After 20 years working with people experiencing homelessness — from running shelter programs in Seattle to supporting HUD’s Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program nationally — I’ve learned what works and what doesn’t. Utah’s proposed legislative changes concern me deeply because they repeat mistakes I’ve watched fail in cities across America.
I’m not an outside critic. My family and I chose to make Salt Lake City our home, and I’ve watched this community grapple with these challenges. What I’m seeing in the current proposals isn’t innovation — it’s a return to approaches that research and experience have shown produce worse outcomes at a higher cost.
What actually works?
In my years facilitating communities of practice on coordinated entry and training practitioners nationwide, I’ve seen a consistent pattern: People recover faster when they have stable housing first, then receive services — not the reverse.
Research published in JAMA Network Open confirms what I’ve witnessed firsthand: Housing First with intensive case management is cost-effective and produces better outcomes than treatment-first models. When people have a safe place to sleep, they show up for treatment appointments. They take their medications consistently. They can focus on recovery rather than daily survival.
I’ve facilitated trainings across the country helping communities move people into housing quickly while maintaining trauma-informed, person-centered approaches. The communities that succeed aren’t the ones with the most enforcement or the biggest institutions — they’re the ones that invest in permanent housing with supportive services.
The institutional model doesn’t work
The proposed centralized campus with involuntary commitment facilities represents a fundamental misunderstanding of what people experiencing homelessness need. Having worked extensively with both large and small communities, I can tell you that institutional congregate settings produce worse outcomes than community-based permanent housing.
Large facilities create their own problems: disease transmission, violence, lack of privacy, loss of dignity. People avoid them. And when you make them involuntary? Research shows that involuntary commitment for substance use disorder is less effective and more dangerous. People are more than twice as likely to experience fatal overdoses compared to those in voluntary treatment.
I’ve spent years working with the Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program, where we’ve proven that young people thrive when given housing, support and a voice in their own recovery — not when they’re warehoused in institutions.
What Utah should do instead
As a Salt Lake City resident and someone who has watched Utah’s homelessness increase 18% in the past year, I understand the urgency. But urgency shouldn’t lead us to expensive mistakes.
Utah needs to invest in what actually works:
Permanent supportive housing: Utah’s own data shows 95% of people placed in permanent housing stay housed. This isn’t speculation — it’s Utah’s track record when we commit to housing.
Rapid rehousing: Help people get back into housing quickly with temporary assistance. It costs far less than keeping people in shelters or jails.
Crisis response teams: Pair mental health professionals with law enforcement. I’ve seen this work in multiple cities — it reduces arrests and improves outcomes.
Youth-specific programs: Building on successful models I’ve helped implement through YHDP, invest in developmentally appropriate services for young people experiencing homelessness.
The real crisis
From 2000 to now, Salt Lake County rents have increased 140%. That’s the crisis. Research shows that every $100 increase in median rent correlates with a 9% increase in homelessness.
We can’t solve this by building more shelter beds or institutional facilities. We solve it by building affordable housing and helping people access it with supportive services.
A personal plea
I’ve devoted my career to this work because I’ve seen people transform their lives when given the right support. I’ve watched someone who had been homeless for years become a peer support specialist helping others. I’ve seen young people exit homelessness and go to college. I’ve witnessed families reunited when parents got stable housing and treatment.
These successes didn’t happen in institutions. They happened in scattered-site housing with voluntary services, trauma-informed care and people being treated with dignity.
Utah has an opportunity to lead again, as we once did with Housing First. But that requires courage to stick with evidence-based approaches even when political pressure pushes toward punishment and institutions.
The 4,600 Utahns experiencing homelessness deserve better than recycled failures. They deserve what we know works: housing, services and dignity.