3 thoughts on “Housing for NYC’s Most Vulnerable Under Scrutiny for ‘Screening’

  1. These evaluations were completely controlled by the assessor – contrary to “industry” standards. And, speaking of industry, let’s follow the money here: supported housing means concentrations of diagnostic codes and support services, generally ministered by a single agency, in one place, contrary to the Olmstead decision. Recently a local nursing home was ordered to relocate their long-term residents with severe mentally illness to a community setting. NYS allocated funds – ultimately, an institutional placement was proposed with a small number (fewer than 20%, as I recall) of so-called affordable apartments to induce community acceptance. The agency asserted that the “community integration” meant there would be recreation facilities in the building: no one in the community would ever see the residents; furthermore, all residents would follow strict medication regimes (?!?). Wrong on so many levels. “Housing First” was originally crafted with push-in services for people located IN the community, rather than business opportunities for so-called not for profit operators (what do you think motivates the cherry-picking?) . Let’s not pursue Creedmore-style solutions! A smaller IRA residence allows better support services and better community integration/acceptance.

  2. i can see why housing agencies are doing this now. one of the main problems with supportive housing is that agencies were just taking about anyone for many many many years. without thinking if the person was able to be on there own. with many of the people being so damn unstable that it would cause problems for the landlord. because of this happening so many times many landlords throughout the years would turn around and refuse to give apartments or even talk on the phone once they knew the people on phone was working for a housing agency for the mentally disable. now there are a few people every now and than that are great people. but the problem is that problems had happen so much more often that landlords are not taking a chance. and now with less and less housing being around. with less and less apartments being open. agencies are not taking a chance with people who are being unstable in which a housing agency has maybe 15 apartments in a building. the agency doesn’t want to bring in someone who will cause problems and make the landlord say he is not going to rent out the apartments any more to the agency. and with some housing agencies getting out of the supportive housing business. it will mean even more problems than before in what and who the agencies will take in terms of who comes into the program. i have a friend that the apartment he is in had someone else. well the person in question was causing so many problems for the landlord that the housing agency was scared that the landlord would not rent put the apartment to the agency again. lucky the landlord in question gave the agency a second chance after my friend was in the apartment for over a year the landlord asked the agency if they had anymore people who needs apartments that is like the person that moved in. this time instead of taking the chance and just moving anyone in. the agency had learned there lesson in not just moving anyone in just to fill beds up. and told the truth to the landlord that they had people who they had but did not know if they would be the same like my friend. all in all motto of the story is that housing agencies are done losing good apartments they have left and are now being very very very picky who they take.

  3. Pingback: City Council Looks at Reducing Recidivism for People with Mental Illness | New York County Defender Services

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *