Date post: | 10-Apr-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | abqjournal |
View: | 614 times |
Download: | 0 times |
J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 9
Homelessness CountsC H A N G E S I N H O M E L E S S N E S S F R O M 2 0 0 5 T O 2 0 0 7
RESEARCH REPORTS ON HOMELESSNESS
A closer look at the homelessness numbers, with a focus on
decreases and increases at the state and local levels.
38077 NAEH Cover.qxd:11516-00_Cover 1/5/09 3:43 PM Page C1
The authors would like to give a special acknowledgment to Mary Cunningham, who helped shape, contributed to, provided careful editing of this report. The authors would also like to thank Amanda Krusemark for providing diligent editing. All errors and omissions are the sole responsibility of the authors.
Acknowledgments
The Homelessness Research Institute of the National Alliance to End Homelessness prepared this report. The primary authors of the paper are M William Sermons and Meghan Henry.
Authors
The National Alliance to End Homelessness is a nonpartisan, mission-driven organization committed to preventing and ending homelessness in the United States. The Alliance works collaboratively with the public, private, and nonprofit sectors to build state and local capacity, leading to stronger programs and policies that help communities achieve their goal of ending homelessness. Guiding our work is A Plan, Not a Dream: How to End Homelessness in Ten Years. This plan identifies our nation’s challenges in addressing the problem and lays out practical steps our nation can take to change its present course and truly end homelessness within 10 years.
The Homelessness Research Institute, the research and education arm of the National Alliance to End Homelessness, works to end homelessness by building and disseminating knowledge that drives policy change. The goals of the Institute are to build the intellectual capital around solutions to homelessness; to advance data and research to ensure that policymakers, practitioners, and the caring public have the best information about trends in homelessness and emerging solutions; and to engage the media to ensure intelligent reporting on the issue of homelessness.
Copyright © 2009. The Homelessness Research Institute at the National Alliance to End Homelessness.
ContentsPreface: A Word about the Recent Economic Crisis 3
The Movement to End Homelessness 3
Measuring Progress 4
Homelessness in the United States 5
Homelessness by State 7
Sheltered and Unsheltered 12
Subpopulations: Chronically Homeless Adults 14
Subpopulations: Homelessness among Families 16
Conclusion 17
Appendix A: A Note About the Recent Geographical Changes 18
Appendix B: Homelessness among Subpopulations by State 19
Appendix C: Homelessness by Subpopulations by Community 22
Homelessness CountsC H A N G E S I N H O M E L E S S N E S S F R O M 2 0 0 5 T O 2 0 0 7
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:54 PM Page 1
List of ExhibitsExhibit 1 Homelessness by Population 6
Exhibit 2 Sheltered and Unsheltered Homelessness 12
Exhibit 3 Chronic Homelessness in 2005 and 2007 14
Exhibit 4 Percentage Individuals and Persons in Families with Children 16
List of TablesTable 1 Changes in CoC Homelessness Estimates: 2005 to 2007 6
Table 2 Estimates of Homelessness by State 7
Table 3 CoCs with Large Reported Changes in Homelessness 11
Appendix B Homelessness among Subpopulations by States 20
Appendix C Homelessness among Subpopulations by Community 23
List of MapsMap 1 Homelessness Estimates by State, 2007 9
Map 2 Homelessness Incidence by State, 2007 9
Map 3 Changes in Homelessness by State, 2005 to 2007 10
Map 4 Unsheltered Homelessness in the United States 13
2
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:54 PM Page 2
PrefaceA WORD ABOUTTHE RECENT ECONOMIC CRISIS
This report analyzes homeless count data collected in January 2007 and comparesthose data to homeless counts collected in January 2005. The report reveals that
some progress has been made toward ending homelessness nationally and in individualstates, as well as among homeless subpopulations. These data represent the most recentcomprehensive homeless counts. The progress documented in this report occurred dur-ing a time of both relative economic stability and increased commitment by states andcommunities toward ending homelessness.
Now, the circumstances surrounding the United States and global economies, including ele-ments known to impact homelessness, have changed dramatically. Problems in the hous-ing and mortgage markets have led to a national recession and global economic crisis.Recent economic indicators are projecting increases in unemployment and poverty rates1.If these projections are realized, they will undoubtedly lead to increases in the number ofhomeless households and households at risk of homelessness. Already, there are reports inthe national news of increasing utilization of homeless services by individuals and families.Unfortunately, the economic crisis poses a threat to the local governments and nonprofitsthat are attempting to respond to this increasing demand for homelessness services.
The next count will occur at the end of January 2009 and will provide a clearer picture ofhow the current crisis has affected the number of people who experience homelessness.In the meantime, this report provides the best possible assessment of national trends inhomelessness and provides a useful backdrop for interpreting the new counts.
The Movement to End HomelessnessIn 2000, the National Alliance to End Homelessness released the report A Plan, Not a
Dream: How to End Homelessness in Ten Years, and in 2003 the federal government
31 See Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “Recession Could Cause Large Increases in Poverty and Push Mil-lions into Deep Poverty,” November, 2008.
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:54 PM Page 3
challenged communities to create plans to end chronic homelessness. Since that timeover 300 communities have taken up that challenge, and more than 220 have completedtheir plans to end homelessness. The majority of these communities did not limit theirgoals to eradicating chronic homelessness, but instead established plans to end home-lessness in all of its forms. To this expanded end, many communities outlined strategiesto address the unique issues associated with various subpopulations such as families, eld-erly, veterans, youth, and ex-offenders.2
While there are still far too many people without permanent housing in the United States,the movement to end homelessness is making progress. Hundreds of communities areretooling their homeless assistance systems using Housing First approaches and are execut-ing their local plans to end homelessness. At the federal level, the U.S. Department of Hous-ing and Urban Development (HUD) is targeting resources to permanent housing, and bothCongress and the Executive Branch have made commitments to end chronic homelessness.The HUD homeless programs have funded operating costs for 60,000 new units of perma-nent supportive housing for homeless people with disabilities, out of the 150,000 needed.
Importantly, for the first time in the history of our national homelessness problem, thereare data available to estimate changes in homelessness over time. While these data, col-lected by communities from across the country, have numerous limitations and shouldbe taken as estimates, rather than a precise census, they reveal a 10 percent declinenationally in homelessness from 2005 to 2007 and larger percentage declines among fam-ilies and chronically homeless adults. These overall and subpopulation declines are likelythe result of real progress in helping homeless individuals and families get back into hous-ing, but are also affected by changes in data collection methods. Although there is stillmuch work ahead, we should view these declines as early progress.
Measuring ProgressIn 2007, the National Alliance to End Homelessness released Homelessness Counts,3 a
study that analyzed local data and created a national estimate of homelessness in theUnited States. The report laid the groundwork for measuring efforts to end homelessnessby establishing a baseline number of homeless people from which to monitor changes.Measuring progress is important because it helps policymakers to understand the scope ofthe problem, to identify communities that are showing results and those that are fallingbehind, and to identify those interventions that are working to end homelessness. Thisreport is a follow-up to Homelessness Counts, which used data collected in 2005. Here weanalyze changes in homelessness from 2005 to 2007, looking more closely at changes atthe state level and among homeless subpopulations. This report focuses on community
42 Cunningham, M., Lear, M., Schmitt, E. & Henry, M. 2006. What’s in Community Plans to End Homelessness.Washington, DC: National Alliance to End Homelessness. 3 Cunningham, M. & Henry, M. 2007. Homelessness Counts. Washington, DC: National Alliance to End Homelessness.
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:54 PM Page 4
point-in-time counts because only these counts cover all states and territories and on theyears 2005 and 2007 because all of the Continuums of Care (CoCs), the local or regionalbodies that coordinate funding and services for homeless people, completed homeless-ness counts in those years. The period from 2005 to 2007 marks the first time in the his-tory of homelessness that we can estimate nationwide changes in the homeless population.
The estimates included in this report, a tabulation of local point-in-time counts collectedby CoCs across the country, are adjusted for data summary errors, inaccurate outliers, anddata omissions.4 While these data have numerous limitations and caveats, includingchanges in data collection methods from 2005 to 2007 and increases in coverage (seeAppendix A), they are the best available at this time. Moving forward, policymakersshould continue to invest in technical assistance to help communities improve their localpoint-in-time counts and Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) data. Andpolicymakers should continue to use the data, which will lead to more accountability andimproved data collection methods. Ultimately, better data will lead to a more compre-hensive understanding of the homelessness problem and its solutions and assist policy-makers in focusing on those solutions.
The national picture of decreased homelessness over the two-year period 2005 to 2007should not be interpreted to mean that all communities and states have experienced simi-lar declines. To the contrary, almost half of the CoCs (44 percent) reported increases inhomelessness, and over one-third of states (36 percent) reported increases. Because muchof the policy that affects homelessness outcomes is designed at the state and local levels,the variation across communities and states is as much of the story as the estimates ofnational improvement. Changes at the state and CoC levels are addressed in “Homelessnessby State” and in the sidebar, “A Closer Look at Communities.” These state- and local-leveldecreases and increases are the cumulative result of a number of factors: changes in hous-ing and homelessness policy and practices, demographic changes, economic factors, andother external factors. While it is the goal of the Alliance to be able to determine the degreeto which changes in homelessness at the state and local levels are attributable to policy, prac-tices, and other internal or external factors, the current data are not sufficient to support theidentification of reasons for increases and decreases in each state or local community.
Homelessness in the United StatesHomelessness in the United States declined by 10 percent—from an estimated
744,313 homeless persons on a given night in January 2005 to 671,859 on a given
54 Please see Appendix A in this report and the methodological appendix for more information about datacleaning techniques and methodological limitations.
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:54 PM Page 5
night in January 2007 (Table 1). In addition, some homeless subpopulations experiencedeven larger percentage decreases. Chronic homelessness fell by almost 30 percent, from171,192 persons to 123,790 persons, and persons in homeless families decreased by 18percent, from 303,524 to 248,511. A review of Table 1 and Exhibit 1 reveals that decreasesare reported among the subcategories detailed in this report.
It is important to note that these estimates provide a national snapshot of people whoare homeless at a point in time (usually a night during the last week in January). Manymore people are homeless over the course of the year (see the sidebar, “AnnualCounts” ).
6
Table 1 Changes in CoC Homelessness Estimates: 2005 to 2007
2005 Estimate 2007 Estimate Change % Change
Total Homeless 744,313 671,859 –72,454 –10%
Individuals 437,710 423,348 –14,362 –3%
Chronically Homeless 171,192 123,790 –47,402 –28%
Persons in Families 303,524 248,511 –55,013 –18%
Family Households 98,452 83,935 –14,517 –15%
Unsheltered 322,082 280,460 –41,622 –13%
Sheltered 407,813 391,399 –16,414 –4%
Notes: The 2005 numbers are an adjusted tabulation of 2005 CoC point-in-time estimates. These data wereadjusted and corrected for data entry errors, summation errors, and outliers that were based on unscientificextrapolations or states that did not follow HUD’s guidance for counting homeless people. Please see Homeless-ness Counts, National Alliance to End Homelessness (2007), available at www.endhomelessness.org for moreinformation on these adjustments.
Exhibit 1 Homelessness by Population
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
Total Homeless Homeless Persons inFamilies with Children
HomelessIndividuals
ChronicallyHomeless
Num
ber
Hom
eles
s
20052007
–10%
–3%
–28%
–18%
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:54 PM Page 6
7
Homelessness by StateEstimates of homelessness5 and homelessness incidence6 were presented for the
first time for each state and territory in Homelessness Counts. This allowed policy-makers at the state and local levels to identify the extent of the problem nationally andin their communities. In this version of the report, we are expanding the amount ofstate-level data presented to allow a more complete assessment of the homelessnessproblem in each state. In addition to total homelessness estimates and homeless inci-dence, we are including rates of change from 2005 to 2007 and estimates for severalsubpopulations.
Table 2 and Map 1 provide homelessness estimates by state. The state totals were cre-ated by aggregating the CoC estimates within each state. Not surprisingly, the largest
Table 2 Estimates of Homelessness by State
2007 Homeless 2005 HomelessHomeless 2007 per 10,000 Homeless 2005 per 10,000 Change Pct Change
State Population Population 2007 Population Population 2005 2005–2007 2005–2007
AK 1,642 683,478 24 2,749 663,661 41 –1,107 –40.27
AL 5,452 4,627,851 12 4,731 4,557,808 10 721 15.24
AR 3,836 2,834,797 14 5,626 2,779,154 20 –1,790 –31.82
AZ 14,646 6,338,755 23 12,264 5,939,292 21 2,382 19.42
CA 159,732 36,553,215 44 170,270 36,132,147 47 –10,538 –6.19
CO 14,225 4,861,515 29 21,730 4,665,177 47 –7,505 –34.54
CT 4,482 3,502,309 13 5,357 3,510,297 15 –875 –16.33
DC 5,320 588,292 90 5,518 550,521 100 –198 –3.59
DE 1,061 864,764 12 1,108 843,524 13 –47 –4.24
FL 48,069 18,251,243 26 60,867 17,789,864 34 –12,798 –21.03
GA 19,639 9,544,750 21 27,161 9,072,576 30 –7,522 –27.69
GU 725 173,456 42 980 168,564 58 –255 –26.02
HI 6,070 1,283,388 47 5,943 1,275,124 47 127 2.14
IA 2,734 2,988,046 9 8,130 2,966,334 27 –5,396 –66.37
ID 1,749 1,499,402 12 5,424 1,429,096 38 –3,675 –67.75
IL 15,487 12,852,548 12 16,599 12,763,371 13 –1,112 –6.70
IN 7,358 6,345,289 12 9,857 6,271,973 16 –2,499 –25.35
KS 2,111 2,775,997 8 5,278 2,744,687 19 –3,167 –60.00
KY 8,061 4,241,474 19 4,934 4,173,405 12 3,127 63.38
LA 5,494 4,293,204 13 5,476 4,523,628 12 18 0.33
5 Homelessness estimates refer to the number of people who were homeless on a given night in January 2007,as estimated by CoCs and summed to create state and national estimates.6 Homelessness incidence refers to the representation of the state homelessness estimates as a fraction of thestate population. These estimates are presented here per 10,000.
