Executive Summary
This paper serves as a resource for program developers and planners seeking to enhance the effectiveness of social welfare programs from a budgetary perspective. Relative to this value, homelessness is a serious problem affecting authorities in San Mateo County and, by extension, California. It is caused by several socioeconomic factors, including unemployment, high costs of renting or owning property, and mental health or addiction problems. In a community of approximately 764,000 residents, up to 1,800 individuals in San Mateo County lack proper shelter. The County’s homelessness problem has been addressed through policy and budgetary interventions.
This report evaluates San Mateo County’s budget for its homelessness eradication program. It seeks to determine the reasons for the discrepancy between the substantial budget allocations for homeless eradication programs and the increase in the number of people lacking proper homes over the last five years. Based on a systematic document review process, the evidence supports the following four main findings:
- Historically, San Mateo County’s homelessness budget has been skewed towards housing provision.
- Stakeholder engagement is insufficient in decision-making and should be fostered to enhance inclusivity.
- Administrative redesigns are required to improve budget effectiveness in the implementation of housing solutions for the needy.
- A holistic response to homelessness should be promoted.
Overall, this report demonstrates that San Mateo’s budget allocation processes for its homelessness program are significantly skewed towards shelter provision. Consequently, this document contains proposals to finance intangible goals in the County’s housing program, which have been largely neglected in the past five years. The desired results can be obtained through equitable resource distribution and the adoption of inclusive practices in decision-making. In relation to this objective, budget allocations for interim and permanent shelters should be aligned with human development programs to maximize their impact.
Introduction
Homelessness can be addressed by channeling resources to build interim and permanent shelters for those in need. The lack of decent shelter is a serious social problem affecting individuals worldwide (Boesveldt, 2019). It may make it difficult for people to enjoy life, including decreasing their ability to develop relationships, start a family, and go to work.
Homeless people experience feelings of isolation and neglect, which may evolve into serious health problems, including poor mental health (Veasey & Parker, 2022). Relative to this assertion, specific issues attributed to homelessness, such as drug abuse, are products of the condition in the first place. Therefore, one’s homelessness status is likely to negatively affect critical aspects of life.
Broadly, homelessness affects society in multiple ways, including the strain on public resources. The scourge equally has the potential to stress the community health system through increased hospitalizations and emergency room visits (Boesveldt, 2019). Poverty increases are equally associated with high rates of homelessness in a society. Overall, lack of stable housing is a significant problem affecting society today. Indeed, public resources are becoming increasingly strained as they try to cater to the needs of a growing population (World Population Review, 2023). Therefore, there is a need for a thorough understanding of the effectiveness of the processes and systems in place to address homelessness as a social problem.
Problem Statement
San Mateo County got into homelessness due to the state-wide increase in the number of homeless people in California. Economic strains and financial hardships in society have contributed to the growth of this scourge (Wood et al., 2019). Current research indicates that homelessness in the County and the state is a complex problem with diverse causes (Waegemakers et al., 2021). The use of economic and social arguments to describe the complexity has been adopted by observers (National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2023).
Similarly, researchers agree that there is no one solution for solving the issue (San Mateo County Executive Office, 2023). Therefore, there is a need to adopt a nuanced approach to understanding the contextual factors that influence the communal problem. This plan of analysis is employed in the present report to analyze factors that affect the utilization of funds in San Mateo County to address homelessness.
Current State
Effective fund utilization for programs aimed at addressing homelessness is an important step in promoting good governance. Doing so helps societies to promote accountability and enhance the effective utilization of community resources (World Population Review, 2023). The State of California has invested billions of dollars to address homelessness. Recent estimates suggest that more than $17 billion of the government’s resources have been channeled toward this objective (Office of the Governor of California, 2023). However, it is unclear how these funds have been used and the extent to which they have played a role in helping to eradicate homelessness in California.
The County of San Mateo, which is home to about 700,000 residents, has received a portion of California’s state investments to address homelessness (San Mateo County Executive Office, 2023). It is estimated that about 1,650 inhabitants lack proper shelter (San Mateo County Executive Office, 2023). In response, County authorities, through the County Navigation Center, have provided hundreds of temporary housing shelters (County of San Mateo, 2022).
The Navigation Center is one of San Mateo County’s main institutions mandated to help victims find safe, decent, and stable housing. It is currently engaged in providing temporary housing units and intensive support services in the community through sustainable development (County of San Mateo, 2022). These services are supplemented by California’s plan to eradicate homelessness.
