Homelessness in the United States

Homelessness in the United States refers to the issue of homelessness, a condition wherein people lack "a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence" as defined by The McKinney–Vento Homeless Assistance Act. Point-in-time single night counts prepared by shelter providers differ greatly from federal government accounts. In 2014, approximately 1.5 million sheltered homeless people were counted.
The federal government statistics are prepared by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Annual Homeless Assessment Report; , HUD reported there were roughly 553,000 homeless people in the United States on a given night, or 0.17% of the population. Annual federal HUD reports contradict private state and local reports where homelessness is shown to have increased each year since 201 across several major American cities, with 40 percent increases noted in 2017 and in 2019. In January of 2018 the federal government statistics gave comprehensive encompassing nationwide statistics, with a total number of 552,830 individuals, of which 358,363 (65%) were sheltered in provided housing, while some 194,467 (35%) were unsheltered.
Historically, homelessness emerged as a national issue in the 1870s. Early homeless people lived in emerging urban cities, such as New York City. Into the 20th century, the Great Depression of the 1930s caused a substantial rise in unemployment and related social issues, distress and homelessness. In the 21st century, the Great Recession of the late 2000s and the resulting economic stagnation and downturn have been major driving factors and contributors to rising homelessness rates.
In 2009 it was estimated that one out of 50 children or 1.5 million children in the United States of America would experience some form of homelessness each year. There were an estimated 37,878 homeless veterans in the United States during January 2017, or 8.6 percent of all homeless adults. Just over 90 percent of homeless U.S. veterans are male. Texas, California and Florida have the highest numbers of unaccompanied homeless youth under the age of 18, comprising 58% of the total homeless under 18 youth population. New York City reported it had approximately 114,000 temporarily homeless school children.
Historical background.
Pre-colonial and colonial periods.
Following the Peasants' Revolt in England, constables were authorized under 1383 English Poor Laws statute to collar vagabonds and force them to show support; if they could not, the penalty was gaol.
Vagabonds could be sentenced to the stocks for three days and nights; in 1530, whipping was added. The presumption was that vagabonds were unlicensed beggars. In 1547, a bill was passed that subjected vagrants to some of the more extreme provisions of the criminal law, namely two years' servitude and branding with a "V" as the penalty for the first offense and death for the second.
Large numbers of vagabonds were among the convicts transported to the American colonies in the 18th century.
Urbanization.
Homelessness emerged as a national issue in the 1870s. There are no national figures documenting homeless people demography at this time. Jacob Riis wrote about, documented, and photographed the poor and destitute, although not specifically homeless people, in New York City tenements in the late 19th century. His book, "How the Other Half Lives", published in 1890, raised public awareness of living conditions in the slums, causing some changes in building codes and some social conditions.
The growing movement toward social concern sparked the development of rescue missions, such as America's first rescue mission, the New York City Rescue Mission, founded in 1872 by Jerry and Maria McAuley. In smaller towns, there were hobos, who temporarily lived near train tracks and hopped onto trains to various destinations. Especially following the American Civil War, a large number of homeless men formed part of a counterculture known as "hobohemia" all over America.
By the late 19th century, many American towns and cities had significant numbers of homeless people. In New York City, for example, there was an area known as "the Bowery." Rescue missions offering "soup, soap, and salvation", a phrase introduced by The Salvation Army, sprang up along the Bowery thoroughfare, including the oldest one, The Bowery Mission. The mission was founded in 1879 by the Rev. and Mrs. A.G. Ruliffson.
20th century.
The Great Depression of the 1930s caused a devastating epidemic of poverty, hunger, and homelessness. There were two million homeless people migrating across the United States. Many lived in shantytowns they called "Hoovervilles" deriding the President they blamed for the Depression. Residents lived in shacks and begged for food or went to soup kitchens. Authorities did not officially recognize these Hoovervilles and occasionally removed the occupants for technically trespassing on private lands, but they were frequently tolerated out of necessity.
A 1960 survey by Temple University of Philadelphia's poor neighborhoods found that 75 percent of the people that are homeless were over 45 years old, and 87 percent were white.
The Community Mental Health Act of 1963 was a pre-disposing factor in setting the stage for homelessness in the United States. Long term psychiatric patients were released from state hospitals into Single Room Occupancies and sent to community health centers for treatment and follow-up. Never adequately funded, the community mental health system struggled to meet patient needs and many of the "deinstitutionalized" wound up living on the streets, with no sustainable support system. In the United States, during the late 1970s, the deinstitutionalization of patients from state psychiatric hospitals was a precipitating factor which seeded the population of people that are homeless, especially in urban areas such as New York City.
1980s and 1990s.
The number of homeless people grew in the 1980s, as housing and social service cuts increased and the economy deteriorated. The United States government determined that somewhere between 200,000 and 500,000 Americans were then homeless. There were some U.S. federal initiatives that aimed to help, end and prevent homelessness; however, there were no designated homeless-related programs in the Office of Management and Budget.
The history of the United States illustrates that this was a time when there was economic distress, high unemployment, and was the period when chronic homelessness became a societal problem. In 1980, federal funds accounted for 22% of big city budgets, but by 1989 the similar aid composed only 6% of urban revenue (part of a larger 60% decrease in federal spending to support local governments). It is largely (although not exclusively) in these urban areas that homelessness became widespread and reached unprecedented numbers. Most notable were cuts to federal low-income housing programs. An advocacy group claims that Congress halved the budget for public housing and Section 8 (the government's housing voucher subsidization program) and that between the years of 1980 and 1989 HUD's budget authority was reduced from $74 billion to $19 billion. Such alleged changes are claimed to have resulted in an inadequate supply of affordable housing to meet the growing demand of low-income populations. In 1970 there were 300,000 more low-cost rental units (6.5 million) than low-income renter households (6.2 million). By 1985, the advocacy group claimed that the number of low-cost units had fallen to 5.6 million, and the number of low-income renter households had grown to 8.9 million, a disparity of 3.3 million units.
In response to the ensuing homelessness crisis of the 1980s and after many years of advocacy and numerous revisions, President Reagan signed into law the McKinney–Vento Homeless Assistance Act in 1987; this remains the only piece of federal legislation that allocates funding to the direct service of homeless people. The McKinney–Vento Act paved the way for service providers in the coming years. During the 1990s homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and other supportive services sprouted up in cities and towns across the nation. However, despite these efforts and the dramatic economic growth marked by this decade, homeless numbers remained stubbornly high. It became increasingly apparent that simply providing services to alleviate the symptoms of homelessness (i.e. shelter beds, hot meals, psychiatric counseling, etc.), although needed, were not successful at solving the root causes of homelessness. The United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH), a federal agency contained in the Executive Branch, was established in 1987 as a requirement of the McKinney–Vento Act of 1987.
A 1990 survey found that most literally homeless people were unable to bathe or shower.
21st century.
Improved data.
Over the past decades, the availability and quality of data on homelessness has improved considerably, due, in part, to initiatives by the United States government. Since 2007, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development has issued an Annual Homeless Assessment Report, which revealed the number of individuals and families that were homeless, both sheltered and unsheltered. In 2009, there were about 643,000 sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons nationwide. About two-thirds of those stayed in emergency shelters or used transitional housing programs, with the remaining living on the street in abandoned buildings or other areas not meant for human habitation. About 1.56 million people, or about 0.5% of the U.S. population, used an emergency shelter or a transitional housing program between October 1, 2008 and September 30, 2009. Around 44% of homeless people were employed.
According to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development's 2008 Annual Homeless Assessment Report, the most common demographic features of all sheltered homeless people are: male, members of minority groups, older than age 31, and alone. More than 40 percent of sheltered homeless people have a disability. At the same time, sizable segments of the sheltered homeless population are white, non-Hispanic (38 percent), children (20 percent), or part of multi-person households (33 percent). Approximately 68 percent of the 1.6 million sheltered homeless people were homeless as individuals and 32 percent were persons in families.
In 2008 more than 66 percent of all sheltered homeless people were located in principal cities, with 32 percent located in suburban or rural jurisdictions. About 40 percent of people entering an emergency shelter or transitional housing program during 2008 came from another homeless situation (sheltered or unsheltered), 40 percent came from a housed situation (in their own or someone else's home), and the remaining 20 percent were split between institutional settings or other situations such as hotels or motels. Most people had relatively short lengths of stay in emergency shelters: 60 percent stayed less than a month, and a 33 percent stayed a week or less.
Causes.
Lack of available and affording housing as a cause of homelessness was named by most of the mayors in 2004 when the United States Conference of Mayors surveyed the mayors of major cities on the extent and causes of urban homelessness. The next three causes identified by mayors, in rank order, were mental illness or the lack of needed services, substance use and lack of needed services, and low-paying jobs. The lowest ranking cause, cited by five mayors, was prisoner reentry. Other causes cited were unemployment, domestic violence, and poverty.
The major causes of homelessness include:
2001–2020.
According to the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the demand for emergency shelter in 270 U.S. cities increased 13 percent in 2001 and 25 percent in 2005. Twenty-two percent of those requesting emergency shelter were turned away.
In response to the Great Recession in the United States, President Obama signed several pieces of legislation that addressed the homelessness crisis. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 addressed homelessness prevention, in which he allocated an additional $1.5 billion to HUD for the "Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Rehousing Program (HPRP)." The purpose of HPRP was to assist individuals and families who are otherwise healthy and not chronically homeless in escaping homelessness or preventing homelessness of the vulnerable population. On May 20, 2009, President Obama signed the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act into Public Law (Public Law 111-22 or "PL 111-22"), reauthorizing HUDs Homeless Assistance programs. It was part of the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009. The HEARTH act allows for the prevention of homelessness, rapid re-housing, consolidation of housing programs, and new homeless categories.
In the first year of the new decade, the Federal government launched of "Opening Doors: The Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness." "Opening Doors" is a publication of the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, which worked with all Federal agencies and many state and local stakeholders on its creation and vision, setting a ten-year path for the nation on preventing and ending all types of homelessness. This plan was presented to the President and Congress in a White House Ceremony on June 22, 2010.
