The Range of Stuff We Do
I love the work we do at OrgCode. Chances are many of you know me, have seen me speak, or subscribe to this blog because someone else said you should read it. For that, I am grateful.
For many readers I wonder if you know all the things that we do at OrgCode because you may not know the range of talents on our team, or you may have encountered us in only one setting. So, allow me to dedicate this blog to outlining the various things we do:
Housing Forecast Modelling
We have developed a proprietary model that allows us to use various data inputs to predict the amount of affordable housing needed in a municipality or region based upon income strata. It looks at the next 10 years and presents three different scenarios – what is required to maintain the status quo; what is necessary to make modest improvements; and, what has to happen to adequately address a range of housing needs.
SPDAT
Many people know of the Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (SPDAT) which is a common assessment tool that is grounded in evidence that your community can use to help each individual/family get to the level of support and housing to address their needs. We have webinar and in-person training options to help communities get going.
Homelessness and Housing Plans
We love the opportunity to work with communities to create or refine homelessness and housing plans spanning 5 to 10 years in length. We use data to drive the plans and anchor expectations in evidence and proven best practices. We harness local talents to move forward. We customize each plan to local context.
Community Planning
Most of the staff on OrgCode have Graduate Degrees in Planning, and yours truly teaches a Graduate Course on Community Planning and Housing. (Want to guess where we find really talented people to work at OrgCode?) We relish the opportunity to work with neighbourhoods, cities, regions and even larger provinces on Community Planning efforts to address social and built form issues in rural and urban environments.
Leadership Development
One of my favourite pieces of training to deliver is on leadership in ending homelessness. But we do other leadership work as well with funders, Boards of Directors, emerging leaders, Team Leaders, and leadership in the non-profit sector. We also do one-on-one coaching when requested with leaders to help them behind the scenes to effectively embrace their full leadership potential.
Coordinated Access
Achieving a coordinated approach to accessing services in a community is a very detailed task that has many steps. We work through the various steps to create an approach that will work specifically for the community to meet its needs and highlight the awesomeness of service providers.
Research
Nerds are sexy. Research gives nerds materials to work with; and therefore, we believe research is nerd food. We do quite a bit of research – from scouring peer-reviewed journals and synthesizing the main currents of thought and practice, to undertaking new research, especially community-based research. Examples of this include our work with people that do sex work, persons living outdoors in the Virginia Beach area, and persons not accessing services in Edmonton.
Excellence in Housing-Based Case Management
Offered as a two or one day training course, after SPDAT this is our most sought after training. We teach the fundamentals of case management in a housing setting to maximize opportunities for helping people stay housed while concurrently working on other life issues.
Data Mining and Analysis
We love numbers and have yet to encounter a data set that is too daunting to tackle. From HMIS information to government service use data, we dig beyond the descriptive statistics to create deeper meaning from the numbers and help inform services, funding and policy. And we present our findings in plain language that is easily understood by people that aren’t data geeks.
Performance Management Frameworks
Related in part to data mining, we help communities understand what performance management is, how performance measurement is related to the broader field of performance management, and then help them craft a performance management framework to help inform data collection, policy, funding decisions, and program monitoring.
Program Evaluation
If you never evaluate your programs you have no idea if they are working, worth doing, or have the opportunity to achieve even greater service excellence. Several of our staff team delight in undertaking program evaluations across a range of services such as children’s services, services to the LGBT community, and, homeless and housing programs.
Policies and Procedures
We believe that policies and procedures are necessary for program delivery so that there is an expectation in type of services delivered, acceptable service models for services, and accountability to end users of services as well as to peers and the funder. We have helped dozens of communities add meaning to their programs by helping them create appropriate policies and procedures for what they do, why they do it, and how they do it.
Board Retreats
While Boards can take many forms (policy, governance, etc.), one thing we know to be true is that a strong Board with a cohesive vision gets better results. We have facilitated numerous retreats for Boards in the non-profit sector to help them maximize the potential of the organization they oversee, as well as sometimes help Boards work through complex service, personnel, leadership, and funding matters.
Advising
Political and strategic policy advice are amongst my favourite “secret” jobs to do. We don’t publish the list of elected officials or candidates for office that we provide advice to in order to help them craft their position in a way that promotes positive change. We have no allegiance to a specific party affiliation when doing so. Partnership trumps partisanship.
