In 2023, there were about ******* homeless people estimated to be living in the United States, the highest number of homeless people recorded within the provided time period. In comparison, the second-highest number of homeless people living in the U.S. within this time period was in 2007, at *******. How is homelessness calculated? Calculating homelessness is complicated for several different reasons. For one, it is challenging to determine how many people are homeless as there is no direct definition for homelessness. Additionally, it is difficult to try and find every single homeless person that exists. Sometimes they cannot be reached, leaving people unaccounted for. In the United States, the Department of Housing and Urban Development calculates the homeless population by counting the number of people on the streets and the number of people in homeless shelters on one night each year. According to this count, Los Angeles City and New York City are the cities with the most homeless people in the United States. Homelessness in the United States Between 2022 and 2023, New Hampshire saw the highest increase in the number of homeless people. However, California was the state with the highest number of homeless people, followed by New York and Florida. The vast amount of homelessness in California is a result of multiple factors, one of them being the extreme high cost of living, as well as opposition to mandatory mental health counseling and drug addiction. However, the District of Columbia had the highest estimated rate of homelessness per 10,000 people in 2023. This was followed by New York, Vermont, and Oregon.
When analyzing the ratio of homelessness to state population, New York, Vermont, and Oregon had the highest rates in 2023. However, Washington, D.C. had an estimated ** homeless individuals per 10,000 people, which was significantly higher than any of the 50 states. Homeless people by race The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development performs homeless counts at the end of January each year, which includes people in both sheltered and unsheltered locations. The estimated number of homeless people increased to ******* in 2023 – the highest level since 2007. However, the true figure is likely to be much higher, as some individuals prefer to stay with family or friends - making it challenging to count the actual number of homeless people living in the country. In 2023, nearly half of the people experiencing homelessness were white, while the number of Black homeless people exceeded *******. How many veterans are homeless in America? The number of homeless veterans in the United States has halved since 2010. The state of California, which is currently suffering a homeless crisis, accounted for the highest number of homeless veterans in 2022. There are many causes of homelessness among veterans of the U.S. military, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance abuse problems, and a lack of affordable housing.
Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-SA 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The graph displays the top 15 states by an estimated number of homeless people in the United States for the year 2025. The x-axis represents U.S. states, while the y-axis shows the number of homeless individuals in each state. California has the highest homeless population with 187,084 individuals, followed by New York with 158,019, while Hawaii places last in this dataset with 11,637. This bar graph highlights significant differences across states, with some states like California and New York showing notably higher counts compared to others, indicating regional disparities in homelessness levels across the country.
This statistic depicts the rate of homeless individuals in the United States in 2017, by metropolitan area. In 2017, the rate of homelessness per 10,000 individuals was highest in New York City, at 88.7.
In the period from 2012 to 2013, discoveries in shale oil and advances in drilling techniques created an oil boom in North Dakota. Migrant workers from across the continent flocked to the rural prairie state in search of plentiful and well-paying jobs. The state now boasts high economic indexes across the board, including the lowest unemployment rate in the country. But the boom has put a strain on North Dakota's infrastructure. As some cities nearly double their populations, housing has been unable to keep pace with the growth. Employed and healthy individuals are forced to brave the frigid northern conditions in cars and tents.The three maps in this web application paint a picture of the homeless problem in North Dakota by showing how the state's homeless counts, percentages, and change compare to the rest of the United States. While North Dakota's total homeless population is relatively low, the population is high for its size and growing at a tremendous rate.
description: This data set shows the location of Baltimore City's Tansitional and Emergency "Homeless" Shelter Facilities. However, this is not a complete list. It is the most recent update (2008), and is subjected to change. The purpose of this data set is to aid Baltimore City organizations to best identify facilities to aid the homeless population. The data is broken down into two categories: Emergency Shelter and Transitional Housing. Please find the two definitions below. The first is simply _ _ _shelter _ and the second is a more involved program that is typically a longer stay. Emergency Shelter: Any facility with overnight sleeping accommodations, the primary purpose of which is to provide temporary shelter for the homeless in general or for specific populations of homeless persons. The length of stay can range from one night up to as much as six months. Transitional Housing: a project that is designed to provide housing and appropriate support services to homeless persons to facilitate movement to independent living within 24 months. These data set was provided by Greg Sileo, Director of the Mayor's Office of Baltimore Homeless Services.; abstract: This data set shows the location of Baltimore City's Tansitional and Emergency "Homeless" Shelter Facilities. However, this is not a complete list. It is the most recent update (2008), and is subjected to change. The purpose of this data set is to aid Baltimore City organizations to best identify facilities to aid the homeless population. The data is broken down into two categories: Emergency Shelter and Transitional Housing. Please find the two definitions below. The first is simply _ _ _shelter _ and the second is a more involved program that is typically a longer stay. Emergency Shelter: Any facility with overnight sleeping accommodations, the primary purpose of which is to provide temporary shelter for the homeless in general or for specific populations of homeless persons. The length of stay can range from one night up to as much as six months. Transitional Housing: a project that is designed to provide housing and appropriate support services to homeless persons to facilitate movement to independent living within 24 months. These data set was provided by Greg Sileo, Director of the Mayor's Office of Baltimore Homeless Services.