In New York City, the number of homeless people using nightly shelter services has tripled from approximately 20,000 to more than 60,000 between January 2000 and January 2015. In 2016, homelessness is considered an epidemic in several U.S. cities. "Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and seven of the 15 City Council members announced they would declare a state of emergency and try to find $100 million to cure what has become a municipal curse."
In September 2018, in MARTIN V. CITY OF BOISE, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the city's Camping and Disorderly Conduct Ordinances violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. Cities can't punish homeless people for sleeping in public when the homeless shelters are full.
During the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, mass job loss and unemployment led to fears of mass evictions as tenants became unable to pay rent. According to US government sources, homelessness has increased drastically, particularly in the US West as real estate shortages drove up rents even higher, when people from already lower income levels were laid off from their jobs and evicted from existing housing. The estimates for homeless persons in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic range from 600,000 to 1.5 million people, making the US the worst affected industrialized country with regard to unhoused individuals. Local city governments in California and Oregon have started to intensify anti-homelessness campaigns in 2020, with limited success as local citizens reported extensive sprawls of homeless people in parks and public areas, creating unsanitary conditions with negative effects on small businesses.
Definitions and categories.
The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development acknowledges four categories of people who qualify as legally homeless: (1) those who are currently homeless, (2) those who will become homeless in the imminent future, (3) certain youths and families with children who suffer from home instability caused by a hardship, and (4) those who suffer from home instability caused by domestic violence.
According to the Stewart B. McKinney Act, 42 U.S.C. § 11301, et seq. (1994), a person is considered homeless if they "lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence and ... has a primary nighttime residency that is: (A) a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living accommodations... (B) an institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be institutionalized, or (C) a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings." Human Rights Watch (2010) identified emancipated teenagers in California as a new homeless population.
Homeless veterans.
Homeless veterans are persons who have served in the armed forces who are homeless or living without access to secure and appropriate accommodation. There were an estimated 57,849 homeless veterans estimated in the United States during January 2013; or 12 percent of all homeless adults. Just under 8 percent of homeless U.S. veterans are female.
Throughout the 21st century, homeless service providers and the Federal government have been able to reduce chronic homelessness and homelessness among Veterans with targeted efforts and interagency cooperation on initiatives like the HUD-VASH program. Indeed, the prominent role of the Department of Veterans Affairs and its joined up approach to veteran welfare help to distinguish the US response to veteran homelessness internationally.
Youth homelessness.
The number of homeless children in the US grew from 1.2 million in 2007 to 1.6 million in 2010. The US defines homelessness as "individuals who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence," per McKinney–Vento Homeless Assistance Act. The number of homeless children reached record highs in 2011, 2012, and 2013 at about three times their number in 1983. An "estimated two million [youth] run away from or are forced out of their homes each year" in the United States.
One out of 50 children or 1.5 million children in United States of America will be homeless each year. In 2013 that number jumped to one out of 30 children, or 2.5 million.
Texas, California and Florida have the highest numbers of unaccompanied homeless youth under the age of 18; comprising 58% of the total homeless under 18 youth population
Street children in the United States tend to stay in the state, 83% do not leave their state of origin. If they leave, "street children" are likely to end up in large cities, notably New York City; Los Angeles; Portland, Oregon; and San Francisco. Street children are predominantly Caucasian and female in the United States, and 42% identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT).
The United States government has been making efforts since the late 1970s to accommodate this section of the population. The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act of 1978 made funding available for shelters and funded the National Runaway Switchboard. Other efforts include the Child Abuse and Treatment Act of 1974, the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System, and the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. There has also been a decline of arrest rates in street youth, dropping in 30,000 arrests from 1998 to 2007. Instead, the authorities are referring homeless youth to state-run social service agencies.
In 2020, the National Center for homeless Education reported that over 1.5 million students in the U.S. public education system experienced homelessness during their 2017 and 2018 school year.
College youth.
College youth that are homeless account for over one million of the young homeless population.
According to the Free Application Federal Student Aid, also known as FAFSA, in 2013, over 58,000 students identified as homeless on their application. "The federal government defines these unaccompanied homeless youth (UHY) as individuals who do not have "fixed, regular and adequate" housing and who are "not in the physical custody of a parent or adult." The McKinney–Vento Act is considered the key piece of federal legislation pertaining to educational support for homeless children and teens. The causes of homelessness varies from student to student. There are two types of homeless college students: firstly students that are homeless upon entering college and secondly students who become homeless during college. For the youth that become homeless upon entering college, this situation represents the students that are having trouble sustaining housing due to job loss of their parent or guardian, the lack of a parent or guardian or because youth has been asked to leave the home or decided to runaway.
Two reasons for a college youth to become homeless while attending college are firstly being unable to sustain the financial expenses for housing and food and secondly, by having the financial support given by family revoked. Fortunately, there are programs available at state colleges and universities that provide students with the necessary resources to obtain financial and housing stability and sustainability. There are also organizations such as the National Association For The Education Of Homeless Children and Youth (NAEHCY) that advocate for a higher education so the children and youth can fulfill their dreams. Another innovative model that can be of great help to college students experiencing homelessness is Single Stop USA, which operates in community colleges to help connect low-income students to the resources they need, including housing, to not only stay in school but to excel
LGBT youth.
According to a survey, Massachusetts Youth Risk Behavior Survey, one in four teens that participated in this survey who identify as gay or lesbian are homeless. Various sources report between 20 percent and 40 percent identify as LGBT. Research shows that a disproportionate number of homeless youth in the United States identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, or LGBT. In addition, LGBT youth are at greater risk for risky sexual behavior, substance use, and mental health issues.
Homeless families.
The topic of homeless families first emerged in the United States during the 1980s when social welfare programs were being cut and high rates of income inequality, child poverty, and the lack of affordable housing were becoming an issue. The issue of homeless families came back in 2009 after the Recession, which replicated the same issues from the 80s. The 2000s saw a new population of those experiencing homelessness: families with children. While an emerging problem at the beginning of the decade, the problem continued to persist through 2010. At the close of the decade the trend continued unabated, with the number of individuals in homeless families increasing from 431,541 in 2007 to 535,447 in 2009. Though the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) conducts an annual Point-in-Time count of the homeless, including homeless families, its methodology has been criticized for under-reporting the number of homeless families. HUD reported that the number of homeless families decreased by 2% from 2017 – 2018, and by 23% from 2007 – 2018. However, 85% of local services for the homeless reported an increase during the same time. While HUD reported 111,592 homeless minors in 2018, the United States Department of Education reported 1.3 million homeless minors in the 2016 – 2017 school year.
As of 2019, the state of New York had the greatest number of homeless families, at 15,901. California had the second-greatest number of homeless families, at 7,044, followed by Massachusetts at 3,766. Wyoming had the fewest, at 37.
Homeless women with children.
Another study discovered that the three biggest risk factors that contributed to family homelessness in the United States are: ethnicity, lack of resources (specifically funds), and young children/pregnancy. There is also a strong correlation between homeless families and households run and financed by a single female, especially one from a minority group and with at least two children. Single-income families, especially those below the federal poverty line, have a harder time finding housing than other families, especially given the limited affordable housing options. Homeless families do not always take refuge in shelters, but being homeless also does not necessarily mean living on the streets. Homeless women with children are more likely to live with family or friends than those without children, and this group is treated with higher priority by both the government and society. Homeless mothers have a much higher prevalence of depression, at 40 – 85%, compared to 12% in women of all socioeconomic groups. Homeless mothers also have higher rates of substance use, anxiety disorders, and PTSD. Nearly all of them (92%) experience physical or sexual abuse.
Chronic homelessness.
As recently as 2017 across the United States, on any given night, there are approximately 85,000 chronically homeless people can be found sleeping on the streets or in shelters. A chronically homeless individual is defined as an unaccompanied person who has been homeless for a consecutive year (or four or more periods of homelessness within the last three years) with a disability preventing them from working. This definition was expanded in 2009 due to the HEARTH act to include families who were experiencing prolonged or repeating homelessness due to a disabled parent. Leaving these individuals to remain on the streets can cost taxpayers up to $50,000 per year for a single chronically homeless individual by them cycling in and out of treatment facilities, jails, hospitals and other institutional care facilities. Since 2007 the number of chronically homeless individuals has decreased by 33% with Utah even reporting to have achieved an end to chronic homelessness.
Efforts to assist homeless people.
The community of homeless people in the United States is aided by governmental and non-governmental organizations. According to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, in 2017, the number of people experiencing homelessness in unsheltered locations increased for a second straight year by 9% between 2016 and 2017. This issue is partly caused by a lack of affordable housing and is exacerbated by the criminalization of behaviors associated with homelessness. This problem is also costly for the country in supporting these individuals. Multiple studies have demonstrated success in reducing the homeless population as well as its harmful financial and societal effects by providing these individuals with a combination of housing without preconditions and supportive care. These studies include the 2014 Housing first implementation of the Department of Veterans Affairs National Center on Homelessness Among Veterans and a study performed through Brown University.
Housing.
Homeless individuals report a lack of affordable housing as the number one reason for becoming homeless.
The two main types of housing programs provided for homeless people are transitional and permanent housing. Transitional housing programs are operated with one goal in mind—to help individuals and families obtain permanent housing as quickly as possible. Transitional housing programs assist homeless for a fixed amount of time or until they are able to obtain housing on their own and function successfully in the community, or whichever comes first.
