits, and other vulnerabilities. Homeless people have problems that require sustained intervention strategies that wilt permit them the opportunity to enter the labor market, maintain permanent housing~ remain healthy and functional, and take care of their families. To this end, more and more transitional housing programs have been opened--programs that provide shelter stays of longer duration than emergency shelters as well as an array of support services designed to help people move along the path toward economic independence. Do people do better after living in transitional housing? To address this question, this research monitored homeless families who "graduated'from a large trans#ional housing program in Baltimore. Following two cohorts of families for more than one year at several points in time, this research finds that families exhibited a series of positive changes in the lives of both adults as well as children. Families did not become economically self-sufficient as indicated by complete independence from income maintenance programs. This study suggests that the availability of income maintenance programs, particularly rental housing subsidies may be a critical factor in permitting homeless people to stabilize their life situations.

llnstitute for Public Policy Studies, Gladfelter Hall, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122.

2Correspondence should be directed to Anne B. Shlay, Institute for Public Policy Studies, Gladfetter Hall, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122.

135

1053,4J'/89/94/IM00-0135507,00/0 © 1994 Human Sciences Press, Inc.

136 Shlay

INTRODUCTION

Despite the escalation of attention placed on the blight of the homeless, an end to this problem does not appear to be in sight. Entrenched poverty, unaffordable housing, under-funded income maintenance programs, a dearth of housing subsidies, joblessness, as well as growing problems with substance abuse and mental illness, will continue to force many to join the ranks of the homeless. Without massive changes in public policy and the economy that substantially alter the condition that produce acute poverty, homelessness will remain a part of the metropolitan landscapema legacy of Reagan/Bush policies, deindustrialization, and economic restructuring (Shlay & Rossi, 1992).

The growth of homelessness is manifested in macro structural changes. Nonetheless, programs and policies designed to ameliorate homelessness are not directed at altering macro forces such as the economy but at the micro conditions and circumstances of individuals and families. Approaching homelessness as the problem of individuals is often viewed as "blaming the victim" because the focus is on the character and skill deficits of people rather than faulting the larger social order that allowed these people to fall between the cracks. Yet, without the political will and wherewithal to transform macro forces (or even to tinker ever so gently)the problems of homeless people may be the only programmatic game in town. Hence, many programs designed to address homelessness specifically target the characteristics of individuals that appear to prevent them from maintaining a permanent abode.

This paper is about a group of people who participated in a small experimental program designed to address the problems of homeless families with children--the Transitional Housing Program (THP). Located in Baltimore, THP provides housing for a period of up to 2 years, combined with an array of supportive services that are intended to help people make the "transition" from being homeless to permanently domiciled.

Does participation in programs like THP help people alter their life circumstances and enter the social and economic mainstream? Using data collected as part of a THP monitoring project, this paper addresses the social and economic situations of families over several intervals after leaving the program. It provides information along several dimensions: household economics and human capital, health, problems, relationships and social networks, quality of life, and short- and long-term goals.

THE PROGRAM

The homeless population has become increasingly diverse. In the early eighties, homelessness was primarily the plight of homeless men

Running on Empty 137

(Rossi, 1989). Now many women and children are experiencing the crisis that homelessness represents across the country (Rossi, 1993). In Maryland, a recent census of the sheltered homeless found that one-third were children less than 18 years old (Shlay, 1992a). Of these, one-half were children less than 6 years old.

The number of transitional housing programs for homeless families has rapidly expanded in recent years. The expansion of these programs reflects, in part, the increasing number of homeless families with children. But this growth also reflects largely increased funding available for these programs. Under the transitional housing component of the Supportive Housing Demonstration Program of the McKinney Act, funding increased from $62 million to $109 million between 1988 and 1991 (Interagency Council on the Homeless, 1992). A large portion of these funds have been targeted at homeless families with children. The goal of this program is to foster "independent living" within a 24-month stay (Interagency Council of the Homeless, 1992).

Baltimore's THP was created as part of this new wave of services for homeless families. It's design reflects a growing recognition that acute poverty and its most severe manifestation, homelessness, are accompanied by a host of problems that often operate as antecedents for many homeless situations. These include educational deficiencies (e.g., illiteracy, no high school diploma), limited employment experience, substance abuse, and welfare dependency. In addition, like many homeless people, a sizeable number of THP adult residents experienced physical and sexual abuse as children, grew up as children of alcoholics or drug abusers, lived in foster care situations, or were later battered by a spouse. Therefore, to redress the conditions that maintain such severe economic destitution appears to require providing families with an array of supportive services that may given them the skills and resources to break down barriers to achievement and move then closer to the social and economic mainstream.

Since 1989, THP has been providing housing and services to families with children in two former school buildings that have been converted to house families and the various programs that make up the THP. In total, THP can house up to 71 families at a time. Families typically live at THP for up to 2 years. THP's standard programmatic model is that adult family members use THP services, programs and supports to determine their short- and long-term goals and then, with THP case managers, initiate a process to ultimately achieve them. Activities include THP's own curricu- lum, GED and pre-GED classes, employment and training, college, support groups, life skills counseling, child care (pre-school and before/after school childcare), parenting counseling, health care education, mental health services, and intensive family services. Successful THP participants, who are

138 Shlay

not prematurely terminated from the program, "graduate" from the THP and are awarded a Section 8 certificate (or some equivalent) to help them stay in permanent housing)

THP residents are recruited from emergency shelters. Applicants are screened for chemical dependency. Residents are selected according to their perceived motivational levels for achieving economic independence and their potential for becoming either t~:ained for the labor market or employed. The program is not intended to help "any" homeless families but those who appear to be the most response to the services available at the facility. The resident selection process is designed to "cream" those most likely to succeed. Nonetheless as this paper will show, creaming is no guarantee for success because people who are most likely to be able to "make it" do not become homeless in the first place.

The recognition that participation in THP over two years might not be sufficient to adequately remedy the host of problems of many homeless people led to the creation of the "THP follow-up program," one designed to work with families after they leave the program. Follow-up services include support groups for graduates and regular contact with families from THP follow-up staff. Rather than have families leave the array of institutional supports at THP cold turkey, the follow-up program is designed to provide some support in a more mainstream (i.e., non-institutional) envi- ronment.

Follow-up families were also monitored on a regular basis as part of a research component to the follow-up program. The THP monitoring project was developed to learn whether families were able to prevent homelessness and other calamities from occurring again and whether they continued to make progress towards achieving goals established while in the program (Shlay, 1991, 1992b).