Naturally, it is expected that the level of investments made by the state of California to address homelessness in the region would yield positive results. However, this is not the case because the number of homeless people has increased instead of decreased (Office of the Governor of California, 2023). For instance, the number of unsheltered people has increased by about 20% in the last three years (Boesveldt, 2019). This outcome has been reported despite an increase in the percentage of budget allocations to the County during the same period (Veasey & Parker, 2022). These outcomes indicate a mismatch between the increase in budget allocations to address homelessness and the state of victims on the ground.
Future State
Homelessness in San Mateo County is a problem that community members intend to eliminate. Current plans adopted by the County aim to eradicate the homelessness problem by 2025 (San Mateo County Executive Office, 2022). To achieve this objective, San Mateo County has utilized its funds to implement a six-pronged strategy focused on addressing homelessness, as outlined in Figure 1.
Based on the pursuit of the above-mentioned homeless programs, San Mateo County aims to advance equity and promote effective data management in the administration of community projects. The goal has been to empower victims to develop their life foundations by connecting them with employers or hiring them to work onsite (County of San Mateo, 2022). Access to health services and social benefits has similarly been included in the type of support offered by county authorities to address homelessness.
Background
Homelessness around the World and in America
Globally, the number of homeless people is computed by analyzing various indicators of one’s well-being. State authorities, government officials, and international agencies estimate the number of people who are homeless by sampling the number of victims who receive services from shelters and access food through soup kitchens and mobile food vans (United States Census Bureau, 2020). Residents of a country who live in outdoor shelters or in locations where homeless people sleep equally contribute to current homelessness statistics. According to the aforementioned indicators, the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2020) reports that approximately 1.6 billion people worldwide are homeless.
In the United States (US), the Department of Housing and Urban Development estimates that about 600,000 people lack a proper shelter to sleep in every night (Security Team, 2023). The number of homeless people has been rising in the US since 2017. Still, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the American economy increased the number of unsheltered people by about 127,000 (National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2023). California has drawn national attention to the plight of the destitute for having the highest percentage increase in the number of homeless people. It is estimated that about 161,000 people in the state are homeless (World Population Review, 2023). Compared to national statistics, this number means that about one-third of all homeless Americans reside in the state of California. Figure 2 below shows that California and Washington, DC are states in the US with the highest number of homeless people.
Figure 2 indicates that California and the state of DC have more than 40 homeless people per sample of 10,000. These victims experience a permanent form of homelessness where there is no short-term or long-term plan for breaking the cycle (California State Auditor, 2023). The growth in the number of homeless people in San Mateo County mirrors that of California.
For example, California represents about 30% of all homeless people in the US, while San Mateo County’s homelessness problem has been worsening in the last three years, from a low of 1,512 unsheltered people in 2019 to 1,808 in 2022 (California State Auditor, 2023). The similarity in homelessness trends between San Mateo County and California highlights the importance of understanding the causes of homelessness in the County and their association with California’s homelessness problem.
Causes of Homelessness in San Mateo County
Economic Insecurity and Homelessness
Several economic factors have caused a rise in the number of homeless people in San Mateo County. They include unemployment, drug abuse, breakdown of families, and financial challenges, just to mention a few (San Mateo County Executive Office, 2023). These causative factors have limited access to decent housing due to loss of income, lack of access to health services, suppressed economic opportunities, and wage stagnation (National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2023; Casimire, 2021). Collectively, these factors create an unfavorable environment for living, thereby contributing to the homelessness crisis. This type of insecurity puts them at risk of losing their homes as well.
Many households in San Mateo County face barriers to accessing housing opportunities compared to those for employment. Stated differently, more jobs are being created than homes, thereby negatively impacting housing availability and contributing to homelessness (National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2023). The estimated cost for housing per person has also been significantly high. This statement suggests that a high cost of living for residents deters most people from acquiring or renting homes.
Similarly, it suggests that inhabitants of San Mateo County should have a high wage to afford decent housing (Security Team, 2023). Due to the shortage of housing in San Mateo County, residents have had to contend with paying exorbitant prices to rent or own property. For example, the average rent for a two-bedroom apartment is $3,300. The average sales price of a single-family home is close to $2 million.
These statistics suggest that San Mateo County has an affordability problem that is contributing to homelessness. It excludes a majority of the population from the market, thereby adding to the crisis. Overall, improving the economic conditions of residents is essential to addressing the future of homelessness in the County. The same relationship is true for the provision of services for homeless people. The goal is to promote economic empowerment, encourage citizen participation, and enhance trust between authorities and the public.
Housing Costs and Homelessness
The relationship between housing shortages in San Mateo County and homelessness highlights the role of supply-side economics in addressing the problem. The current homelessness situation in San Mateo County is partly caused by the low supply of houses in the area and unfavorable economic conditions. The demand for housing has outpaced the supply, creating a market gap that increases homelessness and makes decent shelter difficult to access. At the same time, job losses due to the COVID-19 pandemic led to evictions, thereby worsening the homelessness crisis (Casimire, 2021). Consequently, in the past two decades, homelessness in San Mateo County has been increasing.
