IV.
WORKING ASSUMPTIONS
The proposed plan for counting homeless youth is built on a number
of working assumptions. They include the following:
Reasons for homelessness. Youth are homeless for a different
set of reasons than adults. Homeless youth are primarily young
victims of physical, emotional and/or sexual abuse, young orphans of
parents who have died of aids or serving jail terms, and the
vulnerable, neglected children of parents with substance abuse.
Different needs. Because the reasons for their homelessness
is different, their needs are different from those of the adult
homeless population.
Different interview instruments. Determining the needs of
homeless youth thus requires different interview forms than those
used for the adult homeless population. These interview instruments
are used for counting the homeless youth population. These
instruments reflect those differences to better understand the needs
and gaps in services for this sub-population.
Congregate differently. Homeless youth and adults congregate
in different places and approach the issue of shelter differently.
This is best described by the "couch surfing" of homeless
youth and the lack of presence of this sub-population in adult food
and shelter programs. This is a significant difference with this
sub-population as opposed to homeless adults and families. Thus any
count of homeless youth requires a different form of mapping as to
where these youth can be identified and counted.
Staffing. The staffs that work with homeless youth are
different from those working with homeless adults. This in no way
reflects any differences in skills or knowledge between the two
groups. The existence of a street outreach program targeting runaway
and homeless youth, with a street outreach staff knowledgeable about
this population, is most helpful in developing a count of homeless
youth. Ideally, any volunteers brought on to participate in the
effort should participate in a training program conducted by the
street outreach workers, or at the very least, be trained in basic
principles of street outreach.
Duplicate counting. Duplication and multiple counting of
individuals represent the gravest danger to the creation of a
creditable and valid survey. Given the issue of confidentiality and
the reluctance to give one's name, the methodology suggests seeking
three ID markers: date of birth, county of birth and mother's first
name. The reliability of each of the markers has been tested in
other studies of this population, with each having different degrees
of validity and reliability. Additional markers drawn from
observation will also be used. These will include sex, race, etc. We
assume that all data will be computerized in order to purge possible
duplication.
Time frame. The nature of the differences between homeless
youth and homeless adults, as to where each is to be found, does not
require the same time frame for conducting a count of homeless
youth. Thus while the adult homeless population count may fit into
the design that is limited to one night, this does not have to be
the case for homeless youth. Best practices have been successful in
counting homeless youth and determining their needs have extended
their effort for as little as one week or as long as one month.
However, the count will focus around a point-in-time, preferably a
major national holiday, which is then used as a reference point for
an individual's homelessness
