Attending a St. Anthony’s advocacy meeting for the first means being bombarded by acronyms: SSI, IHSS, Calworks. It means facing some disheartening news: increased muni prices for seniors and the disabled, increased co-pays for medi-cal, and grant reductions proposed in the Senate budget hearing. The list could go on.

But an advocacy meeting also means taking all the bad news while still seeing the good news. Here’s some good news: all the letters and emails opposing the IHSS (in-home senior service) cuts were presented in the Senate budget hearing. Here’s some more: St. Anthony guests are signing a petition opposing the increased muni fares and other guests may potentially find part-time work as 2010 census employees. Good news does not reduce bad news, but understanding that it’s not all bad news can help from becoming completely overwhelmed at all the work ahead. But good news does not mean relaxing, it means plowing ahead so that there’s more good news.

New numbers from the National Academy of Science reveal an alarming 15.8 percent of Americans are below the federal poverty line. Original US Census Bureau numbers set the percentage at 13.2 percent—and underestimate of about 7 million people.

That means 1 in 6 Americans are living in poverty.

The US Census Bureau has not updated formula parameters for calculating poverty to reflect economic change since 1955; thus, increased costs of medical care, childcare, transportation as well as cost of living as it varies by geographic location are not accurately factored in to calculations.

This raises the question: how then is poverty defined? Since the 1960s the government has marked poverty in absolute terms, independent of outside factors and events. The US Census Bureau defines individuals or families who are below the “absolute poverty line” are considered to have insufficient resources to meet basic needs for healthy living and are without sufficient income for food, shelter, and clothing necessary to preserve health.

Absolute poverty line thresholds vary depending on collective income and number of family members, but generally if a family’s total income is less than its calculated “threshold” then they are considered poor.

These inflexible measures primarily overlooked people 65 and older—a growing population that is increasingly suffering from financial crisis due to health care costs.

As the US Census Bureau reexamines its methods for evaluating the citizen’s economic state, perhaps more important is our evaluation of the needs of 47.4 million impoverished Americans.

The numbers from this year’s official homeless count are in, reflecting only a slight increase in the number of people without a home.  According to the report, there were 6,514 homeless people at the time of the count, up only 2% from the last count in 2007.

I’m certainly not the first to say it but it’s worth mentioning the potential flaws in the logic of the count.  For one, it’s taken on January 27, in the thick of San Francisco’s rainiest, coldest season, on a day when weather is likely to compel many to seek temporary shelter with family or friends, if available.  When those connections are worn thin, of course, people end up back on the streets or in shelters, though by then far from the gaze of homeless counters.  I wonder what the count would be like on, say, a sunny day in August.

Which brings me to the second point: how are we to get an accurate impression of the homeless population from just one day of counting?  And, without actually talking to people–volunteers are instructed to count solely by sight–how are we to be sure the count is accurate?  I would think that an average of several days of counting, coupled with subject interviews, would yield a more accurate number and a more comprehensive understanding of the issues facing the homeless.

It will be interesting to see how the count pans out during the next pass, as the economy forces more out of their homes and into marginal housing or the streets.  Will these people count, or will they remain invisible?

Nearly five years after the Mayor Gavin Newsom’s release of the Ten-Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness, the majority of San Francisco’s homeless population is still out in the rain. Mayor Newsom created a 33-member council of advocates, legislators and service providers to advise the most effective strategy to end chronic homelessness, and guide his policy-making in the areas of homelessness.

“The plan produced by the Ten-Year Planning Council is both a blueprint and a bold step toward a new and revolutionary way to break the cycle of chronic homelessness,” concluded Newsom, in his office’s press release following the release of the plan in June 2004.

It unfortunately appears this blueprint has been collecting dust, and lays the ground work for a home the homeless will never see.

The plan’s central strategy is a housing first model. The “Housing First” model emphasizes immediate placement of the individual in permanent housing, where they have access to services, on site, necessary to stabilize the individuals and keep them housed.

A few key statistics found in the Ten-Year Plan:

The cost to provide one chronically homeless person permanent, supportive housing, with treatment and care is nearly one-fourth of the cost to care for the same person using Emergency Room services and/or incarceration costs San Francisco. ($16,000/year versus $61,000/year.)

San Francisco has the highest per capita rate of homelessness of any major American city.

7,000 homeless people live in SF at a given time. Some estimates put the number as high as 15,000.

There are 1,623 homeless kids in the San Francisco school system.

Up to 20% of homeless people have full-time jobs; 30% of adults in homeless families have full-time jobs. (The National Coalition for the Homeless)

52% of Bay Area cities said more mental health services is the most effective way to reduce homelessness. (U.S. Conference of Mayors 2007 Status Report on Hunger and Homelessness)

With the looming budget crisis and drastic cuts threatening the already starved social service programs, many of the programs required for this plan to work are facing devastating funding reductions, if not complete elimination. The 2009 bi-annual city-wide homeless count was conducted January 27; the results of this count will perhaps shed light on what progress has been made.

Tonight at 8 p.m. San Francisco volunteers will begin the city’s biennial count of its homeless residents. The survey will include the number of people living on the street, in shelters, and in other city funded programs. The last count of 6,377 was done in January of 2007.

The city is required to conduct this count every two years in order to receive federal assistance and uses the data collected to evaluate current programs.