The housing shortage in San Mateo County is a product of several factors. The policy environment that enables developers to integrate new technologies and achieve faster completion times remains weak, making it difficult to develop an effective approach to address the housing crisis in the region (Boesveldt, 2019). The level of financial sophistication of San Mateo’s capital market has similarly affected the supply of houses in the jurisdiction, thereby making it difficult for developers to access capital for house development (Boesveldt, 2019). Overall, San Mateo County’s housing market is experiencing growth while struggling to keep pace with demand. Investments made in the region are likely to help address the housing shortage.
Mental Health, Addiction, and Homelessness
There is a cyclic relationship between homelessness, mental health problems, and addiction. Mental health problems and drug addiction have contributed to the growth in the number of unsheltered people in San Mateo County. Individuals with severe, untreated mental health issues are unable to hold on to a job, and therefore cannot pay rent (National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2023). At the same time, people with drug or alcohol problems face similar circumstances. Broadly, there is a causal relationship between poor mental health, addiction, and homelessness. Addiction is a scourge that worsens the welfare of unsheltered people. It inhibits their access to support services because the homeless may lack access to rehabilitation centers.
Broadly, the effect of poor mental health and addiction on homeless people explains the link between socioeconomic factors and the high prevalence of the problem in society. If left unchecked, homelessness could cause a significant decline in life quality in San Mateo County because unsheltered people have a lower life expectancy compared to the general population (Wood et al., 2019). Most health problems affecting its victims are linked to their housing status. Therefore, there is a link between homelessness, mental health illnesses, and addiction. In San Mateo County, authorities have tried to reverse the trend by increasing budget allocations to programs aimed at ending homelessness.
San Mateo County Efforts to Address Homelessness
Stakeholders in San Mateo County have addressed homelessness through collective action. Over the past two decades, the concept of stakeholder involvement has permeated various levels of governance in San Mateo County, promoting the inclusion of stakeholders, including private partners, non-governmental organizations, philanthropies, foundations, and well-wishers, in managing homelessness (County of San Mateo, 2023). Notably, in the last 20 years, since the 2003/2004 budget, there has been a surge in budget allocations to shelter provision. About 80% of San Mateo County homelessness funds have been allocated to shelter provision.
The Center for Homelessness, a division of San Mateo County’s Human Services Agency, has taken up the role of coordinating all activities aimed at managing the crisis in the County. Before 2003, San Mateo County primarily used its homelessness funds to develop crisis intervention plans and expand access to basic care, including education and health services (County of San Mateo, 2023). Notably, the County used its past budget allocations to increase access to social services for people living in homeless shelters. This area of spending was occasioned by an increase in the demand for sanitary services for both genders due to the increase in unsheltered people.
Despite the nobility of the above-mentioned initiatives, authorities have experienced a problem in providing personal security to homeless people because their dwellings are associated with high crime rates, drug abuse, prostitution, and such ills (CBS SF Bay Area, 2021). Thus, local authorities have used county resources to transfer families from the streets into shelters that are safe and conducive to living. The plan to increase county allocations for shelter expansion is part of a recent push to increase San Mateo’s capacity to manage an increase in the number of homeless people (Office of the Governor of California, 2023). The County intends to develop more shelters for the needy in the current and future budgets, guided by statistics generated from trends monitoring the actual number of homeless victims.
During the COVID-19 period, budget allocations to address the plight of the homeless in San Mateo County increased because of additional funding from Federal authorities. As part of this initiative, San Mateo County received $47 million in relief funds for its homelessness programs (CBS SF Bay Area, 2021). At the same time, authorities received $54 million in state allocation to build additional housing units for victims (San Mateo County Executive Office, 2022). This supplementary funding is part of an initial $254 million in county allocations for the same project. Additional funds received from non-governmental agencies and well-wishers have been channeled toward the same initiative. The increase in budget allocation for housing programs requires a commensurate improvement in the welfare of the homeless.
Literature Review
Researchers have studied homelessness as a social and public policy issue affecting communities worldwide. This study examines homelessness through a review of twenty-one critical articles that discuss the issue. Their findings are categorized into three main themes: an evaluation of strategies for coping with homelessness, government response to homelessness, and a budgetary focus on homelessness.
Coping with Homelessness
Researchers who have investigated homelessness as a socioeconomic problem have paid attention to psychosocial factors that make people vulnerable to homelessness in the first place. Proponents of this school of thought suggest that loneliness and social exclusion among the homeless negatively affect their well-being. In a London-based study, Rogans-Watson et al. (2020) assessed the health impact of homelessness on its victims by evaluating the geriatric conditions of 33 people with a mean age of 55.7 years.