Some shelters and associated charitable foundations have bought buildings and real estate to develop into permanent housing for the homeless in lieu of transitional Housing.
The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and Veterans Administration have a special Section 8 housing voucher program called VASH (Veterans Administration Supported Housing), or HUD-VASH, which gives out a certain number of Section 8 subsidized housing vouchers to eligible homeless and otherwise vulnerable US armed forces veterans. The HUD-VASH program has been successful in housing many homeless veterans.
As of 2018, the number of U.S. citizens residing in their vehicles because they can't find affordable housing has "exploded", particularly in cities with steep increases in the cost of living such as Seattle, Los Angeles, Portland, and San Francisco. Bloomberg reported in November 2018 that the wealthiest cities in the U.S., in particular those in the Western states, are experiencing a homelessness crisis driven largely by stagnant wages and "skyrocketing rents".
In 2019, Google had pledged one billion USD into funding 20,000 homes over the next decade throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. The metropolitan area of San Francisco has some of the most expensive real estate in the United States.
Housing First.
The Housing First approach recognizes that housing is one of the most impactful social determinants of health that affect those experiencing homelessness. Housing First has met with success since its initial implementations in 2009 by providing relatively no strings-attached housing to homeless people with substance use disorder problems or mental health issues. Housing First allows homeless men and women to be taken directly off the street into private community-based apartments, without requiring treatment first. This allows the homeless to return to some sense of normalcy, from which it is believed that they are better-poised to tackle their addictions or sicknesses. The relapse rate through these types of programs is lower than that of conventional homeless programs.
Housing First was initiated by the federal government's Interagency Council on Homelessness. It asks cities to come up with a plan to end chronic homelessness under the assumption that if homeless people are given independent housing immediately with some social and financial support, then there will be reduced needs for emergency homeless shelters.
The Housing First approach is currently being used in Chicago, Illinois in the Better Health Through Housing (BHH) Collaborative.The BHH Collective began in 2015 as an initiative in Chicago, Illinois between BHH and University of Illinois Hospital to provide frequent homeless emergency department patients. The housing was paid for by the hospital and federal housing subsidies. The program also provides the individuals with case managers, specialized health services based on the individual’s needs, and other services they need. BHH Collective aims to address the connection between housing and health by providing supportive housing to homeless individuals in order to improve the health of the homeless and address homelessness at the same time.
Comprehensive health care.
In 2002, as a part of his FY2003 budget, President Bush made "ending chronic homelessness in the next decade a top objective." The bi-partisan, congressionally mandated, Millennial Housing Commission, in its Report to Congress in 2002, included ending chronic homelessness in 10 years among its principal recommendations. By 2003, the Interagency Council on Homelessness had been re-engaged and charged with pursuing the President's 10-year plan. The Administration has recently undertaken some collaborative efforts to reach its goal of ending chronic homelessness in 10 years. On October 1, 2003, the Administration announced the award of over $48 million in grants aimed at serving the needs of the chronically homeless through two initiatives. The "Ending Chronic Homelessness through Employment and Housing" initiative was a collaborative grant offered jointly by HUD and the Department of Labor (DOL).
Addressing homeless health is difficult in a traditional healthcare setting due to the complex nature of the needs of the homeless and the multitude of health consequences they face. In 2003-04, the proposed Bringing America Home Act was intended to provide comprehensive treatment for many homeless mental and substance use disorder patients - it has not been passed or funded. Scholars and public health experts advocate for health care to be tailored especially for homeless patients.
Tailored care approach.
Homeless patients tend to be patients with multiple burdens of “medical, mental health, and substance use problems”. The Tailored Care approach recognizes the unique situation of homeless people and seeks to provide specialized care to the homeless community.
This approach has been used in the government-sponsored Health Care for the Homeless Model (HCH Model). Each HCH project is federally funded and works as federally qualified health centers that work at the intersection of multiple disciplines. These health centers usually provide their patients access to health services such as primary care, mental health services, and addiction services as well as social services such as after-jail services and case management. However, there is no set structure that each health center needs to follow—each health center has the agency to provide a variety of services based on their networks and connections with the local neighborhood, government, or community but are not mandated to do so except for providing primary care.
Public libraries.
Public libraries can and often do significantly assist with the issues presented by homelessness. In many communities, the library is the only facility that offers free computer and internet access, so this is where many people experiencing homelessness go to locate services for basic needs such as healthcare, education, and housing. Libraries computers are also necessary for building a resume, searching for open jobs in the area, and completing job applications.
The news article and video entitled, "SF library offers Social Services to Homeless," speaks about the San Francisco library having a full-time social worker at the library to reduce and help homeless patrons. It mentions that Leah Esguerra, who is a psychiatric social worker, has a usual routine which is done by making her rounds to different homeless patrons and greeting them to see if she could help them. She offers help in different forms that could range from linking patrons with services or providing them with mental health counseling. She also supervises a 12-week vocational program that culminates in gainful employment in the library for the formerly homeless (Knight, 2010). The changes have garnered positive results from all patrons. Since this service started, staff at the library stated that they have noticed a drop in inappropriate behavior. The addition of Social Workers in the library has multiple benefits as they can assist with issues such as education; emergency services (food, clothing, housing, and crisis support); employment; family matters; health improvement (including health insurance); immigration; and support groups for men, women, and teens.
The San Jose University Library became one of the first academic libraries to pay attention to the needs of homeless people and implement changes to better serve this population. In 2007, the merged University Library and Public Library made the choice to be proactive in reaching out. Collaborations with non-profit organizations in the area culminated in computer classes being taught, as well as nutrition classes, family literacy programs, and book discussion groups. After eighteen months, the library staff felt they still were not doing enough and "analyzed program participation trends supplemented by observation and anecdotes" in order to better understand the information needs of homeless people. When it was understood that these needs are complex, additional customer service training was provided to all staff who were interested. Once the staff more fully understood the needs of homeless people, it was determined that many programs in place already, with a few minor adjustments, would be helpful to homeless people. For example, the providing book clubs have proven to be very effective bridges between librarians and the homeless. Programs were tailored to meet these needs. Additional changes implemented included temporary computer passes and generous in-house reading space to counteract the policies in place that may prevent a homeless person from obtaining a library card.
The Dallas Public Library started "Coffee and Conversation" which is part of their Homeless Engagement Initiative. The staff hopes these bimonthly events between staff and homeless patrons will help them better serve the homeless people population in Dallas. They also sponsor Street View podcast, a library produced podcast featuring the stories and experiences of the city's homeless population. Guests often include social service providers.
In May 1991, Richard Kreimer, a homeless man in Morristown, N.J. sued the local public library and the Town of Morristown for expelling him from the library after other patrons complained about his disruptive behavior and pungent body odor. He later won the case and settled for $250,000.
Effects of homelessness.
Effects.
The downtown partnership in Nashville, Tennessee conducted a census on businesses. Sixty percent of responded identified public inebriates, transients and vagrants affect their employees, clients and customers. Businesses were solicited to identify issues that need to be addressed. Transients and panhandlers ranked were in the top five issues. Two 7-Eleven locations in Sacramento, California and Portland, Oregon that have been so troubled by panhandler and vagrants briefly employed a high-pitched noise maker to repel them. A local news source 750 KXL in Portland described the sidewalk in front of a Downtown Portland 7-Eleven as being transformed from "barely walkable" to clean and orderly for the first time in years after the repelling device was installed by the building's owner, Standard Insurance Company. The manager of the 7-Eleven told reporters he would see as many as a dozen transients loitering in front of his store all at once.
The building's owner issued a statement that the goal was to protect the "safety of their employees, tenants, and guests in a location that has been consistently plagued by public drug use and menacing behavior." The 7-Eleven told reporters transients loitering in front of his store adversely affects his business. After several complaints were made to the city, the city announced the deterrent device as used in this situation did not comply with the city noise code. The device was shut off when reporters made a follow up visit. The manager commented it was effective for the duration they were used. A manager for a Modesto, California 7-Eleven also attested to the effectiveness of sound for deterring undesirable activity commenting that "Once the music started, the riffraff left".
The McKinney–Vento Homeless Assistance Act.
Homelessness has a tremendous effect on a child's education. Education of homeless youth is thought to be essential in breaking the cycle of poverty. The McKinney–Vento Homeless Assistance Act mandates equal opportunity to a free public education to homeless students. This act is supposed to break down the barriers homeless students have to receiving an education. These barriers include residency restriction, medical record verification, and transportation issues. Once a student surpasses these barriers, they are still subject to the stigma of being homeless, and the humiliation they feel because of their situation. Some families do not report their homelessness, while others are unaware of the opportunities available to them. Many report that maintaining a stable school environment helps the students because it is the only thing that remains normal. Many homeless students fall behind their peers in school due to behavioral disorders, and lack of attendance in school.
Since the United States housing bubble collapse, there has been a rise in the number of homeless students. NAEHCY or the National Association for the Education of Homeless for Children and Youth, has reported a 99% increase in homeless students within a three-month period (San Diego).
Of 1,636 schools, 330 reported no increase, 847 reported an increase of half, and 459 reported an increase of 25 percent or more. Due to underfunding many school districts are struggling to provide the necessary services to support homeless students, as mandated in the provisions of the McKinney–Vento Act, such as rising transportation needs and the greater range and usefulness of services. Wisconsin Rapids Public Schools Homeless Liaison Heather Lisitza says:
This is especially worrisome since homeless students are 1) 1.5 times more likely to perform below grade level in reading; 2) 1.5 times more likely to perform below grade level in spelling; and 3) 2.5 times more likely to perform below grade level in math.
There are a few worries that there will be false reports of homeless students, but mostly it is not an issue.
Various laws have both directly and indirectly criminalized people that are homeless and people attempting to feed homeless people outdoors. At least 31 cities have criminalized feeding people that are homeless.
