The Homeless Chronicles. Part 12

This is #12 in a multi-part series about homelessness. Previously we noted that

• Homelessness changes depending on your definition, from very narrow to very broad.
• There are three main groups of homeless people – (1) people who chose to be homeless, (2) people whose disabilities create/contribute to homelessness, and (3) people who experience a major negative event which propels them into homelessness.
• The life style homeless basically want to be left alone. The temporary homeless are looking for help to return them to their normal life. The chronic homeless have such disabling conditions they are the most difficult to reach and to help.
• In recent years, a greater percent of the homeless are coming from the temporary group, fueled largely by the high cost of housing in relationship to their income.
• The commonly used federal survey under –estimates the number of homeless. In reality, there are over a million homeless people nationwide, 250,000 in California and between 10,000 and 15,000 in Orange County.
• There is wide diversity among California counties in the percent of the population who are homeless. Orange County at 0.22% (22 homeless people for every 10,000 residents) is mid low range with an average of 0.39% for the State.
• There is wide diversity among California counties in the percent of the homeless population who are unsheltered. Orange County at 58% is mid low range with an average of 65.3% for the State.
• There is wide diversity among California counties in the percent of the homeless who self-report being mentally ill. Orange County at 28% is mid range with an average of 29.5% for the State.
• The percent of homeless in Orange County who self-reported being mentally ill increased by 133% from 2017 to 2019, an increase unparalleled in the County’s history and in any other California county.
• Neither changes in language nor methodology account for the dramatic increase in mental illness among OC’s homeless. In addition, analysis of commonalities among counties experiencing high increases could not be found.
• Two factors were found that might account for the increase – the lack of spending on mental health care and the unorganized way in which homeless people were moved around.

Today we’ll get some perspective on the reality of the numbers. Previously we noted that the County reported 6,800 homeless people in their point-in-time survey. But that figure is very wrong.

According to the County, the point-in-time survey they conducted is done within federal guidelines, and therefore open to all the errors we discussed earlier. Why Orange County does the minimum required of the federal government is open to question, since many other counties go far beyond the minimum. But let’s just confine our discussion to the minimum that the County admits to. Our first problem is that the County’s data just does not add up. Here are some of the problems in their report –

The 2019 OC PIT survey was finally published on July 29, 2019 from the office of Frank Kim (OC Executive Officer) although a preliminary report was issued a few months earlier. I was interested in a few topics and while reading the report I came upon discrepancies in the data being reported. These discrepancies were found in every area I investigated and are reported below. This compilation is not meant to be exhaustive since it was limited to only a few areas. The extent to which these discrepancies are isolated to only those areas I studied or whether or not they are pervasive is unknown. Nor is it possible to know whether or not these discrepancies are simply typographical errors or substantive errors, although in most cases it is more likely to be substantive issues.

Number of Adults with Mental Heath Issues

(The PIT report consistently uses the words “mental health issues” (MHI) but the survey itself (See p. 135) asks the question – “Do you have a serious mental illness or emotional impairment that seriously limits your ability to live independently.” It’s a wonder why the County uses a general phrase like “mental health issues” when the survey specifically talks about “serious mental illness…”)

According to what page you are reading, there are 1,594, 1,654, or 1,657 adults with “mental health issues.” Based on the regional counts, there are 1,657 adults with “mental health issues”, but according to the housing counts there are 1,654 and the data for disabling conditions lists 1,594 adults.

Regional Counts are listed on pages 37, 46, and 55 for people in the North, Central, and South regions and for those who are sheltered and unsheltered. Add them up and you’ll find 1,657 adults with mental health issues. But under Disabling Conditions” on page 62 the report indicates there are 1,594 sheltered (618) and unsheltered (976) people. That’s a difference of 60 people.

Number of Youths

According to where you are looking, there are 966, 980, 985, 986, 1,016, 1062 or 1,210 total children. It’s a heck of a difference between 966 and 1,210 children.

Number of adults with a Developmental Disability

According to what page you are reading, there are 609, 616, or 622 adults with a developmental disability. Based on the regional counts (See pages 37, 46, and 55), there are 616 adults with ““Developmental Disability”, but according to the housing counts (See pages 21 and 22) there are 622 and the data for disabling conditions (See page 62) lists 609 adults.

SubPopulations

According to what page you are viewing, there are either 296 or 311 Veterans, 227 or 275 transition age youth (TAY), and 607 or 612 Seniors.

Veterans: On page 60 the report claims there are 88 sheltered veterans but on page 100 they say there are 99 sheltered veterans. On page 60 the report claims 208 unsheltered veterans but on page 100 it’s 212 unsheltered veterans.

Seniors: On page 60 the report claims there are 356 unsheltered seniors but on page 89 they say there are 357 unsheltered seniors. OK. That’s a small difference, but why should there be any difference at all? On page 59 the report claims 251 sheltered seniors but on page 89 it’s 255 sheltered seniors.

Looking at the comparisons, of the total 6 subpopulation comparisons, none produce identical figures. For some figures the differences are minimal, but in other cases the differences are substantial (e.g., TAY sheltered).

PIT Counts

The 2019 OC report has a section summarizing PIT counts from 14 other CoCs (Continuums of Care). The data listed there (See page 8) are the total homeless counts in 2017 and 2019 for the 15 counties. The data listed on page 8 was compared with the original reports with the following discrepancies noted. The first figure is the OC 2019 report figure and the second figure is the original figure.

• Los Angeles 2019 - 56,257, 58,936
• San Diego 2017 – 9,160, 9116
• San Joaquin 2017 – 1,542, 1,552
• Sacramento 2017 – 4,692, 3,665
• San Francisco 2017 – 6,858, 7,499

On a percent basis, some of these discrepancies are pretty large (Sacramento 28%, San Francisco 8.5%).

BOTTOM LINE

This report is not an attempt to evaluate the entire PIT survey but is simply a compilation of the discrepancies I found when looking at seven variables –

• Number of adults with mental health issues.
• Number of adults with a developmental disability
• Number and housing status of children
• Number of seniors
• Number of veterans
• Number of transition age youth
• Census data from other CoCs

Discrepancies were found in all of these areas. Here are the discrepancies –

• Number of adults with mental health issues - 1,594, 1,654, or 1,657
• Number of adults with a developmental disability - 609, 616, or 622
• Total number of children - 966, 980, 985, 986, 1,016, 1062 or 1,210
• Number of sheltered children – 244, 247
• Number of unsheltered children – 722, 738, 772, 966
• Number of seniors – 607 or 612
• Number of veterans – 296 or 311
• Number of transition age youth – 227 or 275
• Census data from CoC – 5 discrepancies with differences as high as 28%

It's incredible that an official document from the County, on an issue everyone recognizes is a major challenge, should have so many discrepancies in the data. It's even more incredible that these problems were pointed out to the County months ago, and as of this date, nothing has been done to correct the record.

Data from the PIT survey is the County's most used method for communicating with the public. It's also a basis from evaluating how well the County is doing, and provides guidance for what programs to enhance and what funding to provide. It's also mandated by the federal government. To find such sloppy work is a dis-service to everyone.

About the Author

Dr. Jim Gardner is the former Mayor of Lake Forest. A Clinical Psychologist, he is a former University Professor and Department Head. He authored several reports about homelessness.