Philip F. Mangano is Executive Director of the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (ICH), which component of the Domestic Policy Council with the Exectuive Office of the President of the United States. It is charged with coordinating the response of 20 federal agencies. The goal is to end homelessness in America in 10-years by 2012. Initially, established in 1987, ICH was reconstituted after a period of dormancy.
Mangano earned an education degree from Boston University and a graduate degree in theological studies from Boston Theological Institute. Mangano’s advocacy to reduce or end homelessness spanned two decades prior to his appointment by President Bush (March 2002) as ICH head. His work includes the Massachusetts Housing and Shelter Alliance (MHSA), a Massachusetts-based coalition of 80 agencies operating over 200 programs serving the homeless. Additionally, he has contributed to the work of the National Alliance to End Homelessness.
In this second part of a candid Street Sense interview, Mangano discusses his homelessness in Washington, D.C. and across the country with reporter Muata Langley.
[Read part one of this interview]
As ICH head, what milestones did you set out to achieve and what structural accomplishments can you boast of?
Mangano: I would say that I came to Washington with the same set of milestones that we had established in Massachusetts. That was a clear commitment to abolish the social wrong and social evil of homelessness. So that’s the ultimate objective. Milestones along the way have been somewhat framed by the opportunities that have presented themselves in Washington. If there is one thing I discovered in Washington is that it is a more complex environment than any state environment and any local environment. I think as an advocate you are always probing for where the opportunities are and then you are going to go as deep into those opportunities as possible. I believe that is why we have been so aggressive about the 10-year planning process in cities and the state interagency councils. Our objective starting from a year ago when we really focused on 10-year planning processes.
Hunger and homelessness are still on the rise in US cities. Data show families as the fastest growing subgroup of people experiencing homelessness. In ICH’s analysis, what conditions makes this possible?
Mangano: No one I know would deny that homelessness continues to increase in our country. It is part of the national disgrace of our country and that’s why the commitment is to not only reduce but to end homelessness. Part of effort is to change the perception—public and public policymaker perception around homelessness. For twenty years we’ve been managing homelessness. The investment in homelessness was made in simply managing, maintenance of efforts and accommodating the wrong. Our efforts from the beginning have been to change that verb of homelessness. To change it from managing homelessness to ending the national disgrace.
Resources need to catch up with where we are going in policy. I would readily say that our rhetoric is outstripping our resources. Part of what we are attempting to do in the administration is to bring together the resources that will accomplish the objective that we are talking about. One thing I know as an advocate, government needs to put their resources where their rhetoric is. That is part of the objective of ICH in the federal government is to ensure that federal agencies are stepping up to the table. Is it enough? Absolutely not. And even the increases: the President has increased homelessness resources in three successive difficult fiscal years. He’s actually increased the resources for homelessness in his budget including his 2005 budget. But are those resources enough? No, they are not. No single year’s investment of federal, state, and local resources will end homelessness. No two years or three years. That is why we have been realistic in setting an objective of ending chronic homelessness in ten years: while also beginning to look at other profiles of homeless people.
One thing I am acutely aware of, as a person who spent twenty years on the other side of government is it is very difficult to secure new resources on the issue of homelessness without having political will. On rare occasion you can get resources without political will but for the vast majority of situations on any issue you need to constellate political will before new resources will be invested.
The Administration’s 2005 budget, say advocates for the homeless, falls short in addressing affordable housing production, cuts Section 8, and places continued emphasis on “chronic homelessness”. How do you read the President’s budget?
Mangano: I can understand in the President’s budget there are some things to be affirmed and there are some things that make advocates unhappy. On the affirmation side there’s no question that the continued movement of the chronic homelessness initiative as it is in the Samaritan Initiative, which the President has proposed $70 million new dollars from HUD and HHS (Health and Human Services), and VA (Veteran’s Administration). The first time a multi-departmental initiative is being moved forward in a Presidential budget in term of the Samaritan Initiative. So we’re happy about that. We believe that will make an impact in cities across the country just as our chronic initiative has made a difference. Obviously, to be affirmed is the increased money for the healthcare for homeless programs to expand that important resource. To be applauded is the increase in PATH resources—the mental health outreach resources that are available. Certainly, less visible in the budget but as important are efforts to prevent homelessness. If there is on thing we have learned in the last twenty years it is that prevention is just as important as intervention. We shouldn’t be focused only on waiting for people to become homeless before we take action to end their homelessness. We need to be actively engaged in preventing homelessness.
The president has proposed increased resources … investing 300 million new dollars to get better outcomes for people coming out the back door of prisons and fails … $60 million to get better outcomes coming out of foster care system … increased substance abuse treatment slots to prevent homelessness among people suffering from addiction … increased resources on the mental health side that will help prevent homelessness. All of those are increases in the budget. All of them will help us prevent homelessness. Is everything in the budget that I would have wanted on the housing side? I would frankly have to say no. Not everything that I had hoped for. I don’t have the last say in the budget.
Paraphrasing a former congressional rep, “the problems of the nation are most acutely felt by DC residents.” With dramatic demands for emergency food, shelter, and homeless services increasing in DC—is a national human crisis imminent?
Mangano: There is no question that the national disgrace of homelessness is present here in Washington, DC. But I will say that anyone who came as a tourist on the streets of Washington back in the mid-to late 1980s would have say that the situation has improved. Not necessarily that there are fewer homeless people in Washington D.C. But there certainly seem to visitors and other people fewer people on the streets. The new partnership established in Washington, it is generally felt, is and the city administration is doing a better job.
Is there a message of hope or inspiration that you would leave for people experiencing homelessness and/or their advocates?
Mangano: You can be certain that ICH will continue to advocate that homeless people have a place at every table of planning around homelessness in this country.
