Facebook
TwitterIn 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.
Facebook
TwitterWhen 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.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution-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.
Facebook
TwitterIn 2023, there were an estimated ******* white homeless people in the United States, the most out of any ethnicity. In comparison, there were around ******* Black or African American homeless people in the U.S. How homelessness is counted The actual number of homeless individuals in the U.S. is difficult to measure. The Department of Housing and Urban Development uses point-in-time estimates, where employees and volunteers count both sheltered and unsheltered homeless people during the last 10 days of January. However, it is very likely that the actual number of homeless individuals is much higher than the estimates, which makes it difficult to say just how many homeless there are in the United States. Unsheltered homeless in the United States California is well-known in the U.S. for having a high homeless population, and Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego all have high proportions of unsheltered homeless people. While in many states, the Department of Housing and Urban Development says that there are more sheltered homeless people than unsheltered, this estimate is most likely in relation to the method of estimation.
Facebook
TwitterFinancial overview and grant giving statistics of Shelter the Homeless International Projects
Facebook
TwitterFinancial overview and grant giving statistics of Homeless and Orphanage Children International
Facebook
TwitterThe number of people left homeless due to wildfires in 2023 amounted to **, a considerable decrease when compared to the figures of 2022 and 2021, when ***** and ***** people lost their homes due to such disasters.
Facebook
Twitterhttps://www.wiseguyreports.com/pages/privacy-policyhttps://www.wiseguyreports.com/pages/privacy-policy
| BASE YEAR | 2024 |
| HISTORICAL DATA | 2019 - 2023 |
| REGIONS COVERED | North America, Europe, APAC, South America, MEA |
| REPORT COVERAGE | Revenue Forecast, Competitive Landscape, Growth Factors, and Trends |
| MARKET SIZE 2024 | 2.48(USD Billion) |
| MARKET SIZE 2025 | 2.64(USD Billion) |
| MARKET SIZE 2035 | 5.0(USD Billion) |
| SEGMENTS COVERED | Service Type, Target Population, Funding Source, Duration of Stay, Regional |
| COUNTRIES COVERED | US, Canada, Germany, UK, France, Russia, Italy, Spain, Rest of Europe, China, India, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Rest of APAC, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Rest of South America, GCC, South Africa, Rest of MEA |
| KEY MARKET DYNAMICS | Rising homelessness rates, Government funding initiatives, Increasing demand for temporary housing, Growing awareness of housing instability, Shift towards supportive services integration |
| MARKET FORECAST UNITS | USD Billion |
| KEY COMPANIES PROFILED | Walnut Street, Homeward Bound, Pathways to Housing, Rapid ReHousing, Trellis, Bridge Housing, USA Cares, Family Promise, The Salvation Army, Shelterbox, Common Ground, Supportive Housing Services, Interstate Realty Management |
| MARKET FORECAST PERIOD | 2025 - 2035 |
| KEY MARKET OPPORTUNITIES | Increased demand for affordable housing, Government support for transitional programs, Rise in homelessness and displacement, Expansion of mental health services, Collaborations with non-profit organizations |
| COMPOUND ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (CAGR) | 6.6% (2025 - 2035) |
Facebook
Twitterhttps://researchintelo.com/privacy-and-policyhttps://researchintelo.com/privacy-and-policy
According to our latest research, the Global Winter Shelter Overflow Monitoring market size was valued at $415 million in 2024 and is projected to reach $1.18 billion by 2033, expanding at a CAGR of 12.2% during the forecast period of 2024–2033. One of the major factors fueling the growth of this market globally is the increasing demand for real-time capacity monitoring and intelligent resource allocation in homeless shelters and emergency response centers, especially during harsh winter months. As urban populations rise and climate change leads to more unpredictable and severe winter conditions, the need for advanced monitoring solutions that ensure the safety and well-being of vulnerable populations is more critical than ever. This has led to a surge in investments in digital infrastructure and smart monitoring platforms by municipalities, non-profit organizations, and government agencies worldwide, further propelling the market’s expansion.
