Bill Overview
Title: PUPP Act of 2022
Description: This bill permits the Department of Housing and Urban Development to award grants for interim and permanent housing that accommodates individuals (or families) who are homeless and have pets. Entities eligible for the grant include local governments, nonprofits, and entities that house or shelter homeless individuals.
Sponsors: Rep. Crow, Jason [D-CO-6]
Target Audience
Population: homeless individuals with pets
Estimated Size: 43500
- The bill targets homeless individuals (or families) who have pets, a subset of the general homeless population.
- The global homeless population is estimated to be around 150 million, but not all of these have pets.
- The best estimate of the fraction of homeless individuals with pets varies globally, often cited around 5-25%.
- Given those percentages, if we apply this specifically to the homeless population globally, it gives a range of 7.5 million to 37.5 million that might be impacted.
Reasoning
- The PUPP Act targets a specific subset of the homeless population—those with pets—which estimates suggest number between 29,000 and 58,000 individuals in the U.S.
- The policy's impact depends on the availability of funds, the effectiveness of the distribution of grants, and the current state of housing and support for homeless individuals with pets.
- Given the budget constraints, the policy is likely to affect a moderate number of the target population initially, potentially increasing over time as the program scales with additional funding.
- The simulated interviews aim to reflect a cross-section of the population considering both direct and indirect impacts, ranging from high to none, reflecting varied individual circumstances.
Simulated Interviews
Unemployed (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's tough to find a place that allows my dog. Most shelters don't accept pets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Freelance Artist (Portland, OR)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Living rough to keep my cats with me is worth it, but I hope for better options.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Panhandler (New York, NY)
Age: 58 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 2
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I would love a stable place for me and my cat. It would change everything.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 2 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Part-time Worker (Austin, TX)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's been hard not finding pet-friendly assistance. This could help people like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Construction Worker (Chicago, IL)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having my dog with me is non-negotiable, so housing options are very limited.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Worked in retail (Seattle, WA)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It can be so challenging to find spaces that accommodate service animals.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired (Miami, FL)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about what will happen to my dog if I can't keep a roof over our heads.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Busker (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finding a pet-friendly shelter is a rare stroke of luck.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Barista (Denver, CO)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hoping the policy could offer more stable pet-inclusive housing options.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Day laborer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finding a place that welcomes pets, especially less common ones like a snake, is challenging.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $210000000)
Year 2: $150000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $210000000)
Year 3: $150000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $210000000)
Year 5: $150000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $210000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The grant program aims to address a specific need within the homeless population, making it a focused, discretionary expenditure.
- The main beneficiaries are entities able to develop and manage pet-friendly housing facilities.
- Impact is largely constrained to urban areas where both homeless populations and services for the homeless are concentrated.