The United Way of King County has published an ethnographic study of homelessness (PDF) that shatters many of the myths and generalizations about homeless people.

From the introduction:

Fundraising for the Campaign to End Chronic Homelessness is at its halfway point, and the associated resources are now beginning to be deployed in the community. To ensure that we and our partners truly understand the shape and scale of the problem, and use our resources to the best possible effect, we commissioned this Ethnographic Assessment of Homeless Street Populations. It is Washington State’s first-ever effort to take a probing, anthropological look at the people and places of King County homelessness, and capture the diversity of the homeless experience.

Not everyone who is lingering on the street is homeless, and not everyone who is homeless is on the street. Drug and alcohol use is widespread, but hardly universal, and different ages of the homeless have different preferences in substances.

For some homeless people, life will turn around if there is a dependable roof overhead. For others, the challenge is deeper, and success will hinge on supportive services, including mentorship in regaining critical social skills.

All this and more emerges from this rich, textured, and challenging report. As we move forward in United Way of King County’s work to end homelessness, the report will guide our effort to be as comprehensive and effective as possible in our approach. link

Story in the Seattle P-I

Further down, the report notes:

Now, there are evidence-based practices for serving the chronic homeless population. Positive results have been found for models that incorporate Housing First principles, recovery first models, generic outreach, employment options, day centers, harm reduction, and motivational interviewing approaches to chemical dependency. Seattle has yet to develop a coordinated effort incorporating all of these components. However, as reported earlier, MID workers noted a clear difference on the street with the opening of the 1811 Eastlake Project (DESC) for chronic alcoholics and Real Change, which provides the opportunity to earn cash by selling papers. The innovations of Housing First principles have transformed the service philosophy toward this group in recent years. Equally transformative approaches are needed for other homeless streetbased
populations.

In other words, we may need to suspend some of our assumptions about what we should do and look at the research. Many people objected when 1811 was opened, as it lets alcoholics drink in their rooms, but it does get them off the street, giving them a greater chance of achieving sobriety and employment.

The “Chronic Homeless” category used in this report is a bit broad; it’s designed to encompass groups that aren’t adequately described by the other categories “Chronic Public Alcoholic,” “Mentally Ill and Mentally Ill Offender,” “Drug Addicted Offender.” I think the simply down-and-out are a bit overlooked, though I haven’t read the report in its entirety. What about those who have chronic, untreated health issues? Getting such issues fully treated is not easy for the homeless, and such issues can quickly lead to homelessness for those without insurance.

For those of you who know our homeless friend Paul, I’m saddened to report that he passed away about two weeks ago, after spending several weeks in a coma. While he did have some drug issues in his past, most of his issues were related to chronic health problems. We saw over and over that he’d get short-term treatment for his MRSA infections and then be released, so the infections would never go away. They eventually destroyed his kidneys, forcing him to go to dialysis four times a week. A number of other complications made the kidney failure worse, and ultimately contributed to his untimely death.

These are serious issues, and United Way’s $25 million campaign to end homelessness will be a necessary start in addressing them.

I get emails from Josh Peck and celebrities all the time via the One Campaign. Most of the time, they’re asking me to write to some policymaker to request some anti-poverty action be taken.

Today, I got one that shared the results of a recent campaign - the effort to get Liberia’s debt canceled by the International Monetary Fund.

In short, it worked.

On October 26, ONE members sent emails to the International Monetary Fund asking them to make good on their promises and cancel Liberia’s debt. Each individual email might not seem like much, but all together we flooded IMF’s email system and it couldn’t handle them all.

And it worked. We did it. We put on the pressure, and they responded. But you don’t have to take my word for it.