THE QUESTION

Evaluation research on homeless service programs, particularly transitional housing programs, is extremely limited (Rossi, 1991; Bassuk & Co- hen, 1991). Most research on programs to date have focused on either specific subgroups of the homeless (e.g., alcoholics and the mentally ill) (Newman 1992; Heubner & Cross, 1991) or on single service needs (e.g., health care) (Wright & Weber, 1987). A major evaluation is currently in

3A Section 8 certificate is a housing voucher. People holding a certificate may rent a unit on the private market that is up to code and does not rent for more than what H U D considers a fair market rent. The tenant pays one-third of their income in rent. The government pay the landlord the difference.


process on the Robert Wood Johnson/HUD homeless families program, a nine city demonstration designed to provide services and housing to homeless families although the research does not address the impact of the program per se(Rogg, 1991). Another significant evaluation is being conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health on programs for substance abus- ing single parents. But at this writing, no findings from these investigations are available.

Current wisdom is that problems of homelessness should be targeted with a combination of housing and supportive services that are both comprehensive and coordinated (Lindbom, 1991). Yet operationalizing the most effective bundle of comprehensive services remains an elusive goal. Although it is commonplace to hear political disdain for emergency shelters as "treatment" for homelessness, advocacy for more sustained interventions is often articulated in the most general of terms. The call is for more services, more transitional housing and ultimately, for more permanent housing as if these either alone or in concert will result in homeless people entering the labor market and becoming "productive" members of society.

Yet a major knowledge void exists on the effects of these programs. An investigation of services for homeless families with children across five cities could not report on the effectiveness of programs because of the absence of an evaluation of program outcomes of follow-up once families left the program (Macros Systems, 1991). Indeed, it was suggested that the programs would be difficult to evaluate because of the absence of well-defined program goals and the difficulty in attributing success or failure to particular program features.

The absence of sustained information of the short- and long-term effects of transitional housing strategies means that it is unclear what may be expected from these programs. Anecdotal information abound about 'success' stories; these are the people that "sell" programs. Yet without research designs that include control groups, little can be concluded from the experiences of those who go through a program and do well (Rossi, 1991). Were participants successful because of the program or because they were already on a trajectory toward success?

At the same time, the void in contemporary knowledge about these programs makes it difficult to generalize from the experiences of participants who do not do well. It is almost a truism that most social programs fail to have their intended effects, in part, because of problems in imple- mentation, but more often because these programs are trivial in magnitude compared to the tidal forces that produce poverty, homelessness, and economic destitution (Rossi & Wright, 1984; Rossi & Freeman, 1989). More- over, as recent history demonstrates, even when programs result in people acquiring employment and educational credentials, these achievements may

140 Shlay

not lead to people becoming economically self-sufficient during recession- ary periods with high rates of joblessness.

Homelessness is symbolic of society's failure at securing the most minimal quality of life for its citizens. Unaffordable housing, joblessness, underemployment, and a niggardly welfare state do not originate with homeless individuals or even the poor themselves but with public policy, the corporate community, and political and economic structures.

Homelessness may not originate with individuals. Yet it has been noted that while many people are poor, not all poor people become homeless (Rossi, 1989). To be sure, the estimated large number of the "near" or "would be" homeless--those who are in precarious housing situations and are at risk of becoming homeless, illustrate the thin boundaries between the domiciled poor and the homeless (Cordray & Pion, 1991). At least three million people have been estimated to be precariously housed (Rossi, 1992). Nonetheless, homelessness reflects the failure of some individuals, it would appear, at coping with basic life sustaining institutions even if this failure is not particularly their fault. These institutions include the labor market, the welfare system, the housing market, and the family.

Information on the coping strategies and life experiences of poor families is very sparse. Little is known about the lives of extremely poor families, particularly poor families who manage to survive on the limited resources provided through public assistance. Therefore, a crucial question for public policy and program development hinges on the factors that keep people in permanent housing, out of the shelters and off the streets. What permits vulnerable, very low income families to survive or, at the very least, to avoid homelessness?

To explore this issue, the paper addresses the life experiences and situations of two cohorts of THP graduates--former homeless families. It focuses on several questions. First, did THP graduates exhibit movement in the direction of economic independence? Second, did the lives of these formerly homeless families seem to be improved over where they were prior to becoming part of the program? Third, how did these families survive after leaving THP? Finally, do the life situations of these families indicate that interventions like THP have a role to play in altering the dynamics of homelessness and acute poverty?

RESEARCH DESIGN AND DATABASE

This study is not an evaluation of the Transitional Housing Program. It is not designed to determine the impact of participating in any THP program, either while residing at one of the facilities or after graduation.


Rather, its goals are to describe what happens to families on a regular basis after they leave the program.

The focus on describing T H P graduate families over time as opposed to evaluating the impact of THP is built into the design of this investigation. The research is based on a very small number of cases and the design did not include a control group, so it is not possible to compare the experiences of T H P families with a group of similar families that did not participate in this program. All families experienced the same treatment (THP) so there is no systematic way to statistically compare families over time. More- over, the small number of cases limits the statistical tools that may be used.

Data and design limitations preclude making any judgment on the effectiveness of the program. Yet the richness of the data and the longitudinal design provide a good opportunity to monitor the life circumstances and situations of these formerly homeless families of which very little to date is known. With the focus on description, this research design may be viewed as yielding a series of case studies over multiple points in time.

The research design is to monitor families over time by interviewing heads of households at regular intervals. Beginning in the spring of 1991, household heads were interviewed every 3-4 months by T H P follow-up counselors. The families monitored for this study are T H P graduates who completed the program after June, 1990. Cohort One graduated from the program in late 1990 (N = 19). Cohort Two graduated from the program in late 1991 (N = 22). 4

Interviews were conducted using the "TH P survey," a survey designed in consultation with T H P staff and administrators. Survey questions solic- ited information on family composition, economic and educational activi- t ies, hea l th , p rob lems , re la t ionsh ips and social ne tworks , p r o g r a m participation and goals. Each survey respondent was provided with $5.00 in compensation.

Table I shows the survey field intervals for each survey wave. In total, the survey was fielded at five points in time. Interviews with Cohort One were conducted at all five intervals. Interviews with Cohort Two were conducted for the last two intervals.

At each point in time, surveys were administered to the majority of each cohort 's members. For Cohort One, response rates were about 75% at each point in time. For Cohort Two, response rates were just over 60% at each point in time.

4Graduation roans that residents have successfully completed their course of programs while at THP. Graduation is to be distinguished from termination, where residents are prematurely asked to leave THP, typically for some form of misconduct that violated the contractual agreement negotiated between management and residents.

142 Shlay

Table I. Survey Field Interviews a

Fall- Fall- Spring S u m m e r Winter Spring Winte r

1991 1991 1991-1992 1992 1992-1993

Cohort one Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4 Wave 5 (N = 16) (N = 16) (N = 15) (N = 15) (N = 14)

Cohort two Wave 1 Wave 2 (N = 14) 0v = 13)

aSource: Transitional housing program monitoring project.