The findings showed that 40% to 50% of the reviewed cases had frailty, which is associated with poor health outcomes (Rogans-Watson et al., 2020). These findings suggest that most dispossessed people suffer from multiple health problems, which isolates them further from the general population. This causal link highlights the relationship between homelessness, loneliness, and poor health outcomes.
Vulnerable members of the community, such as women and children, are most affected by the effects of homelessness. In a US-based study, Galvin et al. (2023) support this statement by highlighting the effects of homelessness on pregnant mothers. They analyzed health data generated from five inter-conception care centers, which served 2,953 patients with mental and physical healthcare needs from 2016 to 2019.
Their findings demonstrated that pregnant women were disproportionately affected by homelessness, especially if there was no supportive health system in place. Consequently, expectant women found it harder to cope with the effects of homelessness compared to other demographics. Given the complex needs of vulnerable community members, Galvin et al. (2023) propose that housing and health services should be provided collaboratively to address the needs of unsheltered mothers.
The effect of homelessness on drug addicts and people with mental health challenges highlights the effects of the problem on vulnerable populations. In a UK-based study, Zeitler et al. (2020) analyzed patients’ data from 283 practitioner records generated between 2015 and 2016. They found that homelessness not only worsens the health outcomes of its victims, but it also contributes to a cycle of drug addiction for people with mental health problems as well. Victims of homelessness often resort to drug addiction and alcohol use as a coping mechanism. Therefore, the link between the two is confirmed by the reliance on substance use to cope with its effects.
Volunteers who care for the homeless have the task of ensuring victims get access to basic services. However, they too experience psychosocial difficulties coping with its effects. A study by Waegemakers et al. (2021), conducted in seven Canadian cities, aimed to investigate the challenges faced by front office staff who worked with homeless individuals during the pandemic.
According to the findings, low participation rates for frontline staff were reported during the pandemic’s peak. Most of them cited burnout and moral distress as impediments to the provision of optimal care for the homeless. This finding highlights the importance of supporting healthcare workers in their roles, as they play a crucial part in the healthcare system for the homeless.
In a related UK study authored by Pawson et al. (2022), the lived experiences of a group of experts from the Bristol Golden Key (GK) partnership and the Fulfilling Lives program who volunteered to provide care to homeless people at a shelter were discussed. The investigation underscored the importance of forming strategic partnerships to achieve these objectives. Researchers analyzed data using an iterative process that included information review from primary and secondary sources. The study’s findings revealed that system change and service improvements for people with low incomes significantly increased with heightened collaboration at different levels of engagement.
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health draws attention to the link between poor health outcomes and homelessness. In a Canadian study, Kerman et al. (2022) analyzed data from 701 service providers who worked with the homeless during the pandemic. Y, collecting data using surveys, Kerman et al. (2022) found that the pandemic intensified mental health challenges by increasing depression, fatigue, and substance use issues. This investigation highlighted the link between poor mental health outcomes and homelessness. Its findings emphasize the need for providing additional care and support to unsheltered victims suffering from poor mental health.
Language skills have helped some victims of homelessness to cope with their condition when seeking help from service providers. In a Finnish study, Prokopis et al. (2022) contend that organizations that cater to the needs of the homeless should adopt soft leadership skills and management methods that create positive change by supporting individual empowerment programs, such as language proficiency. The authors made this claim after evaluating data from six change laboratory sessions involving 15 participants employed in an assisted housing support facility (Prokopis et al., 2022). They demonstrated that soft skills are critical for homeless people to seek services, employment opportunities, and better their overall well-being. Broadly, these skills are instrumental in helping them to better cope with their status.
Relative to the need to embrace transformative programs that empower unsheltered people to gain control of their lives, in a UK-based study, Dixon (2021) investigated the effects of 25 Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) aimed at addressing homelessness. These SIBs are partnerships involving public, private, and third-party sectors contributing to the provision of essential services for the unsheltered. Dixon (2021) found that these SIBs helped nurture accountability in corporate management and public policy governance fields to the benefit of homeless victims. Therefore, collaboration and partnerships are tools that stakeholders could use to increase the effectiveness of programs aimed at addressing homelessness.
Government Response to Homelessness
The effects of homelessness on staff working with unsheltered people have been the focus of researchers who have examined the response of authorities to the problem. One UK-based study investigated the pace of welfare reform as a response to homelessness. Data was collected through eight interviews with participants from Eastern and Western neighborhoods in the UK (Veasey & Parker, 2022). Interpretive phenomenology analysis was used in the investigation to collect data between 2019 and 2022. The findings of the study revealed that reforming the criminal justice system would require a replacement of individuals with recommended ideologies of staff working with the homeless.
