{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022375215146299483, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.9640718562874255, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Who Gets “Housing First”? Determining Eligibility in an Era of Housing First Homelessness

Drawing on two years of ethnographic fieldwork at a Midwest nonprofit organization, this project considers how a “housing first” approach to homelessness operates in practice. I show how formal implementation of diagnostic tools and prioritized categories reinforces normative beliefs about gender and vulnerability, which shape providers’ understandings about what people have legitimate claims to social support—or who, in other words, are the “truly vulnerable” homeless. I demonstrate that this convergence of organizational mandates and cultural expectations produces a mutually reinforcing process that guides and constrains case management. Through this, three housing eligibility trajectories arise: accessible, guided, and blocked pathways. Although this system benefits many individuals, it produces barriers to support for those deemed ineligible, leaving many in an indefinite state of services limbo. In effect, this system has produced a climate where merely being homeless is no longer enough to be considered sufficiently vulnerable for receiving housing.