Longitudinal response rates (percentage of cohort members consistently interviewed over time) were lower than the cross-sectional response rates (percentage of cohort members at each point in time). For Cohor t One, about 50% (N = 9) were interviewed at four or more points in time. For Cohort Two, the longitudinal response rate was 36%; eight members of Cohort Two were interviewed at both points in time.

Since this article is directed at monitoring stability and change in the life situations associated with these formerly homeless families, the paper relies on data for which the maximum amount of information is available over time, not at each point in time. For Cohort One, the analysis is based on those respondents who were interviewed at least four points in time (N = 12-15 at each point in time). For Cohort Two, the analysis is based on those respondents who were interviewed at two points in time (N = 8). The analytical focus is essentially one that compares the life circumstances of the same people over time.

THE GRADUATES: VIGNETTES

T H P is a program for homeless families, typically single parent moth- ers with children. Before learning what life was like for these families after leaving THP, this paper provides several vignettes of the lives of these families prior to becoming a part of the T H P experience and while they were in the program. These stories are offered as an introduction to the people who are the subjects of this investigation.

Vivian Brown: Vivian, a black single parent with two children, became a T H P resident when she was 20 years old. her two boys were ages 2 and 3. When moving to THP, she did to have a high school diploma. Vivivan grew up with an alcoholic f a the r (she listed him as an emergency contact person) . Her file conta ins no information on how she became homeless, al though there are repeated reports o f "problems with men." She was receiving A F D C when she entered the program,


about $400.00 per month. Her employment experience prior to joining T H P was in child care; her career goat while at T H P was to become an office worker. At T H P she completed her G E D and a vocational program in secretarial work. She left T H P with a Section 8 cert if icate; she con t inued to received AFDC and Medica id . Af te r moving, Vivian enrol led in college and was employed as a work-study student; her goal was to receive her associates degree.

Chari ty Hanson: When Chari ty first c a m e to THP, she was 29 years old and pregnant with her fourth child. She brought with her a set of twin girls, age 12 and another girl, age 6. Charity is black and has never been married. When she came to THP, she was receiving $477 per mon th in A F D C payments. First pregnant at age 16, she was beaten by the father of her first two children. Charity was working full-time when she developed pneumonia , lost her job and her home. She and her children were living with her sister before moving to THP. Charity had already received a high school diploma prior to entering the program. Her goal while at T H P was to start her own business. She received a certificate in lead aba tement work and, after leaving THP, worked with a program designed to help poor women start small businesses. When she left THP, she had a Section 8 certificate and continued to receive AFDC.

Wilma Smith: Wilma was 26 with two children, ages 3 and 7, when she came to THP. Black and never married, Wilma had experience in carpentry. Her income when she arrived at T H P was AFDC, about $400 per month. She became homeless when her boyfriend moved out of the house. Unable to manage financially, she was evicted and moved to the Salvation Army shelter. Wilma was in foster care as a child. She lists a sister as an emergency contact. While at THP, she completed her GED. Her file contains reports of Some violent incidents. When she graduated from THP, she received a Section 8 certificate and continued to received AFDC. Af te r leaving THP, she enrol led in a t raining program to become a medical secretary.

Sheila Lyle: Sheila, age 24 with two children age 21 months and 6 years old, had been living with her mother in a ret irement home. She was forced to leave because she was not on the lease and the neighbors complained. After living in a shelter, she moved to THP. Only one child, the younger one, was living with her at this time. It is unclear where the other one was living, but he soon moved into THP. Al though she initially reported that she was not a substance abuser (she passed the requisi te screening tests), it was later discovered that she had problems with substance abuse and was enrolled in a program. When she arrived at THP, she already had a high school diploma and a certificate as a child care provider. She had work experience as a child care provider and had been employed as a factory worker. Sheila received $300 per mon th in AFDC. While at THP, she enrolled in college. She left THP with a Section 8 certificate, still on AFDC.

Laura Avers: Laura, age 35, had been sexually abused as a child. She was the seventh child in a family of 13 children. She a t tempted suicide at age 19 and was treated in a mental health center. Laura was separated from her husband when she moved to THP. At the time, she had two children, ages 11 and 12---a girl and a boy. The boy was determined to be emotionally disabled and had been placed in foster care. Laura became homeless when her husband threw her and her daughter out of the house. She came to T H P from a shelter. Laura had a high school diploma in hand when arriving at T H P and was working as a temporary worker. She was an admitted substance abuser and had been addicted to cocaine. Laura a t tended a vocational program while at T H P in legal and medical word processing. When she left THP, her major source of income was from employment , a l though she continued to receive food stamps. She was placed in a special H U D

144 Shlay

housing subsidy program with the option to eventually purchase her house. By the time that she moved from THP, she had regained custody of her son.

These vignettes provide apt illustration of the interplay of various factors that play into the dynamics of homelessness. These include race, gen- der, marital status, family history, victimization, substance abuse, poverty, welfare policy, education, and employment.

FINDINGS

THP families were victims of an accumulation of factors that culmi- nated in each becoming homeless. By living at THP and participating in programs that were, in theory, tailored to meet the individual needs of each client, people who graduated from the program were hoped to be on the path towards having more stability in their lives, greater control over the future, and continued progress toward meeting the life goals established while in the program. The remainder of this paper addresses the life situation of these families at multiple points in time, 8 to 15 months after graduation.

Demographics and Family Composition

Like most homeless families, the head of the typical THP graduate household was a black, single parent who had never been married (with the exception of one chronically mentally ill father whose former wife was a substance abuser). Members of Cohort One were more likely to experience marriage than Cohort Two; about one-third of Cohort One had been married at some point in time compared to about one-fourth of Cohort Two. Yet, those who had been married did not remain so. Only one Cohort One household reported living with a spouse, and their coupling was in- termittent. Whether they had or had not ever been married, THP graduate families were almost entirely headed by women during the course of this investigation.

At the time of the first survey, members of Cohort One tended to be slightly younger than members of Cohort Two (mean age of household head = 28.21 and 20.28 for Cohort One and Cohort Two, respectively). Members of Cohort One tended to have more children than Cohort Two. Cohort One families typically had at least two children; 84% had two or more children. About half of all Cohort Two families had only one child in the household.


Household Economics and Education

Table II shows the economic and educational characteristics of Co- hort One and Two at each respective point in time. For Cohort One, information is reported at five points in time, wave one through wave five. For Cohort Two, information is reported at two points in time, wave one and wave two.

Virtually all household heads in both groups had some regular employment experience. Yet current employment was very uneven at the time of each survey. Employment among Cohort One members was low. On average, about one-third were employed at any point in time (range = 36% to 23% currently employed at each time in time). Employment among Cohort Two members was much higher. At wave one, 63% were employed. By wave two, three-quarters were employed. Cohort Two members were employed at about twice the rate of Cohort One members.

Few Cohort One members were employed shortly after they left THP (wave one); employment remained low and even declined at one point (wave four). For Cohort Two members, employment was high (63%) soon after they left the program (wave one) and increased over a short period of time. By wave two, 75% were employed.

