Table 1.
Demographic and Geographic Characteristics of Homeless People in Selected US Metropolitan Areasa
| Characteristic | HMIS Homeless Populationb(n = 130,554) | ACS Poverty Populationc(n = 1,905,110) | ACS General Populationd(n = 14,708,440) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Veteran, % (n = 10,726) | Nonveteran, % (n = 119,828) | Veteran, % (n = 63,655) | Nonveteran, % (n = 1,841,455) | Veteran, % (n = 1,023,515) | Nonveteran, % (n =13,684,925) | |
| Age, y | ||||||
| <29 | 6.8 | 32.4 | 6.2 | 33.6 | 4.3 | 24.9 |
| 30-44 | 24.0 | 38.5 | 14.2 | 28.1 | 15.3 | 31.3 |
| 45-54 | 40.8 | 21.0 | 20.0 | 14.5 | 15.0 | 18.5 |
| 55-64 | 23.3 | 6.7 | 25.5 | 10.2 | 25.4 | 12.5 |
| ≥65 | 5.1 | 1.4 | 34.1 | 13.7 | 40.1 | 12.9 |
| Sex | ||||||
| Female | 10.2 | 48.9 | 9.8 | 60.2 | 6.8 | 54.8 |
| Male | 89.8 | 51.1 | 90.2 | 39.8 | 93.2 | 45.2 |
| Race | ||||||
| Black | 46.0 | 46.9 | 21.2 | 19.4 | 11.4 | 13.9 |
| Nonblack | 54.0 | 53.1 | 79.8 | 80.6 | 88.6 | 86.1 |
| CoC metropolitan area | ||||||
| Columbus, Ohio | 6.4 | 4.4 | 7.2 | 6.1 | 7.5 | 5.6 |
| Denver, Colorado | 7.6 | 3.3 | 16.3 | 10.6 | 19.5 | 13.5 |
| Lansing, Michigan | 2.4 | 1.7 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.6 | 1.5 |
| New York City | 36.5 | 62.2 | 35.4 | 54.8 | 24.5 | 45.7 |
| Phoenix, Arizona | 20.2 | 12.3 | 24.9 | 16.1 | 29.2 | 18.7 |
| San Jose, California | 17.5 | 12.0 | 5.9 | 5.3 | 7.6 | 9.2 |
| Tampa, Florida | 9.3 | 4.1 | 8.3 | 5.1 | 10.1 | 5.8 |
Abbreviations: HMIS, Homeless Management Information System; ACS, American Community Survey; CoC, Continuum of Care.
a
Source: CoC data are collected for geographic units established by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development to track resource use for homeless populations.
b
People within a CoC who used homelessness services, according to HMIS 2008.
c
Adults identified by the ACS 2006-2008 whose incomes fell below the federal poverty threshold.
d
ACS, 2006-2008.