North America currently holds the largest share of the Winter Shelter Overflow Monitoring market, accounting for over 38% of the global market value in 2024. The region’s dominance is attributed to its mature technological landscape, robust funding for social welfare programs, and stringent regulatory frameworks that mandate effective shelter management, especially during winter emergencies. The United States and Canada lead the adoption of advanced software and hardware solutions, leveraging IoT, cloud computing, and analytics for real-time occupancy tracking and resource optimization. The presence of numerous non-profit organizations, proactive municipal authorities, and significant federal investments in homelessness prevention further reinforce North America’s leadership in this sector. Ongoing public-private partnerships and integration of AI-driven analytics are expected to keep the region at the forefront of innovation and market growth through 2033.
Asia Pacific is identified as the fastest-growing region in the Winter Shelter Overflow Monitoring market, projected to register a remarkable CAGR of 15.7% from 2024 to 2033. This rapid growth is driven by increasing urbanization, rising incidences of extreme weather events, and heightened government focus on social welfare infrastructure across countries such as China, Japan, South Korea, and Australia. Investments in smart city initiatives and the proliferation of cloud-based monitoring solutions are enabling municipalities and non-profits to adopt scalable and cost-effective shelter overflow management systems. Additionally, regional governments are launching targeted policy reforms and incentives to improve the resilience of social services, which is fostering the adoption of advanced monitoring technologies. The market in Asia Pacific is also benefiting from collaborations with international humanitarian organizations and technology vendors, further accelerating the deployment of innovative solutions.
Emerging economies in Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa are gradually adopting Winter Shelter Overflow Monitoring solutions, although market penetration remains relatively low compared to developed regions. Challenges such as limited digital infrastructure, budgetary constraints, and varying policy frameworks often hinder the widespread implementation of advanced monitoring systems. However, localized demand is rising, particularly in urban centers facing increasing homelessness and unpredictable winter conditions. International aid, NGO partnerships, and localized pilot projects are playing a crucial role in bridging the technology gap and demonstrating the value of real-time monitoring for shelter management. Over the forecast period, as governments in these regions prioritize social protection and invest in digital transformation, the adoption rate of winter shelter monitoring solutions is expected to accelerate, albeit from a smaller base.
| Attributes | Details |
| Report Title | Winter Shelter Overflow Monitoring Market Research Report 2033 |
Facebook
TwitterFinancial overview and grant giving statistics of Global Partnership for Homeless Health Inc.
Facebook
Twitterhttps://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/privacy-policy/https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/privacy-policy/
Transitional Housing Services Market size was valued at USD 100 Billion in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 342.6 Billion by 2031, growing at a CAGR of 15.2% during the forecast period 2024-2031.
Global Transitional Housing Services Market Drivers
The market drivers for the Transitional Housing Services Market can be influenced by various factors. These may include:
Increasing Homelessness Rates: The rising rates of homelessness globally are a significant market driver for transitional housing services. Factors such as economic instability, lack of affordable housing, and social issues contribute to this increasing trend. Many cities report surges in homelessness, prompting governments and NGOs to seek robust solutions. Transitional housing serves as an intermediary step, offering individuals and families temporary support while they work towards permanent housing solutions.