(continued)
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:54 PM Page 7
8
states—California, New York, and Texas—also had the largest counts of homeless per-sons in 2007. The homelessness incidence estimates, presented in Table 2 and Map 2,provide better comparisons across states because the incidence estimates account fordifferences in population across states. Nevada, Hawaii, Oregon, and Californiareported the highest incidence of homelessness. With 49 homeless people per every10,000 people living in the state, Nevada had the highest incidence of homelessness inthe country. South Dakota, Kansas, Iowa, North Dakota, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Wyoming
Table 2 Estimates of Homelessness by State (continued)
2007 Homeless 2005 HomelessHomeless 2007 per 10,000 Homeless 2005 per 10,000 Change Pct Change
State Population Population 2007 Population Population 2005 2005–2007 2005–2007
MA 15,127 6,449,755 23 14,730 6,398,743 23 397 2.70
MD 9,626 5,618,344 17 7,995 5,600,388 14 1,631 20.40
ME 2,638 1,317,207 20 2,775 1,321,505 21 –137 –4.94
MI 28,295 10,071,822 28 26,124 10,120,860 26 2,171 8.31
MN 7,323 5,197,621 14 7,313 5,132,799 14 10 0.14
MO 6,247 5,878,415 11 7,135 5,800,310 12 –888 –12.45
MS 1,377 2,918,785 5 1,652 2,921,088 6 –275 –16.65
MT 1,150 957,861 12 1,343 935,670 14 –193 –14.37
NC 11,802 9,061,032 13 10,765 8,683,242 12 1,037 9.63
ND 636 639,715 10 655 636,677 10 –19 –2.90
NE 3,531 1,774,571 20 3,350 1,758,787 19 181 5.40
NH 2,248 1,315,828 17 3,233 1,309,940 25 –985 –30.47
NJ 17,314 8,685,920 20 19,385 8,717,925 22 –2,071 –10.68
NM 3,015 1,969,915 15 5,256 1,928,384 27 –2,241 –42.64
NV 12,526 2,565,382 49 16,402 2,414,807 68 –3,876 –23.63
NY 62,601 19,297,729 32 61,094 19,254,630 32 1,507 2.47
OH 11,264 11,466,917 10 16,165 11,464,042 14 –4,901 –30.32
OK 4,221 3,617,316 12 4,869 3,547,884 14 –648 –13.31
OR 17,590 3,747,455 47 16,221 3,641,056 45 1,369 8.44
PA 16,220 12,432,792 13 15,298 12,429,616 12 922 6.03
PR 4,309 3,942,375 11 7,335 3,916,632 19 –3,026 –41.25
RI 1,372 1,057,832 13 6,866 1,076,189 64 –5,494 –80.02
SC 5,660 4,407,709 13 7,958 4,255,083 19 –2,298 –28.88
SD 579 796,214 7 1,029 775,933 13 –450 –43.73
TN 11,210 6,156,719 18 8,066 5,962,959 14 3,144 38.98
TX 39,761 23,904,380 17 43,630 22,859,968 19 –3,869 –8.87
UT 3,011 2,645,330 11 3,104 2,469,585 13 –93 –3.00
VA 9,746 7,712,091 13 10,346 7,567,465 14 –600 –5.80
VI 559 112,940 49 538 108,708 49 21 3.90
VT 1,035 621,254 17 927 623,050 15 1,455 11.65
WA 23,379 6,468,424 36 23,970 6,287,759 38 –591 –2.47
WI 5,648 5,601,640 10 6,773 5,536,201 12 –1,125 –16.61
WV 2,409 1,812,035 13 1,522 1,816,856 8 887 58.28
WY 537 522,830 10 487 509,294 10 50 10.27
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:54 PM Page 8
9
Map 1 Homelessness Estimates by State, 2007
2007 Total Homeless537–2,500
2,501–10,000
10,001–25,000
25,001–65,000
65,001–160,000
1,642AK
6,070HI
23,379WA
17,590OR
12,526NV
1,749ID
1,150MT
636ND
579SD
3,531NE
2,111KS
4,221OK
39,761TX
5,494LA
3,836AR
6,247MO
2,734IA
7,323MN
5,648WI
15,487IL
8,061KY
7,358IN
28,295MI
11,264OH
19,639GA
5,660SC
11,802NC
9,746VA
2,409WV
16,220PA
62,601NY
1,035VT
2,248NH
17,314 NJ
1,061 DE
9,626 MD
5,320 DC
4,482 CT1,372 RI
15,127 MA
2,638ME
11,210TN
1,377MS
5,452AL
537WY
3,011UT
14,646AZ
3,015NM
14,225CO159,732
CA
48,069FL
Map 2 Homelessness Incidence by State, 2007
Homeless per 10,0005–10
11–20
21–35
36–45
46–90
24AK
47HI
36WA
47OR
49NV
12ID
12MT
10ND
7SD
20NE
8KS
12OK
17TX
13LA
14AR
11MO
9IA
14MN
10WI
12IL
19KY
12IN
28MI
10OH
21GA
13SC
13NC
13VA
13WV
13PA
32NY
17VT
17NH
20 NJ
12 DE
17 MD
90 DC
13 CT13 RI
23 MA
20ME
18TN
5MS
12AL
10WY
11UT
23AZ
15NM
29CO44
CA
26FL
* All homeless estimates are based on point-in-time counts.
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:54 PM Page 9
10
all reported low incidences of homelessness. With 5 homeless people per 10,000 peo-ple in the state population, Mississippi reported the lowest incidence of homelessness.Among territories and the District of Columbia, Washington, D.C., Guam, and the Vir-gin Islands had very high rates of homelessness, with Washington, D.C. reporting thehighest.
Table 2 and Map 3 provide changes in homelessness by state. In 64 percent of the statesand territories, the homelessness estimates decreased, with Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, SouthDakota, and New Mexico reporting the highest decreases in homelessness. The fact thatmost states experienced decreases is consistent with the overall assessment of a nationaldecline in homelessness. However, in 36 percent of the states and U.S territories, the esti-mates went up. Kentucky, West Virginia, Tennessee, and Maryland reported the biggestincreases. At 63.3 percent, Kentucky reported the largest state-level increase. This analy-sis cannot explain why homelessness increased or decreased in particular states. In somestates, it appears that the changes in homelessness were the result of methodologicalchanges. For example, both Texas and North Carolina increased the coverage area; there-fore, when the CoCs did their annual counts, they covered a wider geography. But, moststates that experienced increases have not modified their coverage area. The estimatesand the changes from 2005 to 2007 should be used as a starting point for further investi-gation and explanation into why the estimates changed.
Map 3 Changes in Homelessness by State, 2005–2007
PCT Change DirectionDecrease
Increase
–40%AK
+2%HI
–2%WA
+8%OR
–24%NV
–68%ID
–14%MT
–3%ND
–44%SD
+5%NE
–60%KS
–13%OK
–9%TX
+0.33%LA
–32%AR
–12%MO
–66%IA
+0.14%MN
–17%WI
–7%IL
+63%KY
–25%IN
+8%MI
–30%OH
–28%GA
–29%SC
+10%NC
–6%VA
+58%WV
+6%PA
+2%NY
+12%VT
–30%NH
–11% NJ
–4% DE
+20% MD
–4% DC
–16% CT–80% RI
+3% MA
–5%ME
+39%TN
–17%MS
+15%AL
+10%WY
–3%UT
+19%AZ
–43%NM
–35%CO–6%
CA
–21%FL
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:54 PM Page 10
11
Table 3 CoCs with Large Reported Changes in Homelessness
CoC Number 2005 2007 Change
CA-514 Fresno/Madera, CA 14,228 4,247 –9,981
GA-504 Augusta, GA 7,359 489 –6,870
CA-513 Visalia, Kings, Tulare Counties 7,757 1,106 –6,651
CO-500 Colorado Balance of State 10,314 4,450 –5,864
RI-500 Rhode Island Statewide 6,866 1,372 –5,494
TX-703 Beaumont, Port Arthur, SE 5,319 710 –4,609
IA-502 Des Moines/Polk 5,331 1,041 –4,290
FL-602 Punta Gorda/Charlotte County 4,793 730 –4,063
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires communities to conduct acount of their homeless population every other year. Using a range of methodologies, communities countboth their sheltered and unsheltered populations and submit the estimates to HUD. The quality of commu-nity counts is uneven, with some jurisdictions using more rigorous methods than others. However, therehave been significant efforts from HUD to provide guidance and increase technical assistance to help localcommunities collect accurate estimates.
This report tabulates, summarizes, and compares data from CoC point-in-time counts conducted in 2005 and2007. There are numerous difficulties to counting homeless people, including definitional issues, findinghomeless people, data collection and enumeration methods, sampling and extrapolation, de-duplicating, anddiffering time frames. Additionally, because it is up to each CoC to design a data collection method that meetslocal needs, each point-in-time count has its own limitations, which are not described here. One noted draw-back in using the CoC data is that communities can, and many do, change their data collection methodologiesfrom year to year. In addition, many of the CoCs change geography from year to year (see Appendix A).
Communities across the country experienced a mix of increases and decreases in their local homeless popula-tion. Of the 433 CoCs that reported data in both 2005 and 2007, little more than half (56 percent) reporteddecreases in the total number of homeless people within their jurisdiction. Among the 244 CoCs that experi-enced a decrease, homelessness declined by 147,005 people. The reported declines ranged from 1 person to9,981 people, with a median decline of 172. At face value, most of these declines appear reasonable—meaningthat they appear achievable within a two-year time frame and are not obviously due to changes in data collec-tion methods. There were, however, several CoCs that reported declines that accounted for a sizable share ofthe total decline. Eight of these CoCs are shown in Table 3. A closer look at the reported changes shows thatsome CoCs were reporting adjustments to their data, rather than real declines in homelessness. Rhode Island,for example, incorrectly reported an annual number in 2005 instead of the requested point-in-time number.In 2007, Rhode Island correctly reported a point-in-time number, which at first glance appears to be an enor-mous reduction in homelessness. Not all large declines are due to this type of adjustment. Some are due to acombination of methodological changes, more accurate reporting, and real changes in homelessness.
Approximately 44 percent of CoCs experienced an increase in homelessness between 2005 and 2007. Thetotal increase among the CoCs reporting increases was 66,958 people. The increases ranged from 1 person to8,319 people, with a median increase of 121. Some of these increases are real; however, as with examiningcommunities with decreases, these numbers should be handled with caution. As communities continue toimprove the accuracy of their counts, both adjustments and real changes in levels of homelessness will bereflected in the counts.
A Closer Look at Communities
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:54 PM Page 11
Sheltered and Unsheltered
The CoC estimates provide data on how many homeless people are living in shelters(this includes emergency shelters and transitional housing) and how many home-
less people are literally sleeping on the street or other places not meant for human habi-tation (e.g., cars, woods, campsites, abandoned buildings). The 2007 estimates show that58 percent (or 391,399 people) were living in homeless shelters or transitional housing,and 42 percent (or 280,460) were unsheltered (Exhibit 2).
Because the estimates were taken in January and many communities take emergencyaction when temperatures drop below freezing by providing additional hypothermia pre-vention beds, it is unsettling and unacceptable that such a large number of people werestill found sleeping outside or in other places not meant for habitation during the wintermonths. Unsheltered homeless peopleare often more vulnerable to illness, drugabuse, and violence than their shelteredcounterparts.7 So it is particularly positivenews that the number of reported unshel-tered people is down 13 percent, from322,082 in January 2005 to 280,460 inJanuary 2007. The number of people inshelter also decreased, from 407,813 to391,399 (or about 4 percent) (Exhibit 2).
Nationally, shelter utilization rateshover around 99 percent for emergencyshelters that serve individuals and 88percent for those that serve families.Transitional housing utilization rates arenotably lower—83 percent for individu-als and 73 percent for families.8 The exis-tence of unused emergency shelter andtransitional housing capacity suggests that existing shelter is not well matched to shel-ter needs in some communities. Restrictive rules at shelters may also explain some ofthe unused capacity. A number of CoCs reported a high proportion of unshelteredhomeless people. Most of these CoCs are located in warm weather locations such asFlorida and California. A closer look at the emergency shelter needs in these locations
12
Exhibit 2 Sheltered and UnshelteredHomelessness
0
100,000
50,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
Sheltered Unsheltered
20052007
407,813391,399
322,082
280,460
7 O’Connell JJ. Premature mortality in homeless populations: a review of the literature. Nashville, Tenn.:National Health Care for the Homeless Council, Inc., 2005. http://www.nhchc.org/PrematureMortalityFinal.pdf.8 For more on shelter utilization rates, please see HUD’s Third Annual Homeless Assessment Report (2008).
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 12
13
Map 4 Unsheltered Homelessness in the United States
Percent Unsheltered2–10%
11–20%
21–30%
33–45%
51–70%
16%AK
55%HI
28%WA
53%OR
62%NV
36%ID
26%MT
9%ND
7%SD
15%NE
13%KS
27%OK
42%TX
29%LA
40%AR
18%MO
11%IA
20%MN
10%WI
21%IL
26%KY
17%IN
59%MI
17%OH
58%GA
45%SC
33%NC
22%VA
11%WV
9%PA
8%NY
30%VT
43%NH
17% NJ
20% DE
33% MD
6% DC
18% CT4% RI
9% MA
2%ME
42%TN
38%MS
16%AL
26%WY
10%UT
41%AZ
42%NM
51%CO70%
CA
57%FL
is necessary. Map 4 shows the percentage of unsheltered homeless people across theUnited States.