Research studies highlight collaboration between the government and non-profits in addressing homelessness. For example, Wood et al. (2019) sought to learn how governments and institutions collaborate to provide adequate care for homeless people. The researchers recruited 50 homesteads in Australia for the investigation and gathered data from the region’s homeless shelter agencies and facilities. The investigation found that governmental and non-governmental agencies could provide prompt care to patients. Therefore, referrals to homeless shelters were identified as practical examples of how the two entities could collaborate to improve homeless welfare.
In a separate article, Boesveldt (2019) examined the opportunities available to homeless people when accessing essential services. The probe explained the role of local governance arrangements in increasing or decreasing the number of homeless people on the streets. It also explained the level of access they would get when seeking essential health services. Regarding methodology review, this research article was based on analyzing social welfare activities undertaken in Copenhagen, Glasgow, and Amsterdam (Boesveldt, 2019). Information was analyzed from primary and secondary data sources. The researchers found that the policy environment for implementing associated initiatives needs to be stronger. Flexibility would make it easier to have a holistic approach to crisis management.
A Budgetary Focus on Homelessness
Interventions by staff are part of the solutions developed to address homelessness. Another area of investigation is resource use, which has been examined to determine the role of budgetary processes in controlling project activities. Regarding this goal, Cuadrado-Ballesteros and Bisogno (2022) conducted a study investigating the relationship between budget transparency and company financial stability. The review, which drew on data from 110 countries, found that budget transparency was linked to improved financial performance. Therefore, maintaining an open and transparent system was essential to effective public service provision for the homeless.
Proper and effective budgeting ensures that public programs meet their goals. Relative to this statement, Białek-Jaworska and Kopańska (2023) explored the probability that public agencies would use funds not part of the consolidated plan to circumvent budget control limits. This idea was developed based on a dynamic panel data analysis of organizations linked to 866 Polish municipalities. From 2010 to 2018, the investigation demonstrated that municipalities with low debt obligations created higher off-budget revenues, thereby developing capabilities to overcome budgetary control limits.
Still, researchers have found that differences in accounting and budgetary processes influence project outcomes. For example, Kuroki and Motokawa (2022) say authorities using accrual-based attachment methods and non-financial sets in their computing tend to have more off-budget items than entities with fewer effects. The investigation findings were developed after evaluating the actions of budget officers in 546 local government offices in Japan. Primary data was analyzed using regression models, and it was established that non-budget amounts tempted managers to suppress their budgets. Financial constraints can lead to the same outcome, especially when the project involves high accrual costs.
Austerity’s role in limiting budget control is one aspect of financial control rarely studied by researchers. Raudla and Douglas (2022) examined the effects of austerity on budget implementation processes and found that fiscal crises lead to enhanced budget planning outcomes. The investigation results were developed after interviewing three employees from Portugal and Austria.
Overall, the investigation pointed out the link between austerity and budget control. In this review, dialogue emerges as pivotal for the effective collaboration of different levels of government in addressing socioeconomic problems. In an unrelated Finnish study, Rajala and Sinervo (2021) demonstrated that the combination of information, channels for sharing such information, and the quality of information output depend on culture as a tool for unlocking knowledge. Therefore, organizational culture promotes collaboration as a tool for homelessness prevention.
Regarding budget analysis and performance, Höglund et al. (2023) investigated the use of performance measures as a tool for budgetary control. Based on the use of the interpretive case study technique, their investigation included data gathered from 30 respondents, including politicians, officials, and public health representatives, who shared their views on budget planning and analysis using interviews. The Swedish-based study revealed an interconnected and complex web of relationships between different stakeholders involved in budget-making and implementation. Therefore, the need for a performance review was prioritized to ensure these relationships do not undermine the integrity of the budget-making process.
A different study indicated that budget crises provided opportunities for authorities to reflect on and reform their programs. In this context of analysis, political and economic crises create significant inflection points for exploiting paradigmatic opportunities to enhance budgeting processes. Mussari et al. (2021) state that the Italian government implemented these reforms to enhance its overall impact on society. The researcher argued that the centralization of budget-making policies was instrumental in improving the delivery of its associated programs. This finding is important in evaluating how to improve fiscal responsibility in budget-making processes for the homeless.
A crucial part of budget-making will be increasing citizen participation. Mattei et al. (2022) noted its relevance in building future budgetary processes. After analyzing participatory budget regulations in more than 100 European municipalities, they argued that citizen involvement in fiscal planning is engaging and inclusive. Similarly, they found that institutional design arrangements were essential in capturing people’s attention. This study played a crucial role in understanding how legislative reforms can be introduced and adopted to enhance the effectiveness of budgeted homelessness programs.