Facebook
TwitterSeroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii has been extensively studied in a variety of different human populations. However, no study has focused on homeless populations. Accordingly, the present study aimed to assess the seroprevalence of anti-T. gondii antibodies and the risk factors associated in homeless persons from homeless shelter of São Paulo city, southeastern Brazil. In addition, anti-HIV antibodies and associated risk of T. gondii and HIV coinfection have been evaluated. Anti-T. gondii antibodies were detected by indirect fluorescent antibody test. In addition, anti-HIV levels were tested by chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay, with positive samples confirmed by rapid immunoblot assay. Overall, IgG anti-T. gondii seropositivity was found in 43/120 (35.8%) homeless persons, with endpoint titers varying from 16 to 1,024. The only two pregnant women tested were negative for IgM by chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay, with normal parturition and clinically healthy newborns in both cases. There were no statistical differences in the risk factors for anti-T. gondii serology (p > 0.05). Anti-HIV seropositivity was found in 2/120 (1.7%) homeless persons, confirmed as HIV-1. One HIV seropositive individual was also sero-reactive to IgG anti-T. gondii, and both were negative to IgM anti-T. gondii. This is the first study that reports the serosurvey of T. gondii in homeless persons worldwide. Despite the limited sample size available in the present study, our findings have shown that the prevalence of anti-T. gondii antibodies in homeless persons herein was lower than the general population, probably due to homeless diet habit of eating mainly processed food intake. No statistical differences were found regarding risk factors for anti-T. gondii exposure in homeless persons. Future studies should be conducted to fully establish risk factors for anti-T. gondii exposure in homeless persons.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
BackgroundHomelessness is one of the most disabling and precarious living conditions. The objective of this Delphi consensus study was to identify priority needs and at-risk population subgroups among homeless and vulnerably housed people to guide the development of a more responsive and person-centred clinical practice guideline.MethodsWe used a literature review and expert working group to produce an initial list of needs and at-risk subgroups of homeless and vulnerably housed populations. We then followed a modified Delphi consensus method, asking expert health professionals, using electronic surveys, and persons with lived experience of homelessness, using oral surveys, to prioritize needs and at-risk sub-populations across Canada. Criteria for ranking included potential for impact, extent of inequities and burden of illness. We set ratings of ≥ 60% to determine consensus over three rounds of surveys.FindingsEighty four health professionals and 76 persons with lived experience of homelessness participated from across Canada, achieving an overall 73% response rate. The participants identified priority needs including mental health and addiction care, facilitating access to permanent housing, facilitating access to income support and case management/care coordination. Participants also ranked specific homeless sub-populations in need of additional research including: Indigenous Peoples (First Nations, Métis, and Inuit); youth, women and families; people with acquired brain injury, intellectual or physical disabilities; and refugees and other migrants.InterpretationThe inclusion of the perspectives of both expert health professionals and people with lived experience of homelessness provided validity in identifying real-world needs to guide systematic reviews in four key areas according to priority needs, as well as launch a number of working groups to explore how to adapt interventions for specific at-risk populations, to create evidence-based guidelines.
Facebook
Twitterhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
Disasters include all geophysical, meteorological and climate events including earthquakes, volcanic activity, landslides, drought, wildfires, storms, and flooding. Decadal figures are measured as the annual average over the subsequent ten-year period.
Thanks to Our World in Data, you can explore death from natural disasters by country and by date.
https://www.acacamps.org/sites/default/files/resource_library_images/naturaldisaster4.jpg" alt="Natural Disasters">
List of variables for inspiration: Number of deaths from drought Number of people injured from drought Number of people affected from drought Number of people left homeless from drought Number of total people affected by drought Reconstruction costs from drought Insured damages against drought Total economic damages from drought Death rates from drought Injury rates from drought Number of people affected by drought per 100,000 Homelessness rate from drought Total number of people affected by drought per 100,000 Number of deaths from earthquakes Number of people injured from earthquakes Number of people affected by earthquakes Number of people left homeless from earthquakes Number of total people affected by earthquakes Reconstruction costs from earthquakes Insured damages against earthquakes Total economic damages from earthquakes Death rates from earthquakes Injury rates