What Happens and What's Forgotten When Number Crunchers Get Tough

The only thing less sexy than learning about homelessness is statistics. Let's be honest. An intense interest in either makes you a very odd duck indeed. But to love the more challenging of the two takes a collection of unique propensities, including the talent of not being sickened or terrified by the sight of Roman numerals in sequence. Which entirely excludes me.

But maybe you love statistics. You trust them. If that's the case, you might find a lot in common with Michael Arnold, Executive Director for Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. A couple weeks ago he released the shocking and, frankly, implausible conclusion that homelessness in Los Angeles County has decreased by a whopping, recession-beating 38% in a report on the subject. Cue double-take. I know what you're thinking: if politicians wanted to cook the numbers, they might have been a little more conservative.

L.A.'s homeless service providers are just as suspicious. Advocates like David Snow at Santa Monica's Upward Bound House and Andy Bales at Union Rescue Mission point out that their  agencies have seen a marked increase in service requests, particularly in the case of families. "There's no way that anybody who works with families would agree with [the conclusions of this report]," Bales said. While it's reasonable to consider how threatening the perception of decreased need might be for service providers, it's equally impossible to ignore national trends that support their experiences. For evidence of this, check out Shannon's post on family homelessness.

Despite all this, Arnold stands by his numbers. In Thursday's Los Angeles Times, he says of some of the study's most vocal critics, "Really, it's a very small number of agencies who have raised a cry, and most of them are family providers...I think a lot of their hue and cry is anecdotally based, not data based. They are spreading disinformation." Strong words. To a limited extent, he's right. The numbers are probably sound. Service providers are objecting mostly by using their personal experiences. That plus his impressive expertise makes it extraordinarily difficult to challenge the approach.

Except that I'm not someone convinced by numbers alone. Very few people are. What's incorrect about this study on the homeless and others like it isn't that they go astray in their methods or intentions (For more on this, consider David Henderson's post on the subject at the Inforum blog). It's more that they miss the forest for the trees.

For a bigger picture, you have to step back a bit, look at it from the perspective of, say, United Nations special rapporteur, Raquel Rolnik. This human rights investigator toured the United States recently to assess the current housing crisis. She wrapped up her visit in L.A. Thursday and was quoted by the London Guardian as saying, "I was shocked when I realised that the US, and countries in Europe - England - as well, had a solid housing policy for many years that worked pretty well. That was dismantled and the situation became worse...but I didn't expect to see what I have seen [here]. In some ways the situation is worse than I expected."

Bickering about 38% is laughable next to this observation.

Image courtesy of http://www.purple.com.