Among states and territories, there is a wide variation in the degree to which the homelesspopulation is unsheltered. The unsheltered percentage for individual states is shown inAppendix B. The states with the highest unsheltered percentages were California, Nevada,and Michigan, all of which had percentages at or over 60 percent. Among territories, theVirgin Islands, Guam, and Puerto Rico had three of the highest unsheltered percentages,
Annual Counts
While point-in-time counts provide an estimate of how many people are homeless at a giventime, there are far more people who are homeless over the course of the year. The Depart-ment of Housing and Urban Development released the first annual count of the shelteredhomeless population in 2008. This report revealed 1.6 million persons living in emergencyshelter and transitional housing over the course of 12 months (October 1, 2006 to Septem-ber 20, 2007).9 This annual estimate does not include persons living on the street, in cars,in abandoned buildings, or in other places not meant for human habitation, nor does itinclude those individuals and families who were staying in shelters for victims of domesticviolence. This estimate should be of particular interest to policymakers when determiningannual funding for federal programs aimed at preventing and ending homelessness.
9 Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2008. Third Annual Homeless Assessment Report. Washington, DC.
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 13
with 87 percent, 86 percent, and 68 percent, respectively. Maine had the lowest unshelteredpercentage in the country with just over 2 percent of its homeless population unsheltered.Rhode Island had the second lowest percentage with fewer than 4 percent of its homelesspopulation unsheltered. South Dakota, New York, and Pennsylvania follow, all with unshel-tered percentages less than 10 percent. Additionally, the District of Columbia had one ofthe lowest percentages, with only 6 percent of its homeless population living on the street.
Subpopulations:Chronically HomelessAdultsThis report makes the distinction between homeless individuals and homeless per-
sons who are members of families. Most people who experience homelessness areindividuals, who represented 63 percent of the total homeless population in the January2007 point-in-time count. Homelessness among individuals decreased 3 percent, from437,710 in January 2005 to 423,348 in January 2007.
While the number of homeless individuals decreased by only 3 percent, the number ofindividuals identified as chronically homeless declined by 28 percent—from 171,192 inJanuary 2005 to 123,790 in January 2007 (see Exhibit 3). Chronically homeless adults aredefined as individuals with a disabilitywho have been homeless for long periodsor who experience repeated episodes ofhomelessness. Research indicates thatonly a small subset of homeless adults ischronically homeless. In 2007, chroni-cally homeless persons made up 18 per-cent of the total homeless population and29 percent of homeless individuals. Thisis down from 23 percent and 40 percent,respectively, in 2005.
This decrease is likely due to both realdecreases, meaning more chronicallyhomeless people getting back into perma-nent housing, and changes in the meth-ods used to count chronically homelesspeople. Considering recent efforts to
14
Exhibit 3 Chronic Homelessness in 2005and 2007
Non-chronically HomelessChronically Homeless
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
171,192
266,518 300,313
123,790
2005 2007
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 14
increase the stock of permanent supportive housing targeted to chronically homeless peo-ple, one would expect a decrease in this population. And in a number of places, decreasesin chronic homelessness have had a visible effect on the street.10,11
Caution about the homeless point-in-time counts is particularly important when estimat-ing the number of chronically homeless people, because identifying chronic homeless-ness has inherent difficulties. Identifying chronically homeless adults using existingpoint-in-time count methods involves homeless individuals both knowing and reportingto a data collector that they fit the definition of chronic homelessness or asking the datacollector to make that assessment based on interview questions. As a result, estimates ofthe number of chronically homeless adults suffer from reliability problems. Trend datashowing the numbers going down over a longer time period (three to five years) will bringincreased confidence that these estimates are evidence of a true decrease in chronichomelessness.
Changes in chronic homelessness estimates and chronic homelessness as a percentage oftotal homelessness are shown in Appendix B for each state. The states with the highestrates of chronic homelessness are West Virginia, Mississippi, California, and Utah. WestVirginia had the highest rate, with almost 48 percent of homeless people being chroni-cally homeless. Maine had the lowest rate of chronic homelessness, with less than 4 per-
15
10 National Alliance to End Homelessness. 2005. Community Snapshot: San Francisco. Washington, DC http://www.endhomelessness.org/content/article/detail/94211 National Alliance to End Homelessness. 2007. Community Snapshot: Portland. Washington, DC.http://www.endhomelessness.org/content/article/detail/178512 Cunningham, M., Henry, M., & Lyons, W. 2007. Vital Mission: Ending Homelessness among Veterans. Wash-ington, DC: National Alliance to End Homelessness.
Estimates of Non-Chronically Homeless Individuals
The number of homeless individuals has declined overall by 3 percent since 2005. In Janu-ary 2007, there were 423,348 homeless individuals compared with 437,710 in 2005. How-ever, the number of homeless individuals who are not chronically homeless increased overthe last two years, from 266,518 in 2005 to 300,313 in 2007. Non-chronically homelessindividuals are a large portion of the total homeless population and are the one homelesssubpopulation for which there is a reported increase at the national level. Few studies havebeen conducted on this growing population. This population includes persons who becomehomeless for short periods of time due to losing their jobs, homes, or other financial sup-ports. Increased research on reasons for this increase is needed.
Homeless Veterans
In November 2007, the Alliance released the first report to quantify the number of home-less veterans at the national and state level. This report detailed the strategies needed to endhomelessness among veterans. That report used 2005 data. An update that included 2007data was published in 2008 and estimated the number of homeless veterans at 154,000. Formore detailed information about homelessness among veterans and its solutions, see VitalMission: Ending Homelessness among Veterans.12
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 15
cent. Other states with low rates of chronic homelessness were Idaho, Kentucky, Mon-tana, and Wyoming. Widespread changes in methodology for identifying the chronicallyhomeless from 2005 to 2007 prevent more detailed analysis into the reasons for thesestate-level variations.
Subpopulations:Homelessness amongFamilies
Homelessness among persons in families with children declined 18 percent, from303,524 in January 2005 to 248,511 in January 2007 (Table 1).13 The number of
homeless family households declined by 14,517 (or 15 percent), from 98,452 in January2005 to 83,935 in January 2007 (see Table 1). Additionally, persons in families with chil-dren represented a smaller share of the total homeless population in 2007 than they didin 2005. In 2005, 41 percent of the homeless population was made up of persons in fam-ilies with children. By 2007, however, this had decreased to 37 percent (see Exhibit 4).
There were even more pronounceddecreases among unsheltered persons infamilies with children. The number ofunsheltered homeless persons in fami-lies with children decreased by 30 per-cent, from 101,326 in 2005 to 70,628 in2007. In 2007, unsheltered persons infamilies represented 28 percent of allhomeless persons in families, down from33 percent in 2005. While this reductionshows progress, it is unacceptable thatany families with children are living onthe streets or in other places not meantfor human habitation.
State-level changes in family homelessness and family homelessness as a percentage oftotal homelessness are reported in Appendix B. The table reveals that two-thirds of states
16
Exhibit 4 Percentage Individuals and Persons in Families with Children
Personsin
Families37%
Individuals63%
13 According to HUD guidelines, an adult is considered a part of a family if he or she is accompanied by atleast one child.
N = 671,859
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 16
and territories experienced decreases in family homelessness ranging from 1 to 84 per-cent and that the remaining states reported mostly modest increases.
Communities across the country are implementing strategies to end family homelessness,including increasing permanent housing options for families and Housing First initiatives.Approximately 49 percent of plans to end homelessness specify families as a target sub-population. The recent emphasis on ending homelessness among families has resulted inprogress.
Conclusion
This report shows that far too many people remain homeless in the United States,many of whom are unsheltered—living on the street or in other places not meant
for human habitation. The report also underscores the difficultly in counting homelesspeople and highlights some of the challenges with data collection methods. Neverthe-less, for the first time ever, communities are collecting enough data to measure progressin ending homelessness. While most communities and states have made progress towardending homelessness, there are still far too many people who are homeless in the UnitedStates and too many communities where there is no evidence of progress.
These data are intended to help policymakers understand the size and scope of the prob-lem and further promote the implementation of effective strategies to end homelessnessin all communities across the country. The data available at the time of this publicationdo not reflect those households that were affected by the recent economic crisis. Thepoint-in-time counts conducted at the end of January 2009 may reveal that more people,likely those who were already precariously housed or in some other way at risk, havebecome homeless. Policymakers at all levels—community, state, and federal—shouldconsider the evidence of progress from 2005 to 2007 and the likely increases in homeless-ness in 2009 when making decisions about our safety net programs aimed at preventingpeople from becoming homeless and shortening the length of time they stay homeless.
17
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 17
Appendix A: A Note about theRecent GeographicalChangesIn 2005, 462 CoCs reported data to HUD, all of which were then included in HomelessnessCounts. In 2007, 461 CoCs reported data to HUD. While a large majority of CoCs remainedunchanged between 2005 and 2007, some shifted. There were 24 CoCs that were absorbedby another CoC in 2007. That is, they existed on their own in 2005, but in 2007 their geog-raphy was covered by a different CoC. For example, CT-511 Litchfield County submittedan application in 2005 that included their homelessness population chart. In 2007, thatcounty joined the Connecticut Balance of State Continuum of Care (CT-505) and the num-ber of homeless people living in Litchfield County was then counted as part of the Bal-ance of State. There were 20 other CoCs that joined Balances of State in North Carolina,Texas, Missouri, Indiana, Virginia, and Puerto Rico.14 Three other CoCs joined other coun-ties or regional CoCs when submitting their 2007 application for funding: Steuben Countyin New York (NY-506), which joined Elmira/Chemung County (NY-510); Clarksville/Mid-Cumberland in Tennessee (TN-505), which joined the larger Central Tennessee CoC (TN-503); and Aguadilla in Puerto Rico (PR-505), which joined South/Southeast Puerto Rico(PR-503).
To make accurate comparisons between years, there were adjustments that needed tobe made among the 2005 CoCs. It would be erroneous to compare the Connecticut Bal-ance of State of 2007, for example, with its geographically smaller version of 2005. Toaccount for this, we merged the 2005 CT-511 Litchfield County with the 2005 Balance ofState. In Texas and North Carolina, this was done as well, but the 2007 geographic areais not the same as that which was created for 2005. Both states have new Balance of StateCoCs that cover regions previously not represented. Much of Texas in 2005 did not belongto any CoC and thus did not report any data on homelessness. Because of this, data forthe Texas and North Carolina Balances of State should be considered baseline figures.Though they have 2005 comparison data, the area covered in 2007 is much larger thanthat of 2005.
1814 All of the baseline numbers included in this report are from Homelessness Counts, National Alliance to EndHomelessness (2007).