from earthquakes Number of people affected by earthquakes per 100,000 Homelessness rate from earthquakes Total number of people affected by earthquakes per 100,000 Number of deaths from disasters Number of people injured from disasters Number of people affected by disasters Number of people left homeless from disasters Number of total people affected by disasters Reconstruction costs from disasters Insured damages against disasters Total economic damages from disasters Death rates from disasters Injury rates from disasters Number of people affected by disasters per 100,000 Homelessness rate from disasters Total number of people affected by disasters per 100,000 Number of deaths from volcanic activity Number of people injured from volcanic activity Number of people affected by volcanic activity Number of people left homeless from volcanic activity Number of total people affected by volcanic activity Reconstruction costs from volcanic activity Insured damages against volcanic activity Total economic damages from volcanic activity Death rates from volcanic activity Injury rates from volcanic activity Number of people affected by volcanic activity per 100,000 Homelessness rate from volcanic activity Total number of people affected by volcanic activity per 100,000 Number of deaths from floods Number of people injured from floods Number of people affected by floods Number of people left homeless from floods Number of total people affected by floods Reconstruction costs from floods Insured damages against floods Total economic damages from floods Death rates from floods Injury rates from floods Number of people affected by floods per 100,000 Homelessness rate from floods Total number of people affected by floods per 100,000 Number of deaths from mass movements Number of people injured from mass movements Number of people affected by mass movements Number of people left homeless from mass movements Number of total people affected by mass movements Reconstruction costs from mass movements Insured damages against mass movements Total economic damages from mass movements Death rates from mass movements Injury rates from mass movements Number of people affected by mass movements per 100,000 Homelessness rate from mass movements Total number of people affected by mass movements per 100,000 Number of deaths from storms Number of people injured from storms Number of people affected by storms Number of people left homeless from storms Number of total people affected by storms Reconstruction costs from storms Insured damages against storms Total economic damages from storms Death rates from storms Injury rates from storms Number of people affected by storms per 100,000 Homelessness rate from storms Total number of people affected by storms per 100,000 Number of deaths from landslides Number of people injured from landslides Number of people affected by landslides Number of people left homeless from landslides Number of total people affected by landslides Reconstruction costs from landslides Insured damages against landslides Total economic damages from landslides Death rates from landslides Injury rates from landslides Number of people affected by landslides per 100,000 Homelessness rate from landslides Total number of people affected by landslides per 100,000 Number of deaths from fog Number of people injured from fog Number of people affected by fog Number of people left homel...
Facebook
Twitterhttps://qdr.syr.edu/policies/qdr-standard-access-conditionshttps://qdr.syr.edu/policies/qdr-standard-access-conditions
Project Overview This study used a community-based participatory approach to identify and investigate the needs of people experiencing homelessness in Dublin, Ireland. The project had several stages: A systematic review on health disparities amongst people experiencing homelessness in the Republic of Ireland; Observation and interviews with homeless attendees of a community health clinic; and Interviews with community experts (CEs) conducted from September 2022 to March 2023 on ongoing work and gaps in the research/health service response. This data deposit stems from stage 3, the community expert interview aspect of this project. Stage 1 of the project has been published (Ingram et al., 2023.) and associated data are available here. De-identified field note data from stage 2 of the project are planned for sharing upon completion of analysis, in January 2024. Data and Data Collection Overview A purposive, criterion-i sampling strategy (Palinkas et al., 2015) – where selected interviewees meet a predetermined criterion of importance – was used to identify professionals working in homeless health and/or addiction services in Dublin, stratified by occupation type. Potential CEs were identified through an internet search of homeless health and addiction services in Dublin. Interviewed CEs were invited to recommend colleagues they felt would have relevant perspectives on community health needs, expanding the sample via snowball strategy. Interview questions were based on World Health Organization Community Health Needs Assessment guidelines (Rowe at al., 2001). Semi-structured interviews were conducted between September 2022 and March 2023 utilising ZOOM™, the phone, or in person according to participant preference. Carolyn Ingram, who has formal qualitative research training, served as the interviewer. CEs were presented with an information sheet and gave audio