In the United States in 2023, **** percent of the unaccompanied homeless youth in the Watsonville/Santa Cruz City and County, California were unsheltered.
Homelessness has been a consistent problem for the city of Louisville for decades now. Despite efforts from the city government and local nonprofits, homelessness increased 139% last year alone. The Covid-19 pandemic significantly worsened the crisis, but the risk factors that contribute to homelessness are still endemic across the city: lack of affordable housing, lack of access to physical and mental healthcare, stagnant wages, etc. Homelessness has negative effects on mortality, personal health of the homeless, and public health in general (also see here, no paywall). When I recently attended a strategy meeting for the Louisville Downtown Partnership, one of the top issues voted by attendees was the rise of homelessness downtown. This could come from genuine care or that many Americans associate homeless people with crime. Everyone benefits when the issues that cause homelessness are addressed effectively, and a vital part of that is knowing what areas are most at-risk.The app above was made to map certain risk factors across Jefferson County. The risk factors include percent of households with 50%+ income going to rent, persons without health insurance coverage, percent of households at or below the poverty line, percent of households using public assistance, percent of persons reporting extensive physical and mental distress, unemployment, along with other economic and health-based factors. This doesn’t include every possible factor that could cause homelessness, but many that have strong effects. A dummy census tract was made with all the worst possible outcomes for risk factors, which was then used to rank the similarity of every census tract in Jefferson County; the lower the rank, the more at-risk the tract is. The app allows you to click through every tract in the county and see the ten most at-risk ones.The most at-risk places tend to line up with the west end and areas of the city that were historically redlined. These areas also saw mass amounts of “urban renewal” in the 60s and 70s. They also tend to line up with areas of the city that face the highest eviction rates (thanks to Ryan Massey for pointing this out).
Community integration of homeless in a Cologne suburb. Topics: Characterization of the suburb Poll; closeness with the suburb or with the city of Cologne; length of residence in the suburb; previous place of residence and moving frequency; rent costs; size of household and number of rooms; possession of durable economic goods; year of construction of building; satisfaction with residence; moving plans; possible destination of moving; particular advantages of the residential area in Poll; favorite part of town of Cologne; familial relations in the part of town or in the entire city; frequency of contact with parents, grandparents, children, siblings and the rest of the relatives; distribution of circle of friends about the part of town and the other parts of the city; contacts with neighbors and colleagues; location of place of work; frequency of change of place of work; occupational mobility; desire for remaining in the part of town given a change of occupation; shopping habits; frequency of trips downtown; leisure activities and place of these leisure activities; club membership; time extent of club activity; participation in activities of the Poll Buergerverein; significance of this organization; judgement on the moving of schools; most influencial personalities in the suburb; most important integration factors in the part of town; influence of the part of town on the entire city; anomy (scale); evaluation of despicability of selected crimes; most important reasons for development of so-called Rocker groups; most effective measures to reduce crime; perceived differences in the old and new part of town; identification of areas that belong together in the part of town and assignment of different social groups to the parts of town; assignment of social groups to the homeless settlement; significance of the homeless problem and preferred measures to eliminate it; measures to prevent homelessness; attitude to differential treatment of the homeless and the rest of the population; recommendations on treatment of the homeless; judgement on the proportion of homeless in the part of town; personal contacts with the homeless; intensity of contacts; fear of contact and social distance to the homeless; preferred measures in view of the two homeless settlements in Poll; perceived differences among the homeless; typical characteristics with which one can recognize the homeless; judgement on a media report about the homeless in Poll; judgement on the municipal facilities in the part of town; personal importance of the existence of such facilities; religiousness. Interviewer rating: residential building size and willingness of respondent to cooperate.