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 18
Appendix B: Homelessness amongSubpopulations by State
19
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 19
Tota
l Pe
rson
s in
Pe
rson
s in
PC
T PC
T U
nshe
lter
ed
Uns
helt
ered
PC
T PC
T Ch
roni
cally
Ch
roni
cally
PC
T PC
T H
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Fa
mili
es
PFC
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
s H
omel
ess
Uns
helt
ered
Ch
ange
H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
s Ch
roni
c Ch
ange
St
ate
2007
2007
2005
2007
2005
–200
720
0720
0520
0720
05–2
007
2007
2005
2007
2005
–200
7
AK1,
642
580
1,28
535
%-5
5%25
51,
318
16%
–81%
278
626
17%
–56%
AL5,
452
1,26
81,
111
23%
14%
1,65
61,
448
30%
14%
993
1,54
318
%–3
6%
AR3,
836
849
1,17
122
%–2
7%1,
551
1,97
640
%–2
2%85
22,
578
22%
–67%
AZ14
,646
4,62
63,
874
32%
19%
6,02
84,
958
41%
22%
2,80
41,
348
19%
108%
CA15
9,73
241
,000
46,7
7326
%–1
2%11
1,22
111
8,27
570
%–6
%43
,686
62,4
5927
%–3
0%
CO14
,225
7,38
112
,516
52%
–41%
7,25
414
,294
51%
–49%
2,05
02,
047
14%
0%
CT4,
482
1,30
91,
922
29%
–32%
811
799
18%
2%1,
023
1,23
823
%–1
7%
DC
5,32
01,
603
1,72
430
%–7
%34
035
46%
–4%
1,76
01,
773
33%
–1%
DE
1,06
134
545
933
%–2
5%20
711
920
%74
%15
011
314
%33
%
FL48
,069
15,0
2925
,175
31%
–40%
27,5
4033
,078
57%
–17%
7,46
313
,139
16%
–43%
GA
19,6
397,
118
15,2
1336
%–5
3%11
,298
11,6
9058
%–3
%2,
484
2,02
013
%23
%
GU
725
471
731
65%
–36%
622
722
86%
–14%
052
0%–1
00%
HI
6,07
02,
735
2,75
145
%–1
%3,
358
3,49
555
%–4
%77
81,
326
13%
–41%
IA2,
734
1,23
04,
146
45%
–70%
293
3,51
611
%–9
2%30
769
211
%–5
6%
ID1,
749
647
2,10
337
%–6
9%62
433
236
%88
%95
235
5%–6
0%
IL15
,487
6,83
47,
779
44%
–12%
3,31
64,
986
21%
–33%
2,68
13,
592
17%
–25%
IN7,
358
2,62
44,
200
36%
–38%
1,26
22,
778
17%
–55%
694
2,27
29%
–69%
KS
2,11
190
31,
805
43%
–50%
282
370
13%
–24%
159
349
8%–5
4%
KY
8,06
14,
171
2,52
552
%65
%2,
121
1,50
826
%41
%57
489
27%
–36%
LA5,
494
2,52
11,
984
46%
27%
1,57
71,
225
29%
29%
562
939
10%
–40%
MA
15,1
276,
835
5,94
845
%15
%1,
414
1,80
89%
–22%
2,79
02,
963
18%
–6%
MD
9,62
64,
576
3,35
248
%37
%3,
210
1,48
633
%11
6%1,
550
1,27
916
%21
%
ME
2,63
81,
502
1,43
357
%5%
6218
2%24
4%97
178
4%–4
6%
MI
28,2
9510
,742
11,9
1438
%–1
0%16
,743
15,1
4659
%11
%2,
716
4,55
510
%–4
0%
MN
7,32
34,
054
3,94
155
%3%
1,44
51,
057
20%
37%
1,41
41,
333
19%
6%
MO
6,24
72,
911
3,04
247
%–4
%1,
110
1,97
418
%–4
4%1,
221
1,27
920
%–5
%
MS
1,37
726
221
019
%25
%52
636
538
%44
%59
344
343
%34
%
20 App
endi
x B
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 20
MT
1,15
051
753
545
%–3
%29
547
626
%–3
8%83
234
7%–6
5%
NC
11,8
023,
411
3,01
329
%13
%3,
923
3,80
033
%3%
1,64
52,
404
14%
–32%
ND
636
233
232
37%
0%59
499%
20%
8011
313
%–2
9%
NE
3,53
11,
359
1,18
238
%15
%52
41,
060
15%
–51%
785
733
22%
7%
NH
2,24
899
31,
618
44%
–39%
975
1,75
343
%–4
4%36
757
516
%–3
6%
NJ
17,3
148,
342
10,2
9548
%–1
9%2,
478
4,63
814
%–4
7%2,
525
4,71
015
%–4
6%
NM
3,01
51,
154
1,89
138
%–3
9%1,
267
3,20
742
%–6
0%71
192
324
%–2
3%
NV
12,5
263,
152
10,9
4725
%–7
1%7,
708
9,70
262
%–2
1%1,
546
2,56
912
%–4
0%
NY
62,6
0134
,545
33,7
9055
%2%
5,32
06,
111
8%–1
3%6,
476
9,20
410
%–3
0%
OH
11,2
644,
394
6,73
739
%–3
5%1,
884
3,85
417
%–5
1%2,
308
3,93
520
%–4
1%
OK
4,22
11,
239
2,20
329
%–4
4%1,
132
992
27%
14%
779
598
18%
30%
OR
17,5
907,
719
8,53
244
%–1
0%9,
261
8,44
653
%10
%2,
829
3,84
616
%–2
6%
PA16
,220
7,99
17,
826
49%
2%1,
479
1,40
99%
5%1,
589
1,57
710
%1%
PR4,
309
395
1,22
29%
–68%
2,94
14,
968
68%
–41%
2,90
45,
498
67%
–47%
RI*
1,37
272
92,
821
53%
–74%
4910
84%
–55%
134
843
10%
–84%
SC5,
660
1,88
92,
242
33%
–16%
2,57
44,
284
45%
–40%
573
1,88
210
%–7
0%
SD57
931
128
354
%10
%41
427%
–2%
104
109
18%
–5%
TN11
,210
2,74
82,
284
25%
20%
4,76
42,
206
42%
116%
2,76
72,
183
25%
27%
TX39
,761
13,4
8214
,937
34%
–10%
16,8
7920
,213
42%
–16%
7,92
311
,064
20%
–28%
UT
3,01
11,
066
1,30
235
%–1
8%31
353
610
%–4
2%80
161
527
%30
%
VA9,
746
4,22
34,
180
43%
1%2,
179
2,91
222
%–2
5%1,
963
2,22
820
%–1
2%
VI55
922
137
4%–8
4%48
735
487
%38
%48
735
887
%36
%
VT1,
035
436
471
42%
–7%
315
226
30%
39%
156
139
15%
12%
WA
23,3
7910
,090
11,5
7343
%–1
3%6,
522
9,52
028
%–3
1%2,
603
4,79
911
%–4
6%
WI
5,64
83,
245
3,39
157
%–4
%56
31,
631
10%
–65%
689
1,18
012
%–4
2%
WV
2,40
949
454
721
%–1
0%26
230
611
%–1
4%1,
151
500
48%
130%
WY
537
206
246
38%
–16%
140
8626
%63
%38
567%
–32%
21
Tota
l Pe
rson
s in
Pe
rson
s in
PC
T PC
T U
nshe
lter
ed
Uns
helt
ered
PC
T PC
T Ch
roni
cally
Ch
roni
cally
PC
T PC
T H
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Fa
mili
es
PFC
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
s H
omel
ess
Uns
helt
ered
Ch
ange
H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
s Ch
roni
c Ch
ange
St
ate
2007
2007
2005
2007
2005
–200
720
0720
0520
0720
05–2
007
2007
2005
2007
2005
-200
7
*Rho
de Is
land
’s 2
005
coun
t w
as a
n an
nual
est
imat
e.
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 21
22
Appendix C: Homelessness among Subpopulations byCommunity
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 22
App
endi
x C
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
AK-5
00An
chor
age
CoC
974
224
278
132
1,98
150
175
299
8–5
1%
AK-5
01Al
aska
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 66
854
302
123
768
125
533
320
–13%
AL-5
00B
irm
ingh
am/J
effe
rson
, St.
Cla
ir, S
helb
y 2,
104
516
575
864
2,23
464
866
676
3–6
%Co
unti
es C
oC
AL-5
01M
obil
e Ci
ty &
Cou
nty/
Bal
dwin
Cou
nty
CoC
649
8415
023
945
690
113
238
42%
AL-5
02
Flor
ence
/Nor
thw
est
Alab
ama
CoC
265
812
213
427
00
140
130
–2%
AL-5
03
Hun
tsvi
lle/
Nor
th A
laba
ma
CoC
830
215
6974
582
340
2055
43%
AL-5
04
Mon
tgom
ery
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 45
610
864
125
477
146
6478
–4%
AL-5
05
Gad
sden
/Nor
thea
st A
laba
ma
CoC
119
416
1596
1948
324
%
AL-5
06
Tusc
aloo
sa C
ity
& C
ount
y Co
C 34
515
5113
207
2553
2567
%
AL-5
07
Alab
ama
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C68
443
221
192
409
275
715
667
%
AR-5
00
Litt
le R
ock/
Cent
ral A
rkan
sas
CoC
1,82
249
119
063
51,
300
366
7814
840
%
AR-5
01
Faye
ttev
ille
/Nor
thw
est
Arka
nsas
CoC
27
934
122
3561
323
423
637
6–5
4%
AR-5
02**
Conw
ay/A
rkan
sas
Riv
er V
alle
y Co
C 16
315
7610
41,
919
1,27
540
748
1–9
2%
AR-5
04
Del
ta H
ills
CoC
90
122
827
551
01,
569
628
383
888
–43%
AR-5
05
Sout
heas
t Ar
kans
as H
omel
ess
Coal
itio
n Co
C 13
025
9510
166
5151
69–2
2%
AR-5
062
John
son,
Pop
e, Y
ell C
ount
ies
CoC
211
03
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/A
AR-5
071
No
Long
er C
oC
N/A
.N
/AN
/A34
230
0N
/A
AR-5
083
Fort
Sm
ith
CoC
194
3537
47N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
AR-5
09
Hot
Spr
ings
/Sou
thw
est
Arka
nsas
CoC
4
30
225
116
14–8
4%
AR-5
103
Hem
pste
ad, S
evie
r, H
owar
d, L
ittl
e R
iver
32
220
5420
5N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Coun
ties
CoC
AZ-5
00
Ariz
ona
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 2,
997
425
762
1,98
42,
608
252
753
1,64
215
%
AZ-5
01
Tucs
on/P
ima
Coun
ty C
oC
3,20
189
094
31,
191
2,37
830
282
270
235
%
AZ-5
02
Phoe
nix/
Mes
a/M
aric
opa
Coun
ty
8,44
81,
489
2,92
12,
853
7,27
879
42,
299
2,61
416
%R
egio
nal C
oC
CA-5
00
San
Jose
/San
ta C
lara
Cit
y &
Cou
nty
CoC
7,20
21,
757
1,25
75,
101
7,01
22,
676
1,21
44,
389
3%
CA-5
01
San
Fran
cisc
o Co
C 5,
703
1,73
553
22,
791
5,40
41,
755
612
2,65
56%
23
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 23
24 App
endi
x C
(con
tinu
ed)
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
CA-5
02
Oak
land
/Ala
med
a Co
unty
CoC
4,
838
1,25
71,
812
2,49
65,
129
1,50
62,
119
2,53
9–6
%
CA-5
03
Sacr
amen
to C
ity
& C
ount
y Co
C 2,
452
718
487
1,00
52,
229
626
482
645
10%
CA-5
04
Sant
a R
osa/
Peta
lum
a/So
nom
a Co
unty
CoC
1,
314
297
426
532
1,73
731
784
078
3–2
4%
CA-5
05
Ric
hmon
d/Co
ntra
Cos
ta C
ount
y Co
C 4,
062
1,22
51,
170
3,15
96,
271
1,97
01,
466
5,27
8–3
5%
CA-5
06
Sali
nas/
Mon
tere
y Co
unty
CoC
1,
402
336
253
893
1,57
048
730
61,
067
–11%
CA-5
07
Mar
in C
ount
y Co
C 1,
002
172
156
400
1,01
741
033
244
2–1
%
CA-5
08
Wat
sonv
ille
/San
ta C
ruz
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 2,
789
1,16
138
12,
303
3,35
31,
374
586
2,67
9–1
7%
CA-5
09
Men
doci
no C
ount
y Co
C 1,
422
520
230
1,13
81,
651
841
150
1,50
9–1
4%
CA-5
10
Turl
ock/
Mod
esto
/Sta
nisl
aus
Coun
ty C
oC
1,59
355
259
295
91,
613
667
623
935
–1%
CA-5
11
Stoc
kton
/San
Joa
quin
Cou
nty
CoC
2,47
920
182
230
33,
360
895
875
588
–26%
CA-5
12
Dal
y/Sa
n M
ateo
Cou
nty
CoC
1,79
847
541
01,
094
1,23
151
331
049
146
%
CA-5
13
Visa
lia,
Kin
gs, T
ular
e Co
unti
es C
oC
1,10
649
569
826
7,75
72,
753
3,96
47,
235
–86%
CA-5
14
Fres
no/M
ader
a Co
unty
CoC
4,
247
941
1,58
11,
512
14,2
282,
158
9,47
07,
786
–70%
CA-5
15
Ros
evil
le/P
lace
r Co
unty
CoC
58
748
219
137
466
8224
791
26%
CA-5
163
Red
ding
/Sha
sta
Coun
ty C
oC
296
8614
946
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/A
CA-5
17
Nap
a Ci
ty &
Cou
nty
CoC
365
150
129
146
337
101
9814
38%
CA-5
18
Vall
ejo/
Sola
no C
ount
y Co
C 1,
956
524
1,13
81,
499
3,54
068
62,
533
2,97
9–4
5%
CA-5
19
Chic
o/Pa
radi
se/B
utte
Cou
nty
CoC
1,47
835
342
154
285
6.
352
300
73%
CA-5
20
Mer
ced
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 2,
641
701
446
2,42
02,
554
526
1,98
42,
352
3%
CA-5
21
Dav
is/W
oodl
and/
Yolo
Cou
nty
CoC
414
9312
218
663
364
129
315
–35%
CA-5
22
Hum
bold
t Co
unty
CoC
90
721
954
158
51,
847
511
742
1,40
1–5
1%
CA-5
23
Colu
sa, G
lenn
, Teh
ama,
Tri
nity
15
527
9410
119
959
119
126
–22%
Coun
ties
CoC
CA-5
243
Yuba
Cit
y, M
arys
ville
/Sut
ter,
Yub
a 36
244
150
63N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Coun
ties
CoC
CA-5
253
El D
orad
o Co
unty
CoC
10
78
4216
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/A
CA-5
263
Tuol
umne
, Cal
aver
as, A
mad
or
400
9014
832
1N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Coun
ties
, CoC
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 24
25CA-6
00
Los
Ange
les
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 68
,608
22,3
7616
,643
57,1
6660
,289
34,8
985,
554
50,4
1414
%
CA-6
01
San
Die
go C
oC
3,48
553
786
81,
016
4,26
877
91,
521
1,44
6–1
8%
CA-6
02
Sant
a An
a/An
ahei
m/O
rang
e Co
unty
CoC
3,
649
257
1,53
71,
071
2,84
8.
