Homelessness: Pathways, Not Parking Places
Executive Summary
Portland is at an inflection point. We have spent enormous resources on homelessness, yet outcomes are not where they need to be. People are still living on our streets, neighborhoods are losing confidence, and too many individuals remain stuck in a system that tries to manage homelessness—but does not consistently solve it. I believe we can do better.
Homelessness is not one problem: it reflects addiction, mental health challenges, and economic hardship such as loss of employment, health issues, or other systemic barriers. The issue is not a lack of effort, but a system that is not designed to consistently produce results.
My approach is grounded in a simple idea: Every person who enters shelter should be on a clear, supported pathway out of homelessness.
The Problem: What’s Broken
Today, too many parts of our system are working against each other instead of together.
Shelter has become a destination rather than a transition point. People enter, but too many do not move forward, turning short-term support into a holding pattern. At the same time, we rely on a one-size-fits-all model for people with very different needs—addiction, mental health, and employment—so services are not consistently aligned with what actually helps people exit homelessness.
We are also asking the wrong thing of people in crisis. Instead of delivering coordinated support, we expect individuals to navigate a fragmented system of agencies, appointments, and requirements. It’s an unrealistic burden that too often leads to failure.
And we are not measuring what matters. We track beds and spending, but not consistently whether people are getting housed and staying housed. The result is inconsistent outcomes, limited transparency, and unclear accountability across the City, County, and providers.
Root Cause: Why This Persists
This is not simply a funding issue…it is a structural one.
Incentives are tied to activity rather than outcomes. Providers are funded to deliver services, but not always accountable for results. At the same time, fragmentation between the City and Multnomah County creates gaps in ownership, coordination, and slows decision-making.
Most importantly, we are not consistently matching people to the intervention and support that addresses their primary barrier to housing. Without that alignment, even well-funded programs underperform.
That’s why this effort must begin with tight coordination with Multnomah County. I look forward to working closely with either Sharon Meieran or Julia Brim-Edwards to align strategy, funding, and execution. Without that partnership, we will not succeed.
The Policy: A Results-Driven System
I am proposing a Pathways to Housing system: a model designed to connect each person to the right intervention and support that moves them toward housing as quickly as possible.
We start by moving people off the street and into shelter—but only if that shelter functions as the first step in a system that works. From there, we create a more structured and accountable approach built around specialized pathways:
Low-Barrier Stabilization — immediate shelter, safety, and basic accommodations (mobility, age, service animals)
Health Stabilization (Physical) — medical care, chronic conditions, and disability support
Behavioral Health — mental health care
Recovery (Addiction) — substance use treatment
Work & Housing — employment and permanent housing
Family Stabilization — family support and reunification
Vulnerability Prioritization (cross-cutting) — seniors, people with disabilities, and medically fragile prioritized across all pathways
Every individual receives a system-wide, standardized assessment within the first week and a 90-day pathway plan that defines clear next steps toward housing.
Services are delivered where people are: integrating treatment, employment support, and housing navigation into the shelter environment. Each person is assigned a single accountable navigator responsible for coordinating services and driving progress.
We also shift how the system is measured and funded—focusing on housing placements, length of stay, engagement in treatment or work, and long-term stability.
Finally, we address practical barriers to housing with a flexible fund for deposits, identification, transportation, and other small but critical needs that often prevent someone from exiting shelter.
The Business Case
A system built around pathways and outcomes is not just more effective—it is more efficient and humane.
When people move more quickly from shelter into housing, costs decline. Emergency services, hospital visits, and law enforcement interactions decrease, while more individuals return to work, health, and regain their stability.
This approach is not about dramatically increasing spending; it is about using existing resources more effectively to produce better outcomes.
What Portland Can Learn from Denver
Denver has demonstrated what a coordinated, data-driven system can achieve. By connecting outreach, shelter, and housing into a single pathway—and managing that system in real time—they have produced measurable results:
45% reduction in unsheltered homelessness (2023–2025)
Up to 64% reduction in street homelessness in key areas
98% reduction in large encampments
2,000+ people moved from encampments into shelter and housing
8,500+ people brought indoors overall
~45% reduction in encampment-related emergency calls
These results have been supported by independent audits and evaluation, reinforcing that the progress is real.
Denver has not solved homelessness. But they have proven something critical: When a system is coordinated, accountable, and focused on outcomes, results improve—quickly and visibly and people get the help they need.
Tradeoffs & Risks
This approach requires real change. Transitioning to a pathways-based system will require providers to adapt, stronger City–County coordination, and sustained leadership focus. It also depends on having sufficient housing options available.
We must also ensure that an outcomes-based system does not unintentionally deprioritize those with the highest needs. These challenges are real—but manageable, and far less costly than maintaining the status quo.
Implementation Plan
Execution is what matters.
In the first 100 days, I will focus on alignment and momentum; working with Multnomah County to establish a shared approach, setting clear performance metrics, and identifying a small number of pilot programs.
In the first year, we will build consistency by implementing standardized needs assessments, introducing navigator roles in key programs, beginning the shift toward outcomes-based contracting, and launching a public dashboard.
Over the following two to three years, we will scale what works: expanding successful pathways, aligning funding with results, and improving coordination across agencies.
This will not be solved overnight. But with focus and discipline, we can build a system that delivers better results year by year.
What Success Looks Like
Success will be visible and measurable: fewer people living on our streets, shorter shelter stays, stronger support, and more individuals moving into permanent housing. More people will engage in treatment, rebuild health, return to work, and regain stability.
And just as important, Portlanders will regain confidence that their government can deliver results for the city and some of our most vulnerable neighbors.
Bottom Line
This is not about choosing between compassion and accountability—it is about delivering both. We can build a system that meets people where they are, addresses the root causes of homelessness, and produces real, measurable outcomes. Because a shelter bed should never be the end of the story—it should be the beginning of the way home.