Examining Housing Prioritization Scores through an Intersectional and Critical Race Theory Framework

Background and Purpose: The study examines the Housing Prioritization Tool (HPT) through Intersectional and Critical Race Theory frameworks. The HPT assesses vulnerability among homeless individuals, replacing the VI-SPDAT in many Continuums of Care (CoCs) across the United States. There is limited research examining the HPT and its susceptibility to perpetuating systemic biases in assessment, particularly across gender and race. This study aims to determine (1) if, and to what extent, does gender explain variation in assigned HPT scores, (2) if, and to what extent, does race explain variation in assigned HPT scores, and (3) if, and to what extent, does the intersection of race and gender explain variation in HPT scores.

Methods: Data were collected from a Midwest city from November 2022 to February 2024. Participants were assessed using the HPT at local agencies. An independent samples t-test was run to determine if there were mean differences in scores by gender and race. Following, an ANOVA and Tukey post hoc analysis was conducted to determine if scores differed significantly by groups that differed by the interaction of race and gender. Finally, a sequential multiple linear regression was completed to assess the statistical significance of the interaction between race and gender on the total HPT scores controlling for covariates.

Results: Independent-samples T-test indicated that there was a significant mean difference in HPT scores between male (26.64) and female (22.04) participants, as well as Black (21.01) and White (25.85) participants. Tukey post hoc analysis from a one-way ANOVA revealed that the mean increase from Black Female to Black Male (5.55, 95% CI [2.86, 8.24]) was statistically significant (p = <.001), as well as the increase from Black Female to White Female (5.49, 95% CI [3.24, 7.74]) was statistically significant (p = <.001), as well as the increase from Black Female to White Male (9.53, 95% CI [7.19, 11.88]) was statistically significant (p = <.001), as well as the increase from Black Male to White Male (3.98, 95% CI [1.46, 6.50]) was statistically significant (p = <.001), as well as the increase from White Female to White Male (4.04, 95% CI [2.00, 6.08]), but no other group differences were statistically significant. Results from a sequential multiple regression indicate that gender significantly predicted HPT scores, b = 3.145, t(1541) = 5.532, p < .001, and race also significantly predicted HPT scores, b = 1.300, t(1541) = 2.349, p < .001, when controlling for other variables in the model.

Conclusions and Implications: This study highlights the pervasive racial and gender bias in vulnerability assessment scores, suggesting the HPT may suffer similar reliability and validity issues as the VI-SPDAT. These disparities indicate structural and systemic inequality, such as racism and sexism, may drive biased scores. The findings call for considerations beyond the tool to ensure equitable solutions, including modification of existing processes, and specific accommodations to mitigate inadequacies of assessment tools and disadvantages from structural and systemic discrimination and oppression. Future research should center BIPOC voices and explore the impact of racism and sexism on homelessness.