In 2014, the United Nations Human Rights Committee criticized the United States for the criminalization of homelessness, noting that such "cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment" is in violation of international human rights treaty obligations. A 2018 report by Philip Alston, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, found that homeless persons have effectively been criminalized in many cities around the United States, and noted that "punishing and imprisoning the poor is the distinctively American response to
poverty in the twenty-first century."
Vagrancy.
In August 2012, a federal district judge in Philadelphia ruled that laws prohibiting serving food to homeless people outdoors were unconstitutional.
On June 19, 2014 the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit struck down a 1983 ordinance in the city of Los Angeles which "bans people from living in cars or recreational vehicles on city streets or in parking lots" as being "unconstitutionally vague ... Unlike other cities, which ban overnight parking or sleeping in vehicles, Los Angeles' law prohibits using cars as 'living quarters; both overnight and 'day-by-day, or otherwise.'"
Homeless rights advocates are pushing for "Right to Rest" bills in several states in 2015, which would overturn laws that target homeless people for sitting, eating, and sleeping in public places.
In 2018, in "Martin v. Boise" the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that city ordinances banning sleeping outside cannot be enforced if there are not enough shelter beds available in the city.
Crimes against homeless people.
Since the 1990s, there has been a growing number of violent acts committed upon people experiencing homelessness. The rate of such documented crimes in 2005 was 30% higher than of those in 1999. Some teens engage in this activity as a source of amusement. CNN reported in 2007 that such incidents were on the rise.
The Center for the Study of Hate & Extremism (CSHE) at California State University, San Bernardino in conjunction with the NCH found that 155 homeless people were killed by non-homeless people in "hate killings", while 76 people were killed in all the other traditional hate crime homicide categories such as race and religion, combined.
Various studies and surveys indicate that homeless people have a much higher criminal victimization rate than the non-homeless, but that most incidents never get reported to authorities. A 2007 study found that the number of violent crimes against homeless people is increasing. In 2013, there were 109 attacks on homeless people, a 24 percent increase on the previous year, according to the NCH. Eighteen people died as a result of the attacks. In July 2014, three boys 15, 16 and 18, were arrested and charged with beating to death two homeless men with bricks and a metal pole in Albuquerque.
As in other countries, criminals—both individuals and organized groups—sometimes exploit homeless people, ranging from identity theft to tax and welfare scams. Homeless people, and homeless organizations, are also known to be accused or convicted of frauds and scams. These incidents often lead to negative impressions of the homeless by the general public.
Health.
Homelessness is a public welfare and health epidemic within the United States. Any period of homelessness is associated with adverse health consequences. These adverse health consequences are associated with poor living conditions and a lack of access to treatment facilities. Due to living in extreme poverty it is unlikely for an individual or a family to have a healthcare plan. These healthcare plans are important in obtaining treatment for illnesses or injury from treatment facilities. Without it, individuals and families are left to deal with their ailments themselves or endure further financial burden by receiving treatments without a health insurance plan. Respiratory infections and outbreaks of tuberculosis and other aerosol transmitted infections have been reported. Homeless intravenous drug users are at an increased risk of contracting HIV, and hepatitis B and C infections. The close living spaces of areas such as Skid Row in California provide an environment in which infectious diseases can spread easily. These areas with a high concentration of homeless individuals are dirty environments with little resources for personal hygiene. It was estimated in a report to congress that 35% of homeless were in unsheltered locations not suitable for human habitation.
There is a bidirectional relationship between homelessness and poor health. Homelessness exacts a heavy toll on individuals and the longer individuals experience homelessness, the more likely they are to experience poor health and be at higher risk for premature death. Health conditions, such as substance use and mental illness, can increase people's susceptibility to homelessness. Conversely, homelessness can further cause health issues as they come with constant exposure to environmental threat such as hazards of violence and communicable diseases. Homeless people suffer from disproportionately high rates of poly substance use, mental illness, physical health problems and legal issues/barriers in attaining employment.
Large number of homeless people work but few homeless people are able to generate significant earnings from employment alone. Physical health problems also limit work or daily activities which are barriers to employment. Substance use is positively associated with lower work level but is negatively related to higher work level. Those with physical health problems are substantially more likely than those with mental health problems to be in the more generous disability programs. Substance use disorders are also a barrier to participation in disability programs. Rates of participation in government programs are low, and people with major mental disorders have low participation rate in disability programs.
Children's health.
There are risks to seeking refuge in shelters, which are heightened and more noticeable for children. Such risks include health problems such as malnutrition from lack of access to food with nutritional content, behavioral problems associated with coping, social insecurity from growing up in an unstable environment, and mental illnesses such as PTSD and trauma.
Mother's health.
Just as children who come from homeless families are at a higher risk of developing behavioral, mental, and physical health problems than their peers, their mothers are also at a higher risk especially in developing mental illnesses. There are many things that contribute to why homeless women are at a higher rate of developing a mental illness compared to the general population, but there has been a reoccurring three among studies focused on this issue.
Mental health.
Homeless individuals report mental illness as being the number three reason for becoming or staying homeless. Such illnesses are often closely linked with the fourth reason—substance use—and therefore it is generally accepted that both of these issues should be treated simultaneously. Although many medical, psychiatric, and counseling services exist to address these needs, it is commonly believed that without the support of reliable and stable housing such treatments remain ineffective. Furthermore, in the absence of a universal healthcare plan, many of those in need cannot afford such services.
Public attitudes.
Many advocates for homeless people contend that a key difficulty is the social stigma surrounding homelessness. Many associate a lack of a permanent home with a lack of a proper bathroom and limited access to regular grooming. Thus, people that are homeless become "aesthetically unappealing" to the general public. Research shows that "physically attractive persons are judged more positively than physically unattractive individuals on various traits... reflecting social competence."
In addition to the physical component of stigmatization exists an association of homeless people with mental illness. Many people consider the mentally ill to be irresponsible and childlike and treat them with fear and exclusion, using their mental incapacitation as justification for why they should be left out of communities.
A common misconception persists that many individuals who panhandle are not actually homeless, but actually use pity and compassion to fund their lifestyles, making up to $20 an hour and living luxurious lives. This exception to the rule seems more prevalent due to media attention, but in reality, only a few cases exist.
Public opinion surveys show relatively little support for this view, however. A 1995 paper in the "American Journal of Community Psychology" concluded that "although the homeless are clearly stigmatized, there is little evidence to suggest that the public has lost compassion and is unwilling to support policies to help homeless people." A Penn State study in 2004 concluded that "familiarity breeds sympathy" and greater support for addressing the problem.
A 2007 survey conducted by Public Agenda, a non-profit organization that helps leaders and their citizens navigate through complex social issues, found that 67 percent of New Yorkers agreed that most homeless people were without shelter because of "circumstances beyond their control," including high housing costs and lack of good and steady employment. More than one-third (36 percent) said they worried about becoming homeless themselves, with 15 percent saying they were "very worried." 90 percent of New Yorkers believed that everyone has a right to shelter, and 68 percent believed that the government is responsible for guaranteeing that right to its citizens. The survey found support for investments in prevention, rental assistance and permanent housing for homeless people.
Public Agenda has also concluded, however, that the public's sympathy has limits. In a 2002 national survey, the organization found 74 percent say the police should leave a homeless person alone if they are not bothering anyone. In contrast, 71 percent say the police should move homeless people if they are keeping customers away from a shopping area and 51 percent say homeless people should be moved if they are driving other people away from a public park.
Statistics and demographics.
Completely accurate and comprehensive statistics are difficult to acquire for any social study, but especially so when measuring the ambiguous hidden, and erratic reality of homelessness. All figures given are estimates. In addition, these estimates represent overall national averages; the proportions of specific homeless communities can vary substantially depending on local geography.
Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress.
Perhaps the most accurate, comprehensive, and current data on homelessness in the United States is reported annually by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in the Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress (AHAR), released every year since 2007. The AHAR report relies on data from two sources: single-night, point-in-time counts of both sheltered and unsheltered homeless populations reported on the Continuum of Care applications to HUD; and counts of the sheltered homeless population over a full year provided by a sample of communities based on data in their Management Information Systems (HMIS).
Other statistics.
Total number.
Over the course of the year (October 2009 – September 2010), the 2010 Annual Homeless Assessment Report found that 1,593,150 individuals experienced homelessness Most were homeless temporarily. The chronically homeless population (those with repeated episodes or who have been homeless for long periods) decreased from 175,914 in 2005 to 123,833 in 2007. According to the 2017 AHAR (Annual Homeless Assessment Report) about 553,742 people experienced homelessness, which is a 1% increase from 2016.
Familial composition.
According to the NCHWIH report:
Marital status.
According to the 2014 NCHWIH report:
Race and ethnicity.
According to the 2010 SAMHSA report, Among all sheltered individuals over the course of a year (October 2009-September 2010):
Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity
According to the 2014 NCHWIH report:
Mental health.
According to the 2010 SAMHSA report:
According to analyses of data from the 1996 NSHAPCxiv:
Substance use.
According to the 2010 SAMHSA report:
According to analyses of data from the 1996 NSHAPCxiv:
Education.
According to the 1996 Urban Institute findings of the National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients (UIHAC) report
Employment.
According to the 1996 UIHAC report:
A 2010 longitudinal study of homeless men conducted in Birmingham, Alabama, found that most earned an average of ninety dollars per week while working an average of thirty hours per week
Location.
According to the 2010 SAMHSA report:
According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development:
Duration.
According to the 2010 SAMHSA report:
Research on shelter use in New York City and Philadelphia concluded that
In New York City
Data from the 1996 NSHAPC show that about 50% of people who were homeless were experiencing their first or second episode of homelessness, which typically lasted a few weeks or months to one year.
Gender.
According to the 2017 Annual Homelessness Assessment Report:
Age.
According to the 2017 Annual Homelessness Assessment Report:
See also.
Housing:
General:


