IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/chosxx/v39y2024i8p1951-1973.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Racial and gender bias in self-reported needs when using a homelessness triaging tool

Author

Listed:
  • Chamari I. Kithulgoda
  • Rhema Vaithianathan
  • Cameron Parsell

Abstract

Self-reported surveys are commonly used when prioritising clients for homelessness services. Results can determine whether a homeless person receives housing or not. However, when relying on self-reported historic vulnerabilities, one needs to be concerned about the degree to which clients might feel stigmatised by these questions and report inaccurately. The present study compares self-reported data pertaining to mental health, emergency room healthcare, and incarceration with like administrative data. Our findings show that Black female clients are more likely to under-report mental health inpatient interactions and incarceration compared to Non-Black males in the same age group. There is a statistically significant association between under-reported mental health inpatient interactions and race for Black clients. Differently, under-reported emergency room healthcare or mental health crisis service uses did not have a statistically significant association with race or race-gender intersections. Relying on self-reported risks as a basis for homelessness services might be flawed.

Suggested Citation

  • Chamari I. Kithulgoda & Rhema Vaithianathan & Cameron Parsell, 2024. "Racial and gender bias in self-reported needs when using a homelessness triaging tool," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(8), pages 1951-1973, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:chosxx:v:39:y:2024:i:8:p:1951-1973
    DOI: 10.1080/02673037.2022.2151986
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/02673037.2022.2151986
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/02673037.2022.2151986?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:chosxx:v:39:y:2024:i:8:p:1951-1973. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/chos20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.