The amount of time worked per week by employed Cohort One members varied considerably over time. At wave one, employed Cohort One members worked, on average, 28.6 hours per week, and the large standard deviation (20.95) indicates substantial variation around this central ten- dency. At wave one, some employed Cohort One members worked full time while others worked part time.

The average time spent on a job increased at waves two and three for employed Cohort One members while the standard deviation decreased, indicating less variation in hours worked per week. This means that the small number of employed Cohort One members were almost uniformly working more hours. But the amount to time spent on a job per week declined, on average, at waves four and five from their wave one levels. Clearly time spent on a job for employed Cohort One members was very uneven.

For employed Cohort Two members, the number of hours worked per week was considerably more stable over time. At both wave one and wave two, employed Cohort Two members worked, on average, 36 hours per week. Most employed Cohort Two members worked full time.

Earnings for both cohorts were low. They were lower for Cohort One members. At wave one, earnings per hour among employed Cohort One members averaged about $4.79, just above the minimum wage. By wave five, earnings for some had increased by they remained, on average, quite

Tab

le I

I. H

ouse

hold

Eco

nom

ic a

nd E

duca

tion

al A

ctiv

itie

s a

Coh

ort

one

Coh

ort

two

Wav

e 1

Wav

e 2

Wav

e 3

Wav

e 4

Wav

e 5

Wav

e 1

Wav

e 2

(N =

15)

(N =

14

) (N

=

12)

(N =

13

) (N

=

12)

(N =

8)

(N

= 8

)

Em

ploy

men

t %

Eve

r re

gula

r jo

b 93

%

93%

93

%

93%

93

%

100%

10

0%

% C

urre

ntly

em

ploy

ed

33%

36

%

33%

23

%

33%

63

%

75%

Hou

rs p

er w

eek

Mea

n 28

.60

40.6

0 35

.00

23.5

0 28

.75

36.0

0 36

.00

(SD

) 20

.95

3.97

10

.00

9.19

13

. t 5

8.

84

8.94

Ear

ning

s pe

r w

eek

Mea

n $4

.79

$5.1

5 $5

.88

$5.0

0 $5

.87

$6.9

8 $6

.88

(SD

) (.

89)

(.65

) (.6

3)

(0.0

0)

(1.8

9)

(2.0

2}

(1.6

4)

Ix~o

king

for

wor

k %

Cur

rent

ly l

ooki

ng

60%

57

%

25%

54

%

50%

25

%

38%

%

Int

eres

ted

to l

ook

20%

14

%

41%

25

%

17%

38

%

12%

ne

xt y

ear

Inco

me

Sour

ces

% A

FD

C/w

elfa

te

73%

79

%

75%

85

%

83%

56

%

38%

%

SSi

7%

0%

8%

15

%

8%

0%

0%

% S

ocia

l se

curi

ty

0%

14%

8%

8%

8%

0%

0%

%

Une

mpl

oym

ent

0%

0%

8%

8%

0%

0%

0%

%

Pen

sion

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

%

Ali

mon

y 0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

%

Chi

ld s

uppo

rt

7%

14%

8%

8%

8%

25

%

12%

%

Hel

p fr

om r

elat

ive

21%

7%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

%

Sur

plus

foo

d 0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

g

r

% F

ood

stam

ps

93%

86

%

% S

ecti

on 8

cer

tifi

cate

87

%

78%

%

Oth

er h

ousi

ng s

ubsi

dy

14%

7%

Edu

cati

on

Mea

n 11

.40

12.0

0 (S

D)

(1.4

0)

(1.2

2)

%

12+

64

%

64%

Cre

dit

and

savi

ngs

% W

/che

ck.

or s

ay.

acct

. 27

%

14%

%

Wit

h cr

edit

car

d 7%

0%

%

Wit

h cr

edit

in

stor

e 13

%

7%

75%

83

%

8%

11.5

8 (1

.56)

58

%

25%

0%

8%

85%

77

%

8%

11.5

8 (1

.31)

62

%

30%

0%

8%

83%

10

0%

0%

11.8

2 (1

.08)

58

%

25%

0%

8%

75%

63

%

25%

11.8

8 (.

83)

87%

63%

0%

O

%

aSou

rce:

Tra

nsit

iona

l ho

usin

g pr

ogra

m m

onit

orin

g pr

ojec

t.

75%

75

%

12%

t2.0

0 (,

37)

100%

63%

0%

O

%

-s

o B

148 Shlay

low. At wave five, employed Cohort One members earned an average of $5.87 per hour.

Earnings for Cohort Two members were higher and they continued to stay higher over time. At wave one, they earned an average of $6.98 per hour, an average of $2.19 more per hour than employed Cohort One members at a comparable point in time (wave one). Assuming work at 40 hours per week for 52 weeks per year, a person would gross an income of about $14,000 annually. To be sure, earnings at this level are considerably higher than AFDC payments (although they do not account for the benefits from food stamps, medicaid, or childcare costs). Nonetheless, these earning levels by employed Cohort Two members, even assuming full-time employment, cannot be considered to be high.

It is important to recognize that in both cohorts, a significant proportion of the unemployed members reported that they were actively look- ing for work or were planning to took in the near future. Yet, as will be discussed later in this paper, one of the most serious problems cited by THP graduates was finding a job that they wanted.

Not surprisingly, the vast majority of Cohort One members retained their welfare benefits and, with few exceptions, most people continued to receive AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) and food stamps. At wave one, 73% were receiving AFDC. By wave five, 83% were receiving AFDC.

Virtually everyone continued to use their Section 8 housing subsidy or some equivalent form of housing subsidy. Only one or two people at any point in time received income from other sources including SSI, unemployment or child support. For Cohort One, their consistent main source of economic support came from public income maintenance programs.

Cohort Two members relied less on AFDC. At wave one, 50% were receiving AFDC and declined to 38% by wave two. Clearly for Cohort Two members, higher rates of employment meant less reliance on AFDC.

Cohort Two members continued, however, to receive other forms of public aid. At both waves of the survey, three-quarters of Cohort Two members were receiving food stamps. And like Cohort One members, virtually every Cohort Two member received a Section 8 housing subsidy or some equivalent at both points in time. Cohort two members appear to have exhibited some movement in the direction of economic independence. Nonetheless, they had not become economically independent within 8 months of leaving THP.

