Since taking office, the Trump administration has moved to overturn America's longstanding approach to tackling homelessness. Having enjoyed bipartisan support for decades, the “housing first” model prioritizes putting people in stable accommodation before addressing other issues such as mental health and substance abuse.
This evidence-backed approach first became prominent in George W. Bush's presidency, and Salt Lake City became an early success story in 2005. It was supported by the Trump administration during his first term as president, with former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson praising the model several times.
But as homelessness gets worse due to the country's housing affordability crisis, conservative think tanks and GOP lawmakers point to “housing first,” and the network of nonprofits and service providers that support it, as perpetrators. Project 2025, Heritage Foundation's 900-page policy blueprint, the Project explicitly calls for “end housing-first policy.”
Trump has appointed Scott Turner (pastor and former Texas Senator), showing deeper changes for the Housing and Urban Development Agency (HUD). Federal government policies are poised to turn their backs on new approaches to embracing essential treatment and faith-based models from individuals and institutions who have supported housing.
During his time as a lawmaker, Turner denounced the welfare of the government for voting against several bills to expand affordable housing and protect low-income tenants, and hurting American families. During the confirmation hearing, Turner emphasized his interest in leaning more towards local organizations, including religious groups, to resolve the homeless crisis.
Now as a secretary, he has created a “Doge” style task force aimed at reducing institutional spending, including money directed at housing-first organizations. Recent leaks suggest that HUD is planning to cut massive staffing delivery. Particularly the department responsible for Homeless Programme, Affordable Housing and Disaster Relief, the office of community planning and development. The New York Times reported in February that the office could cut 84% from 936 employees to just 150.
When Vox asked HUD to explain his homelessness strategy and housing-first position, spokesman Kasey Lovett repeatedly refused to deal with homelessness.
The administration did not wait long for it to act. By January 27, the Office of Management and Budget had affected $3.6 billion in previously approved homeless funds and imposed a full grant freeze. A federal judge ordered the freeze to be lifted, but many homeless service providers have not yet received the money. Earlier this week, more than 50 Democrats sent a letter urging the HUD to release funds allocated to these Congress.
The results are already shown. In Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, a region outside of Philadelphia, authorities recently held a press conference to highlight $5 million in homeless funds that have been promised but have not received. “Losing this funding could mean double the number of people sleeping on the streets and the number of uncovered population,” one commissioner warned. “This is very serious. It affects children – 120 children and all 400.”
The freeze reflects years of skepticism among conservatives about the federal government's approach to tackling homelessness and choosing recipients, even if it ends. By 2019, Trump's Economic Advisory Council had questioned the effectiveness of housing-first, and Trump appointed longtime housing-first critic Robert Marview to lead the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness to highlight the shift.
Under Marbut's leadership, the council has issued a report encouraging leaders to consider requesting alcohol and other treatments in exchange for housing assistance. Most of the leaders did not take up recommendations.
The Biden administration then returned to clear support for housing first, and even expanded federal Medicaid dollars with grants for rental assistance.
However, during this time, housing-first attacks began to gain momentum in several GOP-led states. This began diverting resources from the model with support from conservative groups such as the Austin-based think tank, the Manhattan Institute, and the Heritage Foundation, which was founded in 2016. Missouri, Florida, Georgia and Utah are now redirecting tens of millions of people from permanent housing solutions to transition and short-term options, with the explicit responsibilities of housing first approaches.
What is the best way to help?
At the heart of the discussion is fundamental disagreement about what constitutes success by dealing with homelessness. For housing-first advocates, stable housing is both a primary goal and foundation for addressing other issues. However, critics argue that they are not only housed without improving health or substance use, but do not represent actual progress.
This philosophical division shapes how both parties interpret research into housing-first effectiveness. Critics like Judge Glock, a graduate of the Cicero Institute, who is currently directing the research at the Manhattan Institute, point to the National Academy of Sciences and the Lancet study, which found limited evidence of improved health outcomes among housing finance participants.
Supporters like Margot Kuchell of the Homelessness and Housing Initiative at the University of California, San Francisco, Benioff, see this argument differently. “Housing number one wasn't just 'homes', it never happened,” she told Vox. “In fact, it describes a strategy to best pair services with housing in the most efficient way possible.” She argues that the voluntary nature of housing is successful by helping people maintain their clients' dignity and autonomy while increasing the likelihood that people will actually embrace and stick to treatment.
Veteran homelessness probably provides the most clear example of the potential model. In 2008, the Housing First Program began a combination of HUD-provided housing vouchers for veterans with case management and clinical services offered by VA. As a result, overall homelessness has increased nationwide over the past decade, but veteran homelessness has fallen more than half.
However, most housing first programs are not as well supported (financially or politically) as they are as efforts to end veteran homelessness. “The problem with housing-first policy is that Congress is not providing funds to scale up,” University of Pennsylvania's Dennis Calhane told VOX. “Only about 15% of people who have experienced homelessness will participate in the Housing First Program in a given year.” Also, while regular check-in by case managers remains a core component of the Housing First Program, many programs do not meet these standards. As critics have pointed out, this has limited improvements to some vulnerable individuals, although indoors, in other outcomes.
Despite these shortcomings, most experts believe they are deeply concerned about things that are far from home first. In future papers, Culhane found that the model was associated with a 15% decline in homelessness nationwide from 2010 to 2018. HUD's housing-first investment added more than 100,000 units of permanent support homes, along with 144,000 additional subsidized beds.
Culhane added that past experience shows that models such as transitional housing and “treatment No. 1” which were the main approaches from the late 1980s to the mid-2000s were expensive and failed. “Funds were fully tied together at high costs to manage beds and services, and there was no funds specifically for the final game of leading people to housing,” he said.
Critic Glock admitted there was not much evidence of his preferred alternative, with more strings attached. “We have the turnover rates [transitional] The units are wild and substantial, and those who enter highly structured environments often require drinking or regular mental health diagnosis.
Still, Glock believes that zero delegation to people is a mistake. “It doesn't have to be a complete drinking,” he added. “But now you're not even forced to get a medical checkup.” He hopes the Trump administration will abandon what he calls that “all-purpose” approach. “The problem was that the federal government first created housing as a uniform and universal standard for homeless housing, which was inappropriate,” he added.
Trump's tight pivot on Housing First shows that over 650,000 Americans have experienced homelessness on certain nights, with about 40% of those individuals sleeping on the streets, cars, parks, railway stations and other primarily undesigned locations. It is unclear whether lawmakers plan to properly fund the federal housing voucher program. But even if it is funded, taking away the federal agency that manages the voucher could lead to further challenges in the fight against the homelessness.