Thomas Alderson

Thomas Hopper Alderson GC (15 September 1903 – 28 October 1965) was a British Air Raid Precautions (ARP) warden in Bridlington, and the first person to be directly awarded the George Cross shortly after its creation in 1940.
Alderson was fifth of six children. He went first to his local village school and then continued his schooling at Elwick Road senior boys' school, West Hartlepool, becoming Head Boy. During World War I he witnessed the bombardment of West Hartlepool by the German High Seas Fleet on 16 December 1914. After leaving school at 15 he first worked as an office boy and a draughtsman, and then undertook an engineering apprenticeship. He joined the Merchant Navy, becoming a first engineer. Following the birth of his daughter in 1935 he became an engineer for West Hartlepool council. He moved to Bridlington in 1938 as works supervisor for the Corporation. Local authorities were responsible for air raid precautions and trained their own workforces in rescue work. Alderson attended an anti-gas school at Easingwold, near York, and became an instructor in the subject.
He worked as part-time Air Raid Warden, leading a detachment of rescue and demolition parties in Bridlington. The coastal town was soon attacked by Luftwaffe bombers, and residential areas were hit. On three occasions in August 1940, Alderson led rescue teams and entered dangerous buildings to rescue trapped civilians. He was the first person to receive the newly-instituted George Cross from the King, and in a radio broadcast at the time insisted that his award was for all the rescue parties in Bridlington. This interview can be heard in full on "The Blitz", an audiobook CD of wartime recordings.
In 1946, Alderson joined the East Riding of Yorkshire County Council workforce as an assistant highways surveyor. He then joined the new Civil Defence Corps, this time to protect the civilian population from nuclear warfare, rather than conventional bombs. On 28 October 1965 he died of lung cancer in Northfield Hospital at Driffield, Yorkshire. His George Cross is now on display at the Imperial War Museum alongside a medal from the RSPCA, awarded later in the war for rescuing two horses from a burning stable.
Citation.
The "London Gazette" citation appeared in a supplement to the issue of 27 September 1940, dated 30 September 1940:


Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 568 U.S. 78 (2013), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Natural Resources Defense Council and Santa Monica Baykeeper challenged the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (District) for violating the terms of its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit as shown in water quality measurements from monitoring stations within the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers. The Supreme Court, by a unanimous 9-0 vote, reversed and remanded the Ninth Circuit's ruling on the grounds that the flow of water from an improved portion of a navigable waterway into an unimproved portion of the same waterway does not qualify as a "discharge of a pollutant" under the Clean Water Act.
Parties.
Los Angeles County Flood Control District.
The Los Angeles County Flood Control District is the petitioner in this particular case. The district was established upon adoption of the Los Angeles County Flood Control Act in 1915, after a disastrous regional flood occurred. The district's primary purpose is to provide flood protection, water conservation, recreation, and aesthetic enhancement within its boundaries. As of 1985, the responsibilities and authority of the district were transferred to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. The Flood Control District encompasses more than 3,000 square miles and 85 cities in Southern California. It includes approximately 500 miles of open channel, 2,800 miles of underground storm drainage pipelines, and an estimated 120,000 catch basins.
Natural Resources Defense Council.
The Natural Resources Defense Council and Santa Monica Baykeeper are the respondent. The Natural Resources Defense Council is a nationwide environmental action group consisting of over 1.3 million members and over 350 lawyers, scientists and other professionals. Santa Monica Baykeeper is a non-profit organization that aims to protect and restore the Santa Monica Bay, San Pedro Bay and adjacent waters through enforcement, field work, and community action.
Background.
The district operates a "municipal separate storm sewer system" (MS4), which is a conveyance or a system of conveyances that collects and transports stormwater runoff into waters of the U.S. The district's MS4 transports stormwater through rivers and channels flowing to the Pacific Ocean. Because stormwater is often heavily polluted from various non-point sources, the Clean Water Act and its implementing regulations require certain MS4s to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit before discharging stormwater into navigable waters. Between 2002 and 2008, monitoring stations in the Los Angeles River, San Gabriel River, Santa Clara River, and Malibu Creek continually detected water pollution levels that exceeded its MS4 permit in its stormwater channel system. Some of the pollution levels exceeded included high levels of aluminum, copper, cyanide, fecal coliform bacteria, and zinc.
Prior cases.
District court opinion.
In 2008, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Santa Monica Baykeeper (collectively NRDC) filed a citizen-enforcement action against the district and county in the Central District of California, and alleged that the district violated the NPDES permit and the Clean Water Act. NRDC sought to impose liability on the district for its permit violations in four rivers: the Los Angeles River, San Gabriel River, Santa Clara River, and Malibu Creek. The district argued that this issue was resolved by the court's earlier decision in the "South Florida Water Management Dist. v. Miccosukee Tribe" (541 U.S. 95) case, which determined that transferring water within a single water body does not constitute a "discharge." The district court initially denied summary judgment because the evidence did not clearly show whether the standards-exceeding pollutant had been discharged through the district's MS4. Thus, the district court concluded that NRDC failed to show whether there had been a "discharge" from a "point source" within the statutory meanings of those terms. The district court granted summary judgment to the district on these claims and concluded that the record was insufficient to warrant a finding that the MS4 had discharged stormwater containing the pollutants detected at the downstream monitoring stations.
"South Florida Water Management District v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians".
In this 2004 U.S. Supreme Court case, the Miccosukee Tribe challenged the South Florida Water Management District on an issue related to the operation of a new pump station that transferred water from a concrete canal to a large undeveloped wetland area as part of the Central and South Florida Flood Control Project. During rain events, stormwater collected in the canal contained contaminants such as phosphorus and fertilizers from agricultural and urban land uses. The district impounded water in the wetland area, a remnant of the original South Florida Everglades, to conserve fresh water that might otherwise flow directly to the ocean and to preserve wetland habitat. When water levels in the canal rose above a set level, the pump would transfer water out of the canal and empty the water in the canal. In doing so, the phosphorus-containing the water altered the wetland's ecosystem, which was naturally low in phosphorus, and stimulated the growth of algae and plants that were uncommon in the Everglades ecosystem.
The Miccosukee Tribe filed suit under the Clean Water Act, which prohibits "the discharge of any pollutant by any person" unless done in compliance with the Act. The Tribe claimed that the pump station required an NPDES permit, because it moved phosphorus-laden water from the canal into the wetland area, but the district contended that the pump's operation did not constitute the "discharge of a pollutant" under the Act. The district court granted the Tribe summary judgment, and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed. For the purposes of NPDES permitting requirements, the Government (as an impartial adviser to the district) contended that all water bodies that fall within the Act's definition of "navigable water" (which are defined as "the waters of the U.S.") should be viewed collectively. Since the Act requires NPDES permits only when there is an addition of a pollutant to "navigable waters," this approach implied that such permits are not required when water is transferred from one navigable water, unaltered, into another navigable water body. However, because neither the district nor the Government raised the "unitary waters" approach before the Eleventh Circuit or in their briefs respecting certiori and because some factual issues remained unresolved, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to resolve the unitary waters argument and the case was remanded to the lower court.
Appeals Court opinion.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed in part, finding that the NRDC was entitled to summary judgment on its claims regarding the Los Angeles River and San Gabriel River because the monitoring stations are located within the MS4 owned and operated by the district. The U.S. Court of Appeals held that the district was liable for the discharge of pollutants that occurred when the polluted stormwater detected at the monitoring stations flowed out of the concrete-lined portions of the rivers, where the monitoring stations are located, into lower, unlined portions of the same rivers. However, with regard to the Santa Clara River and Malibu Creek, NRDC failed to provide adequate evidence for the district court to determine if stormwater discharged from the MS4 caused or contributed to exceedances of permitted water quality levels. As such, the NRDC was entitled to summary judgment on the district's liability for discharges into the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers but not the Santa Clara River or Malibu Creek.
Supreme Court decision.
Issues.
The Clean Water Act regulates discharges of pollutants, including discharges of pollutants from municipal stormwater systems. The petition of a "writ of certiorari" (filed October 11, 2011) posed two questions to the Supreme Court:
Granting of certiorari.
The petition for a "writ of certiorari" sought to expand the definition of "navigable waters of the United States" to potentially include human engineered improvements, and to also reverse the verdict of the Ninth Circuit based on the Supreme Court's prior ruling in "South Florida Water Management District v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians".
On June 25, 2012 the Supreme Court granted certiorari and limited to Question 2 set forth in the initial petition for a writ of certiorari.
The Supreme Court granted the "certiorari" in order to address the Ninth Circuit's verdict which reversed a previous decision and held that the Los Angeles County Flood Control District was liable due to the discharge of pollutants that occurred when polluted water was detected at the monitoring stations as it flowed out through the concrete channel to unimproved portions of the river. The Supreme Court decided to limit its scope to the latter of the two questions, leaving the first to the lower courts.
Arguments.
The case was argued on December 4, 2012 by NRDC senior attorney Aaron Colangelo for respondents and GMSR partner Timothy T. Coates for the petitioner L.A. County. Essentially conceding that the premise upon which the Ninth Circuit's decision was based was incorrect, the NRDC and Baykeeper sought to argue that the exceedances detected at monitoring stations themselves sufficed in establishing the liability of the district under the Clean Water Act for its upstream discharges. NRDC felt that the Court of Appeals came to the correct decision, albeit for the wrong reasons, in their evaluation of the discharge of pollutants from an improved portion to an unimproved portion of the same waters. The NRDC and Baykeeper contended that the exceedances detected at the instream monitoring stations were sufficient to establish the district's liability under the Clean Water Act for upstream discharges. In addition, the NRDC argued that under the terms of the permit, the district had agreed to be severally liable with its co-permittees for any excess pollution in the river picked up by the monitoring stations.
The district sought to argue that under the EPA's 2008 water transfer rule (40 C.F.R. § 122.3(i)) it was not liable for violating its permit. The NRDC, however, pointed out that the water transfer rules did not apply in the cases of MS4s stating that "[m]unicipal separate storm sewer systems...are clearly subject to regulation under the Act. CWA section 402(p)."
The district argued that the issue granted "certiorari" by the Supreme Court had to be resolved in favor of the district on the basis of previous standing. Again, this point was not in contention on the part of the NRDC. As the first issue upon which the petition for certiorari was not going to be addressed in court, the district sought to argue the alternative monitoring argument that the NRDC was attempting to bring forth. The district argued that the monitoring theory itself was contrary to the Clean Water Act, which imposes liability only where it is shown that a permitee has discharged in violation of permit terms. The Supreme Court ruled that their grant of certiorari was only to evaluate the Court of Appeals ruling as it related to the prior standing and "did not address or indicate any opinion on the issue the NRDC and Baykeeper seek to substitute."
Opinion of the court.
The case was argued on December 4, 2012 with a decision being issued on January 8, 2013.
Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the court which held that the flow from an improved portion of a navigable waterway into an unimproved portion of the same waterway does not constitute a "discharge of a pollutant" under the Clean Water Act. This was based on the standing of the "South Florida Water Management Dist. v. Miccosukee Tribe." Based on this, the court found that the Ninth Circuit's decision was not in accordance with this hold and reversed and remanded the decision.
Significance of the case.
Some environmental groups expressed concern that the U.S. Supreme Court decision inappropriately relied on the Court's past decision on the "South Florida Water Management District v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians" case. While the Court was asked to determine whether the transfer of water that arguably contained pollutants from one part of a water body into another part of that same water body needed a permit to discharge pollutants in the Miccosukee case, there is no doubt that municipal storm sewers need permits to discharge into rivers in the "Los Angeles Flood Control District v. NRDC" case. Outside parties asserted that the two situations have nothing in common.
In general, several parties believe that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision is narrow in its scope, and questioned why the Supreme Court had decided to hear the case rather than just reverse the Ninth Circuit's decision. However, the reversal of the Ninth Circuit's judgment against the Los Angeles County Flood Control District in the case implies that local water quality advocates will continue to pressure the local regulator, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, to ensure that the new municipal stormwater permit effectively implements its water quality improvement measures.
Additionally, while the Supreme Court decided against addressing the first question raised in the certiorari, if it had been addressed, it would have further defined "navigable waters" under the Clean Water Act.
Some observers of the case contend that there are additional lessons that can be taken from the Supreme Court case. By not defending the decision made by the Ninth Circuit, the NRDC was able to steer the Court's attention to more plausible grounds in an effort to keep the case alive for a remand.