Both cohorts tended to have higher levels of education than typical welfare recipients. Over half of all Cohort One household head members had a high school diploma or equivalent. Cohort Two household head

Tab

le 1

1I. H

eatt

h a

Coh

ort

one

Coh

ort

two

Wav

e 1

Wav

e 2

Wav

e 3

Wav

e 4

Wav

e 5

Wav

e 1

Wav

e 2

(N =

15)

(N =

14

) (N

=

t2)

(N =

13

) (,V

=

12)

(,V =

8)

(,V =

8)

Im

C .n"

O

t~

B

~7

Doc

tor

visi

ts

% I

II

53%

21

%

% E

mot

iona

l pr

oble

m

13%

7%

%

Inj

ury

7%

7%

% P

hysi

cal

chec

k-up

80

%

43%

%

Rou

tine

den

tal

exam

53

%

29%

Hea

lth

Car

e C

over

age

% M

edic

aid

87%

86

%

% B

lue

cros

s 0%

7%

%

HM

O

47%

43

%

% O

ther

ins

uran

ce

0%

0%

Hea

lth

perc

epti

on

% E

xcel

lent

20

%

29%

%

Goo

d 33

%

57%

%

Fai

r 40

%

7%

% P

oor

7%

0%

33%

61

%

41%

50

%

88%

0%

8%

8%

0%

25

%

0%

8%

0%

0%

0%

67%

76

%

50%

75

%

63%

50

%

33%

17

%

25%

38

%

83%

92

%

83%

63

%

38%

0%

0%

9%

0%

12

%

42%

38

%

36%

38

%

62%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

58%

40

%

41%

25

%

62%

25

%

51%

58

%

75%

38

%

17%

15

%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

aSou

rce:

Tra

nsit

iona

l ho

usin

g pr

ogra

m m

onit

orin

g pr

ojec

t.

X

150 Shlay

members had even higher levels of education. By wave two, every Cohort Two member had a high school diploma or GED.

The differences between Cohort One and Cohort Two members' level of educational attainment are important. Cohort Two household head members were 1.5 times more likely to have a high school diploma or equivalent than Cohort One household head members. Indeed, higher levels of education among Cohort Two members may be part of the explanation for the higher earnings and rates of employment achieved by this group.

For this study, having a checking or savings account or some institu- tionalized form of credit (e.g., a credit card) was considered one indicator or economic integrationwan indicator of being part of the economic mainstream. Many people do not have access to conventional banking services because of their high costs, although some people are able to obtain some banking services through some special "no frills" programs. People who do not have checking accounts often have to rely on more expensive check cashing stores or deal in dangerous cash (Caskey, 1991). Therefore, deter- mining whether people are beginning to rely more on conventional banking services may be considered part of the process toward becoming economically independent (Shlay & Holupka, 1992).

Cohort One members were less likely to have a checking or savings account than members of Cohort Two. Few Cohort One members had a checking or savings account--less than one-third at any point in time. Co- hort Two members were more than twice as likely to have a checking or savings account than Cohort One members---63% at both points in time. Yet, scarcely anyone relied on formal credit institutions through having either a credit card or credit at a store.

Health

Table III shows findings concerning three dimensions associated with health: health care behavior (visits to health care professionals), health care insurance (type of coverage), and self-evaluation of health. Visits to health care professionals, particularly for routine exams are considered to be in- dicators of integration into the health care system. Having health insurance other than Medicaid is considered to be another indicator of moving in the direction toward economic independence. And self-evaluation of one's health is considered to be a major predictor of morbidity and therefore, a good measure of one's actual health. Therefore, performance along all three dimensions provides a good indication of the physical well-being and future physical well-being of cohort members. In both groups, most people

Tab

le I

V.

Pro

blem

s a

Coh

ort

one

Coh

ort

two

Wav

e 1

Wav

e 2

Wav

e 3

Wav

e 4

Wav

e 5

Wav

e I

Wav

e 2

(N =

15)

(N =

14

) (N

=

12)

(N =

13

) (N

=

12)

(N =

8)

(N =

8)

~s

How

chi

ldre

n do

ing

o B

% B

ette

r 48

%

39%

%

Wor

se

10%

15

%

% T

he s

ame

41%

45

%

Any

pro

blem

s %

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

40%

50

%

% F

indi

ng c

hild

care

33

%

36%

%

Pay

ing

rent

7%

14

%

% P

ayin

g o

ther

bill

s 33

%

36%

%

Chi

ldre

n at

hom

e 53

%

28%

%

Chi

ldre

n at

sch

ool

40%

2

t%

% O

ther

fam

ily m

embe

rs

27%

14

%

% Y

our

frie

nds

7%

7%

% F

indi

ng j

ob w

ante

d 36

%

43%

%

Hea

lth

27%

14

%

% F

inan

ces

46%

36

%

% I

mpo

rtan

t re

lati

onsh

ip

27%

21

%

% D

rugs

0%

0%

%

Alc

ohol

7%

7%

Vic

timiz

atio

n %

any

thin

g st

olen

13

%

14%

%

Pro

pert

y da

mag

ed b

y so

meo

ne

0%

14%

%

Inj

ured

by

som

eone

0%

0%

%

Thr

eate

ned

w/in

jury

7%

0%

57%

52

%

64%

31

%

67%

13

%

15%

0%

0%

0%

30

%

33%

36

%

68%

33

%

66%

31

%

66%

50

%

50%

33

%

23%

33

%

12%

43

%

34%

0%

17

%

12%

29

%

67%

46

%

50%

0%

29

%

33%

38

%

8%

12%

12

%

17%

38

%

17%

0%

29

%

8%

8%

0%

25%

14

%

17%

8%

0%

12

%

14%

33

%

42%

38

%

38%

43

%

0%

8%

0%

0%

0%

42%

38

%

17%

12

%

12%

17

%

15%

8%

12

%

12%

0%

0%

0%

t2

%

12%

8%

8%

8%

0%

12

%

8%

15%

0%

0%

12

%

8%

8%

0%

12%

12

%

8%

0%

0%

0%

0%

8%

0%

0%

0%

12%

'*So

urce

: Tra

nsit

iona

l ho

usin

g pr

ogra

m m

onit

orin

g pr

ojec

t.

152 Shlay

at some point in time had visited a doctor for a physical check-up; most also had a routine dental exam. THP graduates appear to have been well integrated into the health care system.

All Cohort One members had some form of health insurance and the vast majority relied on Medicaid for health care coverage (over 80% at each wave). Reliance on Medical Assistance as their primary form of health insurance was fairly consistent at each point in time.

Like Cohort One, all Cohort Two members also had some form of health insurance. They relied much less on Medicaid, however, than Cohort One members. At wave one, 63% were on Medicaid. By wave two, the proportion relying on Medicaid had declined to 38%.

Over time, Cohort One members' health appears to have improved over time. At wave one, just over 50% reported themselves to be in good health or excellent health compared to others their age. By wave five, fully 100% of Cohort One members evaluated their health as good or excellent. Cohort Two uniformly left THP in good health (wave one) and they stayed healthy (wave two); 100% reported their health to be either good or excellent at both points in time.

Problems

Homeless people, and poor people in general, typically have many problems, in part, because of their economic circumstances. Table IV shows some of the problems that people in each cohort experienced over time.