https://www.ibisworld.com/about/termsofuse/https://www.ibisworld.com/about/termsofuse/
Community housing and homeless shelters, mostly small nonprofits, heavily depend on government and charitable funding. According to the Annual Homelessness Assessment Report (AHAR 2023), out % of 653,100 individuals experiencing homelessness, 60.7% were sheltered, while 39.3% remained unsheltered, highlighting a significant underserved market. The pandemic increased unemployment, housing costs and poverty levels, raising demand for shelter services, with government support aiding many establishments. As a result, industry revenue grew at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.0%, reaching $21.9 billion by 2024, with a 2.0% climb in 2024 alone. Notably, industry profit rose to 7.0%, with most profit reinvested into operations, as 96.0% of shelters are nonprofits and 98.0% of community housing providers are federally tax-exempt. Individual service needs vary widely. About one-third of shelter services cater to emergency housing. Six out of ten people experiencing homelessness are in urban areas, explaining the concentration of shelters in cities. Also, three out of ten people experiencing homelessness come from a family with children. Catering to a diverse demographic (families, youths, adults, veterans) can restrict economies of scale, but specialized services can attract targeted charitable contributions. Urban shelters face higher rents and costs because of competitive pressures. However, they can gain from group purchasing, network development for better rates and spreading positive information to boost donations. Service provision is expected to remain fragmented, with shelters competing intensely for grants. Donations will fluctuate depending on the economy, increasing during booms and decreasing in downturns. Shelters integrating telehealth, training and security measures may attract a broader group, reducing unsheltered homelessness and increasing revenue for service and infrastructure improvements. Despite favorable economic trends, such as decreasing poverty and unemployment rates and slower housing price growth, revenue will strengthen at a CAGR of only 0.2%, reaching $22.0 billion by 2029.
CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
The most recent rate of homelessness is calculated using ACS population estimates from the previous year, unless otherwise noted.
Data Source: HUD's Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) Point-in-Time (PIT) Estimates by State and American Community Survey (ACS) 1-Year Estimates
Why this MattersSafe, adequate, and stable housing is a human right and essential for the health and well-being of individuals, families, and communities.People who experience homelessness also struggle to maintain access to healthcare, employment, education, healthy relationships, and other basic necessities in life, according to the DC Interagency Council on Homelessness Strategic Plan.BIPOC populations are disproportionately affected by homelessness due to housing discrimination, mass incarceration, and other policies that have limited socioeconomic opportunities for Black, Latino, and other people of color.
The District's Response Strategic investments in proven strategies for driving down homelessness, including the Career Mobility Action Plan (Career MAP) program, operation of non-congregate housing, and expansion of the District’s shelter capacity.Homelessness prevention programs for at-risk individuals and families, such as emergency rental assistance, targeted affordable housing, and permanent supporting housing.Programs and services to enhance resident’s economic and employment security and ensure access to affordable housing.
In 2023, there were about 10,173 homeless youth living in California, the most out of any U.S. state. New York had the second-highest number of homeless youth in that year, at 4,468.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Analysis of ‘COVID-19 Deaths by Population Characteristics Over Time’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/60f5842f-a359-4b03-ad21-1bcfc3bf7fe6 on 13 February 2022.
--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---
Note: On January 22, 2022, system updates to improve the timeliness and accuracy of San Francisco COVID-19 cases and deaths data were implemented. You might see some fluctuations in historic data as a result of this change.
A. SUMMARY This dataset shows San Francisco COVID-19 deaths by population characteristics and by date. Deaths are included on the date the individual died.
Population characteristics are subgroups, or demographic cross-sections, like age, race, or gender. The City tracks how deaths have been distributed among different subgroups. This information can reveal trends and disparities among groups.
Data is lagged by five days, meaning the most date included is 5 days prior to today. All data update daily as more information becomes available.
B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED COVID-19 deaths are suspected to be associated with COVID-19. This means COVID-19 is listed as a cause of death or significant condition on the death certificate.
Data on the population characteristics of COVID-19 deaths are from: * Case interviews * Laboratories * Medical providers
These multiple streams of data are merged, deduplicated, and undergo data verification processes. It takes time to process this data. Because of this, data is lagged by 5 days and death totals for previous days may increase or decrease. More recent data is less reliable.
Data are continually updated to maximize completeness of information and reporting on San Francisco COVID-19 deaths.
Data notes on each population characteristic type is listed below.
Race/ethnicity * We include all race/ethnicity categories that are collected for COVID-19 cases.