recorded, informed oral consent – considered appropriate for remote research conducted with non-vulnerable adult participants – in the full knowledge that interviews would be audio recorded, transcribed, and de-identified, as approved by the researchers’ institutional Human Research Ethics Committee (LS-E-125-Ingram-Perrotta-Exemption). Interviewees also gave permission for de-identified transcripts to be shared in a qualitative data archive. Shared Data Organization 16 de-identified transcripts from the CE interviews are being published. Three participants from the total sample (N=19) did not consent to data archival. The transcript from each interviewee is named based on the type of work the interviewee performs, with individuals in the same type of work being differentiated by numbers. The full set of professional categories is as follows: Addiction Services Government Homeless Health Services Hospital Psychotherapist Researcher Social Care Any changes or removal of words or phrases for de-identification purposes are flagged by including [brackets] and italics. The documentation files included in this data project are the consent form and the interview guide used for the study, this data narrative and an administrative README file. References Ingram C, Buggy C, Elabbasy D, Perrotta C. (2023) “Homelessness and health-related outcomes in the Republic of Ireland: a systematic review, meta-analysis and evidence map.” Journal of Public Health (Berl). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-023-01934-0 Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, Wisdom JP, Duan N, Hoagwood K. (2015) “Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research.” Administration and Policy in Mental Health. Sep;42(5):533–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y Rowe A, McClelland A, Billingham K, Carey L. (2001) “Community health needs assessment: an introductory guide for the family health nurse in Europe” [Internet]. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe. Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/108440
Facebook
TwitterThe research, entitled Homelessness during COVID-19: Homeless Migrants in a Global Crisis, took a biographical life story approach to understand the experiences of 43 non-UK nationals who experienced homelessness during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the first phase of the project, and in order to gain insight into the homelessness sector, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 37 people across nine homelessness organisations. The focus of the interviews was on migrant homelessness before and during the pandemic. Due to ethical reasons, we are not able to upload data from the life story interviews that we conducted with migrants experiencing homelessness. However, the data from the semi-structured interviews with staff in the homelessness sector that we have submitted to the UK Data Service helped us to frame our research and provided much-needed contextual information during the pandemic.
People experiencing homelessness are disproportionately impacted by coronavirus. Despite government efforts to place rough sleepers in hotels to contain the spread of the disease, many migrants sleeping rough with No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) have been left behind at the height of a global pandemic. This project, involving researchers from University of Portsmouth, University of Sussex and St Mungo's, the homeless charity, will produce an 18-month qualitative-based study of migrant homelessness framed by the wider global and national context. Working with two of St Mungo's migrant services, Street Legal, St Mungo's legal team and Routes Home, a service supporting people sleeping rough from outside of the UK, a particular focus of the study will be the experience of non-UK nationals and their attempts, during the crisis, to resolve their immigration status. Many of these migrants are at the sharpest end of homelessness: almost 1,000 rough sleepers housed in emergency accommodation in London have NRPF (Heath, 2020).
Most migrant homeless clients are faced with multiple everyday challenges; they experience the hostility and aggression directed toward homeless people, compounded with often intense experiences of racism. Migrant homeless clients are also likely to be afraid of 'authorities' for various reasons including fear of deportation by the Home Office and personal histories of violent persecution by state actors in their original countries of belonging. During the pandemic, increased numbers of police on the streets have created high anxiety for refugees/asylum seekers and destitute migrants who report being retriggered with PTSD symptoms, with no access to NHS mental health services that are now delivered primarily remotely and are restricted access except to those patients who have access to free or cheap wifi, or unlimited phone credit (Munt 2020). A cultural miasma of fear and anxiety due to pandemic can affect such vulnerable minority groups particularly forcefully, with public attitudes generating direct aggression toward perceived 'outsiders' as harbingers of disease. Historically, the discourse of the 'stranger' (Ahmed 1991) or foreigner as bringer of disease has been well recognised within cultural sociology (Munt 2007), and as cultural suspicion grows under such conditions, feelings of alienation and estrangement amongst vulnerable groups intensifies.
