Luke Powers on National Homelessness Statistics
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2024/10/14
Luke Powers is a business professional who helps people donate more effectively. As a graduate of the University of Notre Dame’s Mendoza College of Business, Luke majored in management consulting and minored in innovation and entrepreneurship. He is passionate about leveraging his business expertise to make a positive impact. His interests include business development, start-up strategy, and consultative sales. Luke is based in Miami, Florida, and continues to develop his entrepreneurial skills. SmileHub released new reports on the Best Charities for Homeless Support and the States That Help Homeless People the Most in 2024.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Today, we are joined by Luke Powers from SmileHub. We’ll focus on five critical areas regarding homelessness in the United States. To start, what is the current state of homelessness in the U.S.?
Luke Powers: National homelessness is at a critical juncture. Over 580,000 people are affected, according to the latest estimates, many of whom face systemic barriers such as mental health challenges and a lack of affordable housing. Chronic homelessness is at its highest level in recent years, as many states struggle to provide sufficient resources despite varied efforts to address the crisis. These combined factors have created a situation where nearly one-quarter of all homeless individuals experience chronic patterns of homelessness. States like California and New York lead the way in overall homeless numbers, while states in the Southeast and South, such as Tennessee and Georgia, lag significantly in providing adequate support. The situation is exacerbated by expensive rental markets and insufficient shelter availability, leading many people experiencing homelessness to remain unsheltered.
Jacobsen: Where would you say the situation is the worst, either by state or, if available, by city?
Powers: While I don’t have specific city-level data, I can tell you that the bottom three states—ranking 50th, 49th, and 48th—are Tennessee, Georgia, and South Carolina in terms of providing sufficient support for people experiencing homelessness. If you visit our blog page, you can see the detailed rankings. The Southeast region consistently ranks poorly, with six states in the bottom ten—seven if you include Louisiana. Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina, in particular, struggle with high rates of unsheltered individuals and significant barriers to accessing affordable housing and essential services.
Jacobsen: Which areas have the lowest levels of homelessness?
Powers: Based on the data, there’s a general trend across the Midwest and Northeast where states provide better support for individuals experiencing homelessness. Connecticut, Illinois, North Dakota, Maryland, New York, Indiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Wyoming, and Montana are the top ten states supporting homeless individuals. Montana stands out as an outlier from that regional pattern but still performs well in homelessness support.
Jacobsen: What are the notable outlier states, and what are the reasons for their rankings for reducing and increasing homelessness? To clarify, outliers on the subfactors for reduced and increased homelessness.
Powers: Let me break this down into three primary categories: shelters and housing support, homeless support services, and food and health support. For positive outliers, Connecticut ranks in the top 16 across all categories. It is in the top four for shelter, housing, food, and health support. On the other hand, Tennessee ranks last (50th) in shelters and housing support, 46th in food and health support, and 26th in homeless youth support. Homeless youth support is a critical factor where Tennessee struggles, and these low rankings in shelters, housing, and food and health support contribute to its overall poor performance.
If you’re looking at larger states, California ranks 21st overall, but despite having the largest homeless population in the country, they are 43rd in shelters and housing support. Despite considerable efforts, this illustrates the state’s ongoing challenges in effectively addressing homelessness.
So, getting that support is difficult. However, they are ranked number one in homeless youth support and just below average at 30th in food and health support. Texas, another one of our largest states, ranks 36th overall. They are 29th in shelters and housing support, 5th in homeless youth support, but ranked last, 50th in food and health support. So, you can see how some bigger states have issues, even if they perform well in certain areas.
Jacobsen: What tends to reduce the level of homelessness in realistic terms?
Powers: Reducing homelessness is a complex issue and requires a multifaceted approach. This includes increasing the availability of affordable housing, providing adequate shelters and support services, and addressing healthcare and employment barriers. States that implement supportive policies, such as expanded Medicaid and protections for people experiencing homelessness, or states with fewer anti-homeless policies tend to see reductions in homelessness. Investments in charities, mental health services, and employment opportunities also help reduce homelessness. Key factors include reducing the hours needed to afford housing and improving access to education and employment.
Jacobsen: Are there any other important topics related to this report that we should highlight?
Powers: We’ve covered the significant aspects of the report. My only question was whether you’d like more details about larger states like Florida and New York.
Jacobsen: Yes, let’s continue with that. Please share the information on New York, Florida, and Pennsylvania to round out the top five largest states by population.
Powers: Sure. New York ranks fifth among the five most populous states, placing fifth overall. It is fifth in shelters and housing support, 21st in homeless youth support, and 20th in food and health support. Despite being just slightly above average in two of those categories, it performs well in shelters and housing support, which raises its overall ranking.
Conversely, Florida ranks 43rd overall, 46th in shelters and housing support, 10th in homeless youth support, and 45th in food and health support. This shows a trend of the most populous states struggling to support their large homeless populations.
Lastly, Pennsylvania ranks 11th overall. Like other states in the Midwest and Northeast, they perform relatively well, ranking 21st in shelters and housing support, 19th in homeless youth support, and 6th in food and health support.
States that rank highly in these categories typically offer better support services for their populations, such as more mental health counsellors per capita, fewer anti-homeless policies, more healthcare centers for people experiencing homelessness, lower unemployment rates, and fewer unsheltered homeless individuals. They also have laws protecting sources of income, more emergency housing vouchers per person experiencing homelessness, and lower minimum wages required to afford a studio apartment. It isn’t easy to cover every topic in this discussion, but I’ve highlighted some of the most critical factors. Let me know if you need more information.
Jacobsen: That should be all for now. I appreciate your time today and all the information you’ve shared. Hopefully, we can do more of these in the future.
Powers: Absolutely. To see more of our reports, visit smilehub.org/blog.
Jacobsen: Great. Thank you so much for your time, Luke. I appreciate it.
Powers: Thanks, Scott. Have a good one!
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 