Alpha Omega saved my life. I was out there homeless, completely.
HUD proposes converting permanent supportive housing to short-term transitional housing, potentially forcing 30+ veterans from Memphis facility to streets within weeks. Advocates argue transitional housing averages only months, not years, and most residents return to homelessness; HUD claims current system is costly and ignores root causes.
- HUD proposes redirecting $3 billion from permanent housing to transitional housing
- Up to 170,000 previously homeless people could be displaced nationwide
- Nearly 33,000 veterans face homelessness in the U.S.; almost 14,000 are unsheltered
- Alpha Omega in Memphis must convert one permanent facility to transitional housing, affecting 30+ veterans
- Federal judge in Rhode Island temporarily blocked the plan; ruling expected soon
The Trump administration's HUD plan to shift $3 billion from permanent housing to transitional housing could displace over 170,000 previously homeless people, including vulnerable veterans like 78-year-old Jayson Carter, though a federal judge has temporarily blocked the effort.
Jayson Carter is seventy-eight years old. He served in the Air Force during Vietnam. He has end-stage renal disease and neurological damage from a series of falls. For the past two years, he has lived in a permanent supportive housing facility in Memphis, Tennessee, run by Alpha Omega Veterans Services. He is preparing himself for what he calls his worst-case scenario: living in his old Buick, the one without air conditioning.
Carter is one of more than twenty veterans at Alpha Omega facilities who could be forced out within weeks if a policy shift by the Trump administration's Department of Housing and Urban Development moves forward. The plan would redirect more than three billion dollars in federal grants away from permanent housing programs and toward transitional housing—temporary shelter meant to bridge the gap between crisis and stability. On its surface, the logic seems reasonable. In practice, advocates say, transitional housing typically lasts only a few months, not the two years it is designed to provide. Most residents cycle back into homelessness.
Al Edwards runs three housing facilities for Alpha Omega, an organization that has served homeless veterans in the Memphis area for nearly forty years. He learned last year that he would have to convert the permanent supportive housing building where Carter lives into a transitional facility. That means everyone currently living there—roughly thirty veterans—would need to leave. "Definitely I'll have to evict everyone," Edwards told reporters. He has cried over the decision. He calls it the most stressful period of his life. When he told residents what was coming, they asked him where they would go. He had no answer.
Carter's response was direct. "It would simply be catastrophic," he said. "I'd be back on the street in my old Buick with no air conditioning." His health would make survival on the streets far harder. He stopped dialysis two years ago because the treatment was physically and emotionally exhausting. Before that, he had cycled through rehabilitation hospitals, relearning how to walk after previous injuries. Alpha Omega gave him stability when he had none. "Alpha Omega saved my life," he said. "I was out there homeless, completely. And they gave me a place that was safe and protected, where I could get my strength back."
The scale of the potential displacement extends far beyond Memphis. Ann Oliva, executive director of the National Alliance to End Homelessness, estimates that up to 170,000 previously homeless people across the United States could be forced from permanent housing and back onto the streets within the next year if the HUD plan succeeds. A federal judge in Rhode Island has temporarily blocked the effort as part of a lawsuit filed by the National Alliance and other advocacy groups. A ruling is expected soon.
The HUD spokesperson defended the shift in a statement, saying the current federal system for homeless Americans is "fundamentally flawed." The department claims that some homeless people using these programs are exposed to illegal drugs and sexual predators, and that permanent housing costs taxpayers an exorbitant amount while ignoring the root causes of homelessness—mental illness, substance abuse, and other underlying conditions. The plan aligns with Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation's policy blueprint for a second Trump administration, which calls for ending "Housing First" policies in favor of addressing health and addiction issues before moving to permanent interventions.
Oliva sees the logic as backwards. "The HUD is trying to pull funding from evidence-based, well-managed programs across the country—permanent housing programs—in favor of short-term interventions that actually don't keep people housed for a long period of time," she said. Deborah DeSantis, president and CEO of the Corporation for Supportive Housing, worried about the instability the shift would create for housing providers who have spent years understanding their local needs and building structures to meet them. "Now they're being asked to create programs that don't address those local needs," she said.
The numbers tell part of the story. According to a 2024 HUD report, nearly 33,000 veterans face homelessness in the United States, with almost 14,000 unsheltered. Veterans make up roughly five percent of the adult homeless population. Carter offered his own arithmetic: "If HUD is trying to save money and all these people end up on the street, some other agency is going to have to take care of them. So you're robbing Peter to pay Paul. That's what I don't understand." A federal court will soon decide whether his fear becomes reality for him and 169,999 others.
Citas Notables
It would simply be catastrophic. I'd be back on the street in my old Buick with no air conditioning.— Jayson Carter, 78-year-old Vietnam veteran facing displacement
The HUD is trying to pull funding from evidence-based, well-managed programs across the country in favor of short-term interventions that actually don't keep people housed for a long period of time.— Ann Oliva, executive director of the National Alliance to End Homelessness
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does the administration believe transitional housing is better than permanent supportive housing?
They argue that permanent housing is expensive and doesn't address root causes—mental illness, addiction, the underlying reasons people become homeless in the first place. They see it as treating the symptom, not the disease.
But the data suggests transitional housing doesn't work as intended. Why push a policy that the evidence doesn't support?
That's the central tension. Advocates point out that transitional housing averages only a few months, not the two years it's designed for, and most people cycle back to homelessness. The administration frames it as reform; critics see it as abandonment.
What happens to someone like Jayson Carter if he's forced out?
He lives in his car. He has end-stage renal disease and neurological damage. Winter comes. He's seventy-eight. The math is grim.
Is there any middle ground here—a way to address root causes while maintaining housing stability?
That's what permanent supportive housing is supposed to do. It provides stable housing while also offering mental health services, addiction treatment, job training. The theory is that you can't address those issues if you're sleeping in your car.
So why is the administration moving away from it?
Cost, partly. Ideology, partly. A belief that the current system has failed and needs to be dismantled. But the people living in these facilities—they're not abstractions in a budget debate.
What does Edwards tell the residents when they ask where they'll go?
He doesn't have an answer. That's the cruelty of it. He's known these people for years. He's watched them stabilize. Now he has to tell them to leave, and he can't tell them where to go or what comes next.