The project will innovate by examining the biographical and life history narratives of St Mungo's clients in London in relation to their experiences of homelessness during the coronavirus crisis. Alongside semi-structured interviews, we will use participatory research methods including peer research, autoethnographic diaries, mobile phone photo-ethnographies and life history narratives in order to capture the rich and emotive narratives of those experiencing crisis. In doing so, we will examine the intersection of personal histories, complex global processes and the dynamics of the particular situation (Stewart, 2012, 2013). Researching vulnerable groups requires ethical sensitivity. It carries the danger of risking more disappointment among the respondents and exacerbating intense feelings of loneliness and isolation. To avoid this, and to make a positive intervention, we will seek to engage clients with services and support as part of the research project. Based on its findings, and working with St Mungo's partners, the project will make recommendations for measures that can be taken across the UK and elsewhere to support the homeless, particularly those most vulnerable, during times of crisis.
Facebook
TwitterThis layer contains detailed Point in Time counts of homeless populations from 2019. This layer is modeled after a similar layer that contains data for 2018, 2013, and 2008.Layer is symbolized to show the count of the overall homeless population in 2019, with a pie chart of breakdown of type of shelter. To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right. The Point-in-Time (PIT) count is a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night in January. HUD requires that Continuums of Care Areas (CoCs) conduct an annual count of homeless persons who are sheltered in emergency shelter, transitional housing, and Safe Havens on a single night. CoCs also must conduct a count of unsheltered homeless persons every other year (odd numbered years). Each count is planned, coordinated, and carried out locally.The Point-in-Time values were retrieved from HUD's Historical Data site. Original source is the 2019 sheet within the "2007 - 2019 PIT Counts by CoCs.xlsx" (downloaded on 3/10/2020) file. Key fields were kept and joined to the CoC boundaries available from HUD's Open Data site.Data note: MO-604 covers territory in both Missouri and Kansas. The record described in this file represents the CoC's total territory, the sum of the point-in-time estimates the CoC separately reported for the portions of its territory in MO and in KS.For more information and attributes on the CoC Areas themselves, including contact information, see this accompanying layer.Suggested Citation: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)'s Point in Time (PIT) 2019 counts for Continuum of Care Grantee Areas, accessed via ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World on (date).
Facebook
Twitterhttps://researchintelo.com/privacy-and-policyhttps://researchintelo.com/privacy-and-policy
According to our latest research, the Shelter Management Mobile Check-In market size was valued at $1.2 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach $3.8 billion by 2033, expanding at a robust CAGR of 13.5% during the forecast period of 2025–2033. The primary factor fueling this market’s global growth is the increasing demand for real-time, data-driven solutions to streamline shelter operations, improve occupant safety, and ensure regulatory compliance. As governments and humanitarian organizations face mounting challenges in managing shelter populations due to natural disasters, homelessness, and public health emergencies, the adoption of mobile check-in technologies is rapidly accelerating. These solutions offer unparalleled efficiency in registration, occupancy tracking, and resource allocation, fundamentally transforming the way shelters operate worldwide.
North America currently holds the largest share of the global Shelter Management Mobile Check-In market, accounting for over 38% of total market value in 2024. This dominance is attributed to the region’s mature technological infrastructure, proactive government policies around disaster management, and a strong ecosystem of non-profit organizations. The United States, in particular, has seen widespread adoption of mobile check-in platforms across both government-run and privately managed shelters, driven by stringent regulatory requirements for data transparency and occupant safety. High-profile natural disasters and public health crises have further accelerated investments in digital shelter management solutions, making North America a bellwether for innovation and best practices in this sector.
In contrast, the Asia Pacific region is the fastest-growing market, projected to expand at a CAGR of 17.2% through 2033. Rapid urbanization, increasing frequency of natural disasters, and substantial government investment in digital public safety infrastructure are key drivers in countries such as China, India, and Japan. These nations are embracing cloud-based shelter management mobile check-in systems to address massive population displacements and improve emergency response capabilities. The region’s tech-savvy population and growing mobile penetration further support the adoption of these solutions, while international aid agencies and local governments collaborate to scale up digital shelter management initiatives.
