4 ms·

Most of the homeless shelters I'm personally familiar with (have volunteered at) are not-for-profit...they have limited funding, manpower, and facilities... On

Most of the homeless shelters I'm personally familiar with (have volunteered at) are not-for-profit...they have limited funding, manpower, and facilities... On a really good day everyone gets fed, clothed, bathed and has a climate-controlled place to spend the night...most of the time its a stiff challenge to provide those basics..the wherewithal required to offer extras like counseling, job coaching, or to accommodate individual patron's schedules (coming and going--a security issue) is just not there the majority of the time...

derefr 11y ago
I wonder if the debt-counselling advice of "tackle the worst debt first and pay it off entirely before touching your other debts" has an equivalent here? Maybe instead of sheltering and feeding 20 people, they could shelter, feed, and empower 5, enough to get those people out of the system and make room for the next 5. In the end, with several such facilities operating this way, available care slots would actually increase.
- pyre 11y ago
  > they could shelter, feed, and empower 5, enough to get those people out of the system and make room for the next 5 What do you do about the 15 that you left on the street in the middle of winter, and it's -40 out? Will they get by until you're ready for them? What other prioritization will you be doing? Maybe you'll also prioritize the most hireable candidates to the top of the list to be re-groomed for the workforce. What about those that find themselves in a less hireable state? How far down the list are they, and how long do they have to wait to be helped? What about the people that are homeless due to untreated mental health conditions? Do you just ignore them for now? Are they the "class" of homeless that gets helped last?
  - derefr 11y ago
    Actually, going by the analogy, you'd do precisely the opposite: solve the most intractable cases first, because they're the ones that would be soaking up the most of your long-term resources. Like Murray[1]. [1] http://gladwell.com/million-dollar-murray/ http://gladwell.com/million-dollar-murray/
  - dredmorbius 11y ago
    You've limited resources. At some point, yes, you play God. Head off to G+ and look up Andreas Schou. He used to run a homeless shelter in Boise, Idaho. Kind of fell into the job, previous boss was incompetent. Or skimming. Or something else. But he was out and Andreas, just another volunteer, was in. Some days he could help out. Some he couldn't. Sometimes he kept his cool. Sometimes he didn't. I'll try to find the article. Here: https://plus.google.com/+AndreasSchou/posts/B9iRsq2kVeL https://plus.google.com/+AndreasSchou/posts/B9iRsq2kVeL Andreas works for Google now. Writes some amazingly fucking good shit on G+ as well.
    - pyre 11y ago
      My point was that it's not as cut-and-dry as the parent post made it (like balancing a math equation or something). The 15 that you are not helping (at the moment) don't just wait on a shelf until you're ready for another batch. There are touch decisions to make if you go down that route.
      - dredmorbius 11y ago
        Are you helping anyone by attempting and failing to help 20? If not, then help a number you can actually help. Apply a selection process: triage, sortition, intuition. Whatever. Someone's going to get helped, someone's not. If you've got additional bandwidth, make loudly known that there are more people who need help, and that others should step forward. It's rather like emergency first-responder practices. First ensure you're safe yourself. Then save who you can. Avoid wasting time on helpless cases, or those who can survive without help. Recruit others.
- Outdoorsman 11y ago
  Looking at a spreadsheet and looking into the eyes of a fellow human being are two different experiences altogether...practicality and pragmatism get left behind, quite easily...

derefr 11y ago

I wonder if the debt-counselling advice of "tackle the worst debt first and pay it off entirely before touching your other debts" has an equivalent here? Maybe instead of sheltering and feeding 20 people, they could shelter, feed, and empower 5, enough to get those people out of the system and make room for the next 5. In the end, with several such facilities operating this way, available care slots would actually increase.

pyre 11y ago
> they could shelter, feed, and empower 5, enough to get those people out of the system and make room for the next 5 What do you do about the 15 that you left on the street in the middle of winter, and it's -40 out? Will they get by until you're ready for them? What other prioritization will you be doing? Maybe you'll also prioritize the most hireable candidates to the top of the list to be re-groomed for the workforce. What about those that find themselves in a less hireable state? How far down the list are they, and how long do they have to wait to be helped? What about the people that are homeless due to untreated mental health conditions? Do you just ignore them for now? Are they the "class" of homeless that gets helped last?
- derefr 11y ago
  Actually, going by the analogy, you'd do precisely the opposite: solve the most intractable cases first, because they're the ones that would be soaking up the most of your long-term resources. Like Murray[1]. [1] http://gladwell.com/million-dollar-murray/ http://gladwell.com/million-dollar-murray/
- dredmorbius 11y ago
  You've limited resources. At some point, yes, you play God. Head off to G+ and look up Andreas Schou. He used to run a homeless shelter in Boise, Idaho. Kind of fell into the job, previous boss was incompetent. Or skimming. Or something else. But he was out and Andreas, just another volunteer, was in. Some days he could help out. Some he couldn't. Sometimes he kept his cool. Sometimes he didn't. I'll try to find the article. Here: https://plus.google.com/+AndreasSchou/posts/B9iRsq2kVeL https://plus.google.com/+AndreasSchou/posts/B9iRsq2kVeL Andreas works for Google now. Writes some amazingly fucking good shit on G+ as well.
  - pyre 11y ago
    My point was that it's not as cut-and-dry as the parent post made it (like balancing a math equation or something). The 15 that you are not helping (at the moment) don't just wait on a shelf until you're ready for another batch. There are touch decisions to make if you go down that route.
    - dredmorbius 11y ago
      Are you helping anyone by attempting and failing to help 20? If not, then help a number you can actually help. Apply a selection process: triage, sortition, intuition. Whatever. Someone's going to get helped, someone's not. If you've got additional bandwidth, make loudly known that there are more people who need help, and that others should step forward. It's rather like emergency first-responder practices. First ensure you're safe yourself. Then save who you can. Avoid wasting time on helpless cases, or those who can survive without help. Recruit others.
Outdoorsman 11y ago
Looking at a spreadsheet and looking into the eyes of a fellow human being are two different experiences altogether...practicality and pragmatism get left behind, quite easily...