Bridging Disciplinary Boundaries (January 11 - 14, 2007)

Introduction: Prevalence estimates that between one and two million youth and young adults experience homelessness each year. Although many successfully transition out of homelessness, approximately one-quarter remain chronically homeless and “on the streets.” Research on this population has primarily been limited to studies in single cities, service evaluations, and descriptive approaches; only a single national cross-sectional database exists of youth staying in crisis shelters.

Basing our understanding of homeless youth on geographically limited samples is problematic; analyses of national data on shelter youth suggest significant differences across federally-designated regions. Further, greater reported transience has been associated with lower rates of protective factors, higher rates of illegal behaviors, and greater involvement in street culture. Although research to dates casts doubts about the generalizability of existing studies of homeless youth, while simultaneously suggesting the potential importance of transience, little is known about the impact of geographic region or transience separately, much less how these concepts inter-relate. This presentation provides new evidence concerning the role of transience and mental health/addiction among service-using street youth through comparing these young people in two diverse urban areas.

Methods: A convenience sample of street youth (16 to 23 years old) from St. Louis, Missouri (n=46) and Austin, Texas (n=50) were recruited from drop-in shelters, outreach, and street locations using comparable recruitment strategies. Youth were interviewed concerning transience and mobility patterns using event-history methods. Mental health (depression, PTSD, and alcohol/substance abuse/dependence) were assessed using diagnostic interviews. Locations were mapped using GIS (ArcView) and cities were compared using chi-square, ANOVA, and multiple regressions.

Results: Austin youth were mainly male, white or Latino, averaged 21 years old, and more than half had graduated from high school. In St. Louis, youth were mostly male, African American, averaged 20 years old, and more than half had dropped out of school. Concerning transience, none of the youth interviewed in Austin had originally become homeless there; however, over 90% of St. Louis youth had become homeless there. 72% of Austin youth had lived in homeless shelters, while only 17% of St. Louis youth had lived in these facilities. Austin youth lived in many more cities, moved more often, and traveled greater distances than St. Louis youth. Concerning other high risk behaviors, Austin youth were three times more likely to have substance-related diagnoses (75% vs. 25%), but one-third less likely to have an affective disorder (17% vs. 57%) than St. Louis youth. Austin youth also had more arrests for violence and theft (40%) than St. Louis youth (25%).

Discussion: Findings strongly affirm the differences between the two cities and suggest that different cities have distinct street youth populations. It appears that some street youth may go to cities perceived as “cool” – offering a culture they perceive as friendly (Austin). Other youth do not relocate, but stay with existing supports (St. Louis). Given that federal policy assumes a homogeneous population (e.g., funding the same service models nationwide), findings of differences in these issues suggests the need to examine city populations separately in determining optimal service configurations.