Mary Jayne Gold

Mary Jayne Gold (1909 – October 5, 1997) was an American heiress who played an important role helping European Jews and intellectuals escape Nazi Germany in 1940-1941, during World War II.
Early years and education.
Born in Chicago, Illinois into a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant family of considerable wealth, Mary Jayne Gold was educated at the Master's School at Dobbs Ferry, New York and a finishing school in Italy. In the 1930s, her money allowed her to enjoy the vibrant social scene in London and Paris. Piloting her own airplane, she traveled around Europe, spending her time at luxury hotels, skiing at the best resorts in the Alps, and socializing with the elite of the day.
During World War II.
Gold was living in a Paris apartment when France fell to the onslaught of the German army in 1940. She fled to the Mediterranean seaport of Marseille in southern France which, although not Nazi occupied, was under the control of the collaborationist Vichy regime. In Marseille she met Miriam Davenport, an American art student, and Varian Fry, an American journalist and intellectual. Fry had come to France on a personal mission to help members of Europe's intellectual and artistic community escape the Nazi threat. In the armistice agreement between Germany and defeated France, France had agreed to "surrender on demand" refugees to the Nazis.
Instead of returning to the United States, Mary Jayne Gold chose to remain and joined Davenport and Fry along with other volunteers in sheltering refugees and organizing their escape through the mountains to Spain or by smuggling them aboard freighters sailing to either North Africa or ports in North or South America. She was helped in part by returning French Foreign Legionnaire turned local gangster Raymond Couraud, who became her lover.
Mary Jayne Gold helped subsidize the operation which is credited with participating in the rescue of some 2,000 refugees, Among the escapees were notables such as the sculptor Jacques Lipchitz, artist Marc Chagall, writer Hannah Arendt and Nobel Prize winner, physician and biochemist Otto Meyerhof.
In fall 1941, Mary Jayne Gold returned to the United States, while Couraud traveled to Spain and onwards to England, where he became a war hero in the Special Air Service.
After the war.
After the war, she divided her time between her apartment in New York City and a house she had built in the village of Gassin, Var, not far from St. Tropez, on the French Riviera. In 1980, she wrote about her wartime experiences in the memoir "Crossroads Marseilles 1940", published by Doubleday in 1980, and translated into French in 2001 by Alice Seelow. Mary Jayne Gold's literary estate was left to Pierre Sauvage.
Mary Jayne Gold never married and had no children. She died of pancreatic cancer in 1997 at her villa in Gassin.
Her great-nephew's mother, Alison Leslie Gold, is a well-known author of books on the Holocaust, notably, "Anne Frank Remembered: The Story of the Woman Who Helped Hide the Frank Family" (1987), which was co-written with Miep Gies.
Published work.
"Crossroads Marseilles, 1940" (1980)


Lake Champlain Seaway

The Lake Champlain Seaway was a canal project proposed in the late 19th century and considered as late as the 1960s to connect New York State's Hudson River and Quebec's St. Lawrence River with a deep-water canal. The objective was to allow easy ship traffic from New York City to Montreal through Lake Champlain, lowering transportation costs between the two cities.
Though supported by business groups in New York and Quebec, it proved economically unfeasible. Prohibitive costs (estimated at $100 million in 1900), opposition from railroads, and the diminishing utility of canal transportation prevented the project from advancing beyond the early planning stages. The Great Depression cut the project's planning budget, while World War II and completion of the St. Lawrence Seaway delayed matters. The growth of road and air transportation reduced the need for a canal, but the project was still under serious consideration as late as 1962.
As proposed, ships would have used a dredged channel in the Hudson River, transferred to an upgraded Champlain Canal, navigated Lake Champlain, traversed an upgraded Chambly Canal and St Ours Canal, and traveled a dredged route up the Richelieu River to Montreal. Today, the seaway's planned route is covered by the Lakes to Locks Passage.


United Homeless Organization

The United Homeless Organization was a 501(c)(3) homelessness charity based in New York City. It was disbanded in 2010 after it was ruled to be operating fraudulently.
Founded in 1985 by Stephen Riley, who ran the organization from his apartment in the Bronx, The United Homeless Organization solicited money at sidewalk tables at various locations in Manhattan. Solicitors paid the organization $15 per shift (with 3 to 4 shifts per day) to rent a table and collection jug; any remaining funds raised they could keep for themselves. According to the United Homeless Organization, more than three-quarters of its solicitors were homeless, and all had been homeless at one time.
In November 2009, New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo filed suit in New York Supreme Court in Manhattan against the group, charging that the founders kept most of the change collected. The suit charged that Riley and director Myra Walker used the money to buy items for their personal use, and to pay bills unrelated to the United Homeless Organization.
On June 24, 2010, Judge Barbara R. Kapnick ruled that the United Homeless Organization be permanently shut down and further banned Riley and Walker from ever engaging in non-profit work again.


Kansas Pacific Railway Co. v. Dunmeyer

Kansas Pacific R. Co. v. Dunmeyer, 113 U.S. 629 (1885), was a writ of error to the Supreme Court of Kansas. The action was brought in that court on a covenant of warranty of title to two pieces of land in a deed of conveyance made by the Kansas Pacific Railroad Company to Dunmeyer. The Pacific Railroad Acts generally allowed railroads to sell public land adjacent to their routes as part of a land grant to raise funds but made an exception for land that already had a homestead filed. G. B. Dunmeyer claimed he purchased land that already had an existing claim.
Background.
The suit was brought for breach of covenant of warranty of title to a tract of land in Kansas. Plaintiff in error was defendant below. Its title was derived from grants of public land to aid in the construction of a railway to the Pacific. The tract was within the location of the railroad grants, but was excepted from those grants by reason of a homestead entry and possession. Subsequent to this entry and possession, the party so in possession took title from the railroad company, and the homestead entry was cancelled. The alleged paramount adverse title was derived from a patent from the United States issued on a homestead entry made subsequent to these proceedings. The Supreme Court of Kansas found that there was a breach of the warranty, and rendered judgment accordingly. This writ of error was brought to review that judgment.
The land was sold by the company to George W. Miller, to whom a certificate of sale was given, which afterwards was assigned to Lewis Dunmeyer, to whom the company made a deed purporting to convey a good title. On this covenant for good title Dunmeyer brought the present action, alleging that the railroad company never had any title, and that the covenant was therefore broken. On this issue the case was tried. Several other defenses were set up, among them that the covenant was not broken, because Dunmeyer was in possession when he bought the certificate issued to Miller and when he took his deed, and has never been disturbed or ousted; that Miller was in possession when he bought of the company and transferred possession to Dunmeyer, and that this has been held ever since, and that Miller's purchase was a compromise of disputed rights, and he and Dunmeyer are therefore estopped to maintain this action. But these and perhaps other points, decided against plaintiff in error, do not present questions of federal law which this Court can review in a judgment of a state court.
The record shows that on July 25, 1866, Miller made a homestead entry on this land which was in every respect valid if the land was then public land subject to such entry. It also shows that the line of definite location of the company's road was first filed with the Commissioner of the General Land Office at Washington, September 21, 1866. This entry of Miller's therefore brought the land within the language of the exception in the grant as land to which a homestead claim had attached at the time the line of said road was definitely fixed. For we are of opinion that under this grant, as under many other grants containing the same words or words to the same purport, the act which fixes the time of definite location is the act of filing the map or plat of this line in the office of the commissioner of the General Land Office.
Decision.
Of two arguments made, the stronger is in regards that while the company did not file its line of definite location until about two months after Miller made his homestead entry, it did designate the general route of said road, and file a map thereof in the General Land Office July 11 of the same year, 1866, which was fifteen days before Miller's homestead entry. This latter map was filed in the office of the register and receiver on 26 July, one day after Miller made his entry.
It is argued that until this was done, Miller's right of entry remained unaffected. But the court was of opinion that the duty of filing this map, as required by the act, like that of the line of definite location, is performed by filing it in the General Land Office, which is filing it with the Secretary of the Interior, and that whatever rights accrue to the company from the act of filing it accrue from filing it there.
In this case before the high court, a claim was made and filed in the land office, and there recognized, before the line of the company's road was located. That claim was an existing one of public record in favor of Miller when the map of plaintiff in error was filed. In the language of the act of Congress, this homestead claim had attached to the land, and it therefore did not pass by the grant.
Of all the words in the English language, this word "attached' was probably the best that could have been used. It did not mean mere settlement, residence, or cultivation of the land, but it meant a proceeding in the proper land office, by which the inchoate right to the land was initiated. It meant that by such a proceeding, a right of homestead had fastened to that land which could ripen into a perfect title by future residence and cultivation. With the performance of these conditions the company had nothing to do. The right of the homestead having attached to the land, it was excepted out of the grant as much as if, in a deed, it had been excluded from the conveyance by metes and bounds.
The difference in the two cases is obvious. The judgment of the Supreme Court of the State of Kansas was affirmed.


