Page 71 - IJPS-9-1

International Journal of
Population Studies Düsseldorfer Model for counting homeless people

4.1. Interpretation of the number of homeless thus seeks to develop and realize perspectives beyond
people with postbox addresses homelessness, therefore needing to be in sharper focus. In
The high number of people with postbox addresses may addition, whether a quota exists for the construction for
indicate a high number of people who are not yet homeless Housing First residences needs to be determined so that
but who live in precarious housing situations. However, sufficient living space is available for homeless people.
more detailed analyses and interpretations of their 4.5. Access to work
numbers are necessary to learn who exactly is behind the
postbox addresses and what support services they need. The empirical analyses revealed that the interviewees want
With such information, it is possible to provide specific to work. In that light, it would be relevant to develop job
services to the target group. Indeed, the high number of offerings after housing is created. In addition to creating
postbox addresses found in this study shows a need for offerings for employment, services that structure day-to-
action. day life can provide the kinds of orientation and support
that enable integration into the labor market.
4.2. Consideration of diverse life situations
4.6. Sociospatial-related social work
Even if DHSS is characterized by an array of services,
whether current services comprehensively address the The empirical analyses additionally captured the
diverse, living situations of homeless people remains experiences of exclusion that homeless people experience
unclear. The empirical analyses of the interviews suggest daily. Thus, added to the recommendations mentioned here,
that people who are homeless are not a homogeneous the question of spatial exclusion should be investigated
group and that their specific life situations have to be in the context of sociospatial social work (e.g., Deinet
considered in a highly open-minded way. That need raises 2009; Knopp & van Rießen 2020). It is also necessary to
the questions of not only whether services are sufficient create solutions with the people themselves, as well as the
for specific situations (e.g., women and couples) but also professionals, the administration, and policymakers, that
who uses the services, who does not, and why they do do not perpetuate displacement and that account for the
not. Those questions bring into focuses of the institutional fact that people who are homeless also need structure and
barriers and limitations that lead to homeless people places to stay.
not using them. For instance, as the empirical analyses 4.7. Organization of the support system
showed, shelters do not afford privacy. In response, single
and double rooms need to be part of the future standard to According to the empirical analyses, entry into the support
enable security, autonomy, and privacy. system, especially at shelters, should be organized so that
people take the help offered and are accompanied when
4.3. Analyses of (non-)users they leave the system, which should happen as soon as
Because the conducted qualitative research using interviews possible. By offering housing within the framework of
in facilities for homeless people, only individuals who were Housing First projects and enabling everyday structure,
institutionally connected were reached. For that reason, systems can enable them to change and improve their
people with psychological handicaps, who generally do not living conditions in the long term.
access the services of homeless support, were not reached
(Bäuml et al., 2017). Thus, groups of people do not or 4.8. Challenges caused by the COVID-19 pandemic
cannot use the help system need to be identified, as do the Needless to say, the pandemic has exacerbated the
services specifically for them that should be developed or homelessness crisis in many parts of the world due to
expanded. job losses, rising living cost, other financial hardships,
and reduced social services caused by the pandemic (U.S.
4.4. Importance of own housing for social Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2021;
participation Watts et al., 2022). Counting the number of homeless

The importance of having one’s own housing became people has becomes more challenging than before as the
specifically clear in the empirical analyses of living case of Düsseldorfer due to increased undercounting,
situations as an essential element of comprehensive social hidden homelessness, and people who are not regularly
participation. Without one’s own housing, incidents with in contact with support services, and the situations will
violence and theft remain unavoidable, both on the street likely continue in the years to come. A more refined
and, in some cases, in shelters. Newer models of homeless comprehensive method is clearly warranted to count the
support such as Housing First (Tsemberis, 2010), which homeless population more accurately, especially in the
understands homeless people as active subjects and crises, such as the pandemic.

Volume 9 Issue 1 (2023) 65 https://doi.org/10.36922/ijps.397