According to a recent op-ed in these pages by Andy Bales, the CEO of Union Rescue Mission, Housing First — the evidence-based model for ending homelessness used across the state, the country and internationally — has failed. He cites the increasing number of people on our streets left to “suffer and die” as the reason this model has failed.

However, he fails to acknowledge the successes of Housing First in the last three years, where over 80,000 people experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles County have been permanently housed — a record in our country. The problem we face is that the inflow into homelessness is greater than the numbers we can get housed. The real problem in L.A. is that there is a shortage of affordable permanent housing.

Housing First does work, has worked and is working in L.A. Housing First provides the stability of a home of one’s own plus comprehensive supportive services, including mental health, physical health, substance use treatment, life skills, education and job training. This approach allows people to start on a path to wellness, healing and community reintegration without worrying about where they are going to sleep, eat or whether they will be safe.

The last thing we need is to move away from a model that has had overwhelming success, such as the 97% success rate achieved by Union Station Homeless Services using the Housing First model. Returning to the outdated, failed and vastly more expensive model of building bigger and bigger shelters, and forcing people into treatment programs only to put them back on the streets if they relapse, is just wrong.

The evidence speaks for itself. A gold-standard research study conducted in 2021 showed that Housing First programs decreased homelessness by 88%. In contrast, the “treatment first” model, where participants are forced to participate in treatment before being housed, has a substantially lower success rate of 31% to 45%. It’s obvious — if you are focused on survival, such as finding a place to sleep, eat or be safe, it becomes difficult to work on other, larger issues such as substance use or mental or physical health concerns.

It is also crucial to dispel a few myths surrounding Housing First. Contrary to common misconceptions, Housing First does not provide “free” housing to people. Every person moving in signs a lease and must pay rent equal to 30% of their income. They are required to abide by the rules of the place they live, just like any other tenant. They are not allowed to use illegal drugs or commit other illegal activities in their housing.

In fact, a new study conducted by Elior Cohen at UCLA found that housing programs substantially reduce crime rates, lower the number of emergency room visits and increase employment among residents. If you want to see evidence of this, visit the Downtown Women’s Center in L.A. or come to Marv’s Place in Pasadena. Both places are perfect examples of the Housing First model, providing beautiful, safe and dignified environments for people to live, with stability and healing at the forefront.

Let’s also examine the costs of Housing First. While housing costs in Los Angeles have skyrocketed, the fact remains that permanent housing — even with comprehensive services — is still vastly cheaper than building or operating shelters. One study showed that a Housing First program costs up to $23,000 less per consumer per year than a shelter program, while achieving significantly better long-term outcomes.

Don’t be fooled. As someone who works on this issue every day, I look at the data and know that Housing First does work. It is cheaper, more effective and more humane, allowing people to heal and end their homelessness. There is a reason this model is accepted worldwide. It works.

Anne Miskey is the CEO of Union Station Homeless Services in Pasadena.