Yesterday, Masood Ahmed, Director of the IMF’s External Relations, posted an open letter on the IMF’s website announcing that they finally took the step necessary to move forward. Some key excerpts:

I am pleased to inform you that on November 12, 2007, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has secured adequate pledges from member countries for the cost of the IMF’s debt relief to Liberia
…
We have received a large volume of emails on this topic, so this letter is being posted because it is impossible to respond to each message individually.
…
I take this opportunity to also thank all those who have expressed their concerns about Liberia’s debt situation. Their strong support to the cause of debt relief contributed to the broad donor support that made this financing possible. link

Liberia’s debt is being canceled as part of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative (HIPC) from the International Monetary Fund. IMF explains:

How the HIPC Initiative works

To be considered for HIPC Initiative assistance, a country must: (1) be IDA-only and PRGF-eligible; (2) face an unsustainable debt burden, beyond traditionally available debt-relief mechanisms; (3) establish a track record of reform and sound policies through IMF- and IDA-supported programs; and (4) have developed a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) through a broad-based participatory process. Once a country has met or made sufficient progress in meeting these criteria, the Executive Boards of the IMF and IDA formally decide on its eligibility for debt relief, and the international community commits to reducing debt to the agreed sustainability threshold. This is called the decision point. Once a country reaches its decision point, it may immediately begin receiving interim relief on its debt service falling due. In order to receive the full and irrevocable reduction in debt available under the HIPC Initiative, however, the country must: (i) establish a further track record of good performance under IMF- and IDA-supported programs; (ii) implement satisfactorily key reforms agreed at the decision point, and (iii) adopt and implement the PRSP for at least one year. Once a country has met these criteria, it can reach its completion point, at which time lenders are expected to provide the full debt relief committed at decision point. link

It’s nice to hear that an email can make a difference. You can sign up to participate in things like this at one.org.

(Product)^RED is a joint marketing/fundraising initiative, the brainchild of U2 frontman Bono, in which (RED)-branded products raise money for the Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB, and malaria. The campaign has received a good deal of criticism for its use of blatant consumerism to raise money for charity - or, it could be argued, the reverse - using charity to promote for-profit brands.

Mike Todd had a better idea a few months ago (blogged here) - simply give money to charity. Duh. Bono believed, rather brilliantly, that Americans would really get behind something commercial, which would do good for people in need even if it was just another outlet for our selfishness. But there’s also a good argument that we can do better.

A somewhat satirical website is now up at BuyLessCrap.org (warning - some Abercrombie-esque semi-nudity). As the name suggests, it advocates simply (gasp!) giving money to charities that help our planet’s neediest.

A recent article in Advertising Age criticized (Product)^RED for spending $100 million on marketing but raising only $18 million for the Global Fund. Defenders of the campaign say these initial marketing expenses will pay off handsomely in public awareness and real dollars for charity, but not everyone sees this as a good shift. From the Ad Age article:

Mark Rosenman, a longtime activist in the nonprofit sector and a public-service professor at the Union Institute & University in Cincinnati, said the disparity between the marketing outlay and the money raised by Red is illustrative of some of the biggest fears of nonprofits in the U.S.

“There is a broadening concern that business is taking on the patina of philanthropy and crowding out philanthropic activity and even substituting for it,” he said. “It benefits the for-profit partners much more than the charitable causes.” link

Does RED benefit megabrands more than the poor?

It’s Lent, and while I’m not much for fasting, this is intriguing:

One billion people live on a dollar a day or less! The Mutunga Partnership is trying to turn this tragic statistic into a tool for raising awareness, for building a sense of community with the poor, and for raising funds for micro-credit development. The idea is that a household lives on a food budget of $2.00 a day, per person for a week. The money saved is then donated to The Mutunga Partnership. This idea doesn’t require finding extra cash – just a temporary change in lifestyle. It’s a challenge! link

I recall David talking about eating only rice for a while, and it is intriguing on multiple levels:

• The spiritual discipline of fasting (at least from some things)
• The spiritual discipline of simplicity (which is necessary given such a limited food budget)
• The spiritual discipline of almsgiving
• The advantage this challenge grants to those who grow their own food

Would you do it? Are you going to? What do you think?

In case you’re wondering, the money is used for Kiva-like microfinance projects.