Sexual orientation * Sexual orientation data is collected from individuals who are 18 years old or older. These individuals can choose whether to provide this information during case interviews. Learn more about our data collection guidelines. * The City began asking for this information on April 28, 2020. Gender * The City collects information on gender identity using these guidelines.
Comorbidities * Underlying conditions are reported when a person has one or more underlying health conditions at the time of diagnosis or death.
Transmission type * Information on transmission of COVID-19 is based on case interviews with individuals who have a confirmed positive test. Individuals are asked if they have been in close contact with a known COVID-19 case. If they answer yes, transmission category is recorded as contact with a known case. If they report no contact with a known case, transmission category is recorded as community transmission. If the case is not interviewed or was not asked the question, they are counted as unknown.
Homelessness
Persons are identified as homeless based on several data sources:
* self-reported living situation
* the location at the time of testing
* Department of Public Health homelessness and health databases
* Residents in Single-Room Occupancy hotels are not included in these figures.
These methods serve as an estimate of persons experiencing homelessness. They may not meet other homelessness definitions.
Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) occupancy
* A Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) is a type of long-term care facility that provides care to individuals, generally in their 60s and older, who need functional assistance in their daily lives.
* Facilities are mandated to report COVID-19 cases or deaths among their residents. The City follows up with these facilities to confirm.
* There may be differences between the City’s SNF data and the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) dashboard. The difference may be because the City and the State use dif
--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---
Homelessness and Hidden Homelessness in Rural and Northern Ontario is the first study of its kind to empirically challenge these popular perceptions. In fact, as the analysis of data from the recent Canadian Social Survey demonstrates, compared to city dwellers, a higher percentage of people from rural Ontario reported that they had experienced homelessness or hidden homelessness at some point in their lives. The research carried out for this report was based on a survey of service providers (with responses from 204 service providers and 30 service managers), focus groups (with 76 key sector stakeholders), and interviews (with 40 people who had experience of homelessness or hidden homelessness) in 10 communities in northwestern, northeastern, southwestern, and southeastern Ontario. This was augmented by an analysis of Ontario data from Canada’s General Social Survey. The causes of homelessness in rural and northern Ontario were found to be similar to those in big cities: poverty, mental illness and addictions, lack of affordable housing and domestic violence. The study also revealed that many Indigenous peoples are at risk of homelessness and hidden homelessness, particularly those living in northern areas of the province.
<p class="gem-c-attachment_metadata"><span class="gem-c-attachment_attribute"><abbr title="OpenDocument Spreadsheet" class="gem-c-attachment_abbr">ODS</abbr></span>, <span class="gem-c-attachment_attribute">309 KB</span></p>
<p class="gem-c-attachment_metadata">
This file is in an <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/using-open-document-formats-odf-in-your-organisation" target="_self" class="govuk-link">OpenDocument</a> format
For quarterly local authority-level tables prior to the latest financial year, see the Statutory homelessness release pages.
<p class="gem-c-attachment_metadata"><span class="gem-c-attachment_attribute"><abbr title="OpenDocument Spreadsheet" class="gem-c-attachment_abbr">ODS</abbr></span>, <span class="gem-c-attachment_attribute">1.19 MB</span></p>
<p class="gem-c-attachment_metadata">
This file is in an <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/using-open-document-formats-odf-in-your-organisation" target="_self" class="govuk-link">OpenDocument</a> format
https://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/terms-and-conditionshttps://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/terms-and-conditions
DCLG collects information on the number of households with or expecting dependent children, who are, at the end of each quarter, in any of the following types of temporary accommodation: • Bed and Breakfast (B&B) - typically involves the use of privately managed hotels where households share at least some facilities and meals are provided; • Annexe accommodation - is also generally paid on a nightly basis, privately managed but may not be part of a B&B hotel and may not involve shared facilities. A distinction is made on the basis of whether at least some facilities are shared or there is exclusive use of all facilities; • Hostel accommodation - hostels assumes shared accommodation, owned or leased and managed by either a local authority, housing association or non-profit making organisation; includes reception centres and emergency units; • Private sector accommodation - dwellings may be leased from the private sector, either directly, or by a local authority or a Registered Social Landlord; • Other - includes mobile homes, such as caravans, ‘demountables’, ‘portacabins’ and ‘transposables.’ The last 20 years have seen a rapid increase in homelessness, with the numbers of officially homeless families peaking in the early 1990s. In 1997 102,000 were statutory homeless, i.e. they met the definition of homelessness laid down in the 1977 Housing (Homeless Persons) Act. Other homeless people included rough sleepers - those without any accommodation at all - and hostel users. In 1997, fifty eight per cent of statutory homeless households had dependent children, and a further 10 per cent had a pregnant household member, compared to 51% and 10% respectively in 2003. Poor housing environments contribute to ill health through poor amenities, shared facilities and overcrowding, inadequate heating or energy inefficiency. The highest risks to health in housing are attached to cold, damp and mouldy conditions. In addition, those in very poor housing, such as homeless hostels and bedsits, are more likely to suffer from poor mental and physical health than those whose housing is of higher quality. People living in temporary accommodation of the bed and breakfast kind have high rates of some infections and skin conditions and children have high rates of accidents. Living in such conditions engenders stress in the parents and impairs normal child development through lack of space for safe play and exploration. Whilst cause and effect are hard to determine, at the very least homelessness prevents the resolution of associated health problems. Legacy unique identifier: P01088