Establishing Housing First and Rapid Re-Housing Programs
Designing and delivering a highly effective Housing First and/or Rapid Re-Housing program starts with an investment in detailed training to ensure that the staff involved in the initiative have the breadth and depth of technical knowledge to fulfill the requirements of the intervention in such a way so as to maintain fidelity to the interventions. In many communities this turns into a 6 to 12 month engagement with the community to help them achieve excellence in their programs.
Facility and Program Realignment
Got transitional housing you don’t know what to do with anymore? A shelter you are looking to decommission? We have had the pleasure of working with communities to help them re-purpose what they do with the bricks and mortar when they work to realign programming so that the asset has the potential to assist the community.
Funding Advice
In an era of decreased resources, it is imperative that we invest in change and spend on impact. We are happy to help many communities with their funding decisions – from creating frameworks to how they should view the allocation of funds, to working cooperatively with philanthropists; from how to support funding from a policy perspective to actually sitting on funding committees to provide an independent perspective and subject matter expertise where such technical knowledge is absent from the funders.
Training
Over the years we have developed quite a robust training curriculum that we can make available to communities. Some of the more popular training courses are:
Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool, and associated training:
Train the Trainer
Improving Case Management through SPDAT
Improving Performance through SPDAT
Assertive Engagement
Promoting Wellness and Reducing Harm
Objective-Based Interactions
Performance Based Contracting
Creating the Narrative of Success
Change Cycle of Complex Social Issues
Working Effectively with Elected Officials
Data Driven Decision Making
Housing-Based Motivational Interviewing
Progressive Engagement
Effective Permanent Supportive Housing Programming
Accountability in Human Services
High Functioning and High Performing Teams
Being Awesome: How to Find Your Inner Awesome and Bring it to Your Work (And in case you didn’t know it, I am a fan of you being awesome)
Point in Time Counts
With GIS skills on the team, keen survey development and analysis tools, and established use of advanced statistical methods in Point in Time counts we help communities increase the accuracy of Point in Time counts while decreasing the number of volunteers and staff required to be involved. We also create meaningful reports from the Point in Time Counts that can be used for service improvements, policy-making and communications – not just another document that sits on a shelf. We have effectively guided Point in Time Counts in communities of all sizes.
Visioning
Using a range of proven techniques we work with communities and organizations establish a direction of where they want to be in the future, and set about a course of how they will develop strategies and implement actions to get to the desired future.
Keynote & Motivational Speaking
Primarily using “edutainment” I love the opportunity to engage with audiences of all sizes and demographics to provide a new understanding of complex social issues and create a momentum towards positive change.
The Tallest Blade of Grass is the First to be Cut by the Lawnmower
(Thanks to B for inspiring this blog. Also, as an aside, if you love the Tallest Blade expression, I recommend getting the demotivational poster from despair.com…which is a spin on the Russian proverb of the tallest blade being the first to succumb to the scythe. Also, if you’d rather watch me rant about this blog instead of reading it or in addition to reading, you can see it here.)
Whatever it is, the way you tell your story online can make all the difference.
So true.
This blog is dedicated to the early adopters…to the brave who step out from the status quo…to the ones that try instead of staying on the sidelines and critiquing…to the organizations that stepped out from the pack only to be cut down by other organizations…to the great ideas for social change squelched by misinformed elected representatives.
If you have anything worth doing, chances are you have naysayers. I have seen it so often over the past decade of my life that I come to expect that when naysayers show up it is a sign the right thing is happening.
Maybe people try to cut the Tallest Blade out of fear. Go out on a limb and you attract attention to the mediocrity of others. Others will wonder why they aren’t capable of doing more.
Maybe people try to cut the Tallest Blade out of empathy. Perhaps they once tried to reach out in a new direction and felt the pain of being non-conformity by being ridiculed by others and now try to shield others from the same pain.
Maybe people try to cut the Tallest Blade out of jealousy. They always wished they could have done it. They just didn’t have the guts.
If ever you step out of the norm expect someone to tell you it can’t be done (at least not done where you live) or that it isn’t worth doing (takes too much work, requires too many resources, will be too long of a change process, it’s a great idea just not worth doing now or not worth doing at the expense of upsetting others, etc.).
Also, don’t necessarily expect people to haul out the lawnmower right away. It will build to a crescendo and likely follow these steps:
Usually if you create an idea or action worthy of naysayers it actually starts with wild enthusiasm. (“Awesome, let’s end homelessness!”)
