pull down to refresh

The rare reported fall in the nation's homeless population is mostly the result of the ebbing migrant surge of 2023 and 2024.

This week's lead story covers the release of the federal government's latest homelessness survey, which reported a rare decline in the country's homeless population. That's welcome news that nevertheless looks a little less rosy when one examines the details.

The End of the Migrant Surge Leads to a Fall in Nationwide Homelessness The End of the Migrant Surge Leads to a Fall in Nationwide Homelessness 

There were 745,652 homeless people in the country in 2025, according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) latest annual homelessness survey

That represents a rare decline of 3 percent in the homeless population from 2024, when there were 771,480 homeless people.

HUD's numbers come from the annual point-in-time count, conducted one night each January by state and local homeless service providers, during which volunteers go out and literally count the number of people sleeping on the streets and in shelters.

This year's reported 3 percent decline follows an unprecedented 18 percent spike in the homeless population in 2024.

That spike was largely driven by the influx of foreign migrants into big city shelter systems in places such as New York, Chicago, and Denver. Even by the time the 2024 numbers had been published, there were signs that the migrant surge was ebbing.

That's now reflected in the 2025 numbers. The report notes that New York and Illinois, the two states hit hardest by the migrant surge, saw the biggest declines in their homeless populations. 

Collectively, the two states saw their homeless populations fall by roughly 24,000 people. That accounts for almost 90 percent of the national total fall in homelessness.

...read more at reason.com
91 sats \ 0 replies \ @Yermin 3 Jun

Reason’s headline is technically clever and substantively incomplete.

Yes, national homelessness fell 3.3% in 2025, from 771,480 to 745,652, a drop of 25,828 people.

Yes, New York and Illinois accounted for roughly 23,800 of that decline, about 92% of the national drop.

So the narrow math is real.

But here’s the part they glide past:

Homelessness is still up 15% since 2007 and 26% since 2013.

Individuals experiencing homelessness hit a record high: 515,286.

Chronic homelessness hit a record high: 155,750.

So no, the story is not “fewer migrants, fewer homeless.”

The real story is:

The 2024 spike was partly inflated by a migrant shelter surge.
The 2025 decline was partly inflated by that surge easing.
But underneath both, America’s homelessness crisis is still historically high, and the hardest, most entrenched part of it is getting worse.

That’s the high-signal read.

The migrant surge explains the headline swing.

It does not explain away the crisis.

reply

Surprising that there isn't more gloating from Trump about this

reply

He’s probably waiting for the right moment, or maybe he hasn’t been told about the report yet.

HUD's numbers come from the annual point-in-time count, conducted one night each January by state and local homeless service providers, during which volunteers go out and literally count the number of people sleeping on the streets and in shelters.

Do you think the methodology makes sense? January is winter, and a lot of people might be looking for somewhere a bit warmer and more sheltered from the cold.

reply

This is the sort of thing that really has no great methodological options.

I'd be surprised if it isn't pretty noisy and correlated with winter severity. For that reason, you wouldn't want to put much stock in a single number. As long as they do it consistently though, trends over time should be ok.

reply

ouw, is that counter-narrative. Woopsie, woopsie.

reply

Maybe! Do you think a 3% drop is a big win?

reply

no, I was just gonna say... it's kind of tiny. Given the uncertainties in this method, probs nothing

reply

I feel like all we see, though, is the value going up, so even if it stays the same, I feel like that is a positive. I do feel, though, like an indicator that would paint a clearer picture is what the State and Local governments are planning/setting aside funding for. If the amount of money is relatively stable, then I think that would show that the number isn't growing and could be decreasing, after all, what government ever wants to actually cut a program they like.

reply