https://www.gesis.org/en/institute/data-usage-termshttps://www.gesis.org/en/institute/data-usage-terms
The social situation of the homeless in a Cologne suburb. Topics: Most important problems in the settlement; problems in the relationship between the settlement and surroundings; plans to leave; length of residence in the settlement and year of first utilization of a city shelter; reason for admission into a city shelter; type of quarters on first admission and before admission; frequency of moving into such accomodations and settlements; perceived deterioration from the move; number of rooms; possession of durable economic goods; defects in residence; number of children and schools attended or kindergarten; attitude to establishment of a special school in the part of town; perceived discrimination of one´s children in school; regular pocket-money for the children; place of leisure time of one´s children; contacts of one´s children outside of the settlement; person raising the children; perceived discrimination of the homeless; exercise of an honorary activity in the settlement; attitude to a self-help committee in the settlement; interest in participation in such a committee; assumed effectiveness of a community of interests of the homeless; most important tasks of such a community of interests; most important institutions as contact to improve the situation of the homeless; location of place of work; frequency of change of job; change of occupation; satisfaction with place of work; shopping place; possession of savings; manager of family income; decision-maker for expenditures; debts; eating main meal together; leisure activities in the settlement; contact persons in leisure time; leisure contacts outside the settlement; neighborhood contacts in the settlement; contacts with non-homeless; establishing these contacts on leisure time or through work; identification as Cologne resident or resident of the part of town; desire to move to another part of town; favorite part of town in Cologne; intensity of contact with the population in the part of town; contacts with residents of another settlement; participation in meetings of the Poll Buergerverein; assumed representation of interests of the homeless through this organization; most influencial personalities in the part of town; persons making a particular effort for the homeless; most important differences between the residents of one´s own settlement and another settlement in the part of town; knowledge of press reports and television reports about the homeless and judgement on validity; most important reasons for homelessness; most important measures to prevent homelessness; perceived differences between the homeless; filing a complaint against the city to obtain better housing; experiences with contacts with authorities; satisfaction with the manager of the settlement; most important task of a manager; anomy (scale); comparison of personal housing situation with that of parents; social origins; social mobility compared with father and father-in-law; contacts with relatives; judgement of relatives about living in this settlement; relatives likewise living in emergency shelters; personal condition of health; number of sick family members and type of illnesses; recommendations on dealing with the homeless; society or the individual as responsible for one´s own homelessness; desire for integration in a normal residential area; personal extent of commiting crimes and conviction; type of offenses; perceived improvement in living conditions in the emergency shelter; comparison of the situation between the settlement and a temporary shelter; place of birth; length of residence in Cologne; re-married; religiousness; club memberships; extent of club activity; party preference; assumed effectiveness of this survey on the situation of the homeless. Interviewer rating: name sign on door; description of residential furnishings regarding family pictures, other pictures, knick-knacks, religious figures and possession of books; condition of windows, wallpaper and furniture; length of interview; number of persons present during interview; carrying out house work by the person interviewed during the interview; conduct of other persons present during the conversation; willingness of respondent to cooperate.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
ABSTRACT In this paper I present results of a project that, in the context of critical discourse studies and the interdiscursive analysis of public policies, focused on representations in online journalism regarding public policies aimed at the homeless population. The research project (CAPES 88881.172032/2018-01) was developed at the Pompeu Fabra University, Spain. Considering the main newspaper of the city of São Paulo, in its digital platform, we have compiled a comprehensive corpus of news about homeless situation published in a period of three years. The choice to specifically address data from Folha de S Paulo is justified because it is the city with the largest homeless population in Brazil. Also, because our previous study has shown that this is the vehicle, among those studied, that publishes more news related to territorial issues, our focus of interest to investigate via the discursive categories of metaphor and representation of social actors.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Analysis of ‘COVID-19 Cases by Population Characteristics Over Time’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/a3291d85-0076-43c5-a59c-df49480cdc6d on 13 February 2022.