Parents were asked their perceptions of how their children were doing over the last 3 months--better, worse, or about the same. They were also asked to elaborate on these responses in terms of why they viewed their children in the way that they did. The situation of children is particularly important because of the deleterious effects of homelessness and acute poverty on children's well-being (Molnar et aL, 1991; Institute of Medicine, 1988).

Parents in both cohorts tended to view their children as doing better or remaining about the same at each point in time. Very few Cohort One members assessed their children as doing worse; no Cohort Two members saw their children's situation deteriorating at either wave one or wave two. Moreover, more parents in both groups tended to view their children's situation as improving.

Their explanations for their positive spin on their children's situation would sound familiar to more affluent families:

He's an extraordinarily bright child with few behavioral problems. She's very bright and full of life--a happy child.


They are good children. He's doing extremely well in school. She has her own room. He skipped a grade.

But other explanations for why things for their children might be better or steady state were more telling of the trouble these families had seen in terms of their children's health, emotional well-being and overall development:

She's listed as emotionally disturbed. They put her in a special program. [ am hoping for the best. He's doing well in physical therapy. Now I am drug free. We have a good relationship. He's doing well in spite of the lead poison. I have regained custody of him and our relationship has improved.

Moreover, several parents acclaimed the benefits for their children from having a stable place to live; one reported that her children were growing up "normally."

To be sure, when asked specifically if they had problems with their children either at home or at school, several parents acknowledged the presence of problems. But these problems appear to have dissipated over time, particularly for Cohort One. At wave one, almost half of all Cohort One parents reported having problems with their children either at home or school (53% and 40% at home or school, respectively). Although the number with problems varied over time, by wave five hardly any Cohort One parent reported problems with their children. Cohort Two parents reported very few problems with their children at home, although several reported problems at school (29% at wave two).

For both cohorts, the most significant and consistent problems were associated with employment. At each point in time and for each cohort, more than one-third reported problems findings a job that they wanted. On average, about one-third of either group reported problems finding childcare. And over half of either cohort at multiple points in time cited problems with transportation. It would appear that finding a job, finding care for children while at a job, and simply getting there were the most serious problems facing THP graduate families.

Few people in either cohort reported problems paying their rent, an important and positive finding in light of these families' formerly homeless situation. People expressed new ease in paying the rent, underscoring the importance of housing subsidies in insuring these people's hold on their housing.

More people, primarily Cohort One members, reported problems paying other bills and, more generally, said that they had problems with their finances. This appears to reflect the reality that Cohort One members, with

dg

Tab

le V

. R

elat

ions

hips

and

Soc

ial

netw

orks

"

Coh

ort

one

Coh

ort

two

Wav

e 1

Wav

e 2

Wav

e 3

Wav

e 4

Wav

e 5

Wav

e 1

Wav

e 2

(g

=15

) (g

=

14)

(g

= 12

) (g

=

13)

(g

= 12

) (g

=

8)

(g

= 8)

Rel

atio

nshi

ps

% A

ny c

lose

fri

ends

73

%

71%

83

%

93%

10

0%

100%

10

0%

% T

alke

d to

clo

se f

rien

ds

67%

71

%

83%

93

%

100%

10

0%

100%

%

Any

clo

se r

elat

ives

80

%

93%

83

%

76%

10

0%

100%

10

0%

% T

alke

d to

clo

se r

eL

67%

86

%

83%

76

%

100%

10

0%

100%

G

roup

mem

bers

hip

% S

uppo

rt g

roup

73

%

72%

83

%

46%

36

%

50%

75

%

% S

ocia

l gr

oup

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

% W

ork

grou

p 7%

7%

8%

0%

0%

0%

0%

%

Rel

igio

us o

rgan

izat

ion

33%

28

%

17%

23

%

64%

12

%

63%

%

Chi

ldre

n's

grou

p 13

%

7%

0%

23%

9%

0%

0%

%

Com

m./

char

ity

grou

p 20

%

14%

8%

0%

18

%

0%

0%

% O

ther

gro

up

20%

14

%

0%

8%

0%

0%

0%

% A

ny g

roup

80

%

87%

85

%

77%

73

%

62%

88

%

"Sou

rce:

Tra

nsit

iona

l ho

usin

g pr

ogra

m m

onit

orin

g pr

ojec

t.

m"

Tab

le V

I Q

ualit

y of

Lif

e a

Coh

ort

one

Coh

ort

two

Wav

e 1

Wav

e 2

Wav

e 3

Wav

e 4

Wav

e 5

Wav

e 1

Wav

e 2

(N =

15)

(N =

14

) (N

=

12)

(N =

13

) (N

=

12)

(N =

8)

(N =

8)

e-

¢}

Jpw

tjo

mgs

are

goi

ng

over

las

t 3

mon

ths

% B

ette

r no

w

60%

50

%

25%

38

%

75%

63

%

75%

%

Wor

se n

ow

7%

14%

25

%

8%

0%

12%

0%

%

Abo

ut t

he s

ame

33%

36

%

50%

46

%

25%

25

%

25%

Lif

e sa

tisf

acti

on

% V

ery

satis

fied

26

%

43%

25

%

38%

67

%

50%

88

%

% F

airl

y sa

tisfi

ed

67%

21

%

58%

54

%

33%

38

%

12%

%

N

ot t

oo s

atis

fied

7%

14

%

17%

0%

0%

12

%

0%

% N

ot a

t al

l sa

tisfi

ed

0%

0%

0%

8%

0%

0%

0%

~'So

urce

: Tra

nsit

iona

l ho

usin

g pr

ogra

m m

onit

orin

g pr

ojec

t.

t~t

156 Shlay

lower wages and more children than Cohort Two members, were more economically strapped. Nonetheless, Cohort Two members did not report an economically trouble-free existence; 29% percent cited that they had problems paying bills other than the rent.

Importantly, few people in both cohorts recounted being victims of crime. The overall absence of crime victimization indicates that people were consistently able to minimize this often frequent type of trouble in poor people's lives.

Both cohorts universally reported few social problems, either with friends, relatives or an important relationship. Only one or two people in either group cited that they had problems with either drugs or alcohol although self reports of substance abuse among the homeless are believed to be unreliable (Shlay & Rossi, 1992; Baumohl & Huebner, 1991).

Relationships and Social Networks

Homeless people are often and friends often provide (Rossi, tion that has been suggested to homelessness (Hopper, 1991).

Yet, at each point in time,

devoid of the social support that family 1989). Indeed, it is people's social isola-

be one of the important antecedents of

members of both groups reported con- nections with family and friends, indicating the availability of close social ties. Almost everyone reported that they had a close friend or relative and that they had spoken with them recently. Moreover, an overwhelming majority of both groups belonged to some kind of group or organization, typically a religious group or a support group. Both cohorts appeared to be socially integrated, as indicated by organizational memberships and familial and friendship ties.

