Housing Bromides
An invitation to common ground dialoging (otherwise known as having a conversation)
This is the inaugural piece that will be labeled with the tag “HousingBromides”.
There are no pictures, footnotes, nor other linkage in this piece. There will be in the following pieces of the tag “HousingBromides”
The system being used to put people in line to receive emergency shelter (temporary shelter housing) and permanent housing (long-term housing) is less than efficacious. Particularly in a timely fashion for the person actively seeking assistance.
From my perspective it’s not any different than it was in (2010-2011) and (2017-2018) and now (July-August 2025 - xxxx? 2026). For a person trying to get the assistance the “system” pro-offers, it’s offers extremely dismal outlooks for safety and processing.
Since none of my experience in the “homelessness/unhoused” field includes being a case worker, I rely on the many case workers in the field I come across both virtually and non-virtually. I can only imagine the frustration and bleakness that the broken system gives them as they try to perform their goals.
Let me give a brief definition of “system” as I’m using it. It’s not simply the infrastructure of the technical system used to promulgate and represent the applicants or resources. It’s the infrastructure of the concepts, thought modalities, punitive vs nonpuntive biases within the “founding fathers” of the system. AND, the various and diverse beliefs and certainty traps that humans have been taught — we are not born with beliefs, we learn them, re-learn them and learn differing beliefs as we live life.
If you’d like to dialogue with me on that, opportunity will be upcoming in additional posts with the tag “HousingBromides”.
The sequence of steps and their timing follows the same patterns now as they did in my past. I know this because I have been a participant in the proccess then (2010-2011) and (2017-2018) and currently (July/August 2025 - xxxx? 2026).
Essentially, the same “players” are in the process; the same stigmas (some much more magnified); the same deadwalls & barriers; and the same CES (Coordinated Entery System) processing.
I know about this because when I asked to be entered into the current CES, I was told “you have to be referred”. And, as I sat with a person who is a casewoworker, I found myself looking at the same file on their computer screen with my last photo from one of the last time’s I was “active” within CES.
Some of the obstacles of the entire homelessness/unhoused field are:
Accurate information on the customer/client and service providers
Automatically being sent to a very small geographical space (I’m talking SPA 4 (Service Planning Area) that spans about 1 mile in circumference. SPA 4 is the Metro Los Angeles area and covers much more than a 1 mile designated area.
Unable to ask for assistance from the Inside Safe — one apparently must be referred to the program. What are the parameters and criteria? Who’s making the judgment call? And where is the empowerment in that? (/rant)
Transportation — if all one has is their wheelchair or feet and no funding for the bus or ride share transportation, one of the only other ways is through a smart phone — not a simple telephone-call accepting/making phone.
Phone or electronic access — This brings into the equation cost, AND, keeping said unit charged.
Let’s have a dialogue. I personally invite you.
I do not currenntly allow for comments on my posts, for the sake of my sanity and the safety of my site — I am in the process of setting up means around that. In the m ean time…
… if you do want to be apprised of how that sharing will take place, please alert me and utilize this form (it does NOT put you on a mailing list).