This will be followed by bubble bursting. (“That was an unrealistic idea, and besides that so called evidence people talked about proving it can be done, well, have you heard about that one paper that talked about how all of that evidence was maybe not the way some people said it was?”)
Once bubbles are popped, expect turmoil. (“We started changing our programs around but now we don’t know what to do!” And all the homeless people are confused. Is that what we want?”)
Turmoil will give way to panic because instead of seeking information or counsel on how to fix what is going on, people will turn their attention on needing someone to blame. (“This program is totally not working! We’re person-centered and all this change stuff doesn’t let us serve people the way we always have.”)
Panic will stir up a witch-hunt – and the “witches” may well all leave town. (“See, now all the people that started this are dropping like flies!”)
The innocent people (the Tallest Blades) who decided to grow in the first place will be ostracized or punished – sometimes professionally and sometimes personally. (“I always thought she was a pushy b!tch anyways, so I am kinda glad she’s gone so things can get back to normal.”)
Non-participants and naysayers (the short to medium sized blades of grass) will be promoted to positions of prominence or celebrate that they out-lasted the Tall Blades. (“It’s a fad we see every few years…a new idea comes along, but then people see it is a bad idea, and we can go back about our business. Someday people will realize that we have been right all along. We must be doing something right if we’re the only ones that always seem to be around while others come and go.”)
The Tallest Blade phenomenon has no shortage of situations in the pursuit of increasing housing options or ending homelessness or addressing any complex social justice issue. When elected officials lament the lack of affordable housing but go on to suggest it has to be in some different neighborhood/community and be paid for by some other unseen taxpayer or private money, I fear for the Tallest Blades trying to create housing options anyway. When people who have never operated a Housing First program or never read a peer reviewed piece of research on it say it never works I fear for the Tallest Blade in the community trying to implement Housing First with fidelity to practice. When people say that Permanent Supportive Housing is too destructive to community at large and just creates the wild west, they are cutting down the Tallest Blade doing all they can to make it work it their community rather that working with them to make it work better. When people who know nothing about adult learning and the failures of deterrents and coercion try to force people to change her/his behavior to conform to the expectation of a service rather than adjusting the service for the person, I fear for the Tallest Blade. And so on.
So here’s to you, Tall Blades. I will water and fertilize you whenever you want. I will distract and make dull the lawnmower as best as I can. Stand proud, Tall Blades, for you are the gorgeous reason for us to keep doing this work and inspire the rest of us to grow up tall with you. Besides, if you stay tall and proud it’s entirely possible the rest of the blades will finally catch up to your height of excellence, forget they themselves were once smaller blades, and tell anyone that the grass has always been this long.
True Currency in a Bankrupt World: A Discussion of Approaches to Substance Use
“The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you’re uncool.” – Lester Bangs (Spoken by Phillip Seymour Hoffman in the movie Almost Famous)
Let’s talk about something un-cool to talk about in most circles – substance dependency. So much has been talked about the death of Phillip Seymour Hoffman. Insights like this one from Russell Brand talked of how the death was inevitable in how drug laws are created and enforced. This one from the Washington Post suggests the death points to a broader opioid epidemic. Counter point to this mourn-ography (as Brand puts it) look at the sensationalism and mockery of Rob Ford, known in Late Night circles as “Toronto’s Crack Smoking Mayor”.
In the former (Hoffman) people see tragedy; in the later (Ford) people see buffoonery. A respected actor with a rather large body of work is a loss; the mayor of North America’s fourth largest city using drugs is spectacle.
As I have blogged about previously, required abstinence is not the way to go. There is not a strong relationship between sobriety and housing retention. It has been suggested, however, that somehow it means I encourage or promote drug use. I don’t. I believe the evidence that security of housing is helpful for assisting people in reducing or stopping their substance use. And, I believe in a four-pronged approach to helping programs and communities address the matter of drugs more holistically:
Education
Enforcement
Harm Reduction
Treatment
On the matter of education, I think we need to broaden awareness of what drugs are prevalent in which communities. We need to, from a young age, increase awareness of substances and their impacts without a simplistic “Just say no” approach that glosses over the pervasive and entrenched position that drugs have in our society. I would also urge people to become more educated on the broad range of evidence that supports different approaches to addressing substance use in communities.
