Unhoused or Homeless? Why the Words We Use Matter—And What They Say About Policy, Dignity, Agency, and Home When discussing housing instability, two terms often emerge: “homeless” and “unhoused.” While they may describe similar conditions, they carry different histories, implications, and impacts on policy, public perception, and the people themselves. “Homeless” has long been the default. It’s entrenched in legal frameworks and widely used in data collection (such as HUD’s Point-in-Time counts). But it also carries heavy, often stigmatizing connotations—suggesting individual failure, street encampments, or panhandling. In contrast, “unhoused” has gained traction over the past 15 years in activist and social service communities as a more human-centered alternative. It emphasizes a systemic failure—the absence of adequate housing—rather than a personal shortcoming. Cities like Los Angeles and Seattle have adopted more compassionate phrasing: “people who are unhoused” or “experiencing homelessness.” Why does this matter? Because framing shapes response. Language influences how we think, act, and legislate. “Homeless” may elicit charity or criminalization. “Unhoused” calls attention to housing policy, zoning, tenant protections—and ultimately, human rights. But let’s go deeper. There’s also a crucial difference between being housed and feeling at home, to truly dwell. Objects can be housed. Data is housed on servers. Cars are housed in garages. But “home” means more than shelter—it signifies identity, safety, connection, and agency. And research supports this: Home flexibility boosts well-being. People who can shape and adapt their living space tend to report higher life satisfaction and a greater sense of purpose. Knowing one has a place of permanence to live and grow strengthens resilience. The emotional bond to one’s home and neighborhood increases social connection, reduces stress, and enhances coping skills. Social ties foster health. A secure home environment encourages belonging and engagement—factors as predictive of health as quitting smoking. At Baltimore’s Hope Village, this theory meets practice. Residents of this innovative tiny-home community don’t just get shelter—they get agency: • Repainting their home to their liking-making the effort; • Continuing one's education to fulfill one's dreams and life goals; or • Joining a nonprofit board to give back. Think about this last one. Someone recently without an apartment or home is now secure enough to give their time to help others! They aren’t just “housed.” They’re at- home-makers. And that makes all the difference. Let’s be intentional with our language. Because how we talk about housing reflects what we believe about people—and what kind of future we’re willing to build together. www.ndc-md.org. #HousingJustice #SocialDesign #UrbanPolicy #MentalHealth #HomeIsMoreThanShelter #HopeVillage #PlaceAttachment #CommunityResilience #TraumaInformedDesign #UnhousedNotHomeless
Very impressive, Challenging, smart work with an incredibly dedicated and passionate team! A must see project and vision.
Everyone deserves an economic break to become part of the City do they not ? How to scale up this concept for the repopulation of a City in the midst of an approximate 70 year decline in population?
Director International Planning at BCT Design Group, Inc.
1moGreat project Randy, I would love to see it.