By Beth Morrissey
Department of Homeless Services Commissioner Seth Diamond, second from right, testifies at Thursday's Committee on General Welfare hearing. (Beth Morrissey/The Brooklyn Ink)
City Council members clashed with the Department of Homeless Services Commissioner Thursday over ethical issues related to a controversial experiment designed to evaluate the effectiveness of one of its programs to aid the homeless.
The program, known as HomeBase, helps individuals and families who are at risk of becoming homeless gain access to a variety of services, including rental assistance, job training, and legal services.
The controversy surrounds the revelation last September that the DHS was conducting an evaluative study involving 400 families.? By random selection, the families were divided in half for the study.? One group was allowed to access the HomeBase service.? The other 200 families were not given access to the service and would be studied as a? “control group.”
Members of the General Welfare Committee questioned the program’s claim that participation in the study is voluntary.
Brooklyn Councilman Stephen Levin read from the participant consent form that families had to sign when applying for HomeBase Services.? The form reads, “Participation in the study is voluntary.? If you agree to participate, you may or may not be randomly selected to receive HomeBase services.? If you choose not to participate, you will not be eligible for HomeBase Services.”
That was less than voluntary, Levin said. “If I was going in to receive HomeBase Services and I was at risk for homelessness… then wouldn’t I feel compelled to enter into the study?”
DHS Commissioner Seth Diamond defended the study, being conducted in conjunction with? HYPERLINK “http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/CUNY%27s+Center+for+Urban+Research” CUNY’s Center for Urban Research, as a way to eventually expand services for the homeless.? “We want to know how to target resources effectively to reach them.? We can’t do that now.? The study is about trying to help us be able to learn how to do that,” he said.
According to Diamond, the study seeks to answer the question “But for the HomeBase Services would people have accessed shelter?”
Diamond pointed out during the hearing that HomeBase cannot fully serve all of its current applicants.? “We did not reduce the number of people served for the sake of this study,” said Diamond, noting that 1500 HomeBase applicants a year are referred to other services when the program runs out of funds. “Instead of referring people to other city-wide services when HomeBase caseloads filled up…this summer we randomly determined those who will receive HomeBase services.”
Brad Lander, who also represents Brooklyn, believed that the random selection process created an ethical problem.? “There’s a difference between doing a random assignment where you extend a new benefit to some people where they would not have been eligible before and withdrawing a benefit that they likely would have received otherwise,” said Landers.
Louise Seeley, the executive director of the non-profit group Housing Court Answers, questioned the value of the study’s data.? “By only looking at whether they entered shelter, you don’t know whether they became homeless,” said Seeley during her testimony.? They could have become homeless and wander the street…They could end up in terrible conditions.”
This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured site: So, Why is Wikileaks a Good Thing Again?.
No comments:
Post a Comment