For example, take a look at the research findings from InSite – the Safe Injection Site in Vancouver. There will always be a place for enforcement when it comes to drugs, but I think as a society we need to ask ourselves about the best approach to doing so. I really like this piece by Erik Luna where he quite rightly outlines that mandatory minimums do not meet the generally accepted criteria of law – meeting neither the goals of punishment nor consequentialist goals of deterrence.
So where is the place for enforcement? When organized crime is attached to the drug trade, that is an obvious one to me. When minors are impacted, that is argument for another. When any individual is exploited by the drug trade, including sexual exploitation, I believe that is another reason for enforcement. Punishing the substance user? That is in essence punishing someone for having a health condition.
If we take criminality of the drug discussion out of the equation (which I appreciate is difficult because of how interwoven the drug trade is to often harmful and dangerous criminal behavior), we can look at substances from a health perspective. And when we embrace that perspective we can more clearly see the opportunities for harm reduction and treatment. There is a place for both. It is not either/or.
First, let’s consider harm reduction. While harm reduction is interpreted and considered from many different perspectives, I would urge people to consider it from a person-centered point of view within a broader societal context. (Person focusing outward, not society focusing inward.) Harm reduction aims to decrease adverse health, economics and social consequences of substance use without requiring abstinence or cessation of any sort. Harm reduction is achieved through action and policy. Harm reduction considers the broader needs and impacts of substance use on society when supporting the individual. Through harm reduction, we should expect to see fewer interactions with emergency health services and police as a result of drug offences. We should expect to see fewer upset communities and neighbors as a result of behaviors that stem from substance use. We should see improved health and less destructive behaviors on the personal level. It is absolutely incorrect to think that harm reduction embraces use at all costs. It is a myth to think that all harm reduction efforts are a guise to legalize all substances in all forms. It is also incorrect to think that harm reduction enables use, as the evidence demonstrates that the likes of wet housing debunks the enabling hypothesis when you look at rates and types of substance use, and further evidence shows that people are more likely to decrease or stop substance use once they have security of housing. I believe that housing in and of itself is often a form of harm reduction.
Now let’s consider treatment. When treatment is mandatory in order to use a service or access housing, then housing or service becomes the reward of treatment. The problem with this, as I have discussed in other blogs – and as you can research yourself in the evidence – is that rates of treatment success are low. It isn’t that we shouldn’t encourage people to seek treatment and support people that do – we can and we should – but we should never require treatment in order to access housing or services. When treatment is considered we must also do so patiently and from an informed perspective. Treatment is not one size fits all – a treatment that worked for one person is not guaranteed to work for another. The scope and style of treatment should be matched to a person’s experience and personality. Treatment should make sense relative to a person’s housing situation and her/his social network. Treatment comes with a range of emotions – from guilt of needing it to elation of how it helps curb substance use. When treatment doesn’t work out there can also be a range of emotions. And we also need to have informed discussions about treatment with people that may want it or benefit from it, rather than jumping on a treatment bandwagon just because the person is upset with their substance use or is trying to placate someone else by going to treatment.
Substance dependency may be un-cool to talk about. But it is a conversation we need to have if we are truly going to offer a range of approaches to properly confront a complex social issue. And as un-cool as it is to talk about, if we don’t talk about substances when we talk about housing for people with complex and co-occurring issues, there will be a large number of people remaining homeless for no reason other than they didn’t fit a pervasive view of substance use and what should be done about it, rather than considering a range of approaches.
Any Approach to Ending Homelessness Needs Shelters to be Awesome
Ending homelessness is not anti-shelter. In fact, in many instances ending homelessness starts with shelter. Let me put this in a system context.
First of all, your community (or your organization if you are a small shelter in a smaller or more rural setting) needs to start by keeping as many people out of shelter as possible when it is safe and appropriate to do so. Great shelter services start with seeing diversion as a service – not a denial of service.
Next you need to understand who the people are that are seeking shelter. They’ll fit into one of three groups: people using shelter for the first time in his/her life; people with a history of episodic use; people that rely on shelters on almost a daily basis (perhaps when they are not in hospital or jail). Regardless of the group, the emphasis on getting out of shelter and into housing should be the same. But, the strategies to achieve that goal will be different. For example, most first time users of a shelter will get out with a very minimal amount of service or no services at all, whereas chronic users may need more in-depth supports to effectively get out of shelter and into housing. Right size your approach based upon need, not one-size fits all.