749
747
28%
CA-6
03
Sant
a M
aria
/San
ta B
arba
ra C
ount
y Co
C 4,
253
503
1,04
12,
773
4,05
845
485
22,
911
5%
CA-6
04
Bak
ersf
ield
/Ker
n Co
unty
CoC
1,
537
316
289
632
1,65
331
642
861
6–7
%
CA-6
05
San
Bue
na V
entu
ra/V
entu
ra C
ount
y Co
C 1,
290
301
282
931
1,31
333
051
489
4–2
%
CA-6
06
Long
Bea
ch C
oC
3,82
962
81,
015
2,15
04,
475
1,05
62,
017
2,80
5–1
4%
CA-6
07
Pasa
dena
CoC
96
927
929
353
51,
217
306
599
1,03
1–2
0%
CA-6
08
Riv
ersi
de C
ity
& C
ount
y Co
C 4,
508
1,00
31,
165
3,17
84,
785
1,12
51,
588
3,13
1–6
%
CA-6
09
San
Ber
nard
ino
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 6,
969
2,38
677
85,
749
4,47
51,
370
1,06
73,
530
56%
CA-6
10
San
Die
go C
ount
y Co
C 3,
841
438
1,16
32,
329
5,19
042
41,
639
3,30
5–2
6%
CA-6
11
Oxn
ard
CoC
671
016
660
464
222
825
432
45%
CA-6
12
Gle
ndal
e Co
C 29
679
135
6336
286
115
238
–18%
CA-6
13
Impe
rial
Cou
nty
CoC
342
229
288
229
424
.20
315
5–1
9%
CA-6
14
San
Luis
Obi
spo
Coun
ty C
oC
2,40
861
51,
060
2,22
127
711
012
0N
/A76
9%
CO-5
00
Colo
rado
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 4,
450
1,44
31,
817
3,35
710
,314
1,03
27,
026
8,73
6–5
7%
CO-5
03
Met
ropo
litan
Den
ver
Hom
eles
s In
itia
tive
CoC
8,69
841
25,
249
3,51
310
,157
491
5,10
85,
089
–14%
CO-5
04
Colo
rado
Spr
ings
/El P
aso
Coun
ty C
oC
1,07
719
531
538
41,
259
524
382
469
–14%
CT-5
00
Dan
bury
CoC
15
248
2825
234
4078
23–3
5%
CT-5
01
New
Hav
en C
oC
778
196
204
137
1,13
411
159
033
4–3
1%
CT-5
02
Har
tfor
d Co
C 90
720
722
716
866
301
251
355%
CT-5
03
Bri
dgep
ort/
Stra
tfor
d/Fa
irfi
eld
CoC
356
3913
832
378
122
116
40–6
%
CT-5
04
Mid
dlet
own/
Mid
dles
ex C
ount
y Co
C 30
277
9610
138
414
411
870
–21%
CT-5
05*
Conn
ecti
cut
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 64
716
817
415
577
483
311
60–1
6%
CT-5
06
Nor
wal
k/Fa
irfi
eld
Coun
ty C
oC
262
5459
4919
911
826
832
%
CT-5
07
Nor
wic
h/N
ew L
ondo
n Ci
ty &
Cou
nty
CoC
285
5314
137
319
8613
277
–11%
CT-5
08
Stam
ford
/Gre
enw
ich
CoC
301
4295
4942
693
115
23–2
9%
CT-5
09
New
Bri
tain
CoC
16
547
5874
256
6773
57–3
6%
CT-5
10
Bri
stol
CoC
91
2133
3210
527
4747
–13%
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 25
26 App
endi
x C
(con
tinu
ed)
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
CT-5
12
City
of
Wat
erbu
ry C
oC
236
7156
104
282
4665
25–1
6%
DC-
500
Dis
tric
t of
Col
umbi
a Co
C 5,
320
1,76
01,
603
340
5,51
81,
773
1,72
435
4–4
%
DE-
500
Del
awar
e St
atew
ide
CoC
1,06
115
034
520
71,
108
113
459
119
–4%
FL-5
00
Sara
sota
, Bra
dent
on, M
anat
ee C
ount
ies
CoC
1,01
213
523
551
81,
330
385
367
385
–24%
FL-5
01
Tam
pa/H
ills
boro
ugh
Coun
ty C
oC
6,48
352
82,
086
5,43
39,
921
1,24
87,
512
3,63
0–3
5%
FL-5
02
St. P
eter
sbur
g/Cl
earw
ater
/Lar
go/P
inel
las
2,52
661
139
71,
221
3,82
491
31,
215
2,22
3–3
4%Co
unty
CoC
FL-5
03
Lake
land
/Win
terh
aven
, Pol
k Co
unty
CoC
80
219
720
931
570
915
315
218
413
%
FL-5
04
Day
tona
Bea
ch/D
ayto
na/V
olus
ia, F
lagl
er
1,47
818
462
490
92,
667
264
1,13
32,
162
–45%
Coun
ties
CoC
FL-5
05
Fort
Wal
ton
Bea
ch/O
kalo
osa,
Wal
ton
2,17
982
898
62,
074
1,85
71,
108
740
1,73
517
%Co
unti
es C
oC
FL-5
06
Tall
ahas
see/
Leon
Cou
nty
CoC
590
150
156
9555
8.
193
986%
FL-5
07
Orl
ando
/Ora
nge,
Osc
eola
, Sem
inol
e 3,
823
951
1,81
41,
820
2,63
11,
259
700
934
45%
Coun
ties
CoC
FL-5
08
Gai
nesv
ille
/Ala
chua
, Put
nam
Cou
ntie
s Co
C 67
817
989
415
757
186
201
435
–10%
FL-5
09
Fort
Pie
rce/
St. L
ucie
, Ind
ian
Riv
er, M
arti
n 1,
734
202
762
1,27
62,
016
303
913
1,58
9–1
4%Co
unti
es C
oC
FL-5
10
Jack
sonv
ille
-Duv
al, C
lay
Coun
ties
CoC
2,
743
416
506
1,15
82,
930
452
409
721
–6%
FL-5
11
Pens
acol
a/Es
cam
bia,
San
ta R
osa
Coun
ty C
oC
629
3626
128
23,
797
609
2,50
63,
221
–83%
FL-5
12
Sain
t Jo
hns
Coun
ty C
oC
1,23
811
913
91,
132
981
213
133
834
26%
FL-5
13
Palm
Bay
/Bre
vard
Cou
nty
CoC
1,89
957
636
71,
397
1,51
731
431
681
925
%
FL-5
14
Oca
la/M
ario
n Co
unty
CoC
48
07
132
168
1,41
026
743
51,
079
–66%
FL-5
153
Pana
ma
City
/Bay
, Jac
kson
Cou
ntie
s Co
C 31
330
4410
2N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
FL-5
17
Har
dee/
Hig
hlan
ds C
ount
ies
CoC
904
240
024
081
035
027
270
012
%
FL-5
185
Colu
mbi
a, H
amil
ton,
Laf
ayet
te, S
uwan
nee
250
5910
116
5N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Coun
ties
CoC
FL-5
19
Pasc
o Co
unty
CoC
2,
260
212
1,82
788
13,
677
1,06
11,
961
1,17
8–3
9%
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 26
27FL-5
20
Citr
us, H
erna
ndo,
Lak
e, S
umte
r 2,
019
861,
174
1,82
71,
412
101
702
1,00
143
%Co
unti
es C
oC
FL-6
00
Mia
mi/
Dad
e Co
unty
CoC
4,
392
407
1,22
91,
380
5,16
083
11,
719
1,98
9–1
5%
FL-6
01
Ft L
aude
rdal
e/B
row
ard
Coun
ty C
oC
3,15
422
270
370
13,
114
625
508
442
1%
FL-6
02
Punt
a G
orda
/Cha
rlot
te C
ount
y Co
C 73
027
395
280
4,79
31,
207
2,06
14,
634
–85%
FL-6
03
Ft M
yers
/Cap
e Co
ral/
Lee
Coun
ty C
oC
2,38
214
742
41,
949
2,05
633
421
81,
629
16%
FL-6
04
Mon
roe
Coun
ty C
oC
1,12
128
910
464
498
147
193
544
14%
FL-6
05
Wes
t Pa
lm B
each
/Pal
m B
each
Cou
nty
CoC
1,76
632
946
41,
039
1,40
637
661
260
426
%
FL-6
06
Nap
les/
Coll
ier
Coun
ty C
oC
484
5010
111
955
310
910
430
8–1
2%
GA-
500
Atla
nta/
DeK
alb,
Ful
ton
Coun
ties
CoC
6,
840
1,19
61,
218
2,11
56,
832
636
1,15
92,
262
0%
GA-
501
Geo
rgia
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 10
,255
657
5,22
78,
284
10,5
9971
47,
637
7,84
9–3
%
GA-
503
Athe
ns/C
lark
e Co
unty
CoC
46
415
816
013
143
613
615
811
76%
GA-
504
Augu
sta
CoC
489
9011
638
7,35
917
55,
491
732
–93%
GA-
505
Colu
mbu
s-M
usco
gee/
Rus
sell
Cou
nty
CoC
540
6912
735
246
421
2921
816
%
GA-
506
Mar
iett
a/Co
bb C
ount
y Co
C 53
715
419
120
872
517
442
033
0–2
6%
GA-
507
Sava
nnah
/Cha
tham
Cou
nty
CoC
514
160
7917
074
616
431
918
2–3
1%
GU
-500
G
uam
CoC
72
50
471
622
980
5273
172
2–2
6%
HI-
500
Haw
aii B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
2,32
055
31,
075
1,56
52,
445
649
1,09
01,
522
–5%
HI-
501
Hon
olul
u Co
C 3,
750
225
1,66
01,
793
3,49
867
71,
661
1,97
37%
IA-5
00
Siou
x Ci
ty/D
akot
a Co
unty
CoC
16
441
425
185
3788
6–1
1%
IA-5
01
Iow
a B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
1,52
910
785
118
92,
614
210
1,49
658
6–4
2%
IA-5
02
Des
Moi
nes/
Polk
Cou
nty
CoC
1,04
115
933
799
5,33
144
52,
562
2,92
4–8
0%
ID-5
00
Boi
se/A
da C
ount
y Co
C 58
126
171
109
2,74
773
961
66–7
9%
ID-5
01
Idah
o B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
1,16
869
476
515
2,67
716
21,
142
266
–56%
IL-5
005
McH
enry
Cou
nty
CoC
253
3470
18N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
IL-5
01
Roc
kfor
d/W
inne
bago
, Boo
ne C
ount
ies
CoC
575
110
254
501,
667
483
1,09
31,
209
–66%
IL-5
02
Wau
kega
n/N
orth
Chi
cago
/Lak
e Co
unty
CoC
49
652
256
1038
793
148
1128
%
IL-5
03
Cham
paig
n/U
rban
a/R
anto
ul/C
ham
paig
n 42
959
271
1326
130
143
2664
%Co
unty
CoC
IL-5
04
Mad
ison
Cou
nty
CoC
240
2316
337
300
3222
274
–20%
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 27
28 App
endi
x C
(con
tinu
ed)
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
IL-5
05
Evan
ston
CoC
18
339
5390
184
7654
89–1
%
IL-5
06
Joli
et/B
olin
gbro
ok/W
ill C
ount
y Co
C 39
739
153
1836
543
196
129%
IL-5
07
Peor
ia/P
erki
n/Fu
lton
, Peo
ria,
Taz
ewel
l,
434
183
9998
568
251
228
135
–24%
Woo
dfor
d Co
C
IL-5
08
East
Sai
nt L
ouis
/Bel
levi
lle/
Sain
t Cl
air
79
982
513
357
1,10
623
844
175
7–2
8%Co
unty
CoC
IL-5
09
DeK
alb
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 13
039
7024
116
2053
3112
%
IL-5
10
Chic
ago
CoC
5,97
91,
018
2,05
21,
633
6,68
01,
266
2,66
71,
702
–10%
IL-5
11
Cook
Cou
nty
CoC
1,23
719
864
616
81,
085
199
623
6114
%
IL-5
12
Blo
omin
gton
/Cen
tral
Illi
nois
CoC
46
757
239
6849
281
181
54–5
%
IL-5
13
Spri
ngfi
eld/
Sang
amon
Cou
nty
CoC
260
2416
415
438
187
9223
–41%
IL-5
14
Dup
age
Coun
ty C
oC
766
173
386
124
557
8435
019
38%
IL-5
15
Sout
h Ce
ntra
l Ill
inoi
s Co
C 24
611
188
3226
87
201
141
–8%
IL-5
16
Dec
atur
/Mac
on C
ount
y Co
C 34
734
223
180
377
5426
019
7–8
%
IL-5
17
Auro
ra/E
lgin
/Kan
e Co
unty
CoC
47
424
511
856
506
229
9854
–6%
IL-5
18
Roc
k Is
land
/Mol
ine/
Nor
thw
este
rn
600
8539
294
664
8532
619
0–1
0%Il
linoi
s Co
C
IL-5
19
Wes
t Ce
ntra
l Ill
inoi
s Co
C 30
517
7015
727
814
209
131
10%
IL-5
20
Sout
hern
Illi
nois
CoC
87
015
945
474
300
120
194
7019
0%
IN-5
00
Sout
h B
end,
Mis
haw
aka,
St.
Jose
ph
584
115
167
063
512
624
611
1–8
%Co
unty
CoC
IN-5
02
Indi
ana
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C*
4,90
645
01,
916
1,02
86,
935
1,28
23,
338
2,37
3–2
9%
IN-5
03
Indi
anap
olis
CoC
1,
868
129
541
234
2,28
786
461
629
4–1
8%
KS-
500
Law
renc
e/D
ougl
as C
ount
y Co
C 41
332
232
4314
252
30N
/A19
1%
KS-
501
Kan
sas
City
/Wya
ndot
te C
ount
y Co
C 18
723
6057
175
5238
757%
KS-
502
Wic
hita
/Sed
gwic
k Co
unty
CoC
52
656
158
5372
818
419
119
7–2
8%
KS-
503
Tope
ka/S
haw
nee
Coun
ty C
oC
227
1812
81
518
4823
818
–56%
KS-
505
Ove
rlan
d Pa
rk/J
ohns
on C
ount
y Co
C 23
412
174
8723
713
175
80–1
%
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 28
29KS-
507
Kan
sas
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 52
418
151
413,
478
.1,
133
.–8
5%
KY-
500
Ken
tuck
y B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
4,31
618
62,
813
1,89
52,
579
383
1,60
81,
006
67%
KY-
501
Loui
svil
le/J
effe
rson
Cou
nty
CoC
2,58
725
994
618
01,
473
269
692
452
76%
KY-
502
Lexi
ngto
n/Fa
yett
e Co
unty
CoC
1,
158
129
412
4688
224
022
550
31%
LA-5
00
Lafa
yett
e/Ac
adia
na C
oC
631
4732
617
468
010
033
517
2–7
%
LA-5
01
Lake
Cha
rles
/Sou
thw
este
rn L
ouis
iana
CoC
24
744
4828
188
6750
3231
%
LA-5
02
Shre
vepo
rt/B
ossi
er/N
orth
wes
t Co
C 85
778
353
134
874
113
298
173
–2%
LA-5
03
New
Orl
eans
/Jef
fers
on P
aris
h Co
C 1,
619
220
818
629
2,05
128
963
159
1–2
1%
LA-5
04
Bat
on R
ouge
CoC
1,
042
7734
024
189
016
441
216
917
%
LA-5
05
Mon
roe/
Nor
thea
st L
ouis
iana
CoC
31
315
193
5111
713
4320
168%
LA-5
06
Slid
ell/
Livi
ngst
on/S
outh
east
Lou
isia
na C
oC
434
4226
323
131
935
102
6236
%
LA-5
07
Alex
andr
ia/C
entr
al L
ouis
iana
CoC
18
826
7948
250
153
61.