Quality of Life

Table VI shows each cohort's perceptions of the quality of their lives at each point in time. Quality of life was investigated in two ways. First, people were asked to reflect about how "things" were going over the last 3 months--better, worse, or about the same. Second, people were asked the levels of satisfaction with their lives.

Cohort One members did not consistently report their lives were getting better, but they also did not suggest that life was getting worse. At those times closer to when they left THP, more people reported that life was going better largely, as they described, because they were "no longer homeless," "had my own place," "fixed my place up real nice," "have a job


with a steady income," and simply "feel better about things." Overall, getting out of the program and living independently was reported to be a very positive experience.

At those initial periods after leaving THP, life "staying the same" did not necessarily reflect an optimal status quo. Cohort One members reported the continuation of financial problems and joblessness. One woman admitted that "I still don't have anything worthwhile. I still drink." But the few people that reported that life was getting worse had serious problems. One woman reported depression. Another's mother had become a "crack- head" and had consequently become homeless.

At later periods, waves three and four, fewer Cohort One members reported that life was getting better. Nonetheless, people's explanations for how they viewed their lives at this point revealed that when life stayed the same, that was not too bad. Several people reported simply no significant changes. Two reported feeling peaceful. And one merely reported the bot- tom line, that she still "had a roof over her head."

Yet, by wave five, Cohort One members testified that life had changed for the better; three-quarters reported that life was going better, while the remainder reported that life had stayed the same. For many, this change reflected their satisfaction with staying on course--"maintaining a positive attitude," "everything is falling into place," "I fell good about my life," and "no problems." One women completed a GED. Another did not "drink as much." At this point, over 1 year after leaving the program, Co- hort One members' assessments of their lives were quite upbeat.

Cohort Two, like Cohort One, tended to report that things were going better for them in the period immediately after leaving the program (wave one). Unlike Cohort One, however, Cohort Two members continued to report increasing changes for the better (wave two). Like Cohort One, Co- hort Two members' initial positive reports (wave one) were associated with getting their own place to live and being more independent. But, by wave two, the THP graduation euphoria has subsided. Life was now getting better because, "I have a real good job with benefits," "I feel emotionally stable," "I'm a better parent," and "my children are doing really well." A couple of Cohort Two members reported completing job training programs.

Not surprisingly, both groups expressed levels of satisfaction with their lives that mirrored whether things were getting better or worse. People gradually expressed growing satisfaction with their lives. By wave five, 100% of both cohorts were either very or fairly satisfied with their lives.

People were also asked about the best and worst things that happened to them in the last 3 months to get some appreciation for some of the highs and lows in their lives. The "best" things largely were the events that explained why life had improved and represented the kinds of things that

158 Shlay

would make most people happy--a new job or apartment, getting pregnant, a new boyfriend, stopping drinking, doing well in school or completing a program. One graduate's personal best was simply getting her car fixed.

The worst things that happened to them were typically quiet bad. Peo- ple reported being laid off and assaulted. One person had her telephone service cut off, another lost her gas and electricity. For one person, the worst thing was experiencing a reduction in AFDC benefits. Another re- lapsed on drugs. Another experienced two burglaries in the course of 3 months.

Yet, when asked about their worst, most recent life event, several in both groups had nothing to report. There was "nothing significant," "nothing worth discussing," and simply "nothing." Overall, people were increasingly more positive than negative about the course of their lives.

Short- and Long-Term Goals

By design, THP is intended to help people begin to move along a course toward meeting established goals and ambitions that could, at some point, permit them to become economically independent. Becoming and remaining goal-oriented was therefore, considered to be an important out- come of the program. Of course, being able to articulate a goal does not necessarily mean that one is taking any action toward achieving it. None- theless, consistently vocalizing goals is some indication that some action, in the long run, may be taken toward reaching them. Did THP graduates develop goals that might indicate that they were working toward becoming self-sufficient? To determine this, THP graduate were asked for up to five short-term and long-term goals at each wave of the survey.

In both cohorts, every person articulated an employment or school related goal as either a short- or long-term goal at one or more waves of the survey. The most popular goal was simply obtaining permanent employment, or, as one person put it, "a job to keep." Several people expressed that they wanted to continue with school or finish school (e.g., college or a GED) or complete a education program for a particular cre- dential (e.g., nursing school). Some people said that they wanted better paying jobs. In short, everyone suggested that they were interested in either building up their "human capital" or developing some long-term attach- ment to the labor market.

Two people volunteered that they held as a goal to "come off of AFDC" and "get off social services." But for both people, these goals was offered secondary to getting a job. Another person said that her short-term goal was to "maintain independent living." But that short-term desire was


juxtaposed against her long-term goal to achieve economic independence. Apparently, each person had developed an understanding that education and employment were important goals to work toward.

People also expressed other goals that might serve as proxies for moving along a path toward economic independence. A few people wanted to learn to budget their money or to be better at it. Several people stated that they wanted to open a bank or saving account; one wanted an "ade- quate savings account" as well.

A few people mentioned goals associated with substance abuse. At wave one, one Cohort Two member expressed the short-term goal to "become drug free." By wave two, this person's goal was to "remain drug free." Still another person wanted to "remain sober."

In addition, people had material ambitions as welt--to buy furniture or to buy their own house. The most popular material goal was to buy a car, reflecting the problems people had expressed in getting transportation where they want to go. But, specific material goals were far less frequently mentioned than employment or educational desires, an unusual finding given the level of economic deprivation experienced by this group.

CONCLUSION

Did the changing life circumstances of THP graduates indicate that they were moving in the direction of greater economic independence? Were their lives improved after leaving the program? What resources did they use to survive? How were they able to maintain permanent housing this time? More broadly, can the experiences of this small group of formerly homeless families help address how programs and policies may alter some of the dynamics of homelessness and acute poverty?

No THP graduates became fully economically independent in the course of this investigation. For a sizeable proportion, employment income was substituted for AFDC. However, almost all households continued to receive food stamps and a housing subsidy, mainly Section 8.

The economic activities of each cohort exhibited important differences. Few Cohort One members acquired employment and the vast majority continued to rely on an array of public supports including AFDC, Medicaid, food stamps, and Section 8. Cohort Two members exhibited the opposite pattern; employment increased among this group and the number of people relying on AFDC and Medicaid declined, although they continued to receive food stamps and a rental housing subsidy.

What explains these different patterns of economic activity? No ready explanation is available. Cohort Two members tended to be younger than

160 Shlay

Cohort One members. They also had more education and fewer childrenm both important predictors of economic success. Yet these differences in age, education, and number of children were not large. Therefore, this explanation is highly tentative.

Nonetheless, other findings showed remarkable similarities among both groups. In brief:

• Parents consistently reported positive changes for their children along a variety of dimensions: behavior, emotional and physical well-being, and academics.