The importance of adopting sound budgetary policies to address social problems, such as homelessness, comes from the need to employ fiscal discipline as a tool of budgetary control. Johansson-Berg and Wennblom (2023) share this view based on the findings of a Swedish study that included survey responses from 211 government employees. The authors posit that personnel safety is critical to the realization of optimum outcomes. The freedom to make sound decisions without the fear of retribution emerged as the biggest motivator for developing such outcomes. These findings indicated that the soundness of budget processes depended on the psychological safety of managers involved.
The importance of enhancing collaborative innovation capacity in public financing and budgeting has been supported by other researchers, including Pulkkinen et al. (2023). They say that participatory budgeting is a reliable way of increasing innovation capacity. The investigation was conducted in local government offices in Finland. Data was collected between 2019 and 2022 and involved citizens and municipal workers. Overall, 24 interviews were completed in the data collection process (Pulkkinen et al., 2023). Data was also gathered from a secondary literature review process, where information was obtained from participatory budgeting processes in Lahti Municipality. The researchers found that organizations need adequate resources to institutionalize participatory budgeting.
Overall, this literature review contains data from twenty-one critical articles, which have discussed homelessness as a social and governance problem. Three main themes, which have emerged from the investigation, include a review of how homeless victims cope with the problem, an examination of responses that authorities have come up with to address it, and the need for budget review to enhance the effectiveness of funded programs.
State and non-state actors should collaborate with one another in three areas to develop housing infrastructure and provide services for people in need. However, it is unclear how different jurisdictions will adopt such recommendations to meet the needs and objectives of their local homelessness programs. Based on this background, this study will focus on how authorities managed homelessness in San Mateo County.
Methodology
The findings of this report were developed after reviewing secondary research data relating to public funding budgeting processes. Emphasis was made to include materials developed by reputable scholars and publishers. The main keywords used in the search process include homelessness, policy, San Mateo, and Budget. Materials were obtained from reputable databases, including Emerald Insights, Sage, Springer, and Google Scholar. These materials were selected using the date of publication as the main selection criterion. For example, all materials that were published more than a few years ago were excluded from the review. The goal was to get the most up-to-date information about the research topic.
Limitations
The limitations of this study refer to the recognition of research aspects outside the scope of the researcher. The first limitation of the investigator relates to the jurisdictional boundaries of review. The analytics is focused on analyzing the budget allocation process of San Mateo County. Therefore, the findings of this investigation are limited to the homelessness problem in the County. The second limitation relates to the indicative nature of the current assessment. In this review, the insights about the financial operations of San Mateo County should not be misconstrued to represent actual actions taken in the organization.
Similarly, the proposed outcomes of the research process are relevant to the County’s operations and not to any other interested party involved in the program. The third limitation of this study relates to the year of review. The current investigation analyzes the research process by analyzing the budget actions taken in the last five years (2017-2022) to manage homelessness. Therefore, the proposals contained in this report are based on an analysis of the housing departmental outcomes within the analytical period.
Findings
As highlighted in the introduction section of this report, the present investigation was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the San Mateo budget in addressing the County’s program needs.
Infrastructure Expansion
The County of San Mateo has been using part of its annual budget to finance infrastructure expansion services, addressing the needs of local populations. In the past five years, the County has purchased buildings and hotels to house the homeless. Despite the progress made in expanding San Mateo County’s homelessness program, there is skepticism about the state’s ability to address the underlying problems in the community that have caused homelessness in the first place.
The need for infrastructure expansion in the County of San Mateo has been a key part of the County’s plan to address homelessness. The initiative was informed by research investigations, which showed that poor economic conditions have forced multiple families to live together to share expenses (Hoque et al., 2022). It is believed that infrastructure expansion would alleviate the housing problem and make the community’s housing more affordable.
Support from members to achieve this goal has been forthcoming because most of them believe that the inadequate supply of shelter has exacerbated the problem (Hoque et al., 2022). It is believed that ordinary people with regular jobs may experience accommodation difficulties with the regular rent price for an apartment being $3,000 or above (Office of the Governor of California, 2023). These figures mean that affordable housing is out of reach for a majority of the citizens.
The 2023/24 budget maintains general research and contingencies of not less than 10%, which have been used to finance the infrastructure expansion projects. This action is consistent with the Board of Supervisors’ policy of fund management for emergency operations. The average general reserve percentage for the 2019-2023 period was between 15% and 17%, which is consistent with the funding model for state-wide programs of a similar nature (Office of the Governor of California, 2023).
