Return to the ground floor of this tower
Return to the Main Courtyard
Return to Fort Freedom's home page
]]]]]]]]]]] HELPING THE HOMELESS [[[[[[[[[[[[[[
Why Private Care Is Far Superior to Public (2/6/1989)
[From Human Events, 4 February 1989, pp. 5:2-6:2]
[Kindly uploaded by Freeman 10602PANC]
[First and second paragraphs omitted.]
In a remarkable series on the homeless aired on WRC-TV in
Washington, reported Jack Cloherty investigated services provided
to the homeless by two privately run and two publicly run
shelters (Pierce and Blaire). The series went on to win an award
given by Washington Monthly, a neo-liberal magazine published in
the Nation's Capital.
As the WRC cameras showed, the words ``service'' and ``care''
could not even be applied to the two city-run government
shelters. Entering the Pierce shelter was like entering the
outer rings of hell, while conditions in the Blaire shelter were
so disgraceful Cloherty and his camera crew were not even allowed
in.
At Pierce, the camera revealed urine-soaked mattresses with no
sheets and broken toilets overflowing with human filth. Showers
-- just four of them for the roughly 200 men the shelter is
supposed to hold each night -- were clogged with rust and were
barely functional. Soap was scarcer than in the Soviet Union and
towels were never provided. The place was infested with rats.
One homeless man interviewed by Cloherty said he got lice and
scabies from spending a night at the shelter, while another said
he would rather spend the night on the streets than in either of
the city-run facilities.
In addition to the fear of catching lice and scabies,
according to Sister Ronnie Daniels, a nurse who tries to provide
some health care to those desperate enough to use the government
shelters, men tend to shun the city-run facilities because ``they
are afraid that when they get here, they will be antagonized.
Violence here is very high.'' That's because by law, the
shelters cannot turn anyone away, even those acting violently
towards other residents.
What makes this situation even more outrageous is its $1.2
million annual pricetag. Under D.C. law, maintenance and repair
of the two shelters must be done by the city, while their
day-to-day operations are contracted out to the D.C. Council of
Churches. But virtually none of that $1.2 million goes for
maintenance and repairs, as Cloherty discovered after
interviewing a number of city officials. The great bulk of it
goes to pay the salaries of the 52 workers assigned to the
shelters.
When Cloherty asked the head of the shelter program whether it
has ``become a situation where the shelter serves the staff more
than the [homeless] men,'' the official denied it.
But the denial was hollow. In the name of compassion and
caring for the homeless, D.C. taxpayers are being bilked
annually of $1.2 million to line the pockets of government
bureaucrats.
In startling contrast, Cloherty visited shelters run by
private groups. At the Central Union Mission, a
non-denominational Christian rescue mission, the facilities were
spotless. All men coming to the shelter are required to take a
shower and they are provided with towels and their own set of
toiletries. Those needing it are treated for lice. Bedsheets
are cleaned and changed every day. Hot meals are provided.
All this is remarkable enough. But the Central Union Mission
provided such sanitary and high-quality care for about 100 men
per night at a cost of approximately $300,000 annually. While
the city shelters supposedly offer a place to sleep for about 200
men each night, they do so at a cost four times that of the
private mission and its surroundings are worse than medieval.
Furthermore, as Dr. Robert Rich, executive director of the
Central Union Mission told HUMAN EVENTS, the shelter for homeless
men is just one of 19 social service ministries the mission
provides. The total annual cost of these 19 ministries is
$900,000 -- still less than what the city pays to run just two
decrepit shelters.
A similar story can be told of other private homeless shelters
that Cloherty visited at the Luther Place Memorial Church.
According to shelter director Pam Hollander, the church provides
a number of shelters that can accommodate about 100 homeless
women each night at an annual cost of about $450,000. The
shelters are able to provide the homeless women with showers,
laundry facilities, clean clothes, clean beds and hot meals.
Rich, who is also an ordained minister, told HUMAN EVENTS that
one of the main reasons his group has been so successful in
providing such outstanding care for the homeless is that ``we're
not bureaucrats. We have a staff of 18 who are salaried. But
for us it's not a job, it's a ministry. That makes a big
difference in the way you treat people.'' Hollander gave HUMAN
EVENTS a similar assessment. ``The key is attitude. It's not
just a job, it's a calling based on the belief that we are
children of God and that those we serve are children of God.''
The Luther Place shelter accepts a small amount of local and
federal funds, but the bulk of its money comes from private
donations.
Rich, on the other hand, refuses to take any government funds
because he fears the restrictions this would place on his
programs. According to Rich, ``The government tries to change
your curriculum, telling you what you can do and cannot do.''
The most important restriction that accepting government money
would entail, Rich explained, is ``that there could be no chapel,
no religious service. We have chapel service every night for
the men. You can't have a spiritual aspect for any program in
the public sector. It's not allowed.''
But this aspect, forbidden in public shelters, is vital to
helping the homeless overcome their plight, Rich believes.
``It's not just physical, it's also emotional and spiritual
care,'' Rich told HUMAN EVENTS. ``You can give a man who comes
in here good food and clean clothes, which we do. You can give
him a shower and a shave and a clean bed. He can walk out of
here looking like a million dollars in the morning and then come
back the same night looking like he did the first time.
``But when you get to the soul and the heart and the mind, and
that man sees that he can do something better and with the Lord's
help he will, then you are on the road to recovery.''
Both the Central Union Mission and the Luther Place shelter
reserve the right to refuse to accommodate violent and disruptive
individuals. As Rich told HUMAN EVENTS, public shelters also
``should be allowed to take a man who won't keep the peace and
show him the door. When a man is shown the door in a public
shelter, he must be down to line zero in his conduct and he needs
to be made to think about that.''
Hollander expressed a similar view. ``In our shelter, if
people are violent they are asked to leave. No drugs, no
alcohol, no weapons, no violence. Whether it is public or
non-public, you must at some point make a decision for the
good of the community as opposed to the individual.''
President Bush is on record as supporting full funding for the
McKinney Act for the Homeless, which authorizes money for various
homeless programs that are scattered through a number of
government agencies.
But full funding for that act would throw almost a billion
dollars at ill-planned and ill-conceived programs. As currently
conceived, these government programs come with any number of
restrictions that work against model efforts of private providers
of homeless care such as Dr. Rich.
There is a lesson for the Bush Administration in the stark
contrast between public and private sector care for the homeless
here in Washington. Indeed, Bush has a golden opportunity with
the homeless issue to forge a true conservative agenda that
stresses private initiative over patronizing government
bureaucracy in helping the poor.
If government is to spend money on the homeless, it should do
so in a way that encourages, not hinders, the private sector.
The object is to ignite a thousand points of light, not snuff
them out.
* * *
Return to the ground floor of this tower
Return to the Main Courtyard
Return to Fort Freedom's home page