True Colors United

True Colors United (formerly True Colors Fund) is an American nonprofit organization addressing the issue of youth homelessness in the United States. Founded in 2008 by Cyndi Lauper, the organization focuses on the unique experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) youth, who make up 40% of the homeless youth population in America.
History.
True Colors United was founded in 2008 by Cyndi Lauper, her manager Lisa Barbaris, and agent Jonny Podell, following the success of Lauper's True Colors tour, which benefited LGBT foundations including the Human Rights Campaign, PFLAG, and the Matthew Shepard Foundation.
Issue.
In America, up to 1.6 million youth experience homelessness each year. LGBT youth make up to 40% of all young people experiencing homelessness, but are only an estimated 7% of the total youth population. Homeless LGBT youth are at greater risk for victimization, unsafe sexual practices, and mental health issues than non-LGBT youth experiencing homelessness.
The most commonly cited reason LGBT youth become homeless is family rejection due to their sexual orientation or gender identity. Other reasons include family issues, aging out of foster care, abuse in the home, and poverty.
Work.
Training and education.
True Inclusion Assessment.
The True Inclusion Assessment tool enables homeless youth serving organizations to assess their level of LGBT-inclusion. Following completion of the Assessment, a work plan is created to guide the organization toward building a safer and more supportive environment for LGBT youth. True Colors United provides technical assistance and support during the implementation of these plans.
True Inclusion Directory.
The True Inclusion Directory is an online directory of safe and affirming services for homeless LGBT youth. Users are able to search for service providers and events based on location and the type of resource needed.
True Connect.
True Connect is a mobile application developed by True Colors United to help connect homeless LGBT youth to resources and opportunities near them. The app will pull data from True Colors United's True Inclusion Directory to link young people to resources like phone charging stations, gender-neutral restrooms, food, shelter, employment programs, and more.
True Colors Learning Community.
The True Colors Learning Community is an international collective of professionals working to address LGBT youth homelessness, or whose work has the potential to impact the issue. 40 to None Network members share case studies, innovative practices and strategies, top headlines from the field, and information about upcoming in person and virtual events.
Learning Community members have access to an online training platform designed to educate individuals about and enable them to address LGBT youth homelessness in their communities. The Learning Community provides short, interactive content to help establish a common understanding about LGBT youth homelessness.
LGBTQ Youth Homelessness Prevention Initiative.
A partnership with five federal partners (the U.S. Departments of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Education, Health and Human Services, Justice, and USICH), the LGBTQ Youth Homelessness Prevention Initiative identifies successful strategies to address LGBT youth homelessness and implements them in cooperation with communities around the country. Currently, prevention plans are being implemented in Houston, TX and Hamilton County, OH.
Youth Count Toolkit.
Point-In-Time (PIT) counts are mandated by HUD to capture a 24-hour snapshot of a community's homeless population. Since most PIT counts are designed to count adults, True Colors United developed the Youth Count Toolkit to offer communities effective strategies for counting homeless youth.
Advocacy.
Federal policy.
True Colors United works with federal, state, and local government to advocate for policies that fund vital resources for homeless youth, and that programs receiving such funding are inclusive and affirming of LGBT youth. True Colors United's relationship with the White House has led to the first and second ever White House Policy Briefings on Youth Homelessness in 2015 and 2016.
State Index on Youth Homelessness.
The State Index on Youth Homelessness provides a snapshot of some of the legal, systemic, and environmental barriers and complex challenges youth experiencing homelessness face. The Index also provides states, advocates, grassroots activists, and youth themselves with a tool recommending concrete steps that states can take to protect the safety, development, health, and dignity of youth experiencing homelessness, thereby helping end the cycle of homelessness and increasing youth’s prospects for a brighter future.
Research.
Every two years, True Colors United collaborates with the Williams Institute to survey homeless youth service providers about the LGBT youth they serve. Information gathered from the survey in published in the "Serving Our Youth" report and informs the development of True Colors United's public engagement, technical assistance, and online course development. "At the Intersections" is a collaborative report led by True Colors United and the National LGBTQ Task Force and explores the intersectional nature of the different factors facing homeless LGBT youth.
Youth collaboration.
True Colors Fellowship.
The True Colors Fellowship offers up to five young people ages 18–24 the unique opportunity to execute a six-month project that contributes to a more inclusive world in which lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender, queer, and questioning young people are included and affirmed in their identities. Throughout the experience, True Colors Fellows make lasting professional connections, gain hands-on organizing experience, and build their leadership skills.
National Youth Forum on Homelessness.
True Colors United’s National Youth Forum on Homelessness (NYFH) is a group composed exclusively of young people to contribute to the growing national dialogue on how to make youth homelessness rare, brief, and non-recurring. The primary goal of NYFH is to identify and analyze policy that impacts youth who are at risk of or experiencing homelessness, and advocate for strong policy based upon that analysis. Forum members, all of whom have experienced homelessness, use personal experience, research, and data to assess the effectiveness of programs that assist homeless youth and advocate for change.
True Opportunities.
True Colors United works with corporate and arts world partners to provide at-risk and homeless LGBT youth with the opportunity to learn about career opportunities available to them. Through a partnership with the Tony winning musical "Kinky Boots", the "Raise You Up" program takes young people backstage to show them the many different aspects to putting together a Broadway show, introduce them to cast and crew, and watch the show.
Events.
Impact Summit.
True Colors United's Impact Summit is an annual conference that brings together leaders working to end LGBT youth homelessness for interactive sessions, action planning, and networking opportunities. It is the only national conference focusing on LGBT youth homelessness.
State of Out Youth: A Town Hall.
State of Out Youth is an annual panel discussion with LGBTQ youth from across the country about the most pressing issues facing them today. First held in 2013, State of Out Youth has been a collaborative effort in partnership with CenterLink, GSA Network, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and Lambda Legal.
Cyndi Lauper & Friends: Home for the Holidays.
Home for the Holidays is an annual benefit concert held each December at the Beacon Theater in New York City. First held in 2011, the concert raises awareness about LGBT youth homelessness, with 100% of proceeds benefiting True Colors United. Past performers include musicians and comedy acts such as Lou Reed, P!nk, Josh Groban, 50 Cent, Sharon Osbourne, Jason Mraz, Boy George, Ledisi, Nelly Furtado, Sarah McLachlan, Whoopi Goldberg, Adam Lambert, Rosie O'Donnell, Roberta Flack, Carson Kressley, Sufjan Stevens, and St. Vincent.


Catarina de Albuquerque

Catarina de Albuquerque (born 1970) is a Portuguese lawyer and human rights activist who served as the first United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to safe drinking water and sanitation (2008–2014). After becoming Executive Chair of Sanitation and Water for All (SWA) in 2015, in September 2018 she was appointed SWA's Chief Executive Officer.
Biography.
Born in 1970, Catarina de Albuquerque attended the German International School in Lisbon before graduating in law from the University of Lisbon. She then earned a master's degree in law (LLM) from the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, leading her into her first contacts with the United Nations.
Catarina de Albuquerque joined Sanitation and Water for All in 2014 and has since strengthened political will in favour of water, sanitation and hygiene, and positioned SWA as a vital contributor to the Sustainable Development Goals agenda.
In July 2018, following a wide-ranging governance review, SWA created the position of Chief Executive Officer and Ms. de Albuquerque was chosen for the position in a competitive process. Through her strategic leadership as CEO, she is an influential and powerful advocate for SWA and the human rights to water and sanitation. She leads the SWA secretariat and provides strategic leadership compatible with its vision and high-level objectives, including all operational, executive and fundraising activities.
In 2008, Ms. de Albuquerque was appointed by the Human Rights Council to become the first UN Special Rapporteur on the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation. In 2010, she played a pivotal role in the recognition of water and sanitation as human rights by the UN General Assembly. Her work helped ensure that the rights to water and sanitation were incorporated into the language of the Sustainable Development Goals.
Between 2004 and 2008 she presided over the negotiations of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which the UN General Assembly approved by consensus on 10 December 2008. She also participated in the development of several other international human rights standards, including the two Optional Protocols: one on the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, and the one on Sale of Children, Child Pornography and Child Prostitution.
She was awarded the Human Rights Golden Medal by the Portuguese Parliament (10 December 2009) for outstanding work in the area of human rights. Her work in human rights was also honoured by the Portuguese President of the Republic with the Order of Merit (October 2009), which is a recognition of an individual’s personal bravery, achievement, or service. She holds an honorary degree from the University of Carolina at Chapel Hill, a Law Degree from the Law Faculty of the University of Lisbon (Portugal) and a Diplome d’Etudes Superieures from the Institut Universitaire de Hautes Etudes Internationales (Geneva, Switzerland).
Ms. de Albuquerque has been an invited Professor at the law faculties of the Universities of Braga and Coimbra (Portugal), at the American University’s Washington College of Law, at the European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratization. She was also a Senior Legal Adviser at the Office for Documentation and Comparative Law, an independent institution under the Portuguese Prosecutor General’s Office. During her career she has also worked for the Swiss Development Agency, the European Commission, UNICEF, and UNDP, among others. She has country experience in Angola, Bangladesh, Brazil, Costa Rica, Egypt, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kiribati, Moldavia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nicaragua, Portugal, Romania, Senegal, Slovenia, Switzerland, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Tuvalu, Uruguay, and USA.
Awards.
She received the Order of Merit from the Portuguese President in October 2009 and the Human Rights Golden Medal from the Portuguese Parliament in December 2009.