–25%
LA-5
08
Hou
ma-
Terr
ebon
ne C
oC
163
1310
141
107
552
652
%
MA-
500
Bos
ton
CoC
5,10
498
82,
156
306
5,81
996
21,
875
299
–12%
MA-
5015
Hol
yoke
/Fra
nkli
n, H
ampd
en, H
amsh
ire
964
8154
753
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/ACo
unti
es C
oC
MA-
502
Lynn
CoC
23
612
666
2839
490
253
44–4
0%
MA-
503
Cape
Cod
Isla
nds
CoC
697
288
289
329
1,07
132
745
857
1–3
5%
MA-
504
Spri
ngfi
eld
CoC
1,05
314
932
433
668
112
239
4558
%
MA-
505
New
Bed
ford
CoC
39
078
8134
272
4181
5443
%
MA-
506
Wor
cest
er C
ity
& C
ount
y Co
C 1,
302
144
625
341,
093
149
550
2519
%
MA-
507
Pitt
sfie
ld/B
erks
hire
Cou
nty
CoC
374
4016
859
347
3918
067
8%
MA-
508
Low
ell C
oC
432
143
224
1437
611
217
444
15%
MA-
509
Cam
brid
ge C
oC
432
200
8656
501
172
113
45–1
4%
MA-
510
Glou
cest
er/H
aver
hill/
Sale
m/E
ssex
60
691
278
2261
213
323
846
–1%
Coun
ty C
oC
MA-
511
Qui
ncy/
Wey
mou
th C
oC
280
6313
334
334
9613
940
–16%
MA-
512
Law
renc
e Co
C 31
054
117
1996
37N
/A50
223%
MA-
513
Mal
den/
Med
ford
CoC
13
717
104
2220
727
159
38–3
4%
MA-
514
Fram
ingh
am/W
alth
am C
oC
747
108
522
172
908
159
366
76–1
8%
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 29
30 App
endi
x C
(con
tinu
ed)
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
MA-
515
Fall
Riv
er C
oC
153
2445
1412
722
443
20%
MA-
516
Mas
sach
uset
ts B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
623
436
524
498
9136
470
25%
MA-
517
Som
ervi
lle
CoC
211
4174
1523
315
680
6–9
%
MA-
518
Bro
okli
ne/N
ewto
n Co
C 13
02
124
210
44
769
25%
MA-
519
Attl
ebor
o/Ta
unto
n/B
rist
ol C
ount
y Co
C 29
245
125
6338
512
216
017
6–2
4%
MA-
520
Bro
ckto
n/Pl
ymou
th C
ity
& C
ount
y Co
C 65
410
438
281
685
112
399
100
–5%
MD
-500
Cu
mbe
rlan
d/Al
lega
ny C
ount
y Co
C 16
225
8421
235
2412
274
–31%
MD
-501
B
alti
mor
e Ci
ty C
oC
2,60
741
095
462
92,
904
393
822
583
–10%
MD
-502
H
arfo
rd C
ount
y Co
C 14
531
5113
115
2049
2026
%
MD
-503
An
napo
lis/
Anne
Aru
ndel
Cou
nty
CoC
289
7413
571
273
5815
645
6%
MD
-504
H
owar
d Co
unty
CoC
17
50
121
2418
216
129
29–4
%
MD
-505
B
alti
mor
e Co
unty
CoC
63
446
442
5839
858
281
3959
%
MD
-506
Ca
rrol
l Cou
nty
CoC
174
3150
1321
526
7929
–19%
MD
-507
Ce
cil C
ount
y Co
C 11
926
422
9816
4725
21%
MD
-508
Ch
arle
s, C
alve
rt, S
t.M
ary’
s Co
unti
es C
oC
1,97
324
31,
410
1,67
154
487
383
7426
3%
MD
-509
Fr
eder
ick
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 22
342
819
268
7299
53–1
7%
MD
-510
G
arre
tt C
ount
y Co
C 82
049
1917
03
338
2%
MD
-511
M
id-S
hore
Reg
iona
l CoC
31
163
111
172
174
.70
5179
%
MD
-512
H
ager
stow
n/W
ashi
ngto
n Co
unty
CoC
21
011
108
324
224
109
23–1
3%
MD
-513
W
icom
ico/
Som
erse
t/W
orce
ster
Cou
nty
CoC
215
5377
3718
242
7425
18%
MD
-600
Pr
ince
Geo
rge’
s Co
unty
CoC
1,
168
264
362
345
939
299
477
257
24%
MD
-601
M
ontg
omer
y Co
unty
CoC
1,
139
231
499
123
1,20
914
445
215
6–6
%
ME-
500
Mai
ne B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
1,39
835
903
401,
503
3688
215
–7%
ME-
501
Ban
gor/
Peno
bsco
t Co
unty
Coc
49
918
305
1354
577
279
3–8
%
ME-
502
Port
land
CoC
74
144
294
972
765
272
02%
MI-
500*
* M
ichi
gan
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 2,
250
149
1,27
793
12,
149
192
1,27
260
75%
MI-
501
Det
roit
CoC
18
,062
1,50
36,
149
13,3
2414
,827
1,33
85,
906
10,5
1622
%
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 30
31MI-
502
Dea
rbor
n/W
ayne
Cou
nty
CoC
865
122
352
247
735
170
407
240
18%
MI-
503
St. C
lair
Sho
res/
War
ren/
Mac
omb
769
163
228
518
575
165
6326
134
%Co
unty
CoC
MI-
504
Pont
iac/
Roy
al O
ak/O
akla
nd C
ount
y Co
C 1,
011
123
207
609
1,29
313
745
569
5–2
2%
MI-
505
Flin
t/G
enes
ee C
ount
y Co
C 35
427
9714
12,
212
2,00
11,
638
1,88
9–8
4%
MI-
506
Gra
nd R
apid
s/W
yom
ing/
Ken
t Co
unty
CoC
91
274
450
105
869
8044
955
5%
MI-
507
Prot
age/
Kal
amaz
oo C
ity
& C
ount
y Co
C 61
442
326
2141
233
207
149
%
MI-
508
Lans
ing/
East
Lan
sing
/Ing
ham
Cou
nty
CoC
408
122
203
1735
748
128
5714
%
MI-
509
Ann
Arbo
r/W
asht
enaw
Cou
nty
CoC
413
8512
856
429
5012
217
9–4
%
MI-
510
Sagi
naw
Cit
y &
Cou
nty
CoC
361
5712
487
285
4210
517
27%
MI-
511
Lena
wee
Cou
nty
CoC
9320
488
109
1573
24–1
5%
MI-
512
Gra
nd T
rave
rse/
Antr
im, L
eela
nau
241
5576
2525
082
6814
1–4
%Co
unti
es C
oC
MI-
5133
Mar
quet
te/A
lger
Cou
ntie
s Co
C 37
021
0N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
MI-
514
Bat
tle
Cree
k/Ca
lhou
n Co
unty
CoC
20
541
6588
147
5336
4939
%
MI-
515
Mon
roe
Coun
ty C
oC
142
1633
1116
219
7538
–12%
MI-
516
Nor
ton
Shor
es/M
uske
gon
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 33
275
180
185
444
8924
522
6–2
5%
MI-
517
Jack
son
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 46
323
277
181
312
2724
921
48%
MI-
5182
Livi
ngst
on C
ount
y Co
C 63
438
5N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
MI-
519
Hol
land
/Ott
awa
Coun
ty C
oC
319
321
013
373
926
810
3–1
4%
MI-
521
Cass
Cou
nty
CoC
342
2113
540
367
–37%
MI-
5222
Alpe
na, I
osco
, Pre
sque
Isle
, NE
105
764
38N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Mic
higa
n Co
C
MI-
523
Eato
n Co
unty
CoC
19
73
160
9213
05
112
2052
%
MI-
5242
Del
ta C
ount
y Co
C 45
08
28N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
MN
-500
M
inne
apol
is/H
enne
pin
Coun
ty C
oC
2,98
476
31,
473
556
3,41
577
71,
662
357
–13%
MN
-501
Sa
int
Paul
/Ram
sey
Coun
ty C
oC
1,29
424
067
612
41,
288
264
591
142
0%
MN
-502
R
oche
ster
/Sou
thea
st M
inne
sota
CoC
44
632
303
3346
843
330
36–5
%
MN
-503
D
akot
a Co
unty
CoC
36
39
305
6044
636
228
182
–19%
MN
-504
N
orth
east
Min
neso
ta C
oC
232
2715
611
613
712
104
4769
%
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 31
32 App
endi
x C
(con
tinu
ed)
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
MN
-505
St
. Clo
ud/C
entr
al M
inne
sota
CoC
38
969
202
7639
436
292
88–1
%
MN
-506
N
orth
wes
t M
inne
sota
CoC
26
645
152
3111
020
5911
142%
MN
-507
Co
on R
apid
s/An
oka
Coun
ty C
oC
185
1614
412
218
1318
716
–15%
MN
-508
M
oore
head
/Wes
t Ce
ntra
l Min
neso
ta C
oC
242
8298
7712
121
6826
100%
MN
-509
D
ulut
h/Sa
int
Loui
s Co
unty
CoC
50
110
523
120
747
781
270
865%
MN
-510
Sc
ott,
Car
ver
Coun
ties
CoC
15
24
125
4611
318
5541
35%
MN
-511
So
uthw
est
Min
neso
ta C
oC
169
1210
489
563
3614
202%
MN
-512
W
ashi
ngto
n Co
unty
CoC
10
010
8518
709
5911
43%
MO
-500
St
. Lou
is C
ount
y Co
C 33
644
246
4640
633
260
80–1
7%
MO
-501
St
. Lou
is C
ity
CoC
1,38
625
858
621
31,
485
134
793
348
–7%
MO
-503
3St
. Cha
rles
, Lin
coln
, War
ren
Coun
ties
CoC
49
838
276
271
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/A
MO
-600
Sp
ring
fiel
d/G
reen
e, C
hris
tian
, Web
ster
51
894
192
4044
011
620
634
18%
Coun
ties
CoC
MO
-601
Cl
ay, P
latt
e Co
unti
es C
oC
108
1064
321,
340
152
898
321
–92%
MO
-602
Jo
plin
/Jas
per/
New
ton
Coun
ty C
oC
306
2187
837
925
774
147
–19%
MO
-603
St
. Jos
eph/
Buc
hana
n Co
unty
CoC
10
049
350
9425
236
6%
MO
-604
K
ansa
s Ci
ty/J
acks
on C
ount
y/In
depe
nden
ce/
1,59
947
277
915
41,
644
425
441
198
–3%
Lee’
s Su
mm
it, C
oC
MO
-606
M
isso
uri B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC*
1,
396
235
646
346
1,34
713
734
784
04%
MS-
500
Jack
son/
Ran
kin,
Mad
ison
Cou
ntie
s Co
C 71
837
292
278
488
233
6637
47%
MS-
501
Mis
siss
ippi
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 38
599
152
4154
397
9518
9–2
9%
MS-
503
Gul
f Po
rt/G
ulf
Coas
t R
egio
nal C
oC
274
122
1820
762
111
349
139
–56%
MT-
500
Mon
tana
Sta
tew
ide
CoC
1,15
083
517
295
1,34
323
453
547
6–1
4%
NC-
500
Win
ston
Sal
em/F
orsy
th C
ount
y Co
C 50
312
213
724
455
214
9220
11%
NC-
501
Ashe
vill
e/B
unco
mbe
Cou
nty
CoC
635
105
9318
749
016
968
103
30%
NC-
502
Dur
ham
Cit
y &
Cou
nty
CoC
539
9510
337
535
7813
128
1%
NC-
5032,
3,*
Nor
th C
arol
ina
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 2,
421
267
1,03
296
11,
721
239
602
510
41%
NC-
504
Gre
ensb
oro/
Hig
h Po
int
CoC
1,18
221
230
420
281
226
515
227
646
%
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 32
33NC-
505
Char
lott
e/M
eckl
enbu
rg C
ount
y Co
C 1,
976
222
412
328
2,19
655
057
853
7–1
0%
NC-
506
Wil
min
gton
/Bru
nsw
ick,
New
Han
over
, 62
820
616
920
962
734
415
938
50%
Pend
er C
ount
ies
Coc
NC-
507
Ral
eigh
/Wak
e Co
unty
CoC
1,
043
7933
870
1,10
611
736
577
–6%
NC-
508
Anso
n, M
oore
, Mon
tgom
ery,
Ric
hmon
d 18
910
142
9723
513
181
137
–20%
Coun
ties
CoC
NC-
509
Gas
toni
a/Cl
evel
and,
Gas
ton,
Lin
coln
65
215
584
438
396
107
157
122
65%
Coun
ties
CoC
NC-
511
Faye
ttev
ille
/Cum
berl
and
Coun
ty C
oC
757
4931
244
41,
032
9823
976
0–2
7%
NC-
513
Chap
el H
ill/
Ora
nge
Coun
ty C
oC
208
4660
2523
070
5933
–10%
NC-
516
Nor
thw
est
Nor
th C
arol
ina
CoC
1,06
977
225
901
930
140
230
812
15%
ND
-500
N
orth
Dak
ota
Stat
ewid
e Co
C 63
680
233
5965
511
323
249
–3%
NE-
500
Nor
th C
entr
al N
ebra
ska
CoC
257
1014
090
471
2725
018
2–4
5%
NE-
501
Om
aha/
Coun
cil B
luff
s Co
C 1,
870
615
532
238
1,24
163
928
818
551
%
NE-
502
Linc
oln
CoC
966
125
430
128
1,44
7.
550
614
–33%
NE-
503
Sout
hwes
t N
ebra
ska
CoC
852
4213
9921
5519
–14%
NE-
5043
Sout
heas
t N
ebra
ska
CoC
108
1473
7N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
NE-
505
Panh
andl
e of
Neb
rask
a Co
C 16
917
114
4792
4639
6084
%
NE-
5063
Nor
thea
st N
ebra
ska
CoC
762
281
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/A
NH
-500
N
ew H
amps
hire
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 1,
300
137
635
531
1,39
519
180
066
7–7
%
NH
-501
M
anch
este
r Co
C 50
413
515
919
71,
277
218
524
750
–61%
NH
-502
N
ashu
a/H
ills
boro
ugh
Coun
ty C
oC
444
9519
924
756
116
629
433
6–2
1%
NJ-
500
Atla
ntic
Cit
y &
Cou
nty
CoC
514
138
156
8964
832
510
925
2–2
1%
NJ-
501
Ber
gen
Coun
ty C
oC
1,39
265
769
182
528
300
264
148
164%
NJ-
502
Bur
ling
ton
Coun
ty C
oC
896
218
286
116
980
263
432
238
–9%
NJ-
503
Cam
den
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 85
313
023
921
41,
029
450
366
280
–17%
NJ-
504
New
ark/
Esse
x Co
unty
CoC
2,
326
379
917
420
1,68
264
068
742
038
%
NJ-
505
Glo
uces
ter
Coun
ty C
oC
167
3577
3022
853
146
28–2
7%
NJ-
506
Jers
ey C
ity/
Bay
onne
/Hud
son
Coun
ty C
oC
2,84
241
41,
951
164
2,95
133
51,
765
272
–4%
NJ-
507
New
Bru
nsw
ick/
Mid
dles
ex C
ount
y Co
C 99
624
527
426
81,
178
396
647
463
–15%
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 33
34 App
endi
x C
(con
tinu
ed)
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
NJ-
508
Mon
mou
th C
ount
y Co
C 83
090
388
731,
299
329
799
209
–36%
NJ-
509
Mor
ris
Coun
ty C
oC
292
9114
063
412
4415
711
2–2
9%
NJ-
510
Lake
woo
d To
wns
hip/
Oce
an C
ount
y Co
C 42
444
167
4355
663
303
41–2
4%
NJ-
511
Pate
rson
/Pas
saic
Cou
nty
CoC
1,06
219
468
423
11,
440
432
667
483
–26%
NJ-
512
Sale
m C
ount
y Co
C 46
515
214
1118
615
161
815
0%
NJ-
513
Som
erse
t Co
unty
CoC
36
624
147
2350
812
117
166
–28%
NJ-
514
Tren
ton/
Mer
cer
Coun
ty C
oC
1,59
819
475
835
62,
995
443
2,08
893
8–4
7%
NJ-
515
Eliz
abet
h/U
nion
Cou
nty
CoC
1,18
879
765
116
1,56
429
81,
044
297
–24%
NJ-
516
War
ren
Coun
ty C
oC
222
1683
732
436
125
79–3
1%
NJ-
5173
Hun
terd
on C
ount
y Co
C 10
919
273
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/A
NJ-
518
Oce
an C
ity/
Cape
May
Cou
nty
CoC
250
3760
816
314
5928
53%
NJ-
519
Suss
ex C
ount
y Co
C 35
986
188
434
787
169
283%
NJ-
520
Cum
berl
and
Coun
ty C
oC
163
1252
5736
766
136
248
–56%
NM
-500
Al
buqu
erqu
e Co
C 1,
276
159
455
287
3,64
971
31,
264
2,48
1–6
5%
NM
-501
N
ew M
exic
o B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
1,73
955
269
998
01,
607
210
627
726
8%
NV-
500
Las
Vega
s/Cl
ark
Coun
ty C
oC
11,4
171,
483
2,89
67,
573
12,1
981,
979
7,71
89,
424
–6%
NV-
501
Ren
o/Sp
arks
/Was
hoe
Coun
ty C
oC
863
3312
198
808
302
184
178
7%
NV-
502
Nev
ada
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 24
630
135
373,
396
288
3,04
510
0–9
3%
NY-
500
Roc
hest
er/I
rond
equo
it/G
reec
e/M
onro
e
612
8127
510
682
103
315
16–1
0%Co
unty
CoC
NY-
501*
El
mir
a/Ch
emun
g Co
unty
CoC
17
55
361
462
081
95–6
2%
NY-
502
Aubu
rn/C
ayug
a Co
unty
CoC
55
624
2213
517
8291
–59%
NY-
503
Alba
ny C
ity
& C
ount
y Co
C 61
968
223
8064
219
919
179
–4%
NY-
504
Catt
arau
gus
Coun
ty C
oC
142
047
3859
372
488
80–7
6%
NY-
505
Syra
cuse
/Ono
ndag
a Co
unty
CoC
74
068
137
1165
411
310
69
13%
NY-
507
Sche
nect
ady
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 28
835
132
7941
245
7411
7–3
0%
NY-
508
Buf
falo
/Eri
e Co
unty
CoC
1,
169
197
400
161
1,36
113
341
216
7–1
4%
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 34
35NY-
510
Itha
ca/T
ompk
ins
Coun
ty C
oC
788
3216
130
2223
34–4
0%
NY-
511
Bin
gham
ton/
Uni
on T
own/
Bro
ome
204
6622
3719
082
45N
/A7%
Coun
ty C
oC
NY-
512
Troy
/Ren
ssel
aer
Coun
ty C
oC
212
3113
346
352
3916
830
–40%
NY-
513*
W
ayne
, Ont
ario
, Sen
eca
Coun
ties
CoC
98
351
0N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
NY-
514
Jam
esto
wn/
Dun
kirk
, Cha
utau
qua
750
498
343
5810
910
1–7
8%Co
unty
CoC
NY-
5153
Cort
land
Cou
nty
CoC
393
93
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/A
NY-
516
Clin
ton
Coun
ty C
oC
538
35
143
4032
15–6
3%
NY-
517
Orl
eans
Cou
nty
CoC
395
295
184
1N
/A11
7%
NY-
518
Uti
ca/R
ome/
One
ida
Coun
ty C
oC
316
2113
016
280
4582
7013
%
NY-
519
Colu
mbi
a/G
reen
e Co
unty
CoC
32
512
185
1415
749
598
107%
NY-
520
Fran
klin
Cou
nty
CoC
283
81
182
91
56%
NY-
521
Mad
ison
Cou
nty
CoC
180
110
225
16.
–18%
NY-
5221
No
Long
er C
oC
N/A
.N
/AN
/A12
767
2315
N/A
NY-
523
Sara
toga
CoC
25
540
7310
938
968
126
74–3
4%
NY-
5243
Nia
gara
Fal
ls/N
iaga
ra C
ount
y Co
C 16
95
198
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/A
NY-
600
New
Yor
k Ci
ty C
oC
50,3
725,
233
29,0
153,
755
48,1
557,
002
28,2
904,
395
5%
NY-
601
Poug
hkee
psie
/Dut
ches
s Co
unty
CoC
54
713
425
984
366
165
151
5449
%
NY-
602
New
burg
h/M
iddl
etow
n/O
rang
e Co
unty
CoC
41
413
711
318
740
7.
187
163
2%
NY-
603
Isli
p/B
abyl
on/H
unti
ngto
n/Su
ffol
k 1,
728
401,
195
672,
728
473
1,54
019
6–3
7%Co
unty
CoC
NY-
6045
Yonk
ers/
Mou
nt V
erno
n/N
ew R
oche
lle/
1,
829
140
1,13
913
6N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Wes
tche
ster
Cou
nty
CoC
NY-
605
Nas
sau
Coun
ty C
oC
781
1252
591
1,21
518
886
291
–36%
NY-
606
Roc
klan
d Co
unty
CoC
48
834
4253
484
9762
971%
NY-
607
Sull
ivan
Cou
nty
CoC
343
3211
776
308
1913
13
11%
NY-
608
Kin
gsto
n/U
lste
r Co
unty
CoC
35
949
112
201
321
9712
511
012
%
NY-
6093
Pu
tnam
Cou
nty
CoC
310
00
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/A
OH
-500
Ci
ncin
nati
/Ham
ilto
n Co
unty
CoC
1,
046
226
326
591,
344
352
457
199
–22%
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 35
36 App
endi
x C
(con
tinu
ed)
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
OH
-501
To
ledo
/Luc
as C
ount
y Co
C 74
520
032
111
473
914
227
514
21%
OH
-502
Cl
evel
and/
Cuya
hoga
Cou
nty
CoC
2,18
565
249
918
42,
208
1,15
242
422
4–1
%
OH
-503
Co
lum
bus/
Fran
klin
Cou
nty
CoC
1,37
350
343
211
41,
869
433
847
62–2
7%
OH
-504
Yo
ungs
tow
n/M
ahon
ing
Coun
ty C
oC
249
2812
817
364
224
142
.–3
2%
OH
-505
D
ayto
n/K
ette
ring
/Mon
tgom
ery
Coun
ty C
oC
785
120
281
6680
412
738
072
–2%
OH
-506
Ak
ron/
Bab
erto
n/Su
mm
it C
ount
y Co
C 82
421
524
919
21,
050
208
220
195
–22%
OH
-507
O
hio
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 3,
521
315
1,90
51,
023
7,17
21,
209
3,65
82,
780
–51%
OH
-508
Ca
nton
/Mas
sill
on/A
llia
nce/
Star
k Co
unty
CoC
53
649
253
115
615
8833
418
0–1
3%
OK
-500
N
orth
Cen
tral
Okl
ahom
a Co
C 21
218
7039
241
5182
47–1
2%
OK
-501
Tu
lsa
City
& C
ount
y/B
roke
n Ar
row
CoC
66
697
188
7269
417
813
952
–4%
OK
-502
O
klah
oma
City
CoC
1,
734
533
313
456
1,42
619
928
613
322
%
OK
-503
**
Okl
ahom
a B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
231
077
821,
424
9196
444
–84%
OK
-504
N
orm
an/C
leve
land
Cou
nty
CoC
594
7026
527
226
545
9872
124%
OK
-505
N
orth
east
Okl
ahom
a Co
C 30
538
143
155
819
3463
464
4–6
3%
OK
-506
2So
uthw
est
Okl
ahom
a R
egio
nal C
oC25
011
6524
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/A
OK
-507
2So
uthe
aste
rn O
klah
oma
Reg
iona
l CoC
22
912
118
32N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
OR
-500
Eu
gene
/Spr
ingf
ield
/Lan
e Co
unty
CoC
2,
332
707
1,03
777
21,
293
410
749
109
80%
OR
-501
Po
rtla
nd/G
resh
am/M
ultn
omah
Cou
nty
CoC
3,91
859
691
31,
634
5,10
41,
756
1,81
02,
355
–23%
OR
-502
M
edfo
rd/A
shla
nd/J
acks
on C
ount
y Co
C 62
451
235
273
799
463
216
608
–22%
OR
-503
Ce
ntra
l Ore
gon
CoC
2,02
932
41,
302
1,71
449
336
368
151
312%
OR
-504
Sa
lem
/Mar
ion/
Polk
Cou
nty
CoC
1,99
714
383
21,
416
1,49
122
761
292
134
%
OR
-505
O
rego
n B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
4,43
456
82,
697
1,63
03,
260
551
2,06
11,
048
36%
OR
-506
H
ills
boro
/Bea
vert
on/W
ashi
ngto
n 68
024
828
541
22,
013
174
1,73
11,
653
–66%
Coun
ty C
oC
OR
-507
Cl
acka
mas
Cou
nty
CoC
1,57
619
241
81,
410
1,76
822
998
51,
601
–11%
PA-5
00
Phil
adel
phia
CoC
7,
640
654
3,77
144
76,
653
494
3,33
617
615
%
PA-5
01
Har
risb
urg/
Dau
phin
Cou
nty
CoC
412
118
148
5438
042
155
588%
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 36
37PA-5
02
Upp
er D
arby
/Che
ster
/Hav
erfo
rd/D
elaw
are
696
7647
937
873
114
546
42–2
0%Co
unty
CoC
PA-5
03
Wil
kes-
Bar
re/H
azle
ton/
Luze
rne
Coun
ty C
oC
188
1670
2313
710
685
37%
PA-5
04
Low
er M
ario
n/N
orri
stow
n/Ab
ingt
on/
526
5231
811
962
962
468
53–1
6%M
ontg
omer
y Co
unty
CoC
PA-5
05
Ches
ter
Coun
ty C
oC
387
4820
987
389
3311
664
–1%
PA-5
06
Rea
ding
/Ber
ks C
ount
y Co
C 73
979
442
5852
554
231
3841
%
PA-5
07
Alto
ona/
Cent
ral P
enns
ylva
nia
CoC
1,01
784
506
6596
412
048
714
65%
PA-5
08
Scra
nton
/Lac
kaw
anna
Cou
nty
CoC
222
3113
120
531
4829
929
7–5
8%
PA-5
09
Alle
ntow
n/N
orth
east
Pen
nsyl
vani
a Co
C 64
567
407
4858
910
937
542
10%
PA-5
10
Lanc
aste
r Ci
ty &
Cou
nty
CoC
589
4226
440
545
.22
