 Comment on Dennis P. Culhane et al.’s “Testing a typology of family homelessness based on patterns of public shelter utilization in four U.S. jurisdictions: Implications for policy and program planning”Martha R. Burt Housing Policy Debate, 2007, vol. 18, issue 1, 43-57 Abstract: This comment discusses several implications of the shelter use patterns revealed in the article by Culhane and his colleagues. It takes issue with the premise that reducing shelter use by families will necessarily mean that fewer of them are or will become homeless. It discusses the limited evidence of the need for transitional and permanent supportive housing options for families and offers an alternative to eliminating transitional housing completely—a blended model of supportive housing that expects many families to move on but offers permanency for those that cannot. Finally, it discusses the difficulties of putting the authors’ recommendations into practice, since they would require a good deal of centralized control and major changes in homeless and mainstream systems of care. Few communities would have the commitment and the resources in the form of mainstream and homeless assistance agencies to approximate the type of system being suggested. Date: 2007 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:houspd:v:18:y:2007:i:1:p:43-57 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2007.9521593 Access Statistics for this article Housing Policy Debate is currently edited by Tom Sanchez, Susanne Viscarra and Derek Hyra More articles in Housing Policy Debate from Taylor & Francis Journals |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.