Emerging economies in Latin America, Africa, and parts of Southeast Asia are also witnessing gradual adoption of shelter management mobile check-in technologies, albeit at a slower pace. Challenges such as limited digital infrastructure, inconsistent funding, and varying regulatory frameworks can impede rapid deployment. However, humanitarian crises and localized demand for efficient shelter management are prompting governments and NGOs to pilot mobile check-in platforms, often with support from international donors. As digital literacy improves and policy reforms are enacted, these regions are expected to contribute increasingly to the global market, although their aggregate market share remains modest compared to established and fast-growing regions.
| Attributes | Details |
| Report Title | Shelter Management Mobile Check-In Market Research Report 2033 |
| By Component | Software, Services |
| By Deployment Mode | Cloud-Based, On-Premises |
| By Application | Homeless Shelters, Disaster Relief Shelters, Animal Shelters, Emergency Shelters, Others |
| By End-User | Government Agencies, Non-Profit Organizations, Private Organizations, Others |
| Regions Covered | North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Latin America and Middle East & Africa &l |
Facebook
TwitterThis layer contains detailed Point in Time counts of homeless populations from 2018, 2013, and 2008. A 2019 version is now available!Layer is symbolized to show the count of the overall homeless population in 2018, with overall counts from 2008 and 2013 in the pop-up, as well as a pie chart of breakdown of type of shelter. To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right. The Point-in-Time (PIT) count is a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night in January. HUD requires that Continuums of Care Areas (CoCs) conduct an annual count of homeless persons who are sheltered in emergency shelter, transitional housing, and Safe Havens on a single night. CoCs also must conduct a count of unsheltered homeless persons every other year (odd numbered years). Each count is planned, coordinated, and carried out locally.The Point-in-Time values were retrieved from HUD's Historical Data site. The 2018, 2013, and 2008 sheets within the "2007 - 2018 PIT Counts within CoCs.xlsx" (downloaded on 2/7/2019) file were combined and joined to the CoC boundaries available from HUD's Open Data site. As noted in the "Mergers" sheet in the PIT Excel file, some CoC Areas have merged over the years. Use caution when comparing numbers in these CoCs across years. Data note: MO-604 covers territory in both Missouri and Kansas. The record described in this file represents the CoC's total territory, the sum of the point-in-time estimates the CoC separately reported for the portions of its territory in MO and in KS.For more information and attributes on the CoC Areas themselves, including contact information, see this accompanying layer.Suggested Citation: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)'s Point in Time (PIT) counts for Continuum of Care Grantee Areas, accessed via ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World on (date).
Facebook
TwitterPersons, households, and dwellings
UNITS IDENTIFIED: - Dwellings: yes - Vacant Units: Yes - Households: yes - Individuals: yes - Group quarters: yes
UNIT DESCRIPTIONS: - Dwellings: Dwelling is any inhabited physical place, constructed or adapted for housing people. - Households: Household is a group of people, related or otherwise, who occupy the dwelling. - Group quarters: Collective houshold is a group of people who share the dwelling in a non-familial system, for reasons of work, health, discipline, religion, punishment, etc.
All the population in the national territory at the moment the census is carried out. Homeless, passengers in transit (international flights), personnel on duty in hospitals, factories, institutions, and other places, employees of the National Institute of Statistics, embassies and consulates
Population and Housing Census [hh/popcen]
MICRODATA SOURCE: National Institute of Statistics, Ministry of Planning and Coordination, Republic of Bolivia
SAMPLE SIZE (person records): 642368.
SAMPLE DESIGN: Systematic sample of every tenth dwelling with a random start; drawn by IPUMS Homeless, passengers in transit (international flights), personnel on duty in hospitals, factories, institutions, and other places, employees of the National Institute of Statistics, embassies and consulates
Face-to-face [f2f]
A single booklet that consists of sections on geographic location, dwelling, and population (individual)
Facebook
TwitterIn 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.