233
8%
PA-5
11
Bri
stol
/Ben
sale
m/B
ucks
Cou
nty
CoC
262
811
98
632
1452
129
6–5
9%
PA-6
00
Pitt
sbur
gh/M
cKee
spor
t/Pe
nn H
ills
/ 1,
380
143
479
248
1,18
724
548
152
16%
Alle
ghen
y Co
unty
CoC
PA-6
01
Sout
hwes
t Pe
nnsy
lvan
ia C
oC
628
4531
058
568
109
260
6011
%
PA-6
02
Nor
thw
est
Penn
sylv
ania
CoC
28
332
142
927
359
120
54%
PA-6
03
Bea
ver
Coun
ty C
oC
213
3324
8251
6N
/A0
318%
PA-6
05
Erie
Cit
y &
Cou
nty
CoC
393
6117
276
372
5814
142
6%
PR-5
02*
Puer
to R
ico
Bal
ance
of
Com
mon
wea
lth
CoC
2,00
41,
475
951,
438
5,06
33,
900
787
3,77
3–6
0%
PR-5
03*
Sout
h/So
uthe
ast
Puer
to R
ico
CoC
2,30
51,
429
300
1,50
32,
272
1,59
843
51,
195
1%
RI-
5006
Rho
de Is
land
Sta
tew
ide
CoC
1,37
213
472
949
6,86
684
32,
821
108
–80%
SC-5
00
Char
lest
on/L
ow C
ount
ry C
oC
539
4610
757
840
316
170
304
–36%
SC-5
01
Gre
envi
lle/
Ande
rson
/Spa
rtan
burg
1,
606
273
517
506
2,04
733
370
673
5–2
2%U
psta
te C
oC
SC-5
02
Colu
mbi
a M
idla
nds
CoC
1,56
918
529
162
32,
638
554
542
1,39
7–4
1%
SC-5
03
Myr
tle
Bea
ch/S
umte
r Ci
ty &
Cou
nty
CoC
1,77
058
906
1,33
91,
936
523
638
1,47
6–9
%
SC-5
04
Flor
ence
Cit
y &
Cou
nty/
Pee
Dee
CoC
17
611
6849
497
156
186
372
–65%
SD-5
00
Sout
h D
akot
a St
atew
ide
CoC
579
104
311
411,
029
109
283
42–4
4%
TN-5
00
Chat
tano
oga/
Sout
heas
t Te
nnes
see
CoC
1,06
467
987
757
685
115
277
303
55%
TN-5
01
Mem
phis
/She
lby
Coun
ty C
oC
1,81
487
633
701,
876
346
727
109
–3%
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 37
38 App
endi
x C
(con
tinu
ed)
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
TN-5
02
Kno
xvil
le/K
nox
Coun
ty C
oC
956
162
162
126
751
286
9611
227
%
TN-5
03*
Cent
ral T
enne
ssee
CoC
36
033
109
7933
947
125
140
6%
TN-5
04
Nas
hvil
le/D
avid
son
Coun
ty C
oC
2,15
682
416
039
01,
542
824
138
227
40%
TN-5
06
Oak
Rid
ge/U
pper
Cum
berl
and
CoC
704
217
371
508
629
4617
932
112
%
TN-5
07
Jack
son/
Wes
t Te
nnes
see
CoC
2,25
531
056
02,
001
1,68
926
064
980
634
%
TN-5
09
Appa
lach
ian
Reg
iona
l CoC
55
988
8121
442
516
080
132
32%
TN-5
10
Mur
free
sbor
o/R
uthe
rfor
d Co
unty
CoC
43
811
263
148
130
9913
5623
7%
TN-5
123
Mor
rist
own/
Blo
unt,
Cam
pbel
l, C
ocke
90
425
552
247
1N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Coun
ties
CoC
TX-5
00
San
Anto
nio/
Bex
ar C
ount
y Co
C 2,
247
218
872
449
1,65
126
945
127
736
%
TX-5
01
Corp
us C
hris
ti/N
uece
s Co
unty
CoC
27
746
8411
43,
100
286
362
2,69
2–9
1%
TX-5
03
Aust
in/T
ravi
s Co
unty
CoC
5,
281
443
2,16
53,
886
1,89
225
852
872
617
9%
TX-5
04
Dew
itt,
Lav
aca,
Vic
tori
a Co
unti
es C
oC
487
2826
217
831
616
171
256
54%
TX-6
00
Dal
las
City
& C
ount
y/Ir
ving
CoC
3,
381
574
1,36
234
03,
729
1,00
11,
377
412
–9%
TX-6
01
Fort
Wor
th/A
rlin
gton
/Tar
rant
Cou
nty
CoC
2,87
647
91,
326
201
4,26
91,
076
1,37
91,
812
–33%
TX-6
03
El P
aso
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 1,
241
208
437
273
1,07
149
545
614
816
%
TX-6
04
Wac
o/M
cLen
nan
Coun
ty C
oC
431
7011
017
248
678
261
392
–11%
TX-6
072,
3,*
Texa
s B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
10,6
361,
625
3,78
05,
133
6,60
72,
687
4,16
783
661
%
TX-6
10
Den
ton
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 20
756
122
9647
053
272
286
–56%
TX-6
11
Amar
illo
CoC
43
175
173
133
1,16
732
939
572
1–6
3%
TX-6
13
Long
view
/Mar
shal
l Are
a Co
C 37
468
121
114
288
104
9577
30%
TX-6
151
No
Long
er C
oC
N/A
.N
/AN
/A58
158
167
45N
/A
TX-6
243
Wic
hita
Fal
ls/W
ise,
Pal
o Pi
nto,
Wic
hita
, 26
320
740
49N
/A.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Arch
er C
oC
TX-7
004
Hou
ston
/Har
ris
Coun
ty C
oC
10,3
633,
627
2,30
95,
346
12,0
053,
602
2,99
66,
583
–14%
TX-7
014
Bry
an/C
olle
ge S
tati
on/B
razo
s Va
lley
CoC
28
940
136
7017
040
3521
70%
TX-7
024
Conr
oe/M
ontg
omer
y Co
unty
CoC
N
/A.
0N
/A22
665
157
101
–100
%
TX-7
034
Bea
umon
t/Po
rt A
rthu
r/SE
Tex
as C
oC
710
119
168
242
5,31
955
51,
576
4,76
0–8
7%
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 38
39TX-7
044
Gal
vest
on/G
ulf
Coas
t Co
C 26
740
1583
283
9292
68–6
%
UT-
500
Salt
Lak
e Ci
ty &
Cou
nty
CoC
2,07
954
568
919
82,
138
369
831
194
–3%
UT-
503
Uta
h B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
716
217
246
8655
616
828
915
729
%
UT-
504
Prov
o/M
ount
ainl
and
CoC
216
3913
129
410
7818
218
5–4
7%
VA-5
00
Ric
hmon
d/H
enri
co, C
hest
erfi
eld,
Han
over
1,
158
185
241
144
1,46
929
422
669
6–2
1%Co
unti
es C
oC
VA-5
01
Nor
folk
CoC
54
097
113
104
600
8915
764
–10%
VA-5
02
Roa
noke
Cit
y &
Cou
nty/
Sale
m C
oC
566
168
8138
493
257
9563
15%
VA-5
03
Virg
inia
Bea
ch C
oC
476
6029
846
628
170
247
293
–24%
VA-5
04
Char
lott
esvi
lle
CoC
265
3169
2824
3.
8710
49%
VA-5
05
New
port
New
s/H
ampt
on/V
irgi
nia
90
824
734
633
91,
034
361
282
307
–12%
Peni
nsul
a Co
C
VA-5
07
Port
smou
th C
oC
217
4280
5233
210
211
010
6–3
5%
VA-5
08
Lync
hbur
g Co
C 28
959
6519
119
239
4662
51%
VA-5
09
Pete
rsbu
rg C
oC
8034
4441
132
2817
91–3
9%
VA-5
10
Stau
nton
/Way
nesb
oro/
Augu
sta,
Hig
hlan
d
950
351
6525
628
46%
Coun
ties
CoC
VA-5
12
Ches
apea
ke C
oC
129
252
4320
74
112
186
–38%
VA-5
13
Shen
ando
ah, F
rede
rick
, Pag
e, W
arre
n 26
534
116
4785
336
633
26–6
9%Co
unti
es C
oC
VA-5
14
Fred
eric
ksbu
rg/S
pots
ylva
nia,
Sta
ffor
d 56
165
473
4640
761
8546
38%
Coun
ties
CoC
VA-5
17
Dan
vill
e, M
arti
nsvi
lle
CoC
187
1048
118
8111
3610
131%
VA-5
18
Har
risb
urg/
Roc
king
ham
Cou
nty
CoC
117
271
966
853
277
%
VA-5
19
Suff
olk
CoC
3013
219
3917
1423
–23%
VA-5
21*
Virg
inia
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 60
852
338
103
639
7839
422
9–5
%
VA-6
00
Arli
ngto
n Co
unty
CoC
46
227
313
721
942
017
812
516
210
%
VA-6
01
Fair
fax
Coun
ty C
oC
1,59
333
594
615
41,
458
293
933
155
9%
VA-6
02
Loud
oun
Coun
ty C
oC
211
5213
097
9324
5323
127%
VA-6
03
Alex
andr
ia C
oC
375
114
145
9239
191
151
80–4
%
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 39
40 App
endi
x C
(con
tinu
ed)
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
Tota
l Ch
roni
cally
Pe
rson
s in
U
nshe
lter
ed
PCT
Chan
ge
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
wit
h H
omel
ess
Hom
eles
sH
omel
ess
Fam
ilies
Hom
eles
sTo
tal
Code
CoC
Nam
e20
0720
07Ch
ildre
n 20
0720
0720
0520
0520
0520
0520
05–2
007
VA-6
04
Prin
ce W
illi
am C
ount
y Co
C 61
488
374
258
504
6231
815
622
%
VI-5
00
Virg
in Is
land
s Co
C 55
948
722
487
538
358
137
354
4%
VT-5
00
Verm
ont
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 79
612
731
128
076
197
419
193
5%
VT-5
01
Bur
ling
ton/
Chit
tend
en C
ount
y Co
C 23
929
125
3516
642
5233
44%
WA-
500
Seat
tle/
Kin
g Co
unty
CoC
7,
902
932
2,79
52,
222
7,31
51,
931
2,96
02,
216
8%
WA-
501
Was
hing
ton
Bal
ance
of
Stat
e Co
C 6,
995
787
3,56
52,
027
6,73
91,
016
3,50
53,
610
4%
WA-
502
City
of
Spok
ane
CoC
1,08
325
236
819
41,
824
254
461
384
–41%
WA-
503
Taco
ma/
Lake
woo
d/Pi
erce
Cou
nty
CoC
1,59
619
293
625
41,
924
286
1,15
148
7–1
7%
WA-
504
Ever
ett/
Snoh
omis
h Co
unty
CoC
3,
453
207
1,25
71,
303
3,24
174
41,
853
1,66
27%
WA-
506
Spok
ane
Coun
ty C
oC
274
522
715
115
911
132
9072
%
WA-
507
Yaki
ma
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 68
489
299
143
1,19
026
874
751
3–4
3%
WA-
508
Vanc
ouve
r/Cl
ark
Coun
ty C
oC
1,39
213
964
322
81,
578
289
764
558
–12%
WI-
500
Wis
cons
in B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
3,10
529
92,
061
288
2,61
337
21,
561
297
19%
WI-
501
Mil
wau
kee
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 1,
470
234
701
175
2,81
854
91,
251
1,24
0–4
8%
WI-
502
Rac
ine
City
& C
ount
y Co
C 25
629
118
627
666
9346
–7%
WI-
503
Mad
ison
/Dan
e Co
unty
CoC
81
712
736
594
1,06
619
348
648
–23%
WV-
500
Whe
elin
g/W
eirt
on A
rea
CoC
118
914
2299
3827
2119
%
WV-
501
Hun
ting
ton/
Cabe
ll, W
ayne
Cou
ntie
s Co
C 33
168
9658
312
112
8585
6%
WV-
503
Char
lest
on/K
anaw
ha, P
utna
m, B
oone
, 32
513
363
6240
214
483
76–1
9%Cl
ay C
ount
ies
CoC
WV-
508
Wes
t Vi
rgin
ia B
alan
ce o
f St
ate
CoC
1,63
594
132
112
070
920
635
212
413
1%
WY-
500
Wyo
min
g St
atew
ide
CoC
537
3820
614
048
756
246
8610
%
*CoC
larg
er in
200
7 du
e to
its
mer
ging
wit
h an
othe
r Co
C.
**Co
C is
geo
grap
hica
lly
smal
ler
than
it w
as in
200
5.
1 N
o lo
nger
a C
oC a
nd r
egio
n no
t cu
rren
tly
repr
esen
ted
by a
ny C
oC.
2 N
ew C
oC t
hat
was
a p
art
of a
larg
er C
oC in
200
5.
3 N
ew C
oC f
rom
an
area
tha
t w
as n
ot a
ccou
nted
for
in 2
005.
4 R
enam
ed C
oC b
ut g
eogr
aphy
sta
yed
the
sam
e.
5 In
clud
ed in
last
yea
r's
file
s, b
ut t
here
was
no
repo
rted
dat
a.
6 R
hode
Isla
nd's
200
5 co
unt
was
an
annu
al e
stim
ate.
38077 NAEH Text .qxd:11516-01_HC2.qxd 1/5/09 1:55 PM Page 40
38077 NAEH Cover.qxd:11516-00_Cover 1/5/09 3:43 PM Page C3
National Alliance to End Homelessness1518 K Street, NWSuite 410Washington, DC 20005
www.endhomelessness.org
38077 NAEH Cover.qxd:11516-00_Cover 1/5/09 3:43 PM Page C4