In the face of New York’s enduring homelessness crisis, one lesson has become unmistakably clear to policymakers and advocates alike: the transformative power of supportive housing can and does change lives.
Recent data reveals that a mere 5% of previously unhoused New Yorkers experienced homelessness again after being connected to supportive housing, which offers rent-restricted housing coupled with voluntary support services.
But this evidence-based model is at risk, stretched thin by a complex interplay of pandemic fallout, tenants grappling with profound behavioral and physical health challenges, workforce shortages, stagnant wages, supply constraints, and new regulations. As a result, the ability of the supportive housing community to fulfill its fundamental promise — that tenants will receive long-term, individualized care — is in jeopardy.
Regrettably, this problem may be worsening. In June, New York City issued a memorandum instructing permanent supportive housing providers to adopt a “low barrier admissions” approach. Rightfully, the memorandum states that credit checks are irrelevant to successful tenancy because the programs provide a rental subsidy.
The memorandum also rightly bans criminal background checks, as research has definitively shown that previous criminal system involvement is not a good predictor of future behavior or successful tenancy.
While this move aligns with the philosophy of supportive housing, it falls short in the current landscape. Low-barrier housing is a central tenet of Housing First. Housing First also requires that services match tenants’ needs; without this vital match, it merely becomes Housing Only. If the low barrier policy is enforced as a blunt instrument, sending people into programs that do not have adequate resources to serve them, nobody wins.
It is clear that the industry is not adequately resourced to meet today’s challenges. Wages for direct service staff have remained at poverty levels for years, which, combined with the lingering effects of the pandemic has resulted in an alarming 30% vacancy rate in the human services workforce. This, in turn, causes exorbitant turnover rates, preventing the development of trusting, long-term relationships between tenants and providers, a cornerstone of this model’s success.
Finally, navigating the labyrinth of regulations poses significant hurdles. Established four decades ago, supportive housing has been built and maintained by more than 30 different city, state, and federal programs, each with unique restrictions and goals. Funding is equally erratic. A funding stream from the late 1980s, New York State Supportive Housing Program (NYSSHP), has had marginal increases in decades, meaning providers dependent on it receive a mere $3,000 in annual revenue per unit, compared to the $17,500 allocated to units funded by the latest city program.
These challenges predate the pandemic but have intensified since. More New Yorkers require intensive services to thrive, and a surge in serious drug use with incredibly dangerous substances has heightened overdose risks. Supply shortages, a staffing crisis, and underfunded models have pushed our community to the brink.
The city’s low barrier policy is being implemented in a context that is a far cry from the original Housing First vision of the 1980s, where every resident was linked to a mobile Assertive Community Treatment team — a multi-disciplinary high-level of care that provided psychiatric services, prescribed medications, embedded peers and offered tenants round-the-clock support.
We must return to that vision in this moment of crisis. New York City rightfully boasts an array of supportive housing options and is a national leader. However, to maintain this status, we must acknowledge that not all supportive housing is created or maintained equally. Providers must be able to nimbly navigate an unequal landscape to meet tenant needs.
This flexibility is imperative in upholding the supportive housing promise: when a tenant enters the door, the requisite services they need will await them.
To honor this promise, we must construct the right infrastructure. This means full funding for the workforce, modernizing all models of supportive housing so that needs align with services, and ensuring providers have access to multi-disciplinary teams with clinical services and peers. We must also build a full continuum of care to ensure every New Yorker, in an emergency, can access the help they need.
Providers bear a profound responsibility to their tenants — both incoming and existing — as well as the surrounding communities. They promise to provide sufficient services to meet the needs of the tenants and to be good neighbors who enhance the community. They must have the support they need to keep these promises, both to site future supportive housing and maintain the well-being of tenants and programs for years to come.
Leone is the executive director of the Supportive Housing Network of New York. Page is the president and CEO of The Fortune Society.