San Mateo County has prioritized shelter acquisition in its budget allocation process. During the COVID-19 period, five million dollars was obtained from capital funds to purchase homeless shelters for vulnerable victims (Office of the Governor of California, 2023). The County’s annual budget has similar provisions for this area of spending.
Equity
As highlighted above, San Mateo County has allocated most of its resources towards expanding its housing infrastructure for the homeless. However, this initiative has not been implemented equitably from a budgetary perspective. For example, discriminatory practices were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic period. In the 2021/2022 budget, the County of San Mateo set aside $100 million for the housing department to manage the effects of the pandemic (Office of the Governor of California, 2023).
However, these funds were not effectively utilized because the impact on the community was dismal. They were not distributed according to the needs of each community or sub-region of the County. Therefore, authorities have been unable to insulate community members from the risk of homelessness. Changes made to promote equity in the budgeting process are designed to transform how the County responds to the needs of its residents and conducts business internally. Overall, based on the importance of promoting equity as a core principle of budget planning, the County of San Mateo needs to improve its budget-making process to be inclusive.
Administrative Impact
The County of San Mateo’s budget has had an administrative impact on the operations of the County’s Housing Department. Reductions in budget allocations and an increase in priority areas have led to a reduction in the administrative size of the department. Notably, an assessment of the five-year budget process shows a reduction of 15 authorized positions in the county department (Office of the Governor of California, 2023). This change has led to the development of a leaner workforce.
However, additional funding channeled towards improving health services is expected to add 120 new positions in the Health Department. Forty percent of these positions will be created due to the need to convert temporary into permanent help (Office of the Governor of California, 2023). Therefore, some departments will witness an increase in administrative size, while critical ones will report an increase in the same index.
Conclusion
The effectiveness of San Mateo County’s homeless budget was examined by evaluating whether it met the tangible and intangible goals of the program. Tangible goals relate to the development of physical materials, while intangible ones are associated with immaterial growth. In terms of tangible growth, most of the budget allocations for the San Mateo County Homelessness program were invested into acquiring new shelters for the needy. This plan entailed renting and buying properties for this purpose.
Given its centrality to the government’s homelessness eradication strategy, many resources were directed towards expanding the shelter network in the County. However, the intense focus on acquiring new premises created an imbalanced allocation of county funds to the homelessness program. It excluded stakeholders who were not involved in the shelter acquisition process but were willing to participate in other activities. Therefore, there is room for improvement in how the County engages different players during decision-making.
Equity is the second area of intangible growth assessment that the San Mateo budgetary process has failed to adequately address. Systemic weaknesses have deprived certain regions of the County of the resources needed to address jurisdictional issues. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed these weaknesses in county response planning because minorities and immigrants suffered the brunt of the crisis more than any other demographic group.
Equity concerns remain unaddressed and may be evaluated at various levels of operations, including the budget and resource allocation process. This proposal complements the earlier-mentioned plan of including all shareholders in decision-making. It will help to ensure the interests of all players and all pertinent areas of program implementation are addressed.
Recommendations
The primary issue that emerges from this report is the lack of a collaborative response plan among county and city authorities during budget planning and implementation. The current framework of engagement involves the regional government in planning, thereby missing the opportunity for private players and non-governmental organizations to play a role in addressing the plight of homeless people in society. The lack of coordination among departments or institutions involved does not mean that positive progress is not being realized. Instead, there have been significant developments made in multiple areas of homeless program planning. Nonetheless, it is untenable to conduct these actions in isolation, especially if there is no endgame in sight.
The inadequacy of county authorities to solve the homeless problem in San Mateo County highlights the need for focused interventions. The current budget estimates helped to highlight areas of expenditure that consume most of the project’s funds – housing. This area of spending is likely to add to most of the County’s outflow of funds based on the continued placement of increasing shelter acquisitions as the primary response strategy to homelessness.
San Mateo County has made significant progress in this regard. Still, it has been unable to effectively solve the homelessness problem in the County due to the rise in the number of unsheltered people in the region. Therefore, the County’s housing plan should be coupled with another strategy of promoting human development, including creating employment opportunities for the homeless in their newly built communities.
References
Białek-Jaworska, A, & Kopańska, A.K. (2023). Do fiscal rules of local debt affect municipal off-budget activities? Analysis of various types of municipalities. Meditari Accountancy Research, 31(7), 156-184.
Boesveldt, N.F. (2019). Denying homeless persons access to municipal support. International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare, 12(3), 179-191.
Bryant, K. (2021). Review and approve the town’s response to the San Mateo County grand jury report: Second units: adding new housing in the neighborhoods. Woodsidetown.
California State Auditor. (2023). Statewide homelessness data.
Casimire, A. (2021). San Mateo County cities take steps to meet housing goals. Localnewsmatters.