Look carefully at the programming offered within the shelter. The intent of shelter is not to heal or fix people – it is to provide shelter. Remarkably imperfect people are great at maintaining housing. This includes more complex issues like substance dependency and compromised mental wellness. Does the shelter offer any programming that is unintentionally prolonging anyone’s homelessness or incentivizing their homelessness? If so, rethink those programs. Some common examples include employment programs for people that are homeless, matched savings programs for people that are homeless, and education programs (like getting your GED through a shelter program). Is there a way you can offer these same supports once people get housed? That way you don’t lose your knowledge of how to deliver helpful programs, but you aren’t incentivizing homelessness.
Examine whether the shelter has an infrastructure that is promoting housing solutions. Do people have access to a telephone, computer and landlord listings? Is there a place where a landlord can leave a message that doesn’t “out” the person as being a shelter resident? Are there easily understood directions to the nearest benefits office? Is there access to a bus pass so that a person can get around the city to look at places? In family shelters, is there a service that can mind small children while mom/dad go look for housing without schlepping kids around with them? Are there staff available to answer the most common questions about housing? Are there staff resources (either shelter staff or an external service provider) that can work with people that have more intensive needs in navigating housing access and supports that may be of benefit?
Then look at the range of shelter services in your community (where there is more than one shelter). Is there a coordinated approach to figuring out how to get into shelters and ensure the person gets to the most appropriate shelter based upon his/her presenting issues? Are there any barriers in place of specific shelter providers or across the broad spectrum of shelter providers that impedes someone from getting into shelter? (Examples from my travels – requirements for ID; criminal reference check at the local police station first; documented proof of residency in the community prior to seeking shelter.)
I also encourage the shelter system to have standards of service that transcend more than one shelter provider. This way, from the shelter users perspective, there are certain transparent elements they can expect from any shelter provider. (In other words, they don’t just get lucky and get a “good” shelter provider through coordinated intake.) One of the elements that I urge shelter providers to reach consensus on, for example, are reasons for barring/service restrictions and length of time. I find it baffling that in the same community telling a shelter staff in Shelter A to F*ck off can get someone barred for two weeks, but punching a shelter staff in Shelter B in the face gets someone barred for three days.
But perhaps the most important things shelters can do to help end homelessness is maintain a housing focus in their work. When people are admitted to the shelter remind and encourage them to work on housing. When people are going through the orientation process, remind and encourage them to work on housing. When people are rising in the morning, remind and encourage them to work on housing. Yes, shelters can and should deal with crises and all of the symptoms of system failures that resulted in someone needing shelter in the first place; but if there isn’t a housing focus we will never be able to build enough shelters to keep up with demand.
Over time if your community has a strong focus on ending homelessness the number of shelter beds will be right-sized. But there will never be a day when shelters are not needed. There will always be some people experiencing housing instability. It is foolish to think otherwise. To me it’s like the local fire station – I never want there to be a fire in my home, but I sure am glad the firefighters are close by and ready to help me when there is. I never want people to need shelters, but I sure am glad really well-intentioned, professional people are there to provide shelter when it is absolutely necessary. I just don’t want anyone to confuse a shelter with a home.
Things I Am Learning to Say
The title makes it sound like I am trying my hand at a new language. I am not. The things I am learning to say are all in English. More accurately, some of the things I am learning to say I am really learning to say more frequently, more honestly, with more conviction, with more thoughtfulness.
“I was wrong.”
Still tastes like vinegar each time I say it, but I have come to appreciate the value of it. I used to think admitting I was wrong was a sign of weakness and vulnerability. Turns out it helps build trust. I thought people would lose respect for me. Turns out admitting wrongness can help gain people’s respect.
“Can you help me?”
I thought asking for help would be seen as a sign of weakness. I thought working 16-18 hour days would be better than asking for help. Turns out asking for help makes us vulnerable in the right ways, helps gain people’s trust, and people overwhelmingly respond positively when help is requested of them.
“Awesome.”
Okay, so this is a word I use a lot. And I mean it when I tell people to be awesome or embrace their awesomeness. So what do I need to learn to say with this word? That it doesn’t lose its meaning if I say is sincerely to people.
“I appreciate you.”
I say thanks for people’s contributions to work quite regularly, but I am learning to say that I appreciate the person that did the work. (And not sound creepy when saying it.) I honestly do appreciate people even though I am not really a people person. I need to learn to take time out to say it.
