An Elementary School's Lonely Journey to Support Its Homeless Students

• In Event: Homeless Students in New York City and Collaboration in Schooling Policy Reform

Abstract

Objective
This session looks at the implementation of a comprehensive intervention model in an elementary school, grades K-5, serving high numbers of students living in temporary housing. It highlights successful school-based strategies in supporting the educational success of homeless students, and expounds on the complications involved in serving homeless youth across school and shelter contexts. Specifically, it looks at a number of areas where the school found its attempts to partner with nearby shelters were futile.

Framework
Research links homelessness with hunger and poor nutrition, health problems and lack of health and mental health care, developmental delays, psychological problems, and academic underachievement (Buckner, 2008). At the elementary school studied, twenty-three percent of families live in one of the five stand-alone shelters around the school community. Students in shelters are among the most vulnerable in the school. In addition to being absent more frequently than their more permanently housed peers, ten percent of students identified in temporary housing attending the school have been held back at least once academically due to transportation, relocation, and academic challenges pertaining to homelessness.

Over the past two years, the Principal and staff have generated a number of initiatives to provide additional supports to their homeless students. These include student and family counseling; mentoring for at-risk students with an emphasis on those living in domestic violence shelters; mental health services; after school and summer programming; and an array of wellness services including links to local community organizations and a weekly food pantry.

Results
A comparison of outcome data between the 2014-2015 and the 2015-2016 years (after the provision of comprehensive services) revealed an improvement in attendance rates for students in shelters across virtually all grades. However, service effectiveness in each of these areas was found to be limited due to communication gaps and a lack of coordination of services between and across providers. School staff reported that they are weighed down providing additional targeted supports to students in shelters. For example, school personnel staff is often leveraged to accompany mental health providers on home visits to local shelters because shelter sites are scattered and/or the shelter staff has not established a relationship with the school. School staff are diverted from regularly scheduled school-based responsibilities including academic, mental health, and clerical duties due to lack of communication between the shelters and the school. School staff reported frustration that shelter staff has access to student attendance but does not dedicate time to regularly monitor, intervene, or communicate truancy causes and interventions with the school. Lastly, information specific to enrollment, transportation, and parental rights at times is not communicated during the shelter intake process and consequently families receive different messages from school and shelter staff.

Author

• Dan Russo, NYC Department of Education