Housing solutions officials outline rising homelessness, point to lack of affordable housing and HUD funding risks

Erin Velez, chief of staff at Housing Solutions, and Amy Olsen, Continuum of Care director at Housing Solutions, told the Tulsa Women's Commission on Feb. 7 that Tulsa’s most recent point-in-time and system-use data show homelessness rising and a severe mismatch between need and available permanent housing.

Velez said the most recent point-in-time count interviewed nearly 1,400 people in a single night — about a 23% increase from the prior year — and that unsheltered, visible homelessness is spreading beyond downtown to other parts of the city. She said about 81% of people counted were sheltered and that 81% of surveyed people first became homeless in Oklahoma, with 73% first becoming homeless in Tulsa. Velez identified lack of affordable housing as the primary driver and said over half of people counted were experiencing homelessness for the first time that year.

Olsen and Velez described other factors that contribute to homelessness in Tulsa: youth exiting foster care (she said nearly one in five youth who leave foster care exit directly into homelessness), domestic violence, criminal-justice involvement, and disabling conditions. They said roughly half of people they assess report disabling conditions and that about a quarter reported being employed. The presenters said veteran homelessness is comparatively low, which they attributed to targeted federal resources such as HUD-VASH vouchers and VA housing navigators.

Speakers explained how the community’s system of care categorizes housing responses: rapid rehousing for shorter needs, and permanent supportive housing for people with long-term or chronic needs who require ongoing services. Velez told the commission the average wait time from assessment to placement in housing in Tulsa was “about 360 days” — just under a year — and warned that permanent supportive housing turns over less frequently than other assistance types, making new units harder to find.

The presenters said Tulsa’s housing study estimates a need for about 13,000 housing units over 10 years to meet demand across income levels, with concentrated gaps in low-income housing. During a back-and-forth on costs, speakers referenced an estimate of roughly $245,000,000 per year needed to close part of the shortfall; the presenters also discussed a separate estimated financing gap figure during the discussion and said they would confirm final numbers in follow-up materials.

Velez and Olsen emphasized the central role of federal HUD funding for the local Continuum of Care: HUD dollars pay for permanent supportive housing, rapid rehousing subsidies, emergency shelter operations and many providers’ staffing. They told the commission a recent temporary pause in HUD funding sparked “panic” across the sector but that funds were restored after advocacy; they said a sustained interruption would reduce or eliminate housing payments and supportive services, and would particularly threaten smaller agencies that lack braided funding streams.

The presenters laid out current system work and next steps: continuing the strategic plan update (the “Way Home for Tulsa”/continuum strategic plan), targeted outreach into areas with growing encampments, eviction-prevention programming and policy work to increase renter protections (they noted Oklahoma remains one of a few states without tenant anti-retaliation statutes). They called for community advocacy on local zoning and for public champions when affordable housing projects come before city council.

Commission members asked clarifying questions about definitions (for example, what “sheltered” includes), disabling-condition breakdowns (presenters said some data are self-reported and not medically verified), and how HUD funding flows to local programs. Velez and Olsen invited commissioners to review the strategic plan and to connect to continuing advocacy and volunteer opportunities.

Votes at a glance

- Approval of minutes from prior meeting — outcome: approved (motion and second recorded; roll-call tally not specified in transcript). - Motion to adjourn — outcome: approved (motion and second recorded; roll-call tally not specified in transcript).

Closing note: presenters offered to return to commission committees and community groups to present detailed data and to share materials; they said updated, downloadable data and the strategic plan are available through the Way Home for Tulsa/continuum materials referenced in their presentation.