“Despite its success, the creation of supportive housing has fallen far short of the need—in large part because of fierce resistance by local residents.”

A recent report released by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) revealed that homelessness grew by an alarming 18 percent over the past year, and ought to have us all hanging our heads in shame.

A record three quarters of a million homeless individuals across the country doesn’t happen by accident. It is the result of decades of policy choices at the local, state, and federal levels—including choices that have empowered self-interested not-in-my-backyard voices to block the creation of supportive housing that is critical to preventing homelessness.

In New York, the news is worse. State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli followed up on the HUD report with a report of his own showing that in the Empire State, homelessness grew by 53.1 percent from January 2023 to January 2024, more than four times the rest of the nation. From 2022 to 2024, the number of homeless children grew by more than 30,000 to 50,773, the DiNapoli report said. Now, nearly one of every three of New York’s homeless are children, one of highest shares in the nation. 

Affordable supportive housing—a proven model that pairs permanent, affordable homes with services like job training, mental health counseling, and addiction treatment—has been a game-changer for addressing chronic homelessness. Studies have shown that supportive housing reduces homelessness, saves taxpayer dollars by cutting reliance on emergency services, and improves quality of life for some of our most vulnerable neighbors.

But despite its success, the creation of supportive housing has fallen far short of the need—in large part because of fierce resistance by local residents.

NIMBYism isn’t new and not specific to supportive housing. The “not in my backyard” mentality has been an obstacle to the creation of housing of all types. But when it comes to affordable supportive housing, the pushback is especially intense. Projects meant to serve formerly homeless individuals or those with mental health conditions, substance use disorders, or histories of incarceration often face intense opposition from residents who express fears about things like safety, property values, and neighborhood character.

These fears are often based on misconceptions rather than reality. For example, a recent study by Furman Center for Real Estate & Urban Policy at NYU found that supporting housing development does not hurt property values in the long term. 

However, this pushback carries weight with local officials who are wary of political backlash. As a result, supportive housing projects are routinely delayed, downsized, or scrapped altogether, perpetuating cycles of homelessness that harm individuals and burden communities.

If homelessness is to be addressed at scale, we need a coordinated effort to break down the barriers to supportive housing development. Part of that is changing the narrative about the people supportive housing serves and how it benefits not just the individuals who move in, but neighborhoods and our society.

It’s easy to view homelessness as a byproduct of drivers like job loss and mental illness, but the reality is more complex: a lack of stable housing also makes it more difficult to find employment and exacerbates mental health and substance use challenges. This maintains a cycle that is very difficult to break.

Supportive housing is an upstream investment that helps stabilize the lives of its residents, reducing the need for expensive emergency interventions like hospitalizations, shelter stays, and incarcerations that strain public resources. Further, it is permanent housing that is designed to integrate seamlessly into neighborhoods. Most supportive housing developments are indistinguishable from other residential buildings, blending into the fabric of the community while providing residents with a safe, dignified, stable place to live.

Overcoming these challenges will also require leadership from elected officials. Mayor Eric Adams’ City of Yes plan removed some of the barriers that give veto power to anti-housing voices. But we must build on that progress by further streamlining approval processes, creating financial incentives for communities that welcome supportive housing, and launching public education campaigns to dispel myths and build broader understanding of the issue.

This means calling out the hypocrisy of saying we want to solve homelessness while refusing to create the very solutions that will make a meaningful difference, and standing up to NIMBY resistance when supportive housing developments do still require public approval.

It’s time to stop viewing supportive housing as something to resist and start seeing it for what it truly is: a solution that saves lives, strengthens communities, and gives everyone a chance to thrive. The path forward requires courage, compassion, and a willingness to put facts above fear. 

Sherry Tucker is the CEO of WellLife Network, which provides supportive housing services in New York City and Long Island.