• THP graduates reported improved physical well-being. Their health improved and they exhibited integration into the health care system.

• Graduates had few difficulties in paying rent. • The main problems reported were associated with finding trans-

portation, childcare and employmentRproblems associated with becoming attached to the labor market.

• Graduates were not anomic or socially isolated as indicated by ties to family and friends.

• Graduates increasingly reported greater happiness, sense of emotional well-being, and control over their lives.

• Graduates consistently expressed life goals in line with become part of the social and economic mainstream. Every person volunteered an employment or educational related aspiration as a goal.

These findings suggest that the life changes of THP graduates showed significant improvements in the direction of leading healthier, productive, and stable lives. Most did not become economically self-sufficient in the sense that it is more commonly understood----complete independence from income maintenance programs, a finding common to most studies of these types of programs (Shlay, 1993). Nonetheless, the changes exhibited over time by both graduate cohorts suggest that THP graduates were exhibiting important strides in altering the course of their lives. As noted in other work, these may be considered the "steps toward independence" that permit people to build up the human capital and other resources required for becoming self-sufficient (Shlay & Holupka, 1992).

This research cannot determine whether the positive life changes experienced by THP graduates are directly attributable to the program. The small number of cases and the absence of a control group preclude making any judgments on either the strengths and weaknesses of the program in general or its individual components (Rossi, 1991). But clearly, THP graduates' lives were altered for the better. They arrived at THP homeless and destitute. Eight to 15 months after leaving the program, they had stable living situations, permanent housing, and were able to pay the rent.


What was the source of this new found stability? This study suggests that the availability of income maintenance programs, particularly rental housing subsidies, may be a critical factor in permitting people to stabilize their life situations. Low income people receiving housing subsidies or living in public housing are rarely at risk of becoming homeless. And THP residents, upon graduation, are awarded what may be considered the cadillac of U.S. welfare policy, a Section 8 certificate. This feature of the program, the provision of a rental housing subsidy upon graduation, may be an es- sential element that provides stability in families lives, permitting them to build on their human capital, take better care of their children, and ultimately, lead healthier and happier lives.

Further research is necessary to explore the role of housing subsidies in aiding programs targeted at promoting the economic self-sufficiency of low income populations. Contemporary welfare policy has focused on the negative consequences of being on welfare. Yet for homeless people, getting on welfare may be a tool for achieving economic independence. Hope- fully, additional longitudinal research will permit a determination of the viability of interventions desired to address the devastation in the lives of the contemporary homeless.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Presented at the 1993 Annual Meeting of the Urban Affairs Asso- ciation (Indianapolis). This research was conducted under contract with the Housing Assistance Corporation and the Johns Hopkins Institute for Policy Studies. Follow-up Counselor Herbert Gilliam conducted the interviews and participated in the design of the survey. Jean Biddinger and Anila Mirza performed data entry. Barbara Urso managed the production of this article. Ramesh Thyagarajan provided computer assistance. Transitional Housing Program staff, particularly Angie Battaglia, provided guidance and support along the way and Eric Cohen gave helpful comments on this article. I appreciate the artful contributions of each as well as the willing participation of THP graduates in this investigation.

REFERENCES

Bassuk, E. L., & Cohn, D. A. (1991). Homeless Families with ChiMren: Research Perspectives. Final Report of a Three Day Conference Sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health and the National Institute for Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

162 Shlay

Baumohl, J., & Huebner, R. B (1991). Alcohol and other drug problems among the homeless: Research practice and future directions. Housing Policy Debate, 2, 837-866.

Caskey, J. P. (1991). Check cashing outlets in the U.S. financial system. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City Economic Review, November, December, 53-67.

Cordray, D. S., & Pion, G. M. (1991). What's behind the numbers? Definitional issues in counting the homeless. Housing Policy Debate, 2, 587-616.

Hopper, K. (1991). Homelessness old and new: The matter of definition. Housing Policy Debate, 2, 757-813.

Huebner, R. B., & Crosse, S. B. (1991). Challenges in evaluating a national demonstration program for homeless persons with alcohol and other drug problems. In Debra J. Rogg (Ed.), Evaluating programs for the homeless. New Directions in Program Evaluation, No. 52, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Institute of Medicine (1988). Homelessness, health and human needs. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Interagency Council on the Homeless (1992). Federal progress toward ending homelessness. 1991/1992 Annual Report. Washington, D.C.: Interagency Council on the Homeless.

Lindblom, E. (1991). Toward a comprehensive homelessness-prevention strategy. Housing Policy Debate, 2, 957-1025.

Molnar, J., Rath, W. R., Klein, T., Lowe, C., and Hartmann, A. H. (1991). lllfares the land: The consequences of homelessness and chronic poverty for children and families in New York City. New York, NY: Bank Street College of Education.

Newman, S. J. (1993). The severely mentally ill homeless: Housing needs and housing policy. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Institute for Policy Studies.

Rogg, D. J. (1991). The evaluation of the homeless families program: Challenges in implementing a nine-city evaluation. In Debra Rogg (Ed.), Evaluating programs for the homeless. New Directions in Program Evaluation, No. 52. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Rossi, P. H. (1989). Down and out in America: The origins of homelessness. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Rossi, P. H. (1991). Strategies for homeless research in the 1990s. Housing Policy Debate, 2, 1029-1055.

Rossi, P. H. (1992). Persistence and change. In Benedict Giamo and Jeffrey Grunberg (Eds.), Beyond homelessness: Frames and reference. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press.

Rossi, P. H. (1993). Adrift in America: Origins and analysis of contemporary family homelessness. Amherst, MA: Social and Demographic Research Institute, University of Massachusetts.

Rossi, P. H., & Freeman, H. E. (1989). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Rossi, P. H., & Wright, J. D. (1984). Evaluation research: An assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 10, 331-352.

Shlay, A. B. (1991). The transitional housing program follow-up monitoring project: Report #1. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Institute for Policy Studies.

Shlay, A. B. (1992a). Dealing with desperation: A census of Maryland's sheltered homeless. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Institute for Policy Studies.

Shlay, A. B. (1992b). The transitional housing program follow-up monitoring project: Report #2. Philadelphia, PA: Institute for Public Policy Studies.

Shlay, A. B., & Hotupka, C. S. (I992). Steps toward independence: Evaluating an integrated service program for public housing residents. Evaluation Review, 5, 508-533.

Shlay, A. B., & Rossi, P. H. (1992). Social science research and contemporary studies of homelessness. Annual Review of Sociology, 18, 129-160.

Wright, J. D., & Weber, E. (1987). Homelessness and health. New York: McGraw Hill.

Running on empty: Monitoring the lives and circumstances of formerly homeless families with children

Documents

Transcript of Running on empty: Monitoring the lives and circumstances of formerly homeless families with children