“Sorry.”
We all have things we need to apologize for. (Heck, if you are Canadian you are pre-conditioned to apologize all the time.) Here’s the thing – I am learning to say “sorry” without couching it in a disclaimer or excuse like “But I was really tired when I said…” or “But I am sure you’ve had situations where you’ve…”
“You are welcome.”
I don’t accept thanks well, which means saying, “you are welcome” has not come easy. But if people appreciate me, my work or contributions I need to vocalize my recognition of that. I need to get better at acknowledging people’s appreciation.
Nada. Zip. Zilch. Nothing.
One of the best things I am learning to say is, in fact, saying nothing at all. Learning to listen is actually teaching me lots about learning how to say things I really mean. And it is hard for me to truly be reflective and in the moment to calm what would be my own contributions to the conversation to just say nothing at all.
Police, Judges and Homeless People
Two stories in the news caught my eye over the past little while: this one where a Montreal police officer was filmed threatening to tie a homeless man to a pole in the freezing cold; and this one where a judge in Prince Edward Island put a homeless man in jail for the night because there was not enough space in the hospital where she felt he would be better served. Sure, they both came from Canada, but they are likely very relevant to what is happening in your community.
On the one hand, we see shortcomings in law enforcement in engaging effectively and humanely with homeless persons. Unfortunately, it paints many in police forces in a similar light, which is unfair and untrue. In my travels I have been fortunate to see the likes of the Grand Junction, Colorado police be very proactive in working with homeless people; hands-on street outreach by the likes of Deputy Steven Donaldson in the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office (Tampa) who achieves amazing things in helping homeless folks access housing and resources to stay housed; police working well with street outreach like the DOAP Team at Alpha House in Calgary. I’d like to think that officers like the one in Montreal are the exception, not the norm. But maybe that is wishful thinking. The horror stories about police officers I have heard in my travels would fill a book.
On the other hand, we see the justice system trying to address what, in the instance in PEI, is a shortcoming in the health care system. It would seem the judge had the wellbeing of the man at heart in reaching her conclusion of having the man put in jail when there was no space in the hospital. But we can’t lose sight of the fact that the man’s freedom was suspended in this instance, as a result of an intervention of the court. Nor can we ignore that if the person would be best served by a health intervention, that is most often going to be preferable to the justice intervention.
The bigger question, perhaps, is what is the role of police and judges in the lives of homeless people? And secondly, whether police and judges have the training they need to work effectively with homeless people? (This parks the question of what training homeless service providers, police and judges need to work well with each other…a blog for another day.)
There are community policing efforts where cops know many – if not most – of the street involved people in their beat. Many a time there is a cordial exchange. There are many instances of police also helping ensure the safety of homeless persons on the street. But it seems to me we can do a better job of integrating police into the solution of encouraging and working with people that are street involved to access housing.
There are diversion courts and even programs where outreach workers hang around courtrooms waiting for homeless persons (most often being held on remand) to be released so that they can provide assistance. Seems to me this is a large investment to remedy a situation where a more cost effective solution may be available if there was better information exchange between the courts and homeless serving agencies, and a change in policy that prevented, say, people being released from courts at 4pm on a Friday afternoon of a long weekend.
The role of police and judges should never be to target homeless people because of their homelessness. Involvement in criminal activity makes anyone fair game for policing efforts. But being without a home, or being economically poor, should never be a criminal offence. Police “crackdowns” on specific neighborhoods to “move people along” doesn’t solve anything. It is highly ineffective and very expensive.
As a society, it would seem we have misplaced investment in government assisted housing with investment in prisons and jails. In some places, the creation of more cells is the only housing development (albeit, in the “big house”) that has happened. Incarcerating people exacerbates homelessness. It doesn’t solve it. And it too is remarkably expensive. Many of the same people want lower taxes also want to be tough on crime. Want to reduce crime? House people.
Given the level of interaction that police and judges have with homeless persons, especially chronically homeless people with higher acuity, they should be trained on what homelessness is and the most effective approaches and interventions to end it. Instead, I see an absence of this in my travels, where police and judges are using their best guesses and judgment rather than data and evidence. This is a solvable problem. With small investment, police and judges can learn considerably more about homelessness and its associated issues, thereby encouraging better and more cost effective solutions.