CBS SF Bay Area. (2021). COVID Housing: $47M In assistance coming to San Mateo renters, landlords.
County of San Mateo. (2022). Navigation Centre.
County of San Mateo. (2023). Human services.
Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B., & Bisogno, M. (2022). Budget transparency and financial sustainability. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 34(6), 210-234.
Dixon, R. (2021). Performance management in social impact bonds: How an outcomes-based approach shapes hybrid partnerships. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 34(3), 356-376.
Galvin, A. M, Lewis M. A., Walters, S., & Thompson, E. L. (2023). Homelessness in the perinatal period and associations with reproductive interconception care: 2016-2019 pregnancy risk assessment monitoring system. Public Health Reports, 5(7), 1-13.
Höglund, L., Mårtensson, M., & Nylinder, P. (2023). Public value accounting and the use of performance measurements as a management tool in the context of various assessments. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 19(4), 603-621.
Hoque, Z., Mai, K., & Ozdil, E. (2022). Accounting as a rhetorical devices during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from Australian universities. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 34(6), 168-192.
Johansson-Berg, T., & Wennblom, G. (2023). If managers feel safe, budget control becomes enabling. Evidence from a large local government organization in Sweden. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 35(6), 154-179.
Kerman, N., Ecker, J., Gaetz, S., Tiderington, E. A, & Kidd, S. (2022). Mental health and wellness of service providers working with people experiencing homelessness in Canada: A national survey from the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 67(5), 371-379.
Kuroki, M., & Motokawa, K. (2022). Do non-financial performance and accrual-based cost: Does information affect public sector budgeting? Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 34(6), 95-116.
Mattei, G., Santolamazza, V., & Grandis, F. G. (2022). Design of the participatory budget: How to turn citizens into process protagonists. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 35(3), 294-316.
Mussari, R., Cepiku, D., & Sorrentino, D. (2021). Governmental accounting reforms at a time of crisis: The Italian governmental accounting harmonization. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 33(2), 138-156.
National Alliance to end Homelessness. (2023). State of homelessness: 2023 edition.
Office of Governor California. (2023). California takes action to tackle homelessness.
Pawson, C., Bolden, R., Isaac, B., Fisher, J., Mahoney, H., & Saprai, S. (2022). Learning from collective lived experience: A case study of experts by experience group. Housing, Care and Support, 25(3), 223-235.
Prokopis, D., Sannino, A., & Mykkänen, A. (2022). Toward a new beginning: Exploring the instructional dynamics of expansive learning with workers in a youth-supported housing unit. Journal of Workplace Learning, 34(7), 628-642.
Pulkkinen, M., Sinervo, L. M., & Kurkela, K. (2023). Premises for sustainability – Participatory budgeting as a way to construct collaborative innovation capacity in local government. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 5(1), 1-11.
Rajala, T., & Sinervo, L. M. (2021). The beauty of constructive culture: Planting the seeds for widespread performance information use among councilors. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 34(4), 459-485.
Raudla, R., &Douglas, J.W. (2022). Austerity and budget execution: Control versus flexibility. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 34(2), 292-309.
Rogans-Watson, R., Shulman, C., Lewer, D., Armstrong, M., & Hudson, B. (2020). Premature frailty, geriatric conditions and multimorbidity among people experiencing homelessness: A cross-sectional observational study in a London hostel. Housing, Care and Support, 23(4), 77-91.
San Mateo County Executive Office. (2022). To end homelessness a focus on prevention. Snapshot.
San Mateo County Executive Office. (2023). Homelessness dashboard.
Security Team. (2023). Homelessness in America 2023: Statistics, analysis, & trends.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2020). First-ever United Nations resolution on homelessness.
United States Census Bureau. (2020). How the 2020 census counts people experiencing homelessness.
Veasey, K., & Parker, J. (2022). Welfare conditionality, sanctions, and homelessness: Meanings made by a homeless support worker. Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences, 4(4), 275-291.
Waegemakers Schiff, J., Weissman, E. P., Scharf, D., Schiff, R., Campbell, S., Knapp, J., & Jones, A. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on research within the homeless services sector. Housing, Care and Support, 24(3), 123-133.
Wood, L., Wood, N. J.R., Vallesi, S., Stafford, A., Davies, A., & Cumming, C. (2019). Hospital collaboration with a Housing First program to improve health outcomes for people experiencing homelessness. Housing, Care and Support, 22(1), 27-39.
World Population Review. (2023). Homeless population by state 2023.
Zeitler, M, Williamson A., Budd, J., Spencer, R., Queen, A., Lowrie., R., (2020). Comparing the impact of primary care practice design in two inner city UK homelessness services. Journal of Primary Care & Community Health, 1(11), 1-11.