Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homes for the Homeless


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Sources were found and added to the article. (non-admin closure) CoolSkittle  (talk) 01:40, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Homes for the Homeless

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Laudable but non notable organisation. Theroadislong (talk) 19:41, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:02, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:02, 17 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete The organization receives mentions on several listings of services for the homeless in NYC, but I couldn't find any substantial independent coverage. Changing my stance to Keep in light of sources provided by Bearian and Doncram. Skeletor3000 (talk) 19:49, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete sadly... as the nominator has stated we cannot turn up any WP:N Wm335td (talk) 20:39, 17 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Rubbish. It seems to me none of the above did any looking. --Doncram (talk) 19:05, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * That's a particularly brazen assertion, especially given that the organization's name brings up heaps of results that don't refer to the organization. There's also the numerous articles and listings which merely mention the organization but provide no further coverage. It's a substantial heap to sort through. I put effort into approaching my contributions here thoughtfully and rationally. I'm in the process of reviewing the sources listed below, and may very well update my response as a result. While I conduct my review, maybe you can conduct your own of WP:GOODFAITH. Skeletor3000 (talk) 19:44, 21 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. The short article is poor, and is more about the general problem of homelessness than about the operations of this organization, but addressing that is a matter for editing.  It is a major organization/service provider in New York City.  It took in, and spent, $24.7 million in both 2016 and 2017, per its latest available IRS 990 report available from Guidestar.
 * There have been a series of AFDs, i think all closed "Keep" eventually, about health services providers such as Blue Cross / Blue Shield plans, and similar kinds of organizations. This one, too, is major, receives a lot of funding, and there does exist a lot of coverage about it, including about its founding and growth years, i dunno maybe it is relatively quiet now, but there is tons about this. It partnered/worked with City of New York and with St. John's Cathedral, when homelessness was a huge problem in the 1980s in NYC.  It would be ahistorical, non-encyclopedic to omit this.  Watch the powerpoint-like film-presentation at "Our Story". It operates The Saratoga, hotel for 235 homeless families, in Jamaica, Queens.  It operates a couple different types of afterschool programs.  It operates summer camps in Harriman State Park.  There are dozens or hundreds of New York Times and other major newspapers' articles about these over the years, and covering funding issues, crises, etc. This lawsuit shows Homes for the Homeless in the thick of it all, mentions serving 5,000 families.  Those were crisis days.  The lawsuit includes history, so do lots of NYC budget documents, debates.
 * More about this lawsuit and period: This lawsuit is to New York State Court of Appeals, and was against the NYC adminisandration then under Mayor David Dinkins.  The City was working with Homes for the Homeless, which "pioneered" Tier II shelters for the homeless, which was part of huge and expensive efforts.  Throughout New England and other areas, the main program for the homeless was to provide them a bus ticket to New York City.  And there was serious over-crowding in poverty-ridden areas of the City, so a vast "hidden/nearly homeless"  reservoir existed.  Such that if the City did, at great expense, achieve placement of 100 families, say, out of a homeless shelter to newly constructed or newly rehabilitated buildings (say at cost of $60,000 per unit), then many times that number of families could/would/did appear at the homeless shelters declaring themselves homeless (not entirely wrongly) and putting themselves in position on the waiting list for housing for themselves.  Meanwhile the City was being sued by The Legal Aid Society (which the City funded).  From this and other lawsuits, the City was put under court orders mandated performance orders (i.e. to provide permanent housing to all in the shelters within a certain number of days from the arrival of each family.  Which was impossible to do, despite vast commitment of resources.  The lawsuit describes the role of Stern and Homes for the Homeless during that time, as directly doing a lot, and wanting/needing more funding and contracts to do more, and testifying to what Stern and others thought had to be done.  Effectively all discretionary financial resources of the City were channeled towards addressing homelessness through many programs.  Anyhow, again, the Homes for the Homeless organization was in the thick of it all, participant and subject in countless City Council hearings, lawsuits, news coverage, etc.etc. --Doncram (talk) 19:03, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "A shelter is not a home-- or is it?: lessons from family homelessness in New York City" is 2004 book by Ralph DaCosta Nunez, appears to be about his experience as executive(?) with this organization, and about the affiliated institute that he headed.
 * I reached my monthly limit to read articles, but about ongoing recent stuff, here is 2018 Daily News story about death of newborn boy in their queens shelter. For balance, here is a lighter, inconsequential story. There will be numerous sad, numerous happy stories.
 * To find recent stuff, search in Google news but put quotes around "Homes for the Homeless". A July 30, 2019 mention is:"New York City’s Department of Homeless Services gave out a bevy of contracts in recent days. Homes for the Homeless has received two contracts from the department for its shelters in Queens and the Bronx. The first – a $14.3 million deal – will fund a shelter for homeless families at the Saratoga Family Inn located at 175-15 Rockaway Boulevard in Jamaica, Queens, according to the City Record. A $5.6 million deal meanwhile will fund emergency housing located at 730 Kelly Street in the Bronx."And from Christian Science Monitor"The Queens Mobile Library partners with social services agencies like Homes for the Homeless, hired by New York’s Department of Homeless Services. It operates the family shelter here near JFK airport, which is not only one of the biggest in New York, but the United States. (emphasis added)"Then of course there is more detailed stuff as programs happen.  Every year i suppose since 1980s, but way more in the 1980s than now. --Doncram (talk) 10:07, 20 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep per and WP:HEY. I've added the sources found. Bearian (talk) 22:30, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * P.S. FWIW, since the COI issue was raised, I am an Episcopalian in the diocese of New York and sometimes worship at the CSJD, which co-founded this charity. I don't have any direct connection with the subject of the article. Bearian (talk) 18:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * That is no problem, but thanks. About supposed COI, the article was tagged for that, following additions and removals of some inappropriate material (mission statement, calls for people to be involved in addressing homelessness, a random pic of a homeless person). There is no reason imho to think the editor has any coi, any inside knowledge about this organization and i renoved the tag. Was the AFD started to “fight” that person? By the way i see previous versions of article did have more proper material about the organization (see Talk page) which imho was stripped out inappropriately, previously.—Doncram (talk) 16:03, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.