Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
The city of Indianapolis has acquired land for a “housing hub” that will include the city’s first low-barrier homeless shelter, Mayor Joe Hogsett’s administration announced Tuesday.
According a city press release, the purchase consists of three parcels east of downtown near the 1000 block of East Georgia Street and was made in partnership with Indianapolis-based not-for-profit Rdoor Housing Corp. (formerly Merchants Affordable Housing Corp.), an affordable housing developer.
The city said the parcels cost $2.1 million. It provided no details about the exact location of the property.
A press release from State Rep. Justin Moed, D-Indianapolis, said the shelter would be 30,000 square feet.
The site is intended to become “housing hub” that would centralize city resources for neighbors experiencing homelessness, the city said.
“Today’s announcement is another historic step forward in our efforts to end homelessness in our city,” Hogsett said in a media release. “By purchasing this property and moving forward with this innovative Housing Hub, I am confident we can continue to lead the way in assisting our neighbors in need.”
A low-barrier shelter has seen buy-in from city and state leaders since the pandemic caused a spike in Indianapolis’ homeless population.
After a pandemic count of 1,928 homeless individuals in 2021, the city saw a decline in the 2023 point-in-time count. The annual census found 1,619 sheltered and unsheltered homeless living in Indianapolis in one night in January, an 8% decrease from 2022. The Department of Housing and Urban Development requires communities to complete an annual point-in-time count to receive federal funding for homeless programs, but experts regard the methodology as an unreliable way to count homeless populations.
A November 2021 report from the Office of Public Health and Safety first called for the creation of the low-barrier shelter. The city then allocated $12 million in federal American Rescue Plan Act funding toward the project.
Along with the low-barrier shelter, Hogsett administration officials plan to implement a master leasing strategy in which the city would lease units on behalf of property owners to low- or no-income individuals. Once in place, the new housing plan is expected to create 60 housing units that will be available for unsheltered individuals, with plans for at least 200 master-leased units to be made available citywide.
Funding for a shelter would come partially from the state. Legislation from Moed created a study committee on the topic, which led to a $51 million two-year grant program for cities across the state to establish such programs.
The low-barrier shelter, an approach used in many other states but new to Indianapolis, would have fewer restrictions for people seeking housing.
The 2021 OPHS report lists as common deterrents shelter policies that turn away those with criminal histories, ban drug and alcohol use, require identification, enforce strict rules, and separate families, partners or pets.
Other barriers include lack of shelter safety, limited access for people with disabilities, narrow shelter hours and bad experiences with shelter staff.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
That’s all well and good, but what steps is the city taking to approve more housing at all levels citywide? We need thousands of new homes to be built every year, not a few dozen and a shelter.
This is more election year fodder.
They’ve been working on it for years. From 2021:
https://www.ibj.com/articles/city-report-calls-for-low-barrier-service-rich-shelter-for-homeless-residents
So putting more cream out for stray cats, then giving them housing with no limit on drug use and criminal behavior is going to end stray cats?
How about doing this in very rural Indiana or North Dakota?
Not in my neighborhood please
Bernard, I’ve got news for you, pal. Not everyone who has the misfortune of being homeless are addicted to drugs or involved in criminal activity. We have suburban school districts, with students who are experiencing being homeless through no fault of their own. And, despite that, some of them are making it to class. They might be in YOUR neighborhood. Maybe, you’re the one who needs to move to very rural Indiana or, better yet, North Dakota, because, of course, they probably don’t have any folks who are homeless there. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but it doesn’t mean you have a clue about what you’re talking about.
Decades of research have shown that focusing on housing, without making sobriety or mental health treatment a prerequisite, is the most effective way to reduce homelessness
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2356643-we-can-reduce-homelessness-if-we-follow-the-science-on-what-works/
Joe- if decades of research indicate this, why do we have increasing homelessness? San Fransisco’s budget for homelessness is 1Billion dollars next year. Why not build each person a home? We have spent over $4.2 trillion dollars in the last 20 years on The War on Poverty, but have more people living in poverty.
As Ben Franklin said over 200 years ago: “I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion about the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it.”
Ben Franklin’s point argues against your position, Bernard. Nearly impossible to mobilize out of poverty without housing. On one hand, people feel as if city does nothing in regards to homelessness. Then when things are done to combat homelessness, the same folks are angry. The reason Bernard mentioned rural indiana and North Dakota is one proposed solution (which has been the practice of surrounding counties onto city of indianapolis for years) is to sequester the issue. Out of sight, out of mind. Pretend the issue away.
How do you intend on driving them out of it, throwing them in jail?
I’m all for prohibiting people from living under bridges, etc. Just do this first. I hope that by getting people into a more stable situation that they can get plugged into services and their stay will be brief. Lead them out of homelessness.
“why do we have increasing homelessness? “
We don’t treat mental illness, for one.
“San Fransisco’s budget for homelessness is 1Billion dollars next year. Why not build each person a home?”
Because in San Francisco that’s going to build, what, 2500 units or so?
If you got a better idea I’m all ears.
Great Move!
How far does David A. live from E. Georgia Street?
Yes, research shows that Housing First .. where addiction and mental health treatment is encouraged but not required … achieves fewer subsequent days homeless while also yielding comparable addiction and mental health outcomes, compared to the treatment-required transitional housing model …
HOWEVER, it’s often forgotten that Housing First works 10x times better when implemented as envisioned, in a SAFE environment with intense optional social services.
There are very few homeless Housing First programs that are implemented using the ideal approach. First, 24 hour on-site security is needed, but is rarely implemented. Second, permanent supportive housing programs should employ a very proactive and ASSERTIVE style of case management where rapport is built and then clients are influenced to uptake optional services.
In a group home that I founded and operated a few years ago, a 62y black man with severe schizophrenia, who had zero drug or alcohol use, was placed with us after being exploited at a well-known homeless housing program, where thugs and drug dealers were allowed to take over his apartment, which is not uncommon (due to lack of 24-hour on-site security).
After being placed with us, he achieved his best mental and physical health outcomes in 20 years (according to his doctor). This is because he had a safe environment AND we paid out of our pocket to have a peer support specialist drive him and accompany him to his health care appointments, including for his monthly anti-psychotic injected medicine. Neither the health care systems nor typical homeless housing programs would do this for him, but they should.
Thank you to Joe B. for injecting researched info into this thread. Love to see it!
The State should provide even more resources since it released many inmates from prison during the pandemic and sent them all to Indianapolis.
No accountability at any level of the process. Create a study, grant or whatever, throw OUR tax dollars at a problem and we can say “we” did something.
“Grants” go to housing services. Housing services hire architects and developers. Developer hires a general contractor. Contractor hires a project management company and they hire subcontractors.
This process puts money in the the developer and management companies pockets, and often the single “affordable” unit cost is well in excess of $350K/unit!
Financial resources don’t reach the intended target. There is a tremendous boom in this housing segment by “paper developers” that are exploiting federal, state and local tax dollars.
TAX PAYERS getting scammed by inefficient, ineffective government practices that have been allowed to grow for decades because we don’t demand any accountability or see results!!
Let’s create another commision to study XYZ.
Until we hold their feet to the fire, they will keep figuring out ways to tax us more to “make our problems go away”. Ask questions and demand answers at every level of the political grift!