--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---
Note: On January 22, 2022, system updates to improve the timeliness and accuracy of San Francisco COVID-19 cases and deaths data were implemented. You might see some fluctuations in historic data as a result of this change. Due to the changes, starting on January 22, 2022, the number of new cases reported daily will be higher than under the old system as cases that would have taken longer to process will be reported earlier.
A. SUMMARY This dataset shows San Francisco COVID-19 cases by population characteristics and by specimen collection date. Cases are included on the date the positive test was collected.
Population characteristics are subgroups, or demographic cross-sections, like age, race, or gender. The City tracks how cases have been distributed among different subgroups. This information can reveal trends and disparities among groups.
Data is lagged by five days, meaning the most recent specimen collection date included is 5 days prior to today. Tests take time to process and report, so more recent data is less reliable.
B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED Data on the population characteristics of COVID-19 cases and deaths are from: * Case interviews * Laboratories * Medical providers
These multiple streams of data are merged, deduplicated, and undergo data verification processes. This data may not be immediately available for recently reported cases because of the time needed to process tests and validate cases. Daily case totals on previous days may increase or decrease. Learn more.
Data are continually updated to maximize completeness of information and reporting on San Francisco residents with COVID-19.
Data notes on each population characteristic type is listed below.
Race/ethnicity * We include all race/ethnicity categories that are collected for COVID-19 cases. * The population estimates for the "Other" or “Multi-racial” groups should be considered with caution. The Census definition is likely not exactly aligned with how the City collects this data. For that reason, we do not recommend calculating population rates for these groups.
Sexual orientation * Sexual orientation data is collected from individuals who are 18 years old or older. These individuals can choose whether to provide this information during case interviews. Learn more about our data collection guidelines. * The City began asking for this information on April 28, 2020.
Gender * The City collects information on gender identity using these guidelines.
Comorbidities * Underlying conditions are reported when a person has one or more underlying health conditions at the time of diagnosis or death.
Transmission type * Information on transmission of COVID-19 is based on case interviews with individuals who have a confirmed positive test. Individuals are asked if they have been in close contact with a known COVID-19 case. If they answer yes, transmission category is recorded as contact with a known case. If they report no contact with a known case, transmission category is recorded as community transmission. If the case is not interviewed or was not asked the question, they are counted as unknown.
Homelessness
Persons are identified as homeless based on several data sources:
* self-reported living situation
* the location at the time of testing
* Department of Public Health homelessness and health databases
* Residents in Single-Room Occupancy hotels are not included in these figures.
These methods serve as an estimate of persons experiencing homelessness. They may not meet other homelessness definitions.
Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) occupancy * A Skilled Nursing
--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
National Statistics on Homelessness. Data on households found to be homeless. Contains most useful or most popular data, presented by type and other variables, including by geographical area or as a time series.
In 2023, there were about ******* homeless people estimated to be living in the United States, the highest number of homeless people recorded within the provided time period. In comparison, the second-highest number of homeless people living in the U.S. within this time period was in 2007, at *******. How is homelessness calculated? Calculating homelessness is complicated for several different reasons. For one, it is challenging to determine how many people are homeless as there is no direct definition for homelessness. Additionally, it is difficult to try and find every single homeless person that exists. Sometimes they cannot be reached, leaving people unaccounted for. In the United States, the Department of Housing and Urban Development calculates the homeless population by counting the number of people on the streets and the number of people in homeless shelters on one night each year. According to this count, Los Angeles City and New York City are the cities with the most homeless people in the United States. Homelessness in the United States Between 2022 and 2023, New Hampshire saw the highest increase in the number of homeless people. However, California was the state with the highest number of homeless people, followed by New York and Florida. The vast amount of homelessness in California is a result of multiple factors, one of them being the extreme high cost of living, as well as opposition to mandatory mental health counseling and drug addiction. However, the District of Columbia had the highest estimated rate of homelessness per 10,000 people in 2023. This was followed by New York, Vermont, and Oregon.